Rushefsky Says Wright Developed "A Sense of Entitlement"

Word on the street among the political bigfeet is that Cindy Rushefsky will oust Sheila Wright from her Springfield City Council seat on Tuesday.

I spoke to both candidates earlier this week.

The following is portions of my interview with Council candidate Cindy Rushefsky. (A similar post on Sheila Wright is forthcoming.)

Catanese - What's wrong with the council working things out in meetings and committee beforehand, to come out as a united front?
Rushefsky - It's all well and good to e-mail one and other, but City Council meetings should not be situations where it is a done deal, especially when they are inviting the public to make comments to participate and they really aren't listening because it is a done deal. Municipal government, city government is supposed to be accessible to the people and if they are all working behind the scenes and doing city government in private, it is not accessible.

Catanese - But they do have a point, that a lot of these votes are not-controversial and ceremonial.
Rushefsky - I agree a lot of it is ceremonial, but if it is then you don't need a lot of private comments and e-mails either. What happens is you develop a habit, in the course of dealing with one and other, that excludes everyone else, and it becomes a habit that comes over into the more controversial areas.

Catanese - Let's go through some of those controversial areas. Would you have voted for red light cameras?
Rushefsky - Yes

Catanese - What about the pit bull ordinance?
Rushefsky - Pitbull ordinance, I think was a serious mistake. Don't get me started on dogs, but I really think that you can't take a particular breed and set them apart. We've got to deal with the problem of dogs that are vicious as a whole. That simply a quick fix.

Catanese - What about the underage bar ban?
Rushefsky - I do support that. As a parent, if you don't want your underage child drinking, you're not going to encourage them to hang out in a bar. It just doesn't make any sense. It doesn't make any sense in the context of the bar ban either. I teach this age group and we talked about it a lot in American Government classes, we talked about the studies. Their big concern was over music venues and being allowed access to music and I understand that completely. But you know what, there's some very creative people in this town, I can't believe with all the venues we have in town that we can't come up with a plan for non-alcoholic venues that will allow access to this kind of music for kids.

Catanese - So you actually agree with her on a lot of issues. Why should voters make a change then, and vote for you instead of Sheila?
Rushefsky - Well, you picked out 3 issues. Let's take a bit of a different perspective. I think there are several big differences. One is I think I've developed in this town, a reputation for credibility and integrity.

Catanese - Is she not credible?
Rushefsky - I think the voters will have to decide that April 3rd. When you sit on city government too long, two things happen, one is that you begin to develop a sense of entitlement. That you' e entitled to be treated different than anyone else.

Catanese - Well, that's a strong charge. What's an example of that? Are you saying she does that?
Rushefsky - Yes, I think there's been a pattern of that. During the time that law enforcement officers were picketing at City Hall, Sheila's comment was, "you have no right to picket city hall." Of course they do, but there's the feeling that you can't question what they are doing. It's really left me bemused that, some of the folks who are running, who are part of the problem, are saying how pro-law enforcement they are, how they are trying to say they're going to help police and fire. That's just not what happened.

Catanese - So you would've voted against the pension plan approved by the city?
Rushefsky - I think the pension plan has been chronically underfunded and they are using money that should've gone to the pension, that should be going to make the pension sound, and it's just not there. They are using it for other things. Having said that, I think what has to happen is an outside mediator has to come in and look at the problem, without ties to each side. I think we've gotten to the point where neither side can speak credibly to the other.

Catanese - So is that a no vote? It's an important question whether you would've voted no or not.
Rushefsky - I'd want to look at all of the facts before I said that. I think from what I've seen from this point is the pension is not funded the way it should be funded.

Catanese - Why do you think you are going to win this thing? What's the discontent about?
Rushefsky - There's a lot of comments that (Sheila) is so focused on he little things that she's not looking at the bigger picture, and I disagree with that to some extent. Because I don't think sidewalks, lights and streets are small. I think they are important. I have every intention of pursuing that just as vigorously as Sheila ever did, but I think you've got to be looking at the big picture as well as talking to your constituency and listening to your constituency. I don't think you have to agree with what everyone says, but I think you should at least communicate.

Catanese - Going back, what has she done as an example of a sense of entitlement?
Rushefsky - I'm not going to go there. I think everyone in the city has read the same things I've read and they can form their own conclusions. I'm not going to go in that direction.