The Strib writes that 3 council members aren’t attending the $1.4MM “couples counseling.” Wonsley and Chugtai are apparently two, cited elsewhere. Don’t know the third, but I’m going to guess Chowdhury.
The first step in fixing a problem is admitting you have a problem. Our biggest obstacles on the council either don’t think we have a problem, or have no desire to fix the problem. That’s a problem.
The Strib writes that 3 council members aren’t attending the $1.4MM “couples counseling.” Wonsley and Chugtai are apparently two, cited elsewhere. Don’t know the third, but I’m going to guess Chowdhury.
The first step in fixing a problem is admitting you have a problem. Our biggest obstacles on the council either don’t think we have a problem, or have no desire to fix the problem. That’s a problem.
I am okay with the city trying to get their leaders aligned. However it brings up the interesting idea of who owns this ?
I mean should the city really foot the bill¿
Should the people who do not have interpersonal skills pay for it instead?
It maybe a split of some kind….
If it was $100,000 instead of 14 times that would we even notice?
If each council member plus the mayor kicked in 100K, they might be a little more “invested” in the outcome…..
I agree with your analysis and believe The Advocates and its many supporters are dedicated to making a difference!
And I agree with Mike Shulman ~ participation in the City Council/Mayor “therapy sessions” MUST BE MANDATORY for all involved.