Heard on WILL news this morning that Scott Tapley had turned in his MTD petitions with, I believe I heard, around 1,000 signatures to create a new mass transit district in southwest Champaign. I'd expected to clarify the details with a N-G report, but I can't seem to find one.
Anyway, it appears, if I heard the report correctly, it's now up to a judge to determine whether a subdivision can opt out of one mass transit district (or a potential district) and create its own district. (And whether there ever was an agreement with the subdivision and the city to join.) I'll be curious to know just what arguments the CU MTD brings to the hearing, if, in fact, they have a voice in it.
Those questions aside, one thing that struck me this morning was the number of times I heard the name Scott Tapley in the report. Frequently. More than I heard CU MTD.
Brought to mind another name from the distant C-U past: Gary Shae. Don't know how many remember him, but in the late 80s and early 90s, Shae was instrumental in Champaign's controversial withdrawal from the Champaign-Urbana Intergovernmental Solid Waste Disposal Association, which changed the way garbage is handled in the county. (And not for the better, in my opinion). Shea also had a hand in the eventual end of C-U's excellent recycling center, handing the operation over to the waste haulers. In effect, Shae hooked his wagon to that star, hoping it'd become the vehicle to propel him to bigger and better things. He was mentioned as a mayoral candidate.
Shae lost his next election bid (to current Mayor Jerry Schweighart). Don't think he ever ran again.
What brought Shae to mind was Tapley, a county board member. One wonders if he thinks he's found the vehicle to hitch a ride on to bigger and better public office destinations?
Just wondering, you understand. But it sure does seem to be 'Scott Tapley's Petition.'
And so it goes.
6 comments:
Is there a reason I was taken off the blogroll?...Haven't been outing anyone recently.
It's my understanding that the hearing will be only on the legal validity of the petitions, and, barring a ruling on a technicality (i.e., incorrectly worded petitions or something like that...) that the judge will almost certainly instruct the County Clerk to schedule a referendum. I don't think any argument over issues is allowed.
I'm also amazed by the NG's shoddy reporting on this issue.
Matt,
Not sure why you're missing; hadn't noticed. I attempted to add someone last week (right next to where you should be) and that doesn't seem to be there, either.
Guess it's time to venture back into the dreaded HTML-Land. Aaaaargh!
I hope you are right about the Tapley?Shae analogy.
I don't like Tapley. On IP's blog during a discussion someone (anon) opined that Tapley is the reason Rs have lost in the Cities, because Tapley's far right wing has driven off more electable moderate candidates.
The sooner Tapley goes down the sooner the local Republican party can regain some seats on the county board.
I don't know how apt the Shae/Tapley analogy is, but the similarities struck me. Hadn't thought about Shae's failed windmill tilts for years. Takes kind of a warped old mind to remember that far back. Unfortunately. And I have to agree that Tapley's strident right-wing actions haven't helped the local GOP much. And it needs some help, it would seem.
Somehow, I didn't have you on my blogroll, and Kiyoshi Martinez brought it to my attention today. That's been remedied, and I apologize for the oversight. You've got a fine blog.
Post a Comment