The Amazing Colossal Gleason

It doesn't happen all that often, but now and then I write a letter to the editor. I try to restrain myself, since nothing is more of a joke than those cranks who show up in the Sakonnet Times, week after week, flogging their hobby-horses. But once in a while, something just gets up my nose, like the letter Town Councilor Tailgunner Gleason had in the paper last week clarifying her position on tolls. Yeah, I wrote the the following response, then had second thoughts about sending it in to the paper. It felt too snarky for print. But that's no reason not to share it with you, loyal readers...

To the editor:
Portsmouth Town Councilor Karen Gleason's letter in last week's Sakonnet Times made me laugh out loud, and not in a good way. What provoked the chuckle was Gleason's description of her position at the December 17th meeting with the RI Dept. of Transportation discussing the Sakonnet River Bridge. Here's what she said in her letter:

"Let me reassure you I did not support a $4 toll that evening."

Politicians know the value of the overly-specific denial. In the classic "Pepsi Syndrome" skit from Saturday Night Live, Jimmy Carter is turned into The Amazing Colossal President by nuclear radiation, and the press corps is badgering his spokesman for details. This clip says it all:

Reporter #1: Is it true that the President is 100 feet tall?
Spokesman: Nooooo! Absolutely not!
Reporter #3: Is the President 90 feet tall?
Spokesman: No comment.
— Via SNLTranscripts.jt.org

Gleason may think she's reassuring the public by denying the $4 number, but here's what she said at the meeting:

"I would not object to a toll on this bridge if I thought it was going to be taken care of."

And when Rep. Ray Gallison — who introduced legislation to prevent tolls from being reinstated on the Mount Hope Bridge — took exception to Gleason's proposal, she went further, talking about the tolls there:

"I think the tolls were taken down for political reasons. In my opinion we should have kept them."

So at the meeting in question, not only did Ms. Gleason support tolls for the Sakonnet Bridge, but she also said they should still be in place on Mount Hope. I didn't hear anyone at the recent meeting with the RI Turnpike and Bridge Authority (RITBA) take that position: Not the public, not other members of the Town Council, not our state legislative delegation, not the representative from Patrick Kennedy's office.

And as for turning the new bridge over to the RITBA — which Gleason argues in her letter could provide "much better maintenance?" This is the same RITBA that just came to Town Hall begging for toll increases to meet a $220M shortfall. Does Ms. Gleason think that's going to be solved by her proposed toll of "25 cents?" Or maybe, we should ask her, "How about $3.99?"

I know, I know. "No comment."

John G. McDaid
Portsmouth

Comments

Why not send your letter to the editor? I'm sure you could tone down the snarkiness and still make the same point. If you don't want to do this can I give your post/report on Gleason to a friend who might not mind sending it?

Regretfully, I have attended many meetings where Ms. Gleason stated a particular opinion, only to hear or read her say that the opinion she stated was something completely different than what I heard her say with my own ears. This behavior concerns me; it is a behavior that I do not like to see in elected officials.

It is regretful that this aspect of Ms. Gleason's character is unknown to people who do not attend Town Council meetings. Reading the local papers is helpful but not sufficient for accurate understanding of our elected officials – and very few people try to keep up on local government news by reading the paper.

I believe that Ms. Gleason is well regarded by her family, friends and members of her profession, and I don’t want to cast any aspersion on her personally. I do, however, take exception when opinions she states in her capacity as an elected official are absolutely and completely unfounded. Sadly, this happens on frequent occasions.

It is also unsettling to see that Ms. Gleason is the most frequent member of the council to be the sole “no” vote – even while being unwilling or unable to provide any explanation for why she will be voting against what every body else is voting for.

Fortunately, I take solace from knowing that I am very much far from alone in my estimation of Ms. Gleason, and from the fact 2008 is an election year.