To the Editor:

Having spent several days thinking about what I heard during the Monday night City Council meeting, I have several observations and questions.

I did not like Mayor Perkins’ disrespectful and harsh tone when addressing the representative of the over 4,600 people that had signed a petition asking for restoration of library funding previously cut by the city.

Mayor Perkins had no disrespectful comments for the representative of seven ministers who had signed a petition asking the council not to restore the library’s funding. (Petition 2)

The city council, at Mayor Perkins’ request, agreed to the wishes of the seven over the wishes of the 4,600 and took no action, thus leaving the library struggling to pay utility bills.

Petition 2 referenced minutes from meetings that took place between the county and city in the mid 1980s and city council minutes from the 1990s. What motivated the ministers to research the minutes of some 20 plus years of city meetings? What an enormous task! Was it concern for the library, or with elections coming up, a chance to discredit incumbent county officials? I hope their research was complete and presented the full story and not just select information.

The library budget cut was passed by the city council around the first of October. It was discussed prior to that. Why has this controversy been allowed to grow and continue for so long? It’s my opinion that Mayor Perkins has created and used the library funding issue and resulting controversy to politically hurt county officials prior to the elections. All part of a plan to take over county government then merge city and county into one government with King James as ruler.

If the city has proof the county is not fulfilling an agreement to fund the library then Perkins, prior to October, should have formally requested full funding from the county.

If the county refused, then the city, while continuing to fully fund the library, should have filed suit against the county for restoration of county funding plus reimbursement to the city of the county’s portion paid by the city to the library. That way the library wouldn’t have been the victim of a political agenda. I guess that would have made too much sense and wouldn’t have been as useful.

Tommy Shipley