by Steve Reinbrecht
Reading City Council on Tuesday voted 5-1 to appoint John Slifko to fill a vacancy until the end of the year.
The Reading Eagle was there, but didn’t do its job -- finding out why elected officials vote the way they do.
If only one person resists a unanimous vote, it’s often for a good reason. The Establishment values unanimity and pressures people who rock the boat.
So let’s hear from the boat-rockers, especially on important things like the composition of Reading City Council.
“Councilman Chris Daubert cast the lone vote against Slifko. He did not say why,” the Eagle reported.
Daubert told me later that he was surprised nobody from the Eagle asked him why, and he gave me his reasons for his no-vote on Slifko.
“I voted the way I voted because I didn't have him ranked as the best candidate, all things considered. (Experience with budget, etc.)
“I also am not a fan of appointing someone who has never run for the office or garnered votes for the office. I am beholden to the people that elected me.
“Anyone that is appointed has Council members to thank, not the people. I'd support a change to the Charter to eliminate long-term appointments, but that doesn't fit in this case as it is only for four months.
“Why I didn't speak up in the meeting to explain my vote was very truly out of respect for my colleagues and for Mr. Slifko. He was going to be appointed, regardless of my vote.
“I spoke with him before I voted to let him know why I was doing what I was doing. I really didn't want to ruin it for him, as I have nothing against him. He's a smart and nice guy.
“I was really expecting a question which I would have then answered just as I shared with you.”
