I guess we’ll see how that headline gets conflagrated all out of whack, but I’m sure it will, given the information this column is about to reference came from Facebook threads. And as we all know, and Councilman (who should have resigned or been removed) Jason Nguyen took pains to remind us, nothing ever said on Facebook was really meant.

So, Mayor Cody Kennedy and Councilman Ben Van Dyke, let’s give it a shot. Because this will be about posts either attributed to you, Mr. Mayor (although I couldn’t find it directly, it sure sounded like the Cody I met a while back), or one you wrote yourself, Mr. Council Member, because you begged to sit down and chat, several times, in the comments section.

Let me note here, I sent a message to Cody asking if The Business Times could run his (attributed) excellent piece as an op-ed in the paper (albeit it would run after the retreat, but good op-eds are good op-eds regardless of timing) but I have not heard back. Yes, the ask was a little late and quite frankly (and hopefully) Cody might be already on the retreat and working toward some of the goals he states in his piece.

As for Ben, he should note citizen Craig doesn’t do sit downs (then again, he doesn’t join groups, boards or focus groups as that role is about influence and agenda, and publishers should be impartial) but you are welcome to reach out to the paper at any time for any reason.

After all, you’ve both been covered plenty in the newspaper and, for better or worse, in the occasional column by yours truly.

Regardless, this is what I’m writing. As for the headline. The meaning behind each verb is important. So, in asking for less “strategy” here’s what I mean – and this is something Cody points out very well in the examples of the “Complete Streets” and DEI policies permeating every aspect of everything our fair city does. Even aside conversations of staff on the way to the bathroom.

Because money is at the core of everything Cody mentions. You see, the city brings in a lot of money every year via taxes. The problem for our previous city council “visionaries” is the same problem every government entity has with money: It’s never enough. Especially when it comes to their Utopian visions. The problem is tax money needs to go to critical services the city is required to provide, or has decided it should provide (whether I think it should or not) and be budgeted accordingly. The problem for the previous council was there was little, if any, money left over for its champagne dreams and caviar wishes.

Which is why the previous council used state and federal grants to pursue its goals. The problem is that those grants are chock full of restrictions and mandates, which get you things like Complete Streets and DEI slathered over every inch of grant awards. Then you end up with staff and administration who do everything in accordance of where the money comes from to keep doing the city’s laundry.

Yes folks, if you or I did this, it would be fraud and money laundering.

So, in this sense, Cody is dead-on. We must get Complete Streets and DEI forced mandates out of everything the city does. That’s how you end up with Fourth and Fifth Street debacles. In a way, sadly, the city HAD to finish that project. In my opinion, they should have taken some money they were misappropriating from other grants (I’m kidding?) and paid the grant back and shut the whole thing down. So, while Cody’s goal is to provide city staff with new direction, my fear is even while these folks are robotic in carrying out orders, they aren’t gonna change. They are true believers.

And there’s only one way to be rid of a true believer: Fire them. And Cody, you’ve been around long enough to know where to start. Then, just maybe you can use tax revenues to run the core services you mentioned. That would be refreshing. I mean, we didn’t vote for million-dollar fences around parks and bus stations. We voted to end the old vision.

So, to reference the other verb in the headline, this is where the city should be in “retreat.” It also brings us to Ben’s Facebook post, which was regarding the Orchard Mesa money pit, er, pool. Now the pool, to me, falls under one of those things the city decided to provide and then forgot all together. You see, Ben, the city (along with the county and School District 51) was supposed to provide budget dollars for upkeep. You simply cannot argue that all three entities have done a good job at this – no matter how much you tried to romanticize it.

But then, in a Stout fashion, you doubled down on it in proposing your own pet project: An Orchard Mesa Community Center. If you’ve been paying attention, Ben, you know this: You don’t have the money; now with even less coming in. And where you’d have to get the money continues our city on the road to a pet-project, inhumane society.

So yes, I sincerely hope a strategic retreat to an “attractive, well-run community” comes from city council soon.

In Truth and freedom.

Craig Hall is owner and publisher of The Business Times. Reach him at 424-5133 or publisher@thebusinesstimes.com