Historians have recorded that Rome burned in AD 64 during the reign of Nero. This is irrefutable fact. However, what is not certain is the specifics of Nero's reaction during this tragedy. The account is that he played his instrument, most likely a lyre, and sang songs in an apparent disregard for the plight of his city and it's people.
There of course is no evidence that other than the fire, Nero projected a total divesiture of duty through such an act. But then again, history is often written by the victors who in this case were motivated by rivalries who wished him malice. The historian Suetonius recorded that Nero orchestrated the fire in an act of spitefulness and vengeance, while others record that this is simply a rumour.
At any rate this likely falsehood created the famous "...fiddling while Rome burns" which established Nero as the quintessential civic leader who's contempt for those he was enumerated to lead was only exceeded by his incapacity to lead them.
In Lawrence the fires of discontent remain well stoked with an endless reporting of improprieties, controversies and alleged patterns of corruption that have reportedly generated federal and state probes of Mayor William Lantigua The parallels of "fiddling" are unmistakable therefore.
But all of these remain conjecture and speculation.
What is of greater importance is when the State of The City address is not delivered . As reported this morning, the Lawrence City Charter defines the requirement for a Mayor to deliver a speech to the City Council in the first week of February. It is not important that it is not delivered on time. What is important to understand is the pattern , apparently acceptable by the City Council is now well established. An address on the condition of the city has only been delivered once since Mayor Lantigua took office in January 2010. That occurred three months late in May 3, 2011. This morning there are no explanations as to why none was delivered this week and whether or not one will be delivered. That is unsettling to all citizens in the area, not just those who live in Lawrence.
Consider how easily our nation and much of the free world would collapse into disarray if the President of the United States failed to deliver the State of The Union when it was expected and if there was no explanation why? What if the Governor of Massachusetts exhibited the same patterns of ineptness? These are unthinkable acts because an abject failure to perform the most basic duties by those entrusted with the public's welfare is not a tolerable condition.
The City Charter requires by law an annual address delivered to City Council " by a personal appearance " to keep it informed". Since there is no address are citizens in Lawrence and in the surrounding communities to conclude that the Mayor has no plans for the city, that there have been no accomplishments and that the city's welfare should simply be left to its own devices?
Mayor William Lantigua is a lawfully elected public official. He his the person largely responsible to lead his city . He remains innocent of numerous alleged accusations and has a right to clear his name of any wrongdoing through due process. However, it remains his sole responsibility to initiate one of two acts
He should either immediately issue a strong public statement of consent to it's citizens that an address is forthcoming or if he cannot deliver one he should resign.
Whether or not there is a legitimate basis for failure to consistently comply to this fundamental responsibility to constituents, he has created a spectre of uncertainty and a precedent of failure to represent their interests which compels him to fulfill his responsibilities or relinquish his position now. This does not require an act of recall, or a conclusion of an investigation or a legislative intervention. Rather, it requires only an honorable conclusion of fulfillment or an exit. The choice is his.
Without these the silence from city hall will continue to be the" fiddling " that Lawrence should not tolerate and it's residents will continue to be recipients of the greatest example of civic disservice ever exhibited in recent local political history.
Comments