The Nov. 4 edition of this paper contained a letter to the editor signed by Mayor Louis E. Schaefer expressing concerns about the Ole Seagull’s Sunday Oct. 16 column entitled “A question for Branson’s elected and appointed officials, Would you like to be treated this way?” The style and tenor of the letter was strangely reminiscent of a similar letter on the same topic that was published in the Sep. 29, 2004 edition of this paper. That letter was signed by City Administrator Terry Dody. Oh, and by the way, evidently the answer was “Yes.”
From the “get go,” let’s be clear on what the issue is. It’s not about a tree being cut down, annexing land, what’s in the minutes of meetings, the city requiring the removal of a “breakfast special sign” from a downtown restaurant that had been in place for years, some one being able to speak at public meetings or how they do it, the manner and way in which the liberty tree was removed, etc. To an Ole Seagull it’s about treating people the right way, the way things are done, and, what he believes is yet another example of how Branson is changing under the leadership of the man who seemingly controls its government in a Caesar like grip.
Why the Ole Seagull almost expects to see supplicants throwing palm branches down in front of his Suburban SUV as he drives through “his kingdom,” whoops, sorry, a slip of the tongue, “the city of Branson.” Some might say, “But Seagull, the Mayor doesn’t drive a suburban SUV.” Of course they would be right. Would all those who believe that either the Mayor or the board of aldermen actually control Branson’s city government please raise their hands? Hail Caesar!
Annexation or elections, the city’s new reputation under its current unelected leadership speaks for itself. As that leadership transforms the Branson that used to be into the new “upscale” Branson of the future it sometimes seems that all vestiges of the old, every tree, rock, and, seemingly, the very spirit, personality and “niceness” that used to be Branson, must go. Oh, they’ll talk the talk but when it comes to walking the walk the new Branson appears to be as devoid of the old Branson as the Taneycomo Lakefront is of its trees.
Dody’s letter of a year ago, the current letter, and the city’s handling of the tree situation from day one are but manifestations of what businesses and citizens alike can expect in the new Branson. What is the chance that three business owners simply woke up one morning and said, “We’ve got nothing else to do today so let’s cut down a city owned tree?” An Ole Seagull would suggest that they are about the same as the city of Branson accepting any responsibility for what happened to the tree.
What bodes ominously for the future of Branson however is the manner in which Branson’s uncontrolled unelected leadership is transitioning Branson from the old to the new. One prime example from the mayor’s letter illustrates the point. It said, “The opinion column incorrectly states that after issuing a ticket the ‘city took no further action to pursue the case until the sisters recently filed a motion to have the case dismissed.'”
In fact, the column didn’t even contain the words “issuing” or “ticket” or any word close to them. Further, the sentence preceding the sentence that the writer of the letter quoted from stated, “After the charges were filed in the Branson Municipal Court, the sisters requested, for obvious reasons, a change of venue into the Taney County Court system.”
Even omitting that wasn’t enough of a distortion for the writer of the letter. The first part of the sentence that the writer selectively quoted contained the words “The request was granted and” immediately prior to the words “the city took no further action to pursue the case until the sisters recently filed a motion to have the case dismissed.” The integrity of someone who would intentionally mislead in this manner is as obvious as the motivation prompting the action.
Although the Ole Seagull would relish the opportunity to continue through the letter and deal with each issue on a similar basis what would it accomplish? To the Ole Seagull, this issue has never been about the commission of a crime. It has been about the responsiveness of government, effectively communicating with people, and treating them the way that they would like to be treated. He believes but for the actions of the city itself, the tree would still be standing.
At the end of the day however, what an Ole Seagull believes matters not; what matters is that Branson’s Caesar will still be Caesar and he will still rule supreme. Hail Caesar!
