Unwittingly last night, a chagrinned, resistant and adamant Jeff Cooper helped his City Council colleague Andy Weissman showcase one of the brilliant talents upon which Mr. Weissman has built his lengthy career.
Mr. Cooper objected strenuously to the timing of Mr. Weissman’s proposal to reverse a 38-year-old policy and eliminate healthcare benefits for elected officials when their term in office is completed.
With utter precision, he was echoing a criticism leveled earlier in the day to this newspaper by former Councilman Scott Malsin.
Objections Are Familiar
Both men asserted unabashedly that Mr. Weissman’s attempted historic axing of lifetime benefits – which was successful, 4 to 0 – was suspiciously political. They claimed the sensitive subject deliberately was raised in the midst of a six-way race for four Council seats on April 10.
Intriguingly, there were striking parallels between the bitingly strong accusations by Mr. Cooper and by Mr. Malsin.
Most significantly, despite their obvious upset, neither man identified Mr. Weissman by name, a sign of their respect for the venerable 61-year-old patriarch of the Council.
Throughout his 25 years of dense City Hall involvement, Mr. Weissman has been known by supporters and few foes for his uncommon maturation, his superb balance, his unflappable mien, his seemingly effortless but well-honed iron self-discipline.
Many politicians possess those qualities. Hardly any own all of them.
Following a vitriolic outburst by Mr. Cooper at the far west end of the dais, Mr. Weissman, at the far east end of the dais, turned toward his foe and responded as if he just had been told he had beautiful children.
Mr. Weissman’s satchel of sparkling skills came in handy as the exasperated Mr. Cooper reprised his slate of objections about shrewd timing and dark motivations from the previous meeting.
Nearly buried among the flurries of Mr. Cooper’s blistering critique was a grudging concession that he was “basically fine,” after all, with Mr. Weissman’s ground-shaking proposal.
In serene contrast to Mr. Cooper’s speedy boil, not a vein, not a wrinkle, not a particle of Mr. Weissman’s exterior budged. Deftly skirting hyperbole, he calmly, convincingly assured his colleague that he genuinely regretted that Mr. Cooper was “irked.”
There wasn’t anything “evil or nefarious” about the timing of his proposal, Mr. Weissman said, the sizzling topic having arisen in question-form from a voter during his campaign for re-election.
Notably, two City Council candidates, Jim Clarke and Meghan Sahli-Wells, endorsed Mr. Weissman’s motion, which will be acted upon with ungovernment-like swiftness.
