Whether a person is sitting in the City Council chambers or watching BITV at home in an easy chair, catching the vibes and barbs emanating these days to and from council members, the mayor and administrators in attendance is akin to viewing the last acts of the current Bush Administration. Hands over eyes, painfully peeking through fingers because you’ve got to see what happens next.

Actually, you’ve really got to be there in person in order to appreciate the occasional rolling of the eyes, deep sighs, smirks, pained expressions, dramatic harrumphs and seething stares. It can be disconcerting to watch a dozen or so intelligent, normally mild-mannered adults squirm while attempting to keep their cool under pressure. Ah, the drama of it all.

It can be most entertaining for the viewer – unless you’re a friend or a loved one of a target – when the three very, very, very bad council members (Bill Knobloch, Debbie Vancil and Kim Brackett) decide they’ve had enough of being bossed around. At least, that’s the vibes they seem to be emitting. They’re pleasant and civil most of the time, of course, but their imperturbability seems to be waning these days. There were days, one could suppose, when they mostly boiled but never exploded, though they’ve probably always been prone to emotional outbursts.

These days, if the subject is dear to one’s heart, one or all often come to a meeting ready to spring into action. Knobloch is most effective when bellowing. Vancil combines an riveting stare with a flood of words. Brackett tends to be candid and direct, so watch out. Again, they can be very bad or very good, but almost always worth the price ($0) of admission.

Why don’t they grow up, you ask? How about a little civility?

Good point, but don’t forget that a complicated dynamic exists between the main players and the council needs the administration to supply it with factual, unbiased information that allows it to make sound decisions. So there will be some tension. It’s best, of course, for the community to have a government that is as transparent as possible.

There’s really nothing wrong with letting it all hang out some of the time. And, most of the time the very bad members’ words aren’t meant to be personal, though sometimes they can be disparaging. The other day one of them became irritated with a department director’s report and was accused by another councilor of “haranguing” the man, who was quite capable of defending himself. As are all of the participants.

They need to be respectful, of course, and that appears to be happening more and more these days at least between the seven council members, and between them and the city administrator. They also appear to be understanding that they need to leave their egos at the door and work together to do what’s best for the community as a whole. That’s especially important for the eight elected officials.

It’s beginning to appear that this council is getting somewhat ballsy and more prone to seeing things clear enough to pull away from that 4-3 split it has been stuck on for most issues since January. Which is important, because there are some issues, especially those involving capital projects that are worth millions of dollars, that need a strong majority in order to take them to the voters. Yes, the city has backed itself into in a financial conundrum, but there are ways out of it. Last week, for example, Barry Peters presented to his fellow Finance Committee members a four-point policy approach to rebuilding and stabilizing the city’s reserves, and limiting its levels of debt service. The proposal’s key element suggested that the city may need to get a handle on its operating expense by gradually reducing – through attrition – full-time employees over the course of years.

Painful, yes, but these are the kinds of issues the council needs to address. Vociferously or nicely, whatever.