You might be interested to know that yesterday afternoon, the Mayor changed tonight's 5:30 p.m. meeting from a Study Session at which no votes could be taken to a Study/Special session at which we could vote. He then changed the agenda to include "5. **Discussion and possible staff direction regarding outstanding issues addressed in the Follow-up Memorandum from the Town Manager and Finance Director dated April 13, 2009 and April 20, 2009."
Those Memorandum contain budgetary items. It is conceivable that we will be asked to vote tonight on budget items--with no real notice to the public that this is what's going on. You can bet that the special interest groups know what is going on, and will be in attendance. They will pressure the council members who respond to that kind of influence as to how to vote.
If you can attend tonight, you are encouraged to complete a blue card to speak on item 5.
With best wishes,
Salette Latas
Councilmember
Town of
23 comments:
Thanks for the info.
Even if the mayor calls for a vote, can't the other council members vote to postpone or not take a vote?
Geez, this kind of reminds me of national politics voting when don't have time to discuss or study in detail.
Not acceptable in my humble opinion.
If the majority of the council did not show up could they still have a quorum or conduct business?
The latest item on the agenda, added just under the wire of the 24hr. required notice because of Open Meeting Laws, was added by Latas and Garner regarding the police issue. This was not by Loomis. He added earlier items. Are they, Latas & Garner, who you think are trying a "ploy to circumvent public participation", Zev?
Changing Study Sessions to Special Sessions would allow the Council to vote on items as if it were a Council Meeting. During the budget process this may be a way streamline the final approval of the budget.
I assume the final budget would still be approved at a Council Meeting where public input is permitted.
Prior votes can be undone with a Motion Of Reconsideration' by anyone who voted in the majority.
A quorum is always necessary for a public vote.
I fail to see a conspiracy.
In 2010 there will be an opportunity to replace or reelect the Mayor, Abbott, Carter & Kunisch.
Any good candidates out there?
Bill Garner seems to be making a liar out of himself. He claims that he is not going to micromanage the department heads but he is presenting an alternative budget tat no one but JM has seen mmmm wonder who the the brains behind this operation belong to.
Could it be that JM runs Latas and Garner. I think Latas is smater than that. Maybe I'm wrong we'll see.
I sure wish I could type.
Hey Terry----Typing shouldn't be your biggest concern.
To me, the question is whether it's good or bad that a knowledgeable citizen offers input on the town's financial woes, and finds ways to save money & JOBS that were not to be seen in any proposal.
Personally, I think it's great that a citizen with the expertise is willing to step up, and help,but,it's kind of sad, that it takes an outsider to do the work that high priced employees were either not willing, or not capable of doing.
If I can use an analogy on your comments Terry----if you were at the shooting range, you'd have missed the target by a mile!
No I disagree I think it shows arrogance and deceit for the furtherance of an agenda. Not for the towns wel being but power and control.
If not then why at the last minute, if not then why lie and say your not going to micromanage.
Jm is smarter than Garner I just hope he can understand what his boss has written for him to read to us tonight.
Terry Parish,
Who is JM? This is my first visit to this blog.
OV Citizen, Gandy Dancer
A citizen with quite a reputation as an accountant. However as tonights presentation made clear not a all knowledgeable about law enforcement or how the town has chosen to define expenses.
He was identified in the meeting tonight. He is a nice well meaning individual but just not adept at figuring out what can be outsourced legally or cut from a police dept.
The presentation was actually pretty benign with disclaimers all over looked more like Garner was looking for a political blanket claiming to want to suddenly save jobs when he has consistently pressed to eliminate them immediately.
Terry,
I sort of disagree with you about the meeting.
I think the council was really making an effort to save jobs and cut the budget.
The proposal or plan put forth tonight is not the final plan but a start.
Not being a wise xxx but what would be some of your idea's for the police budget.
And No I don't fault the police for trying to save their jobs, or doing their jobs, etc.
We support the police but also appreciate the efforts being made to try and save money.
You probably recall I disagreed with you a lot on town politics but will Thank You for being in law enforcment.
Coyote
I only was able to stay for Garner's presentation the rest of the Council supposedly had no prior knowledge of what he was going to say. The presentation was benign, and displayed a lack of understanding.
I would find a way to minimize planned overtime. I would increase flex time usage instead of paying overtime etc. There are lots of ways some have already been suggested and I'm sure I'll get to talk about this more in the future.
Terry--- Once again, you are showing why you couldn't get reelected, even with the financial support of all the developer's cash.
Even the OV police guys appreciated Bill's attempt to save some jobs. You, on the other hand, have had nothing but nasty things to say about Bill.
That says more about you than you have to say about Bill.
Art
This is why your blog is so tiresome. I am not the issue but you choose to attack me despite the fact that I addressed the issue and Garner, his presentation and his former attempts to axe employees are certainly all part of that issue.
If you can't dispute my comments and you don't like them just delete them. This is your blog after all.
Terry---You may recall our last meeting that you requested----although it has been some time ago.
I mentioned to you, the word "perception." In trying to help your persona, I noted, it had a lot to do as to how others perceive you.
Since you have seen fit to "come back" to the blog, and offer your expertise as a law enforcement guy, you have spent more time calling others "liars," lambasting John Musolf, Bill Garner me and others.
I'll leave to our readers to judge how they perceive you, you words and your actions.
From my point of view, the Terry Parish who couldn't get reelected as reemerged. That's too bad!
Terry P. & Art,
My second visit to this blog.
So this is Art's blog? Imagine the mess we would be in if the Council operated like this blog.
I've lived here in for six years.
Art, I find the ugly side resides in the individuals who avoid the issues and attack anyone who disagrees with them.
Zev, mscoyote, Deacon and Parish appear interested in understanding the problem and willing to listen to others views.
GD
retired RR engineer
GandyDancer--- What a wonderful observation. Perhaps you should spend a little more time analyzing the aforementioned comments of SOME of the individuals before you offer your "words of wisdom."
Also, perhaps someone would like to fill you in on how our town councils operated for the last 10 years and more.
That might give you a little insight why we are in the mess we are in. It's not the majority of THIS council. It's their predecessors, including Mr. Parish----but that's another story.
As for "Deacon,"---he prefers to remain anonymous.
Thank You GandyDancer
I do try to look at all sides. No expert by any means, but my opinion may trigger something in somebody who either votes or can make a difference.
I notice many new people show up for a short time and never return.
Have my own theory about why that is.
Come back and submit your two cents .
New idea's are needed and interesting.
Art
You forgot to include a little integrity in your little tantrum.
Tell the truth, I said some nice things about JM. The negative comments related To JM whose name I never used, spoke to his police experience and thus lack of knowledge related to police expenditures.
It seems the issues on this blog can't take a punch.
It is when you present a valid fact or argument that cannot be countered that those who disagree with you attack your character or word structure. They do this because they have no counter. It has become obvious that certain people are not as interested in solving problems, coming up with solutions and maybe learning something in the process as they are to pushing their agenda to exact their revenge on those who have given them a speeding ticket.
LBC-09
I don't know if you were referring to me in your last post, but since I have spoken the most about the speeding ticket issue, I assume that you were. So regarding your comment...
"It is when you present a valid fact or argument that cannot be countered that those who disagree with you attack your character or word structure. They do this because they have no counter."
I reply...
That's true. When I presented facts and an argument that could not be countered, I was labeled a victim, paranoid, silly, stupid, a whiner, etc. Thank you for pointing out that that person attacked my character because she could not argue the facts.
And regarding your comment...
"It has become obvious that certain people are not as interested in solving problems, coming up with solutions and maybe learning something in the process as they are to pushing their agenda to exact their revenge on those who have given them a speeding ticket."
I offer this...
I DID offer a solution to the problem. I asked the town to install a bright orange flag on the sign to make it more visible or to install a yellow flashing warning light (which they finally did 2 years later).
But I'll also add this. It's not my job or ANY citizen's job to offer solutions. That's what the town staff gets PAID to do.
VC- Im not talking about your speeding ticket. I could honestly care less. You need to let that go. Atleast move on for your mental health. It seems in every blog on every article you bring up this same scenario and it is clear that you have formed your opinion on the dept. based solely on this one contact with this one officer.
This seems hardly fair.
Your right it is not our job to tell the town what they need to do to do their jobs. That is why thet are getting paid. I will give you that.
LBC-09,
You said I bring up the same scenario in every blog on every article. Well, no, it was you who brought it up...
"to exact their revenge on those who have given them a speeding ticket."
...and I simply responded.
You also said I have formed my opinion of the OVPD based on one incident. Well, no again. I also told of the incident where the officer refused to speak to me or even make eye-contact with me and he would speak only to my husband.
That's TWO less than stellar encounters.
When I add my two encounters with the dozens upon dozens of other poor OVPD encounters I've heard from other people (not just on this site but in personal conversations), that's how I came to my conclusion. It's not based merely on one incident.
Post a Comment