This & That

"It's Legal, So It's Ethical." ~ Joe Morelle

Say what?



It was so ethical that Joe voted to change the law for anyone hired/elected after 1995 - because - we always change laws that are ethical.....riiiiiiight? Oy. Way to tap-dance around those questions!
Even NYC Mayor Bloomberg called it "the ultimate scam" - it's THAT ethical.

At least Gantt was just blunt and honest and basically told Rachel Barnhart that he "Doesn't talk to you." (Meaning white reporters named Rachel Barnhart, apparently.) I can appreciate the honesty, even though I think it's wrong to collect retirement and still "work" at the same job and collect a salary on top of it - (in quotation marks because Gantt failed to show up for 23 out of 84 session days last session.....so....uh....yeah..."work".)

I'm not saying Gantt doesn't deserve his retirement - but I think he needs to actually retire in order to collect it - and he has, in the past, done a bunch of good things for his constituents in the city (Gates - not so much), but for the past few years he barely goes to Albany, and is now taking advantage of his retirement.....but not retiring. Supposedly, his back bothers him and that's why he can't make the long drive to Albany often - so, in my opinion, it's time to actually and really retire. I think Lovely Warren is just that - lovely, and a competent, caring individual who could probably run and win his district no problem. He deserves to have the North Street Community Center named after him and he deserves all the accolades he received today. He's fought hard for some of our most vulnerable citizens, and he's a longtime elected official - there are a lot of people who have benefited from his representation. But....when it's time to retire....it's time to retire.

I don't like it when any politician does that - not just Gantt.

Here's WHEC's article - video on right, (Gantt actually grants them an interview - they're the ones in the beginning of the 13Wham video - off camera - who he invites into his office, saying "You guys wanna come in?"), and he does his best John Boehner impression, and tells people to "go straight to hell" at the end of the video. Nice.





Inanity:

Link.


"For parents of school aged children please do make sure that children are safe on their trek to school as side walk plowing seems to be a budget causality, even though we had been promised that there would be no cuts to services by the current Supervisor." - This, quite literally, is a lie. Total fabrication. Nothing new with these folks.

Reality:



As you can see from the Adopted 2011 Budget for Sidewalk Plowing - the budget actually INCREASED for 2011. Your sidewalk plowing for THIS year was hammered out LAST year for the 2010 budget...there was an increase in that budget as well.

MEH Cut the sidewalk plowing budget for 2009 by $6,985. MEH increased the sidewalk budget for 2010 by $2,703. MJD increased the sidewalk budget for 2011 by $3,371. My apologies - I was looking at the wrong line - the figures I stated were for salaries (which did increase) - not services. So, here is the correct figures for SERVICES and SUPPLIES which did INCREASE as well for the 2011 budget:

MEH cut the services and supplies portion of the sidewalk plowing budget for 2009 by $6,571.
MEH cut the services and supplies portion of the sidewalk plowing budget for 2010 by $116.
MJD increased the services and supplies portion of the sidewalk plowing budget for 2011 by $1,331.

Overall (total to town tax levy):
MEH cut the overall sidewalk plowing budget for 2009 by $14,559.
MEH increased the overall sidewalk plowing budget for 2010 by $4,716.
MJD increased the overall sidewalk plowing budget for 2011 by $7,038.

Any cuts to services and supplies were from the past administration. MJD actually increased the services and supplies portion of the sidewalk budget for 2011.

There are NO cuts to sidewalk plowing by the current Supervisor, so your little precious ones will be safe walking on the sidewalk. Using fear, and outright lying to you is this blog on the IDC website.

FYI - North and East side sidewalks are plowed in even numbered years and South and West side sidewalks are plowed in odd numbered years....but some main and school sidewalks are plowed on both sides every year. Also, even though my town provides alternate sidewalk plowing in odd/even years as well, we as the homeowners are responsible for clearing the walk in front of our house - I believe this is true in Irondequoit as well. If we had a fire hydrant on/near our property - we are responsible for clearing around that too.

Again, sidewalk plowing was NOT a "budget casualty" for 2011. You can be assured that your sidewalks will be plowed accordingly next year, and this year as well.

Pathetic that they have to try to instill fear into the residents and then tell you to call the Supervisor and complain about "budget casualties" that aren't even true. You can thank your local IDC for that.


Upcoming TB Meeting:

Agenda for 12/21/2010 Town Board Meeting was up today - here's a screen shot - a lot on the agenda for the last TB of 2010.




Censuring at SB Meetings Link:


From the article:
"Speaking during a public input time during the meeting, the man, who could not be reached for comment today, reportedly said something like the school board doesn’t seem willing to respond “unless a gun is pointed to their heads.”

Maybe that comment was "a throwaway" or "misspeaking"? That's what Brighton Town Clerk Susan Kramarsky said her comment was when she leaned over to the former police chief during a Town Board meeting to say "Can you shoot him? I'll take responsibility." after the respectful public input from a resident of Brighton.

Link.


Here's the YouTube of it - towards the end of the video at the 2:14 mark is when she whispers it to the former Chief, and it's caught on mic.


Ok, let me see if I have this straight....BEFORE the Florida SB shooting it is ok to say something like "Can you shoot him" at a TB meeting about a resident.....but AFTER the Florida SB shooting it is not ok to say something like "the school board doesn’t seem willing to respond unless a gun is pointed to their heads.”

Got it!

Oh my goodness! How could I forget this epic threat! It was made during the Public Defender "debate" at a public meeting by a sitting NYS Assemblyman right after the murder of 4 public officials and 2 police officers at another government meeting in St. Louis, Missouri.



LOL So.....politicians say things even worse than "can't get the school board to respond unless there is a gun to their heads" and they get re-elected. A citizen makes a reference to it in a widely used figure of speech that most everyone I know has used at some point in time... and he gets censured and threatened with being banned from public school board meetings.....but elected Democrat officials can get away with saying things like "Can you shoot him? I'll take responsibility." and "you wonder why a guy go into Missouri and shoot some damn body.".....and that's ok? No censuring or punishment for them? I'm pretty sure that Kramarsky and Gantt both have booklets labeled "Code Of Conduct For Elected Officials" somewhere in their file cabinets.

These two particular elected officials have set a precedent for conduct at public meetings.
Their responsibility as elected public officials in our country, in our towns, and in any school district is to model appropriate civil discourse for our kids,......riiiiiight???.....and maybe someone should have reminded Gantt and Kramarsky that “personal or issue-related differences of opinion are welcome; however, they are to be resolved through respectful, reasoned dialogue.”......riiiiiight?

Elected Public Officials can speak this way publicly without repercussions - but citizens who make non-threatening comments using insensitive figures of speech are censured and threatened with banishment.

I understand your sensitivity after what happened in Florida....absolutely....I would be working on extra security...how to diffuse situations.....emergency actions to be taken in such instances. But let's look at what the two situations are:

In Irondequoit there's a guy who shows up to almost every school board meeting, is probably sometimes rude....but calls out the board on things that they don't want to be called out on. It's uncomfortable. He makes a comment with an unfortunately timed figure of speech at a school board meeting. Saying "You can't get the school board to respond unless there's a gun to their head" or whatever, is in no way shape or form threatening, or even close to what happened in Florida.

In Florida, you had a bi-polar ex-con who showed up to a meeting and proceeded to spray paint a circle with a "V" in it on the wall, (which is when I would have shot his ass or at the very least tazed him....I mean... really. Someone who gets up and spray paints a V on the wall at a school board meeting - I don't think he's there to be a positive speaker - and I don't think it will progress well.) His wife was fired from her teaching job and they lost their benefits. He decided to go to the SB meeting and commit "suicide by cop". Not the same situation at all.

And, I just have to say this about the Florida incident.....as "courageous" as it was for that lady to sneak up behind him and try to whack the gun out of his hand with her purse......I think it was stupid. I immediately thought of Ruth Buzzi when I saw the video on the news, and I said to myself "She is lucky he didn't kill her. How stupid." Now - if she grabbed her purse and took a gun out of it - that would have been helpful. Sorry if that sounds callous and mean - but that's how I feel about it.

D&C article from 12-21 names the person who made the comment as Leonard Siebert.



Who the heck is Leonard Siebert? Never heard of him before. Well, here is what he said, according to the D&C:
"His effort wouldn't be so necessary if the district would respond to anything short of a gun to the head approach,"

Wow. I know. How frightening! I know my kids said that they wouldn't go to TB meetings in Brighton because Susan Kramarsky asked the police chief if he could shoot a resident after he gave public input.....and they were really scared of David Gantt when he said "wonder why a guy go into Missouri and shoot some damn body" - they don't want to go to County meetings because of that.

What kind of punishment or censuring did they receive? None.

Kids all across Rochester were disturbed by those two people and their comments at public meetings.

Those poor, poor children! What about the children?!?!?!