Part where I wonder what the hell you guys are up to:
"There was discussion about taping the Regular Board Meetings - possibly starting the broadcast after public input, putting comment portion first and then calling meeting to order. This could be done on a trial basis of 2-3 months to see what the public feeling is. Council member Aldersley commented that people could FOIL tape from meeting; she also said an option would be to NOT BROADCAST THE MEETINGS AT ALL, let the public tape the meetings."
Ok, so, you don't want to air the public comment portion - I assume it's because everyone is negative, nasty, and against progress....and you don't want that going out to the public.
Strike one.
Aldersley thinks if anyone wants to see government meetings in full, they'll have to FOIL it if they want to see it.
Strike two.
Aldersley doesn't want to broadcast the meetings at all - let the public go to the trouble of taping it.
Strike three.
Will she be out...in November? I doubt it. A Dem is a Dem - and if the only Dem they have is one who wants to keep the public from viewing public input at the public meetings.....then they'll vote her back in again.
Is this the "control the conversation" that Miriam Ganze was telling you to do? You know, where she wants the Town Board to "Stop Allowing CERTAIN People" to comment publicly? (Page 1, second paragraph - underlined.)
How convenient was it to
I'm confused.....very confused.....because it said on this Ad when you three R's were running for election that you stood for listening to the residents, and open government.
Workshop Fail!!
12 comments:
campaign talk
Debbie Essley October, 2009:
“I believe that any new development proposed in the town must be clearly presented to the citizens with 100 percent full disclosure…”
Mary Daurizio October, 2009
Called for: forums for residents to discuss problems and concerns without time restrictions,
Stated: “I would organize meetings to discuss problems and concerns of residents in a forum that would not restrict time for input. Together, the residents and developer would examine what present zoning allows, how the proposal will affect the community both positively and negatively, and what opportunities for compromise can be reached, etc. We will work toward consensus and use every effort to bring the process to a successful conclusion.”
democrat could not come up with one name or candidate to run against these promises.
HUGE FAIL!
OMG-I can't believe what I'm seeing in the workshop minutes!
Unbelievable!
That guy who got up that spoke about getting rid of public input seemed like a plant to me. The whole time he spoke I kept thinking- I wonder if this TB is going to get rid of public input?!
Then come to find out not only may they not tape the public input portion of the meeting, if Stephanie gets her way the meetings won't even be taped and televised. (((WHAT!?!?!)))
I also thought it was cheap that all of public input time at the beginning of the meeting was used by the Supervisor's comments. Her comments end at 7:35 and then it's public hearing time. After the hearing the board decided to go through the whole agenda instead of getting input over with. They saved input for the very end.
Sorry guys, what you are proposing in the workshop minutes ISN'T Open Government! My opinion is that even workshops should be taped and televised. Look at the stuff you speak about that nobody even knows about. 4pm meetings are pretty hard for the public to get to.
A few times watching the meeting I heard about the "shouting matches" regarding Titus Avenue. When was that? My recollection was a public hearing with many concerned residents speaking but I didn't see any disrespectful discussion or shouting.
Thank you Paul for making a motion to open the public input regarding Titus again when the time comes and thank you John for seconding it.
I was very surprised and disappointed by MJD and Deb Essley's behavior during this part of the meeting. :(
Just because you don't like what a resident says or if they have a question that you don't like doesn't give you the right to shut the public up.
You just can't say that you are for Open Government and then behave in the opposite manner. There will always be people who disagree, you can't please all of the residents but they do have the right to speak and be heard.
It's 3 minutes per speaker per month. I find it hard to believe that this Town Board can't handle that. I also think it's the residents right to see the public input portion of the meeting. If somebody doesn't like that portion they don't have to watch it. It's pretty easy.
The definition of public office - a position concerning the people as a WHOLE.
The people as a Whole, not just the ones that are saying what you want to hear...
I cannot believe I am about to say this but I couldnt agree with you more!
I love how anonymous #1 is reminding people of the campaign promises of better open govt., no time restrictions, etc. Where ARE those meetings?
Has this "“I would organize meetings to discuss problems and concerns of residents in a forum that would not restrict time for input." happened yet in the 2 years they have been in office???
I didnt think so.
I cannot believe the 2 parties agreed to cross endorsement and I dont believe for a second that what is happening now (Bob Moore) wasnt planned all along. Kudos to the Republicans, they sure stuck it to the Democrats!!
I cant enlarge the font for the workshop minutes, does it say who brought this to the table? Or was it on the agenda?
So, to clarify~they (supposedly) wanted to take away the right to vote with a choice and now they want to either do away with public input and/or not televise the meetings at all? (Like the school boards)Yep, this is better. But they all get along...
Anon @ 11:54pm -
If you click the link at the top of the blog (above the page, it should be in purple), it should take you right to the page of the workshop meeting minutes page I have on the blog - you can enlarge it there at the top wit the arrow.
I don't know if it was specifically on the Workshop Agenda - but I am assuming it is under the general "discussion items" that is listed sometimes.
Nobody brought it to the table - it was just a "discussion".
"So, to clarify~they (supposedly) wanted to take away the right to vote with a choice"
You could say that.....but....as in the case with what happened in the City for the Mayor election.....what we were told is that they aren't taking away your choice, that you can still collect signatures to run if you want to. They basically say they aren't taking away your choice and "This is who we endorse. If you want someone different, you'll have to find them and finance them yourselves."
"and now they want to either do away with public input and/or not televise the meetings at all?"
It seems the first part of the discussion was all of them and it dealt with not televising the public input portion - have public input first and THEN call the meeting to order and start broadcasting.
Aldersley is the one who suggested that people could FOIL the meetings, and she also suggested that the Town not broadcast the meetings at all and let the public tape the meetings.
Whether they all agreed or not, I don't know.
That's why, like Cheri, I would like to see the workshops video recorded. The workshops are too early for the working public to attend - so -an option may be to send someone with a video camera (not on a tripod though - only hand held so as not to interfere with the meetings) to record workshop meetings.
I'd be more than happy to put them up on here! :)
Cheri -
"Then come to find out not only may they not tape the public input portion of the meeting, if Stephanie gets her way the meetings won't even be taped and televised. (((WHAT!?!?!))) "
I think what Aldersley is talking about is the not having the online live feed of the meetings, and not having the archive of videos online with their free Vimeo feature.
I think the meetings would still be broadcast (maybe without public input aired) on the public access channel.
She did say the public could tape it, so I am assuming it would still be broadcast on the telly.
Although, I'm not really sure because she said "not broadcast at all" and....is she talking about online or on the public channel? When she said the public could FOIL it....did she mean not broadcast it and just let them FOIL the dvd or something?
Confusing.
Nothing confusing at all:
give their contributor friend special zoning no one wants. Look at the money durizio is spending to stop a legal cell tower but it is in view of her house. Read the seqra resolution for the cell tower. Then look at what the board does for titus ave. They could care less about what the people want for the town. It is only about the back room deal with durizio demarza aurelli gang.
Look at the lies the board said after their 2010 library joint board meeting. They wanted to control the conversation. They wanted to come up with a plan (not the public).
This has been their agenda all along. The campaign talk was all lies.
@foils, I hope that what Stephanie said is not accurate or that she was having a brain glitch because I think it is pretty cool to have the meetings live on the it network. I also think it makes less work for Barb (who has still yet to be formerly appointed) if everyone starts foiling the meetings every month. (which is what I would advocate everyone doing just to be obnoxious)
When they campaign on MORE open government I dont think this is what the voters had in mind...oh but thats right, there really doesnt need to be any honest campaigning this time around, does there?
I think it's pretty cool to have meetings live online too!
Especially for residents of Irondequoit who may not have cable. I have had DirecTV satellite for 12 years - so I wouldn't be able to "tape" meetings or watch them live if I lived in Irondequoit.
What about residents who don't have cable or satellite, but have a computer? They might appreciate the live online feed too.
Barb is awesome - she should have been appointed a long time ago, and I remember a few blogs where I suggest that a few times. I wonder why that hasn't happened? They obviously like her and appreciate her hard work.
Aldersley suggesting to not broadcast meetings at all - whether it's online or on cable - doesn't sit well with me.
That they all want to try out "cutting public input" from the broadcasts doesn't sit well with me either.
Hopefully, they as a Board don't try to do this.
It is really unfortunate for Irondequoit voters that this cross endorsement deal was cut. The people deserve to have elected officials ideas questioned, challenged and vetted.
On vacation????
Nothing since this last entry?
Nothing on the last board meeting?
Nothing on the local candidates and cross endorsement?
Come on back, you used to be the only group writing what others werent...
Sorry anonymous - but blogs will be few and far between right now.....because......
1. It's summer and nothing much happens until September/November.
2. I am waiting for my 1st grandchild to be born tonight or early Wednesday morning - I'm a little bit preoccupied right now.
:)
Well, I guess you have a reason then...CONGRATS!!!!
Post a Comment