Put it on the Ballot
The most interesting development in last night's city council meeting was the ORT's obvious disregard for their job requirements. They pretty much surrendered and admitted their lack of ability to govern with Sellers proposal. In his motion, he suggested that the "Free Trash" be placed on the April ballot for the voters to decide. May and O'Connell rightly pointed out the absurdity of such a motion that would need to state how it would be funded.
Do we pass a tax increase as part of this proposal?
Do we vote on the trade-off (e.g. if we get free trash, then we don't get a full-strength police or public works department)?
Council members are elected to make these decisions and to create a feasible budget that keeps us safe and maintains the roads. Thus Sellers pretty much stated he couldn't do that with his motion.
What other issues can we add?
Do we pass a tax increase as part of this proposal?
Do we vote on the trade-off (e.g. if we get free trash, then we don't get a full-strength police or public works department)?
Council members are elected to make these decisions and to create a feasible budget that keeps us safe and maintains the roads. Thus Sellers pretty much stated he couldn't do that with his motion.
As sad as that may seem, it really could be fun. The World Series isn't the only game in town. It's time to play "You Vote For It!", a game that is sweeping suburban Overland. The object of the game is to name various other issues that we can have placed on the ballot that falls under the scope of aldermanic duty.
I will get us started:
- Place on the ballot to get the pot hole fixed on my street.
- Place on the ballot a stop sign at (place street name here) and (place other street name here).
What other issues can we add?
posted by suzyjax at 5:56 AM
30 Comments:
In order to be the Mayor of Overland you must be able to speak in full coherent sentences.
If running, should all candidates be made to use Mark Brown Printing & Economical Mail bulk permit #1402
LOL Twolayer
Should live stock (farm animals) be allowed to graze within city limits?
The above does not include rats.
Mr. Herman explained at the Council meeting that in order to add something to the ballot you would need to work out specific language for it, as well as pass an ordinance to do so.
I understand your point about them defaulting to the residents rather than making the decisions themselves, but this is far from unusual these days. On the state level, for awhile there it seemed to be the order of the day. Have a difficult issue? Avoid the political hassles and leave it to the people to decide.
In a way I welcome this proposal. In order to have this on the ballot we would need to have several meetings of the Refuse Committee, the Council, etc to discuss what the ballot measure would say. Those meetings are public, and the discussions would likely bring out what the specific proposal for "free" trash is.
I wonder how many supporters the Mayor and her concurring Council Members would loose when people learn that the proposal is likely to only reduce their trash bill, not eliminate it. In other words, it will not be "free", by the average resident's definition of the word.
Most people I know who take issue with paying for trash service have an issue with the bill itself, not the amount. When they learn that their bill will still come every quarter (it will just be marginally smaller) they are going to be mad. They didn't want that bill at all and they voted for Mayor Purzner on the basis that they would get "free" trash service back (free meaning in their minds, no direct bill to them.
The best approach to the Trash issue in my opinion is to get them discussing it as a possibility. Eventually, they will have to spell out what the service is, how it will be paid for long term, what the residents will still have to pay, etc. When that happens, I believe the Mayor and her supporting Council members will see a massive exodus of supporters.
Sailor,
I agree, Purzner and Company, will have a mass exodus of supporters once they expose the real deal. If the "free trash" gets put on the ballot, we may finally get the particulars on this so called "free trash".
twolayer,
I saw the news clip you mentioned, on channel 4 at noon. Purzner is not only an idiot, she is a stupid idiot.
Oooooooooooo, I agree with you about that lighting they had on Purzner, it was horrible, yikes, I almost felt bad for her. Every crease, crevice, crinkle, wrinkle, sag and bag was accentuated by the angle of the lighting.
Mr. WhiteFolks, I tried to find your source in today's PD by Sylvester Brown. This is all I could find, from a column on gay voters, which quoted an Overland woman:
"I think most of my neighbors have suspicions because I have short hair and wear comfortable shoes," the Overland resident said to raucous laughter. Still, she keeps quiet, she says, because she lives among neighbors who make fun of "Mexicans" and the "colored guy" on the block.
WF, I don't see the connection here perfectly. I'd like to see if you can add a link to the article you mention.
Overland,
When is it going to sink in that these people can not and will not give you the truth or facts, it doesn't matter who they are talking to. They have been asked repeatedly about the trash and either can't or refuse to give any info. They have admitted they have not talked to or gotten any bids from any trash hauler. Now how in the world can they budget for something they have no idea what it is going to cost.
They have been asked repeatedly to give any kind of fact or figures about anything they say and they can't, don't, won't.
There is nothing they could say or do at this point in my opinion that would ever change my mind about any of them.
New Girl,
I saw it again & I still can't believe it. I was not surprised at what she said, because she said it in the post article. It was the look on her face and giggling.
Mr. Whitefolks,
Did I miss something here? I didn't see, even remotely, where Nazrudin insinuated you were racist. He wanted to know if there was a connection with the article you mentioned with the goings on in Overland's government. I caught the irony of the woman's "colored guy" statement. Perhaps you inferring, Nazrudin, wants to label you a racist is another off colored (no pun intended) joke.
I wish we could all be more clairvoyant. It’s sometimes difficult to get a message or punch line across to one another on these boards.
Lighten up Francis !!!!! Any of you homos call me Francis...and I'll kill ya.
re: Sylvester Brown's article
When I read the article this morning, I thought the woman was saying that her neighbors were the one using the term "colored".
Thus, if she is poking fun at any of her neighbors it is at the rednecks.
Mr. WF, it matters zip to me whether or not you are a racist. Racism is a value some support.
Value differences are one of the issues over which the US of A was created. Some of our ancestors' contemporaries opined that they were right, and the old European ways were just plain wrong, thereby invented a new nation which obliterated hundreds of indigenous tribes.
Opinions = biases = beliefs. Americans are entitled to dumb ideas. Some yanks can't get enough of dumb ideas.
Today's post has an article in it about the company that would like to build a hotel on Page.
Also articles on Joe King of Berkeley, St.Peter's & an article about voter id cards
The link to Purzner's propaganda Dot CON site, is back on the main page of Overland's official site.....sigh
Monday an attorney spoke to the council about his firm. That outfit insures Overland in some way.
That some insurance firm representing Overland needs to get involved over mayor purzner's sunshine law litigation, makes me wonder. I think it was Travellers.
Who contacted them?
The deductible might be so high that the legal fees don't involve the insurer.
Insurance contracts have exclusions. If ms. purzner thinks she is a demigod, she needs to realize that not all "Acts of God" are included in all insurance contracts.
The reason our elected officials are still talking about the trash issue is because this issue is a key concern for a lot of residents. The issue is far from a mute point when you consider that most of us know at least one person who voted for Mayor Purzner based on this issue (2 ladies on my block alone). The issue is important to a good portion of the residents so the Council has to deal with it. It is their job to address the concerns of the residents they represent.
Right now, those who's primary issue is trash service have no reason to support anyone but the Mayor and her supporting Council members. That is because all they have really heard so far is one side say we want to give them "free" trash and another side say they don't. That is not an accurate portrayal of the issue, but without discussion that is what many see.
There are no whats, hows, or whys being discussed. I know from personal experience (those ladies mentioned above) that a discussion that moves beyond sound bites and gets into specifics reaches reasonable people. The residents deserve the opportunity to decide on their own what is right.
This is where the previous administration failed in my opinion. This would likely be a non-issue, had the previous administration reached-out and involved the public in the trash issue though town meetings and the like. Many are angry because the first they heard about it was when they received a letter from the City telling them to expect a new bill.
I personally feel that 2 police officers, 1 dispatcher and 2 public works employees is a far too expensive price for "free" trash collection (even if it was really "free" to the residents, which it will not be). But there are many other issues with this proposal that, if aired, would likely swing the public against it as well. Different people respond differently, to different issues. Put them all on the table and it is entirely likely that the vast majority will decide against the proposal on their own.
We tried ignoring the public with this issue and we now have Mayor Purzner. Just because the issue is not of interest or importance to some of us, does not mean that everyone in Overland feels the same. People in Overland deserve to see this issue finally fully discussed on a factual basis. When it is, I am confident that the nearly all Overland Residents will favor leaving the service the way it is. Don't sell them short.
Our Council is focused on this issue because they are there to represent the interest of the Residents and this is THE issue to a great number of them. If you want this issue to come to conclusion, you have to consider taking the time to fully hash it out at the municipal level so that residents can make their own decisions on it based on the facts and the realities, not the sound bites.
Whether this measure actually ends up on the ballot or not, residents will still make their position known with their vote in April. I would rather that be a fully informed decision.
The people of Overland in effect voted on "free" trash last April.
1115 voted for it (Ann Purzner),
2065 voted against it,
and about 6500 registered voters didn't care to vote.
That is a yes vote by:
35% of those who voted,
11% of registered voters,
7% of Overland residents.
7% !!!
The tail is wagging the dog!
Was “free” trash for residents ever Ms. Purzner’s objective in running for Mayor? Or was it simply a means by which she hoped to get elected, after which she could achieve her (?) real objectives what ever they may be?
I agree with the Juice. The reason Con won was there were 3 people running.
As for the trash the ballot idea, I am generally for referenda and initiatives; however, I am not sure that you can practically address this on the ballot which is what Big Herm was probably trying to say.
Just sit down and try to write the authorizing ordinance on which the vote would be taken. Its difficult. I have thought about it.
Do you aks the voters to prohibit the City from entering into a waste services contract that results in any fees to the citizens? If so, how long does that prohibition last? Does a prohibition against fees mean ANY fees? What about substantially large items?
Do you ask the voters to approve a specific contract? If so, what if they don't? Where does that leave you? Do you go back and negotiate again and then put it to the voters again? This is ineeficient to say the least.
Do you ask for permission to negotiate a contract within certain parameters? If so, haven't you now tied your negotiators hands? The other side knows where you need to end up. No leverage.
Maybe the only way to do it is to ask for competitve proosals for both a fee based and non-fee based service. Then you pick the best bid from each category and place it on the ballot as an either/or. Still, that vote is only good for as long as the contract term and then you are back at square one.
Like I said, practically, this is tough. I should know, I spent over 40 years (give or take year for my indictment) in the General Assembly.
Initiative and referendum are best suited for broader policy issues and not for the operational level where the rubber meets the road........ or, in this case, where the trash meets the can.
Sorry for the typos in the last post. Its tough to type with these handcuffs on, especially when you are dead eerrrr... I mean "term limited"
o.j.,
I can't see mayor purzner being capable of deeper, ulterior motives and / or hidden agendas. She has not demonstrated the level of cognitive skills to think that much.
Rather, I do see her doing what owensby and her marrioneteers program her to say, and nothing more.
As for having real objectives, last year she was among many who wanted Bob Dody out of City Hall.
Now that Owensby and the marionneteers don't have Dody to rant about, their thoughtless, malicious anger is being taken out on any and all people not marching lockstep to their dull, thudding beat.
Jeff O'Connel cracked me up when the mayor said "call me mayor", to which he snorted, "ok mayor ann."
Ghost of Norm,
You're on this one like a Ritenour Grad on a paper pitcher at the Lion's Fair beer garden at your park.
I would venture to guess that there has NEVER been a study conducted by a developer on a tax abatement or TIF district that did not support exactly what the developer projected.
Cozad: "Can you do a study for my development? I'll pay you $10K"
Economist: "Sure, for $15K I'll let you write it."
The best way to avoid this is for the City to commission the study, the cost of which is to be borne by the developer. Municipalities throughout the County have been left scratching their heads when the financial projections are not met...... guess what.... the bonds still have to be paid.
Also, one other point to ponder. The site is turning to gold now that the Page Avenue extension is open AND development of Kinloch/Berkeley has gotten off of the ground. It sits right at the intersection. An upscale hotel in that area would be successful. That's not to say that a certain amount of public assistance may not be warranted (infrastructure, etc.) because upscale hotels breed upscale development. Just look at the Ritz in Clayton. Bankruptcy for the first developer but look at it and its surroundings now. Not many burned out Explorers with dead people in them being found in Clayton after an evening at Hadley's
Overland has only one chance with this. This is their shot. If it is looking for another strip mall or big box store, then that's exactly where it will end.
Unfortunately, big development, needs big ideas and big ideas come from big thinkers. With the current bunch, looks like we will be welcoming another nail salon, cell phone shop and tanning booth to the hottest spot Overland has to offer.
hee hee
Wino Blue Goat is trying to play virtual online detective.
Too bad Musical Wino Goat's blue eyes can't read very well. Little does the bleating goat realize that Sourpickles and UNINCORPORATEDMAN know each other very well.
Sorry Wino Goat, you lose that round....buzzzzzzzzzt. Ya'll come back now and try again ya' heeya.
Let me put that in Country Wino Goat talk: HEY MAN YOU LOSE DUDE!!
http://www.goatstore.com/info.php?id=463027
The goat pictured in the upper left hand corner has blue eyes....believe it or not. The goat store even has a game called psychic detective.
$39.95 a room, I was thinking more a hourly rate, for those to cheap to fork out for an entire night.
And if your head explodes with dark forebodings too
I'll see you on the dark side of the moon
ORT CRACK SMOKING SONG:
'Cause WE got friends in low places,
Where the Whiskey drowns,
And the CRACK chases OUR blues away,
But THE ORT will be okay,
Now we're not big on social graces,
Think WE WILL slip on down to the MIDWOOD oasis,
Oh we got friends,
In low places.
Garth had a vision!
Don't tempt me .... muaaaaaaaah
Post a Comment
<< Home