Housing - from last council meeting

Bob:

"The sunshine law allows for meetings between one or two different people to discuss things. If you didn't have the outside discussion - no business would ever be conducted in a sanctioned meeting. It would take forever"

Bob, look, if the city officials have a meeting outside of the public view, and they discuss city business and that discussion influences the decisions made within the council meeting format, it has essentially violated the public's trust of their officials. NO city business should be conducted without the public's knowledge. It doesn't matter whether it is one councilperson meeting with the city manager or all five, if a decision is made on any city business, outside the parameters of a public meeting, it doesn't do anything for the trust level. The conversations between councilmembers and the city manager between council meetings was brought to this forum's attention by Mr. Adkins himself I believe and a discussion ensued within these pages on the subject.

If it isn't a violation of the Sunshine Law, it certainly sends a message to the public that information is being hidden from the people or that a decision was made prior to the public knowing about it via council meeting and out in the open as all decisions need to be.

The public has a right to know what their leaders are doing in their city. It isn't exclusively the leaders city, it's the people's city and they are suppose to represent our wishes, not form the opinions/direction themselves without including the people. It eludes to good old boy backroom antics and none of us want that, do we?

What is it that needs to be discussed behind closed doors anyway other than city employee personnel matters as is stated in the council meeting notes.

And on the subject of providing you proof on the claims made on this forum, I have suggested once (now twice) to you that if you pick a subject, you, most likely, will find some data that will support the MUSA claims. You just need to search for it and accept it as factual in nature as it usually comes from the Journal articles. I still don't know why you started on this forum lambasting the city leaders and suddenly, you are defending their actions. Puzzling at best. You have made a complete turnabout IMO.

And, why do you take your attorney's word as the ultimate truth? His opinion is not necessarily the gospel either.

Ok Bob, have read your hypothetical situation involving the city manager and the "stop in/one at a time councilmembers"

Bob:
"Second - the intent of the laws was to prevent secret meetings and secret votes - all *actions* must be taken in the daylight view of citizens."

The situation you have described where there is conversation between city manager and council people about adopting a policy IS out of the daylight view of the citizens. It is not in council chambers where the public is able to hear the dialogue and provide input. Rather, it is a private conversation concerning city business and a proposal and is held in the city manager's office which is not an announced public venue.

An example of a committee being formed out of the public's view, that has had some dire consequences in the past, is the Historical Committee. Designed to control architecture and color schemes in the S. Main St area, it has expanded to include the entire downtown apparently as they have stuck their noses in the O'Reilly's fiasco as to "proper" exterior design" for their precious downtown area. Ridiculous.....and the committee should be dissolved as it is more of a nuisance than a worthwhile endeavor. Self-imposed important people serving the community in a negative way in most cases.

Bob:
"The item is added to the agenda at the next meeting - where the proposal is read, and discussion ensues"

Are the people allowed to comment or is it strictly between council and city manager in your story?

Bob:
"The proposal would be read, at each iteration, at the next meeting - what, 5, 6, 7, different times? Just to pass something - it would take 16-20 weeks without any outside convo regarding the matter"

You're WAY OFF on this one. Read the history of the work agendas on the city site. Most of the proposals that come before council are declared emergency readings and therefore, only read one time for consideration to push it through quickly. Very seldom are council agenda items read a second time and delayed from enacting. If you attend or watch a typical council meeting, the reading of the proposal is given, there is little to no discussion before the blanket rubber stamp "ayes" are spoken by council members. Never a question asked(which makes it appear as if it has been discussed before the meeting and the vote pre-arranged- Hmmm) It is so habitual, it has been duly noted on this forum and is rather apparent when viewing council meetings. This is what we are talking about Bob when we mention that the city manager contacts each councilmember BEFORE the actual meeting to discuss the item and to perhaps "convince" the councilperson to vote in favor of the measure BEFORE it hits the chamber floor for consideration. THIS is the problem as this is, what did you say before......"all actions must be taken in the daylight view of the citizens" Does this activity look to you like it is in a daylight view of the citizens Bob?

Bob:
"HOWEVER - these same people only "want to throw 'em all out" - but for as long as you have been preaching that message it hasn't worked, has it?"

Number of reasons for that happening Bob. Getting them thrown out hasn't worked for us because we can't seem to persuade decent people on this site to run for office. The reasons no one wants to run ranges from no time to do it to don't want the headaches of dealing with the MMF political candidate machine set up here to not having a chance of winning because our side of the ledger doesn't have enough voters to overcome the voting block who support the city fed candidates. Don't want to end up like Josh Laubach and forced out either. Rebels with independent thinking are forced out Bob. Comply or leave is the mantra. We don't know how to get the potential voters off the couch and to the polling place on election day to overcome the city block and vote for a decent, non-programmed candidate and therefore, turn council personnel over to a 5 person combo who will actually represent the people rather than play puppet for the city manager/MMF. If we could get 5 people on council who will not buy the city nonsense and actually control the city manager (or fire him for incompatibility with council's agenda), we could start to see a change in direction for the city that would be a positive for the people. Until these things I mention are in place, we have business as usual with no hope on the horizon of making this city any better. JMO

Note: 7 days until JJ's

Buddha

If I may, let’s assume your lengthy hypothetical situation up to the point where the council meetings take place. Here is where the problem lies.

In a REAL council meeting in Middletown, usually the first reading of the ordinance is just that, A READING, and only a reading with NO DISCUSSION because ALL of the discussion has already taken place and everyone has already agreed to approve it. ALL of council has been informed of its merit according to our city manager’s view and have been persuaded BEFORE the meeting to approve it. Our city manger thoroughly explains how he does this on The City Manager’s Blog (titled City Council Deliberations and dated February 17, 2017) on website City of Middletown,org., and he ACTUALLY SAYS that discussion in the meeting is unnecessary.

In council meetings there is almost always immediate, unanimous approval … no discussion. This is not conjecture …

Go to the You Tube videos of our Council meetings and see for yourself. Also, almost all of the ordinances are declared an EMERGENCY, another point of contention. Declaring an emergency allows council, at their discretion, to IMMEDIATELY APPROVE AN ORDINANCE on the first reading with no notice to the public whatsoever. Why is the city continually operating on an emergency basis??? Here’s why:

An emergency ordinance, under Ohio rules, WILL BE IMMEDIATELY ENACTED upon approval; circumventing the required thirty day waiting period for enactment of new ordinance. (They may, but seldom do, wait to approve an emergency ordinance at the next meeting with a second reading.) Either way an emergency ordinance can be and usually is, easily approved WITHOUT ANY DISCUSSION and without public input. COUNCIL FINISHES THE RACE BEFORE IT STARTS!!! This MAY not violate the Sunshine Law BUT IT DOES VIOLATE THE SPIRIT OF THE LAW.

We, on this forum, have been running a marathon for years. Then you come along running a sprint for the last few yards, reaching rapid conclusions from the perspective of a newcomer. In the brief period of time since you joined this board you could not have absorbed all the pertinent information here on MUSA, City of Middletown.org and You Tube videos of council meetings..

If you or your attorney had thoroughly read, without prejudice, the several posts on this subject, you would have known about this. You wanted proof.   Its right at your finger tips.

Well John,

Bob:

"I guess it makes more sense for me to sit right here and keep participating and keep working to change our beautiful town into the shining city on the hill that it should be."

Darn right it makes sense for you to sit right here Bob. If you'll wait a few minutes, we'll get the flag out as a backdrop, find some patriotic music and you can do the "keep working to change our beautiful town into the shining city on the hill that it should be" routine with more effectiveness. Better yet, we'll get the same writers for the "My Town" song on You Tube that was performed a few years ago in the city building. Drama is your game Bob. It is entertaining.

Five days Bob to the Java meeting. Are you ready to meet some of us face to face as you mentioned?

By the way Bob, what are you "capable of"?

VietVet,

VietVet,

buddhalite wrote: Oh yeah - as a parting shot - thanks for nothing.  This topic is almost #2 in all time views on this forum (from what I can see - no report to view, just anecdotal evidence and it's only 2.5 weeks old) - and was headed for #1 - but who cares anymore.

Ok mom, I'll ask the question once again just in case you missed it the first time.

If participating on this site is a waste of time, and you have suggested to Bob to stop being involved, WHY DO YOU CONTINUE TO POST ON THIS SITE?

Why don't you take your own advise and sign off for the last time?

You are demonstrating the same thought process that all city officials, city supporters and those who want to live the city planned dream do. You want to bitch about how negative we are on this forum, yet you still want to add your snide little two cents worth on the insults. Why?

Just leave for greener pastures if you don't like the grass in this one. No one will get mad if you depart. You won't hurt our feelings if you go.

Do yourself a favor and say goodbye.

OR, are you just like us and want a venue to complain about things as you claim we do? You're no better than we are so come down off the "holier than thou" throne lady and take your rose-colored, Jim Jones kool-aid drinking, accept all they tell you opinions with you. It is amazing just how clueless and gullible some people are when the facts are right in front of them. How in the hell do you think the city got from All-American status five + decades ago to the early stages of a ghetto we have now? Bet you weren't even around to make the comparison, were you? How can you support past and present city leaders that have brought us to where we are now?

mom:
"I know for a fact that you do not attend council meetings"

I've attended my fair share of council meetings mom. Not lately though. A little hard to break away from caregiver status for my paralyzed wife. Would you be willing to caregive for her every other Tuesday night while I attend the meetings to meet your requirement? Doubt that you could handle it anyway.

mom:
"You did not reach out to the manager to hold your meetings with him that all on this site demanded"

Good Lord lady! You know as well as I do the reason that wasn't done. A one on one with the city manager would have resulted in targeting and payback down the road. The city government has had instances of vindictiveness on occasion with the residents of this town. It has been documented. If any of us scheduled a meeting with Adkins it would be like scheduling your own lynching. Who needs the added drama from the city in their lives?

mom:
"Bob offers a ray of positive vibes and guess who is there to destroy that? All he was doing was offering a positive point of view, commend the chief for his out reach , and you cannot let that happen"

Simple. Bob is not immune, just as I am not, to the scrutiny and opposite opinions being posted here. We all don't have to agree with Bob just because he chooses to be positive and more forgiving of city nonsense. When you participate on a forum, you should expect some flak now and then regarding your ideas. Like others here, I certainly have received my fair share of opposing comments. It is the nature of the beast on a forum. So, what, are we suppose to all be kinder/gentler to Bob and those on the city side of things? Kinder/gentler has ruined society, masking real issues to be solved for the sake of hurting someone's feelings. It's a tough cruel world out there mom in case you haven't noticed. Not everything is sugar coated and wonderful. A trophy for participation is a joke.

mon:
"He puts his money where his mouth is."

Oh really? How does he do that? So far, he has just given us his opinions without really providing any backup proof in his critique. Isn't that what you city supporters always demand of us even though there is supporting documentation on this very forum to support much of what is said here.

mom:
" Also, to answer your question as to why I don't leave it is simple. I, as a strong woman, will not allow the likes of you to bully those of us who are trying to change the city and it's reputation into silence, sir"

Then don't suggest that Bob leave. Stay strong mom. Again, why do you think you are being bullied on here? We are all trying to get our points across and just because some have a stronger "writing technique" than others doesn't necessarily define a bullying event. Some are more insistent than others IMO. Again, nature of the beast on an open forum mom. You want me to E-Mail you a Hurt Feelings Form? Got one here at work.

mom:
"There are great things happening downtown with all of the new restaurants, wine shop, and vodka distillery"

Perhaps, but these
great things" only encompass less than 3-5% of the population therefore severely limiting the effect it has had on the city's other 98%. The "great things" going on downtown are for a very small contingent of so-called "culturally motivated" people. It is of no interest to the vast majority and therefore, not of any major value.

mom:
"These are exciting times! Lead, follow, or get the hell out of the way"

My hometown too mom. I was here long before most in the city building and most who are trying to develop the downtown. Instead of full speed ahead with a downtown gameplan for the arts and fru fru, it would have been more correct to have asked those who have been here for awhile what they wanted for their city as well. You don't come into a town as a newby, start pushing your way around, changing the direction of the city without offering those who were here well before you an opportunity to have input into the direction of the city. That is rude and unprofessional and it has created some hard feelings with some of the long term citizens. Perhaps we don't want the arts and the fru fru shops downtown. Perhaps we don't want this "culture" crap forced down our throats. Perhaps the new people should have respected the old guard by at least asking for our input and placing a value on it as well after we told you our desires for our city.

Ok, we had our meeting at JJ's. buddhalite , two ladies and I showed. The rest .....well......