Home | Yearly News Archive | Advertisers | Blog | Contact Us |
|
Wednesday, November 27, 2024 |
|
7/19 Council meeting |
Post Reply |
Author | |
Mike_Presta
MUSA Council Joined: Apr 20 2008 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 3483 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: Jul 19 2011 at 10:00pm |
Regarding the Main Street olde tyme lights, at least AJ Smith did the right thing and voted “no” in light of the current economic malaise and the extra financial burden on the taxpayers and the property owners who cannot afford the extra assessment. However, the installation of the decorative lighting did pass. Kudos to the South Main Street group for at least raising $1,000 to lower the burden on the rest of the city for their decorations, even though the rest of the city will be eating the maintenance and utility charges from Duke power for 32 additional lights every month. Regarding the Senior Citizens’ levy vote, both Mr. Laubach and
Mr. Allen abstained due to possible conflicts of interest. (Both stated that their employers are
substantial donors to the Middletown Area Senior Citizens organization.) I find it strange that abstentions did NOT “count with the majority” as they had
in the past. Too bad for the Seniors
that Mr. Landen, Esq. was not in attendance or their levy would be on the
ballot in November. So…why is it that whenever the shot callers in Middletown,
and their stooges at City Hall, want something to pass abstentions always count with the
majority, but in cases like this where there is nothing in it for them
and it may actually work against them, that is not the case??? |
|
“Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012
|
|
Richard Saunders
MUSA Resident Joined: Jun 30 2010 Status: Offline Points: 232 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Methinks something is not quite right with the good residents
of South Main Street. I see that they expect the elder citizens of our fair
city to contribute over $1,000 dollars to decorate their fine South Main Street
neighborhood, and to contribute over $400 each and every month from now until
the day that the dukes at Duke raise the rates for electricity and maintenance
of their grand lamps and lampposts.
These genteel denizens of the arts and upper class bistros seem to think
it their due--this tribute from the less fortunate--even tho’ the elderly of our
community, mostly eking out a bare existence from month to month on a fixed
stipend, have scant resources to spare. So, pray tell, residents of this Main Street area, so
eloquent in your begging for assistance in your own quest, why did we not see you
all, or any, or why did we not see even one, not even one, speak out in favor
of the elder residents in a similar search for assistance? Perhaps you just could not see the light? |
|
spiderjohn
Prominent MUSA Citizen Joined: Jul 01 2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 2749 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
The whole streetlight situation smells imo.
The cost of the project has changed at least twice, and the project is nowhere near biginning.
If the city's share of de-construction/construction is now down to $2363, why did those cheapos just offer to pay 1/2 of the cost instead of ponying up an additional $1100? After all, the monthly cost of operating these light poles will escalate from $117 monthly to $460 monthly. So in the long run, the construction cost is small potatoes. I assume that we are also paying the higher cost in the areas where this type of lighting already exists. If our existing street lamping is so in-efficient and dangerous, obviously the additional lamping and sidewalk design should be installed everywhere. I want it in my neighborhood also. Mr.Adklins is a master magician at spending(losing) taxpayer $$ while achieving little or no taxpayer community benefit. This guy has become mean-spirited.
Mr.Adkins was well-prepared to make this emergency failure into a "first reading". So--we shall ? the monthly expense of this project in 2 weeks, and see how the 4x monthly cost increase to ALL city residents can be justified.
Senior levy?
Maybe the leadership should have timed their presentations properly to avoid the convenient method of "emergency legislation". Took it for granted maybe? IMO tax levys are serious business that should NEVER be approved by emergency. First it was for expanded programs--now it is to service debt on the construction.
A nice facility doing great work, but now they want someone else to pay for their extravagances. Don't we all want someone to pay for our new homes and wish lists? Put it on the ballot--let the public decide. This issue will be brought back as an emergency at the 8/2 meeting, while the city legal finds a way for Mr.Laubaugh to be able to vote. Well--if Mr.Laubaugh recuses himself because he sees a conflict, I don't know why he should be forced to change his opinion.
Anyone else disgusted at how Councilmembers begin their threats, whining and panic when it looks as if the big boys aren'y going to get their way? All of that drama last night for a poorly timed and presented issue that only had 5 votes(6 was necessary) at best?
|
|
acclaro
Prominent MUSA Citizen Joined: Jul 01 2009 Status: Offline Points: 1878 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
What I am disgusted sj is how the Senior Citizen facility nd need to bail them out of their financial hole after over-paying for the John XXIII property ends up on a bailot anyway. Should not the council being placing or acting upon the need and obvious requirement to put dedicated funds on road and infrastructure back as it was in 1986? For 25 years, this hasn't been considered, nothing has been done. But because Stugmyer is a bad fund raiser, they want the citizens to approve a bailout? Illogical and smacks of cronyism.
A sad day when a Senior Citizen building serving few, as many citizens don't belong nor have an interest in paying the fees (several have been offended by the cavalier attitude of the management there), takes higher priority with council than setting back the clock to 1986 when the dedicayed funds for streets were part of the city ordinance.
Why does this project of bailout have a higher priority than the streets. This issue really is at the heart of mismanagement and a lack of concern for prioritization of the woes of Middletown. A Senior Citizen facility that was given $ Mm by AK Steel has a higher priority than dedicated street funds? Explain that one, as it makes absolutely no sense, other than the Vatican bailing out the cash put into the Fenwick move.
|
|
LMAO
MUSA Citizen Joined: Oct 28 2009 Location: Middletucky Status: Offline Points: 468 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
They will try again in August to try to get it on the ballot.When Lesley returns he will get it passed somehow.
The lights on Main Street is going to really pi$$ more people off.Why should the taxpayers have to pay the maintance on these lights when they arent on are streets? Im so tired of having are city ran by a bunch of crooks.They are liar's and spineless.
|
|
Bill
MUSA Citizen Joined: Nov 04 2009 Status: Offline Points: 710 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Where was Stugmyer and that Senior Center board a few years ago when the ridiculous idea to build that yellow monstrosity was discussed? Wasn't there any planning? Who thought this would work? Shame on them. Vote no.
|
|
middletownscouter
MUSA Citizen Joined: Oct 11 2010 Location: Sunset Park Status: Offline Points: 501 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
If the residents on S. Main want the streetlights so badly and they're willing to pony up for them, then I say give 'em what they want.
BUT they should also be paying the extra maintenance fees as well. If the cost to maintain the lights is going to go up by $343 a month, then those same residents should be assessed each year for the difference between what it would have cost for the existing lighting and what the new decorative lighting costs. |
|
acclaro
Prominent MUSA Citizen Joined: Jul 01 2009 Status: Offline Points: 1878 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I don't understand why Mulligan would not abstain from voting as well. His mother was principal when the other Stugmyer was/is Business manager at Fenwick. So, the brother Stugmyer that was put in that position as it helped Fenwick move, is getting help from Mulligan and the crew on council because they provided needed funds to move Fenwick out of Middletown. That is an obvious conflict of interest, although LM will still vote. LL will state there is no conflict between Allen and JL because the support provided the Sr. Citizens Center by each of their employers is philanthropic, not a profit motivation, but both would be wise to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest (and probably an underlying desire to avoid revealing they personally don't think it is prudent to put it on the ballot).
Now recall LL is the same who shot down the RIF and mail box stop to be put in the Senior Citizen Center now being asked to orchestrate the necessary 6 votes. there should really only be 5 available, as LM should abstain. With so many local attorneys on the Board, including Shew, Imhoff, others, probably a conflict with DP as well, as he knows these attorneys and I know Imhoff used to get alot of subcontract work from Pratt and Singer when they had 7 attorneys.
Why is this a higher priority with council than taking care of setting the dedicated fund requiremet back as an ordinance? Buehler...Buehler? Anyone seen Buehler?
|
|
LMAO
MUSA Citizen Joined: Oct 28 2009 Location: Middletucky Status: Offline Points: 468 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I dont care what anyone says the rest of the city will be footing the bill for maintance on them if they happen to go out.They cant keep records on who and who isnt paying for sewer usage let alone keeping records on charging people for South Main pretty lights.
|
|
John Beagle
MUSA Official Joined: Apr 23 2007 Location: Middletown Status: Offline Points: 1855 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Mike, thanks for covering the council meetings. I read your posts with great interest.
|
|
acclaro
Prominent MUSA Citizen Joined: Jul 01 2009 Status: Offline Points: 1878 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Mike, I am certain the counting of an abstention is used only to add to a quaorum, but legally, could not be counted as a YES vote, it cannot. The Roberts Directory for Procedure is relatively renown and the city and state laws would of course address the issue, but an "absent" vote associated with a conflict or another reason, would absolutely not be added to the YES votes. It may be added only to establish a minimal number for quorum.
The interesting point will be will MMF now force Mr. Allen to not run again (I think he will not seek office as this was a favor) and find someone who does not have a conflict. Of course, LL may come back, and state he has done his research and that there to be no conflict of interest with with JL or TA. But, it would make theThe phrase "abstention votes" is an oxymoron, an abstention being a refusal to vote. To abstain means to refrain from voting, and, as a consequence, there can be no such thing as an "abstention vote."
"In the usual situation, where either a majority vote or a two-thirds vote is required, abstentions have absolutely no effect on the outcome of the vote since what is required is either a majority or two thirds of the votes cast. On the other hand, if the vote required is a majority or two thirds of the members present, or a majority or two thirds of the entire membership, an abstention will have the same effect as a "no" vote. Even in such a case, however, an abstention is not a vote. [RONR (10th ed.), p. 387, l. 7-13; p. 388, l. 3-6; p. 390, l. 13-24; see also p.66 of RONR In Brief.]" |
|
warmandfuzzy
MUSA Immigrant Joined: Sep 21 2009 Status: Offline Points: 17 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Can someone explain WHY the costs of maintaining the S.Main Street decorative lights will increase by $343 a month over the costs of maintaining the existing lighting? Who came up with this figure, and what is this cost based on?
|
|
LMAO
MUSA Citizen Joined: Oct 28 2009 Location: Middletucky Status: Offline Points: 468 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
They come up with any price they want.I think the price has jumped up a few times just for the cost. The spineless ones dont give a Dam what the people think,their going to do as they please.
|
|
Mike_Presta
MUSA Council Joined: Apr 20 2008 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 3483 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
|
“Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012
|
|
Mike_Presta
MUSA Council Joined: Apr 20 2008 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 3483 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Acclaro, While I
agree with you in principle, it is simply a fact that Mr. Landen, Esq. rules
that “abstentions count with the majority” whenever it suits the shot
callers. I first
noticed this during the very last council meeting of Perry Thatcher’s council term.
The vote was for the purchase of the acreage
owned by Mr. Thatcher, et al, by the city for the hospital. It was being done as emergency legislation
and needed six votes. Only six council
members were present (I believe because Sonny Hill was ill?) and after the roll
call Landen announced: “Abstentions
count with the majority, the legislation passes.” I am absolutely certain of
this because I was flabbergasted, and I don’t get flabbergasted easily. I saw nothing wrong with this this deal (the
city buying property which Mr. Thatcher and Adam Cristo had owned for many,
many years) but I certainly disagreed with the way it was handled (this “abstentions
count with the majority” scam). They
should’ve simply had a 1st and 2nd reading, and bought
the property with non-emergency legislation. Landen, Esq.
has used this same ploy a few more times since then, the latest being during
the last year, although I can’t recall the specific item of legislation. |
|
“Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012
|
|
acclaro
Prominent MUSA Citizen Joined: Jul 01 2009 Status: Offline Points: 1878 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Mike, if what you say is true, which I have no reaason to doubt your accurancy, then it is a violation of law. An abstention does not count EVER as a YES vote, but is rendered moot as a vote tally when the majority has already voted sufficiently to pass a resolution, motion, et al. In the event the abstention was needed to fulfill a uorum, in your reference, six votes, the vote would be 5-1, as the absention would be considered a NO VOTE, never a YES. If this practice has been routine as counting a vote to be a YES when it is a requirement to fulfill the quorum, it is in legal error. In the case of the two abstentions, the vote would be 4-3, AJ Smith, no, TA, and JL, no, as they abstained. You cannot make an abstention a YES vote in a quorum. When a quorum has been met, and the majority met, the absention is moot, but would not be considered as a YES vote with the majority.
I see your point, when LL returns, if he pulls the 6-1 ruling shell game, it won't fly. I think Mr. Allen would make this point strongly. As stated previously, the "wiggle" room may be in what makes for a "conflict", but it is highly subjective, and as both are on the record as perceiving it a conlfict to vote, they will be hard pressed to alter that position. Unless AJS is moved to change his vote, the Senior Citizen maneuver will have to await another day, and when Tom Allen leaves office.
|
|
ground swat
MUSA Citizen Joined: Mar 31 2011 Status: Offline Points: 367 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
When will staff ever come to the podium with a solid number? Thats what AJ, to his credit brought up with the road repair funds. How do we go from $9,900 to $2,000. I'm glad it's less but again it's how they present a project and guess at the cost. And they wonder why some of us ask questions. But in the same breath I am stunned by the waste of time and redundancy of several on this council. Do they just like to hear themselves talk? I only wish we could limit who can get blip tv.
|
|
Post Reply | |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
This page was generated in 0.109 seconds.
Copyright ©2024 MiddletownUSA.com | Privacy Statement | Terms of Use | Site by Xponex Media | Advertising Information |