< 1 2 3 > 
2 of 3
One thing I hope the new Commissioners will do….
Posted: 06 April 2013 12:17 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 16 ]
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  100
Joined  2011-07-25

not sure having a commissioner’s mind made up is all that bad.  it’s better than sticking a wet finger in the air to judge flow of popular opinion and then voting accordingly. after all, the incumbents, and commissioners-elect to a lesser degree - have been dealing with the library expansion particulars for some time now, if that’s the case in point here.

during the debates, there was only one candidate who said the decision had to wait for the budget process.  the others pretty much committed one way or the other.  my bet with anyone here willing:  3-2 favoring it.

[ Edited: 06 April 2013 12:20 PM by Bob Strawn ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 April 2013 06:14 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 17 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  962
Joined  2012-10-12

I’m with you on this one Kathy.
I would think, given his positions here, that Larry would be the last person to suggest shutting down public input, but, apparently that is not the case.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 April 2013 07:58 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 18 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  799
Joined  2012-10-10

Tough crowd!  I am NOT in favor of “shutting down public input”.  Any person residing in the Citiy of Manhattan should have an opportunity to express their opinion on issues… in a concise and to-the-point manner.  Is my suggestion of one minute too short a time frame?  Perhaps.  However, we seem to have difficulty holding folks to the three minutes allowed in the past.  And, I still believe a well prepared statement could be read in one minute that would present any single person’s position on an issue. 

I will state once again, opinions of those residing in Salina or Topeka or Wichita should not be allowed to influence decisions that will have an effect on and/or have to be paid for be the citizens of this community.  That is NOT shutting down public input… input of those responsible to live with and pay for the decisions of the elected leaders.  Whether it be an on-line discussion board, letters to the editor, coffee shop discussions, etc., there is nothing that prevents folks from not reading or not listening.  When the City Commission is conducting the business of the City, the citizens’ time should be respected as they follow the legislative process.  City Commission meetings are NOT the place for long-winded dissertations that amount to nothing but enhancing the speaker’s ego. 

Each and every person positively or negatively affected by specific issues should be allowed to state how they will be affected… if they are residents of the City.  I do NOT see that as “shutting down public input!”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 April 2013 08:46 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 19 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  141
Joined  2012-10-21

“My point, and I believe Wynn’s, was that there are some issues already decided.  If the Library issue were to come back up, there are 3 commissioners who have their minds already made up that is should go forward.  Two commissioners are against it.  There is no reason to have public input go on and on and on, if it won’t make one iota of difference in the vote.”—Larry

“On many topics it is not going to be worth anybody’s time to listen to a litany of speeches when the deal is already done long before.” —Wynn Butler

Perhaps, I’m just not following your points.  These comments sound to me like there’s no point in having public input when commissioners have already made up their minds.  Mr. Butler didn’t sound interested in being at a meeting until 2 a.m., if needed, to hear public comment.  Some of the meetings that I recall being lengthy were due in part to long presentations by applicants.  Dial and Hy-Vee made presentations during the PUD process that took up 75 minutes of the meeting, and were frequently off topic, in my opinion.  Did commissioners really need to know that the Hy-Vee vice president’s wife was due to have a baby any time now, and Hy-Vee would be the perfect place for him to pick up dinner, flowers, diapers, and olives from the olive bar?  No one suggested that their presentations should be shortened, which I would guess was because the hope was the large crowd of citizens would get weary and go home.  From my perspective, the situation with the Hy-Vee PUD amendment created the sense that public input didn’t really matter and was really almost discouraged by putting off public comment to as late in the meeting as possible.  When that happens, it can create distrust, so I guess I don’t why anyone would want to return to that situation.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 April 2013 08:57 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 20 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  962
Joined  2012-10-12

“Each and every statement should be limited to one minute”...No one outside the city limits should be allowed to speak.
Come on Larry, That is what you said. If that is not limiting public input, then I am Bruce Snead, or that other mayor who suggested the same things you are suggesting.
Your public posturing as an advocate of the “truth” is a sham. The only “truth” you care about is that which exists only in your mind.  My daddy described folks like you in this way…“They talk to hear their heads rattle”. You make many good points, but, sometimes you go too far.  Not every action is a conspiracy.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 April 2013 06:55 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 21 ]
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  100
Joined  2011-07-25

there’s no need, generally, for hours of public comment.  3 mins per speaker should be sufficient to make a point.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 April 2013 11:36 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 22 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  141
Joined  2012-10-21

I don’t have a problem with three minutes per speaker, as that length is somewhat standard.  But, I also think if there is a long line of citizens interested in addressing the commission and it could take hours, then I think they should be allowed to speak.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 April 2013 11:55 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 23 ]
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  100
Joined  2011-07-25

i notice the new commissioners and leftover are already setting the stage for tax increases and more regulations with their summary of what’s ahead in sunday’s mercury.  obviously, that’s what the town wants, given the vote; no need for surprise or irritation.

[ Edited: 07 April 2013 12:04 PM by Bob Strawn ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 April 2013 12:12 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 24 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  962
Joined  2012-10-12

In the nineteen teens, there was a movement in rhetorical circles called the Four Minute Men.  They advocated that all speeches should be four minutes.  They based this on the fact that the Gettysburg Address was four minutes. They considered this a great speech and ergo all speeches should be four minutes. 
A faulty syllogism, of course, but not a bad rule of thumb.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 April 2013 03:53 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 25 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  799
Joined  2012-10-10
Kathy Dzewaltowski - 07 April 2013 11:36 AM

I don’t have a problem with three minutes per speaker, as that length is somewhat standard.  But, I also think if there is a long line of citizens interested in addressing the commission and it could take hours, then I think they should be allowed to speak.

Honestly, I don’t have an issue with the 3-minute rule… if it is strictly enforced across the board.  And, Kathy, if CITIZENS OF MANHATTAN are lined up from 11th to 17th… let them speak.  The same access to the the Commission should not be granted for those residing outside the City.  If the RIP issue comes back up, those who live outside the area but own rental property in town should be able to speak.  They have skin in the game.  And, no, the pathetic pandering to Dial during the development process was uncalled for.  But, when City staff… and certain Commissioners… had their noses glued to Dial’s backside, it happened.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 08 April 2013 10:26 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 26 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  479
Joined  2012-10-10

Kathy – Public input on many of the issues is of value and will influence the finale vote during Commission meetings, if something new and unknown is presented.  That was the case during the free water issue.  Some new facts were presented during the final meeting on that topic, that I believe may have changed a vote or two, I was not a member of that commission.  On other topics however, a done deal is a done deal.  For instance the old Commission was going to pass the LGBT ordinance no matter how many people spoke.  It was a done deal at the time of the meeting.  The same is true for the 2011 Commission everyone knew that the ordinance was going to be overturned and all of the speeches made little difference.  The data and facts were already in place and known to all.  Much research is done by the Staff and provided to the Commission prior to any meeting.  I assume all of the Commissioners read the stuff and do research on the topics before the meetings. People that want to provide input should provide comments by phone, in person or email prior to the meeting.  It is naïve to assume that anyone attends a commission meeting is a blank slate with no leaning in a particular direction.  The done deal idea has been the norm in Manhattan for a long time.  So my point on the library is that it is for me a done deal.  It is going to be built; the only not done deal is the final financing.  So in the interest of time, let us discuss the finance part.  I think Larry does have a point on those that are not city tax payers taking time to speak at a meeting, especially if it is about mil levy or a city ordinance.  You make a good point about sales tax. That does involve those outside the city that shop here.  But folks outside the city that want us to use tax dollars for MAC, the Library etc should carry less weight than those that foot the property tax bill.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 08 April 2013 10:55 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 27 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  962
Joined  2012-10-12

Wynn,
I am just wondering.  If everyone’s mind is already made up, why waste the time with these meetings? Just vote and then call Rich and he will decide who prevails.  It would save you having to stay at those meetings and listen to idiots drivel on and on, and keeping you up past your bedtime.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 08 April 2013 11:02 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 28 ]
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  100
Joined  2011-07-25

this subject is a bit overdone.  i sat there for four years and listened to people say the same thing over and over again.  i also listened to people make great comments about stuff like registering daycare providers and safe-room regulations.  it’s the mayor prerogative.  my observation is that liberals tended to let it go on until people have had their say.  and conservatives, like me, tended to want a more managed approach.  for example, during neighborhood objections to zoning matters, i often asked for a neighborhood spokesman to make their argument.  it’s not demeaning to have an orderly discussion, as long as the subject is fully vetted.  but it’s the mayor who controls. and in my view her/his judgement should be respected by all.

[ Edited: 08 April 2013 11:07 AM by Bob Strawn ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 08 April 2013 11:06 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 29 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  962
Joined  2012-10-12

Bob,
Even Hatesall?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 08 April 2013 11:08 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 30 ]
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  100
Joined  2011-07-25

mark’s approach was different.

Profile
 
 
   
 < 1 2 3 > 
2 of 3
 

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | The Manhattan Mercury, 318 North 5th Street, Manhattan, Kansas, 66502

Reproduction of any kind is prohibited without written consent.