Middletown Forum : The "Amended Motion" http://www.middletownusa.com/forum/ This is an XML content feed of; Middletown Forum : City Council : The "Amended Motion" Tue, 06 Oct 2026 15:40:08 +0000 Wed, 02 Sep 2009 11:54:41 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss Web Wiz Forums 10.12 360 www.middletownusa.com/forum/RSS_post_feed.asp?TID=1854 Middletown Forum http://middletownusa.com/images/blog-logo.jpg http://www.middletownusa.com/forum/ The "Amended Motion" : Mike I understand the 2-fer, I... http://www.middletownusa.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1854&PID=10621&title=the-amended-motion#10621 Author: Pacman
Subject: 1854
Posted: Sep 02 2009 at 11:54am

Mike I understand the 2-fer, I really don't get why they did it that way, but it is what it is for now.  I assume if they lose they will break it down to two issues next time.  I don't think this is the last we will see of this matter if it doesn't pass.]]> Wed, 02 Sep 2009 11:54:41 +0000 http://www.middletownusa.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1854&PID=10621&title=the-amended-motion#10621 The "Amended Motion" : Mike, I remain perplexed to what... http://www.middletownusa.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1854&PID=10618&title=the-amended-motion#10618 Author: accuro
Subject: 1854
Posted: Sep 02 2009 at 11:49am

Mike, I remain perplexed to what your point is on the difference. But the Ohio laws have to have uniformity, you simply cannot make exceptions to have items on the ballot regardless of the charter or not. My point was, how would it be constitutional for Ms. Ford to be denied the right to be on the ballot, and another ballot issue which failed to have sufficient numbers be acceptable when the test for both was not met? The argument presented by the President of the NCAAP was very poor, she did it on economic grounds. The question was why was Mr. Landen pushing this initiative so hard when council had already defeated it? Doesn't the city report to council? Didn't a majority vote on council take place, which did not want a public vote on the issue (I say again- a majority)? So, why did Mr. Laden go outside to seek counsel on an issue which was defeated? Who drove him, what were his motives? That was the round about argument made. Is it Mr. Landen's own initiative or the MINORITY of council thay pushed him. The public record trail would reveal what? Is it not starnge on other issues which are defeated Mr. Landen doesn't seek council to get an opinion? Is there a coincidence the woman was chastised by one of the MINORITY supporters of getting it on the ballot? And if council need not have even considered a petition or vote (obviously that was unexpected, therefore the circling of those seeking the absolute right for the voters to vote on this most significant issue), why the petition. And why did Mr. Schiavoni change his position, based upon insufficient signatures?       ]]> Wed, 02 Sep 2009 11:49:11 +0000 http://www.middletownusa.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1854&PID=10618&title=the-amended-motion#10618 The "Amended Motion" : Pacman wrote:Does anyone think... http://www.middletownusa.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1854&PID=10604&title=the-amended-motion#10604 Author: Mike_Presta
Subject: 1854
Posted: Sep 02 2009 at 10:23am

Originally posted by Pacman Pacman wrote:

Does anyone think this is going to pass?  I don't.  But, the bigger deal that is made about it the more I think you will drive people to vote for it, especially if you keep having performances like you did last night. 
 
If it doesn't pass and they decide to collect signatures again in May 2010, and again , and again, and again........what are you going to do other than vote on it up or down?
 
JMO
Pac:  I actually AM in favor of letting the folks vote on it, but not as a "2-fer" (both wards AND the reduction from 7 to 5) as ONE question.  Also, I believe that this was MOVING MIDDLETOWN FORWARD inspired, which makes it (at least in my opinion) at worst, CRIMINAL, and at best, highly unethical!!!
 
Also, it was obvious that the MAJORITY of council really did NOT fully understand what was what.  Those folks seem willing to vote on ANYTHING, regardless of whether or not they understand it.  Absolutely disgusting!!!
]]> Wed, 02 Sep 2009 10:23:48 +0000 http://www.middletownusa.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1854&PID=10604&title=the-amended-motion#10604 The "Amended Motion" : Accuro: First, amendments to... http://www.middletownusa.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1854&PID=10603&title=the-amended-motion#10603 Author: Mike_Presta
Subject: 1854
Posted: Sep 02 2009 at 10:14am

Accuro:

First, amendments to city charters are governed by different laws than elective offices.  Counncil always has had the right to place (or not place) ANY charter amendment before the voters by ordinance.  Where the problems arose, at least with me, was when an AMENDED ordinance was introduced and deemed to be the "SECOND reading", which allowed council to pass it 5-2.  To pass it as an EMERGENCY ordinance would've required at least a 6-1 margin.  Also, the public really has NO IDEA what the ordinance says, as the actual ordinances were NOT included in the workbook version available to the public.
 
Regarding road repairs:  I, myself, actually did TRY to address this issue when I spoke in OPPOSITION during a public hearing earlier in the meeting on a "substantial modification" to an alleged THREE YEAR PLAN that, according to the actual verbage in the staff report will last either ONE or FIVE years.  The total amount of the plan was alleged to be $600K, but NOWHERE was this figure, or ANY other figure, actually stated in writing.  Regarding my objections about the lack of commitment to road repairs, they brought in Mr. Bo Jangles who did a little soft shoe.  Apparently he tap danced around the issue sufficiently to convince everyone to agree, even though it seemed obvious that no one really was clear on what it was all about.
 
No worries, though, since we were assured by Mr. Adkins that there would be a period allowed for public input, and by Ms. Gilleland that the period ended this past Monday!
]]> Wed, 02 Sep 2009 10:14:05 +0000 http://www.middletownusa.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1854&PID=10603&title=the-amended-motion#10603 The "Amended Motion" : Does anyone think this is going... http://www.middletownusa.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1854&PID=10598&title=the-amended-motion#10598 Author: Pacman
Subject: 1854
Posted: Sep 02 2009 at 10:01am

Does anyone think this is going to pass?  I don't.  But, the bigger deal that is made about it the more I think you will drive people to vote for it, especially if you keep having performances like you did last night. 
 
If it doesn't pass and they decide to collect signatures again in May 2010, and again , and again, and again........what are you going to do other than vote on it up or down?
 
JMO
 
 
]]> Wed, 02 Sep 2009 10:01:45 +0000 http://www.middletownusa.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1854&PID=10598&title=the-amended-motion#10598 The "Amended Motion" : I don't know why someone... http://www.middletownusa.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1854&PID=10587&title=the-amended-motion#10587 Author: accuro
Subject: 1854
Posted: Sep 02 2009 at 8:43am

I don't know why someone has not gotten the ACLU involved in the many issues that take place in Middletown from what I continue to read. As for the ballot language, undoubtedly Ohio voting law and statutes address that issue and "clarity." As for the right to put on the ballot issues which were not supported by petitions, then, is it not also setting precedent that
Ms. Ford must still be on the ballot? Or is the elimination of the ward no longer going to be on the ballot, as it would be write-in? How can the Butler Cty voter registration panel say not enough votes were met, and then put the same measure on the ballot? So, now anyone who has insufficient numbers of registered voters can go to city council and ask them to vote to have their names put on the ballot. And if city council doesn't approve that request, is that a discrimatory practice? Why is no one asking city council pushing to have the infrastructure funds put back on the ballot or simply mandate it by an emergency vote? Do you individuals not realize as the voters voted to allow the funds to be used elsewhere, it will also take a VOTE to put it back on the ballot? And yet as the streets crumble, no one is not asking why is the ward situation taking precedent over getting the infrastructure issue on the ballot? The city doesn
t want to maintian roads because they want you, the citizens to suffer, as leverage for a tax increase. That's what all this ward elimination is about. Why do you think the city moved to have these violations in place for an unpainted shed, a dead plant on the porch? Because its evidence tio use for the grand plan on the HUD funds. And with the stimulus money---who oays that back, the city or the state? If its the city, where's the money coming from? Taxes? Too much not seeing the forest for the trees in my opinion. Playing tactics instead of a strategy matching battle plan with battle plan.   ]]> Wed, 02 Sep 2009 08:43:01 +0000 http://www.middletownusa.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1854&PID=10587&title=the-amended-motion#10587 The "Amended Motion" : I would enjoy a real public veting... http://www.middletownusa.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1854&PID=10582&title=the-amended-motion#10582 Author: Merrell Wood
Subject: 1854
Posted: Sep 02 2009 at 8:26am

I would enjoy a real public veting about about last night's actions. From what I saw, Anita certainly knew  there was a game going on. ]]> Wed, 02 Sep 2009 08:26:14 +0000 http://www.middletownusa.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1854&PID=10582&title=the-amended-motion#10582 The "Amended Motion" : Perhaps MOVING MIDDLETOWN FORWARD... http://www.middletownusa.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1854&PID=10574&title=the-amended-motion#10574 Author: Mike_Presta
Subject: 1854
Posted: Sep 02 2009 at 7:48am

Perhaps MOVING MIDDLETOWN FORWARD TOLD coached them what to do??? ]]> Wed, 02 Sep 2009 07:48:34 +0000 http://www.middletownusa.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1854&PID=10574&title=the-amended-motion#10574 The "Amended Motion" : Merrell Wood wrote:Thank you... http://www.middletownusa.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1854&PID=10573&title=the-amended-motion#10573 Author: Mike_Presta
Subject: 1854
Posted: Sep 02 2009 at 7:44am

Originally posted by Merrell Wood Merrell Wood wrote:

Thank you Mike for clearing up that ringing in my ears. Still, what about the confussing ballot?
Don't ask ME!!!  Ask one of the folks carrying around the HUGE BRAINS that found all of this to be perfectly clear...at least to the point that they felt able to VOTE for it!!!
I'm still trying to figure out how either of TWO versions of an ordinance could EITHER be "second readings"!!!]]> Wed, 02 Sep 2009 07:44:48 +0000 http://www.middletownusa.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1854&PID=10573&title=the-amended-motion#10573 The "Amended Motion" : Thank you Mike for clearing up... http://www.middletownusa.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1854&PID=10571&title=the-amended-motion#10571 Author: Merrell Wood
Subject: 1854
Posted: Sep 02 2009 at 7:38am

Thank you Mike for clearing up that ringing in my ears. Still, what about the confussing ballot?]]> Wed, 02 Sep 2009 07:38:51 +0000 http://www.middletownusa.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1854&PID=10571&title=the-amended-motion#10571