121 replies to this topic

[Robert Giacometti]

I sent an email to our council members this morning expressing my disappointment and asking those who voted "yes" to explain to me why they did, asking them to sell me on why it was a good decision.


I'm not crossing my fingers for a response from everyone. Kerri is the only one who has consistently responded to the few missives I've sent to the Council.

Why do you feel the city council owes you a personal explanation on why they voted yes?

The item was noticed, put on an agenda and open for public discussion, the council members typically make comments, then vote. I don't agree with the vote, but those who voted yes don't owe any of us anything as they followed protocol.

I learned a lesson a long time ago, that its better to NOT get a response than to get a misleading one about something. I don't judge council members on their personal emails, but rather on their votes and public comments.

[cw68]

Why do you feel the city council owes you a personal explanation on why they voted yes?

The item was noticed, put on an agenda and open for public discussion, the council members typically make comments, then vote. I don't agree with the vote, but those who voted yes don't owe any of us anything as they followed protocol.

I learned a lesson a long time ago, that its better to NOT get a response than to get a misleading one about something. I don't judge council members on their personal emails, but rather on their votes and public comments.

I don't feel entitled to a personal explanation. But it would be great if someone, anyone could actually explain to me why this is a good idea -- who better than the people who voted for it? Who better than the people who represent me, work for me? Nothing more, nothing less. As I said, I don't expect an answer. Frankly, in a town this size, that's sad.

This isn't the first time (or the first city) I've written my representatives. The good ones, the ones who care about who they represent engage in dialog. In fact, in the past I've even been invited to speak with them in person regarding my questions. Those are the winners in my book.

(And, fyi, it wasn't in California, it was in Madison, WI. I ended up campaigning for that person during his re-election and remain in friendly contact to this day. He's a good egg. One who left politics after about 10 years and works for a non-profit supporting Cuban-American medical exchanges. Like a "Doctors Without Borders" thang. Guess I'm still hopeful that people who truly want to represent still exist.)

[Robert Giacometti]

I don't feel entitled to a personal explanation. But it would be great if someone, anyone could actually explain to me why this is a good idea -- who better than the people who voted for it? Who better than the people who represent me, work for me? Nothing more, nothing less. As I said, I don't expect an answer. Frankly, in a town this size, that's sad.

This why there is a public meeting and vote on issues, so YOU get a chance to ask questions of the City Council and hear their explanation and or thoughts about issues.

This is how the process works.

Its been my experience if I have a serious concern about an issue to contact a council member in advance and ask them if we can set up a time to address my concerns that most of the time they will respond back. We are a town of 70,000 and there are 5 council members so I really don't expect them to be responding to emails from all of us AFTER an issue has been voted on and AFTER we all had the same opportunity to express our concerns during the public hearing.

[ducky]

This why there is a public meeting and vote on issues, so YOU get a chance to ask questions of the City Council and hear their explanation and or thoughts about issues.

This is how the process works.

Its been my experience if I have a serious concern about an issue to contact a council member in advance and ask them if we can set up a time to address my concerns that most of the time they will respond back. We are a town of 70,000 and there are 5 council members so I really don't expect them to be responding to emails from all of us AFTER an issue has been voted on and AFTER we all had the same opportunity to express our concerns during the public hearing.

That's not true, Robert. In the past, I've written to councilmembers before an issue was voted on numerous times and the only two that have ever given substantive, if any response at all, were King & Howell.

I've also seen Miklos asked a question during a council meeting during the public comment time and say it wasn't his time to answer, it was only that resident's time to speak.

So, cw, like you said, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting.

[Dave Burrell]

Why do you feel the city council owes you a personal explanation on why they voted yes?

The item was noticed, put on an agenda and open for public discussion, the council members typically make comments, then vote. I don't agree with the vote, but those who voted yes don't owe any of us anything as they followed protocol.

I learned a lesson a long time ago, that its better to NOT get a response than to get a misleading one about something. I don't judge council members on their personal emails, but rather on their votes and public comments.

What the heck? I'm surprised as heck to see you post this Robert - what happened to wanting accountability? They are our elected leaders and this is our city property, they sure as hell do to owe us an explanation, remember, they work for US!

Kerri is capable of talking, emailing and giving reasons for her votes, why can't the good ol' boys do the same? Is it too much to ask to just explain their logic behind their voting?

This why there is a public meeting and vote on issues, so YOU get a chance to ask questions of the City Council and hear their explanation and or thoughts about issues.

This is how the process works.

The process doesn't work very well when you're only allowed 2 minutes for Q&A then you get buzzed to shut up and sit down exactly when your two minutes are up, whether you got an answer or not... IMO, this is a good way to keep people in the dark, give them 120 seconds to let them think they have input on something.. that is already decided - what a friggin' farce...

[giacomo]

What the heck? I'm surprised as heck to see you post this Robert - what happened to wanting accountability? They are our elected leaders and this is our city property, they sure as hell do to owe us an explanation, remember, they work for US!

Kerri is capable of talking, emailing and giving reasons for her votes, why can't the good ol' boys do the same? Is it too much to ask to just explain their logic behind their voting?



The process doesn't work very well when you're only allowed 2 minutes for Q&A then you get buzzed to shut up and sit down exactly when your two minutes are up, whether you got an answer or not... IMO, this is a good way to keep people in the dark, give them 120 seconds to let them think they have input on something.. that is already decided - what a friggin' farce...

A farce indeed.
Well said.

[cw68]

What the heck? I'm surprised as heck to see you post this Robert - what happened to wanting accountability? They are our elected leaders and this is our city property, they sure as hell do to owe us an explanation, remember, they work for US!

Kerri is capable of talking, emailing and giving reasons for her votes, why can't the good ol' boys do the same? Is it too much to ask to just explain their logic behind their voting?



The process doesn't work very well when you're only allowed 2 minutes for Q&A then you get buzzed to shut up and sit down exactly when your two minutes are up, whether you got an answer or not... IMO, this is a good way to keep people in the dark, give them 120 seconds to let them think they have input on something.. that is already decided - what a friggin' farce...

And when it's at night and you've got small kids you can't leave at home alone, and you don't know how long it might last so it's awfully hard to hire a babysitter on a school night. Responding to inquiries shouldn't be categorically ignored. If they don't seem to care about their constituents and they won't answer me, then they shouldn't expect me to vote for them. Simple as that.

[Robert Giacometti]

What the heck? I'm surprised as heck to see you post this Robert - what happened to wanting accountability? They are our elected leaders and this is our city property, they sure as hell do to owe us an explanation, remember, they work for US!

Kerri is capable of talking, emailing and giving reasons for her votes, why can't the good ol' boys do the same? Is it too much to ask to just explain their logic behind their voting?



The process doesn't work very well when you're only allowed 2 minutes for Q&A then you get buzzed to shut up and sit down exactly when your two minutes are up, whether you got an answer or not... IMO, this is a good way to keep people in the dark, give them 120 seconds to let them think they have input on something.. that is already decided - what a friggin' farce...

The city council doesn't owe us an explanation on why they voted the way they did AFTER the fact. We have an obligation ourselves to get involved BEFORE the meeting or at the Meeting. If we don't get involved, then we really shouldn't expect them to explain their votes to us privately when we ask.

Some of the council members have stated publically they don't respond via Emails, so how can anyone hold them accountable for something they said they weren't going to do? If you call them in advance on an issue, generally they will return a call. If you follow a process that C C members have indicated they will participate in and then they don't, by all means hold their feet to the fire.

I didn't go to the meeting because I knew it was going to be a waste of time and anticipated the vote going the way that it did. I can't expect the C.C. to explain to me why they voted the way they did, when I didn't go myself. Had I gone. I might have learned why they voted the way they did.

I don't agree with their vote on the Hotel and think its past time that 4 of them be replaced, because of their collective votes on other issues that put the city in the position it is in. Even if all 5 voted NO on the Hotel, I'd still feel 4 needed to be replaced. The Hotel vote might be opening eyes of some residents. Trust me, one was playing politics with this issue.

Wether the council responds to an email or not isn't as important to their voting records!

During Business from the floor, C.C Members are discouraged from responding because it could be perceived they are taking action on items that are NOT on the Agenda.

[camay2327]

Bit from Robert:

Quote:

During Business from the floor, C.C Members are discouraged from responding because it could be perceived they are taking action on items that are NOT on the Agenda.

Unquote:

Robert you are so right, they are not supposed to answer any business from the floor questions.
They can, but they do not have to.

[cw68]

The city council doesn't owe us an explanation on why they voted the way they did AFTER the fact. We have an obligation ourselves to get involved BEFORE the meeting or at the Meeting. If we don't get involved, then we really shouldn't expect them to explain their votes to us privately when we ask.

Some of the council members have stated publically they don't respond via Emails, so how can anyone hold them accountable for something they said they weren't going to do? If you call them in advance on an issue, generally they will return a call. If you follow a process that C C members have indicated they will participate in and then they don't, by all means hold their feet to the fire.

I didn't go to the meeting because I knew it was going to be a waste of time and anticipated the vote going the way that it did. I can't expect the C.C. to explain to me why they voted the way they did, when I didn't go myself. Had I gone. I might have learned why they voted the way they did.

I don't agree with their vote on the Hotel and think its past time that 4 of them be replaced, because of their collective votes on other issues that put the city in the position it is in. Even if all 5 voted NO on the Hotel, I'd still feel 4 needed to be replaced. The Hotel vote might be opening eyes of some residents. Trust me, one was playing politics with this issue.

Wether the council responds to an email or not isn't as important to their voting records!

During Business from the floor, C.C Members are discouraged from responding because it could be perceived they are taking action on items that are NOT on the Agenda.

Why do you keep using such inflammatory language? Requesting a council member to tell me why they voted yes is completely fair. You keep stating EXPECT. These are two completely different things. Regardless, how do you know that I haven't previously requested information from the council members on their positions?

In addition, you can prioritize your voting requirements however you'd like, but don't tell me what is and what is not important.

So who exactly, and how, has stated publicly that they won't respond to emails? I went to the City web site where they have a brief cv on each council member and their email addresses. Kerri and Ernie both state to email them, but the others list their email and there's no mention of not responding to emails. Am I just supposed to know that they've publicly stated this? I bet I'm not the only person who tries to contact them through the same process. If they have certain expectations and requirements to communicate with those with whom they represent, they should put that out their on their page on the City's website. That's their responsibility to tell us, not ours.

Again, yes, it would be great and wonderful if each and every citizen could attend each and every council meeting for its entirety. But that's not the reality and that doesn't make me any less important in terms of being represented.

I'll stick with my way, you stick with yours. In the meantime, I request that you not judge and tell people the rules.

[Robert Giacometti]

Why do you keep using such inflammatory language? Requesting a council member to tell me why they voted yes is completely fair. You keep stating EXPECT. These are two completely different things. Regardless, how do you know that I haven't previously requested information from the council members on their positions?

In addition, you can prioritize your voting requirements however you'd like, but don't tell me what is and what is not important.

So who exactly, and how, has stated publicly that they won't respond to emails? I went to the City web site where they have a brief cv on each council member and their email addresses. Kerri and Ernie both state to email them, but the others list their email and there's no mention of not responding to emails. Am I just supposed to know that they've publicly stated this? I bet I'm not the only person who tries to contact them through the same process. If they have certain expectations and requirements to communicate with those with whom they represent, they should put that out their on their page on the City's website. That's their responsibility to tell us, not ours.

Again, yes, it would be great and wonderful if each and every citizen could attend each and every council meeting for its entirety. But that's not the reality and that doesn't make me any less important in terms of being represented.

I'll stick with my way, you stick with yours. In the meantime, I request that you not judge and tell people the rules.

Why in the world woud you send an email to the city council asking them to explain their vote to you, if you didn't EXPECT a response? Maybe you had some other agenda in doing this, because why would you post about something you didn't expect a response to? If you were truly just interested in why they voted the way that they did, you could just go online to the website and watch it yourself, instead of sending them an email asking them to explain themselves.

I'll always defend your right to choose Council members based upon whatever criteria you think is most important. If you want to ignore their voting records that have put the city in the position its in and use some other criteria for supporting them, Don't get mad at me for challenging your reasoning or thought process on why you are doing it that way. That isn't judging you, its questioning your logic.

Ernie has said that he reads emails, but tries his best to return calls, instead of responding online.

If I was serving as an elected official and there was a vote on a issue and I explained Why I was voting the way that I did during the public session, I too would probaly ignore emails to me AFTER the fact asking me to explain AGAIN, what I already explained in public. I wouldn't waste my time on redundancy on people who don't get it.

Maybe these people do get it and are just playing little political games?

[Dave Burrell]

Why in the world woud you send an email to the city council asking them to explain their vote to you. If you were truly just interested in why they voted the way that they did, you could just go online to the website and watch it yourself, instead of sending them an email asking them to explain themselves.

Robert I watched it , there were no explanations from anybody, so where are you coming from in saying this stuff to cw68? Did they edit that part out? I don't get it... Since you seem to be defending the C.C.'s inaction and non-responses, maybe you can tell us what they said (or thought to themselves) was the justification for their votes since they didn't say it out loud in the meeting and you seem to be able to read their minds.... unfortunately the majority of us don't have those same magical mind reading powers.

I'll always defend your right to choose Council members based upon whatever criteria you think is most important. If you want to ignore their voting records that have put the city in the position its in and use some other criteria for supporting them, Don't get mad at me for challenging your reasoning or thought process on why you are doing it that way. That isn't judging you, its questioning your logic.

Robert it's odd how you're always saying our city council need to be accountable for their actions, but when we ask for them to explain their reasoning behind their votes you now say we don't have a right to ask them - that makes no sense whatsoever and I really do not see why you are telling us to not ask them questions after their votes (what does it matter when we ask?) - are you forgetting that they work for us?.... they don't own the city..

Ernie has said that he reads emails, but tries his best to return calls, instead of responding online.

That's probably because he's not tech savvy due to his age and he is likely more comfortable with using a phone then a computer. Personally I think emails are a better way to communicate because don't these folks have day jobs? Are we supposed to call them and expect a return call while they are working? Emails can be answered anytime and are less intrusive then a phone call.

If I was serving as an elected official and there was a vote on a issue and I explained Why I was voting the way that I did during the public session, I too would probaly ignore emails to me AFTER the fact asking me to explain AGAIN, what I already explained in public. I wouldn't waste my time on redundancy on people who don't get it.

Key difference here (and something you seem to keep missing) is that they DID NOT explain why they voted on that issue. You should stop supporting their inaction until those facts are public. I still think you're wrong that it's ok for candidates to ignore citizens after a vote was made.... To me, responding to citizen inquiries is the key difference between a candidate who cares about the city and it's citizens and one who doesn't give a crap at all.

Can you guess which one will be getting our votes when it comes to re-election? Those that respond go to the top of the list!

Sorry Robert, but city representatives who can't be bothered to respond to citizen questions, do not deserve the job and need to be voted out.

It's really not that hard to respond to an email, unless of course there is something being covered up....

[Tink]

Is it considered an ordinance? Here is the section of the State elections code for creating local referenudms on overturning ordinances:

http://www.leginfo.c...;file=9235-9247

The first step is getting signatures equal to 10% who voted in the city in the last Presidential election to overturn the ordinance.

There is a group looking into this and other ways to AT THE LEAST have them comply with City codes.

[cw68]

@davburr, EXACTLY.

@Robert, I WANT a response. They work for me, they represent me.

As for voting record, I AM trying to use that. I disagree with some of the votes, but I want to know why those who voted for it did. I haven't seen any reasons given, but there could be good reasons I don't know about.

Also, can you please address where/when the council members have said they don't respond to email? You were very convinced that I should have known that and that it was my bad for emailing them. Since you expect people to know that, can you please tell me how I'm supposed to?

[Dos Pennys]

My impression of what Robert might be trying to convey is that it is more important to be proactive as opposed to reactive.

In my opinion, if you voice your concerns before they vote to let them know as their constituents what you would expect them to represent, then if they don't, it gives a little more credibility to the frustration and expectation of an explanation afterwards.