with all due respect, spatny, it sounds like a "gotcha" to me, since you stated: "Case closed - it was an illegal meeting. Members should not attend such things." It sounds like you were trying to call someone out.
Riverside Info » About Riverside
Anyone know about the Open Meetings Act?
(21 posts)-
Posted Friday Nov 20, 2009 13:35 #
-
Are you a mind reader? Now you are going to tell me what I am thinking? I asked about something I saw, and I was correct. I wrote "case closed" after seeing the written response I got this AM from the VM. It clarified the issue, so I said "Case Closed." Meaniing - the end. JohnM came back and attempted to turn an honest error into a commercial for the anti Admin junkies. Pathetic. Maybe having so many noms has split your personality - like The Three Faces of Eve. Hmmm....
Posted Friday Nov 20, 2009 13:45 # -
Further thoughts on split personalities - pick the one(s) you like:
Comments of the Moment
“ With all of the comparisons to Hitler and the Nazis, young people are beginning to think that the allied powers defeated Nazi Germany because Germany had too much health care.”
— Jim Hansen
Proposed extensions of Godwin's Law“ Lou Dobbs is the best kind of populist. He was not afraid to say the things that are on the minds of a majority of Americans.”
— Penny
Lou Dobbs“ When did 'Commie' start to fall out of use? Probably when Republicans started being from 'Red' states.”
— Ronald Noon
What ever happened to "Commie"?“ Pontifex Obamicus needs to do something to bring Senator Liebulus to his senses.”
— Bob
Classical cloture“ Forget the stylebook and do whatever Yuan to.”
— Sean
What's in a name?“ Two wrongs don't make an alright.”
— Joe Helfrich
All right? Not alright, if you ask me“ In this new version of the bible, Jesus asks the lepers what health care plan they're on before he cures them.”
— Tim
Lost in translation“ I, for one, am glad the Voting Rights Act, Medicare and Medicaid didn't have opt-out options.”
— Alice Olson
Opt-out public option“ Wait a minute. The King James isn't the original text?”
— John David Stanway
Lost in translation“ These are people who know God's will far better than God.”
— Jan Baer
Lost in translation“ If English was good enough for Jesus, it should be good enough for the Bible.”
— Frank Dean
Lost in translation“ In the unemployed and underemployed categories, there is one group forever overlooked: full-time at-home parents.”
— Meri O
Answering Your Questions on the Economy“ Nerdy Knowledgeable Gnomes Nattering New Numbers Nonstop.”
— Van Nostrand
24/7 at the Ig Nobels“ Back in the day, the norm for speeches in the Russian Politburo was 5-6 hours. No wonder Communism fell.”
— Rob Lewis
90-minute warningBut only one per nom....
Posted Friday Nov 20, 2009 13:54 # -
Don,
Stop backpedalling. You bring this up and try to tar the members of this commission--one in particular--with the charge of violating the open meetings act. When it finally sinks in that maybe it wasn't the fault of the commission members, you start talking about the "nobility" of the Board and staff in rectifying this honest error. Come off it--you saw a chance to toss some dirt up, but it didn't stick.
But you're right--neither the members of this commission nor the Village president should attend meetings that don't meet the criteria of the open meetings act. I would imagine steps will be taken to prevent this in the future. We can call it the "Spatny Protocol."
Posted Friday Nov 20, 2009 13:56 # -
You said this: "...Don is at least being fair in bringing up something that reflects poorly on the new administration's promise of open and transparent government. Glad to see you're holding their feet to the fire on issues like this."
Who's spinning the facts there? The Village President didn't and doesn't send these out - the Admin does. No matter what happens you guys -some of you under multiple names - try and blame the president for things - and look pathetic in the process. The VM acknowledged the error and told me he would move to correct it so it doesn't happen in the future. Recognizing that is not "backpedaling." No member of the Commission even responded - at least under his/her own name. So there you have it - case closed.
Posted Friday Nov 20, 2009 15:03 # -
Nice try, but I'm not trying to blame the president. You're the one who said "Case closed - it was an illegal meeting. Members should not attend such things." If that's the case (and I agree with you) it seems fair to suggest that the Village president shouldn't attend either--even if only for a few minutes and even if the failure to provide notice was not his fault.
And why on earth would any of the commission members respond to you, particularly in a public forum? They didn't do anything wrong, and they don't answer to you. Again, I believe your only motive in making this post was to cast some people you don't care for in a bad light. Stay classy, Don.
Posted Friday Nov 20, 2009 15:40 # -
Why shouldn't a member - any member - of the Commission clarify the matter if they knew/know about it? Don't they represent the entire Village? Isn't this the public business, discussed in an open forum? The Village Manager answered me, as he should, after I asked here about the rule.
"...something that reflects poorly on the new administration's promise of open and transparent government." You wrote that. "Glad to see you're holding their feet to the fire on issues like this." That's what you said - meaning the Admin. That's what you said. Not me. I didn't hold anyone's feet to any fire. That's your problem in how you look at things. Now you try to blame the Pres for attending - even inadvertently. Presumably they all attended inadvertently. I didn't say they or anyone did it intentionally - I just said asked if it was an illegal meeting because it was not properly made known to the public. And it was. By innocent error. Case closed.
Seven months on and you people are still whining and taking pot shots at every chance. We used to call that a sore loser on the playground. Pathetic.
Posted Friday Nov 20, 2009 17:09 # -
Sticks and stones, Don.
But let's take your statement and run with it. Maybe an administration that gets elected on a platform of open and transparent government should be held accountable for situations like this. We've been told over and over that your guys are not going to let the VM run things like the previous administration. So maybe this can be laid at the Presidents feet. The buck stops with him, right?
I don't really believe that, of course, as I don't expect the president to micomanage at this level. I'm sure he had so idea that proper notice wasn't given. Otherwise, he'd have been a fool to attend the meeting. But I still find it interesting that its a VIOLATON when you thought it was the fault of the commission, but an innocent error when it turns out someone else dropped the ball.
Sorry, too, that you find any hint of criticism pathetic. Perhaps I should strive to show the tolerence and broad-mindedness you exhibited when the previous administration was in charge.Posted Friday Nov 20, 2009 17:52 # -
The previous admin stonewalled on giving information and stalled on FOIAs. This VM is not doing that. Here's what he sent me after I was not able to get a response from any of the Commission members that attended the meeting:
"Don,
Unfortunately, there was a breakdown in communication on the part of staff in regards to this committee and the meeting was not properly posted. Since the meeting was not posted within the parameters of the Act any action taken at this meeting becomes null and void, therefore, the Committee will have to meet again to approve the minutes from the meeting (the only item of action from the meeting). Moving forward, I have asked the Chief who is the liaison to this Committee to ensure the agenda is posted in the required time period.
Please let me know if you have any other questions.
Peter
Peter Scalera
Village Manager
Village of Riverside"He also sent that to Village President, which was the first he knew of it.
That's what I would call a polite and complete admission of an error, and desire to see it doesn't happen again. "Fair and balanced." Just what we all (should) want in our government.
Case closed.
What I find pathetic is the way you and yours try to spin everything against the President and the new Board members. They had nothing to do with this. People see that it's just pathetic sour grapes coming from the losers. It's worse than pathetic. That's my last on this subject. I'd rather try and find a home for some greyhounds - that's more productive. And they're nicer too.
Posted Friday Nov 20, 2009 18:30 # -
Don,
You are aware that the mere fact you state "case closed" does not prove anything, aren't you?
Anyway, I don't think the new Board members had anything to do with this. Nor do I think the members of the commission did anything wrong either. Again, though, I question your motives in posting this here. You could have emailed the commission members directly, as you did with the VM, so I'm not sure why you thought it necessary to bring it up here. I mean, I have my suspicions, but I do so hate to think ill of you.
Anyway, with the Spatny Protocol now in effect, we can all move forward into our glorious new dawn (provided, of course, we don't criticize Dear Leader). Onward!!
Posted Friday Nov 20, 2009 19:32 #
Reply »
You must log in to post.