Saturday, January 30, 2010

Great Scott!!!!!.......Is She Moving????

OK, let’s look at the article that is in the Shawnee Dispatch at http://www.shawneedispatch.com/news/2010/jan/27/council-member-rejects-call-resign/

In a nutshell, a resident of Ward 1 called for Ms Scott to resign so that the position could be put on the upcoming election ballot. The resident (Carri Donohoe Person and her attorney Ginger Brady) were basing this on the fact that they felt that Ms Scott was going to relocate out of the ward. She felt rather than having the council appoint a replacement it should be up to the voters to choose.

OK, now we go to Charter Ordinance 40. If a council member resigns, the city council has 60 days to appoint a replacement or it goes to a special election (that’s expensive). On the other hand, if a council person knows they are moving in the foreseeable future they could resign, even making it effective for a future date. With that in mind, the position could have been put on the general election ballot, no special election needed, and the citizens of Ward 1 would make the decision, not the city council.

In the news article the following appears:

For her part, Scott said “any financial transactions I have pending or not pending is not the business of governing body.” She said if and when she changes her address, she will change voter registration and resign

Brady asked if Scott intended to move to Arizona, and Scott said that decision was “pending.”
“Until then, this seat is occupied,” Scott said. “I intend to do my duties as a Council member for as long as I’m a resident of the city.”


Brady said Scott had not been forthcoming on the matter, and the Council should have had an open discussion as soon as she considered moving so the position could be elected by voters rather than filled by a vote of the Council. She charged that the city was aware of Scott’s intentions ahead of time.

Now, we will keep it simple. Apparently Ms Scott purchased a residence in Arizona in November of 2009. As a matter of fact, some of the documents required her signature to be notarized and that action was handled by Shawnee’s City Clerk, Stephen Powell. So, one could say that a decision to purchase a new residence and eventually relocate was made at least in November 2009. (Probably earlier, since one does not normally wake up one day and run out to buy a house in another state). Since Mr. Powell performed the notary services I think one can safely say that someone of status in the city was aware of a pending relocation.

This is when she could have resigned, with a future effective date. The city manager could then have notified the county election office that by the time of the general election the seat would be open. That means that the citizens of Ward 1 could then have selected her replacement.

Now let’s take another scenario. We know that there are some disagreements among some of the council members. The way it breaks down, if just one of the incumbents running for reelection loses that could change the make-up of the council. Then if Ms Scott resigns shortly after the general election the remaining council members could and would make the appointment of a replacement. Naturally they would do this because they wouldn’t want to go with the costs of a special election.

This is almost like someone is attempting to stack the council. Is that possible? Did anyone influence Ms. Scott to hold off on resigning?

As reported by the Dispatch, Ms Brady stated to the council that Ms. Scott had sold her home here on December 28. It may not have closed yet. Will she have to obtain a new residence in Ward 1?

What is going on here is probably not illegal. But, is it ethical? It appears to be an end around play to create a council that will bend in the wind to certain influences. If the council is going to bend, at least let the voters make that decision.

Sidebar: Tuesday night I went on line to read Charter Ordinance 40. It wasn’t there. An email to the city manager that night was sent and when I checked Thursday morning it was. Along with the notations next to #39 and others that covered these situations that they had been repealed. Why wasn’t #40 on line? It has been effective for quite some time now. Anybody researching the situation would have had old info. Never did get an email back thanking me for finding this error. :-) :-)


Have a comment about this post? Post your comment at http://shawneeray.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=blog&thread=37

Tuesday, January 26, 2010

The Trashman Cometh

Well, last night the council passed a new ordinance concerning trash, recycling etc, along with an administrative code.

Months ago, after many citizens expressed concerns that the city was leaning to a single hauler system the council and staff indicated that anyone who met the requirements could haul trash in Shawnee.

Now, here's the rub...........have the requirments been written so as to make it extremely difficult if not impossible for the smaller haulers to compete? Are the insurance requirements realistic? Will we wind up with a de facto single hauler anyway?

Do you have any comments about this? If so, go here to post them:

http://shawneeray.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=blog&thread=36

Monday, January 18, 2010

Bye Bye Snow

I personally believe that the Shawnee snow crews deserve a pat on the back.

My job requires that I drive quite a bit..........not a desk jockey. During the recent snow problems I was in various areas of the metro. It was obvious that some other areas were not getting the same treatment.

All I can say is that we should be proud of what the Shawnee crews did. It was a tough snow storm, terrible temperatures, bad winds, you name it. And, just when ya thought it might stop.....whammo.......again.

Hats off to the men and women that busted their tails.

Have a comment about this? Post that comment here: http://shawneeray.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=blog&thread=35

Saturday, January 09, 2010

Blogging vs News Reporting

Some readers of this blog have asked me some questions regarding the subject and specifically how it relates to two items that recently appeared in the Shawnee Dispatch.

First of all, blogging is basically an opinion thing. It is not news reporting. A blogger may choose to mention or talk about specific things that have actually happened, but then voice their opinion about those things. It actually is more closely related to letters to the editor or editorials in newspapers.

Now, news reporting is something different. News reporting is supposed to be about verifiable factual events, without voicing an opinion by the author. Balanced. This is an altruistic concept. All reporters have the ability to "color" stories by the way in which they are worded or by leaving out certain information. This does not make them untruthful. It comes down to perception.

Let's use one of my favorite analogies (believe I've mentioned it here before). The two man race. Oh, let's say I get into a foot race with Dan Pflumm. Dan, being younger and in better shape wins. OK, now Kevin Straub asks Dan what happened and Dan replies that he won. Honest statement. Now, Jeff Meyers asks me how I did, and I respond that I came in 2d and that Dan came in next to last. Whooops...........I didn't lie (it was only a two man race)......I just left out that important piece of information. So, now Jeff would think that I was a pretty good runner and that Dan was struggling with the race.

Keeping that concept in mind I will now proceed with what I wanted to say.

Recently the Dispatch wrote an article "Council Disagrees Over Employee Benefits"

http://www.shawneedispatch.com/news/2010/jan/06/council-disagrees-over-employee-benefits/

The article pretty much heavies in on Kevin Straub (something I myself have done in the past).
What the readers wanted to know was why was the Dispatch so "soft" on the article "Council continues to be at odds on many topics"

http://www.shawneedispatch.com/news/2009/dec/15/council-continues-be-odds-many-topics/

They were thinking "soft" when compared to my blog entry of 12/20/2009 "Kuhn Doesn't Get It" In the Dispatch article it was reported "Council members also argued if it was appropriate to allow a citizen, rather than city staff present information about bans on the use of cell phones and other handheld devices while driving......"

No mention was made by the Dispatch that Dawn Kuhn's actions came real close to leaving the research (and associated time and costs) for this subject in the hands of city staff. What the readers wanted to know (and I was really the wrong person to be asked) is why didn't the Dispatch get on Kuhn's case for her diva antics on this issue (which also wasted about 30 minutes of council time).

My only response to the readers is that the Dispatch article was truthful, just not in depth. Now, nobody is perfect, especially and including Dawn Kuhn. But if you search the Dispatch I doubt if you will ever find an article that puts Kuhn in a bad light. Is it possible for a reporter to get too close to their subject(s)? Yes, because contrary to popular belief, reporters are human. My personal thoughts........in a city the size of Shawnee, government reporters need to be rotated periodically.

Do you have a comment about this item? Post that comment here:
http://shawneeray.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=blog&thread=34