Scott's Resignation - It Gets Deeper

Well, the Shawnee Dispatch has another updated article on the Scott resignation. It can be seen here: http://www.shawneedispatch.com/news/2010/mar/31/scott-leave-council-april-13/

There are so many holes in that article. I wonder, does the Dispatch (aka Cheerleader) just take what they are told by the city as gospel or do they ever question things? In a previous posting I mentioned Judge Judy's book, "Don't Pee On My Leg And Tell Me It's Raining". Well, she has another comment that she uses: "If it doesn't make sense, it's probably not true."

OK, here are items from the article. Rather than comment at the end, I'll toss my comments in between them. The Dispatch comments will be in blue, my thoughts will be in red

Shawnee City Council member Cheryl Scott is resigning her Ward I seat effective April 13, but the much-anticipated resignation and the timing of its announcement are causing ripples of criticism.
Scott, who has sold her Shawnee home and is moving to Arizona, submitted her letter of resignation Friday, March 19, at City Hall. During the regular Council meeting on Monday, March 22, Council member Kevin Straub asked if Scott had yet submitted a resignation and whether there had been any discussions about selecting her replacement.
At the time, Mayor Jeff Meyers reiterated his stance that he wouldn’t have knowledge of Scott’s resignation until he received a letter from her.
So, from Friday until Monday nobody told the mayor about Scott's resignation? In the council meeting room, before the council meeting, Scott never said anything to the mayor? Did they have a one on one discussion before the meeting? C'mon now. I need a towel.........I feel something wet on my leg.

Gonzales, who later said she had reviewed Scott’s resignation letter earlier that day but had not told the mayor about the letter, did not comment on Straub’s question, nor did Scott. By not answering Straub at the meeting are they guilty of lying by omission?

When Scott’s resignation was announced publicly three days after the Council meeting, Straub began raising questions anew.
He said he believes Scott and Gonzales’ silence serves as evidence the resignation was delayed because some Council members want to replace Scott with an appointment of their choice. As it now stands, Scott’s replacement won’t be selected until after the April 6 elections in which three incumbents are facing challenges. Straub’s seat also is up for election Tuesday, but he was defeated in the March 2 primary.

"Why wasn’t it announced, why did we hold off?" Straub asked of the letter of resignation. "When the mayor came out and said ‘I have no knowledge of it,’ why didn’t the city manager correct him? Why did Cheryl think that the new City Council, the ones who are elected in April, would be better to pick her replacement than the voters?" Good questions!!!

Meyers said it was up to Scott to decide when she would resign.
"Cheryl is the Council member who has to make that decision, and who’s to say that she wasn’t going to change her mind at some point?" Meyers said. Right, she might change her mind. Bought her new house in November, near her daughter. Sold her Shawnee house in December. Just might change her mind? Where's that towel?

On Thursday, Scott confirmed she was resigning in order to move to Arizona. Wow, now that's a surprise......not.

"I was elected to do what I felt was right, and to me, this was the right thing to do," she said.
Scott declined further comment. Right, it's the right thing to do to let the council select your replacement, rather than the voters.........not.

Gonzales said she didn’t want to correct the mayor during the meeting and continue a discussion among Council members about Scott’s replacement before she had had a chance to discuss the issue with Meyers. Again, is this lying by omission? As a member of the council, Straub was entitled to an honest answer from Gonzales who works for the council. Is she the one to decide if a discussion should continue? Believe that is beyond her scope of responsibility. And she says she didn't discuss it with the mayor beforehand? Huh??? And if not, why not?? As contentious as this item has become one would think that as soon as Gonzales got the letter she would have notified the mayor? She sat on it instead? Please, get me that towel!!!!!

Scott was first elected to the Council in 2004 and was re-elected in 2008. She has been involved within the community with the Sister City Committee, Old Shawnee Days, the Shawnee Great Grillers Barbeque Contest, and the Irish-American and German-American Clubs. OK

Controversy over Scott’s possible resignation arose in late January. Ward I resident Carri Donohoe Person and her attorney came to a Council meeting the day before the deadline to file as a candidate for the April Council elections and asked Scott to resign her seat.
Person said she had learned Scott planned to move to Arizona and that she had sold her Shawnee home in late December. Person said Scott should resign, allowing the Council to vote to put the seat on the ballot for April’s Council elections so voters could choose Scott’s replacement.
At the time, Scott said she would not resign until she changed her address. Marvin Rainey, city attorney, said city ordinances would not allow the Council to put the seat on the April ballot, even if Scott had resigned prior to the filing deadline. But what if she had resigned in November with a delayed date? The city could have notiffed JoCo elections that by the time of the April election the seat would be open. Considering that the Shawnee City Clerk notarized some of the purchase documents for her new home, common sense tells you it would be obvious that a move was in the works. Get me that towel....please.

In addition to giving up her Council seat, Scott indicated she was resigning from her positions on the Johnson County Solid Waste Management Committee and the Shawnee Convention and Visitors Bureau. Her last Council meeting will be April 12, which will be the same meeting Council members elected in the April 6 elections will be sworn in. OK

The resignation puts into effect the process of appointing a replacement Council member to fill out Scott’s current term, which expires in April 2012. The Council has 60 days to fill the vacancy before the city would be required to hold a special election. They don't have to appoint a replacement, they can let it go to the voters.

The replacement must be nominated by a Council member and approved by the majority of the remaining Council members.

Gonzales said the 60 days would begin the day Scott’s resignation is effective. Gonzales said the city would ask Ward I residents to send letters of interest to become Scott’s replacement, and those who applied would be interviewed at a Council meeting before a replacement is appointed.
"I would anticipate that will happen in early May," she said.

Scott's Letter of Resignation - Still Unanswered Questions

OK, let's start now with her actual letter of resignation:

"Carol Gonzales
Shawnee City Manager

March, 19, 2010

I hereby submit my letter of resignation from the Shawnee City Council, to be effective on Tuesday, April 13, 2010. This resignation also applies to the Shawnee Convention and Visitors Bureau and the Johnson County Solid Waste Management Committee

It has been an honor and privilege to represent Shawnee in these capacities.

Cordially,

s/ Cheryl Scott

Cheryl Scott "

So, now what happened at the council meeting on Monday 3/22/10? Councilmember Straub inquired if there was any additional info on a resignation. Mayor Meyers indicated he had no new info. City Manager Gonzales said nothing. Councilmember Scott said nothing.

Huh? According to the changed on line posting of the Shawnee Cheerleader (aka Shawnee Dispatch): "Scott submitted the letter Friday, though the city manager did not have a chance to review it until Monday."

Are they saying that between Friday and Monday, before the council meeting, neither Scott nor Gonzales said anything to the Mayor? If Gonzales knew she had the letter why didn't she answer Straub. Why didn't Scott, having submitted her letter of resignation, say something and answer Straub?

Now, reading Scott's letter what "review" (according to the Dispatch) did the city manager have to do? That letter of resignation seemed to be pretty simple and straightforward. Apparently there is something about simple and straightforward letters that the city manager has trouble understanding.

Who is Playing Games Now?

Is the Shawnee Dispatch playing games?

In my posting of Friday, 3/26 I made it a point to copy|paste a quote from their on line edition.

This is what I showed:

"Scott submitted the letter Monday, though it is dated March 19"

Now, after it has been questioned as to why that fact never came up at the council meeting on Monday, the on line version has been changed to read:

"Scott submitted the letter Friday, though the city manager did not have a chance to review it until Monday."

The question is still there, why wasn't it announced at the meeting Monday night?

Scott Insults Voters of Ward 1

Cheryl Scott apparently doesn't think very much of the voters in Ward 1.

To see what she thinks, read a recent article in the Kansas City Star at http://www.kansascity.com/2010/03/25/1836709/shawnee-councilwoman-resigns-leaving.html

Keep in mind that she bought her new home in Arizona on Nov 25, 2009 and sold her Shawnee home on December 28, 2009. She could have resigned back then, with a delayed effective date, so that her seat could have been put on the April 6th ballot. She has since resigned, and with a delayed date, but too late to go on the ballot for the April 6th election.

Now, here is what what was published in the KC Star:

Scott stressed that the sale on her Shawnee home didn’t close until March 12, and she said she did what she believed was right for the city.

"I felt that the best thing to do was to stay until after the election and let the council appoint my replacement," Scott said.

So, she thinks it is better for the council to select her replacement instead of the voters. Nice going Cheryl.

Did she think it was right for the city for the voters to initially elect her 6 years ago? Did she think it was right for the city that 2 years ago her challenger dropped out, but too late to come off the ballot, and many folks affirmed her for her seat? So why is it not right for the city at this time for the voters to pick her replacement for the council?

Go back to my original post on this subject: http://shawneeray.blogspot.com/2010/01/great-scottis-she-moving.html Did I call this one or not?

Scott's Resignation - Additional Comments

Ya gotta love it. More comments about the Scott resignation.

In an article on line dated Thursday, 3/25/10 (a day after the hard copy was published) the Shawnee Dispatch says "Scott submitted the letter Monday, though it is dated March 19". Did this item make their hard copy edition on Wednesday?

Now this brings up some interesting questions:

1. Why wasn't a public announcement made at the council meeting Monday 3/22/10?
2. Why is there still no mention of it as of this time on the city's website?
3. Was the letter dated the 19th and not submitted until Monday (22nd) because maybe, Scott didn't write it? Did someone in Shawnee write it for her? Was she in Arizona when it was written, and needed to return to Shawnee to sign it before the meeting on the 22nd?

Anybody wanting to answer those questions, please feel free to email me with the answers and I will post them here.

The article in the Dispatch can be read at
http://www.shawneedispatch.com/news/2010/mar/25/scott-submits-resignation-letter/

See my post just below this one.

Scott is Going Bye-Bye! Gee, What a Non-Surprise!

Well, Cheryl Scott has submitted her long overdue resignation, effective 4/13/2010.
My original thoughts on this matter are contained here: http://shawneeray.blogspot.com/2010/01/great-scottis-she-moving.html

There was a follow up here:
http://shawneeray.blogspot.com/2010/02/great-scottpart-2.html
which also included a link to an editorial in the Shawnee Dispatch who also called for her resignation way back when.

Now watch the games begin. I smelled a set up in my original post and that odor is still there.

Ms Scott devoted many years to serving the community. It's a shame that she allowed herself to be caught up in this end around maneuver which could result in the voters of Ward 1 not being able to select her replacement.

The council will have two options:
1. Select a replacement within 60 days of the resignation.
2. Allow it to go to a special election.

Because of the obvious machinations that occurred here, this needs to go to the citizens to allow them to choose. Heck, she bought her new house in Arizona in November..........and the Shawnee City Clerk even notarized the documents for her. It was obvious what was happening.

In 1996 Judge Judith Sheindlin wrote a book published by Harper & Collins entitled "Don't Pee On My Leg And Tell Me It's Raining". We've been getting peed on since November.

Citizen Asks for Reports from NLC

At this past Monday's council meeting a resident, Rod Houck got up and made a suggestion.

He suggested that the five folks going to the NLC conference in Washington DC write a few paragraphs about what they accomplished. He indicated that those reports should be published on the city's website and in the Shawnee Dispatch.

I heard the mayor and Council Member Sawyer say that they'd have no problem with that. Didn't hear the other three say anything (City Manager Gonzales, Council Members Kuhn and Sandifer)

It appeared that Kuhn and Sandifer tossed some negative looks at Mr Houck. Guess they weren't too happy with that suggestion. Mr Houck may not have been aware of the fact that a couple of years ago Council Member Straub had made the same suggestion and Kuhn and Sandifer were not happy with it at that time. Also Sandifer still hasn't answered the question about how the funds were spent in Texas for one of his trips. His response, on the record still remains "it's none of your business"..........so why should he file a report about what he does in DC? Yepper Mickey, still waiting for a real answer.

Last Week's F & A Committee Meeting

Yesterday I received an email from the assistant city manager rescheduling my presentation.

I was supposed to give a presentation last Tuesday to the council's F & A Committee.

A couple of hours prior to the meeting's scheduled start time I received an email that the meeting had been cancelled. That happens from time to time.

Did a little digging though to find out what happened. Michelle Distler, the chairperson of the committee had a conflict. A very important conflict. Apparently the Kansas Department of Health and Environment was having a public meeting concerning the environmental clean up of the old Ken Smith Golf Club and factory which apparently has contaminated ground on the property. To her credit, Ms Distler has been involved in this since prior to her ever becoming a member of the Shawnee City Council. On top of that the KDHE originally scheduled the meeting to be held in Topeka which would have been very inconvenient for the Shawnee citizens living in the area, and wishing to attend the meeting. So she got the KDHE to move the meeting to Shawnee.

OK, now that leaves three members of the committee available (two make a quorum). Whoops, another one is out of the picture.......Cheryl Scott. Did she cancel out even before Ms Distler?
Apparently so. What was the reason for her not being able to make it? When I asked Distler if she knew why Scott wasn't going to be there , she didn’t know. Was she in her new home in Arizona? Commuting only for council meetings and not committee meetings? Would be interesting to find out.

OK, now that leaves two of the committee members. Aparently after hearing that Distler & Scott were not going to be there, Goode who was already at city hall cancelled out. So that unfortunately caused a late cancellation of the meeting and for my presentation to be postponed until the April 20th, Public Works and Safety Committee. Come to that meeting if you’re interested in hearing it.

Another Case of Voter Apathy

I have sent the following as a letter to the editor of the Shawnee Dispatch. If it gets published then hopefully more folks than those who read this blog will read it:

The voters of Ward 3 in Shawnee should be ashamed of themselves regrding the recent primary election.

Not because of the outcome, but because of their total, apathetic attitude.

The ward has approximately 11,000 voters registered and only 839 bothered to vote. That is less than 8% voter turn out.

Oh, they turn out for the presidential election......big darn deal. The president doesn't fix your pot holes, plow your streets, provide you with police and fire protection. The president doesn't set local property taxes, zoning laws and a host of other items that affect us daily.

The really sad part is that it is so much easier to vote in elections now than years ago. There is early physcial voting. There are mail in ballots (and you don't have to be disabled to obtain one).

Voting in an election allows a person to voice their opinion on what they want done in their community. Sitting on their collective rear ends and not voting is a relinquishment of that privilege and shows a willingness to accept whatever is thrown their way.

Too many of America's finest have continuously given of themselves to maintain the privilege of voting.To sit on your butts and not do so is an insult to them.

The Other Election

This past Tuesday voters in 3 Johnson County cities went to the polls. One ward each in Shawnee & Prairie Village had primaries.

The interesting election was down in Gardner. Two sitting council members faced recall elections. Recall elections are not common in JoCo. In this case the people spoke and the two council members have been recalled.

For more information about that recall go to http://www.gardnerrecall.org/

City council members in all cities need to realize that they are serving subject to the will of the people.

Hmmmmm................gives me an idea.................. :-) :-)

Upcoming National League of Cities

In a couple of weeks some members of the city council will go to Washington DC for the annual National League of Cities conference. There can be some good that come out of these things.

Let's take a trip back in time to last year. Because of the city's financial situation,, only four people were scheduled to go. Two council members, the city manager and the mayor. In reality only three went because of a problem with the flight for one of the council members.

This year we have five people scheduled to go. The city manager, the mayor, and three council members: Sawyer, Sandifer and Kuhn.

Now if I understood what was said at the last council meeting only the mayor and councilmember Sawyer are leaving here on Sunday. That's good. The other three are apparently leaving on Friday.

Well, with the city's finances being what they are why are 5 people going?

Here are my suggestions:

1. Reduce the number of people going to four. With all the travel that Sandifer has done in the past twelve months he can stay home. Especially since he apparently thinks it's "none of your business" to explain the costs of his trip to Texas.

2. Have the remaining four leave on Sunday.

3. Let council member Sawyer and the mayor double up on a room and the city manager and council member Kuhn can do the same thing.

The city would then save a bunch on hotel nights and per diem costs(by both reducing the number of nights and using double rooms) and, by leaving here on Sunday, that would cut down on both even more.

If you agree with me email the mayor at JMeyers@CI.Shawnee.KS.US
and cc me at shawneeray@gmail.com

If you don't agree with me, then don't do anything.

Thieves in the Night

It has been reported that there are sign thieves out there. Yep, folks that go around stealing the political signs of candidates.

How sophomoric. How illegal. When a homeowner gives a candidate permission to place a sign in their yard they are exercising their right to free speech.

When a thief steals that sign they are trespassing on the property, and they are stealing something of value. Curious, since it involves free speech before an election I wonder if maybe, just maybe there could be a federal civil rights violation here?

I don't care who the candidate is, stealing of their signs is just wrong.........and illegal.

Political Cowards

Freedom of speech is great. One example is this blog, and the thousands of others out there, letters to the editors of newspapers etc.

What irks me though is when people say things (read that as attack) but they do not have the courage or intestinal fortitude to identify themselves. Those folks are nothing more than fecal matter.

What is setting me off? A mailer recently was mailed with some negative info about Kevin Straub. Hey, they even referenced an old blog post of mine. What gets me is the signature block: "FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY, NOT PAID FOR BY ANY CANDIDATE"

Well, how do we know it wasn't paid for by any candidate? Since whoever was responsible for this failed to identify themselves. Anybody can prepare that statement, even another candidate since there is no information showing who, where or when this item was prepared.

That is cowardly. Additionally, if they are attacking one candidate, then deep down they must have positive feelings for another one.

Methinks I know who is actually responsible for this. Just a hunch, but without proof I can't say.
That's OK, fecal matter eventually floats to the surface. Guess they have to take the negative road since their choice probably couldn't stand on their own merits.

Ward III Primary......Tue, March 2, 2010

There will be a primary in Ward III next Tuesday, 3/2/10. Four individuals are running and the top two vote getters go on to the general election on April 6.

In the past I've had some issues with Kevin Straub...........no denying that. But in this election I'd have to say if I lived in Ward III I'd vote for him.

Sound bytes and blurbs on campaign literature aside...........I've been to many council and committee meetings this past year. Straub's actions to try and maintain freedom of choice with regards to trash disposal are to be commended. Contrary to the comments of his wardmate. The same goes for his feelings towards the franchise fee.

His methods are sometimes unorthodox, but he is something of a rebel. Sometimes being a rebel is good.

Now, when it comes to challengers' comments about "restoring civility" to the council. Heck, they're going against the wrong person. Wanna restore civility to the council? Unseat Diva Dawn Kuhn in 2012. I've sat in on these meetings. I've heard her antagonize and bait Straub on more than one occasion, and on others get downright nasty. When Straub was having problems getting some info from the city manager, Kuhn was heard to chime in with "Well, I always get answers to my questions" Right.........the queen of the rubber stamps gets what she wants.

Civility? What about Mr Travel himself, Mickey Sandifer. When asked to explain some travel costs, in a council meeting, his reply was 'None of your business". (By the way Mickey, this constituent is still waiting for your explanation, and it is my business). This is another one that would need to go in 2012 to restore civility.

Nobody agrees with everybody all the time. Straub is very passionate in what he believes. I don't always agree with his methodology, but he does care.

Unfortunately it's too late for me to move to Ward III to vote for him.

Great Scott.......Part 2

Well, it looks like the Shawnee Dispatch has rendered an opinion on this situation (see my blog post below from January 30, 2010....."Great Scott!!!!!!.........Is She Moving?????)

In an editorial dated 2/10/10 the Dispatch calls for Ms Scott's resignation. The editorial can be viewed at http://www.shawneedispatch.com/news/2010/feb/10/our-view-resignation-order/

As pointed out, Cheryl Scott could have resigned in time for the seat to be placed on the spring election ballot. The resignation could have also had an effective date to coincide with the election, so she would not have had to leave office prior to then.

When she does resign, the only way her replacement will chosen by the voters is if the council does not act within 60 days and then the matter would go to a special election. Highly unlikely because of costs.

The only question that remains is did Ms Scott choose to delay her resignation or was she encouraged by others to do so? And if she was encouraged to delay the resignation by others, who are they?

A resignation is in order, now!!!!!!!!

Another Modification to the Crystal Ball Post

Whoa......now I've received an email from Jessica Marshall basically standing by the use of the term "abatement";

Her email is quoted below and she included a link to a page on the city's web site:


Ray,

This is from the city's Web site about the downtown incentive program:

The Downtown Improvement Incentive Program is a 90% tax abatement program that is available for any type of new construction or building improvement that increases the value of a property in the defined Neighborhood Revitalization Area.

http://www.cityofshawnee.org/WEB/ShawneeCMS.nsf/vwContent/ImprovementIncentiveProgram?OpenDocument

The developer says it is one thing, the reporter says it is something else.

OK folks............here's my take.........Read the submitted documentation and decide for yourself which it is. Or, could it be both?

Let's Modify the Crystal Ball Post

I received an email from Kevin Tubbesing. Apparently, what his project is eligible for is a rebate not an abatement, and as such there is no cost to the taxpayers. Shame on me for quoting a reporter from the Sun.

The content of the email is as follows and should clarify the situation:

"Ray
I do appreciate your attention to the project I am bringing to downtown, but I would ask that you reconsider what appears to me to be a negative tone toward the incentive. As you will see in the attached public documents, this property falls within a downtown revitalization district and is therefore subject to a rebate - not abatement - of taxes generated from improvements to the property. In other words there is no cost to the taxpayer as without the improvement the property value the corresponding taxes would remain unchanged.

Thank you for considering."

The documents he refers to can be viewed at:

Here

and

Here

Sidebar: I sure hope that the Sun makes the change from abatement to rebate also. Especially since they have a substantially larger number of readers.

Sun Publications Has a Crystal Ball

A recent article in the Jouhnson County Sun was about Stag Commercial Properties acquiring the Commerce Bank Building. The article goes on to explain what the owner of Stag has in mind.

Very interesting and can be read at http://sunpublications.com/201002103703/news/developer-plans-to-restore-building.html

One thing about the article that has me confused is this statement:

"Tubbesing will (emphasis added) receive a tax abatement as part of the city’s Downtown Improvement Incentive Program, which is available for new construction or building improvement that increases the value of a property in the Neighborhood Revitalization Area. Loans and grants also are available for downtown business owners."

Since tax abatements have to be voted on before anybody will receive them I guess the writer of the article must have a crystal ball. Maybe the writer can pick out the next winning lottery number for me? Redevelopment/revitalization is good.................but how does one know ahead of time how the council will vote?

Would you like to comment on this item? Post that comment here:
http://shawneeray.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=blog&thread=40

Revisiting The Trashman

See my previous post of January 26th, 2010 "The Trashman Cometh"

I am really concerned that administratively an effort will be made to make it very difficult for more than one trash hauler to be able to actually do business in Shawnee.

The folowing is from the Shawnee Dispatch at:
http://www.shawneedispatch.com/news/2010/jan/27/council-approves-trash-ordinance/

"Straub said he also was concerned the ordinance would hurt the smaller haulers. He said the cost of buying new containers could hurt them. He also was concerned with the insurance coverage the city was requiring for haulers.

The owners of two smaller hauling companies, Superior Disposal and A-1 Disposal, both said they, too, were concerned about the insurance coverage required, though they thought they could handle the container costs.

Vicki Charlesworth, assistant city manager, said the insurance coverage requirements were recommended by the city’s insurance broker to make sure the city was protected. However, the insurance requirements were listed under the administrative portion of the ordinance, so if the requirements were found to be inappropriate, they could be changed without a vote of the Council before the ordinance took affect.

A handful of residents spoke before the Council, most requesting the ordinance be tabled, but Meyers emphasized again that what the county decided shouldn’t have a major effect on what the city was doing.

Straub added that he thought there should have been more public notice about the ordinance vote and said he thought some on the Council were trying to rush it through, though Meyers said no one wanted to rush it through and he resented the implication."

In the above, who would be the one(s) to determine if the insurance requirements were found to be inappropriate? Think about that one.

A few months ago, Councilmember Straub started a petition web site to get folks to sign up to indicate whether they wanted to have a choice in who did their trash hauling and recycling. Ironically he was publicly excoriated for that by the council president, Dawn Kuhn (I commented about that at the time, felt she was wrong, and he was right).

Straub and the other three incumbents (Distler, Pflumm, Goode) up for reelection have been at the forefront in attempting to maintain choice for the citizens of Shawnee in this matter. They need to be able to continue to do everything to provide oversight of this matter. If not, it is possible that the city could wind up with a single hauler by default.

Do you have a comment about this item? If yes, post that comment at http://shawneeray.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=blog&thread=39

Congratulations to Manhattan KS

Yepper, a city whose leadership has intestinal fortitude. Read about their new cell phone ban:

http://cjonline.com/news/state/2010-02-04/manhattan_oks_cell_phone_ban

Would you like to comment about this?
Go here:
http://shawneeray.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=blog&thread=38

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

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

Texting & Driving - In the News, Again

Who is that crazy guy from Shawnee? Click on the link.


http://www.fox4kc.com/videobeta/watch/?watch=60a87ec2-97f2-4307-810b-1c1ab608e09b&src=front

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

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

Franchise Fees & Rate Increases

Looks like KCP&L wants more money. And who else benefits? Well, the City of Shawnee will 5% of the increase via its newly reinstated franchise fee. Well, 2% starting in April and then the additional 3% next January................... Check it out http://www.shawneedispatch.com/news/2009/dec/29/kcpl-requests-rate-increase/

When Councilperson Distler started talking about potential utility rate increases during the discussion of the franchise fee she was basically ignored by some of her fellow councilpersons. Fact is, this is probably just the first of many, many more increases that the various gas and electric utilities will get. Just wait and see what happens with cap and trade. Get your checkbooks out.

Just remember who voted for and who voted against the franchise fee reinstatement:

Voting for:

Scott
Sawyer
Kuhn
Sandifer
And Meyers breaking the tie

Voting against:

Pflumm
Goode
Straub
Distler

Got any comments on this subject? Post them here http://shawneeray.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=blog&thread=33

Tobacco Tax Tiddlywinks

Looks like the governor wants to raise tobacco taxes again. See the AP article at http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iFLm1v-BoGpbLRKscAo7dGkrh97gD9CP61CO6

This makes me ask the same old question (which none of our local legislators, to my knowledge, wants to address): As the tax increases and smoking declines, eventually the goose laying the golden egg is going to go bye-bye. What will replace it?

Now, for all those folks who try to tell us that the tax increaes are going for health care, read these two items from that article:

"Martino said Parkinson has not decided whether to ask legislators to dedicate the new revenues to health programs, or use it to help the state balance its budget for fiscal year 2011, which begins July 1."

This one is even better:

"But in 2002, when legislators boosted the cigarette tax from 24 cents, they did it to help close a budget shortfall. " So keep shoveling that bovine scatology about using it for health costs.............a 55¢ per pack increase (from 24¢ to 79¢ back then) and it went to a budget shortfall.

Have a comment about the above? Post it here http://shawneeray.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=blog&thread=32

Kuhn Doesn't Get It

Background:

1. Back in June 09 I brought up at a city council meeting info regarding a local ban on cell phone use/texting while driving

2. A few days after that, councilperson Distler requested info as to how cities that had enacted oridinances were handling the situation.

3. In October, staff gave a presentation. Apparently there was a miscommunication as to what was asked for, and the presentation did not cover the request.

4. In November a motion was made to have the item researched again to answer the original request and to present that to the council. The motion passed but there was a substantial amount of concern, and even anger among some council members and staff about redoing the research. The primary concerns being time and money.

Current:

Prior to the council meeting of 12/14/09 I contacted Michelle Distler and indicated that I would be willing to volunteer to do the research and presentation. That would eliminate staff time (and associated costs). The only thing is that Ms Distler would have offer a motion to rescind the one from November and accepting my volunteer offer.

At the 12/14 meeting Ms Distler offered that motion. This is something that should have taken less than 2 minutes to proceed with as everything (research, time, money etc) was being taken off of the shoulders of staff. Dawn Kuhn then proceeded to offer a second to the motion if the research was sent in as a report but without a presentation to a committee of the council.

Basically the discussion now, (because of Ms Kuhn) dragged on for almost another half hour. The purpose of presenting the info to a committee of the council, rather than sending in a report, would be to get whatever info was obtained to go on the record. Even the mayor tried to explain to Kuhn that if the motion to rescind was not approved, then the original motion (requiring staff to do the work would stand). Apparently she couldn't see that. She seemed to be concerned about the flood gates opening and citizens of the community storming the gates of city hall to give presentations on items of interest to them. Well, to give a presentation would require council approval. Next, there is always the old "business from the floor" segment of a council meeting where anybody can get up and speak about literally anything. Heck it happened that night, with a gentleman who had drainage problems on his property. And, even though there is a 3 minute time limit, that item went on for awhile (justifiably so).

Ms Kuhn's actions came real close to the item staying on staff's shoulders. After her long winded, nonsensical comments, I came within milliseconds of withdrawing my offer to volunteer to do the work. Fortunately I thought better. The item came to a vote and it passed. (7-1..Kuhn voting yay, the only dissent being Ms Scott) Result: Staff does not have to spend time (and money) on redoing the research. It now falls on my shoulders.

Postscript:

The initial info that I have received from some of the cities that have these ordinances appears to be a mixed bag. Some positive, some negative. Both will be included so as to allay the fears of those who think I may try and color the results.

Ms Kuhn's rambling self aggrandizing commentaries are classic examples of the old sentiment, "If you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance, baffle 'em with BS" She has become a master at circumlocution. Is there anyway to get a refund to the city for all of those leadership classes she attended?

Have a comment about this blog post? Post comments at http://shawneeray.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=blog&thread=31

Take the Poll - Kuhn Kalled on the Karpet

It's not scientific, but could prove eye opening.

Take the poll at http://shawneeray.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=blog&thread=30&page=1

Kuhn Kalled on the Karpet

Wow..............this letter appeared in the Shawnee Dispatch:


To the editor:
Our Boy Scout den attended the Nov. 24 City Council meeting. We are grateful to Mayor Jeff Meyers for the premeeting tour and letting the boys lead the pledge of allegiance.

Council members won’t always agree but Dawn Kuhn’s behavior was totally unprofessional. Her obvious disdain for and catty remarks to fellow Council member Kevin Straub brought the phrases “drama queen” and “Harper Valley PTA” to mind.

From an unbiased and outside point of view — having never met any of the Council members — it appeared Straub may be the black sheep on the Council. The other members didn’t seem interested in the point he was trying to make either, but none came close to matching Kuhn’s tactless demeanor.

It’s unfortunate for the Boy Scouts earning a citizenship badge and high school students meeting a curriculum requirement that this was the model of city government portrayed. Healthy debate and openness to hearing alternatives should be welcome, but this wasn’t on her agenda this night.

Lori Onions
Shawnee

For those wishing to read it as it appears on the Dispatch's website, here is the link:
http://www.shawneedispatch.com/news/2009/dec/02/letter-not-exactly-scouts-honor/

I was there that night. Among the ad hominems that Ms Kuhn tossed out were that Mr Straub was "stupid" and an "impotent coucnilmember". Not necessarily the first time she has done this.

The thing I find disconcerting is that Ms Kuhn is the currently sitting Council President. That means that in the absence of the mayor she would assume his duties. This includes filling in for him at events that he might not be able to attend, or act on his behalf in case of disability, or assume the position if he is unable to perform.

If she cannot control her personal animosities to a fellow member of the council, in council session, I'm not sure that I would like her to continue to sit as President of the Council.

My opinion.........a public apology and resignation as council president would be in order.

If you have any comments about this post them here:
http://shawneeray.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=blog&thread=29

To Approve or Not To Approve....that is the question

Once in awhile council rep Kevin Straub comes up with some good questions.. Problem is they don't always get answered...........at least in a timely manner.

On the agenda at each council meeting is always an item to review and approve the semi-monthly expenditures.

Straub wanted to know what would happen if the council didn't automatically approve the expenditures. It was a valid question since, by the time the item has come to the council the checks have already been issued and sent out. He wanted to know would we ask for the checks to be returned? He wanted to know then, why does the council have to approve this item (more or less rubber stamp). Why not just review the item with no action?

Personally, I see it two ways:

1. If the council has to approve these items then the checks need to be held until the approval is given. Could be interesting like when a council meeting is cancelled like the 10/26/09 one.

2. These items have basically already gone thru a delegated approval process. Large items have been approved by individual council actions. So, why this approval process?

Personally, I'd be leaning towards item 2 above.............but then what do I know?
Whatever the answer is, methinks it is time for Kevin to be given the info. What is taking so long? Is it so difficult to be be researched or is he being deliberately stonewalled?

Do you have comments about this item? Post them here:
http://shawneeray.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=blog&thread=28

Trashy Trash Talk II

On Tuesday, 11/3/09 at 7PM one of the items on the agenda of the Finance & Administration Committee will be to discuss the recycling/trash ordinance.

This is not a decision session....rather a discussion session.

Those who have opinions on this item might want to attend.

Suggestion: Read the packet item as posted on the city's website so you have some additional background as to what is being discussed.

That is available at http://www.cityofshawnee.org/Meetings/AGENDAS.NSF/vwNews/99A892C9AA709AC18625765E00794E00/$FILE/7XATL5.pdf

Have a comment about this? Post it at http://shawneeray.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=blog&thread=27

Brouhaha Brewing with the City Manager

Looks like we have a major brouhaha going with the city manager.

Let's recap for a second. In June I again brought forth the idea of banning cell phones/texting while driving at a city council meeting. A few days after the meeting I spoke with the mayor and he agreed that getting the info from other cities as to how it works for them could be useful. He advised me to contact my council rep and have the rep request the item for a committee meeting.

Michelle Distler did this on 6/24/09 with an email to the city manager:

I received a call from Ray in regards to the Cell Phone Ban. He mentioned he had spoken to Jeff and that Jeff was interested in seeing what other cities have done and how it is working for them. Jeff advised Ray to speak to me and have me ask to have this item put on a committee. I told Ray it probably would not be until after budget and he was fine with that. So I am making a request for this item to be put on a committee meeting. Thank you. Michelle

Since over the summer the budget did have priority the item came up at the F & A committee meeting on 10/6/09. As pointed out in the blog entry below of Sat, 10/10/09, the primary question was never answered nor even addressed. During the meeting Ms Distler asked if I could supply a list of some of the cities and she would pass that on so we could get the info as originally requested. On 10/9/09 Ms distler sent the city manager an email which included a list of cities that I had sent to her.

Carol,
Due to the fact the original request was not fulfilled, we would like to see this come back to committee advising as the email below requested that we see what other cities have done and how it is working for them. By presenting that no other Johnson County cities are looking into this does not address the request that was made. Ray has supplied cities that have enacted a ban and their population size.
Thank you.
Michelle
(list of cities was included)

On 10/17/09 (8 days after the last email, I inquired of Ms Distler if the city manager had responded.

On 10/19/09 the city manager finally responded:

Here's my dilemma - we have already given two presentations on this topic. I apologize if the second one wasn't exactly what was requested. I asked our folks to give an update and I must not have sent the specific email to them as they prepared. My fault. It is my sense that there is not majority support to move forward on anything at this time related to this issue. We have limited staff and limited money - 22 vacancies - 7.5% of our work force. I have projects that staff was directed to look into as part of our budget approval that we have slated out on Committee meetings clear til April 2010 (much more than 4 months) - because we don't have the depth of staff to get to them any sooner. I have a part time intern who is preparing our whole solid waste/recycling plan. This morning I am attending a meeting on State legislative issues because I have no one else to send, and we won't have time to even prepare a legislative program (at least not a good one - I'd like to do something), let alone monitor the session the way we should. These are just a few examples to make my point which is that I really struggle with asking anyone on my staff to take 10 to 12 hours of their time to research an issue at the request of one citizen (one very important citizen of course!) on an issue that there is not a majority support to move forward on at all. Does that make sense? If someone sees it differently, let me know, but I am struggling to find a way to justify it..... Carol

Most of the above correspondence between the council rep and the city manager had the mayor, the assistant city manager and me as cc.

On 10/20/09 I reponded to the city manager's email:

Mornin' folks,

If someone sees it differently let you know? OK.

I am confused, concerned, aggravated, and various other states of being.

To say "I apologize if the second one wasn't exactly what was requested. I asked our folks to give an update and I must not have sent the specific email to them as they prepared. My fault." is an understatement. It came nowhere close to answering the question.
Now, let's look at this: "on an issue that there is not a majority support to move forward on at all" We are not talking, at this time about moving forward on anything. We were talking about obtaining information as to how other cities were handling it. Again, this is information gathering. I remember recently when the President of the Council (Dawn Kuhn) publicly excoriated a fellow council member (Kevin Straub) for that member's stand on the trash issue without having all of the information.

I would like to know specifically which members of the council are against obtaining the information as to how other cities are handling this. Are we afraid of what the information would show? That it could be enfoced? That other problems/violations have been reduced? And yes, as a side benefit, people are paying for being stupid and putting other folks' lives and property in jeopardy. Remember, this IS a public safety issue. And, quite literally, a life and death one.

Now let's look at this: "I really struggle with asking anyone on my staff to take 10 to 12 hours of their time to research an issue" Well, since you assumed responsibility for failing to pass on the question properly, maybe then you could do the research.

Last but not least. Two things stand out as very annoying. Why did it take 10 days (and one reminder) before a council member received a response from the city manager? In the business world that would be totally unacceptable. Especially since the city manger in this government model reports to the members of the council. A response in today's era would be 24-48 hours. Even if it wasn't a total answer, an interim or acknowledgment reply would be the norm. I was curious as to what would happen if a department head failed to respond to the city manager in 10 days. Again, even if it is only an interim or acknowledgment reply. Also, what job in the business world can a person do wrong and then say they are not going to do it over?
Personally I think the original question still needs to be answered. Believe that Chicago, the cities in New Mexico and Brooklyn, OH can probably give a good history.
Ray

As of today I have not received a reply to my email.

I was going to take a poll at the 10/26/09 council meeting to see exactly which council members are against getting the info (not enacting an ordinance, just getting the info). Unfortunately that meeting has been cancelled since there were not enough items for the agenda.

SIDEBAR:

It still bothers me that it took the city manager 10 days to reply to a member of the council. And then only after a reminder. Maybe there is some truth to another council member's public statements about selective members of the council getting speedy replies. This was brought out by another member of the community at the franchise fee meeting.

Also, anyone who works in the private sector who did not provide a report that was asked for by their superiors would be resoundingly reprimanded, especially if they refused to do it over. Do some folks not realize that in a council/manager form of government the council is in charge, not the manager? Have we a case of role reversal here?

Oh, I do not, as stated by the city manager consider myself a very important citizen. All citizens of Shawnee are important.

BTW, it took me less than 45 minutes to compile a list of cities that have ordinances. A short email (or phone call) by the city manager or staff to their counterparts would get the info. Is the 10-12 hours mentioned by the city manager realistic?

If anyone has any comments they'd like to make about this blog entry feel free to post them at http://shawneeray.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=blog&action=display&thread=26

To TIF or not to TIF

Earlier this week the Shawnee city council met with the USD 232 board.

Apparently one of the items they were going to discuss was the TIF district that the school board previously opted out of.......which basically killed the TIF district for I-435 and Shawnee Mission Parkway.

Things change..........let's look north to Wyandotte County. There is a very strong possibility now that the Wizards soccer team and Cerner Corporation are going to be locating in Village West.

Wow, what a coup for KCK/Wyandotte County. Shawnee could concevably benefit from that.

The key would be, IMHO, the type of development that would take place in the proposed TIF district. The article in the Shawnee Dispatch, http://www.shawneedispatch.com/news/2009/oct/14/city-asks-school-board-reconsider-tif-district/ indicates that some members of the School District were concerned about residential development in that area. Valid point. The lawyer for the development group indicated that any residential development would probably be lofts and townhomes. MY opinion....."probably be" is not good enough. "Must be" would be better. The area would be mixed use (see the Dispatch article). I believe the concern of the school board members about residential development is valid. Those concerns need to be addressed. We don't need developers going after Cerner's proposed work force. We need strong, viable, commercial entities up there

We need to be going after the life style/entertainment commercial properties. Like hotels, restaurants, retail and yes, some sort of destination venue. Maybe even a nightclub or two. Anybody for a Coyote Ugly Saloon? They got turned down up north (eventhough there is a Hooters up there). With everything that is happening in Village West we could definitely get some action down here. I may not be expressing this correctly.

If there were firm commitments from the developers, up front, as to what would be in the development then a TIF district might not be a bad idea.

Let's see how this plays out.

Comments about this blog entry? Post them on our forum at http://shawneeray.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=blog&thread=25

Tuesday's Committee Meeting 10/6/09

This past Tuesday (10/6/09) the Finance and Admin Committee of the city council held its monthly meeting.

The first item on the agenda was to be a review of info regarding the use of cell phones to include texting.

A problem occurred when the primary question as originally asked by a member of the city council was never answered.

Let's back up for a second. Back in June I addressed the council and again brought up the cell phone use/texting question. A few days after the meeting a phone conversation took place with the mayor and myself. It was mentioned that there were some cities that had passed local ordinances regarding this item. How was this affecting them? How were the local ordinances being enforced? Accident stats, etc. He expressed an interest in at least finding out what was happening in those cities. And yes, I brought up (eventhough it's a no-no) curiosity as to what effect the fines were having on those populations. The mayor then suggested I direct my questions to my council rep for review. I did this.

On 6/24//09 Council rep Distler sent an email to the city manager. Part of the email said:

"I received a call from Ray in regards to the Cell Phone Ban. He mentioned he had spoken to Jeff and that Jeff was interested in seeing what other cities have done and how it is working for them. Jeff advised Ray to speak to me and have me ask to have this item put on a committee."

Ms Distler had cc'd me and the mayor on that email. The city manager also cc'd me and the mayor when she advised it would be scheduled for October.

Now we come to this past Tuesday's meeting. No info was presented on the effects of bans in those cities that had them. The only thing about any other cities, was that no other city in JoCo was considering this item.

Why was no info supplied as to the original request? I can think of two possibilities:

1. There was miscommunication between the city manager and staff as to what info was to be reviewed.

2. Staff was directed by the city manager to limit the scope of the info provided. Possibly because the city manager does not favor a ban.

I sincerely hope that the problem was item 1 above. As such, Ms Distler has resubmitted the request to include the names of some cities that have these types of bans. If it was item 2, then we have a problem. Why? Because in a manger/council form of government it is the council that makes policy, not the city manager. The city manager is supposed to provide the info to the council............all info..........the good, the bad and the ugly.

Have any comments about this item. Post them here:

http://shawneeray.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=blog&thread=24&page=1

Additional info from the meeting:

An article from the KC Star was shown about a gentleman who was killed at the Harley-Davidson plant this summer by a woman who was talking on her cell phone, failed to stop after hitting him, and then ran over and crushed his head.

Also, this PSA from the UK was shown. If you have a weak stomach do not watch it. Not necessarily recommended for very young children.



If you have trouble viewing the above, you can click here to go to it
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ttNgZDZruI

Dr Phil Interviews a Texter

Short clip from Dr Phil's show. Interesting.



If you have a problem viewing the video, go here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fDlYSPVro0Q

Any comments? Post them here http://www.shawneeray.proboards.com

Old Shawnee Town Makes the KC Star

Old Shawnee Town got a write up in the KC Star on 9/29/09.

The article can be viewed at http://www.kansascity.com/115/story/1479521.html

I started a thread on the forum and if anybody wants to comment, feel free to do so:
http://www.shawneeray.proboards.com

Talkin', Textin', and Drivin'

Well, the item is up on the agenda for the Finance & Admin Committee of the City Council for Tuesday 10/6/09, 7:00PM at city hall

I'll be there. Will you?

Any comments about this? Visit the forum and post your comments at this thread:

http://shawneeray.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=20

Or, just visit the forum: http://shawneeray.proboards.com

Tonganoxie Proves a Point

And what is that point? Apathy. Voter apathy.

Earlier this week the citizens of Tonganoxie voted to permit alcoholic beverage sales on Sunday.
Personally, I agree with that.

But, that is not the point. The point is the vote totals.

The measure passed 250 to 132. OK that means that 65.4% of those who voted approved the issue.

Now, when you consider that Tonganoxie has 2,897 people registered to vote that then means:
a. only 13.28% of eligible voters bothered to vote
b. 8.6% of the eligible voters made the decision for the entire city

We see a similar trend in elections here, especially when the election is just for city offices.

What a waste of a freedom that many have died for. Don't just gripe about things.......go to the polls. Get involved.

Have a comment about this item? Post it at http://shawneeray.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=blog&thread=17

A Slight Mistake

But, it has been corrected.

Regarding the interactive forum I set up at http://www.shawneeray.proboards.com

When I set that up it was supposed to be done so that anybody could view the commentary, without a password or ID. The only people who would need passwords and IDs would be those who wish to add comments.

Well, I found out today, that even guests were being asked to create an account before viewing the forum.

That has been corrected. Passwords and IDs are not needed just to view.

My apologies to those who wanted to read the items but could not. Please try again.

Red, Yellow & Green (part 2)

Received an anonymous email that said:

"City staff had suggested this several times over the past few years. It was not her idea."

That was with reference to the Shawnee Dispatch comment that council rep Kuhn had recommended the item as a budget cut.

Interesting. Does anybody have any additional info on this?

Let me know or post it at : http://shawneeray.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=blog&thread=14&page=1

Sex, Lies and DVDs

Did that title get your attention? Hope so. Wrong topic, but wanted ya to read this.

Franchise Fee Follies

Yep, more on this subject. In a recent letter to the editor of the Shawnee Dispatch http://www.shawneedispatch.com/news/2009/sep/16/fee-more-costly-tax/ former council member and county commissioner John Segale had some negative comments about the franchise fee. He was right. Yours truly also voiced some of the same comments at the council meeting. A small mill levy increase would have resulted in a lower cost to the citizens. Even had a chart showing that. As previously mentioned in this blog (and Segale’s letter) certain individuals are relying on people transferring the responsibility for increased costs with their utility bills to the companies rather than the taxing authority.

Mickey’s Monkey

Council member Mickey Sandifer has a monkey on his back. It’s called the misleading monkey. At least that is what it appears to be to me.

Let’s start at the budget approval council meeting. Sandifer made an impassioned statement that he was concerned about medical response times for those in need if the budget as such was not approved. The comments seemed to be focused on the senior citizens of the community. This is traditionally, the group with more health problems, including life threatening illnesses. Well, I don’t remember seeing anything in the budget that would reduce emergency services. Additionally, ambulance services are provided by Johnson County Med Act. Now it is true that our fire department also provides first responder activity, but again, I didn’t see anything about a reduction in those services. Also, what happens if the units closest to your residence are on another call? Well, a unit from another station could (and does respond). This also includes responses by units from other cities as the result of our mutual assist agreements.

For those who don’t know me, I am one of those senior citizens with potentially life threatening illnesses. Yes, I am over 62, have hypertension, diabetes, and a history of being a guest at Shawnee Mission Medical Center.

Mickey’s Other Monkey

Now we come to the night the council voted on the franchise fee. Apparently some of Sandifer’s fellow council members had received citizen input that he (Sandifer) had intimated that if the franchise fee was not implemented that the city could face litigation.
Sandifer claimed it was a couple of people who misunderstood him. His fellow council members indicated that it was substantially more than just a couple. Hmmmm, interesting. Now where did this supposed litigation come from?

Also, it was brought out that one person was upset because after emailing Mickey, he (Mickey)showed up unannounced at their residence. When confronted with that Mickey actually went ballistic and shouted out words to the effect that “If you email me I’m going to show up”. Wrongo Mickey baby. If someone emails you, you can email them back, call them, or send a snail mail. But you have no right to show up unannounced at their residence.

If you want to comment on this blog post (or any blog post) go to http://www.proboards.com/ and click on the Blog Commentary section..

Red, Yellow & Green

In an article this past week, viewable at http://www.shawneedispatch.com/news/2009/sep/16/city-looks-save-money-buying-traffic-signals/ the Shawnee Dispatch reports action by the city on how the city can save $49K a year by buying rather than leasing certain traffic signals.

A thumbs up to Ron Freyermuth, DPW and Mark Sherfy, Traffic Engineer.

What made me chuckle though was this line in the above referenced article:

Researching the feasibility of buying traffic signals and street lights the city currently leases from KCP&L was one of several cost-saving measures Council member Dawn Kuhn had requested the city research.

Golly gee willikers, was Ms Kuhn the only one of eight (nine if ya count the mayor) that made cost cutting suggestions? Or was she the only one that suggested this particular item?

If anybody wants to email me with an answer to the above two questions, I’ll be happy to post those answers here. One request………keep the answers short, and to the point.

Just click on this link:
mailto:shawneeray@gmail.com?subject=redyellowgreen

A Bunch of Stuff

Got a bunch of stuff to comment on:

School Crossing Guards

An issue in Lenexa as evidenced by this item in the KC Star http://www.kansascity.com/318/story/1448422.html

Is still an issue here in Shawnee. At a city council meeting it was mentioned that parents might want to volunteer. Apparently this was an idea by several council members and members of the community.

Another member of the community suggested that the city also look into the feasibility of the AAA school crossing guard program. Not a bad idea if I say so myself. :-) :-)

See some of the comments posted to the above referenced KC Star article, after the article.

None of your business

Those were the words uttered by council rep Sandifer when council member Straub inquired about some travel expenses that were listed on the bill payment list this past Monday.

OK, Straub asked some questions that probably could have best been answered by staff prior to the meeting. But when he did inquire about some travel expenses by Sandifer, I felt that Sandifer's reply was out of line. There is no love between these two members of the council.
But, council member's travel expenses are everybody's business, other council members and citizens of the community. Personally, I feel that Mr Sandifer owes the council and the city an apology for that comment.............and an explanation now. Will the written copy of the minutes show that comment? Or will one have to listen to the CD?

Check out the forum

Don't forget to check out the on-line forum. You can respond to items already posted, or you can start a thread of your own on a topic that you choose.

This is one way to get people to interact, and to let others know where they stand on issues.
It can be reached by going to http://shawneeray.proboards.com/

Side note to city staff

Setting up your own forum could be one way to get the citizen feedback about the trash issue, other issues, and even be used as a Q & A area for other services. Comments were made at council meetings that the staff was trying to figure out a way to get that input. Many companies use that format for that purpose. Computer software companies especially. They use it as on line "help". Naturally, a software package, integrated into the city's web site would probably be preferablt to the one I set up

Trashy Trash Talk

Ahhhh yes............the trash hauling issue.

Are we having fun yet?

Anyway, I have started a thread on the new forum about this. The idea being to get citizen input and commentary.

To view this please go here: http://shawneeray.proboards.com/index.cgi then click on Shawnee and then the actual thread.

Anybody can go to the forum and read any of the posts. You do have to register though to post a comment. If used properly a forum like this can be a great way for people to get involved and state how they feel. Oh, that includes local elected officials. Feel free to sign up and post your commentary too.

Also, anybody who registers for the forum can also start their own converstations (threads).

New Forum

A few people have asked me about feedback on the blog.

Basically, this blog was set up so that I could post my thoughts. There have been times when items sent to me by others have been posted here.

In an attempt to create interaction among Shawnee residents I have set up a separate forum.

It can be found by going here:
http://shawneeray.proboards.com/index.cgi?

If used properly we could probably get some interesting debates/conversations going.
Debates can get emotional. People can feel very strongly about their ideas. The one basic request is that the debates be conducted in a civil manner

The Irony of Hypocrisy

This past Tuesday the city council's finance and administration committee reviewed the info concerning possible changes in trash hauling and recycling.

A brief description of additional info that the committee and the public asked about can be seen at http://www.cityofshawnee.org/WEB/ShawneeCMS.nsf/vwNews/7E916FAAEFF0F7028625762C0058AE84?OpenDocument

The staff had recommended Model 4 out of 5 models reviewed. Info on that can be found at http://www.cityofshawnee.org/WEB/ShawneeCMS.nsf/0bf32ea7059198088525755100519ded/9faa79bdd540a740862575d80063928f?OpenDocument

Now, on to the subject matter. Third ward council rep Dawn Kuhn made it clear that she was in favor of the city setting up some type of vehicle for the community to be able to voice their opinions. Cool. Something needs to be done along those lines.

But here's the big bite..........when her wardmate set up a site on line
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/Shawnee-Trash-Choice she was one of the more vocal critics of his action.

Granted, his site was focused to try and find out how many people would prefer choice of hauler over a city designated single source. But, it still provided a place for individuals to voice their opinion. Did the fact that over 600 people have already posted on Straub's site have anything to do with her embracing the idea of getting comments from the public?

Oh well, such is life.

Was It Political?

Yepper, we're still going to be talking about that 5% franchise fee. Probably for quite some time.

Here is an interesting item. It is from an article in the Shawnee Dispatch. The full article can be read here: http://www.shawneedispatch.com/news/2009/aug/26/franchise-fees-return-april-1/

"Meyers and some other Council members also insisted they weren’t making the decision for political reasons but for the best interest of the city. The terms of the four Council members who voted in opposition end in April next year."

Was that a little editorializing or side taking instead of reporting? Decide for yourself. Was that an insinuation that the four council reps who voted against the franchise fee did so because they are up for reelection next year? Check their records.

Maybe the reverse is true. Maybe those who voted for it would hope that the citizens of Shawnee would forget about it by the time they came up for reelection (2012). Maybe, they thought that folks would start blaming the utilities for the increased amounts and not the city council. Remember, as previously pointed out, how council rep Kuhn already indicated that folks when looking at relocating would be more likely to compare mill levies rather than franchise fees.

Welllllllll, I'll make a political statement. Three years from now when utility costs have skyrocketed and the 5% franchise fee far exceeds anything that a modest mill levy increase would have cost the citizens, remember who voted for it. Also, remember which council member came up with scare tactics to justify the franchise fee. I know I will.

Solid Waste - Trash Hauling

OK folks...............here we go again.

Tuesday, Sep 8, 2009 the Finance & Administration Committee will be discussing this item.

Eventhough certain council reps give lip service to listening to the public, it is obvious that some of them do not.

Eventhough no final decisions are made at these committee meetings it is important for folks to turn out to let the council committee know how they feel.

Basically, do you want a single hauler, chosen by the city or do you want the opportunity to choose who hauls your trash?

The following two items of information are available on line:

Solid Waste Report

Staff Report and Recommendation

Folks who read this, may want to pass the info on to those of their friends, family and neighbors who might not be aware of this meeting.

Show up, be heard.

Curious, which council reps will eventually use bovine scatological scare tactics to get people to see things their way?

Local Interactions

A couple of folks and I were discussing the interactions between members of governing bodies and the population, specifically in small cities like Shawnee.

Sometimes, there can be conflicts of interest or perceived conflicts of interest. When that happens the member of the governing body that might have that conflict usually recuses themself from involvement.

I remember one incident where council rep Straub excused himself from the discussion and vote on an item concerning Town & Country Villas. He actually exited the council chambers, and returned when the next item came up. He did the right thing.

When a member of the governing body has a direct interest in an item, or a member of their family does, then the actions like what Straub did are the acceptable way of handling it.

Next, the folks I was talking to were kicking around the idea of what if someone came before the council needing something (special use permit, zoning variance, abatement etc). And what if that person and a member of the council were not related, the council person had no financial interest in the item, but they had a strong personal relationship (weekly golfing partners, bowling partners, a business relationship separate from the item like doctor/patient or insurance agent/insured party, work supervisor/subordinate, romantic involvement, etc).

Anyway, we couldn't come to a consensus as to what would be the right way for the situation to be handled.

So, here's the challenge to the readers of this blog. If you have thoughts on this, please click here and email me with your thoughts. The responses might be posted here. Please keep the responses to 50 words or less.

City Responds to State Rep Donohoe

The city responded to State Rep Donohoe's comments about the money that he claimed was available.

I am unable to post pdf documents here, so I had to do an image capture of the letter. As such there are actually two photos below that make up the letter. If you place your cursor over either section and click, that portion of the letter will open in another window, and larger, so it is easier to read: