A few weeks ago I wrote that we were sending 5 people to the National League of Cities Conference in Washington, DC. This was in my opinion, three more than we needed to send. Scroll down to the Feb 25, 2011 post, “The Five That Are Going……….to DC”.
Based on a recent posting to the city’s web site, it was obvious that only four of the individuals went. An inquiry was sent to the city manager requesting info as to whether or not funds were expended on behalf of the non-attendee, Ward III Councilmember Jeff Vaught.
Below are the three questions (in blue) and Ms. Gonzales’ responses, (in red). I would like to sincerely thank Ms. Gonzales for her speedy reply.
1. Were any funds expended on Mr. Vaught’s behalf (hotel reservations, NLC registration and seminar fees, transportation, advances for per diem and any other items)? Two payments made in advance were for airfare and the NLC Conference Registration.
2. If yes, how much and what were they? Air fare was $ 308.39. NLC Conference Registration was $420.
3. If yes, how much is refundable to the city and how much is lost? The City has requests in to the airline and to NLC to have the amounts credited. Review processes are underway for each.
It is nice to know that action is being taken to get credits for these amounts. The only question that remains is, if the city gets the credits, will they be credits resulting in refunds or requiring the city to use the amounts for future meetings.
The latter has happened in the past.
What occurs is that the city gets a credit towards a future meeting, but to take advantage of it, additional funds have to be expended (lodging, per diem, seminar fees, etc.). Let’s hope that it is a refund and the city doesn’t get “forced” into additional expenditures. That is unless the funds are used for one of two individuals to be sent instead of 4, 5 or 6.
Watch this blog for info regarding how much was spent by the other 4 attendees to the DC conference.
Sunday, March 27, 2011
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Sunday, March 20, 2011
Why I've Been Quiet................
On February 28 the city council made a decision to extend the life of the Johnson County Landfill an additional 16 years until 2043. Once that was approved, the council then confirmed a new agreement with Lord Deffenbaugh regarding how much that entity would pay the city.
So why didn’t I say something at that council meeting? I wanted to. I was going to. Then I looked around and realized only one other person was going to say anything. And they didn’t (and later I found out why). Because on an issue of this magnitude the citizens of Shawnee reverted to their normal, lackluster, apathetic attitude. Regardless of whether one agrees or disagrees with this decision by the council, the fact that the citizens of Shawnee fail to participate in local government never ceases to amaze me. One lady showed up as folks were leaving, surprised that it was all over. Unbelievable.
I have written about this before. Almost everybody (over 80%) turns out for Presidential elections, but less than 10% turn out for local elections. And, very few, if any, ever show up at city hall to see firsthand what local government is doing. Guess the intelligent folks of Shawnee feel that the President is responsible for 90% of what affects their daily lives, not the city council.
Now let’s go back and look at the world famous Shawnee dump…….oooops, I mean landfill. The largest in the Midwest. Some folks have claimed we need more commercial development in Shawnee. The city paid a fortune for a study of the I-435 corridor. OK, who is going to build there? Who wants to build there? What kind of building do they want? The council recently approved a TIF district for a substantial amount of acreage just south of the landfill. Is anything ever going to happen there? Well, the owners of that land don’t have to tell us until they submit plans, if ever.
The Village West property in KCK is growing. A new professional soccer stadium, a casino, a major corporate complex, these are some of the things that are hapopening. Not to forget possible expansion of the speedway. The I-435 corridor would be a perfect “right down the road” area to gain some benefits from what is happening up there. Will it happen? I doubt it.
This past week, Mike Hendricks of the KC Star wrote an article about the problems surrounding the development of the former Sunflower Army Ammunition Plant.
The article can be accessed here,
http://www.kansascity.com/2011/03/14/2726135/vision-of-new-community-at-old.html
What is telling, is the cross reference to the Shawnee landfill, via these comments:
“But then there was a big sticking point: The site first had to be cleansed of the toxins and explosives residues that once had the EPA contemplating putting it on its Superfund list. The soil was heavily contaminated with arsenic, lead and mercury, among other poisons.”
“All that dirt and material in dump sites had to be scooped up and hauled off.
But then another big problem arose: According to Kise Randall, who oversees the cleanup effort for Sunflower, the original estimate put the amount of soil to be removed at 612,621 tons. That’s equal to 26,621 truckloads, with most of it going to the Johnson County Landfill.”
Oh well……….guess we can forget about commercial development in Shawnee and just continue with residential development. That is, unless the lazy apathetic citizenry of Shawnee gets off their collective butts and starts getting involved.
So why didn’t I say something at that council meeting? I wanted to. I was going to. Then I looked around and realized only one other person was going to say anything. And they didn’t (and later I found out why). Because on an issue of this magnitude the citizens of Shawnee reverted to their normal, lackluster, apathetic attitude. Regardless of whether one agrees or disagrees with this decision by the council, the fact that the citizens of Shawnee fail to participate in local government never ceases to amaze me. One lady showed up as folks were leaving, surprised that it was all over. Unbelievable.
I have written about this before. Almost everybody (over 80%) turns out for Presidential elections, but less than 10% turn out for local elections. And, very few, if any, ever show up at city hall to see firsthand what local government is doing. Guess the intelligent folks of Shawnee feel that the President is responsible for 90% of what affects their daily lives, not the city council.
Now let’s go back and look at the world famous Shawnee dump…….oooops, I mean landfill. The largest in the Midwest. Some folks have claimed we need more commercial development in Shawnee. The city paid a fortune for a study of the I-435 corridor. OK, who is going to build there? Who wants to build there? What kind of building do they want? The council recently approved a TIF district for a substantial amount of acreage just south of the landfill. Is anything ever going to happen there? Well, the owners of that land don’t have to tell us until they submit plans, if ever.
The Village West property in KCK is growing. A new professional soccer stadium, a casino, a major corporate complex, these are some of the things that are hapopening. Not to forget possible expansion of the speedway. The I-435 corridor would be a perfect “right down the road” area to gain some benefits from what is happening up there. Will it happen? I doubt it.
This past week, Mike Hendricks of the KC Star wrote an article about the problems surrounding the development of the former Sunflower Army Ammunition Plant.
The article can be accessed here,
http://www.kansascity.com/2011/03/14/2726135/vision-of-new-community-at-old.html
What is telling, is the cross reference to the Shawnee landfill, via these comments:
“But then there was a big sticking point: The site first had to be cleansed of the toxins and explosives residues that once had the EPA contemplating putting it on its Superfund list. The soil was heavily contaminated with arsenic, lead and mercury, among other poisons.”
“All that dirt and material in dump sites had to be scooped up and hauled off.
But then another big problem arose: According to Kise Randall, who oversees the cleanup effort for Sunflower, the original estimate put the amount of soil to be removed at 612,621 tons. That’s equal to 26,621 truckloads, with most of it going to the Johnson County Landfill.”
Oh well……….guess we can forget about commercial development in Shawnee and just continue with residential development. That is, unless the lazy apathetic citizenry of Shawnee gets off their collective butts and starts getting involved.
Sunday, February 27, 2011
Extending the Life of the Landfill in Shawnee Part 2
Just a reminder.
The city council will take up the matter of wheter or not to extend the life of Shawnee's landfill.
Originally scheduled to close in 2026, the extension would take it to 2043.
If extended, will this:
1. Inhibit commercial growth, or
2. Accelerate commercial growth
If you have an opinion, Monday night, 2/28/11 at 7:30PM is your chance to voice it.
The city council will take up the matter of wheter or not to extend the life of Shawnee's landfill.
Originally scheduled to close in 2026, the extension would take it to 2043.
If extended, will this:
1. Inhibit commercial growth, or
2. Accelerate commercial growth
If you have an opinion, Monday night, 2/28/11 at 7:30PM is your chance to voice it.
Friday, February 25, 2011
The Five That Are Going................to DC
On Feb 6, 2011 (scroll down) I posted:
"And they're Off..........To Wash. DC"
Now we can tell you who the five people are that are going to Washington DC for the NLC conference 3/12-3/16:
Mayor Jeff Meyers (just went to Denver 3 mos ago)
Ward 1 Councilmember Jim Neighbor (just went to Denver 3 mos ago)
Ward 3 Councilmember Jeff Vaught (just went to Denver 3 mos ago)
Ward 4 Councilmember Mickey Sandifer (just went to Denver 3 mos ago)
City Manager Carol Gonzales (just went to Denver 3 mos ago)
In my previous post I guessed correctly about Mickey (Mr Trip Taker) Sandifer. Don't think this man has ever heard about a trip that he didn't want to go on.
Now, here we go again.......these meetings can provide useful information. But do we need to send 5 people when money is tight? My opinion: the city manager and the mayor should be sufficient. Just look at the previous post of 2/6 and see which cities aren't even sending anybody.
Also, since we are sending 5 and 4 of them are men are they going to take me up on the suggestion of doubling up in their rooms? Those rooms are going to be $242/night plus taxes. That will probably come up to the $280/$290 range per night. Heck, what is the room for? Sleeping, changing clothes and showering. So, why not douible up?
Prediction: Mickey Sandifer spends the most number of nights in DC (based on his actions on previous trips).
"And they're Off..........To Wash. DC"
Now we can tell you who the five people are that are going to Washington DC for the NLC conference 3/12-3/16:
Mayor Jeff Meyers (just went to Denver 3 mos ago)
Ward 1 Councilmember Jim Neighbor (just went to Denver 3 mos ago)
Ward 3 Councilmember Jeff Vaught (just went to Denver 3 mos ago)
Ward 4 Councilmember Mickey Sandifer (just went to Denver 3 mos ago)
City Manager Carol Gonzales (just went to Denver 3 mos ago)
In my previous post I guessed correctly about Mickey (Mr Trip Taker) Sandifer. Don't think this man has ever heard about a trip that he didn't want to go on.
Now, here we go again.......these meetings can provide useful information. But do we need to send 5 people when money is tight? My opinion: the city manager and the mayor should be sufficient. Just look at the previous post of 2/6 and see which cities aren't even sending anybody.
Also, since we are sending 5 and 4 of them are men are they going to take me up on the suggestion of doubling up in their rooms? Those rooms are going to be $242/night plus taxes. That will probably come up to the $280/$290 range per night. Heck, what is the room for? Sleeping, changing clothes and showering. So, why not douible up?
Prediction: Mickey Sandifer spends the most number of nights in DC (based on his actions on previous trips).
Thursday, February 24, 2011
Extending the Life of the Landfill in Shawnee
On Monday, 2/28 the city council will consider extending the life of the landfill here in Shawnee so that it would close in 2043 instead of 2027.
The planning commission has voted to recommend approval for this action. More info is available here:
http://www.shawneedispatch.com/news/2011/feb/08/planning-commission-gives-nod-16-year-landfill-ext/
It's nice to know that we are number one in something. The largest landfill in the midwest.
More info on that is here:
http://www.businessinsider.com/worlds-largest-dumps-2011-2?slop=1#johnson-county-landfill-in-shawnee-ks-is-the-largest-in-the-midwest-us-at-over-1000-acres-1
Should the landfill be kept open another 16 years? Some say yes, some say no. If you live in Shawnee you might want to consider showing up Monday night and voicing your opinion.
The planning commission has voted to recommend approval for this action. More info is available here:
http://www.shawneedispatch.com/news/2011/feb/08/planning-commission-gives-nod-16-year-landfill-ext/
It's nice to know that we are number one in something. The largest landfill in the midwest.
More info on that is here:
http://www.businessinsider.com/worlds-largest-dumps-2011-2?slop=1#johnson-county-landfill-in-shawnee-ks-is-the-largest-in-the-midwest-us-at-over-1000-acres-1
Should the landfill be kept open another 16 years? Some say yes, some say no. If you live in Shawnee you might want to consider showing up Monday night and voicing your opinion.
Monday, February 21, 2011
City Updates Web Site
Congratulations................the city's web site now shows tomorrow's meeting as 6:00PM and at the Justice Center.
Sure happy I emailed them about it............ :-) :-)
Naturally, nobody acknowledged the email...............but they did make the change.
Sure happy I emailed them about it............ :-) :-)
Naturally, nobody acknowledged the email...............but they did make the change.
Sunday, February 20, 2011
Location Change
Eventhough the Agenda info on the city's web site doesn't mention it, I just found out that the meeting Tie 2/22/11 will be held at the Justice Center
Why wasn't that info shown on the published notice?
Special City Council
AGENDA
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
And, it was not mentioned in the email that goes out to all who have signed up for email notifications of city activities. And, the original email says 7:00PM but the city's web site now says 6:00PM.
Why wasn't that info shown on the published notice?
Special City Council
AGENDA
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
And, it was not mentioned in the email that goes out to all who have signed up for email notifications of city activities. And, the original email says 7:00PM but the city's web site now says 6:00PM.
Special Council Meeting 2/22/11
A special meeting of the city council has been called for Tuesday, 2/22/11 at 6:00PM
Here is the agenda for this special meeting:
1. PRESENTATION AND GOVERNING BODY DISCUSSION: ROLE AS A POLICY MAKER.
Presented/Facilitated by John Nalbandian Ph.D.
This presentation and facilitated workshop will provide the Governing Body the opportunity to
discuss concepts and ideas regarding their role as a policy making body. PAGES 1 - 2
COMMENTS: ____________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
2. 2010 ACCOMPLISHMENTS/LOOKING TO 2011 AND BEYOND.
Facilitated by City Manager Gonzales with presentations by Management Team Members.
COMMENTS: ____________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
ADJOURNMENT
Here is the agenda for this special meeting:
1. PRESENTATION AND GOVERNING BODY DISCUSSION: ROLE AS A POLICY MAKER.
Presented/Facilitated by John Nalbandian Ph.D.
This presentation and facilitated workshop will provide the Governing Body the opportunity to
discuss concepts and ideas regarding their role as a policy making body. PAGES 1 - 2
COMMENTS: ____________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
2. 2010 ACCOMPLISHMENTS/LOOKING TO 2011 AND BEYOND.
Facilitated by City Manager Gonzales with presentations by Management Team Members.
COMMENTS: ____________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
ADJOURNMENT
Sunday, February 13, 2011
Valentine's Day at City Council
Tomorrow, 2/14/11 one of the items on the city council agenda is:
6. CONSIDER REVISIONS TO PS-7, CONDUCT OF PUBLIC MEETINGS.
DISCUSSION: At the January 18, 2011, meeting the Public Works and Safety Committee
recommended 3-1 that the Governing Body approve contracting with a third party company to
capture and record the City's public meeting audio recordings and to use software features to
create summary minutes with linked audio. At the October 19, 2010, meeting the Committee
recommended 3-1 that the Governing Body revise language in PS-7, Conduct of Public Meetings
related to summary minutes, speakers signing in at public meetings, responding to Business From
the Floor, and advanced approval of material shown on the display screen. A memo from staff
and a draft policy statement are included for review. PAGES 19 - 40
The background info is on pages 19-40 of the packet which can be read at:
http://www.cityofshawnee.org/Meetings/AGENDAS.NSF/vwNews/1EE2609988C4E11A86257833007E7DEA/$FILE/8DXTRG.pdf
Citizen input at council meetings, the methodology for keeping and reporting what transpires at these meeting should be items of interest to most folks. Hopefully folks will be there.
6. CONSIDER REVISIONS TO PS-7, CONDUCT OF PUBLIC MEETINGS.
DISCUSSION: At the January 18, 2011, meeting the Public Works and Safety Committee
recommended 3-1 that the Governing Body approve contracting with a third party company to
capture and record the City's public meeting audio recordings and to use software features to
create summary minutes with linked audio. At the October 19, 2010, meeting the Committee
recommended 3-1 that the Governing Body revise language in PS-7, Conduct of Public Meetings
related to summary minutes, speakers signing in at public meetings, responding to Business From
the Floor, and advanced approval of material shown on the display screen. A memo from staff
and a draft policy statement are included for review. PAGES 19 - 40
The background info is on pages 19-40 of the packet which can be read at:
http://www.cityofshawnee.org/Meetings/AGENDAS.NSF/vwNews/1EE2609988C4E11A86257833007E7DEA/$FILE/8DXTRG.pdf
Citizen input at council meetings, the methodology for keeping and reporting what transpires at these meeting should be items of interest to most folks. Hopefully folks will be there.
Sunday, February 06, 2011
And they're Off..........To Wash. DC
Yepper...........the annual Washington DC conference for the National League of Cities is coming up, and it will be March 12-16, 2011. That's coming just 3 1/2 months after the NLC conference in Denver.
Most folks will be staying at the designated convnetion hotel for $242 (plus taxes)/night. I doubt that there will be any doubling up of rooms to save money. Again I will say that these conferences can be beneficial. It is just how many folks do we have to send, because in addition to the hotel costs there are other costs. Among these are: registration for the meeting itself per attendee, registration for various seminars, transportation, per diem and probably other costs too. In the past some folks have stayed the entire time and others only part of the time. It will be interesting to see how many stay the the full schedule (arriving 3/11 the night before it starts and returning 3/17, the day after it ends) as that would be 6 nights of hotels and the corresponding per diem reimbursements.
Shawnee likes to compare itself to other local cities whenever a "study" is done. So, let's see where Shawnee stands relative to other cities in the area that were contacted. The list reflects the number of individuals each city is sending:
Shawnee............................................5
Olathe................................................5
Prairie Village...................................5 (see note 1 below)
Mission..............................................4 (see note 2 below)
Roeland Park....................................1
Lenexa...............................................0
Merriam............................................0
Overland Park..................................0
Leawood............................................0
Topeka...............................................0
UG WyCo & KCK..............................0
I didn't ask (not yet anyway) who is attending for Shawnee, but based on previous trips I'd bet that one of them is Mickey "Mr Trip Taker" Sandifer.
(note 1) Prairie Village indicated that their number might be reduced
(note 2) Mission indicated that one attendee will not be staying at the hotel, but with a friend
Most folks will be staying at the designated convnetion hotel for $242 (plus taxes)/night. I doubt that there will be any doubling up of rooms to save money. Again I will say that these conferences can be beneficial. It is just how many folks do we have to send, because in addition to the hotel costs there are other costs. Among these are: registration for the meeting itself per attendee, registration for various seminars, transportation, per diem and probably other costs too. In the past some folks have stayed the entire time and others only part of the time. It will be interesting to see how many stay the the full schedule (arriving 3/11 the night before it starts and returning 3/17, the day after it ends) as that would be 6 nights of hotels and the corresponding per diem reimbursements.
Shawnee likes to compare itself to other local cities whenever a "study" is done. So, let's see where Shawnee stands relative to other cities in the area that were contacted. The list reflects the number of individuals each city is sending:
Shawnee............................................5
Olathe................................................5
Prairie Village...................................5 (see note 1 below)
Mission..............................................4 (see note 2 below)
Roeland Park....................................1
Lenexa...............................................0
Merriam............................................0
Overland Park..................................0
Leawood............................................0
Topeka...............................................0
UG WyCo & KCK..............................0
I didn't ask (not yet anyway) who is attending for Shawnee, but based on previous trips I'd bet that one of them is Mickey "Mr Trip Taker" Sandifer.
(note 1) Prairie Village indicated that their number might be reduced
(note 2) Mission indicated that one attendee will not be staying at the hotel, but with a friend
Tuesday, February 01, 2011
Candidate Finance Reports
Ever wonder where local candidates get the money to run their campaigns?
In the past, if you wanted to find out you could go to the JoCo election office and read the finance reports that each candidate is required to file. You could even get copies of those reports.
Now, thanks to the JoCo Election office again showing initiative, you can now read these reports from the comfort of your home. Just click here
http://www.jocoelection.org/CampaignReports/CampaignReportsDisc.html
These reports are for county and municipal elections within JoCo. Statewide and federal election reports are filed elsewhere.
In the past, if you wanted to find out you could go to the JoCo election office and read the finance reports that each candidate is required to file. You could even get copies of those reports.
Now, thanks to the JoCo Election office again showing initiative, you can now read these reports from the comfort of your home. Just click here
http://www.jocoelection.org/CampaignReports/CampaignReportsDisc.html
These reports are for county and municipal elections within JoCo. Statewide and federal election reports are filed elsewhere.
Sunday, January 23, 2011
Mile High Madness Part II
Previously I wrote and indicated what our council members spent while in Denver. Now, it's time to break down some of those expenses.
Let's look at hotel costs. This is one area that definitely needs to be looked at much closer. As previously pointed out, the rooms are primarily for sleeping, showering and changing clothes. Most of the folks' time is taken up eating, attending seminars and socializing with individuals from other cities.
Our people stayed at the Hyatt Regency. That is the hotel directly across from the Denver Convention Center. The discounted group rate was $240/night. Now if we take the mayor and city manager out of the equation we had 4 council members who between them had 16 nights at the hotel. At $240/night (including taxes) that becomes $3,840.
Now, the folks who went from Lenexa got a group rate of $137/night (including taxes) at the Crowne Plaza. Granted that was a block or so away. Golly, they had to walk a little. If our council reps had stayed there, they could have saved $1,648. And how much could those four have saved if they doubled up? Allowing for a $30 surcharge for 2 in a room they would have paid approximately $1,336 or a savings of approximately $2,500.
How much would have been saved if the mayor and the city manager had also stayed at the lower priced hotel? Naturally in separate rooms, I’m still estimating another $500 could have been saved.
The Crowne Plaza is not exactly a notel motel………it would have served the primary functionality.
The next question is how much more could have been saved if we didn't have a six person delegation? Reduced per diem charges, reduced transportation charges, reduced registration charges for the conference and reduced charges for the number of people attending the various paid seminars. That could have been in the thousands.
This becomes important for another reason. In less than two months, the National League of Cities "biggie" is going to be in Washington, DC. And, considering the time line, arrangements are probably being made right now. Will we be sending another oversized delegation? Will they be staying in the most expensive of all the convention hotels, in individual rooms?
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Representation at these conferences is good. We just don't need to send an army. And, they can walk a little and stay at a better priced hotel.
Let's look at hotel costs. This is one area that definitely needs to be looked at much closer. As previously pointed out, the rooms are primarily for sleeping, showering and changing clothes. Most of the folks' time is taken up eating, attending seminars and socializing with individuals from other cities.
Our people stayed at the Hyatt Regency. That is the hotel directly across from the Denver Convention Center. The discounted group rate was $240/night. Now if we take the mayor and city manager out of the equation we had 4 council members who between them had 16 nights at the hotel. At $240/night (including taxes) that becomes $3,840.
Now, the folks who went from Lenexa got a group rate of $137/night (including taxes) at the Crowne Plaza. Granted that was a block or so away. Golly, they had to walk a little. If our council reps had stayed there, they could have saved $1,648. And how much could those four have saved if they doubled up? Allowing for a $30 surcharge for 2 in a room they would have paid approximately $1,336 or a savings of approximately $2,500.
How much would have been saved if the mayor and the city manager had also stayed at the lower priced hotel? Naturally in separate rooms, I’m still estimating another $500 could have been saved.
The Crowne Plaza is not exactly a notel motel………it would have served the primary functionality.
The next question is how much more could have been saved if we didn't have a six person delegation? Reduced per diem charges, reduced transportation charges, reduced registration charges for the conference and reduced charges for the number of people attending the various paid seminars. That could have been in the thousands.
This becomes important for another reason. In less than two months, the National League of Cities "biggie" is going to be in Washington, DC. And, considering the time line, arrangements are probably being made right now. Will we be sending another oversized delegation? Will they be staying in the most expensive of all the convention hotels, in individual rooms?
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Representation at these conferences is good. We just don't need to send an army. And, they can walk a little and stay at a better priced hotel.
Thursday, January 20, 2011
Letter to Council 1/20/11
Below is a copy of an email I sent earlier today to all members of the City Council, the Mayor and the City Manager. If any of them decide to respond I'll be happy to post the response(s) here, without editing it(them).
This email is being sent to the City Council, Mayor and City Manager
Just prior to the end of the recent PW & Safety Committee meeting, Messrs. Sandifer & Vaught thought to mention the importance of the NLC conference with regards to info about audio capture of meetings.
Immediately following their comments, the committee Chair, Ms Kuhn, advised that there would be no comments about any items that were not on the agenda. What I wanted to say at that time would have been relevant, but decided not to push it.
The record needs to be set straight. Or, shall I say a reminder.
At the 11/8/10 City Council meeting these same items (method of preserving and communicating meeting minutes) came up after previously being reviewed by the PW&S committee.
Various items were then presented at that council meeting, to include the use of audio similar to the way Fairway was doing it. And, yes, it was me that brought that up. At that time, because of that and other info, Mr Neighbor moved that the item be tabled until staff had reviewed the additional info. This can be confirmed with the item in the Shawnee Dispatch from 11/10/2010 at:
http://www.shawneedispatch.com/news/2010/nov/10/council-delays-vote-cutting-minutes/
I bring this up, because the use of audio was brought up well in advance of the NLC conference. Naturally, I wouldn't expect either Messr. Sandifer or Vaught to mention that. Especially considering who brought it up. I will concede that the info from the NLC conference did show other methods of audio capture which could be better than the one currently employed by Fairway. The question is: If the item had not been tabled because of citizen input would the city even have looked at the audio concepts at the NLC conference? And if yes, to what extent?
Ray Erlichman
This email is being sent to the City Council, Mayor and City Manager
Just prior to the end of the recent PW & Safety Committee meeting, Messrs. Sandifer & Vaught thought to mention the importance of the NLC conference with regards to info about audio capture of meetings.
Immediately following their comments, the committee Chair, Ms Kuhn, advised that there would be no comments about any items that were not on the agenda. What I wanted to say at that time would have been relevant, but decided not to push it.
The record needs to be set straight. Or, shall I say a reminder.
At the 11/8/10 City Council meeting these same items (method of preserving and communicating meeting minutes) came up after previously being reviewed by the PW&S committee.
Various items were then presented at that council meeting, to include the use of audio similar to the way Fairway was doing it. And, yes, it was me that brought that up. At that time, because of that and other info, Mr Neighbor moved that the item be tabled until staff had reviewed the additional info. This can be confirmed with the item in the Shawnee Dispatch from 11/10/2010 at:
http://www.shawneedispatch.com/news/2010/nov/10/council-delays-vote-cutting-minutes/
I bring this up, because the use of audio was brought up well in advance of the NLC conference. Naturally, I wouldn't expect either Messr. Sandifer or Vaught to mention that. Especially considering who brought it up. I will concede that the info from the NLC conference did show other methods of audio capture which could be better than the one currently employed by Fairway. The question is: If the item had not been tabled because of citizen input would the city even have looked at the audio concepts at the NLC conference? And if yes, to what extent?
Ray Erlichman
Monday, January 17, 2011
Don't Forget Tuesday 1/18/11 Meeting
Don't forget the Public Works and Safety Committee meeting at city hall Tuesday 1/18/11 at 7PM.
Changes in how the minutes of city council and council committee meetings are kept will be voted on. Transparency must be kept.
Be there.
For info on exactly what is going to be on the agenda see the post with the link below.
Changes in how the minutes of city council and council committee meetings are kept will be voted on. Transparency must be kept.
Be there.
For info on exactly what is going to be on the agenda see the post with the link below.
Friday, January 14, 2011
Important Meeting - Council Transparency 1/18/11 Tuesday
There will be a meeting of the Public Works and Safety Committee on Tuesday 1/18/11 at 7:00PM.
Agenda and packet information is available at
http://www.cityofshawnee.org/WEB/ShawneeCMS.nsf/vwContent/Agendas?OpenDocument
Item 2 on the agenda would appear to be very important with regards to council transparency. This is where they will be discussing the format that the minutes of meetings will be taking. Minutes are the primary memorialization of what goes on at these meetings. Disclosure to the public is keeping within our framework of democracy. One item also includes the possibility of online audio availability.
Another part of item 2 (eventhough it doesn't show on the agenda, it is in the packet for that item) are rules for public participation in meetings. You would think that one short sentence about that could have been included in the agenda. Guess there wasn't enough room to mention that.
It is important to maintain maximum tranparency about what goes on in these meetings. It is also important to preserve citizen rights.
It would be nice to see a good public turnout for this meeting.
Agenda and packet information is available at
http://www.cityofshawnee.org/WEB/ShawneeCMS.nsf/vwContent/Agendas?OpenDocument
Item 2 on the agenda would appear to be very important with regards to council transparency. This is where they will be discussing the format that the minutes of meetings will be taking. Minutes are the primary memorialization of what goes on at these meetings. Disclosure to the public is keeping within our framework of democracy. One item also includes the possibility of online audio availability.
Another part of item 2 (eventhough it doesn't show on the agenda, it is in the packet for that item) are rules for public participation in meetings. You would think that one short sentence about that could have been included in the agenda. Guess there wasn't enough room to mention that.
It is important to maintain maximum tranparency about what goes on in these meetings. It is also important to preserve citizen rights.
It would be nice to see a good public turnout for this meeting.
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
I Hated To Do It................But...............
............because of Vaught's letter to the editor of the Shawnee Dispatch of 12/22, I just had to respond there. http://www.shawneedispatch.com/news/2011/jan/12/letters-word-play/
His original letter is at http://www.shawneedispatch.com/news/2010/dec/22/letter-witness-or-see-wording-question-affects-res/
Back in 1974 at the Academy Awards a streaker ran across the stage. David Niven, a very gifted British actor, handled the situation with much aplomb and said “The only laugh that man will ever get in his life is by stripping ... and showing his shortcomings.”
So, why did Vaught want to show off his vocabulary shortcomings to the world?
His original letter is at http://www.shawneedispatch.com/news/2010/dec/22/letter-witness-or-see-wording-question-affects-res/
Back in 1974 at the Academy Awards a streaker ran across the stage. David Niven, a very gifted British actor, handled the situation with much aplomb and said “The only laugh that man will ever get in his life is by stripping ... and showing his shortcomings.”
So, why did Vaught want to show off his vocabulary shortcomings to the world?
Thursday, January 06, 2011
Mile High Madness
In previous posts it was mentioned that 6 individuals were going to represent Shawnee at the recent National League of Cities conferenec in Denver.
First, let's see how Shawnee compared to some other communities in the area with regards to number of individuals sent. In the past, listening to various presentations, there seems to be a trend to compare our city with some of the others. So why not this one? OK, so, how many folks represented each city?
Olathe...........................8
Lenexa..........................7
Shawnee.......................6
Mission.........................3
Merriam.......................3
Prairie Village..............3
Overland Park..............1
Roeland Park................1
Leawood........................0
Topeka..........................0
UG WyCo&KCK.............0
Now, what did this cost the citizens of Shawnee?
Jim Neighbor, Ward 1................................$2,711.60 5 nights
Mickey Sandifer, Ward 4..........................$2,677.60 5 nights
Jeff Vaught, Ward 3..................................$1,544.52 3 nights
Jeff Meyers, Mayor....................................$1,459.52 3 nights
Carol Gonzales, City Mgr.........................$1,254.57 3 nights
Neal Sawyer, Ward 2...............................$1,044.52 3 nights
=======
Total......................................................$10,692.33
I've always felt that conferences of this kind can be useful. The big question is, in these tough times how many folks do we need to send? I said it before the conference and I'll say it again, my opinion is that two would have been enough, 3 for this one since Mr Sawyer's registration was covered by a previous conference that he couldn't attend.
Note that 2 reps (33% of the city's delegation) accounted for over 50% of the expenses. This is not the first conference where Mickey Sandifer's expenses were near the top of the group's.
Another interesting note is the cost of the hotel rooms. At $240/night why couldn't the four council reps have done what private comapnies have gone to? Doubling up. Neighbor and Sandifer were there for 5 nights, they could have doubled up. Sawyer and Vaught were there for 3 nights. They could have doubled up. Even if there was a surcharge over the $240 for a second person, in most hotels that would not be anywhere near the cost of a separate room. Also, at a conference like this what is the need for separate rooms? One gets up, showers, has breakfast, goes to meetings, has lunch, goes to meetings, has dinner, socializes, then hits the sack. Unless the rooms are being used for mini-conferences/lectures what's the need?
My original comments, months ago suggested that just the mayor, city manager and Councilmember Sawyer should go. Look at the numbers above............the city could have saved approximately $7,000.
In March there will be another National League of Cities conference in Washington DC. It will be interesting to see how many of our city officials go to that one, and what the cost factor will be.
First, let's see how Shawnee compared to some other communities in the area with regards to number of individuals sent. In the past, listening to various presentations, there seems to be a trend to compare our city with some of the others. So why not this one? OK, so, how many folks represented each city?
Olathe...........................8
Lenexa..........................7
Shawnee.......................6
Mission.........................3
Merriam.......................3
Prairie Village..............3
Overland Park..............1
Roeland Park................1
Leawood........................0
Topeka..........................0
UG WyCo&KCK.............0
Now, what did this cost the citizens of Shawnee?
Jim Neighbor, Ward 1................................$2,711.60 5 nights
Mickey Sandifer, Ward 4..........................$2,677.60 5 nights
Jeff Vaught, Ward 3..................................$1,544.52 3 nights
Jeff Meyers, Mayor....................................$1,459.52 3 nights
Carol Gonzales, City Mgr.........................$1,254.57 3 nights
Neal Sawyer, Ward 2...............................$1,044.52 3 nights
=======
Total......................................................$10,692.33
I've always felt that conferences of this kind can be useful. The big question is, in these tough times how many folks do we need to send? I said it before the conference and I'll say it again, my opinion is that two would have been enough, 3 for this one since Mr Sawyer's registration was covered by a previous conference that he couldn't attend.
Note that 2 reps (33% of the city's delegation) accounted for over 50% of the expenses. This is not the first conference where Mickey Sandifer's expenses were near the top of the group's.
Another interesting note is the cost of the hotel rooms. At $240/night why couldn't the four council reps have done what private comapnies have gone to? Doubling up. Neighbor and Sandifer were there for 5 nights, they could have doubled up. Sawyer and Vaught were there for 3 nights. They could have doubled up. Even if there was a surcharge over the $240 for a second person, in most hotels that would not be anywhere near the cost of a separate room. Also, at a conference like this what is the need for separate rooms? One gets up, showers, has breakfast, goes to meetings, has lunch, goes to meetings, has dinner, socializes, then hits the sack. Unless the rooms are being used for mini-conferences/lectures what's the need?
My original comments, months ago suggested that just the mayor, city manager and Councilmember Sawyer should go. Look at the numbers above............the city could have saved approximately $7,000.
In March there will be another National League of Cities conference in Washington DC. It will be interesting to see how many of our city officials go to that one, and what the cost factor will be.
Wednesday, December 22, 2010
Vaught Answers But...May Need an English Lesson
I'm happy to see that Jeff Vaught finally answered my question, with a letter to the editor of the Shawnee Dispatch. The letter is shown below. Eventhough he didn't respond to me directly I thought in all fairness his response should appear here also.
But, before you read it, keep in mind that Mr Vaught may need an English lesson. Read what he says about the words "witness" and "seen" then read one of the definitions for "witness" from Webster's on line.
From Webster's:
to have personal or direct cognizance of : see for oneself
But, before you read it, keep in mind that Mr Vaught may need an English lesson. Read what he says about the words "witness" and "seen" then read one of the definitions for "witness" from Webster's on line.
From Webster's:
to have personal or direct cognizance of : see for oneself
Now, here's Vaught's letter to the editor. Now, even after seeing that, he still wasn't concerned about safety? Oh well:
To the editor,
Shawnee resident Ray Erlichman recently asked me at a city council meeting “have you ever ‘SEEN’ a gas explosion.” My answer was simply “yes.”
A few days later Mr. Erlichman sent me an e-mail with the following line: “…I asked you if you had ever ‘WITNESSED’ a gas ‘PIPELINE’ explosion.” He then went on to ask me when and where that was in an attempt to imply that I was lying, and is now trying really hard to make an issue of it.
Adding a word and switching a word totally changes the question. There is a vast difference between the word ‘witness’ and ‘seen.’
I think Mr. Erlichman needs to review the recording. I would be more than happy to send it to him.
And by the way, I have witnessed a gas explosion, the Gates City Glass Company explosion, July 2, 1990, at 126 W. 5th St. in Kansas City, Mo. I was in my loft across a parking lot less than 300 feet away. I have not witnessed a gas pipeline explosion though, but I have seen one or two.
Jeff Vaught
Member, Shawnee City Council – Ward III
Link is
http://www.shawneedispatch.com/news/2010/dec/22/letter-witness-or-see-wording-question-affects-res/
Monday, December 20, 2010
Vaught Avoiding Verification
Well it looks like councilmember Jeff Vaught has not responded with verification of which gas line explosion he has witnessed.
At the November 22d council meeting when he and I got into it over dollars versus safety he was asked if he had ever witnessed a gas line explosion and he responded that he had.
In my blog post of 12/5 I asked for verification of that. Thinking maybe he didn't read that blog post, I sent him a personal email on 12/15 asking for that info and also posted a copy of that email to this blog. Still no response.
When a member of the council makes a statement about an event they need to be able to back it up.
So, why hasn't Jeff Vaught responded with verification of when and where he witnessed a gas line explosion? I can think of a couple of reasons:
1. He doesn't feel he has to respond to anybody that doesn't live in Ward 3 (not a valid reason)
2. He doesn't like me (still not a valid reason)
For both of the above he needs a refresher course in Civics 101. He is responsible to the citizens, it is not the other way around. OK, let's continue:
3. He didn't read the personal email I sent him. (Possible, but not too smart on his part, and highly unlikely. Go back to 1 or 2 above)
4. Or maybe he can't answer the question because he never did witness a gas explosion and is lacking the intestinal fortitude to admit that he misspoke (polite way of saying he lied). If that is the case, the people of Shawnee have a problem. A city councilmember who can't back up his statements of supposed factual situations is basically misleading the public. Or maybe this arrogant self absorbed person thinks we should just take whatever he says at face value without question? Wrong............that ain't gonna happen..................
I heard from a Ward 3 resident that he bumped into Vaught at a coffee shop this morning and asked him the same question. According to that resident the response that he received was to the effect that Vaught was there to buy coffee not answer questions.
At the November 22d council meeting when he and I got into it over dollars versus safety he was asked if he had ever witnessed a gas line explosion and he responded that he had.
In my blog post of 12/5 I asked for verification of that. Thinking maybe he didn't read that blog post, I sent him a personal email on 12/15 asking for that info and also posted a copy of that email to this blog. Still no response.
When a member of the council makes a statement about an event they need to be able to back it up.
So, why hasn't Jeff Vaught responded with verification of when and where he witnessed a gas line explosion? I can think of a couple of reasons:
1. He doesn't feel he has to respond to anybody that doesn't live in Ward 3 (not a valid reason)
2. He doesn't like me (still not a valid reason)
For both of the above he needs a refresher course in Civics 101. He is responsible to the citizens, it is not the other way around. OK, let's continue:
3. He didn't read the personal email I sent him. (Possible, but not too smart on his part, and highly unlikely. Go back to 1 or 2 above)
4. Or maybe he can't answer the question because he never did witness a gas explosion and is lacking the intestinal fortitude to admit that he misspoke (polite way of saying he lied). If that is the case, the people of Shawnee have a problem. A city councilmember who can't back up his statements of supposed factual situations is basically misleading the public. Or maybe this arrogant self absorbed person thinks we should just take whatever he says at face value without question? Wrong............that ain't gonna happen..................
I heard from a Ward 3 resident that he bumped into Vaught at a coffee shop this morning and asked him the same question. According to that resident the response that he received was to the effect that Vaught was there to buy coffee not answer questions.
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
Request to Jeff Vaught for Info
A copy of today's email to Councilmember Jeff Vaught:
"Mr Vaught,
At the 11/22/10 council meeting when you indicated that you were not concerned about safety I asked you if you had ever witnessed a gas pipeline explosion. You responded in the affirmative.
I again asked..."You have?" and again you responded in the affirmative, as you leaned back in your chair and nodded your head also in an affirmative motion.
Anyway, there are two very simple pieces of information that I would ask you to provide.
What was the location of the explosion and when did it happen?
Thank you,
Ray Erlichman"
"Mr Vaught,
At the 11/22/10 council meeting when you indicated that you were not concerned about safety I asked you if you had ever witnessed a gas pipeline explosion. You responded in the affirmative.
I again asked..."You have?" and again you responded in the affirmative, as you leaned back in your chair and nodded your head also in an affirmative motion.
Anyway, there are two very simple pieces of information that I would ask you to provide.
What was the location of the explosion and when did it happen?
Thank you,
Ray Erlichman"
Sunday, December 12, 2010
Southern Star Was MIA
Remember my posting aboutg the 11/22 council meeting? And how it was mentioned that some members of the council were interested in finding out if a representative from Southern Star was there to answer questions?
Well, I submitted a KORA request (Kansas Open Records Act) and the documentation I received back definitely indicated that Southern Star was notified about the item being on the agenda for that night. They could have had a rep there and for public relations value they should have.
Now, if they had had a representative there would that have really made any difference? Not really, because the city was obligated to perform as indicated in the final agreement. Posturing on the part of some of the council looks good........but that's all it could have been......posturing.
Sidebar: Jeff Vaught has not provided me with the date and location of the gas pipeline explosion that he said he witnessed. Well, maybe he didn't read my blog. Guess I'll just have to email him to try and get an answer.
Well, I submitted a KORA request (Kansas Open Records Act) and the documentation I received back definitely indicated that Southern Star was notified about the item being on the agenda for that night. They could have had a rep there and for public relations value they should have.
Now, if they had had a representative there would that have really made any difference? Not really, because the city was obligated to perform as indicated in the final agreement. Posturing on the part of some of the council looks good........but that's all it could have been......posturing.
Sidebar: Jeff Vaught has not provided me with the date and location of the gas pipeline explosion that he said he witnessed. Well, maybe he didn't read my blog. Guess I'll just have to email him to try and get an answer.
Tuesday, December 07, 2010
False Alarms
At tonight's F&A Committee meeting the police department will be giving a presentation regarding false alarm responses.
Last week they had a community meeting on this topic.
The amount of money being expended and the loss of manpower because of false alarms is very disturbing.
The PD has some suggestions on how to reduce the losses. Methinks the council needs to listen to them.
Last week they had a community meeting on this topic.
The amount of money being expended and the loss of manpower because of false alarms is very disturbing.
The PD has some suggestions on how to reduce the losses. Methinks the council needs to listen to them.
Sunday, December 05, 2010
Boom or Bucks
Well, at the Nov 22d council meeting the item mentioned below about the Southern Star pipeline relocation came up.
Needless to say, many on the council were upset about the cost, feeling that Southern Star was taking advantage of the situation.
When I brought up the safety issue things got quite contentious between council member Jeff Vaught and me. First, when I gave my address, Vaught got real picky. Wanted me to give my complete address. Guess he doesn't like people who live in apartments addressing the council. Also, when I mentioned the safety issue he thought I should be more concerned about the money. When asked if he was concerned about the safety issue regarding the construction beginning before all easement and pipeline movements were handled he indicated that he was not concerned about the safety issue. Also, he lived in the area and I didn't.
His reasoning for not being concerned about the safety issue was, he said, because the contractor was a professional company. Well, professional companies can and have had accidents. That is why they are called accidents and not "on purposes".
I asked Vaught if he had ever witnessed a gas line explosion, and he replied in the affirmative. Now, if he reads this blog, I will ask him here and now to provide us with the info as to when and where he witnessed a gas line explosion. That should prove interesting. If I don't get a reply from him about that I guess I'll have to email him for an answer.
Ya don't mess around an 8" high pressure gas pipeline until ya get all the easements and any necessary relocations done first.
A couple of council members (Vaught included) expressed concern that nobody from Southern Star was at the meeting to answer any questions. Valid point. Question: Since their headquarters is in Kentucky were they notified that the item was going to be on the agenda and that the council might have questions for a representative of theirs?
A side note: If Vaught is so concerned about costs why did he join five (5) others on the recent National League of Cities conference in Denver from 11/30-12/4? Our council does like to compare us to other cities. So, how did other cities handle that conference? I sent inquiries to six, and received replies from three:
Unified Government Wy Co and KCK sent.........................0
Topeka, our state capital, sent..............................................0
Overland Park, sent................................................................1
Comedy line of the night at that council meeting; Kuhn stating that others were being flippant.
Needless to say, many on the council were upset about the cost, feeling that Southern Star was taking advantage of the situation.
When I brought up the safety issue things got quite contentious between council member Jeff Vaught and me. First, when I gave my address, Vaught got real picky. Wanted me to give my complete address. Guess he doesn't like people who live in apartments addressing the council. Also, when I mentioned the safety issue he thought I should be more concerned about the money. When asked if he was concerned about the safety issue regarding the construction beginning before all easement and pipeline movements were handled he indicated that he was not concerned about the safety issue. Also, he lived in the area and I didn't.
His reasoning for not being concerned about the safety issue was, he said, because the contractor was a professional company. Well, professional companies can and have had accidents. That is why they are called accidents and not "on purposes".
I asked Vaught if he had ever witnessed a gas line explosion, and he replied in the affirmative. Now, if he reads this blog, I will ask him here and now to provide us with the info as to when and where he witnessed a gas line explosion. That should prove interesting. If I don't get a reply from him about that I guess I'll have to email him for an answer.
Ya don't mess around an 8" high pressure gas pipeline until ya get all the easements and any necessary relocations done first.
A couple of council members (Vaught included) expressed concern that nobody from Southern Star was at the meeting to answer any questions. Valid point. Question: Since their headquarters is in Kentucky were they notified that the item was going to be on the agenda and that the council might have questions for a representative of theirs?
A side note: If Vaught is so concerned about costs why did he join five (5) others on the recent National League of Cities conference in Denver from 11/30-12/4? Our council does like to compare us to other cities. So, how did other cities handle that conference? I sent inquiries to six, and received replies from three:
Unified Government Wy Co and KCK sent.........................0
Topeka, our state capital, sent..............................................0
Overland Park, sent................................................................1
Comedy line of the night at that council meeting; Kuhn stating that others were being flippant.
Thursday, November 25, 2010
Happy Thanksgiving
To all who visit this blog a Happy Thanksgiving.
Side note: Will be changing computers over the next couple of days, and as such, the email notifications that are sent out about blog changes might not be going out for awhile. so, check back periodically for updates until the emails begin again.
Side note: Will be changing computers over the next couple of days, and as such, the email notifications that are sent out about blog changes might not be going out for awhile. so, check back periodically for updates until the emails begin again.
Sunday, November 21, 2010
More Pipeline Problems
Well folks, it looks like the city blew another one regarding a gas pipeline relocation. Remember the problem with the Monticello Rd (south) project? Well, at least no construction was started on that one without the relocation of the pipeline.
Now, look at tomorrow’s city council agenda, item 20, by clicking here. Then, read the background in the packet by clicking here and then scrolling to page 265.
Looks like the Roberts Street roundabout was started without having certain portions of the pipeline rerouted. It also looks like the cost now to the city will be approximately $220K. And, a delay in the completion of the project.
But more importantly what about the safety issue? You don’t mess with construction around a high pressure gas pipeline until you have it properly secured and moved if necessary. These things can go bump in the night. Don’t believe me? Read what happened in Florida just a few weeks ago by clicking here.
IMHO, there are some questions that need to be answered. And the answers need to be straight forward with no Tijuana Two Stepping.
1. Why wasn't this done prior to the start of construction?
2. Could this have created a danger to the public? (re-read the info from Florida)
3. Who approved the construction to start without remediation of the pipeline?
4. Who is going to be held accountable for this?
With two problem instances concerning Southern Star, street construction and pipelines, it is time for the citizens of Shawnee to stand up and ask for accountability. It is time for the city council to do their job to protect the citizens and not allow, condone or perpetrate a whitewash. And, IMHO the responsibility needs to fall on top level shoulders.
Now, look at tomorrow’s city council agenda, item 20, by clicking here. Then, read the background in the packet by clicking here and then scrolling to page 265.
Looks like the Roberts Street roundabout was started without having certain portions of the pipeline rerouted. It also looks like the cost now to the city will be approximately $220K. And, a delay in the completion of the project.
But more importantly what about the safety issue? You don’t mess with construction around a high pressure gas pipeline until you have it properly secured and moved if necessary. These things can go bump in the night. Don’t believe me? Read what happened in Florida just a few weeks ago by clicking here.
IMHO, there are some questions that need to be answered. And the answers need to be straight forward with no Tijuana Two Stepping.
1. Why wasn't this done prior to the start of construction?
2. Could this have created a danger to the public? (re-read the info from Florida)
3. Who approved the construction to start without remediation of the pipeline?
4. Who is going to be held accountable for this?
With two problem instances concerning Southern Star, street construction and pipelines, it is time for the citizens of Shawnee to stand up and ask for accountability. It is time for the city council to do their job to protect the citizens and not allow, condone or perpetrate a whitewash. And, IMHO the responsibility needs to fall on top level shoulders.
Kansas Open Meetings Act (Press ONE for English)
Another blogger's opinion of full minutes for council meetings:
Kansas Open Meeting Act (Press ONE for English)
Go here: http://nolathe.net/2010/11/20/kansas-open-meeting-act-press-one-for-english/
Kansas Open Meeting Act (Press ONE for English)
Go here: http://nolathe.net/2010/11/20/kansas-open-meeting-act-press-one-for-english/
Saturday, November 20, 2010
Police Response to Private Alarms
The below info was received in an email sent out by the city to all those who subscribe to the city's email update service. Based on the figures below the police department responded to over 3,200 false alarms. That is a terrible waste of time, manpower and money. Folks who have private alram systems need to be held accountable when those systems cause false alarms to be sent out.
Suggest folks attend the meeting listed in the email.
The City will host a meeting regarding police response to private alarms and to solicit input from the public. The meeting will be held on Monday, November 29 at 7:00 p.m. at the Justice Center in the Training Room, 5850 Renner Road.
The topic of the meeting will introduce possible changes to handling burglar alarms. In 2009, the Police Department responded to 3,291 alarms, 98% of which were false. Possible changes could involve procedure changes and/or fee increases to alarm holders. The proposed changes do not include responses to bank alarms, robbery alarms or medical alarms. For more information, contact Lieutenant Jodi Andrews at 742-6891.
Suggest folks attend the meeting listed in the email.
The City will host a meeting regarding police response to private alarms and to solicit input from the public. The meeting will be held on Monday, November 29 at 7:00 p.m. at the Justice Center in the Training Room, 5850 Renner Road.
The topic of the meeting will introduce possible changes to handling burglar alarms. In 2009, the Police Department responded to 3,291 alarms, 98% of which were false. Possible changes could involve procedure changes and/or fee increases to alarm holders. The proposed changes do not include responses to bank alarms, robbery alarms or medical alarms. For more information, contact Lieutenant Jodi Andrews at 742-6891.
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
What Some Others Are Saying
Well, it looks like in the "Point of View" section of the Shawnee Dispatch that folks seem to think the cost of preserving council meetings with full minutes is well worth it.
http://www.shawneedispatch.com/onthestreet/2010/nov/17/do-you-think-detailed-type-written-records-city-me/
There are other places that the council could save the $17,000 without taking government transparency away from the people.
How many transcripts (and the resulting governmental transparency) could have been covered by Dawn Kuhn's trip to Vegas this year?
Good starts with a city council that is not scared of transparency.
http://www.shawneedispatch.com/onthestreet/2010/nov/17/do-you-think-detailed-type-written-records-city-me/
There are other places that the council could save the $17,000 without taking government transparency away from the people.
How many transcripts (and the resulting governmental transparency) could have been covered by Dawn Kuhn's trip to Vegas this year?
Good starts with a city council that is not scared of transparency.
Thanks for the Verification
While entering the city council chambers last night I was confronted by member Dawn Kuhn. She advised me that she had had an opportunity to read my blog. She said she found it entertaining (not sure if that was honest or sarcastic) and wanted to let me know that she had not been referred to as a motormouth since third grade. She then walked off not giving me an opportunity to reply.
Thank you for verifying that that personality trait was even recognizable at a young and tender age.
Thank you for verifying that that personality trait was even recognizable at a young and tender age.
Sunday, November 14, 2010
Transparency - To Be Or Not To Be
Last Monday's council meeting was quite interesting with one of the major topics being an attempt to reduce the minutes of council proceedings from verbatim to summary.
The meeting was covered by the Shawnee Dispatch
http://www.shawneedispatch.com/news/2010/nov/10/council-delays-vote-cutting-minutes/
and the KC Star
http://www.kansascity.com/2010/11/12/2423133/shawnee-looks-at-audio-minutes.html
Basically those who wanted to change the minutes to summary form kept using the ridiculous reason of cutting costs. This is ridiculous, because, as pointed out the costs are negligible and there are transcription services (including local) that can provide full minutes at lower costs.
Then why do some want the minutes format changed from verbatim to summary? Could it be as Councilmember Mickey Sandifer once said because "they use them against us"? Could it be because Councilmember Dawn Kuhn does not want the public to see how she attempts to monopolize meetings? (Former Councilmember Kevin Straub stated his research showed that overall she was responsible for 38% of the dialog).
Full meeting minutes provide the public with complete info and transparency as to what the council does. They also provide info as to what members of the public might say at these meetings. Reducing the minutes to summary format takes all of that away. Thoughts regarding this had previously been strongly mentioned by Council Members Distler and Pflumm and alluded to by others (Sawyer, and Morris) and finally echoed by Vaught.
Additionally, it took yours truly to show that other cities are also making the results of the meetings available on the web in both audio and video format for extremely low costs, to include virtually free.
Ironically, after it was obvious that seven of the eight wanted to postpone any action (even Sandifer saw the handwriting on the wall), Dawn "Motormouth" Kuhn still tried to get the item pushed through. Methinks that maybe she not only does not want folks to see how much she rattles on, but also how she does not chair committee meetings in a fair manner. That's right.....go to a meeting that she chairs. Watch, and listen. If you agree with her you can speak all you want. Be in disagreement with her, and she'll cut you off. Her facial expressions are a dead giveaway. Also, in keeping with her motormouth know it all attitudes, she has to, most of the time, add her two cents in to everybody else’s comments.
Detailed minutes are very important and need to be maintained. The argument of cost is not valid. More info on this can be provided, but one out of town trip by the council members (like the upcoming one to Denver) would cover a year’s worth of minutes.
The meeting was covered by the Shawnee Dispatch
http://www.shawneedispatch.com/news/2010/nov/10/council-delays-vote-cutting-minutes/
and the KC Star
http://www.kansascity.com/2010/11/12/2423133/shawnee-looks-at-audio-minutes.html
Basically those who wanted to change the minutes to summary form kept using the ridiculous reason of cutting costs. This is ridiculous, because, as pointed out the costs are negligible and there are transcription services (including local) that can provide full minutes at lower costs.
Then why do some want the minutes format changed from verbatim to summary? Could it be as Councilmember Mickey Sandifer once said because "they use them against us"? Could it be because Councilmember Dawn Kuhn does not want the public to see how she attempts to monopolize meetings? (Former Councilmember Kevin Straub stated his research showed that overall she was responsible for 38% of the dialog).
Full meeting minutes provide the public with complete info and transparency as to what the council does. They also provide info as to what members of the public might say at these meetings. Reducing the minutes to summary format takes all of that away. Thoughts regarding this had previously been strongly mentioned by Council Members Distler and Pflumm and alluded to by others (Sawyer, and Morris) and finally echoed by Vaught.
Additionally, it took yours truly to show that other cities are also making the results of the meetings available on the web in both audio and video format for extremely low costs, to include virtually free.
Ironically, after it was obvious that seven of the eight wanted to postpone any action (even Sandifer saw the handwriting on the wall), Dawn "Motormouth" Kuhn still tried to get the item pushed through. Methinks that maybe she not only does not want folks to see how much she rattles on, but also how she does not chair committee meetings in a fair manner. That's right.....go to a meeting that she chairs. Watch, and listen. If you agree with her you can speak all you want. Be in disagreement with her, and she'll cut you off. Her facial expressions are a dead giveaway. Also, in keeping with her motormouth know it all attitudes, she has to, most of the time, add her two cents in to everybody else’s comments.
Detailed minutes are very important and need to be maintained. The argument of cost is not valid. More info on this can be provided, but one out of town trip by the council members (like the upcoming one to Denver) would cover a year’s worth of minutes.
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Veteran's Day 2010
In 2000 I composed a poem for Veteran's Day and posted it on a Veteran's web site that I was the wbmaster of.
Decided to share it with you folks.
Decided to share it with you folks.
The GI in the foxhole
The sailor out to sea
The leatherneck standing guard
The pilot flying free
These are the brave men
And yes the women too
Standing guard to protect us
'Neath the old red, white and blue
They haven't asked for much
To them it's not a chore
Staying ready in peacetime
Just in case they go to war
Proudly they do serve
Like thousands gone before
Duty, honor and country
Be it peace or be it war
Our sons and our daughters
It is them that we do love
And proudly do they serve us
With guidance from above
Dedicated, as before, to two special veterans......at least to me.....Abraham Erlichman, USAAF, WWII and the grandson he never knew, Ashly Clayton Erlichman, 1/34 Armor, 1st Inf Div, SW Asia
Sunday, October 31, 2010
Experience or Change, Change or Experience
Every election we hear the same stories. A long term incumbent says that his/her experience will help them to accomplish more for their constituents. The challenger says that the incumbent is too much of an insider and that the constituents deserve change.
Now, let's say, that in this example the challenger wins. Guess what? Two or three elections down the road that person is now the incumbent touting his/her experience.
Which is better? Experience or change? It all comes down to who you support and for what reasons other than that question.
If you haven't early voted.............get out there Tuesday.............don't waste your right and privilege.
Now, let's say, that in this example the challenger wins. Guess what? Two or three elections down the road that person is now the incumbent touting his/her experience.
Which is better? Experience or change? It all comes down to who you support and for what reasons other than that question.
If you haven't early voted.............get out there Tuesday.............don't waste your right and privilege.
Friday, October 29, 2010
Shawnee Voter Apapthy
With the upcoming election next Tuesday I am once again reminded about Shawnee's track record of voter apathy...........particularly in local elections.
It seems that when it comes to the "big ones" (presidential) the turnout is great...........when it comes to the local ones..........Shawnee's citizens sit on their rear ends and do nothing. Ironically, it is local government that has the greatest impact on our daily lives (public safety, sales and property taxes, road maintenance, etc)..........followed by county then state then federal.
Let the numbers speak for themselves:
2008 General Election (Presidential).....Shawnee as a whole and then Shawnee's ward 3, the ward with the highest number of registered voters:
Shawnee registered voters: 40,791
Shawnee voted: 32,266............ 79.10% (fairly good)
Ward 3 registered voters: 11,966
Ward 3 voted: 9,892................ 82.67% (best of the four wards)
2010 General Election (Council):
Shawnee registered voters: 39,862
Shawnee voted: 3,901............. 9.79% (disgusting)
Ward 3 registered voters: 11,930
Ward 3 voted: 893............. 7.49% (worst of the four wards)
What actually happened here locally is that using ward 3 as the example, 470 people elected their council member to represent 11,930 voters. Or, to put it another way, 3.9% of the voters made the decision for the other 96.1% .
Next week's election is for governor, congress, senate and some state legislative seats. I'd guess there will be about a 50% turnout...............better than the city elections...........not as good as the presidential election, and still too low. At the next city election (2012) I would hope that we as a city have a better turn out than the less than 10% we had this year.
Voting is a right, that many have served to protect. There are literally hundreds of millions of people worldwide that would like to be able to have that right. Remember that also the following week, on Veteran's Day, November 11.
It seems that when it comes to the "big ones" (presidential) the turnout is great...........when it comes to the local ones..........Shawnee's citizens sit on their rear ends and do nothing. Ironically, it is local government that has the greatest impact on our daily lives (public safety, sales and property taxes, road maintenance, etc)..........followed by county then state then federal.
Let the numbers speak for themselves:
2008 General Election (Presidential).....Shawnee as a whole and then Shawnee's ward 3, the ward with the highest number of registered voters:
Shawnee registered voters: 40,791
Shawnee voted: 32,266............ 79.10% (fairly good)
Ward 3 registered voters: 11,966
Ward 3 voted: 9,892................ 82.67% (best of the four wards)
2010 General Election (Council):
Shawnee registered voters: 39,862
Shawnee voted: 3,901............. 9.79% (disgusting)
Ward 3 registered voters: 11,930
Ward 3 voted: 893............. 7.49% (worst of the four wards)
What actually happened here locally is that using ward 3 as the example, 470 people elected their council member to represent 11,930 voters. Or, to put it another way, 3.9% of the voters made the decision for the other 96.1% .
Next week's election is for governor, congress, senate and some state legislative seats. I'd guess there will be about a 50% turnout...............better than the city elections...........not as good as the presidential election, and still too low. At the next city election (2012) I would hope that we as a city have a better turn out than the less than 10% we had this year.
Voting is a right, that many have served to protect. There are literally hundreds of millions of people worldwide that would like to be able to have that right. Remember that also the following week, on Veteran's Day, November 11.
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Travel. Travel. Travel
A luxury Shawnee can apaprently afford, NOT.
How about this? The upcoming National League of Cities Convention that has 6 people from Shawnee attending will have zero, nada, none from Topeka and KCK Unified Gov't. Two much larger, major cities are not sending anybody, but little old Shawnee is sending six people.
Now, if you remember I thought that we should send two (the mayor and the city manager). And in this case, a council member who was supposed to go on a previous trip and had to cancel would be going since the previous funds were not refunded but would be applied to this trip. So, in my opinion we have at least three too many people going.
But I guess that is OK...............our city, unlike Topeka and KCK can afford the luxury of sending a large delegation to Denver. The three who IMHO, should stay home are Vaught, Sandifer and Neighbor. And yet, we cannot afford (according to council member Dawn Kuhn) the luxury of full transcript minutes of council meetings.
Pop quiz: Which council member said last week that they did not want full transcript council meeting minutes because "........they use them against us" ?
How about this? The upcoming National League of Cities Convention that has 6 people from Shawnee attending will have zero, nada, none from Topeka and KCK Unified Gov't. Two much larger, major cities are not sending anybody, but little old Shawnee is sending six people.
Now, if you remember I thought that we should send two (the mayor and the city manager). And in this case, a council member who was supposed to go on a previous trip and had to cancel would be going since the previous funds were not refunded but would be applied to this trip. So, in my opinion we have at least three too many people going.
But I guess that is OK...............our city, unlike Topeka and KCK can afford the luxury of sending a large delegation to Denver. The three who IMHO, should stay home are Vaught, Sandifer and Neighbor. And yet, we cannot afford (according to council member Dawn Kuhn) the luxury of full transcript minutes of council meetings.
Pop quiz: Which council member said last week that they did not want full transcript council meeting minutes because "........they use them against us" ?
Saturday, October 23, 2010
Letter to the Council, Mayor and City Manager
The email below was sent this afternoon:
This email is being sent to the Mayor, Council Members and the City Manager of Shawnee, KS.
Dear Mr. Mayor, Members of the Shawnee City Council and the City Manager:
Below are some expanded and some reiterated comments about the council committee meeting that was held on 10/19/10.
I felt the need to express my thoughts to all the members of the governing body, and the city manager. Since Tuesday’s meeting was running long, I kept my comments that night to a minimum.
A copy of this email will be posted on line at http://www.shawneeray.blogspot.com
Should anyone desire to respond I will give consideration to posting those responses.
Committee Structure:
The current committee structure is a borderline farce. As pointed out many items appear before each committee, that based on subject matter belong to the other committee. Many council members still attend the committee meetings that they do not serve on for educational and informational purposes. Then, during budget sessions council members usually also attend all committee meetings.
As stated at the meeting of 10/19 why not go to a "Committee of the Whole Structure"? It would simplify things immensely. It could be chaired by the council president, or as suggested, rotated among the council members. Over a two year period each council member could chair (and vice-chair) each committee for three months.
Meeting Minutes:
Primarily the publication of full meeting minutes is the best way to preserve transparency. It is very simple............it provides a contemporaneous record of who said what. Does the council want the community to know what goes on or not?
Information was given to the city manager about four companies that could possibly provide transcription services at a lower cost than what we are paying now. Modern technology being what it is there probably are more out there. I was totally offended that Dawn Kuhn said that full transcriptions were a luxury the city could not afford. The city cannot afford not to be transparent.
Excessive council travel is a luxury we can do without.
With regards to the audio CDs, it is felt that requiring the public to purchase them is ridiculous. They can be posted on line and people could download them as they see fit. Additionally, the printed minutes could be annotated every 10 pages or so with minute markings so that individuals could proceed to those areas of the audio.
There were comments about video feed of the meetings. Simultaneous internet transmission of the meetings might, at this time be a cost not acceptable. Creating a video, though, and posting it on line for download by the community could be a viable alternative. One of the council members, Jeff Vaught, seemed concerned about folks downloading a video and then posting “snippets” on the web. Is he concerned that a video would show the good, the bad and the ugly of council meetings? As for “snippets”, TV news stations do that all the time. They video tape a council meeting and may only show 30 seconds on the nightly news. Seems Mr. Vaught has not as yet fully grasped what it means to be a public official. This reminds me of his stated dislike for posting advance travel of council members on the web.
Public Comment at Meetings:
The only problem I see here is, as stated by some of the council members, is that there is not enough input from members of the community.
Mandatory time restraints should only be used when there are a large number of people who want to address the council on a particular subject, like the smoking ordinance. Requiring folks to sign in to speak ahead of time can make things run smoother, but should not be a restriction to someone desiring to speak when they had not originally planned on it. Practice has shown that in most cases the presiding official at most meetings has been able to control speaker times.
Actually, in many cases, some members of the council have themselves been overly verbose when discussing issues. Ms Kuhn sort of alluded to this at this meeting, and that she was culpable of that. Amen…………no joke. Maybe time restraints need to be applied to council members?
Dawn Kuhn seemed to be obsessed with the possibility that some people might use the city’s overhead projection system to display images that were “inappropriate” and the possibility of subjecting the city to a lawsuit. Is that possible? Could the city be sued for that? More importantly, what does she mean by “inappropriate”? That is a term that is subject to broad interpretation. So much so, that various courts have nullified laws that use that term (much of the original Internet Decency Act in the Clinton administration got tossed because of that). In the 3+ years that I have been attending meetings I personally don’t remember seeing anything displayed that could be interpreted as being “inappropriate” Having this woman talk about restrictions reminds me of a few years ago when she favored a local ordinance that would give the mayor the authority to declare emergencies and restrict/confiscate weapons. Actually, that would have I believe contradicted state law. It never flew.
Well, this has been one person’s thoughts
Sincerely,
Ray Erlichman
This email is being sent to the Mayor, Council Members and the City Manager of Shawnee, KS.
Dear Mr. Mayor, Members of the Shawnee City Council and the City Manager:
Below are some expanded and some reiterated comments about the council committee meeting that was held on 10/19/10.
I felt the need to express my thoughts to all the members of the governing body, and the city manager. Since Tuesday’s meeting was running long, I kept my comments that night to a minimum.
A copy of this email will be posted on line at http://www.shawneeray.blogspot.com
Should anyone desire to respond I will give consideration to posting those responses.
Committee Structure:
The current committee structure is a borderline farce. As pointed out many items appear before each committee, that based on subject matter belong to the other committee. Many council members still attend the committee meetings that they do not serve on for educational and informational purposes. Then, during budget sessions council members usually also attend all committee meetings.
As stated at the meeting of 10/19 why not go to a "Committee of the Whole Structure"? It would simplify things immensely. It could be chaired by the council president, or as suggested, rotated among the council members. Over a two year period each council member could chair (and vice-chair) each committee for three months.
Meeting Minutes:
Primarily the publication of full meeting minutes is the best way to preserve transparency. It is very simple............it provides a contemporaneous record of who said what. Does the council want the community to know what goes on or not?
Information was given to the city manager about four companies that could possibly provide transcription services at a lower cost than what we are paying now. Modern technology being what it is there probably are more out there. I was totally offended that Dawn Kuhn said that full transcriptions were a luxury the city could not afford. The city cannot afford not to be transparent.
Excessive council travel is a luxury we can do without.
With regards to the audio CDs, it is felt that requiring the public to purchase them is ridiculous. They can be posted on line and people could download them as they see fit. Additionally, the printed minutes could be annotated every 10 pages or so with minute markings so that individuals could proceed to those areas of the audio.
There were comments about video feed of the meetings. Simultaneous internet transmission of the meetings might, at this time be a cost not acceptable. Creating a video, though, and posting it on line for download by the community could be a viable alternative. One of the council members, Jeff Vaught, seemed concerned about folks downloading a video and then posting “snippets” on the web. Is he concerned that a video would show the good, the bad and the ugly of council meetings? As for “snippets”, TV news stations do that all the time. They video tape a council meeting and may only show 30 seconds on the nightly news. Seems Mr. Vaught has not as yet fully grasped what it means to be a public official. This reminds me of his stated dislike for posting advance travel of council members on the web.
Public Comment at Meetings:
The only problem I see here is, as stated by some of the council members, is that there is not enough input from members of the community.
Mandatory time restraints should only be used when there are a large number of people who want to address the council on a particular subject, like the smoking ordinance. Requiring folks to sign in to speak ahead of time can make things run smoother, but should not be a restriction to someone desiring to speak when they had not originally planned on it. Practice has shown that in most cases the presiding official at most meetings has been able to control speaker times.
Actually, in many cases, some members of the council have themselves been overly verbose when discussing issues. Ms Kuhn sort of alluded to this at this meeting, and that she was culpable of that. Amen…………no joke. Maybe time restraints need to be applied to council members?
Dawn Kuhn seemed to be obsessed with the possibility that some people might use the city’s overhead projection system to display images that were “inappropriate” and the possibility of subjecting the city to a lawsuit. Is that possible? Could the city be sued for that? More importantly, what does she mean by “inappropriate”? That is a term that is subject to broad interpretation. So much so, that various courts have nullified laws that use that term (much of the original Internet Decency Act in the Clinton administration got tossed because of that). In the 3+ years that I have been attending meetings I personally don’t remember seeing anything displayed that could be interpreted as being “inappropriate” Having this woman talk about restrictions reminds me of a few years ago when she favored a local ordinance that would give the mayor the authority to declare emergencies and restrict/confiscate weapons. Actually, that would have I believe contradicted state law. It never flew.
Well, this has been one person’s thoughts
Sincerely,
Ray Erlichman
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
Meeting Reminder - Tonight
Just a reminder about the meeting tonight at city hall at 7:00PM. See my post below from 10/16/10.
Conduct of public meetings is on the agenda. This is important because there could be changes proposed that could affect how members of the community can address the council, any of its committees, or any boards.
Protect your rights...................be there.
Conduct of public meetings is on the agenda. This is important because there could be changes proposed that could affect how members of the community can address the council, any of its committees, or any boards.
Protect your rights...................be there.
Monday, October 18, 2010
Lake Quivira Inspection Contract
As pointed out by the Shawnee Dispatch, the city council on 10/11/10 authorized the rates to be charged to Lake Quivira for inspection services. See the complete info at:
http://www.shawneedispatch.com/news/2010/oct/13/citys-inspection-services-remain-same-price-lake-q/
These fees are the same as they have been for ten years.
Some interesting things were brought up at the council meeting:
1. Councilmember Pflumm was concerned that this item never went to a committee first, befor coming to the council. He was also concerned that if the fees have been the same for ten years, we need to look at possible increases. Two valid points.
2. It was brought out that the hourly rate was charged when the inspector hits the gate at Lake Quivira and ends when the inspector leaves. This writer got up and suggested that the hourly rate start when the inmspector leaves their last location. Councilmember Sawyer seemed to concur. In his line of work, when he calls for a service rep the time starts when they leave their previous lcoation, not when they hit his location. Subsequesntly, it came out that in some cases the actual charges were for only 20 or 30 minutes because of the "gate in gate out" concept. Wow, methinks we need an adjustment here. Not only on when the "meter starts" but maybe even a minimum time charge (like one hour minimum). Mr. Sawyer also asked for info as to what a private contractor would charge for these services. I believe he is on the right track on this one.
3. And last but not least it came out that Lake Quivira had already approved the new agreement because "their council meeting came first". Huh??? Council meetings are ongoing events.
Couldn't this have been brought to our council first, before going to Lake Quivira's council?
It was approved with council asking for a review in six months. There is one out.........either party can end the 2 year contract prior to that time with 60 days notice.
http://www.shawneedispatch.com/news/2010/oct/13/citys-inspection-services-remain-same-price-lake-q/
These fees are the same as they have been for ten years.
Some interesting things were brought up at the council meeting:
1. Councilmember Pflumm was concerned that this item never went to a committee first, befor coming to the council. He was also concerned that if the fees have been the same for ten years, we need to look at possible increases. Two valid points.
2. It was brought out that the hourly rate was charged when the inspector hits the gate at Lake Quivira and ends when the inspector leaves. This writer got up and suggested that the hourly rate start when the inmspector leaves their last location. Councilmember Sawyer seemed to concur. In his line of work, when he calls for a service rep the time starts when they leave their previous lcoation, not when they hit his location. Subsequesntly, it came out that in some cases the actual charges were for only 20 or 30 minutes because of the "gate in gate out" concept. Wow, methinks we need an adjustment here. Not only on when the "meter starts" but maybe even a minimum time charge (like one hour minimum). Mr. Sawyer also asked for info as to what a private contractor would charge for these services. I believe he is on the right track on this one.
3. And last but not least it came out that Lake Quivira had already approved the new agreement because "their council meeting came first". Huh??? Council meetings are ongoing events.
Couldn't this have been brought to our council first, before going to Lake Quivira's council?
It was approved with council asking for a review in six months. There is one out.........either party can end the 2 year contract prior to that time with 60 days notice.
Saturday, October 16, 2010
Very Important Meeting - Tue 10/19/10
The Public Works and Safety Committee Meeting scheduled for Tue 10/19/10 at 7:00PM could be one of the most important meetings of the year.
Why do I say that? Because policies could be proposed that would affect citizen comments at council and committee meetings. We must insure that our rights to speak out are not infringed upon.
The wording of the notice is so innocuous as to make it seem almost unimportant.
Over the past several months questions have been raised about
committee meeting structure and public comment during meetings. Staff
has researched neighboring cities meeting structure, as well as more
cost effective methods of delivering a record of the meeting minutes
to the Council and the public.
See info at:
http://www.cityofshawnee.org/Meetings/AGENDAS.NSF/vwNews/2B18F85C6A3245B5862577BC007107A6/$FILE/SNOS-8A8S5M.pdf
Why do I say that? Because policies could be proposed that would affect citizen comments at council and committee meetings. We must insure that our rights to speak out are not infringed upon.
The wording of the notice is so innocuous as to make it seem almost unimportant.
Over the past several months questions have been raised about
committee meeting structure and public comment during meetings. Staff
has researched neighboring cities meeting structure, as well as more
cost effective methods of delivering a record of the meeting minutes
to the Council and the public.
See info at:
http://www.cityofshawnee.org/Meetings/AGENDAS.NSF/vwNews/2B18F85C6A3245B5862577BC007107A6/$FILE/SNOS-8A8S5M.pdf
Friday, October 15, 2010
A Reminder to Veterans
With Veteran's Day approaching I'd like to remind veterans about some changes in federal law in 2008 & 2009.
Veterans (and active duty military) in civilian clothes now have the right to render the military hand salute when:
1. The national anthem is played
2. The flag is raised or lowered
3. The flag passes in review
This is as opposed to the civilian salute of placing one's right hand over one's heart. If you are wearing a hat, and render the hand salute, the hat stays on.
Veterans (and active duty military) in civilian clothes now have the right to render the military hand salute when:
1. The national anthem is played
2. The flag is raised or lowered
3. The flag passes in review
This is as opposed to the civilian salute of placing one's right hand over one's heart. If you are wearing a hat, and render the hand salute, the hat stays on.
Sunday, October 10, 2010
Saturday, October 09, 2010
Two New Links
We have added two links in the link section (lower left side of the blog)
Shawnee Mission Times
Kansas Federalist
Both are projects of the well respected retired sheriff of Johnson County, Currie Myers.
Shawnee Mission Times
Kansas Federalist
Both are projects of the well respected retired sheriff of Johnson County, Currie Myers.
Tuesday, October 05, 2010
Shawnee's Own "Bridge to Nowhere"
Or is it a road to nowhere?
On Monday, 9/27/10 the city council voted to remove entirely the Monticello Road project from the 6 year capital improvement plan. This was the planned reconstruction from Midland Drive to the 7900 block. The idea was to create a four lane roadway.
Let's do a quick recap..............
The residents of the area did not want the project. They bought these homes, most on acreage, so they could be in the country. Vehicle traffic is very limited on that road
The city said too bad.
The residents said there would be a problem with a buried 8 inch high pressure gas pipeline. The city was very cavalier on this......almost passing it off as a non-issue.Then, negotiations with Southern Star took so long, that that was a contributing factor in the original delay....whcih eventually necessitated the city returning CARS money.
By the way, under the terms of the negotiations with Southern Star, it is the city I believe who will have to pay the major portion for the movement of the gas pipeline.And, I believe, that is subject to renegotiation after a cerain point in time. What will be the costs down the road?
Whoooops and what else also happened?
Well, let's see, the city had to buy out two homeowners completely and get them relocated. Remember, that most of these homes sit on large lots, mostly acreage. Believe the city also had to buy lots of front yard, rear yard, side yard areas as additional rights of way for the larger road.
Oh yes, and then there were some new easements that the city paid for. They were so that construction equipment could encroach on what was left of those yards. Easements with time restraints that will probably have to be renegotiated because of the construction delays...............unless, as some dreamers think, those homeowners would donate the eaements without compensation. Fat chance on that one.
Should we even talk about the street lights that were taken down (to make way for the larger road) that have had to be replaced with temporary street lights? Hmmmmm, and what about yard maintenance? Believe the city has to rev up a bunch of mowers now for their newly acquired home sites.
So what has the city gotten for its 3+ million dollars already spent? A road project, that many were against, and that is now not even listed on the capital improvement plan? Land that they must now take care of for weed control etc.
What was the impetus for this? Did it have anything to do with a chunk of land on the south end? Land bordering on Lenexa that could some day be developed or sold to developers for commercial property? But, that development can't be done without a wider road?
On Monday, 9/27/10 the city council voted to remove entirely the Monticello Road project from the 6 year capital improvement plan. This was the planned reconstruction from Midland Drive to the 7900 block. The idea was to create a four lane roadway.
Let's do a quick recap..............
The residents of the area did not want the project. They bought these homes, most on acreage, so they could be in the country. Vehicle traffic is very limited on that road
The city said too bad.
The residents said there would be a problem with a buried 8 inch high pressure gas pipeline. The city was very cavalier on this......almost passing it off as a non-issue.Then, negotiations with Southern Star took so long, that that was a contributing factor in the original delay....whcih eventually necessitated the city returning CARS money.
By the way, under the terms of the negotiations with Southern Star, it is the city I believe who will have to pay the major portion for the movement of the gas pipeline.And, I believe, that is subject to renegotiation after a cerain point in time. What will be the costs down the road?
Whoooops and what else also happened?
Well, let's see, the city had to buy out two homeowners completely and get them relocated. Remember, that most of these homes sit on large lots, mostly acreage. Believe the city also had to buy lots of front yard, rear yard, side yard areas as additional rights of way for the larger road.
Oh yes, and then there were some new easements that the city paid for. They were so that construction equipment could encroach on what was left of those yards. Easements with time restraints that will probably have to be renegotiated because of the construction delays...............unless, as some dreamers think, those homeowners would donate the eaements without compensation. Fat chance on that one.
Should we even talk about the street lights that were taken down (to make way for the larger road) that have had to be replaced with temporary street lights? Hmmmmm, and what about yard maintenance? Believe the city has to rev up a bunch of mowers now for their newly acquired home sites.
So what has the city gotten for its 3+ million dollars already spent? A road project, that many were against, and that is now not even listed on the capital improvement plan? Land that they must now take care of for weed control etc.
What was the impetus for this? Did it have anything to do with a chunk of land on the south end? Land bordering on Lenexa that could some day be developed or sold to developers for commercial property? But, that development can't be done without a wider road?
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Sayonara and Good Luck to Stephen Powell
Stephen Powell, Shawnee's City Clerk will be leaving to become the Assistant Clerk to the Johnson County Commissioners.
I'd like to personally wish Stephen the best in his new endeavor. He has always been most helpful and knowledgable when asked for information pertaining to the city.
He appears to have a very promising future in governmental administration.
Good luck.
I'd like to personally wish Stephen the best in his new endeavor. He has always been most helpful and knowledgable when asked for information pertaining to the city.
He appears to have a very promising future in governmental administration.
Good luck.
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Don't Be Like Olathe - Beware of CIDs
The City of Olathe approved a CID (Community Improvement District) for use at the Great Mall of the Great Plains.
See the story at http://www.kansascity.com/2010/09/22/2242404/sales-tax-district-for-great-mall.html
If folks remember, some people in Shawnee wanted to try that at 10 Quivira Plaza (Shawnee Mission Parkway & Quivira Rd).
Here's the difference.............10 Quivira Plaza is a neighborhood shopping center with the primary merchant being a grocery store. The Great Mall of the Great Plains is located near 151st St & I-35. It's a destination shopping center and would derive most of its money from transient as opposed to neighborhood customers. Exactly what a CID is designed to do.
Be on the look out for some folks to try and resurrect the idea of a CID for 10 Quivira Plaza. Let's not put an extra tax burden on the folks that need to shop there. These are folks that don't exactly live in the highest income area of the city.
See the story at http://www.kansascity.com/2010/09/22/2242404/sales-tax-district-for-great-mall.html
If folks remember, some people in Shawnee wanted to try that at 10 Quivira Plaza (Shawnee Mission Parkway & Quivira Rd).
Here's the difference.............10 Quivira Plaza is a neighborhood shopping center with the primary merchant being a grocery store. The Great Mall of the Great Plains is located near 151st St & I-35. It's a destination shopping center and would derive most of its money from transient as opposed to neighborhood customers. Exactly what a CID is designed to do.
Be on the look out for some folks to try and resurrect the idea of a CID for 10 Quivira Plaza. Let's not put an extra tax burden on the folks that need to shop there. These are folks that don't exactly live in the highest income area of the city.
Saturday, September 18, 2010
Dispatch Didn't Report on Volunteer Presentation
Wow, what happened to the Shawnee Dispatch?
Both staff and a private citizen apparently put in quite a bit of time and effort for the committee presentation on 9/7.
Naturally, with that being a Tuesday it would be too late for the Dispatch to have an article for 9/8/10. But what about the 9/15/10 edition?
It was mentioned to me that there was quite a bit of discussion about this item at the committee meeting with various pro and con comments being made. Naturally, for those of us who could not attend we will have to wait for the minutes and/or the audio CD.
But what happened to the local media reporting on this? I was told that the item was tabled and is not going to the full council at this time, but, don't the citizens of Shawnee deserve to be informed of what transpired? Especially with all the effort that was put into the presentation?
It's not like the Dispatch is covering the happenings in Congress or the UN. I always thought that the Dispatch's primary function was to report about Shawnee happenings.
Or, did somebody not want the information in the press? Considering I was told the meeting lasted almost two hours it seems real strange that nothing has been mentioned about it.
Something to ponder.........................
Both staff and a private citizen apparently put in quite a bit of time and effort for the committee presentation on 9/7.
Naturally, with that being a Tuesday it would be too late for the Dispatch to have an article for 9/8/10. But what about the 9/15/10 edition?
It was mentioned to me that there was quite a bit of discussion about this item at the committee meeting with various pro and con comments being made. Naturally, for those of us who could not attend we will have to wait for the minutes and/or the audio CD.
But what happened to the local media reporting on this? I was told that the item was tabled and is not going to the full council at this time, but, don't the citizens of Shawnee deserve to be informed of what transpired? Especially with all the effort that was put into the presentation?
It's not like the Dispatch is covering the happenings in Congress or the UN. I always thought that the Dispatch's primary function was to report about Shawnee happenings.
Or, did somebody not want the information in the press? Considering I was told the meeting lasted almost two hours it seems real strange that nothing has been mentioned about it.
Something to ponder.........................
I'm Baaaaaaack!!!!!!!!!!!
OK, doc is letting me go back to work come Monday.
Some folks have asked exactly what happened.
I'll keep it short and quick.............developed a case of cellulitis. Leg swelled up, foot looked like a football, pain all over the place. Then we had two additional problems. A blister which needed to be lanced first and some bleeding under the skin. Both areas needed debridement. So, that creates two open wounds.
So, when I hit the streets Monday the wounds are still being treated, but the cellulitis is gone.
Anyway, to those who expressed well wishes, thank you.
Some folks have asked exactly what happened.
I'll keep it short and quick.............developed a case of cellulitis. Leg swelled up, foot looked like a football, pain all over the place. Then we had two additional problems. A blister which needed to be lanced first and some bleeding under the skin. Both areas needed debridement. So, that creates two open wounds.
So, when I hit the streets Monday the wounds are still being treated, but the cellulitis is gone.
Anyway, to those who expressed well wishes, thank you.
Sunday, September 12, 2010
Use of Volunteers in Shawnee
Unfortunately I was unable to attend last week's F & A Committee meeting. Still home recuperating. Hopefully will be released soon by the doctors.........this is draggy.
Anyway, not having been at the meeting I was unable to hear what comments were being made. The presentation that is on line gives some info but not the "give and take".
Personally, I can see where volunteers can be helpful. And, like any other project there will be certain pitfalls. In general I would be more in favor than against as long as certain guidelines are met.
Again not being able to hear what the committee members said, I'm not sure where they stand. Hopefully I will be able to attend the council meeting when this item comes up, so as to hear others' views and possibly to express my own.
Sidebar: See post below, the city changed the number of elected officials to 5. Good job
Anyway, not having been at the meeting I was unable to hear what comments were being made. The presentation that is on line gives some info but not the "give and take".
Personally, I can see where volunteers can be helpful. And, like any other project there will be certain pitfalls. In general I would be more in favor than against as long as certain guidelines are met.
Again not being able to hear what the committee members said, I'm not sure where they stand. Hopefully I will be able to attend the council meeting when this item comes up, so as to hear others' views and possibly to express my own.
Sidebar: See post below, the city changed the number of elected officials to 5. Good job
Tuesday, September 07, 2010
Did We Win One?
Wow, did we win one?
Let's set the stage. On August 9, 2010 I suggested the council post on the city's web site who would be going out of town on convention trips. The reason for that is that the council was apparently not keeping with its own policy of announcing at a meeting who would be going. My suggestion was not met favorably by many of the council members
Now on August 23, 2010 Dawn Kuhn got the policy removed requiring the council to announce at a meeting their travel plans.
I haven't really been surfacing the web that much. Resting and recuperating. Got an email from an individual and they suggested I go to :
http://www.cityofshawnee.org/Web/ShawneeCMS.nsf/vwNews/3F084C6F0CCAD94B8625779300622AD7?OpenDocument
What I found is shown below. Looks like maybe we won one.
In November, six of Shawnee's elected officials will travel to the National League of Cities (NLC) Congress of Cities Conference in Denver,Colorado.
Mayor Jeff Meyers, Councilmembers Jim Neighbor, Neal Sawyer, Jeff Vaught and Mickey Sandifer, along with City Manager Carol Gonzales will attend the 2010 Congress of Cities and Exposition and have the opportunity to attend more than 20 workshops on topics critical to municipalities. The meetings also offer over 20 leadership training seminars, and opportunities to view model programs and ask questions of the city staff who implemented them.
Over 4,000 municipal leaders will descend upon Denver for a one-of-a kind learning opportunity. Those who attend the 2010 Congress of Cities and Exposition can expect to return to Shawnee with fresh ideas, proven solutions and a new network of experts to call friends.
Keep an eye on the City's website on a report back from elected officials that attend the conference.
Sidebar: Correction needed...........six elected officials are not going. Only 5..........the city manager is an appointed position. :-) :-)
Let's set the stage. On August 9, 2010 I suggested the council post on the city's web site who would be going out of town on convention trips. The reason for that is that the council was apparently not keeping with its own policy of announcing at a meeting who would be going. My suggestion was not met favorably by many of the council members
Now on August 23, 2010 Dawn Kuhn got the policy removed requiring the council to announce at a meeting their travel plans.
I haven't really been surfacing the web that much. Resting and recuperating. Got an email from an individual and they suggested I go to :
http://www.cityofshawnee.org/Web/ShawneeCMS.nsf/vwNews/3F084C6F0CCAD94B8625779300622AD7?OpenDocument
What I found is shown below. Looks like maybe we won one.
In November, six of Shawnee's elected officials will travel to the National League of Cities (NLC) Congress of Cities Conference in Denver,Colorado.
Mayor Jeff Meyers, Councilmembers Jim Neighbor, Neal Sawyer, Jeff Vaught and Mickey Sandifer, along with City Manager Carol Gonzales will attend the 2010 Congress of Cities and Exposition and have the opportunity to attend more than 20 workshops on topics critical to municipalities. The meetings also offer over 20 leadership training seminars, and opportunities to view model programs and ask questions of the city staff who implemented them.
Over 4,000 municipal leaders will descend upon Denver for a one-of-a kind learning opportunity. Those who attend the 2010 Congress of Cities and Exposition can expect to return to Shawnee with fresh ideas, proven solutions and a new network of experts to call friends.
Keep an eye on the City's website on a report back from elected officials that attend the conference.
Sidebar: Correction needed...........six elected officials are not going. Only 5..........the city manager is an appointed position. :-) :-)
Sunday, September 05, 2010
What Got Me Going
This on line article in the KC Star
http://www.kansascity.com/2010/08/24/2172196/shawnee-council-changes-travel.html
Hope to be off bed rest in a week (maybe).
http://www.kansascity.com/2010/08/24/2172196/shawnee-council-changes-travel.html
Hope to be off bed rest in a week (maybe).
Thursday, September 02, 2010
Don't Get Sick
I fully intended to attend the council meeting of Monday Aug 23, 2010. Wasn't feeling very well so I stayed home. Tuesday morning I wound up in SMMC where I stayed until last Saturday. Have been home recuperating since and will be doing so for about another week. Hopefully I will be up and running around by then.
Anyway, my time on the web has been curtailed. So this will be brief. It appears that Kuhn & Kumpany have effectively thrown out one of the last vestiges of transparency that the citizens had....the requirement for council members to announce ahead of time at a meeting their planned out of town travel.
Wish I had been there................there are other ways to handle the situation.......and they will be done.
More when I'm feling better.
Anyway, my time on the web has been curtailed. So this will be brief. It appears that Kuhn & Kumpany have effectively thrown out one of the last vestiges of transparency that the citizens had....the requirement for council members to announce ahead of time at a meeting their planned out of town travel.
Wish I had been there................there are other ways to handle the situation.......and they will be done.
More when I'm feling better.
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
More on Council Travel
At the 8/9/10 council meeting I actually suggested what I had written about here. That the council publish on the city's web site their projected travel plans.
One of the primary reasons for this was that in February of 2009 the council voted to have their travel plans announced at a meeting. Well, they did not appear to be doing that, since the only way we found out ahead of time who was going to the National League of Cities March 2010 conference was because I asked a few weeks ahead of time.
Council member Sandifer said he thought it had been announced at a committee meeting, and the city manager indicated that she thought so too. Well, I checked and did not find it in the minutes. Actually emailed them to tell them that, and also to let me know if I was blind and missed it in the minutes of the meetings to let me know. Would you believe? They did not respond. Guess good doesn't start with responding to citizen emails.
Anyway, there did not seem to be much enthusiasm among the council members to have their travel plans announced ahead of time on the web site. But, having been reminded about their adopted motion of Feb 2009 four council members did announce that they were planning on going to the November 2010 conference in Denver. These were council members Neighbor, Sawyer, Vaught and Sandifer. That information was also published in the 8/11/10 issue of the Shawnee Dispatch in their synopsis of the council meeting. I thought I had heard the mayor also say that he was planning, but heard nothing from the city manager (she is not covered by that previous motion).
So, now we have upwards of 6 folks going to that conference (if the mayor and the city manager do go). These conferences can be very beneficial for Shawnee. The only question is, how many folks need to attend in these tough economic times?
My personal opinion is that the Mayor (as CEO) and the city manager (as COO) of the city should attend. As for council members, with the tight budget, my recommendation would be no more than two. Now, for this meeting coming up we have a unique situation. Mr Sawyer did not go to the previous one in Wash DC in March, but had planned on it. As such the registration fee (non-refundable) was paid. The NLC has advised the city that they will allow that to be used for the November meeting. Great............the city doesn't lose it.........so that means that Mr Sawyer would be one of the attendees under my scenario.
Now, what about the other one (with three still planning). Well, Mickey "Travelin' Man" Sandifer could sit this one out. Heck, to paraphrase Will Rogers, I don't think he ever found a trip he didn't want to take. Now that leaves two rookies, Neighbor and Vaught. A coin toss between them could decide that one. Then we'd be down to only two council members going, and possibly the mayor and city manager (and those two usually don't attend these things for the full schedule).
Now, doesn't that make more sense in these strained economic times?
Sidebar: Remember my previous post about Jeff "The Timekeeper" Vaught? (Scroll down to "Budget & Egg Timers"). Well, at the 8/9/10 council meeting a contractor who lost a bid got up and spoke (according to my watch) for 12 minutes. Don't remember our self appointed timekeeper saying anything about that. LOL Guess he is selective as to who he wants to time. :-) :-)
One of the primary reasons for this was that in February of 2009 the council voted to have their travel plans announced at a meeting. Well, they did not appear to be doing that, since the only way we found out ahead of time who was going to the National League of Cities March 2010 conference was because I asked a few weeks ahead of time.
Council member Sandifer said he thought it had been announced at a committee meeting, and the city manager indicated that she thought so too. Well, I checked and did not find it in the minutes. Actually emailed them to tell them that, and also to let me know if I was blind and missed it in the minutes of the meetings to let me know. Would you believe? They did not respond. Guess good doesn't start with responding to citizen emails.
Anyway, there did not seem to be much enthusiasm among the council members to have their travel plans announced ahead of time on the web site. But, having been reminded about their adopted motion of Feb 2009 four council members did announce that they were planning on going to the November 2010 conference in Denver. These were council members Neighbor, Sawyer, Vaught and Sandifer. That information was also published in the 8/11/10 issue of the Shawnee Dispatch in their synopsis of the council meeting. I thought I had heard the mayor also say that he was planning, but heard nothing from the city manager (she is not covered by that previous motion).
So, now we have upwards of 6 folks going to that conference (if the mayor and the city manager do go). These conferences can be very beneficial for Shawnee. The only question is, how many folks need to attend in these tough economic times?
My personal opinion is that the Mayor (as CEO) and the city manager (as COO) of the city should attend. As for council members, with the tight budget, my recommendation would be no more than two. Now, for this meeting coming up we have a unique situation. Mr Sawyer did not go to the previous one in Wash DC in March, but had planned on it. As such the registration fee (non-refundable) was paid. The NLC has advised the city that they will allow that to be used for the November meeting. Great............the city doesn't lose it.........so that means that Mr Sawyer would be one of the attendees under my scenario.
Now, what about the other one (with three still planning). Well, Mickey "Travelin' Man" Sandifer could sit this one out. Heck, to paraphrase Will Rogers, I don't think he ever found a trip he didn't want to take. Now that leaves two rookies, Neighbor and Vaught. A coin toss between them could decide that one. Then we'd be down to only two council members going, and possibly the mayor and city manager (and those two usually don't attend these things for the full schedule).
Now, doesn't that make more sense in these strained economic times?
Sidebar: Remember my previous post about Jeff "The Timekeeper" Vaught? (Scroll down to "Budget & Egg Timers"). Well, at the 8/9/10 council meeting a contractor who lost a bid got up and spoke (according to my watch) for 12 minutes. Don't remember our self appointed timekeeper saying anything about that. LOL Guess he is selective as to who he wants to time. :-) :-)
Sunday, August 01, 2010
Budget Comments
Some peodple have asked me what it was that I said Monday night when addressing those three budget items.
So here goes. Oh, for the record, I have not timed it to see how long it will take to read. :-) :-)
1. Wonderscope: This is easy. They get a $10k subsidy from the city. Their financials would indicate they don't need it. The money comes from a tourism tax, and could be used for Old Shawnee Town. duhhhhhhhhh
2. School Crossing Guards: For this commentary I will use rounded off numbers. The city does not have to pay for them, but has been doing so for many years. The budgeted amount for 2010 was approximately $130K. Because of reduced traffic volume in certain locations, that amount is being changed to $90K for 2011 as some locations no longer qualify for a guard. The school district was approached with some options (mostly volunteers and/or the AAA program) and they shot it down. It's time that the district took over this item. My suggestion was for the amount for 2011 to be cut to $45K. The guards would be paid for by the city until 12/31/10 under the 2010 budget and until 6/30/11 under my proposal. This then gives the district almost a year to formulate a plan (volunteer, paid or a combination), to taking over their just responsibility beginning the fall of 2011. After that, there would be no city funding of this item.
3. Council Travel: This is an area that needs to be looked at closer.
From 3/2009 to 3/2010 Mickey Sandifer took 3 trips at a cost in excess of $7K. At the NLC conference in DC 3/10 he stayed the longest and spent the most of any member of the city delegation (which had four people). My comment/question was could we have done just as well with only the city manager and the mayor(who were there for two days)? And couldn't councilmembers Sandifer & Kuhn have stayed home?. These two cost the city over $5.5K for their participation.
A recent trip to Vegas has already been covered in a previous blog post (scroll down).
There are two more NLC events coming up. One is in September in Philadelphia and the other begins Nov 30 in Denver. I asked who on the council was planning on attending. Only one council member raised their hand, for the Denver trip. If any others are planning why didn't they raise their hands? Hiding it folks? It will now be interesting to see who else goes, and tried to ignore the question.
Here's something that I didn't bring up at the meeting: Going forward, I think it would be a good idea for the city to post on its website any projected/planned travel for members of the governing body (mayor and council). The info would include who is going, where, when, projected costs (per person), reason and perceived benefits to the city. The city could create a "Governing Body Travel Calendar" page. Let the public know ahead of time (45-60days) where they are planning to go to represent the city and for what reason.
If you would like to email the mayor or any member of the city council regarding the above, their email addresses can be found at http://www.cityofshawnee.org/WEB/ShawneeCMS.nsf/vwContent/GoverningBody?OpenDocument
And, if you want, include me as a cc recipient: shawneeray@gmail.com
So here goes. Oh, for the record, I have not timed it to see how long it will take to read. :-) :-)
1. Wonderscope: This is easy. They get a $10k subsidy from the city. Their financials would indicate they don't need it. The money comes from a tourism tax, and could be used for Old Shawnee Town. duhhhhhhhhh
2. School Crossing Guards: For this commentary I will use rounded off numbers. The city does not have to pay for them, but has been doing so for many years. The budgeted amount for 2010 was approximately $130K. Because of reduced traffic volume in certain locations, that amount is being changed to $90K for 2011 as some locations no longer qualify for a guard. The school district was approached with some options (mostly volunteers and/or the AAA program) and they shot it down. It's time that the district took over this item. My suggestion was for the amount for 2011 to be cut to $45K. The guards would be paid for by the city until 12/31/10 under the 2010 budget and until 6/30/11 under my proposal. This then gives the district almost a year to formulate a plan (volunteer, paid or a combination), to taking over their just responsibility beginning the fall of 2011. After that, there would be no city funding of this item.
3. Council Travel: This is an area that needs to be looked at closer.
From 3/2009 to 3/2010 Mickey Sandifer took 3 trips at a cost in excess of $7K. At the NLC conference in DC 3/10 he stayed the longest and spent the most of any member of the city delegation (which had four people). My comment/question was could we have done just as well with only the city manager and the mayor(who were there for two days)? And couldn't councilmembers Sandifer & Kuhn have stayed home?. These two cost the city over $5.5K for their participation.
A recent trip to Vegas has already been covered in a previous blog post (scroll down).
There are two more NLC events coming up. One is in September in Philadelphia and the other begins Nov 30 in Denver. I asked who on the council was planning on attending. Only one council member raised their hand, for the Denver trip. If any others are planning why didn't they raise their hands? Hiding it folks? It will now be interesting to see who else goes, and tried to ignore the question.
Here's something that I didn't bring up at the meeting: Going forward, I think it would be a good idea for the city to post on its website any projected/planned travel for members of the governing body (mayor and council). The info would include who is going, where, when, projected costs (per person), reason and perceived benefits to the city. The city could create a "Governing Body Travel Calendar" page. Let the public know ahead of time (45-60days) where they are planning to go to represent the city and for what reason.
If you would like to email the mayor or any member of the city council regarding the above, their email addresses can be found at http://www.cityofshawnee.org/WEB/ShawneeCMS.nsf/vwContent/GoverningBody?OpenDocument
And, if you want, include me as a cc recipient: shawneeray@gmail.com
Monday, July 26, 2010
Budget and Egg Timers
Well, very few members of the community attended the budget meeting.
And yes, yours truly got up to speak on 3 items. The city’s contributions to Wonderscope, the payment for the school crossing guard program and council travel expenditures.
Here’s the funny part. When I was finished, rather than commenting on any of the pertinent information that was brought up, Jeff Vaught, the self appointed time keeper for the council was critical of the fact that I spoke for eleven minutes. He said citizens are only supposed to speak for three and he wants to see that enforced. The mayor did say (and I do thank you Mr. Mayor) that I did announce that I had three items to address.
Anyway here’s the kicker. In his rush to criticize the time spent (as opposed to addressing the issues) Mr. Vaught showed a lack of knowledge of city policy. The policy is 5 minutes, not three.
Maybe I should have sat down after each item, and then got back up.
Oh, where did I come up with the five minutes not three? From the city’s own website at
http://www.cityofshawnee.org/WEB/ShawneeCMS.nsf/b62f116aa62dde94862575680053ac82/034841e84c8d782086257585005bce15?OpenDocument
This is where it says: Please keep your comments brief. Comments should be tailored so as not to exceed five (5) minutes.
The brochure for this does not actually specify any particular time limit. It can be viewed at:
http://www.cityofshawnee.org/WEB/brochures.nsf/vwNews/81897B60DE6386C2862577200066EF4D/$FILE/PublicComment_09.pdf
Definitely would like to see if Mr. Vaught starts timing other folks………especially those that get up and speak in favor of items he supports.
And yes, yours truly got up to speak on 3 items. The city’s contributions to Wonderscope, the payment for the school crossing guard program and council travel expenditures.
Here’s the funny part. When I was finished, rather than commenting on any of the pertinent information that was brought up, Jeff Vaught, the self appointed time keeper for the council was critical of the fact that I spoke for eleven minutes. He said citizens are only supposed to speak for three and he wants to see that enforced. The mayor did say (and I do thank you Mr. Mayor) that I did announce that I had three items to address.
Anyway here’s the kicker. In his rush to criticize the time spent (as opposed to addressing the issues) Mr. Vaught showed a lack of knowledge of city policy. The policy is 5 minutes, not three.
Maybe I should have sat down after each item, and then got back up.
Oh, where did I come up with the five minutes not three? From the city’s own website at
http://www.cityofshawnee.org/WEB/ShawneeCMS.nsf/b62f116aa62dde94862575680053ac82/034841e84c8d782086257585005bce15?OpenDocument
This is where it says: Please keep your comments brief. Comments should be tailored so as not to exceed five (5) minutes.
The brochure for this does not actually specify any particular time limit. It can be viewed at:
http://www.cityofshawnee.org/WEB/brochures.nsf/vwNews/81897B60DE6386C2862577200066EF4D/$FILE/PublicComment_09.pdf
Definitely would like to see if Mr. Vaught starts timing other folks………especially those that get up and speak in favor of items he supports.
Sunday, July 25, 2010
City Budget Hearing
Tomorrow, Monday, 7/26/10 the city council will hold a public hearing on the 2011 budget.
A public hearing is exactly what it means. A time for the public to comment on the item.
This is when Shawnee citizens have the opportunity to let the council know which parts of the budget they agree with, and which parts they may disagree with.
The council meeting starts at 7:30PM at city hall, 11110 Johnson Drive.
A public hearing is exactly what it means. A time for the public to comment on the item.
This is when Shawnee citizens have the opportunity to let the council know which parts of the budget they agree with, and which parts they may disagree with.
The council meeting starts at 7:30PM at city hall, 11110 Johnson Drive.
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Vegas, Oh Vegas........
My letter below appeared in today's edition of the Shawnee Dispatch http://www.shawneedispatch.com/news/2010/jul/21/vegas-contingent/
In a letter to the editor (July 14) Mr. Vincent attempts to justify the trip to the Las Vegas shopping center convention by Council member Dawn Kuhn.
Was he aware that four people — Jim Martin, Shawnee Economic Development Council executive director, Doug Wesselschmidt, Shawnee Development Services director, Carol Gonzales, Shawnee City manager, and Kuhn — officially represented the city?
Additionally, three local businessmen/developers “….were there representing their companies’ interest and also helping Shawnee where appropriate.” (per Mr. Martin).
Granted, Ms. Gonzales returned early because of the unfortunate and unforeseen situation that occurred within our fire department.
So now my questions are: Did we really need such a large contingent? Could we have done just as well with just Messrs. Martin and Wesselschmidt? And then maybe, only if necessary, either Ms. Gonzales or Ms. Kuhn, but not both? The other three were there on their own.
Also, a review of documents obtained under an open records request indicates that Ms. Kuhn’s return flight was scheduled for two days after the convention ended. A little vacation added on to a business trip?
Maybe we can combine two advertising slogans: Good starts with what happens in Vegas staying in Vegas.
**********
Mr Vincent's letter of 7/14/10 can be seen here http://www.shawneedispatch.com/news/2010/jul/14/letter-shopping-center-expert/
He in turn had referenced Mr Straub's letter, which can be read here http://www.shawneedispatch.com/news/2010/jul/07/letter-budget-matters/
In a letter to the editor (July 14) Mr. Vincent attempts to justify the trip to the Las Vegas shopping center convention by Council member Dawn Kuhn.
Was he aware that four people — Jim Martin, Shawnee Economic Development Council executive director, Doug Wesselschmidt, Shawnee Development Services director, Carol Gonzales, Shawnee City manager, and Kuhn — officially represented the city?
Additionally, three local businessmen/developers “….were there representing their companies’ interest and also helping Shawnee where appropriate.” (per Mr. Martin).
Granted, Ms. Gonzales returned early because of the unfortunate and unforeseen situation that occurred within our fire department.
So now my questions are: Did we really need such a large contingent? Could we have done just as well with just Messrs. Martin and Wesselschmidt? And then maybe, only if necessary, either Ms. Gonzales or Ms. Kuhn, but not both? The other three were there on their own.
Also, a review of documents obtained under an open records request indicates that Ms. Kuhn’s return flight was scheduled for two days after the convention ended. A little vacation added on to a business trip?
Maybe we can combine two advertising slogans: Good starts with what happens in Vegas staying in Vegas.
**********
Mr Vincent's letter of 7/14/10 can be seen here http://www.shawneedispatch.com/news/2010/jul/14/letter-shopping-center-expert/
He in turn had referenced Mr Straub's letter, which can be read here http://www.shawneedispatch.com/news/2010/jul/07/letter-budget-matters/
Monday, July 19, 2010
How Apathetic Will You Be?
Yepper, will Shawnee residents once again show that they don't care about their vote? How many will not vote in the August 3d primary?
The shameful thing is that the JoCo election office has made it sooooooo easy to vote.
In person: 4 locations from 7/20 - 7/31
Advance voting by mail: Just fax in the application and they'll mail a ballot to you
On election day itself.
Just go to http://www.jocoelection.org for complete info
The shameful thing is that the JoCo election office has made it sooooooo easy to vote.
In person: 4 locations from 7/20 - 7/31
Advance voting by mail: Just fax in the application and they'll mail a ballot to you
On election day itself.
Just go to http://www.jocoelection.org for complete info
Sunday, July 18, 2010
Tiahrt vs Moran
A few days ago I received my advance mail ballot. One of the many options available for voting in the Aug 3 primary election.
The Republican party has 4 individuals running to win the nomination to run for US Senator:
Todd Tiahrt
Tom Little
Robert (Bob) Londerholm
Jerry Moran
Now, it does appear that Messrs Tiahrt & Moran are the two frontrunners. What I find amazing is that these two gentlemen are attacking each other with such venom that one wonders are they both republicans?
It would be nice if, instead of their heavy attacks on each other they spent their time, energy, and money, on emphasizing their positives (or perceived positives), by stating factually how they voted on certain key issues etc etc.
Ironically, after the primary, the loser will probably issue a statement that to preserve party unity he will now support the other individual.
What a bunch of nonsense................
The Republican party has 4 individuals running to win the nomination to run for US Senator:
Todd Tiahrt
Tom Little
Robert (Bob) Londerholm
Jerry Moran
Now, it does appear that Messrs Tiahrt & Moran are the two frontrunners. What I find amazing is that these two gentlemen are attacking each other with such venom that one wonders are they both republicans?
It would be nice if, instead of their heavy attacks on each other they spent their time, energy, and money, on emphasizing their positives (or perceived positives), by stating factually how they voted on certain key issues etc etc.
Ironically, after the primary, the loser will probably issue a statement that to preserve party unity he will now support the other individual.
What a bunch of nonsense................
Tuesday, July 06, 2010
Vaught Responds to my CID Posts
Jeff Vaught, Shawnee Council Member from Ward 3 had some email comments about my posts regarding the CID for 10 Quivira Plaza. It's only fair that I post his comments here, along with my response.
From: Jeff Vaught
To: Ray Erlichman
Sent: Tue 7/6/2010 4:55PM
Subject: RE: Sunday morning update - Sticking it to one part of the community
Ray,
I have a difficult time responding to your comments because you seem to be all over the board in your political philosophy. One of my main campaign points was increasing development and improving the development climate in Shawnee. For too long the attitude has been that Shawnee is not pro development so we tend to lose projects to other cities. This is mostly a holdover from the past when Shawnee aspired to be a “residential community” with little to no emphasis on commercial development. Nice concept, bad idea. Without commercial development and redevelopment, our residential mill levee’s will continue to rise until we are no longer able to compete with other cities for even housing. Residential development puts an extreme demand on city services, from public safety to public works. Shawnee desperately needs an increase in both sales tax revenues and commercial property tax revenues.
That being said, I am not automatically onboard with every incentive that is proposed. If you look back and read the minutes from that meeting, I voiced my concern for the 10 Quivira Plaza CID and said I was struggling with it. My goal as a Councilman is not to blow a developer out of the water at his first appearance in front of the council, but to see if we can come to a win-win agreement that we can get public buy-in on. If you truly want to be a voice for the public and not a bomb thrower, I suggest you listen a little closer and maybe even ask a few questions before you make automatic assumptions. I think it’s great that you care as much as you do, but feeding bad information to the public can be just as destructive as bad Government.
Sincerely,
Jeff Vaught
Shawnee City Council – Ward III
My reply:
From: Ray Erlichman
To: jvaught
Subject: RE: Sunday morning update - Sticking it to one part of the community
Sent: Tue 7/6/2010 6:37PM
Jeff,
In my opinion there should not have been a struggle on your part.
The fact that a certain segment of the community would be paying a higher sales tax for the benefit of a shopping center is wrong.
The fact is that if the collections of that sales tax exceeds the expenditures the city then gets to keep the difference to use as it sees fit. Contributed by one segment of the community.
The concept of the CIDs was to draw additional funds from tourist and/or transit dollars...........not from local community shopping venues.
If you are struggling with whether or not the citizens shopping in a local shopping center, where the primary merchant is a necessity merchant (groceries) should pay a higher sales tax, then sir, it is my belief that you are not concerned with the community. And again, it is one of the more moderate income areas of the city. There should be no struggle here.
A TIF was just approved for the I-435 corridor. That is where the commercial development needs to come in.
Ray
From: Jeff Vaught
To: Ray Erlichman
Sent: Tue 7/6/2010 4:55PM
Subject: RE: Sunday morning update - Sticking it to one part of the community
Ray,
I have a difficult time responding to your comments because you seem to be all over the board in your political philosophy. One of my main campaign points was increasing development and improving the development climate in Shawnee. For too long the attitude has been that Shawnee is not pro development so we tend to lose projects to other cities. This is mostly a holdover from the past when Shawnee aspired to be a “residential community” with little to no emphasis on commercial development. Nice concept, bad idea. Without commercial development and redevelopment, our residential mill levee’s will continue to rise until we are no longer able to compete with other cities for even housing. Residential development puts an extreme demand on city services, from public safety to public works. Shawnee desperately needs an increase in both sales tax revenues and commercial property tax revenues.
That being said, I am not automatically onboard with every incentive that is proposed. If you look back and read the minutes from that meeting, I voiced my concern for the 10 Quivira Plaza CID and said I was struggling with it. My goal as a Councilman is not to blow a developer out of the water at his first appearance in front of the council, but to see if we can come to a win-win agreement that we can get public buy-in on. If you truly want to be a voice for the public and not a bomb thrower, I suggest you listen a little closer and maybe even ask a few questions before you make automatic assumptions. I think it’s great that you care as much as you do, but feeding bad information to the public can be just as destructive as bad Government.
Sincerely,
Jeff Vaught
Shawnee City Council – Ward III
My reply:
From: Ray Erlichman
To: jvaught
Subject: RE: Sunday morning update - Sticking it to one part of the community
Sent: Tue 7/6/2010 6:37PM
Jeff,
In my opinion there should not have been a struggle on your part.
The fact that a certain segment of the community would be paying a higher sales tax for the benefit of a shopping center is wrong.
The fact is that if the collections of that sales tax exceeds the expenditures the city then gets to keep the difference to use as it sees fit. Contributed by one segment of the community.
The concept of the CIDs was to draw additional funds from tourist and/or transit dollars...........not from local community shopping venues.
If you are struggling with whether or not the citizens shopping in a local shopping center, where the primary merchant is a necessity merchant (groceries) should pay a higher sales tax, then sir, it is my belief that you are not concerned with the community. And again, it is one of the more moderate income areas of the city. There should be no struggle here.
A TIF was just approved for the I-435 corridor. That is where the commercial development needs to come in.
Ray
Sunday, July 04, 2010
Sticking It To One Part of the Community
Reference is made to the post immediately below regarding the possibility of the CID being reconsidered for 10 Quivira Plaza.
One item that was brought up at the last public hearing about this was only given a cursory explanation.
Let's look at this item, again. In the article written by Mr Gough he states:
"After CID revenues pay all eligible project costs or CID bonds, the municipality can spend any remaining funds as though they were local sales tax receipts." (K.S.A. 2009 Supp. 12-6a34)
Now, I'm no lawyer but the above seems pretty simple. If the CID is approved, then it would seem that if there is any money left over the city can do whatever they want with it. Let's bring that down to earth.............if approved, the folks who go shopping in that center, besides paying a higher tax for things such as food, could be contributing more to the city itself. Is this why the council members of Ward 3 appeared to be favoring the CID at that time?
As mentioned above, this aspect was only glossed over at the last public hearing.
On the other hand, if a CID is formed where the majority of the business is transient and/or tourist, then the effect on members of the community could be minimal. This is described by Mr. Gough and mentioned in the post below. And again, that would be in line with the 3 current CID projects already on the books.
If the city wants to work with a developer for a CID then do it like the others.............where the money comes from transient and/or tourist dollrs.
Remember: Good starts with not sticking it to the members of the community.
One item that was brought up at the last public hearing about this was only given a cursory explanation.
Let's look at this item, again. In the article written by Mr Gough he states:
"After CID revenues pay all eligible project costs or CID bonds, the municipality can spend any remaining funds as though they were local sales tax receipts." (K.S.A. 2009 Supp. 12-6a34)
Now, I'm no lawyer but the above seems pretty simple. If the CID is approved, then it would seem that if there is any money left over the city can do whatever they want with it. Let's bring that down to earth.............if approved, the folks who go shopping in that center, besides paying a higher tax for things such as food, could be contributing more to the city itself. Is this why the council members of Ward 3 appeared to be favoring the CID at that time?
As mentioned above, this aspect was only glossed over at the last public hearing.
On the other hand, if a CID is formed where the majority of the business is transient and/or tourist, then the effect on members of the community could be minimal. This is described by Mr. Gough and mentioned in the post below. And again, that would be in line with the 3 current CID projects already on the books.
If the city wants to work with a developer for a CID then do it like the others.............where the money comes from transient and/or tourist dollrs.
Remember: Good starts with not sticking it to the members of the community.
Thursday, July 01, 2010
Is That CID Rearing Its Ugly Head Again?
Is there a movement afoot to revisit the CID (Community Improvement District) for the 10 Quivira Plaza shopping Center (Shawnee Mission Parkway & Quivira)?
The original plan, which fortunately went nowhere, would have placed an additional 1% sales tax on the stores only in that shopping center. That additional tax money would go to the developer/owner for upgrades to the shopping center.
Today, the state sales tax was increased by 1%, which means that folks in Shawnee will now pay 8.775% on all retail purchases, including food. If the CID plan goes into effect, then folks who shop at that shopping center will pay 9.775%. Outrageous, especially when the major retailer in that center is a grocery store. Doubly outrageous when that shopping center is in one of the more modest income neighborhoods of the city.
Currently, there are 3 CIDs in the State of Kansas. One is in Maple Hill, sits on I-70 and is a truck stop. Another one is in Hays, sits on I-70 and is for a motel and restaurant. The third one is in Junction City, sits on I-70 and is like a mini regional shopping center with major retailers (like Sears).
The examples above fall in line with this statement: "If the project relies upon local business and if the CID sales tax would be unpopular in the community, a CID could negatively impact the project's business. On the other hand, retail businesses that derive a large portion of business from tourism and other transient clientele may not experience the same negative consequences from an additional sales tax."
The above statement was written by Matthew S. Gough, an attorney, who specializes in real estate financing transactions to include economic development financial incentives. The entire article that he wrote was published in both the Feb 2010 issue of The Journal of the Kansas Bar Association and The May 2010 issue of the Kansas government Journal.
If a CID, with its corresponding sales tax increase was to be placed on that shopping center it would be outrageous. How any member of the city council could even entertain that thought is, IMHO, beyond comprehension.
The citizens who would be most affected live in Wards 1, 2 & 4. I urge all, who agree that this is wrong, to contact your elected city council members and stay on them until this matter is put to rest. Side note: Ironically, when the original public hearing was held on this, the two council members who were most in favor of it were the two from Ward 3.
The original plan, which fortunately went nowhere, would have placed an additional 1% sales tax on the stores only in that shopping center. That additional tax money would go to the developer/owner for upgrades to the shopping center.
Today, the state sales tax was increased by 1%, which means that folks in Shawnee will now pay 8.775% on all retail purchases, including food. If the CID plan goes into effect, then folks who shop at that shopping center will pay 9.775%. Outrageous, especially when the major retailer in that center is a grocery store. Doubly outrageous when that shopping center is in one of the more modest income neighborhoods of the city.
Currently, there are 3 CIDs in the State of Kansas. One is in Maple Hill, sits on I-70 and is a truck stop. Another one is in Hays, sits on I-70 and is for a motel and restaurant. The third one is in Junction City, sits on I-70 and is like a mini regional shopping center with major retailers (like Sears).
The examples above fall in line with this statement: "If the project relies upon local business and if the CID sales tax would be unpopular in the community, a CID could negatively impact the project's business. On the other hand, retail businesses that derive a large portion of business from tourism and other transient clientele may not experience the same negative consequences from an additional sales tax."
The above statement was written by Matthew S. Gough, an attorney, who specializes in real estate financing transactions to include economic development financial incentives. The entire article that he wrote was published in both the Feb 2010 issue of The Journal of the Kansas Bar Association and The May 2010 issue of the Kansas government Journal.
If a CID, with its corresponding sales tax increase was to be placed on that shopping center it would be outrageous. How any member of the city council could even entertain that thought is, IMHO, beyond comprehension.
The citizens who would be most affected live in Wards 1, 2 & 4. I urge all, who agree that this is wrong, to contact your elected city council members and stay on them until this matter is put to rest. Side note: Ironically, when the original public hearing was held on this, the two council members who were most in favor of it were the two from Ward 3.
Flag or Advertising Banner
Monday night County Commission Chairperson Annabeth Surbaugh and Shawnee Mayor Jeff Meyers exchanged flags.
Ms Surbaugh in her remarks when discussing Shawnee's history even mentioned its first name, Gum Springs.
Anyway, when the flags were unfurled I was a little surprised. Instead of the flag that is part of the display behind the mayor at council meetings and on the pole outside of city hall, this humongous branding banner is what was shown. You know, the one that says "Good Starts Here". I might be wrong, but I always thought the city's flag was the one with the seal on it (the one with the sun's rays, the wagon, the oxen, the wheat shaft etc).
Being modern is good, ignoring heritage is terrible.
A reminder, "good starts with remembering your roots"
Ms Surbaugh in her remarks when discussing Shawnee's history even mentioned its first name, Gum Springs.
Anyway, when the flags were unfurled I was a little surprised. Instead of the flag that is part of the display behind the mayor at council meetings and on the pole outside of city hall, this humongous branding banner is what was shown. You know, the one that says "Good Starts Here". I might be wrong, but I always thought the city's flag was the one with the seal on it (the one with the sun's rays, the wagon, the oxen, the wheat shaft etc).
Being modern is good, ignoring heritage is terrible.
A reminder, "good starts with remembering your roots"
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Litterbug
Last night the council passed a new ordinance with regards to litter.
Most of it made sense. Neal Sawyer brought up one valid point.............with a $500 maximum penalty there is no minimum penalty. The senior city prosecutor indicated that in some cases a person could get a $5 fine.
Sawyer thought the minimum fine should be a more substantial amount, like maybe $100, to get the point across. Methinks he is right.
Most of it made sense. Neal Sawyer brought up one valid point.............with a $500 maximum penalty there is no minimum penalty. The senior city prosecutor indicated that in some cases a person could get a $5 fine.
Sawyer thought the minimum fine should be a more substantial amount, like maybe $100, to get the point across. Methinks he is right.
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)
