This is a citizen blog. Visit http://eurekatownship-mn.us/ to sign up for the Township newsletter.

Sunday, September 21, 2014

HOLY HYDROCHLOROTHIAZIDE, BATMAN!!!!!





How's YOUR blood pressure doing?  Mine is cookin' away!  Let me tell you why:


For the Board meeting of September 8th, I had requested under the Citizen Input Policy to be placed on the agenda concerning "Ordinance issues."  Those of you who are longer-time readers might recall I have done this in the past. "Public comments," which occur separately on the agenda are limited in length to three minutes.  Not much time to make a point. (You might recall Chair Storlie's moving my requested agenda item to the three-minute public comment section of the agenda, thus effectively reducing the time I as a citizen had to make my argument.  It seemed to me at the time that perhaps he didn't really want to hear from me at all?!?  I strongly objected to his moving of my item.)     The Citizen Input Policy states "Citizens or groups wishing to address the Board are encouraged to complete Agenda Request Form and request that an item be placed on the agenda  for discussion
at a regular Township Board meeting. Although the policy addresses the time limit on "public comments" at the beginning of a meeting and "random" comments "during a meeting," a close read reveals that there is no time limit given for agenda items that are requested. Bear that in mind: in the normal course of things, people on the agenda are not cut off before they can even present their comments, much less can expect any "discussion" as mentioned in this Board-adopted policy.


Chair Kenny Miller "permitted" me to go through my first Ordinance issue comments without interruption.(Without any discussion at that time, either, I might add.) My comments were regarding the Transfer of Building Rights Ordinance procedureI had served on that Task Force, attending all the meetings at which very few Supervisors were ever present and wanted to follow up on a pertinent question that had come up at the Planning Commission meeting the week before.   

However, when I embarked upon my second area of comment which quoted Board and Commission comments from the June 10th Roundtable between the two bodies in regard to the VRWJPO
Water Ordinance, I was quite rudely interrupted.  I was just a few minutes in on my comments as a whole and barely a minute or so on the Water Ordinance item when I became aware of  "sounds of objection" coming from the vicinity of Commissioners Hansen and Cleminson at the side table, as well as Chair Miller cutting me off, saying I had gone beyond my "time limit."  Further, Miller then said emphatically in the direction of the two Commissioners, "She has 40 seconds!"   40 seconds, Mr. Chair, as much as that?




Okay, so this is a Board meeting and the Board Chair responds to two Commissioners who seem to think he should not let me, a concerned citizen, continue to quote the discussion of the Water Ordinance at an OPEN, PUBLIC MEETING of the two bodies, illustrating my concerns. I don't believe they were even recognized by the Chair before the sounds came from their direction. Is this the tail wagging the dog? How conversant is the Board with the adopted policies they are supposed to be following?

My intent in quoting from the Roundtable Meeting was to point out that Commissioners Hansen, Cleminson, and Novacek seemingly "forgot" the Board's directive from that meeting at their September 1 Commission meeting.  On June 10th, the Board had requested "information, fact-finding, individual opinions from the Commission" so that the Board could "responsibly" consider the input and "be educated" on the topic. But what the three Caballeros did was to move to pass the Ordinance on to the Board for adoption, plain and simple, no report.  Commissioner Jennings, supported by Commissioner Barfknecht, had moved to table the vote at least until the minutes from the Special Meeting with the water specialists were complete and approved. WELL, that was voted down 3-2.  Commissioner Novacek's motion was then approved 3-2. (Strangely, the VRWJPO Ordinance matter was not even on the Board agenda for their meeting on the 8th.)

Chair Miller indicated that he thought my comments (which he had scarcely heard the start of) were more appropriate "for a public hearing."  No, Mr. Miller, I would submit to you that that would be way too late if you, as Board Chair, joined by the other supervisors, are not even going to insist beforehand that the Commission provide what you asked for and which Hansen's motion stated they would do.



Is it really too much to ask that Eureka public officials do what they say they are going to do?  Why are some seemingly so uncomfortable at being reminded what they said at a public meeting?

Below are the comments that I had wished to present to the Board:


The second ordinance matter I wish to bring before the Board is that of the Vermillion River Watershed Ordinance.  I speak here as a former Supervisor and a contact person to the VRWJPO.  At the June 10th Roundtable meeting between the Board and the Commission, it was determined that the Planning Commission would review the Ordinance and report to the Board.  When it was raised that a certain Commissioner felt she would just be out-voted, no matter what she contributes, Chair Kenny Miller (starting at approximately 1:42:10) stated, "To respond to one member being out-voted or outweighed, I don't think that there's any vote or out-vote to happen here.  We're looking for information from the panel.  We, responsibly, should weigh one Commission member's fact-finding with what is good for the Township, not against each others' comments.  I want to get from you as a Commission...as a Board, we want to see your individual thoughts so we can weigh them when we make our decision...I think we need to review each member's position and their [sic] input for our own education.  We are going to depend on you to give us information, whether it is singly or as a board. [sic]  You should view all points of it, and you may disagree on whether we should or shouldn't do it, but I am asking you for supporting information, for the pros and cons of this...I would ask that we look at each of your positions and weigh those positions, the pros and the cons.  We want information in front of us."  Butch Hansen made a motion (seconded by Cleminson) that the Planning Commssion "take over the VRWJPO Ordinance review and come back with the information that the Board is seeking."  In the following discussion, Chair Miller again restated that "We are asking you to be an information-gathering [body]."

At the last Planning Commission meeting:

1. The minutes from the Special Meeting of August 18th with Zabel, Slavik, and Watson, were deemed incomplete and were not approved.  Some of the information that was missing from the minutes, for example, was Brian Watson's statements that Eureka has many more challenges than any other township in Dakota County.

2.  It was stated by Chair Hansen that it was "clear" to him that the guests that evening wanted the Township to take over the permitting. It was stated by the guests, more than once, that it does not make a difference to them who does the permitting.  It only matters that the standards are implemented and enforced.  This position of theirs was clear to me as an audience member.

3. It was stated and argued incorrectly by Chair Hansen that the Township review process does not take place side by side with the JPO's review, but, rather, that their review adds much more time.  At each meeting that I have been at, different residents have had their VRWJPO letter in hand.  I have not heard one of them complain about time matters.  AND, as it happens, I was the individual who spoke to the JPO after which they agreed that the Planning Commission could go forward with its review of an application concurrent with the JPO's review, as long as the Board did not approve anything until it had heard from the JPO.  This information and Travis Thiel's email confirming all this has been sent out by me thru the clerk on more than one occasion.

4. Commissioner Hansen even stated that the Board "didn't care" about the Township's taking on the Ordinance--only one Supervisor was in attendance at the meeting all the way thru, he said, and one came a half hour late.  Liaison Behrendt said he did care, but that the meeting was scheduled when he was out of town for a business meeting and he was not able to attend.

5.  Commissoner Novacek made a motion to send the Ordinance to the Board for it to approve it.  Carrie Jennings moved to table that motion at least until the minutes from the special meeting were completed and reviewed.  Her motion failed in a 3-2 vote.  Mr. Novacek's motion passed by a 3-2 vote.

My question is:
WHERE IS THE INFORMATION THAT THE BOARD ASKED BE PRESENTED TO THEM?



                    What's in YOUR medicine cabinet?





No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.