THERE IS NO "BUT"...

It was appalling to me as a citizen to hear former Commissioner and current Supervisor Butch Hansen (your public official) say during the December Town Board meeting under "Citizen Business" that he is "in favor of free speech," but in the next breath tell the Board that this blog "has got to stop."

He also said at that public meeting while in his Supervisor role that the blog is full of "slander and lies."

Now, Mr. Hansen likes to say to other Supervisors in what I would characterize as an ominous and warning tone that they "had better be careful" what they say at public meetings. (He actually did that TWICE at the January 8th Board meeting. Listen to the disc.)


Where was his inner voice telling himself that when he stated that this blog is full of slander and lies, I wonder? It's simply not true. Saying something of that nature is perhaps not a good idea for any public official, even if it could be substantiated, which this cannot! So it appears others are to "be very careful" what they say, but he doesn't get it that he does not have free rein to smear someone himself.


Also during the December Board meeting "Citizen Business" item former Commissioner/former Supervisor Mark Ceminsky (your former public official) stated in referring to this blog, "I know it's free speech, but this has got to stop."

Outside of something like the oft-cited yelling "Fire" in a crowded theater, I don't believe there IS a BUT, Mr. Ceminsky! Why do you think this country has the right to Free Expression? Just to make sure you like what you hear? You don't have to like what you read here. I still have the right to say it and inform the public about what is happening at THEIR public meetings.

This is reminiscent of the time Ceminsky was on the Board and he objected to citizens obtaining copies of the recorded meeting discs even though they are entitled to under the Data Practices Law. When the attorney informed the Board they have no right to prevent this while the disc is still in existence (before minutes approval), the next Ceminsky suggestion was to charge citizens $5 a disc, with only one meeting copied per disc instead of the full month's meetings on one disc as was the existing practice.

However, as I represented to the Board at the time:
1) An entire month's meetings can easily fit on one disc.
2) It takes very little time for the clerk to make a copy of the discs.
3) The Township is not allowed to make money providing this public information to its citizens.

Eventually I did receive my disc requests, but not without a struggle. This whole discussion at that Board meeting did not seem very citizen-friendly to me. Why would this have been a problem since this was the established practice with earlier Boards when others were on them? More information is good, no? WHY try to stop this? (Under Ceminsky's "plan," which failed, if a month had two regular meetings, one special meeting, and a public hearing, a citizen would have to pay $20.00 to receive copies of the discs?! Again, why?)


Back to the blog, if you do not want reported what you say at a public meeting where there is NO presumption of privacy, then simply DON'T SAY IT! Better yet, how about saying something instead that is positive and beneficial to the Township? Put your energy into that.

I AM allowed to criticize and inform about what happens at public meetings. So, Reader, are you! I am proud to live in a country that guarantees that government cannot stop me from such expression. Goodness knows, Mr. Ceminsky has certainly not been shy about being very critical at many meetings of late, so why doesn't that apply to all?

Thankfully, the four Supervisors who make up the rest of the Town Board have a better understanding of citizens' rights!!!!!

What is of particular note to me is that these repeated attempts to stifle this voice have been met with explanations as to why this is not possible (read constitutional), yet these individuals still keep trying and trying. What happens to your right to freedom of expression if the other four Supervisors (or a majority of the Board at any time) do not understand this? Would you actually have to go to court to receive your freedoms? The non-absorption of this issue by Hansen and Ceminsky is very troublesome in my opinion.

At Times Meetings Can Be Long And Contentious

     The January 8, 2018, Town Board meeting was a very
long and at times contentious meeting with an unusual amount
of  unsubstantiated information, presented by a handful of citizens,
and a very disrespectful Supervisor, as relevant issues in the Township
were discussed. Supervisor Hansen threw out his occasional
"you'd better be careful what you say" when he preferred not
to LIKE certain factual comments made.
                                 
     During the Public Comment period, Alan Novacek stated that
"to remove Citizen Business, from the Town Board Agenda to save
money (due to lengthy meetings lasting from 7:00 until midnight or
later at times) implies that rules (are) being made to make it convenient
for the rulers at the expense of the ruled to
 not allow someone to come up and express a
concern unless on the agenda, is a slippery
way to do business. He does not believe there 
is a person in the Township who cares if the
Board is here until 3:00 in the
morning, as they are paid for this job. You are
supposed to worry about us, we are not supposed to worry about 
you.  This is a reality you have to live by!"  

What Kingdom is he living in????????   Supervisors
are paid $80 per evening to sit for many hours. The Township also
pays the Township attorney to attend. The rate paid the attorney
can vary depending on the length of the meeting. Later in the
meeting, Supervisor Hansen suggested they move on as He was
not willing to sit there until 3:00 or 11:00 o'clock. The Board does
allow for Public Comment at the beginning of each meeting and will 
also allow for citizen input during the meeting if the conversation is
pertinent to the issues being discussed at the Board's business meeting.

      Current information regarding the selection of a Township
Building Inspector will be discussed at a future Town Board
meeting and on the blog.

     Airlake Airport update:  Supervisor Hansen stated Mira had
forwarded information to Sherri Buss at TKDA (Township
engineering firm) and Sherri had not responded. He found it
necessary to call her. He also stated, "Say Goodbye to the 
Airport!" He commented that there was a missed window of
opportunity and the Board should step back and take a look at it.
He felt that there is nothing the Township can do to salvage an
agreement between the Township and Lakeville regarding
annexation of the airport property. Supervisor Hansen stated that
Lakeville would continue to annex portions of the property
until the entire airport would be the property of Lakeville.

     Supervisor Jennings clarified that Sherri Buss only received
Supervisor Hansen's application to be submitted to the MET
Council on January 2, which happened to be the date of the
Public Hearing in Lakeville on the annexation by ordinance.
Sherri had responded as soon as possible, Supervisor Jennings
pointed out. Sherri had engaged in a conversation with the MET
Council that day and had asked if such a Township application
would be accepted. She sent emails to the Board documenting
again what the Council would require. An email copy was in
every Supervisor's packet for review before the meeting.

     Supervisor Hansen agreed with Supervisor Jennings when
she reiterated what Sherri Buss had stated. Since it
is a long process, such a request should have been started
several years ago, Sherri said. It is not only a long process,
but very detailed and expensive and requires planning
and engineering studies addressing potential service connections.
Note to reader: This whole process was laid out before
the Township in March of the meeting with Patrick Boylan
and Kyle Colvin (see previous blog posts,)  This is nothing new!
Again, all the planning and money would be up-front with
NO assurance that the MET Council would even accept it.
Remember that the Council sees Eureka as Ag until 2040.
The MET Council does not plan on the possibility of sewer
service out this far until 2040 at the earliest. These points
have been made repeatedly.


     Orderly Annexation was discussed. By this process,
Eureka could agree to allow Lakeville to annex the entire
airport at one time with an arrangement that the Township
would receive some kind of (limited) compensation
in return. This happened with the Launch Park property in
2007. If such an agreement is not reached, MAC can just
repeat its request for annexation by ordinance, 120 acres
at a time. until all the airport is in Lakeville, and the Township
would not receive anything. Whether Lakeville and the MAC
are willing to enter into such an agreement is not known.

     Supervisor Jennings stated that she attended the meeting
in Lakeville as well and that the staged annexation of the
airport until totally within Lakeville was not discussed at
that proceeding. Lakeville and MAC (Metropolitan Airport
Commission) will finalize the intent at their January 26
meeting.

     As discussed with the attorney, an Orderly Annexation
would give the Township an opportunity to negotiate benefits
to the Township such as a possible paved road and tax benefits.

     It was agreed that the attorney will draft a letter of intent
regarding an Orderly Annexation which will be reviewed
by Supervisor Hansen and Chair Barfknecht. The letter
of intent will then be forwarded to MAC with a copy sent
to Lakeville.

STAY TUNED!!!            

Information taken from the CD recording of the meeting!
The history of the annexation issue regarding the 
Airlake Airport can be obtained from previous minutes
or blogs.




 

     

SOMETIMES THE DEVIL IS IN THE DETAILS

A Handful of Citizens Continue Their
Quest To Shut Down The Blog, "Engaging
Eureka in Governance."

During the December 11, 2017, Town

Board meeting, under Citizen Business,

Supervisor Hansen, Mark Ceminsky and

Terri Petter expressed their disdain for

the private citizen blog site, Engaging Eureka in Governance

(theeeg.blogspot.com). Mr. Ceminsky asked the Town Board

to take action to "shut down" the blog. This is one of several

attempts by Mr. Ceminsky to censor freedom of

speech; the right to speak without censorship or restraint by

the Government; a right to express ideas, and opinions

free of Government restrictions and interference.

Freedom of speech is protected by the First Amendment to 

the Constitution.

Supervisor Hansen stated "I believe in freedom of speech."
He felt what is being stated in the blog is "not right; been
going on too long. It needs to stop."
Are they content with taking away someone's constitutional
right simply because they do not like what is said?
Perhaps they should think a little more about what they
are saying at a public meeting, including how the blog
is characterized. Something stated might not make it
into the actual minutes, but it happened nonetheless. If
they do not want it reported to the public then they should
not state it during a public meeting where there is no
presumption of privacy. The blog reports what anyone in
attendance can see and hear for himself.

The Devil can be found in the details. The Town Board

and Planning Commission meetings can last for hours and

many times entail long and detailed discussions between

Board and Planning Commission members, the Township

Attorney and, when appropriate, input from citizens or other

public officials.The conversations are recorded and the

Township clerks transcribe the recordings into written minutes

which are then approved and published on the Township web

site. I believe it would be extremely time consuming and

very inefficient to transcribe every spoken word. The Blog

allows for details regarding the discussion of issues

and also allows for a diversity
of views.

I find it rather perplexing as to
why a Supervisor or citizens
would subject the Township
to a possible law suit. Past
Town Board Supervisor, Mr.
Ceminsky and Ms. Petter are
citizens in the Township who
utilize the First Amendment
to freely express their opinions
on Face Book and other social media venues regarding issues
in and outside the Township.

Eureka Citizens should be quite concerned by the efforts of past
and present elected officials (refer to past minutes) who try to
censor a citizen's right to express their opinions without
censorship restraint, legal penalty or fear of Government
reprisal. I challenge those who are in favor of shutting down the
blog to refer to the utilization of Twitter and other social media
venues by local, State and Federal Government officials and
journalists. Freedom of speech and the right to freedom of
expression applies to ideas of all kinds including those that may
be deeply offensive.

Engaging Eureka in Governance is updated frequently and
generates new content which keeps citizens, who cannot attend
meetings, informed of issues in the Township; offering clarification
and details. The blog relates disc-backed information and
the content also consists of personal thoughts, facts,
and an ongoing chronicle of information regarding local issues.
At times, the Blog reflects the unprofessional
behavior of elected officials and hopefully will hold our officials
to a higher standard.

Stay Tuned!   (Citizens can obtain CD
recordings of PC and TB meetings
for clarification, validation, facts and details.
 Submit a written request via form or email to the Township Clerk.
$5.00 per CD copy.)