meeting of the people scheduled
April 18, 2008 at 5:33 pm | In barnstable, barnstable town council, capeCOG, centerville, hyannis, janet joakim, janet swain joakim, marstons mills, municpal politics |Tags: barnstable, town of barnstable, town council, janet joakim, charter, cog, capeCOG, gary lopez, charter commission, barnstable town council, janet swain joakim, greg milne, janetjoakim
The petitioned “meeting of the people” has been tentatively scheduled for the evening of Tuesday, May 6 at the Knight Auditorium at Barnstable High School.
The meeting is open to all residents of this town who are welcome to come and speak about the questions on the petition as well as ask questions or make comments on any issue that is within the purview of the town council.
Bruce Gilmore, a town meeting moderator, has been asked to act as facilitator of the meeting that will include councilor responses to questions asked via the petition, possible presentations by staff, and a question and answer session with the public.
This meeting was requested via a signed petition initiated by Gary Lopez and filed by Taryn Thoman. The questions, listed at the end of this post, were included in the petition and we have been asked to address them.
One of the questions asks councilors to explain why the town, using your tax money, will not pay for J. Gregory Milne’s personal attorney fees that were incurred when Milne filed legal action against the town clerk to compel her to swear him in to two concurrent elected offices. In preliminary proceedings a judge found against Milne’s request for an injunction regarding this decision.
He has continued to fight this, at cost to the town for it’s own legal fees (we had to hire outside counsel because of the conflicts that would result if we used our own staff attorneys.)
Should we use tax-payer’s money to pay Greg Milne’s personal legal fees as well?
We have been petitioned by Lopez et al to answer why we haven’t and don’t plan to pay for Greg Milne’s personal attorneys, hired to file legal action against the town.
Another issue addressed on the Lopez / Thoman petition is why certain councilors voted against the proposed ordinance set forth to ban docks and piers to protect shellfish relay areas.
The vote was immediatly reconsidered once we took the vote …. leading to what would eventually become a compromise.
While the petition was drawn and being circulated, I was meeting with two of the councilors who were at odds on this issue but whom I believed could find common ground. The end result was a sensible compromise. No one lost, and no one “won.”
I was told that some in the Lopez blogosphere apparently felt this compromise was somehow designed to undermine the petition or something to that effect, when the truth is, we were just doing our jobs and trying to hammer out legislation. It can get messy, it can get angry, but the debate is part of the process, and in the end we are on the way to working it out.
In the end, the final iteration of this ban was tied with a harbor management plan and it passed with the council’s approval.
The third question asked is why councilors didn’t support the split tax - one of our three tax classification questions.
This question has been discussed and explained, and discussed again. The petitioners are constantly citing figures and facts that don’t match the figures and facts given to those of us who take these votes. This is an ongoing issue that has been misrepresented since they attempted a recall over a year ago.
Please take some time to join us for this meeting. Despite the questions posed on the petition, the discussion is open to just about any subject, including what some people have suggested should be a discussion on the costs of lawsuits and such filed by the COG group.
8 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Leave a comment
-
Recent Comments
JSJ on political signs are personal… Christine on political signs are personal… Home-owners in Preci… on recall election JSJ on political signs are personal… JSJ on political signs are personal…
Blog at WordPress.com. | Theme: Pool by Borja Fernandez.
Entries and comments feeds.
I am sure e coggers will find something to complain about despite the fact that you are holding the meeting. They will be BS that they aren’t the ones in charge and taunt you on being “the most powerful woman in Barnstable.” Funny that you have never claiimed that you were. I will be at the meeting asking why these people can’t stop costing our town money with their conspiracy theory.
Comment by cc — April 19, 2008 #
I have had some emails with questions about this.
This meeting is NOT limited to the people who signed the petition. The meeting is open to all residents of Barnstable, and we welcome varing perspectives.
Comment by JSJ — April 19, 2008 #
I think That (TT) should stand up at the meeting and let herself be seen and heard. Get out from behind the computer for a change and speak. At that point, the people can come to their on conclusions. Which they will.
Comment by Anonymous — April 20, 2008 #
No, Lopez and his lieutenants will type the rhetoric for the ciizen soldiers to speak.
Comment by JSJ — April 21, 2008 #
Janet - are you sure anyone can speak on anything? Check the town charter, sweetie, you’re confused again! Taryn Thoman is definately being prepared to speak at “Meeting of the Voters”. Good luck to you, dear.
Comment by Anonymous — April 23, 2008 #
Anyone can speak to anything within the council perview - this is by no means limited to the petition.
-
Parts of the petition were found to be legally null in several areas and the council discussed whether to challenge its validity.
-
If this is truly Mary, then send me an email, I would be happy to discuss this with you. But leaving semi-anonymous messages via moderated comments doesn’t provide for a dialogue, especially given the nature of the comments you have been leaving.
-
Janet
Comment by JSJ — April 24, 2008 #
Mdm. President, I shall be there as a voice of moderation. I am pleased about the shell fish relay, not satisfied, but proud that our town could come to a successful compromise. I shall do all in my power to insure that there are no outspoken calls or vituperous slander and statements.
Call upon me if you need any help, thank you for taking on this thankless task,
Bob
Comment by Bob Lewsen — May 6, 2008 #
I think someone should ask Milne to pay for our/the town lawyer that taxpayers are now paying extra for since we couldn’t use town lawyers. Perhaps that could be stipulated as part of the decision should he lose his appeal. Maybe when he has to think about the cost of his actions he will reconsider this course.
I would hope he would want to share town government positions with as many people as are interested in serving, and not try to claim two positions for himself.
Comment by Jeanne Stevens — May 6, 2008 #