meeting of the people scheduled for may 6, at 6pm

April 23, 2008 at 5:11 pm | In barnstable, barnstable town council, janet joakim, janet swain joakim, municpal politics, town charter, town council, town of barnstable |
Tags: , , , , , ,

The “meeting of the people” is now scheduled for May 6, at 6pm at the Knight Auditorium in Barnstable High School.

The meeting will be facilitated by Bruce Gilmore, a town meeting moderator.

The meeting was originally brought to the council via a petition signed by 300 people per the Town Charter:
Section 8-9 Open Meeting of the Voters The town council may call meetings of the voters of the town. Upon the request in writing of three hundred voters setting forth the purpose (the specific purposes) thereof, the town council shall call a meeting of the voters. The president of the town council or other designee of the town council, shall preside and regulate the proceedings of such meetings. The president of the council shall cause the attendance of town officials and employees necessary to respond to the issues and concerns raised by petitioners

The petition brought to the council included instructions outside the pararmetors of the charter and thus was declared null per the town attorney as detailed by this story: http://barnstablebeat.blogspot.com/2008/03/ruth-weils-decision-on-open-meeting.html

The council, however, held an open discussion and agreed to hold this meeting within the parameters of the charter.  Anyone who wishes to come and speak to the town council about any issues within the purview of the council may do so.

Councilors will be given the opportunity to address the questions listed on the petition, including — why the town won’t pay for Greg Milne’s personal attorney fees accumulated when he filed a law suit against the town. 

 

7 Comments »

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

  1. “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 signed by “mary” — April 23, 2008″

    _
    _

    Mary?

    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 #

  2. The brief exchange which appears above shows the potential problems which attend this upcoming meeting. All responsible, civic-minded voters need to attend this meeting and insure it is positive and productive. Do not let it become a showplace for certain individuals’ obsessive hatreds and personal issues,

    Comment by Anonymous — April 24, 2008 #

  3. Its time for us to take our town back from these people. Our town leaders and our town staff should not have to put up with this cr**! Our tax money isn’t there to settle pointless lawsuits and deal with constant conspiracies.

    We will be there.

    Comment by Anonymous — April 24, 2008 #

  4. Aren’t “Mary” and TT one and the same? I think they were seperated at birth. The coggers will insure that something starts so they can cry “foul” after it is all said and done.
    The boy’s in blue are well aware and I’m sure they will be on hand. I hope TT gets up to speak. That will be a real laugh! I wonder who will be the author for what she says?

    Comment by Anonymous — April 24, 2008 #

  5. Janet, this was on Taryn Thoman’s blog:

    Thursday, April 24, 2008

    “IT’S ABOUT THE V O T E R S , STUPID!!!
    After complaining, consulting and conspiring for ten weeks, Janet Joakim finally got enough muscle behind her to schedule the Open Meeting of the Voters, which she is obliged to do under the current town charter. While Ruth Weil wrote an opinion that the petition for the meeting was not perfect, Joakim was strongly advised by those far wiser than her to ultimiately schedule the meeting. Failure to grant the meeting would have demonstrated one of the many fatally flawed aspects of Joakim’s leadership skills. Clearly threatened by actually having to answer questions from the voting public, Joakim retained Attorney Bruce Gilmore, a defendant in a pending lawsuit against the town. On her hate blog, Janet Joakim takes issue with the town paying attorney fees for Greg Milne in his fight to serve as the elected representative of the people on the charter commission . The irony here is that the town is paying legal fees to represent Bruce Gilmore, who was hired to keep the airport commission from going afoul of the law. Of all the lawyers in town, why did she pick the one who is in such deep dung for racketeering in a U.S. District court? The The Open Meeting of the Voters is scheduled to take place May 6, 2008 at the Knight Auditorium in Barnstable High School. It is not a “meeting of the people”, is not a town council meeting, and is not a general public comment session. The fact that Joakim feels she needs to hide behind so many lawyers just to speak to the public about decisions she claims were rightful and necessary says a lot. Dontcha think?

    Posted by barnstablebeatblog at 6:06 AM
    Labels: Janet Joakim, Open Meeting of the Voters, Town of Barnstable
    1 comments:
    delmonico said…
    For sure. Looks like Joakim is writing her own town charter as she slithers along. I heard John Julius is not even going to be at that meeting. Appointing Gilmore was a dumb move. Makes them all look guilty as hell!

    April 24, 2008 10:27 AM

    ______________________________

    This is the woman who was getting people to sign the petitions, right?
    This should be interesting. How much will it cost the town to have this meeting?
    Will you be paying town employees?
    How much more money will these people waste?

    Comment by Anonymous — April 25, 2008 #

  6. The costs of the meeting include the cost involved in school/town staff setting it up, staff available to answer questions, and a police presence, legal ads to post the meeting, etc…

    Comment by JSJ — April 25, 2008 #

  7. Janet - your spin is all over the place on this! You’ve got a song and dance out of your key and out of step with voters. Who says you are not a hate blog. You are costing the residents and voters an incredible amount of cash in potential/ impending litigation. Maybe we would save money if you would simply step down. I’m sure you won’t print this. You only post comments favorable to you. Hate and all. You do not have us fooled!

    Comment by patti doyle — April 25, 2008 #

Leave a comment

XHTML: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Blog at WordPress.com. | Theme: Pool by Borja Fernandez.
Entries and comments feeds.