I apologize to the Derry NH Politic blog readers in that this post is a little later than the normal times I post. However here is a recap of the last town council meeting.
The meeting started with the congratulations of councilor Carney becoming a new father. We wish the Carneys well in the new chapter of their lives.
Public Hearing on Parking ban on Mt Pleasent St passed by a 5-2 vote.
I basically voted against because i wanted to have limited parking on a time schedule vs an all out ban of parking. The other vote against was councilor Fairbanks.
and then the next public hearings were the discussions on purchasing conservation land and development rights. The hearings got ugly at times, the chairman shut the meeting down for 5 minutes and the rest of the meeting was just plain ugly.
Just when we think that the East /West Derry dividing line is eliminated ( fire dist) now comes the new separatists who say that the Derry Conservation members only deal with East Derry and not with anything on the West side. ( how much do you want to bet these same people will not say a word about the Manning st issues next week)
Its all a show! Some people want to show division, want to cause dis-course and want to show anger. I don't know about you, I'm getting very tired of the shenanigans for the couple of years.
At the end of the meeting, it is a shame that when some members of the council noticed that Ms Ives was the last person to approach the podium to speak and a motion was made to extend the meeting another 10 minutes that these champions of the people prevented a member of the public from speaking. That's about as low as councilors I have ever seen. And if it were a member of their peanut gallery instead of Ms Ives and they got shut down and prevented from speaking you would of heard the world come to an end.
Shame shame on those council members-you know who you are!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
31 comments:
So all you guys accomplished was no parking on Mount Pleasant?
Brian,
I have some questions on the meeting extension vote. Was it the 2nd or 3rd extension, what was the vote total (4-3 which way?), and who voted against it.
thanks
Tom Seidell
Anonymous 5:31,
Yes thats it! The wheels of Town government have grinded down to almost a complete stop. Every thing has become a vendetta or attack on someone. Its getting ugly folks.
Tom,
It was the second extention. It was 10:10 and Margie Ives stood and approached the podium. Most from the crowd were gone or had already spoken. The motion to extend another 10 minutes was from Metts. Bev Ferrante had left becasue she was not feeling well. The No votes came from Fairbanks, Coyle, and Carney. When I complained that they were shutting off a member of the public- One councilor said she was tired. This is wrong! as a matter of fact in todays UL letters from Donna Thompson-she complains that Chair Bulkley shut down the mics and shut down councilor Fairbanks-yet she makes no mention of same councilor shutting down a memeber of the public. This is the hypocricy that is typical from some regulars.
If you guys are having a problem getting the towns' business in --- why was Rose, Thompson, etc. allowed to conduct their questioning of Dionne BEYOND THE 3 MINUTES ALLOWED IN THE RULES?
anonymous 7:19,
The 3 minute rule only applies in the public forum at the end of each meeting to let the public address an issue. During the public hearing on a particular issue, there are no time limits to speak on the agenda topic and members of the public may make comments ONLY on the topic at hand.
So as long as ONE MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC speaks to the issue, that ONE PERSON could essentially filibuster an entire Council Meeting?!
What if I chose to read into the record applicable RSA's to the conservation matter at hand? --- for the "real" purpose of filbustering.
The towns' work is not getting done --- change the rule.
anonymous 7:50,
I believe the public hearings are according to RSA law. any rule change would not come from the council. However you points are well taken. It is up to the chairman to make sure people are heard yet not have people filabustering. in other words we want input on issues that effect us all-as long as facts are stated and the issue is addressed.
Fairbanks says adamantly “I’m going to represent my district!”.
Open question to Councilor Fairbanks:
In the face of the engineering study that says opening Manning Street will have no impact on the traffic on Broadway, EXACTLY HOW DOES VOTING TO SPEND THE $80K TO PAVE IT BENEFIT THE PEOPLE OF DISTRICT 1?
ANonymous 9:32,
Councilor Fairbanks wants us to spend 80K for her friend Ann Evans. Will she admit that? I doubt it.( i bet she has not even read the report) Instead she will use the smoke screen of wanting me to recuse myself from the vote because I live around the corner.Maybe I should change my profession to be able to predict the future? Watch and see.
and more wasted time...what's with carney insisting upon a site walk. isn't he the liason to the conservation comm., so he's the one who should have brought his observations back to the council. then coyle doubling up the town council on reviewing the p&s....
are you guys going to do everything twice?
anonymous 10:45,
I have no idea why Carney said that. As the liason to the board he is charged with keeping councilors up to date on things this commitee is doing. To start asking for site walks and the such, if they really wanted to do that-they should of went when the C.C. did its intial walk. Not try to discredit these dedicated people in public.
Are you starting to see a pattern here? Nobody is any good, all volunteers a not worth a thing, we don't trust any of them. Its getting sickening.
Brian,
I agree that as long as one member of the public wants to speak during the public forum section, and they follow the rules, they should be allowed to.
I realize the meetings are tough enough for the Chair to control, but maybe the Council Rules need to be revised to ensure the public doesn't get cut off. I really don't think taking extra time to listen to listen to your constiuents is too much to ask.
I also have a question on conflict of interest and recusal. Is there a general policy (law, rule, etc.) that everyone should follow? For example, when talking about land issues, it would seem to me that direct abutters should always have to recuse themselves from any debate/deliberations/voting. It also seems to me that Planning and Zoning Board members must run into this on ocassion. I just think:
a) having one rule would make it more consistent and b) It would make it more easier for folks to defend themselves.
Tom Seidell
Another laughable sidebar at this circus is the attempt to gather steam on an ethics committee/ordinance.
How would that NOT turn into another discarded joke just like every other toothless committee? Plus, you'd HAVE TO start that with complete financial disclosures of ALL council members. What do you bet that Coyle really doesn't want to do that because his real estate development interests are a real problem in that regard.
the widening of cyrstal ave and birch strret will certainly help the overall economic development of the downtown,couple this with the additional tax revenue from the cvs and you really see progress in shifting the tax burden from the residential to the commercial.
...LAND AVISORY REPORT - DOA, PRIVATE ROADS - TRASH IT, CONSERVATION COMMITTEE - WE CAN DO EVERYTHING THEY DO BETTER...ETC., ETC...
anonymous 3:04,
Heres what i see. LOA did its job and identified what land opportunities the town should look at. DOA? Just becasue the town does not go out and spend $20Mil to buy everything all at once doesn't mean DOA. eg.. Karas property. Private roads issue trashed? No Private roads issues are a very complex issue not a black and white issue- It also could come with a huge price tag. One that an already over burden citizens are dealing with- Things take time and every situation is different and needs to work on their own merits.As far as the CC saying they can do better-As someone who spent 7 years on planning, I appreciate the knowledge and issues that these groups go through. Law letures and the such... Lets have a little faith in these groups. We can govern two ways- Delegate or Micro-manage. If we micro-manage do the decision makers have the very same knowledge. NO
Hats off to Mr. Dionne who did an outstanding job under very trying circumstances.
You cannot govern EFFCTIVELY if you're micro-managing. We're already seeing the results of those attempts. Nothing's getting done!
The council can either allow town officials i.e. administrator, dept. heads and the towns boards and commissions to do the jobs they were put there to do, or deal with constant gridlock and rehashing the same issues over and over again. Decision time!
Unfortunately, once again we're seeing a similarity between our Council and the well known phrase..."The opposite of progress is Congress".
To Anonymous 4:19pm
You mentioned town administrator. I caught the 9/4 council meeting and when it was time for our TA to give his report, his only remark was 'I've been gone on vacation for two weeks and just got back today'. I've got nothing to report'.....Talk about the wheels of progress. Was there nothing done in that period of time he was gone he could have reported on or was this town running on 'auto-pilot'? I was very disappointed at his lack of professionalism.When department heads are on vacation and have to report on projects, they step up to the plate and do so! Did anyone else notice this?
It's obvious that Mr. Carney has jumped off the fence - to the dark side. A site walk that was already done? Then if I remember right, it was his vote that caused the Mt. Pleasant parking issue to drag into 2 council meetings.
I'd much prefer a guy that shows how to cut through the red tape rather than rapping us up in it.
Obstructionism at it's best.
Anonymous 9:25,
I did notice the lack of a report from the town administrator, and found it unprofessional and somewhat discouraging. Larry Budreau, our human resources director was in charge while the TA was on vacation. Mr. Stenhouse was obviously working on the day of the meeting and should have met with Mr. Budreau to prepare a report for the council/public at the meeting.
The town is a business, and needs to start being run like one. Complete with accountability for everyone from top to bottom. I do not mean to imply with my comments on micro-managing that anyone should be given a free pass. There has to be accountability. But like any business, it should be based on objective performance reviews at regular intervals, and not on who is friends with who.
It would be nice for everyone involved in this business from the TA (CEO), to the council (board of directors), to the shareholders (taxpayers), to start taking personal responsibility and ask themselves, “what am I doing/have I done to move this business forward and towards better performance and profitability.” But it needs to be a group effort, and not this constant finger pointing, and personal attacks and counter attacks that we’re seeing now.
I think its time for another open forum heading Brian.
To Anonymous 1:56pm
Well, did we hit a nerve? It was an observation, and might I add noticed by others not just by myself. TA's, Town Councilors, and anyone sitting on a board or committee (I will even go as far to include Town Employees) set an example to/for the rest. I felt in this instance this observation was a justifiable one and one not to be so lightly dismissed by you.
Running it like corporation? Interesting idea.
I see that successful companies have Boards that limit their involvement in operations - they hire competent people, provide a strategic direction and the resources to execute that direction, then provide oversight and monitor results.
Does this sound like the way Coyle, Fairbanks and Carney want to run our Council?
Yes Anon 10:31 I agree with you on both counts. Surely by now Stenhouse must have his sea-legs under him now that he's returned rested from vacation aboard Rochester taxpayer paid for "Severance."
Indeed you did strike a nerve with anon 1:56. Probably one of Derry's versions of the good old boyos workin' an angle with good old Gary by coming to his defense.
Sorry, but he's yours now.
if the government has grinded down to a complete stop, then shame on them. when the public come to a mtg, wheter or not you like it, we get a chance to state what we want for however long we want. i am sure Ms. Ives has addressed all issues she feels pertinent since she is part of the CC. If she or other of that committee didn't share their opinions with the TC too bad for them. if she had something else to add being their as a person of the public she should have had her say. but come on now this how the gov't itself is keeping it from moving forward.
i believe that chairman bulkey should keep his comments on all this conspiracy garbage to himself, he is just playing this up and adding fuel to the fire.
it is getting tiresome to hear and listen to both side spew. enough is enough. isn't it the TC job to move things along and the publics job to question thier intentions.
this is the good ol US of A the last time i checked.
Annon 1:55
I'm not on any of the committees, but I sense I watch this stuff more than the average joe; I don't remember Buckly making any "comments on all this conspiracy garbage" that you state.
Please share...when did he say anything like that?
annon 1:55
perhaps he did not say it this past mtg but he HAS stated it in the very recent past. what i am trying to say is that it is the publics job to ??? the TC and their job to listen. Not feed into what they are saying or cutting them off because they dont like what is being said. As far as i am concerned these frequent fliers that attend these meetings all them time have committed their time just as much as the TC and other volunteers. I may not like them or their views but i have to give them props for what they do.
i am not on any committees either but i find myself watching frequently. if i had known what a circus this town was i would have moved elswhere.....like chester or londonderry....you know the towns with real town gov't(haha)
Our TA will be off once again...leaving this town in the hands of (what I understand) to be the HR person.... Now tell me what you think will be accomplished while he's gone 'again'! While I'm mentioning Mr. Budreau...how are the towns 7 union contracts progressing? Perhaps he should bring us up to date during a council meeting. Just a thought.
Post a Comment