|
| Author
|
Post |
 
|
|
Dave Starr
F L I N T O I D
|
|
Thu Dec 03, 2009 9:51 am |
|
|
twotap
F L I N T O I D
|
| Sounds like the Omama administration barring anyone from the whitehouse that disagrees with them. |
_________________
"If you like your current healthcare you can keep it, Period"!!
Barack Hussein Obama--- multiple times. |
|
|
Thu Dec 03, 2009 10:12 am |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
There are rules that need to be changed. Limits need to be set on time for speaking at public hearings so individuals don't get up and filibuster. There needs to be clear rules on giving someone extra time to speak. Right now it is a popularity issue. If council likes you or agrees with what you are saying you get more time. Too bad if you are saying something they oppose or they view you as too controversial to one of them. This is a violation of the first amendment.
Ananich refused to give Pam Jerald extra time after others received the extra time and had her removed when she protested. She had challenged him about her relayionship with his Lmited Liability Corporation Campaign Strategy and it's involvement in the mayoral race. Miraculously the tape that aired did not show the confrontation and the incident allegedly occurred during a "tape change". the tape ran 13 minutes short of the usual 3 hour airing.
There are a great number of court cases that allow citizens to address controversial and even embarassing issues to a council member or others in the administration. Any legitimate issue related to the operation of the city and ethical concerns can be addressed. Great care must be taken not to restrict first amendment rights. Police, Fire and others have an absolute right to speak out on issues of general public concerns, such as community safety issues. The administration is already threatening employess about discussing city hall with outsiders.
An even bigger problem is council using their meetings to attack individuals and the administration, in violation of the charter. They have conspired in the past to allow special public speakers, with unlimited time, to carry out their agenda. They have interfered in court cases and verbally attacked city employees . Their immunity should not give them this license.
|
|
|
|
Thu Dec 03, 2009 10:45 am |
|
|
Adam
F L I N T O I D
|
The council should chill out and be thankful it's not rich white people getting gunned down or they'd have more to worry about than time limits and b.s. crap like this.
I'm sure improving the meetings so they can get people like Mays and A.C. to shut up will make things like the killings go so much easier for the council to not deal with. |
_________________
Adam
-
Mysearchisover.com
-
FB
-
Jobs
|
|
|
Fri Dec 04, 2009 1:33 am |
|
|
Ryan Eashoo
F L I N T O I D
|
Dave I agree and disagree on this topic. Some people get up and talk for EVER and ruin it for everyone else.
But the public deserves a chance to talk.
quote:
Dave Starr schreef:
http://www.mlive.com/news/flint/index.ssf/2009/12/flint_city_council_committee_t.html
Too many people saying things they don't want to hear?
|
_________________
Flint Michigan Resident, Tax Payer, Flint Nutt - Local REALTOR - Activist. www.FlintTown.com |
|
|
Fri Dec 04, 2009 10:45 am |
|
|
Dave Starr
F L I N T O I D
|
| There IS a time limit, unless the discussion is about a proposed ordinance. The fact that some speakers may annoy those present is what the 1st amendment is about. Some people just don't grasp the concept that being polite, to the point, and brief is an effective way of getting a point across. |
_________________
I used to care, but I take a pill for that now.
Pushing buttons sure can be fun.
When a lion wants to go somewhere, he doesn’t worry about how many hyenas are in the way.
Paddle faster, I hear banjos. |
|
|
Fri Dec 04, 2009 2:09 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
There needs to be a time limit on public hearings too. Mays, Chris Delmorone and others have spoken in excess of 40 minutes, often repeating themselves, filibustering in a vain attempt to win their point, and not being germaine to the issue.
Council members have given certain individuals a special order where they can speak and they have been given unlimited time. Coleman once gave Mays such a time and he spent over 45 minutes attacking a perceived mutual opponent. I lack the patience to listen to these lengthy tirades and usually tune them out.
If you bashed Williamson, you might have gotten 3 to 6 minutes extra. Criticize one of them and bang, you are sitting down and may get thrown out. The First Amendment does not allow that type of behavior and I am constantly surprised no one has gone to the ACLU. |
|
|
|
Fri Dec 04, 2009 2:42 pm |
|
|
back again
F L I N T O I D
|
| i too have been trapped by the constant drone of certain speakers. web, i agree 100% |
_________________
even a small act of goodness may be a tiny raft of salvation across the treacherous gulf of sin, but one who drinks the wine of selfishness, and dances on the little boat of meaness, sinks in the ocean of ignorance.
P.Y. |
|
|
Fri Dec 04, 2009 4:16 pm |
|
|
1pissedoffguy
F L I N T O I D
|
| I don't like the idea of the "creative editing" , the purpose for recording the meetings is to offer at least a small measure for more transparency. |
|
|
|
Fri Dec 04, 2009 6:34 pm |
|
|
Adam
F L I N T O I D
|
| I do agree there may be a need for a 5 minute time limit for public hearings. |
|
|
|
Sat Dec 05, 2009 11:07 am |
|
|
Dave Starr
F L I N T O I D
|
I was at a council meeting that included a hearing on an ordinance - I can't remember which one. Since ordinance hearings have no time limit on comments, Alex Harris & Ted Jankowski each talked for over 30 minutes. It was obvious that those in attendance tuned them out after the first 3 minutes. Any support they may have had was probably lost duie to their long windedness.
5 minutes should be more than enough time to make a point. |
_________________
I used to care, but I take a pill for that now.
Pushing buttons sure can be fun.
When a lion wants to go somewhere, he doesn’t worry about how many hyenas are in the way.
Paddle faster, I hear banjos. |
|
|
Sat Dec 05, 2009 1:27 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
| Dave-what is really funny is when you see council nodding off on these long winded tirades. |
|
|
|
Sat Dec 05, 2009 2:18 pm |
|
|
back again
F L I N T O I D
|
| agree with dave. some of the same kats come time after time like it's all they have to do in life.....zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. |
_________________
even a small act of goodness may be a tiny raft of salvation across the treacherous gulf of sin, but one who drinks the wine of selfishness, and dances on the little boat of meaness, sinks in the ocean of ignorance.
P.Y. |
|
|
Sat Dec 05, 2009 4:55 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
| Does anyone know what happened with the proposed rule changes? |
|
|
|
Thu Dec 10, 2009 4:19 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
THIS IS WHY WE NEED TIME LIMITS!
Police escort speakers out of Flint City Council meeting for being 'out of order'
By Kristin Longley | Flint Journal
December 14, 2009, 8:14PM
FLINT, Michigan -- The Flint City Council meeting took a chaotic turn tonight after two speakers were ordered out of the meeting for being disorderly.
Police escorted Flint residents Samuel Sutton and Eric Mays out of the council chambers during a public hearing about a proposed zoning change.
Council President Delrico Loyd made the order after asking Mays and Sutton to either stay on topic or take their seats. According to council rules, the council president can order someone out of the meeting for not being germane to the topic of the public hearing.
The two men refused to sit down and two police officers escorted them out without incident while another two officers stood by. They were not in handcuffs.
"I am the chair of this meeting and as chair I have the right to rule you in or out of order," Loyd said. "I kindly ask you to take your seat while I make my rule of order."
The conflict began during Mays' comments at the public hearing. He spoke for about 45 minutes.
Councilman Joshua Freeman said Mays was off-topic and Loyd, the council president, asked Mays several times to stay on topic. Mays disagreed and continued to speak.
Loyd ordered Mays to take his seat. Minutes later, Sutton came to the podium to protest the interruption to Mays' comments.
Sutton refused to leave the podium and council members requested a recess to discuss the matter.
After the recess, Sutton again refused to leave the podium and Loyd ordered them out of the meeting.
Both men disagreed with the order, saying their comments were germane to the public hearing.
"They're trying to change the rules," Mays told an officer. "This could happen to anybody.
"This is the public's time."
After the men left, the public hearing resumed. The conflict lasted about 15 minutes.
Reply to this comment | Post a new comment |
|
|
|
Tue Dec 15, 2009 8:00 am |
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
FlintTalk.com Forum Index
> Political Talk
