Howard, I think one more bullet with " all of the above" or perhaps" it's more fun to wait and see what the council comes up with and then piss and moan about what a lousy job they are doing" would probably get the most votes. That being said, I think the results so far speak volumes.
Dennis, I think people tend to lump their local city council representatives in with "all politicians." People feel powerless in regard to Washington, especially, and also Albany.
Look at how many times we've seen comments from people about how local city council member are lining their own pockets, in it only for the ego and the perks, that they only look out for their own interests, that they don't care about "the working people."
All this even though local elected officials are for all practical purposes volunteers -- putting far more into the job financially than they get out of it. They very rarely have political ambitions beyond the council. They are our fellow business owners, retired police and teachers, our neighbors and friends and relatives and we all have easy, direct access to them any time we want.
I really think it's disgust with what goes on in Washington mostly that makes people feel the system is beyond their touch.
Though, I'm actually surprised and disappointed that there are so many people who feel their voices can't be heard, that they can't make a difference.
Lost and American Idol??? Other than shopping, motives for leaving the house have been branded unhealthy, unsafe or immoral. ...Just stay at home with the TV, junk food and a beverage. Ignore the distractions and entanglements- survive another downtime and go back to work the next day. La La Land, North America. Home of the sluggish.
C.M,
It isn't a matter of not getting out. There comes a time when one has to ask what is the point of making an effort if it is a 'done deal".
We have been told that we should trust our council to make the decisions that are right for the city. Isn't that why they are in office?
That message is loud and clear. Stay out of their way.
Bea historically decisions by council have ruined my hometown, and most of these decisions centered around obtaining federal funding from some ill conceived government sponsored project (ie. the mall).
You can not stay home and then say it's there fault or they don't listen. They can say you just don't care, or they can say you like what they are doing.
I can vouch for Bea's activist credentials. I'll also tell you that she's one of the busiest people I know. She is constantly working on community issues, helping out where she lives and providing her time and effort to many a non-profit organization. She also seems to have to spend an inordinate amount of time defending herself against folks on this site who can't seem to stand the fact that she has a differing opinion.
Chris,
I know she is very, very, active. And always has been. But that's not the point.
When somebody complains, OK.
But to say it is no use going to a Council meeting and stating your case, you are part of the problem. Too many people think that way.
If you had won your election, which I wish you had, would you support nobody attending your meetings because you would not listen. No, you would have encouraged them to come and speak.
I would have encouraged it but I wouldn't have held it against them if they chose not to come.
I'll take this back to a comment that Charlie made a few weeks ago. He said that the voters had spoken on election day and that we should let City Council do what they're going to do. (not verbatim, but close enough)
When a former elected official says a thing like that I can understand why people get to wondering whether or not their opinions really matter.
Posted by Chris Charvella on February 10, 2010 - 4:52pm
I would have encouraged it but I wouldn't have held it against them if they chose not to come.
I'll take this back to a comment that Charlie made a few weeks ago. He said that the voters had spoken on election day and that we should let City Council do what they're going to do. (not verbatim, but close enough)
When a former elected official says a thing like that I can understand why people get to wondering whether or not their opinions really matter.
Chris,
Thanks.
That was the comment I was referring to as well, and others. In essence, you elected them, trust them.
Sorry, I don't have the exacts words used.
No one from the current council has come on this site to say anything to the contrary.
You know me well enough to know that I could stand in front of that body and voice an opinion, but after hours of debate on this site, I realized it would really do little good.
Bea and Chris, nice job completely mischaracterizing my words. What I said was related to an entirely different subject.
Howard is completely right. People distrust government and lump local leaders right into the same pile. Read what Howard said again, he hit it right on the head.
There is no layer of government more responsive to the desires of the public than our Council. People don’t go and speak at Council meetings because; it’s embarrassing and takes a lot of courage to speak publicly. That is not the case one on one. People stop Council people in the grocery store and even kid’s soccer games. Council people are called at home constantly, that is what Marianne Clattenburg is talking about. Your opinions matter to Council, just call them up and tell them what you think.
Don’t think for one second that our Council people are out of touch or are hard to find, that’s just silly. We are all lucky to have the good people who serve on Council; they all care very deeply about our community. Maybe you should give them the benefit of the doubt.
Charlie,
So I'm not "mischaracterizing" your words (and Howard, I'm not beating up on Charlie), perhaps you can explain what you said and the subject to which your comment was directed.
If something wasn’t clear to you in a past thread, you should have asked for clarification at that time. This thread is about whether Council people care about what the public thinks. I have expressed my feelings on the matter. It seems you have decided to go off on a tangent.
'In the end you have to believe the people who are in office right now won in a landslide for a reason.'
Seems pretty clear to me. It's fine to feel that way Charlie and I don't completely disagree with that sentiment. I just think that hearing those words spoken aloud or seeing them in print may make people who are gathering the courage to speak at a meeting or write a letter to the editor think twice about putting in the effort.
People like you and I or John and Bea aren't the norm, you know that better than anyone. You put a lot on the line, especially in a small town, when you make public statements of any kind. It takes a certain amount of guts and possibly a manically driven ego to poke your head out into the public domain and let other people play whack-a-mole with your face and I think the average citizen just isn't up for it. Any statement made by elected officials (past or present) that makes the prospect seem even more hopeless or frightening will send those people right back where they came from and I think that's too bad. A silent public is incapable of keeping their representatives honest, accountable and grounded in reality.
I don't see how the statement from Charlie, "'In the end you have to believe the people who are in office right now won in a landslide for a reason.'"
In anyway equates to this from Bea: "We have been told that we should trust our council to make the decisions that are right for the city. Isn't that why they are in office?."
Charlie's statement is a statement of fact: The incumbants who won last November wom by a landslide. That's a fact. Obviously, that's for a reason. The most probable reason is that the voters were pretty satisfied with the incumbents.
I fail to see how that equals by any stretch of the imagination Charlie saying people shouldn't get involved, that people should just "trust" the council and not get involved, or in anyway being something that would even in the most remote possibility discourage participation.
I just don't see how there is any substance to back a claim that Charlie or anybody else has said people shouldn't participate, or that participation has been discouraged.
I'm not a particular fan of Straw Man kinds of arguments -- saying that somebody said something that is obviously indefensible so that it can easily be torn apart.
I think that what goes on in Washington does disgust the people here but I don't think that it's why we've lost faith in our local council. LOL! Let's not act like the council gets a bad rap for the mistakes of Washington, here. I've sat in on a few city council meetings and my perception was this: If the city council members spent more time dealing with issues at hand, rather than bicker amongst themselves, then maybe they could actually HEAR what their constituents are saying. When I moved to Batavia in February of 1995, the "Esprit De Corps" was more favorable, Citizens to Council. I know that I felt as though I were sitting in a room with a bunch of adolescents disguised as grown ups who were secretly harboring resentment toward each other for things they'd done to each other in high school. It was a joke! I was quite emabarrassed for them. Why would anyone want to witness such nonsense; knowing that nothing good could come of it? Sadly, I've watched the city of Batavia slowly turn into a less than shining version of what it used to be with council people coming in wanting to turn it into Nazi, Germany and taxing it all the while. "Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right." ~H.L. Mencken, 1956---Yep! That about covers it.
I understand the perception that the public’s opinion doesn’t matter in government. I would agree above the county level that perception is probably accurate.
Local government or at least ours is very different. We live in a very small town and if you have an opinion you want to share, you should call your Council person or stop them on the street and talk to them. You do not have to show up to a Council meeting with a prepared speech or use any other method that would open you up to public ridicule. I am confident that every single member of Council would listen to you and your words would have an impact.
If you are wondering why Council people will not participate in online discussions, then read Deb’s comments above.
Charlie,
Expressing an opinion to a local official may provide a certain amount of satisfaction to the person who feels strongly about an issue, but how often does that opinion make a difference?
That's the rub.
When,in your tenure on council, did public opinion sway a decision already considered a done deal?
A year ago, this spring, you and I got into it about this very matter. I'll have to take the time to find the posts, but I recall at the time that our discussion was sparked by the fact that people were speaking out against an issue (most likely the ambulance issue).
It may take a few days because I'm going to be involved in a few things that will take my time, but I'll look them up.
I think those on council forget why they got into the game in the first place. For many, I'm sure, it was because they felt they could make a positive difference and make our city a better place than it was before they took their seat. I understand that hard decisions have to be made. I also understand that not all decisions are perfect.
The perception, real of imagined, that the council won't reconsider a decision is the reason that many have just thrown up their hands in frustration.
Saying that people's comments/complaints/questions do not affect representatives is more of an assumption than a fact. Look at a few things in this state (I know more about that than Genesee County or Batavia). The tax on soda/pop was repealed because people spoke out. "Tea Parties" may well change the face of government in the coming elections, and those were started by citizens who were unhappy with their representatives.
The whole point of representative governments, is that hopefully you vote for the candidate who has passions and opinions similar to your's. Then that candidate votes and makes choices based on their opinions that you voted for. So, essentially, you should trust your local officials, but you still have the ability to speak out against decisions you don't like. Our government does not guarantee that the citizen needs to be listened to after elections are over. Actually some of our forefathers believed most citizens were not able to make intelligent decisions past the voting booth (and is one reason we have free public education).
Rantings and ravings such as what is demonstrated in this thread, using straw man arguments and misrepresenting what has been said in the past is getting old. I don't care how "involved" one is in the community, if you don't use your voice or understand how the government works, then why should anyone listen or respond, especially your representative(s)?
Bea, everything I did was influenced by or an idea that came directly from the public. You are unaware of how much public input there is in a small town like ours. A council person cannot go to McDonalds to buy a hamburger without hearing from the public.
It appears your only goal is to move every conversation back to me for some reason. You have an axe to grind and that is VERY apparent.
To again digress about the ambulance, there was overwhelming public pressure to get out of the business. Public pressure is why the city is no longer in the ambulance business. According to Council’s last actions, it seems that the pressure to stay out of the ambulance business is still there.
The city isn’t ruled by a group of unknown people in backrooms, no matter how much the political insiders in this town would like to believe. Council people are very reactive to public pressure; there is no way to avoid it.
I suppose I should clarify a bit here. I'm positive that most of the folks serving on City Council listen very intently when a constituent speaks to them. What I was addressing above was why many of them choose not to communicate publicly.
It doesn't matter what Charlie meant by his statement, only how it was perceived. Couple that with the fact that, at least for the last few years, Council has had a tendency to dig in its heels and not give an inch no matter what the public outcry and you end up with the poll results above.
In our town people rarely come to speak at Council meetings. People prefer one on one conversations with their Council people. So, just because you don’t see very many people with prepared speeches at Council meetings, does not mean Council people are not getting public feedback. That perception could not be further from the truth.
People, like water, choose the course of least resistance. The average person will complain to his/her pet goldfish before writing a letter to a congressman. I agree with Charlie, local government sees more effective rapport between public and city hall. Local issues are more personal, and local government tends to be more familiar.
I covered local government for the Daily, and I've vountairly attended public meetings when so inclined. Unless an issue negatively impacts the pocketbooks of vast numbers of people, the public stays away from board meetings and hearings. I've seen politicians eager for public input, arrogantly opposed it and bickering- the likes of two-year-olds. ...None of which governs attendance. Attendance is determined by comfort levels. The discomfort of the issue has to exceed the discomfort of doing something about it.
One of the ideals that I grew up with was that cable television, like C-SPAN, would broadcast local government into our living rooms via public access channels. I glimpsed at the offerings on BATV 10 & 17. ...Alot to interest Batavians and Sunday morning shut-ins. I won't cash-in my DirecTV subscription. I imagine a Batavia Town Board meeting will never prevail over a Rangers' game.
Posted by Chris Charvella on February 11, 2010 - 9:14am
It doesn't matter what Charlie meant by his statement, only how it was perceived. Couple that with the fact that, at least for the last few years, Council has had a tendency to dig in its heels and not give an inch no matter what the public outcry and you end up with the poll results above.
That is what I think too, Chris.
No axe to grind with Charlie, he is no longer a player.
When council digs in their heels, no amount of public opinion is going to sway a vote.
Mr. Roach: Batavia's Code Enforcement is the example. There is a plethora of "things that make you go hmmmm" where the council is concerned. We could take a whole day talking about it. Not everyone has each other's standards of living. Not everyone is as neat and tidy as his neighbor. As I've stated in a previous post, The City Council is not a Homeowner's Association.
I understand that some laws are put in place to protect us. And, that there needs to be some sense of some order. However, I AM a Libertarian. When codes infringe on the basic liberties of its citizens I have a problem with that. At what point does it end? My Mother used to say that "The road to hell is paved with good intentions." The older I get the more true I find that statement to be.
Posted by Charlie Mallow on February 11, 2010 - 9:17am
Bea, everything I did was influenced by or an idea that came directly from the public. ....
To again digress about the ambulance, there was overwhelming public pressure to get out of the business. Public pressure is why the city is no longer in the ambulance business. According to Council’s last actions, it seems that the pressure to stay out of the ambulance business is still there.
So this was in instance where the council didn't want to get rid of the ambulance service but did so because the public demanded it?
Regarding the "last action". Is this the denial of additional training for the firefighters for ALS? I don't recall a public outcry demanding that the council not consider this if or when Hyde presented it to the council.
So, the effort to keep up neighborhoods and property are what you equate to "Nazi Germany"?
In the past people complained code enforcement was nonexistent and demanded something be done. Now the complaint is the codes are being enforced.
If you're a landlord and get cited, I understand why you are upset. But, if you're a landlord who does not get cited, I would guess you would be happy to see the codes you follow now being upheld.
And again,if Councilman Ferrando had not stalled for 4 years in setting out the new code, maybe this would not have happened.
I think both sides of this argument have logical and well-based opinions on the matter. Council has been vocal about their intention to hold landlords accountable for code violations, but the landlord in question has given very reasonable explanations for his previous code violations.
I would hope that there is some path in place for the landlord to take that doesn't involve suing the city. If there was an appeal board where he could file a grievance, address the reasons for the code violations and maybe get some relief on the matter, everyone could leave this situation happy.
Mr. Mallow: You stated: "If you are wondering why Council people will not participate in online discussions, then read Deb’s comments above."
While I am a registered Democrat(soley to able able to vote in the primary election) I am truly an Independent. I am also a Libertarian. When I first moved here, I knew no one. I owned no property had no business. I went to council meetings and I had no agenda. Don't fault me for having a completely objective opinion about what I've witnessed in City Council's behavior. They are put in place for the people, not the other way around. Are you saying that they do not partcipate in online discussions because they don't want to know how people really feel? Because I may say some things that might upset them then they don't want to know about it? I bet if everyone on here was singing their praises they'd be on. I am able to see both sides of a situation, sometimes to my detriment. There are landlords out there who I believe shouldn't own property. But, at the end of the day it's about what is right, wrong, fair, or unfair. That, I understand also, sometimes to my detriment. Infringing on someone's liberties is wrong. Deciding who can and can't purchase property is wrong. And, I don't care how City Council tries to spin it.
As an aside, I don't think the landlord could win a lawsuit here, but if he were to find some grounds for litigation it would certainly cost the city a whole lot more than the thousand or so dollars they left on the table.
Mr. Roach: Keeping up neighborhoods and property does seem harmless enough. Afterall, it IS for the greater good, right? Please! Little by little it gets stricter and stricter and costs the taxpayers more and more money for the upkeep. And, when you improve your property the assessment goes up which indirectly, causes your taxes to go up. Which, by the way, seems like the real agenda here. And, in the process, people lose their right to live the way they want to live. THAT is my point here! If I want to let my grass grow higher than 2 inches before I cut it then I should be allowd to. I personally don't like my grass long but, hey, who am I to say that you can't let yours grow? The Neighborhood Improvement Committee had a member actually suggest that "quality of life" tickets be written. If we keep sitting in this pot of water while it gets hotter and hotter at some point City Council might actually think it's a good idea to enforce something like that. We'll be boiled and not even feel it. We don't live in a dictatorship...yet. As I said before, when do you put on the brakes? I think I'm pretty much done discussing this now.
Deborah,
I understand your point. There is a proposal to give you a break, or at least not increase, on your taxes if you improve the property. I have no idea how long the break would be for, but I like the idea.
With grass, garbage, unlicensed cars, etc., there has to be some standard. And whatever that standard is, somebody is going to cry its to strict, or not strict enough. The best Council can hope for is that the majority approve.
The nice thing is that Council members all have to obey the same codes and pay the same taxes.
Howard, I think one more
Howard, I think one more bullet with " all of the above" or perhaps" it's more fun to wait and see what the council comes up with and then piss and moan about what a lousy job they are doing" would probably get the most votes. That being said, I think the results so far speak volumes.
Posted by Rich Martin on
Posted by Rich Martin on February 10, 2010 - 8:00am
That being said, I think the results so far speak volumes.
As well it should. We've been taught well.
How sad people are so cynical
How sad people are so cynical about local government. What do you think is driving the cynicism?
Dennis, I think people tend
Dennis, I think people tend to lump their local city council representatives in with "all politicians." People feel powerless in regard to Washington, especially, and also Albany.
Look at how many times we've seen comments from people about how local city council member are lining their own pockets, in it only for the ego and the perks, that they only look out for their own interests, that they don't care about "the working people."
All this even though local elected officials are for all practical purposes volunteers -- putting far more into the job financially than they get out of it. They very rarely have political ambitions beyond the council. They are our fellow business owners, retired police and teachers, our neighbors and friends and relatives and we all have easy, direct access to them any time we want.
I really think it's disgust with what goes on in Washington mostly that makes people feel the system is beyond their touch.
Though, I'm actually surprised and disappointed that there are so many people who feel their voices can't be heard, that they can't make a difference.
I was the only one to show
I was the only one to show up, no wonder council feels they did the right thing.
Lost and American Idol???
Lost and American Idol??? Other than shopping, motives for leaving the house have been branded unhealthy, unsafe or immoral. ...Just stay at home with the TV, junk food and a beverage. Ignore the distractions and entanglements- survive another downtime and go back to work the next day. La La Land, North America. Home of the sluggish.
C.M, It isn't a matter of not
C.M,
It isn't a matter of not getting out. There comes a time when one has to ask what is the point of making an effort if it is a 'done deal".
We have been told that we should trust our council to make the decisions that are right for the city. Isn't that why they are in office?
That message is loud and clear. Stay out of their way.
Bea historically decisions by
Bea historically decisions by council have ruined my hometown, and most of these decisions centered around obtaining federal funding from some ill conceived government sponsored project (ie. the mall).
Bea, So you just rolled over
Bea,
So you just rolled over and stayed home.
You can not stay home and then say it's there fault or they don't listen. They can say you just don't care, or they can say you like what they are doing.
You're not there, so how do they know?
And because "they" said trust them, you did.
John wrote, "And because
John wrote, "And because 'they' said trust them, you did."
But of course, nobody ever said that.
I can vouch for Bea's
I can vouch for Bea's activist credentials. I'll also tell you that she's one of the busiest people I know. She is constantly working on community issues, helping out where she lives and providing her time and effort to many a non-profit organization. She also seems to have to spend an inordinate amount of time defending herself against folks on this site who can't seem to stand the fact that she has a differing opinion.
Chris, I know she is very,
Chris,
I know she is very, very, active. And always has been. But that's not the point.
When somebody complains, OK.
But to say it is no use going to a Council meeting and stating your case, you are part of the problem. Too many people think that way.
If you had won your election, which I wish you had, would you support nobody attending your meetings because you would not listen. No, you would have encouraged them to come and speak.
I would have encouraged it
I would have encouraged it but I wouldn't have held it against them if they chose not to come.
I'll take this back to a comment that Charlie made a few weeks ago. He said that the voters had spoken on election day and that we should let City Council do what they're going to do. (not verbatim, but close enough)
When a former elected official says a thing like that I can understand why people get to wondering whether or not their opinions really matter.
What is driving cynicism at
What is driving cynicism at ALL levels of government?
Government.
Posted by Chris Charvella on
Posted by Chris Charvella on February 10, 2010 - 4:52pm
I would have encouraged it but I wouldn't have held it against them if they chose not to come.
I'll take this back to a comment that Charlie made a few weeks ago. He said that the voters had spoken on election day and that we should let City Council do what they're going to do. (not verbatim, but close enough)
When a former elected official says a thing like that I can understand why people get to wondering whether or not their opinions really matter.
Chris,
Thanks.
That was the comment I was referring to as well, and others. In essence, you elected them, trust them.
Sorry, I don't have the exacts words used.
No one from the current council has come on this site to say anything to the contrary.
You know me well enough to know that I could stand in front of that body and voice an opinion, but after hours of debate on this site, I realized it would really do little good.
Bea and Chris, nice job
Bea and Chris, nice job completely mischaracterizing my words. What I said was related to an entirely different subject.
Howard is completely right. People distrust government and lump local leaders right into the same pile. Read what Howard said again, he hit it right on the head.
There is no layer of government more responsive to the desires of the public than our Council. People don’t go and speak at Council meetings because; it’s embarrassing and takes a lot of courage to speak publicly. That is not the case one on one. People stop Council people in the grocery store and even kid’s soccer games. Council people are called at home constantly, that is what Marianne Clattenburg is talking about. Your opinions matter to Council, just call them up and tell them what you think.
Don’t think for one second that our Council people are out of touch or are hard to find, that’s just silly. We are all lucky to have the good people who serve on Council; they all care very deeply about our community. Maybe you should give them the benefit of the doubt.
Charlie, So I'm not
Charlie,
So I'm not "mischaracterizing" your words (and Howard, I'm not beating up on Charlie), perhaps you can explain what you said and the subject to which your comment was directed.
If something wasn’t clear to
If something wasn’t clear to you in a past thread, you should have asked for clarification at that time. This thread is about whether Council people care about what the public thinks. I have expressed my feelings on the matter. It seems you have decided to go off on a tangent.
Charlie said: 'In the end
Charlie said:
'In the end you have to believe the people who are in office right now won in a landslide for a reason.'
Seems pretty clear to me. It's fine to feel that way Charlie and I don't completely disagree with that sentiment. I just think that hearing those words spoken aloud or seeing them in print may make people who are gathering the courage to speak at a meeting or write a letter to the editor think twice about putting in the effort.
People like you and I or John and Bea aren't the norm, you know that better than anyone. You put a lot on the line, especially in a small town, when you make public statements of any kind. It takes a certain amount of guts and possibly a manically driven ego to poke your head out into the public domain and let other people play whack-a-mole with your face and I think the average citizen just isn't up for it. Any statement made by elected officials (past or present) that makes the prospect seem even more hopeless or frightening will send those people right back where they came from and I think that's too bad. A silent public is incapable of keeping their representatives honest, accountable and grounded in reality.
I don't see how the statement
I don't see how the statement from Charlie, "'In the end you have to believe the people who are in office right now won in a landslide for a reason.'"
In anyway equates to this from Bea: "We have been told that we should trust our council to make the decisions that are right for the city. Isn't that why they are in office?."
Charlie's statement is a statement of fact: The incumbants who won last November wom by a landslide. That's a fact. Obviously, that's for a reason. The most probable reason is that the voters were pretty satisfied with the incumbents.
I fail to see how that equals by any stretch of the imagination Charlie saying people shouldn't get involved, that people should just "trust" the council and not get involved, or in anyway being something that would even in the most remote possibility discourage participation.
I just don't see how there is any substance to back a claim that Charlie or anybody else has said people shouldn't participate, or that participation has been discouraged.
I'm not a particular fan of Straw Man kinds of arguments -- saying that somebody said something that is obviously indefensible so that it can easily be torn apart.
I think that what goes on in
I think that what goes on in Washington does disgust the people here but I don't think that it's why we've lost faith in our local council. LOL! Let's not act like the council gets a bad rap for the mistakes of Washington, here. I've sat in on a few city council meetings and my perception was this: If the city council members spent more time dealing with issues at hand, rather than bicker amongst themselves, then maybe they could actually HEAR what their constituents are saying. When I moved to Batavia in February of 1995, the "Esprit De Corps" was more favorable, Citizens to Council. I know that I felt as though I were sitting in a room with a bunch of adolescents disguised as grown ups who were secretly harboring resentment toward each other for things they'd done to each other in high school. It was a joke! I was quite emabarrassed for them. Why would anyone want to witness such nonsense; knowing that nothing good could come of it? Sadly, I've watched the city of Batavia slowly turn into a less than shining version of what it used to be with council people coming in wanting to turn it into Nazi, Germany and taxing it all the while. "Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right." ~H.L. Mencken, 1956---Yep! That about covers it.
Deborah, You say they want to
Deborah,
You say they want to turn Batavia into "Nazi Germany". How, and try to give clear examples. Or, did you get carried away?
I understand the perception
I understand the perception that the public’s opinion doesn’t matter in government. I would agree above the county level that perception is probably accurate.
Local government or at least ours is very different. We live in a very small town and if you have an opinion you want to share, you should call your Council person or stop them on the street and talk to them. You do not have to show up to a Council meeting with a prepared speech or use any other method that would open you up to public ridicule. I am confident that every single member of Council would listen to you and your words would have an impact.
If you are wondering why Council people will not participate in online discussions, then read Deb’s comments above.
Charlie, Expressing an
Charlie,
Expressing an opinion to a local official may provide a certain amount of satisfaction to the person who feels strongly about an issue, but how often does that opinion make a difference?
That's the rub.
When,in your tenure on council, did public opinion sway a decision already considered a done deal?
A year ago, this spring, you and I got into it about this very matter. I'll have to take the time to find the posts, but I recall at the time that our discussion was sparked by the fact that people were speaking out against an issue (most likely the ambulance issue).
It may take a few days because I'm going to be involved in a few things that will take my time, but I'll look them up.
I think those on council forget why they got into the game in the first place. For many, I'm sure, it was because they felt they could make a positive difference and make our city a better place than it was before they took their seat. I understand that hard decisions have to be made. I also understand that not all decisions are perfect.
The perception, real of imagined, that the council won't reconsider a decision is the reason that many have just thrown up their hands in frustration.
Incumbants generally win
Incumbants generally win elections over new candidates, a decent explanation can be found here: http://www.mysterypollster.com/main/2004/10/the_incumbent_r.html
Saying that people's comments/complaints/questions do not affect representatives is more of an assumption than a fact. Look at a few things in this state (I know more about that than Genesee County or Batavia). The tax on soda/pop was repealed because people spoke out. "Tea Parties" may well change the face of government in the coming elections, and those were started by citizens who were unhappy with their representatives.
The whole point of representative governments, is that hopefully you vote for the candidate who has passions and opinions similar to your's. Then that candidate votes and makes choices based on their opinions that you voted for. So, essentially, you should trust your local officials, but you still have the ability to speak out against decisions you don't like. Our government does not guarantee that the citizen needs to be listened to after elections are over. Actually some of our forefathers believed most citizens were not able to make intelligent decisions past the voting booth (and is one reason we have free public education).
Rantings and ravings such as what is demonstrated in this thread, using straw man arguments and misrepresenting what has been said in the past is getting old. I don't care how "involved" one is in the community, if you don't use your voice or understand how the government works, then why should anyone listen or respond, especially your representative(s)?
Bea, everything I did was
Bea, everything I did was influenced by or an idea that came directly from the public. You are unaware of how much public input there is in a small town like ours. A council person cannot go to McDonalds to buy a hamburger without hearing from the public.
It appears your only goal is to move every conversation back to me for some reason. You have an axe to grind and that is VERY apparent.
To again digress about the ambulance, there was overwhelming public pressure to get out of the business. Public pressure is why the city is no longer in the ambulance business. According to Council’s last actions, it seems that the pressure to stay out of the ambulance business is still there.
The city isn’t ruled by a group of unknown people in backrooms, no matter how much the political insiders in this town would like to believe. Council people are very reactive to public pressure; there is no way to avoid it.
I suppose I should clarify a
I suppose I should clarify a bit here. I'm positive that most of the folks serving on City Council listen very intently when a constituent speaks to them. What I was addressing above was why many of them choose not to communicate publicly.
It doesn't matter what Charlie meant by his statement, only how it was perceived. Couple that with the fact that, at least for the last few years, Council has had a tendency to dig in its heels and not give an inch no matter what the public outcry and you end up with the poll results above.
In our town people rarely
In our town people rarely come to speak at Council meetings. People prefer one on one conversations with their Council people. So, just because you don’t see very many people with prepared speeches at Council meetings, does not mean Council people are not getting public feedback. That perception could not be further from the truth.
People, like water, choose
People, like water, choose the course of least resistance. The average person will complain to his/her pet goldfish before writing a letter to a congressman. I agree with Charlie, local government sees more effective rapport between public and city hall. Local issues are more personal, and local government tends to be more familiar.
I covered local government for the Daily, and I've vountairly attended public meetings when so inclined. Unless an issue negatively impacts the pocketbooks of vast numbers of people, the public stays away from board meetings and hearings. I've seen politicians eager for public input, arrogantly opposed it and bickering- the likes of two-year-olds. ...None of which governs attendance. Attendance is determined by comfort levels. The discomfort of the issue has to exceed the discomfort of doing something about it.
One of the ideals that I grew up with was that cable television, like C-SPAN, would broadcast local government into our living rooms via public access channels. I glimpsed at the offerings on BATV 10 & 17. ...Alot to interest Batavians and Sunday morning shut-ins. I won't cash-in my DirecTV subscription. I imagine a Batavia Town Board meeting will never prevail over a Rangers' game.
Posted by Chris Charvella on
Posted by Chris Charvella on February 11, 2010 - 9:14am
It doesn't matter what Charlie meant by his statement, only how it was perceived. Couple that with the fact that, at least for the last few years, Council has had a tendency to dig in its heels and not give an inch no matter what the public outcry and you end up with the poll results above.
That is what I think too, Chris.
No axe to grind with Charlie, he is no longer a player.
When council digs in their heels, no amount of public opinion is going to sway a vote.
Mr. Roach: Batavia's Code
Mr. Roach: Batavia's Code Enforcement is the example. There is a plethora of "things that make you go hmmmm" where the council is concerned. We could take a whole day talking about it. Not everyone has each other's standards of living. Not everyone is as neat and tidy as his neighbor. As I've stated in a previous post, The City Council is not a Homeowner's Association.
I understand that some laws are put in place to protect us. And, that there needs to be some sense of some order. However, I AM a Libertarian. When codes infringe on the basic liberties of its citizens I have a problem with that. At what point does it end? My Mother used to say that "The road to hell is paved with good intentions." The older I get the more true I find that statement to be.
Posted by Charlie Mallow on
Posted by Charlie Mallow on February 11, 2010 - 9:17am
Bea, everything I did was influenced by or an idea that came directly from the public. ....
To again digress about the ambulance, there was overwhelming public pressure to get out of the business. Public pressure is why the city is no longer in the ambulance business. According to Council’s last actions, it seems that the pressure to stay out of the ambulance business is still there.
So this was in instance where the council didn't want to get rid of the ambulance service but did so because the public demanded it?
Regarding the "last action". Is this the denial of additional training for the firefighters for ALS? I don't recall a public outcry demanding that the council not consider this if or when Hyde presented it to the council.
So, the effort to keep up
So, the effort to keep up neighborhoods and property are what you equate to "Nazi Germany"?
In the past people complained code enforcement was nonexistent and demanded something be done. Now the complaint is the codes are being enforced.
If you're a landlord and get cited, I understand why you are upset. But, if you're a landlord who does not get cited, I would guess you would be happy to see the codes you follow now being upheld.
And again,if Councilman Ferrando had not stalled for 4 years in setting out the new code, maybe this would not have happened.
I think both sides of this
I think both sides of this argument have logical and well-based opinions on the matter. Council has been vocal about their intention to hold landlords accountable for code violations, but the landlord in question has given very reasonable explanations for his previous code violations.
I would hope that there is some path in place for the landlord to take that doesn't involve suing the city. If there was an appeal board where he could file a grievance, address the reasons for the code violations and maybe get some relief on the matter, everyone could leave this situation happy.
Mr. Mallow: You stated: "If
Mr. Mallow: You stated: "If you are wondering why Council people will not participate in online discussions, then read Deb’s comments above."
While I am a registered Democrat(soley to able able to vote in the primary election) I am truly an Independent. I am also a Libertarian. When I first moved here, I knew no one. I owned no property had no business. I went to council meetings and I had no agenda. Don't fault me for having a completely objective opinion about what I've witnessed in City Council's behavior. They are put in place for the people, not the other way around. Are you saying that they do not partcipate in online discussions because they don't want to know how people really feel? Because I may say some things that might upset them then they don't want to know about it? I bet if everyone on here was singing their praises they'd be on. I am able to see both sides of a situation, sometimes to my detriment. There are landlords out there who I believe shouldn't own property. But, at the end of the day it's about what is right, wrong, fair, or unfair. That, I understand also, sometimes to my detriment. Infringing on someone's liberties is wrong. Deciding who can and can't purchase property is wrong. And, I don't care how City Council tries to spin it.
As an aside, I don't think
As an aside, I don't think the landlord could win a lawsuit here, but if he were to find some grounds for litigation it would certainly cost the city a whole lot more than the thousand or so dollars they left on the table.
Mr. Roach: Keeping up
Mr. Roach: Keeping up neighborhoods and property does seem harmless enough. Afterall, it IS for the greater good, right? Please! Little by little it gets stricter and stricter and costs the taxpayers more and more money for the upkeep. And, when you improve your property the assessment goes up which indirectly, causes your taxes to go up. Which, by the way, seems like the real agenda here. And, in the process, people lose their right to live the way they want to live. THAT is my point here! If I want to let my grass grow higher than 2 inches before I cut it then I should be allowd to. I personally don't like my grass long but, hey, who am I to say that you can't let yours grow? The Neighborhood Improvement Committee had a member actually suggest that "quality of life" tickets be written. If we keep sitting in this pot of water while it gets hotter and hotter at some point City Council might actually think it's a good idea to enforce something like that. We'll be boiled and not even feel it. We don't live in a dictatorship...yet. As I said before, when do you put on the brakes? I think I'm pretty much done discussing this now.
Deborah, I understand your
Deborah,
I understand your point. There is a proposal to give you a break, or at least not increase, on your taxes if you improve the property. I have no idea how long the break would be for, but I like the idea.
With grass, garbage, unlicensed cars, etc., there has to be some standard. And whatever that standard is, somebody is going to cry its to strict, or not strict enough. The best Council can hope for is that the majority approve.
The nice thing is that Council members all have to obey the same codes and pay the same taxes.