I WIN! Most public input presentations in the past year!

Not that there was a contest, but I beat out some fierce competitors. Sorry Zombie Fighter Mayoral Candidate, beat yah. Sorry drug dealer fighter. You are toast. Oh, and I beat cameraman Bruce and the disgruntled veteran. I have had 26 public inputs in the past year. DOC: 2018-06-18 Public Input Frequency (data from city clerk’s office)

And this is why public input is VERY important!

Don’t let the city council buffalo you with ‘compromises’ and threatening certain ‘factions’ we need to keep things just the way they are.

I am just a regular person who watches my city government, and I have proven over the past year you can give the maximum of yourself to make sure our local government operates at it’s highest potential.

So please, step up to the podium and don’t let the very powerful 1% of our community control your lives, you hold that right, guaranteed by the US Constitution and 1st Amendment.

Our founding fathers were not naive, they made this precious gift #1 for a reason, because they knew the best ideas came from the members of this Republic and not behind closed doors by the monied elite.



14 comments ↓

#1 Matthew Paulson on 06.18.18 at 9:06 pm

Scott – I don’t think a “regular person that watches their city government” wins the award for most appearances at public input.

You’re a political activist uses public input as a forum to espouse his beliefs. Maybe you’re worried that fewer people will pay attention to you if there are changes made to public input that limit your ability to weigh in on every last issue?

#2 l3wis on 06.18.18 at 9:17 pm

MP, you busted me. I get so tired of people thinking the 1st Amendment is so important. Especially when we have all these law abiding 2nd Amendment people getting busted for killing kids in school yards.

#3 TYler swanger on 06.18.18 at 9:45 pm

I think this whole public input is a waste of time, so many other issues that need attention. We spend the first month doing this.

Around of applause to the city council 👏

#4 Theresa stehly on 06.18.18 at 11:51 pm

Thanks to City clerk Tom Greco for compiling the frequency and topics covered. In the spirit of compromise and fairness, I would consider limiting speakers to once a month on non-agenda items.

#5 D@ily Spin on 06.19.18 at 6:58 am

The times you’ve spoken have merit. Some speakers should be gaveled immediately. Public awareness and sentiment are more important than liquor licenses, etc.. You are an activist and blogger who has become a valuable commenter and resource. When the news media checks your blog as part of their report, you’re important.
You shouldn’t pat yourself on the back to often. It looks bad. Am I the disgruntled veteran?

#6 Warren Phear on 06.19.18 at 8:04 am

Once every two weeks Scott says something. Not a one topic talker, but instead, a person who speaks truth to power on a variety of city issues. That is what this whole thing is about.

#7 l3wis on 06.19.18 at 9:01 am

Theresa, as I told you this morning. There is nothing in the 1st Amendment that has a limit on the number of times you can exercise your free speech rights in a month. That’s like saying someone who owns 20 guns vs. one gun is abusing their 2nd Amendment rights. As for the city’s ‘valuable time’. I get so tired of that argument. The council CHOSE to run for office, you are NOT volunteers, you get paid to be there. City employees and directors also are well compensated to be there. The public is not. I’m proud that I have shown up that many times, I think I have brought a lot of issues to light, that is what public input is for. I think it’s hard to use the word ‘abuse’ when you are practicing a ‘right’.

#8 l3wis on 06.19.18 at 9:08 am

DS – you are NOT the vet I was referring to.

#9 l3wis on 06.19.18 at 9:11 am

also, no matter how much you limit or move public input around, it doesn’t address the original issue, stopping disruptive behavior. That power is possessed by the Chair, and they simply have to exercise that power when necessary instead creating more rules. It is obvious why they want to implement these rules, they are tired of Public Input, and they are just using the ‘disruptive behavior’ as an excuse.

#10 Fluff McFluffin on 06.19.18 at 9:33 am

Like most things, the public input works well as it was intended within the spirit of what it is. Unfortunately, like most things, a few people abuse the spirit of it and ruin it for everyone else. This doesn’t apply to this only, just look at most of your rules at your workplace, rules in public, rules in Congress, etc. It only takes one or two yahoos to abuse something for it to go away or be changed. Sad.

#11 Bruce on 06.19.18 at 10:13 am

Excuses, Excuses, Blame, Blame. Sure some of us get up and speak, why shouldn’t we? Some of us have broad life experiences we bring to discussions. By making an ordinance change to shut people up does not solve the narrow mindedness we find in policy discussions being presented.

The Selberg anti-citizenship ordinance being shoved down our throats is moving forward to stop other points of views from touching delicate brains. The 17 Public Inputs including my crashing train video only cover items needing open discussion. If we end up with the ability to comment at 1st reading, most of my usual beginning of the meeting comments and many others would never have happened.

I have decided I want all off-the-wall ordinances gone and give the new mayor a chance to succeed without fake controversial issues.

#12 D@ily Spin on 06.19.18 at 10:20 am

“It only takes one or two yahoos to abuse something for it to go away or be changed.” FM
Very true

#13 D@ily Spin on 06.19.18 at 10:43 am

Bruce, you can’t fight city hall. The best we can hope for is not to be arrested or assaulted. I was impressed with the council hearing from 34 citizens. Being scolded is not fun. I’d like to see the councilor who introduced moving Public Comment apologize and withdraw his amendment. That’s not going to happen. There’s more space north from the oak barrier inside Carnegie because there must be more room for ego.

#14 i12doit on 06.20.18 at 6:40 am

“The right of the people to petition the Government for a redress of Grievances.” Hmmmmmmmmm…

Fire away boys and girls! This is not a privilege, it is a right. Odd how many come to convolute the two. Just because someone decides to show up and speak up on a regular basis (without pay) doesn’t mean their Rights are taken away. Only when people are irritated by those who watch and hold them accountable do they wish privilege over Rights. Keep on Reporting and doing your duty. You do more for the city than most of the council combined…. And, they don’t like it.

Leave a Comment