I attended the City Council meeting on Thursday with great interest in hearing more about the sustainability proposals made by Councilmember Elizabeth Walker. I was disappointed that at the start of the meeting she pulled this item from the agenda. There was standing room only in the meeting and the citizens really wanted more information. They were getting involved just as they were asked and the sponsor of the proposal decided not to share more information with the community.
I hope that this discussion continues at the next council meeting. The citizens deserve to hear more about this and Councilmember Walker needs to fill in the gaps.
I think there should be a policy about this. The agenda is posted for the public on the city website. If there is something of intrest then schedules are adjusted and arrangements made to fit the city council meeting into their schedule. It is unfair to delete an item from the agenda without notice and cause. Why would "item two" be deleted when interest is at an all time high?
ReplyDeleteMakes me wonder what is really going on. I wasn't there but why would it be pulled if there were a lot of people there to hear about it? As I see it there are two options. 1 she doesn't really want the people too involved or 2 she doesn't want people to know what it is really about.
ReplyDeleteEither way I am worried about it.
Mike
Why were you not upset when Mayor Ibershof removed not one, but two items off of the previous council meeting agenda?
ReplyDeleteThis occurs all of the time for different reasons. In fact, things were added to the last agenda without complaint.
So why is THIS one worth a tantrum? Perhaps, this kind of unevenly applied, targeted drama is why your identity became such a conversation point?
Really? Me saying I am disappointed is a tantrum? Really?
ReplyDeleteThe reason I was disappointed was because there was a room full of people wanting to hear more about this. The majority of public comment was about it and this is the major issue in town that people are talking about.
This and the fact that a council member snapped at a citizen for asking more about this issue makes me worry about what are the motives behind this proposal.
As far as targeted drama, lets review the facts shall we. Councilmember Walker gave presentations in 2 public meetings. When asked by the paper she refused to comment for 2 weeks and then when she finally commented she requested that she write an article when she felt it was appropriate. Then when citizens show up to hear more about the proposal she pulls it from the agenda. I fail to see how I have caused the drama.
With alll the discussion about this issue and the claims that this blog is making things up about this issue I would think Councilmember Walker would be anxious to discuss the issue and resolve the concerns of the citizens. But instead she added to the mystery of this proposal and pulled it from the agenda. Again how did I cause the drama?
Tantrums and invented drama is Rob's usual political shtick. Mish
ReplyDeletemish,
ReplyDeletethank you for sticking to the issue and refraining from personal attacks. Oh wait...never mind.
Do you have any examples to back up you position?
Interesting that once again the focas is on the author and not the issue. It is a shame that this is the only way some people are able to "discuss an issue."
ReplyDeleteAs far as the issue on hand, I am suprised that Elizabeth Walker didn't want to talk about it. There have been several articles about it in the local paper and many of my friends have been discussing it. I would thimk the council meeting would have been a great place to address the citizens and to get the word out. I know a lot of people made special arrangements to go and they were discouraged by what happened. It is a real shame.
Barry
Now that "props" are finished, I see that Mike the Malcontent is back with something new to complain about. So predictable. Michelle
ReplyDeleteit is sad that the only way you are able to discuss the issue is to call people names. Please stick to the issue being discussed or submit an issue that you would like discussed to goneright@live.com
ReplyDeletethank you
The real issue at hand is open and accountable government. We need to focus on the fact that citizens who made an effort to attend the last council meeting were shown zero respect by E.W. who took the very item people wanted to discuss *off* the agenda. People came because they wanted info and to weigh-in on her Sustainability project. Even just a quick look at what she’s proposed (so far) will show that this is much more than a “passing fancy” – this involves a complete restructuring of our city’s committee system and amounts to the government deciding how we should live. The people who are resorting to name calling and personal attacks on this site would like nothing more than to deprive us of our right to free speech, assemble, and so on.
ReplyDeleteRob, as moderator can you please keep the comments posted limited to the ones that stick to the point. The anonymous "tantrum" one, at least asked a question. But then Mish and Michelle just called names. I suppose you add these to show an impartiality, but it is really unproductive to let these people spout off. Let's stick to the topic! I wouldn't even add this one to the discussion, if I were you.
ReplyDeletethanks for the advise. I do not add them to show impartiality. Once again, any personal comments can be directed to my email goneright@live.com
ReplyDeleteHas anyone thought that she might not have had all of her material ready due to the fact that she is also busy earning a living and has other commitments? This was for a workshop rather than a council meeting, and generally workshops give the council members the opportunity to informally discuss issues and opportunities facing the City. It was interesting to hear on the Council meeting tape that several individuals spoke about the environmental perception of the issue and Councilmember Ockerlander explained what it was that the Council was discussing, thereby setting the record straight because earlier discussion on this forum had the wrong perceptions of this issue. Sustainability means many things and Councilmember Walker’s discussion is more than the environmentalism that this was turned into and has become the focus. The City needs to discuss how it can sustain itself financially and operationally. The City Council needs to look at their long range plans and revise them. Her model, as I understand it from listening to the tape of the retreat, is to expand the council committee to include citizens to obtain their input. The committee may be structured much like the planning commission current is. This committee would review major financial and operational matters as related to the direction of the City and its long-range plans and provide citizen input to the City Council. This committee should be a balanced, cross-section of the citizenry. Isn’t citizen involvement and open/transparent government the discussion here? We have a councilmember trying to involve the citizens in the discussion of a sustainable Duvall and the focus is on why she did not hold the discussion at a certain date and time. Give the Councilmember a chance to get her comments together so she is no longer misunderstood by those who chose to make an issue out of a perception. I look forward to further discussions on the process and I know that she will put it into proper context so that those who choose to clearly view it for what it is, a process not a philosophy, can properly weigh in rather than make political points.
ReplyDeleteLouis
It's not plausible that Councilmember Walker removed the continued sustainability discussion from the agenda because she needed time "to get her comments together..." She was well prepared at the previous two public meetings and my understanding is that this was just supposed to be a continued discussion. I am concerned if you really think she needed time to "put it into proper context." Just tell it like it is, we're not stupid.
ReplyDeleteSteve
This wasn't for a workshop, this was an agenda item for the council meeting. I think it should be rare for items to get added or removed from a council agenda without sufficient public notice. And items should only be removed for legitimate reasons that are made clear to the public. I hope this item wasn't removed because a council member didn't come prepared.
ReplyDeleteThe sustainability committee is going to "review major financial and operational matters as related to the direction of the City and its long range plans..."? Doesn't the city already have a finance committee that does that? Is the Sustainability committee going to replace the finance committee? We need to clearly understand the boundaries of this committee, it seems like everything will fall under the definition of "sustainability." Now I'm concerned enough to show up at the next council meeting. How do I find out if it's on the agenda? And how will I know if it stays on the agenda?
ReplyDeleteJohn
I have to say that in addition to the comments above I am also going to point out that this is more than just a process as Louis states. I believe that it is a fundemental change in how the city would approach many issues. I believe this because this is what Councilmember Walker said it was. I see this as a change in philosophy, focus and direction.
ReplyDeleteI really want to see this issue as clearly as possible because it will have a huge impact on how the city operates and addresses problems.
I would hope that after spending approximately 5 months in the program learning about this issue and making 2 presentations to the city council in public meetings that Councilmembber Walker would be well enough versed in this issue to have a discussion about it with her fellow councilmembers and answer some of their questions. I am not expecting a grand discourse but I believe that she is perfectly capable to have a discussion about it and at the very least address the misconceptions that she states are out there.
I know that she addressed some of these in a letter to the paper and a letter to the editor of the valley voice weekly. She could have just read that. At least that would be something.
I think he posts it to show how ignorant people are. It shows that people are ignorant to the issues at hand. Because they cannot add to an intelligent discussion they spout off whatever they can grab at and even then can't back it up. Rob has never once made a personal attack. I don't always agree with him politicaly but he is showing the true colors of the local government. Which I still don't think is all bad.
ReplyDeleteI like to highlight the difference in the approach to a discussion. I am still amazed at how much of the contempt for my positions and thoughts is because it comes from me. I totally enjoy the discussion about the issue and the exchange of ideas. It makes me a better person when I can truly understand another persons point of view. I may not agree but I am better for it.
ReplyDeleteMy hope is that by highlighting the childish tactic of calling names and making the issue the speaker rather than the idea that people will see that there is a better way to address issues. We will be better off by talking about the issue than by calling each other names. That is what I was taught my first year of school. No not college, kindergarten.
John,
ReplyDeleteThere is a link to the city council agenda on the right side of the blog. you can also access it via the city website.
It appears that there is no way of assuring that any item will stay on the agenda. I would hope that items with as much public interest as the sustainability proposal would stay on the agenda and be discussed openly.
A Train Is Coming…
ReplyDeleteFiscal responsibility, responsible growth, and working to stabilize our economy are not “far left or far right political agendas” as someone vacantly implied on this site. However, this new “sustainability” agenda is VERY FAR LEFT on the political spectrum and, quite frankly, digging down a little to uncover what this agenda is all about …it is scary. Duvall needs to wake up before another pet project is rail-roaded in by our “we know what’s best for you” City Council.
It is humorous the way in which someone wishes to appear humble while imparting his/her “knowledge.” Perhaps that is part of their new image, having switched from personal attacks to a didactic track… but one would assume that anyone who professes to teach, actually knows the subject they are teaching. Am I wrong?
Simply having council members (past or present) as neighbors does not make someone knowledgeable of government – at any level. In fact, they are rather unrelated, agreed?
It does not take extra brain cells to know that city council positions are non-partisan. Note: there is no “R” or “D” required behind a candidates name on any campaign signs, literature, or other materials. It is strictly “NP.”
That being said, a candidate who has no political inclination is someone who blows about in the wind and goes whichever way is ‘popular’ at the moment. They are without a compass (integrity) – political, moral, or otherwise – and that is a dangerous quality, particularly when it applies to someone in a leadership role. Combine that with a lack of intelligence and we are in real trouble.
Let’s not divert from the real issue here with “left” versus “right.” Integrity is the real issue. It is something you either have or you don’t. Political conviction paired with a backbone to hold one’s ground when the going gets tough – to fight for what you believe is right – is not only having integrity, it is being responsible to the people who elected you. It’s doing your job.
Get involved. Go to council meetings so that you know what is actually going on. Study the government process and that means taking a closer look at prior campaign literature and measuring it all up to records. Once you’ve done that, opinions won’t be, well, simply opinions.
Council member Edwards comes under fire for having a record of defending us against paying higher taxes – like the new garbage fee increase – whereas the rest voted FOR the increase. It doesn’t get us better service – it just helps fund roads. Wait, didn’t the Council just raise an impact fee on roads? If you can find anything far right or far left about Edwards, by all means, let us know.
Why not call a spade a spade? This new “sustainability” committee sounds like an experiment in socialism. Council member Walker took it from our northern neighbors, after all. So many of us showed up to the last council meeting with questions, ready to engage the Council on this topic, so why was it pulled? Taking an item off the agenda simply because people showed up to comment and ask questions is not the action of someone who answers to the People. I hear a train coming down the tracks…
And I must admit that I'm concerned about where that train is headed. To replace the Economic Development committee with a Sustainability Committee is certainly more than just a name change.
ReplyDeleteLouis, you said, "Sustainability means many things and Councilmember Walker’s discussion is more than the environmentalism that this was turned into and has become the focus. The City needs to discuss how it can sustain itself financially and operationally." I agree, and that's why we already have a Finance and Administration Committee.
I think everyone in town would agree that we want to have a sustainable town: we need to have enough clean drinking water. We need to feel safe and protected. We want our businesses to thrive and create a prosperous community where we can find critical services. OK, so there's the Public Works, The Public Safety, and the Economic Development Committees. What else does EW want to add that we aren't already addressing?
In the River Current News it quotes her at a public meeting saying "Resources are declining and ability for earth to accommodate chemicals and human population is expanding so it is limiting our ability to live."
Wait a second: that's more than just addressing how the city "can sustain itself financially and operationally," Louis. This is social engineering. And not on a small scale.
The handout EW shared at City Council 3 weeks ago discusses Sustainability concerns in this way: "Examples include discriminatory government policies, wars, businesses that promote the exploitation of child labour and waste management practices that pollute community water supplies." And so we have national help for these: checks and balances, the CPS, the EPA, etc. etc.
What more do you want? On our local level, sustainability means being able to drive to work and provide dinner for the family. After that, get out of our business. - Carolyn Durant
I'm with you Carolyn!
ReplyDelete