Get it here, cuz you can’t find it in the newspapers! I’ve already answered questions last night for reporters about what happened (cuz they didn’t bother to show up) and this morning because people can’t find anything in the WSJ on the items they are interested in. For links to the items below, either see the agenda, or yesterday’s post.
Here’s the rundown.
We heard early public comment from one person opposed to making text messages and instant messaging not public records.
#11 – Chickens – So, single family home owners can have up to 4 chickens if they follow various rules. This would allow renters in two-flats and duplexes to have chickens too. This item was referred since the Health Department wasn’t there to answer questions about how chickens were a health threat. (Where’s that little eye-rolly thing.)
#12/13 – Cliff Fisher project on N Franklin/N Hancock and moving house to 500 block of E Johnson – This will be the final vote on this project, but most of the decisions have already been made. This item passed without comment.
#15 – Solar/Wind Ordinance – This is likely to get referred back for more work. I’ll gladly take it back at Landmarks, since what the City Attorney’s staff told us looks like it wasn’t true . . . sigh. I’m glad I abstained. Referred back to committees as expected.
We heard public testimony from a gentleman supporting adding Steve Hiniker to the CARPC.
#20 – Economic Development Plan – We all congratulated ourselves, staff and EDC and then punted. I proposed two different amendments. One that said the EDC should make priorities and report back to us (as soon as possible) and another that actually did the prioritizing that hadn’t been done. We went with the first, easier one. So, we have a report, that supposed to be a workplan, but isn’t. (Dang that eye rolly emoticon is in high demand this morning.)
#22 – Budget Process Report – We didn’t really make much progress, since we didn’t want to change much. I renewed my pleas to make this year’s process more humane, it fell on deaf ears. The report passed. (However, at CCOC I think I’m making progress on setting the dates for a Thursday, Tuesday, Thursday in 2009.)
#34 – Budget Shortfall – $599,000 out of our $1M contingent reserve for the snow, etc. This passed without comment with the mega motion at the beginning of the meeting.
#35 – Hotel Study – Should we spend money for a study on if we need more hotel’s downtown? If so, is this the right consultant? The motion to place this on file failed 12 votes against in a roll call vote. Those voting against the study were AYE: Webber, Brandon, Sanborn, Solomon, Konkel and Rhodes-Conway. ABSENT: Bruer, Kerr NO: Clausius, Clear, Cnare, Compton, Gruber, Judge, Palm, Pham-Remmele, Rummel, Schumacher, Skidmore, Verveer
#36 – Lake Levels – Using our bully pulpit to get the DNR to do what we want. Passed, with lots of grandstanding and lots of people adding their name to the resolution. We wasted alot of time talking about a unanimous vote.
#60 – ATC Power Lines – Opposing the ATC power lines and expressing our point of view the that ATC power lines should be underground if they happen. Ald. Solomon made an amendment that I missed the language on (it essentially called on us to find ways to reduce energy use, that might make the power lines unnecessary), but prompted a serie of righteous statements, some microphones that turned off because people got too loud and a lecture from the soon to be departed Alder Brandon. Voting for Solomon’s amendment were: AYE: Cnare, Compton, Judge, Konkel, Rhodes-Conway, Rummel, Solomon, Verveer, Webber. ABSENT: Bruer, Kerr, Gruber NO: Clausius, Palm, Clear, Pham-Remmele, Schumacher, Sanborn, Skidmore, Brandon. (Yes, there were more AYE than NO votes, but on the Council, you need 11 votes for something to pass and with Kerr and Gruber missing, that didn’t happen.) Brandon then made an amendment that didn’t make much sense to me, it passed on a voice vote with Rhodes-Conway and me voting against. Then the resolution passed.
#61 – Text messages and IM not public records – I made an amendment that doesn’t prohibit us from using these technologies but does require us to keep a record if we do. The motion passed on a roll call vote. AYE: Cnare, Compton, Judge, Konkel, Plam, Rummel, Sanborn, Solomon, Verveer, Webber. ABSENT: Bruer, Kerr, Gruber NO: Clausius, Clear, Pham-Remmele, Schumacher, Skidmore and Brandon. That cause a little consternation over there on the right side of the room! Ultimately, the ordinance passed with that amendment.
#62 – CDA Land Transfer – Getting the Villager Mall project moving . . . this passed with the mega motion in the beginning of the meeting, with one amendment requiring at least 12,000 square feet for the Southside library.
#72 – Setting higher goals for the efficiency of our Recycling Program. Passed without comment with the mega motion.
#74 – Mailboxes – you won’t be able to park within 4 feet of any mailboxes. This passed on a voice vote – Webber and I voting against. There was a somewhat bizarre discussion with lots of mis-information. And apparently, Ald. Compton doesn’t think we should be able to vote on things that are outside of our districts. i.e. Downtown alders shouldn’t vote on periphery issues. Does that mean she can’t vote on downtown issues? (Again, an eye roll emoticon needed.)
#76 – Banning Alcohol in East Moorland Park – Huh, we have a committee to look at these issues who didn’t look at this issue and will reconsider it later . . . so why are we doing it now? I don’t think anyone really answered that question, or the question about when we will have a policy. This passed on a voice vote, Ald. Sanborn and myself voting against.
#77 – Salt Report – The alternate resolution and the original were referred back to the Commission on the Environment with the mega-motion in the beginning of the meeting.
#79/80 – Reconsideration of Linden Park Plat – At the last meeting, we had wrong information, and despite the fact that the staff told us that at the meeting, the council voted for it anyways. I was somewhat hopeful that three weeks later, we would know what the right answer is, but we don’t. The motion to reconsider was not made, as there was no new information for the council to make any different decision . . . but we might have new info this morning, much too late.
And with that, we were still out by 9:30!
