The nature of the encroachment upon American constitution is such, as to grow every day more and more encroaching. Like a cancer; it eats faster and faster every hour. The revenue creates pensioners, and the pensioners urge for more revenue.The seekers more numerous and more corrupt, and every day increases the circles of their dependents and vanity, luxury, foppery, selfishness, meanness, and downright venality swallow up the whole of society.
John Adams
Total Pageviews
Friday, May 6, 2011
May 4, 2011. Budget Commitee Meeting
May 4, 2011. Budget Commitee Meeting
18 comments:
Anonymous
said...
Anyone else in favor of telling Tiffany to shut up? You're not the chairman, you're not even the co-chairman. Stop trying to run everything.
So while we are at it how about somebody tell me what religious faith Tiffany belongs to the stops her from reciting the pledge. As far as I can tell she is not a Jehovah Witnesses as I saw her entering a Christian Church in Hood River who has no affiliation with the Jehovah witnesses. Anybody?
I though you were supposed to be looking at the flag during the pledge, how is it that you are so aware/concerned with what every one else is or isn't doing?
Hey everyone I have an idea, why don't you go and get a copy of the budget and auditors report and try to figure out how the city can balance a budget with all of the illegal maneuvers that the last council, mayor and administrators left everyone else to deal with? We live in America we all have religious freedoms quit nit picking on one person. Grow up and act like adults you're an embarrassment, shame on you!
So you’re telling me this is not you 3 times in a row? Now I will show you what came through on those 3 reply’s from yesterday. This address also matches today’s comment you made. Now what this tells me is you subscribe to comments on demand to your email box.
Now this is my stat from my comment. Traffic Sources http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CCMQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwhoscityourcity.blogspot.com%2F&rct=j&q=cody%20steelman%20cascade%20locks&ei=LSTATZ_5IfHTiAKu5vGlAw&usg=AFQjCNELCSz46aqEU1uiAxsmGlnomKhwkw
Now you can thank someone who complained about my blog for the new security Google imposed on us all but this is the portion I am allowed to monitor in this new software and what it is telling me. To be honest I do not like my blog being forced to monitor for threats but someone has tried to shut me down. But other parts of this software are very nice for me to have to monitor other items. Now where you see my name in my statistic, this part is blocked out for me for all other commenter’s. But if a problem arises Google has that information. So I do not know what to tell you except for the past 3 weeks since Google updated the blog, all other addresses have been different. Or some at different times have been the same when responding to a previous commenter. All I can say to your comment is, I am only making my opinion based on what the software program is telling me. So now that you see what I can, what do you think happened here? Now all I can say is if you still think I am being deceptive here file a complaint with Google for this software being wrong.
Now some of you are not going to like what you just saw in my previous reply. Many have been asking me to turn off anonymous replies. So to those whom wanted everyone to sign in I hope this helps your cause. So since I was updated with this, even though full disclosure is not available to me without going through Google red tape, I believe this will change things for the better now that everyone knows. Now since this update I can see cities around not only this country but the world watching us. The same is true for my YouTube site even more so than this blog. Just the statistics for this page has averaged 813 visitors this week alone. So it is up to you the commenter’s, to show your intelligence or your ignorance for the world to see. So are we going to step up to the plate, or are we going to strike out? Now I have already sent an email concerning what I thought about this meeting to the budget committee. I did so as I was concerned about a decision the committee made. So just to ease my curiosity did anyone else catch it? Or did you catch something I may have missed? As that is what this blog is about. Being the issues not the B.S.
Why did the Budget Committee make a new rule to only allow for public comment on the first meeting and then only allow comments at the end of the budget process? Why would someone want to muzzle WE THE PEOPLE? Shouldn’t the committee be interested in the public’s opinion on all the items as they are being discussed, like is done at the current council meetings? Do we the people still have a say on how we want our money spent? Is someone afraid that there might be a better way of doing things or a better idea? Is someone trying to push an agenda and not allow others to participate and have an opinion and input into a public process? Or will they say “we do listen, but you don’t know what were doing behind the scenes, we are working very hard to balance the budget and there are a lot of things that you would understand. We do not want to be interrupted and answer your question”
The Mayor said he would listen to all parties, why now does he not want listen? I know someone will say “we as a committee voted on this and no one object”. However, We the PEOPLE DID NOT KNOW this change was discussed and going to be voted on. We thought that the process would be as it was in the past. Could the Mayor and the City be liable for Civil Rights violations?
Is the Mayor going to take us back in time, prior to the government reform act of the early 1900’s? Does he want our city government to run by the GOOD OLD BOY system?
If the last council and administrator allowed this type of gross misconduct to happen they would have been called out on it. Why is no one now calling out the elected officials now with the same venom?
You might want to read Local Budgeting in Oregon put out by the Oregon Department of Revenue, before making ignorant statements. This budget committee has elected to give the public two opportunities to ask questions or give comments during the budget process. The law only requires one. The Council will ultimately adopt the budget. There will also be public comment allowed at that time. Read the information and educate yourself.
Just Asking May 7, 2011 6:24 PM Part 1. Your question concerning speech at the budget meetings was answered from one side of the issue. I apologize for the tone of that answer as I will point out. What that commenter is doing is reading the law and not looking beyond that. When looking at legal issues one must look at both sides of the issues. What can be won if I take this issue to court? So in this part let’s start with the commenter’s position. What that commenter quoted is an administrative rule of the Department of Revenue. The Department of Revenue was created in our State Constitution.
Oregon Constitution, Article 3, Section 2. Budgetary control over executive and administrative officers and agencies. The Legislative Assembly shall have power to establish an agency to exercise budgetary control over all executive and administrative state officers, departments, boards, commissions and agencies of the State Government.
Then we are a municipal corporation. If you follow the history of a municipal corporation you will learn that this started in the middle ages. You will also learn that in our case it boils down to, if we follow the State constitution and laws we will have the States protection. Our Charter also forces us to adhere to the Constitution and state law. So on this side of the issue the commenter was correct and the budget committee is allowed to restrict public comment as long as the people are afforded the opportunity to speak at the public hearing. But this City could allow public speech at all budget meetings should they choose as it would not restrict any State right.
Just Asking May 7, 2011 6:24 PM Part 2. Now let’s look at this from another side.
Oregon Constitution Article 1, Section 1. Natural rights inherent in people. We declare that all men, when they form a social compact are equal in right: that all power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their peace, safety, and happiness; and they have at all times a right to alter, reform, or abolish the government in such manner as they may think proper.
Article 1, Section 8, Freedom of speech and press. No law shall be passed restraining the free expression of opinion, or restricting the right to speak, write, or print freely on any subject whatever; but every person shall be responsible for the abuse of this right.
Article 1, Section 26, Assemblages of people; instruction of representatives; application to legislature. No law shall be passed restraining any of the inhabitants of the State from assembling together in a peaceable manner to consult for their common good; nor from instructing their Representatives; nor from applying to the Legislature for redress of greviances.
Anonymous May 9, 2011 11:37 PM I see someone has learned something not on the blog. From every indicator I see, this budget committee is doing an outstanding job. Since it seems you are privy to what I am doing, you should be fully aware that I have never stated anything negative about the budget committee. Unless you are getting your information from second hand sources you would see that. So that you know I have commended them for their service, in the mess that they were left to straighten out. Enough said.
"Declining beginning balances are a sign of mis-management..." Our CPA says all city beginning balances have been declining for the last few years. A pretty cruel thing for Robb to point out with Brad sitting right next to him.
I do not know what to call it? But if I call it like I witnessed it here is my conclusion. Both along with others beat their own drums by quoting that tourism should not get the 70% as they are grandfathered in. Because if those parties had a clue, they would know State rules governing the administration, creation, and use of local TRT changed on July 1, 2003, as a result of House Bill 2267, which was codified in ORS chapter 320. So in accordance to ORS 320.350, unless the city was financing debt with local transient lodging tax revenues on November 26, 2003, we never had that grandfather clause to begin with.
So unless any of those drum beaters can prove through documented legislation or contractual obligations stating specifically that the city was financing debt State law demands tourism get 70%. If you want to read about this bill and the changes in 2003 go to this link.
So my question is what do the former councils owe tourism since 2003 for their mismanagement of that fund? So can someone tell me how many hundreds of thousands of dollars that is? I would think that the city motel/hotels would be up in arms about this. Maybe they should be repaid the 40% they were forced to pay, which was misappropriated since July 1, 2003? Read the law yourselves. ORS 320.350
http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/320.html
Tell me what you think about this heated issue. But in the end I think this settles it for all.
18 comments:
Anyone else in favor of telling Tiffany to shut up? You're not the chairman, you're not even the co-chairman. Stop trying to run everything.
Right on!!!!
So while we are at it how about somebody tell me what religious faith Tiffany belongs to the stops her from reciting the pledge. As far as I can tell she is not a Jehovah Witnesses as I saw her entering a Christian Church in Hood River who has no affiliation with the Jehovah witnesses. Anybody?
I though you were supposed to be looking at the flag during the pledge, how is it that you are so aware/concerned with what every one else is or isn't doing?
3 comments in 10 minutes from the same ip address?
Take your game somewhere else.
Cody
Well now, that's interesting Cody. I posted the first comment ONLY...You're lying.
@ Anon at 6:39
1) Who do you think you are, the town's conscience?
2) What makes you think someone's current and/or past religious preference and beliefs is any of your business ?
3) Where is it required in our laws?
4) When did you start stalking?
5) Why don't you STFU?
Hey everyone I have an idea, why don't you go and get a copy of the budget and auditors report and try to figure out how the city can balance a budget with all of the illegal maneuvers that the last council, mayor and administrators left everyone else to deal with? We live in America we all have religious freedoms quit nit picking on one person. Grow up and act like adults you're an embarrassment, shame on you!
So you’re telling me this is not you 3 times in a row?
Now I will show you what came through on those 3 reply’s from yesterday.
This address also matches today’s comment you made.
Now what this tells me is you subscribe to comments on demand to your email box.
Traffic Sources
http://mail.aol.com/33646-311/aol-6/en-us/Lite/Msg.aspx?folder=Inbox&uid=28580020&seq=72&searchIn=none&searchQuery=&start=0&sort=received Msg. 05062011-18:27
http://mail.aol.com/33646-311/aol-6/en-us/Lite/Msg.aspx?folder=Inbox&uid=28580020&seq=72&searchIn=none&searchQuery=&start=0&sort=received Msg. 05062011-18:33
http://mail.aol.com/33646-311/aol-6/en-us/Lite/Msg.aspx?folder=Inbox&uid=28580020&seq=72&searchIn=none&searchQuery=&start=0&sort=received Msg. 05062011-18:39
Now this is my stat from my comment.
Traffic Sources
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CCMQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwhoscityourcity.blogspot.com%2F&rct=j&q=cody%20steelman%20cascade%20locks&ei=LSTATZ_5IfHTiAKu5vGlAw&usg=AFQjCNELCSz46aqEU1uiAxsmGlnomKhwkw
Now you can thank someone who complained about my blog for the new security Google imposed on us all but this is the portion I am allowed to monitor in this new software and what it is telling me.
To be honest I do not like my blog being forced to monitor for threats but someone has tried to shut me down.
But other parts of this software are very nice for me to have to monitor other items.
Now where you see my name in my statistic, this part is blocked out for me for all other commenter’s.
But if a problem arises Google has that information.
So I do not know what to tell you except for the past 3 weeks since Google updated the blog, all other addresses have been different.
Or some at different times have been the same when responding to a previous commenter.
All I can say to your comment is, I am only making my opinion based on what the software program is telling me.
So now that you see what I can, what do you think happened here?
Now all I can say is if you still think I am being deceptive here file a complaint with Google for this software being wrong.
Cody
Now some of you are not going to like what you just saw in my previous reply.
Many have been asking me to turn off anonymous replies.
So to those whom wanted everyone to sign in I hope this helps your cause.
So since I was updated with this, even though full disclosure is not available to me without going through Google red tape, I believe this will change things for the better now that everyone knows.
Now since this update I can see cities around not only this country but the world watching us.
The same is true for my YouTube site even more so than this blog.
Just the statistics for this page has averaged 813 visitors this week alone.
So it is up to you the commenter’s, to show your intelligence or your ignorance for the world to see.
So are we going to step up to the plate, or are we going to strike out?
Now I have already sent an email concerning what I thought about this meeting to the budget committee.
I did so as I was concerned about a decision the committee made.
So just to ease my curiosity did anyone else catch it?
Or did you catch something I may have missed?
As that is what this blog is about.
Being the issues not the B.S.
Cody
Cody,
Why did the Budget Committee make a new rule to only allow for public comment on the first meeting and then only allow comments at the end of the budget process? Why would someone want to muzzle WE THE PEOPLE? Shouldn’t the committee be interested in the public’s opinion on all the items as they are being discussed, like is done at the current council meetings? Do we the people still have a say on how we want our money spent? Is someone afraid that there might be a better way of doing things or a better idea? Is someone trying to push an agenda and not allow others to participate and have an opinion and input into a public process? Or will they say “we do listen, but you don’t know what were doing behind the scenes, we are working very hard to balance the budget and there are a lot of things that you would understand. We do not want to be interrupted and answer your question”
The Mayor said he would listen to all parties, why now does he not want listen? I know someone will say “we as a committee voted on this and no one object”. However, We the PEOPLE DID NOT KNOW this change was discussed and going to be voted on. We thought that the process would be as it was in the past. Could the Mayor and the City be liable for Civil Rights violations?
Is the Mayor going to take us back in time, prior to the government reform act of the early 1900’s? Does he want our city government to run by the GOOD OLD BOY system?
If the last council and administrator allowed this type of gross misconduct to happen they would have been called out on it. Why is no one now calling out the elected officials now with the same venom?
Just Asking
Dear "Just Asking"
You might want to read Local Budgeting in Oregon put out by the Oregon Department of Revenue, before making ignorant statements. This budget committee has elected to give the public two opportunities to ask questions or give comments during the budget process. The law only requires one. The Council will ultimately adopt the budget. There will also be public comment allowed at that time. Read the information and educate yourself.
Just Asking May 7, 2011 6:24 PM
Part 1.
Your question concerning speech at the budget meetings was answered from one side of the issue.
I apologize for the tone of that answer as I will point out.
What that commenter is doing is reading the law and not looking beyond that.
When looking at legal issues one must look at both sides of the issues.
What can be won if I take this issue to court?
So in this part let’s start with the commenter’s position.
What that commenter quoted is an administrative rule of the Department of Revenue.
The Department of Revenue was created in our State Constitution.
Oregon Constitution, Article 3, Section 2. Budgetary control over executive and administrative officers and agencies. The Legislative Assembly shall have power to establish an agency to exercise budgetary control over all executive and administrative state officers, departments, boards, commissions and agencies of the State Government.
Then we are a municipal corporation. If you follow the history of a municipal corporation you will learn that this started in the middle ages. You will also learn that in our case it boils down to, if we follow the State constitution and laws we will have the States protection.
Our Charter also forces us to adhere to the Constitution and state law.
So on this side of the issue the commenter was correct and the budget committee is allowed to restrict public comment as long as the people are afforded the opportunity to speak at the public hearing.
But this City could allow public speech at all budget meetings should they choose as it would not restrict any State right.
Cody
Just Asking May 7, 2011 6:24 PM
Part 2.
Now let’s look at this from another side.
Oregon Constitution Article 1, Section 1. Natural rights inherent in people. We declare that all men, when they form a social compact are equal in right: that all power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their peace, safety, and happiness; and they have at all times a right to alter, reform, or abolish the government in such manner as they may think proper.
Article 1, Section 8, Freedom of speech and press. No law shall be passed restraining the free expression of opinion, or restricting the right to speak, write, or print freely on any subject whatever; but every person shall be responsible for the abuse of this right.
Article 1, Section 26, Assemblages of people; instruction of representatives; application to legislature. No law shall be passed restraining any of the inhabitants of the State from assembling together in a peaceable manner to consult for their common good; nor from instructing their Representatives; nor from applying to the Legislature for redress of greviances.
So now I ask who is ignorant here now?
Cody
I think that the BC is just trying to follow the law Cody, unlike King Brad and his pit of vipers.
Anonymous May 9, 2011 11:37 PM
I see someone has learned something not on the blog.
From every indicator I see, this budget committee is doing an outstanding job.
Since it seems you are privy to what I am doing, you should be fully aware that I have never stated anything negative about the budget committee.
Unless you are getting your information from second hand sources you would see that.
So that you know I have commended them for their service, in the mess that they were left to straighten out.
Enough said.
Cody
"Declining beginning balances are a sign of mis-management..."
Our CPA says all city beginning balances have been declining for the last few years.
A pretty cruel thing for Robb to point out with Brad sitting right next to him.
Anonymous May 10, 2011 12:38 PM
I do not know what to call it?
But if I call it like I witnessed it here is my conclusion.
Both along with others beat their own drums by quoting that tourism should not get the 70% as they are grandfathered in.
Because if those parties had a clue, they would know State rules governing the administration, creation, and use of local TRT changed on July 1, 2003, as a result of House Bill 2267, which was codified in ORS chapter 320.
So in accordance to ORS 320.350, unless the city was financing debt with local transient lodging tax revenues on November 26, 2003, we never had that grandfather clause to begin with.
So unless any of those drum beaters can prove through documented legislation or contractual obligations stating specifically that the city was financing debt State law demands tourism get 70%.
If you want to read about this bill and the changes in 2003 go to this link.
http://industry.traveloregon.com/upload/otc/departments/tourismdevelopment/finaltltsurveyresults.pdf
So my question is what do the former councils owe tourism since 2003 for their mismanagement of that fund?
So can someone tell me how many hundreds of thousands of dollars that is?
I would think that the city motel/hotels would be up in arms about this.
Maybe they should be repaid the 40% they were forced to pay, which was misappropriated since July 1, 2003?
Read the law yourselves. ORS 320.350
http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/320.html
Tell me what you think about this heated issue.
But in the end I think this settles it for all.
Cody
Post a Comment