Village Board Meeting 7/14/08

You will see a link to an mp3 file of the meeting below. If you click on the link, you can listen from within your browser, but there is usually a way to move this mp3 file to your desktop. In Firefox, you wait for the whole file to move to the browser, (a minute or two) then you go - File - Save Page As..... and you can put it anywhere you want. The advantage is that you can then listen with other programs (Real Player, Itunes etc.) which allow you to adjust equalizer settings and they give you a time counter. With the time counter and my notes below, you can jump to the part that interests you.

Here's a LINK TO THE AUDIO MP3 FILE


0 hours - 0 minutes - 0 seconds All board members present except John Hrubos. The meeting started with an executive session, which means they kick the audience out for, in this case, about 15 minutes. It was a very nice night though, and Chief Ferritti entertained Liz Thomas and I with the story of his having to shoot the rabid fox that would not let go of the 9 year old girl on Prospect Street! Yikes!

0-03-0 first public comment period. I, Allen Carstensen, attempt to get the board members to proclaim where they stand on the ambulance privatization issue.

This is from our Ulysses Democratic Party Platform,

Our local governments should be committed to taking all actions necessary to maintain and enhance the quality of life for residents of the town, while managing programs in an efficient and fiscally responsible manner.

I would argue that risking the lives of the residents for the questionable tax break of $25/resident is contrary to the intent of the platform.

then there's this

Transparency of our governmental process is essential to maintain a democratic society, as are informed voters. Elected officials must encourage open discussion and information sharing regarding all public matters, both among themselves and with the citizenry.

I would argue that keeping their positions on the ambulance issue secret until the 11th hour does not encourage open discussion, and is contrary to the intent of the platform. An advantage of politics at the level of a small village or town, is that citizens can participate directly by talking to their representatives. Unfortunately, after many months of considering this plan, very few have declared their intentions, and therefore, citizen participation is discouraged.

After my appeal, Mayor Petrovic said he's still analyzing. Debbie Nottke said that she continues to get lots of phone calls, and is also still weighing both sides. We all know where Chris Thomas stands. Rordan Hart remained mum. Hrubos wasn't there. Not much progress.

0-06-30 Ron McLean - Whig St. Asks where this privatization scheme stands, what the schedule for a decision is, and when will the community get a chance to participate in the form of a committee as suggested during the public hearing. Chris Thomas ignores the idea of a citizen panel, and says that there will be a "full board discussion" of the issue during the August meeting. I ask "You have mentioned in the past, the possibility of voting on it in August. Are you now thinking that this is too early?" Chris dodges the question.

0-08-30 Jim Mason Larchmont Drive - former member of the Fire Department and an EMT. ''I'm still concerned, why we are not making the best use of the volunteers that we have. We have more certified EMT's and Paramedics in the Fire Company today, than there has been in the history of the company. Why are they not willing to respond?" (he is referring to the high percentage of calls that are deferred to Bangs during the overnight shift.) "Why are we paying for training for people to get their paramedic certification, and then go to work for Bangs Ambulance Service, not the Village of Trumansburg? This is not fair, it's not fair to our taxpayers, and they should be bound by contract to work in Trumansburg, if we are going to pay for the training" "Your point #8 in FAQ - Village website- states there aren't enough trained volunteers, I don't think that's true, I think we are just not using them right. There's got to be a reason why people are not willing to respond. Is it burn out? Are we wearing them down with what we used to call nuisance calls? The kind of calls where if it were our kids we would have taken them in the car, but today we call the ambulance? So we don't stop to think, the public doesn't stop to think, that when we call the ambulance, we are disrupting a lot of people's lives, and maybe there's some public education that needs to be brought forth so people can stop and think, do I really need this, is it a true emergency, or can I deal with it and take responsibility for it myself? Those are things I think we need to discuss. I'd be willing to meet with the board and talk through these things if my background and my experience could be of any use to you. I spent 16 years as a county legislator, and I chaired it for 4 years, and I chaired the public safety commission for 11 years, and I worked with the fire, and ems personnel all over the county, very closely on a day to day basis"

Mayor Petrovic says "That's a very good offer to help" I agree, and if I were on the board I would propose a resolution to form a committee with Mr. Mason as it's chair that would be composed of several board members, and volunteers, and citizens, and the meetings would be open to the public. The structure of the public hearing, and these Village Board meetings, is not conducive to a back and forth discussion, that is needed to resolve our differences.

Mr. Mason's point about the nuisance calls, is a good point, but I get the impression, from talking to several of the volunteers, that there are a very small number of people, that are abusing the system. They may not be playing with a full deck. They may be hard to reach with a public information campaign. I don't think they are parents that are calling the ambulance when a kid falls off his bike. It's more like they are uneducated, uninformed medicaid patients with chronic medical problems such as diabetes. I think there are several ways of dealing with this problem, and I think Mr. Mason is correct that it needs to be dealt with for the moral of the volunteers. Who would want to be called out in the middle of the night for the same handful of people that are abusing the system? This is not what the volunteers signed up for.

0-12-00 Liz Thomas speaks in favor of forming a committee with representatives from the Town and Village Boards, and EMS people, and residents from both sides of the issue, to study the proposed billing plan further.

Liz mentioned that the August TB meeting will consider a contract with the SPCA. We currently are (I think) the only town in the county to refuse to contract with the SPCA for dog control, in spite of the fact that we benefit from their animal cruelty services and their adoption services etc.

For more information from Liz, here's a link to her latest "Informing Ulysses"
The Comprehensive Plan is nearing completion. Links to the draft can be found here. Now is the time for input. Soon it will be too late.

0-28-10 Ed Hetherington -building inspector - hard to hear

0-31-06 Tom Ferretti's Police report

0-36-16 Jason Fulton's Fire Dept report

0-43-0 Tammy Morse - clerk's report

0-47-28 Tammy McMillan - treasurer's report

0-50-30 Mayor Petrovic's report

0-56-30 Fire and EMS - Chris Thomas

1-10-43 Community liaison - Debbie Nottke

1-15-50 correspondence - Auble water and sewer bill / Save A Lot for rent or sale
Mayor Petrovic mentions the possibility of incentivizing business to use the Save A Lot building. I think we should incentivize Byrne Dairy to buy or rent it.

1-33-50 Discussion of purchase of the Telephone Company Building. I'm writing this a couple weeks after the meeting. The latest news in the Free Press is that the board has voted to go ahead with the purchase.

1-44-39 extending zoning moratorium on the Auble property

1-55-24 zoning revision committee - Sarah Adams is interested in serving - two residents are needed. Marty and Chris from the board will serve. Tim Hamiltion and Bob Brown from the ZBA will serve. They will interview for the two resident spots.

2-04-50 Paying bills

2-10-40 Second public comment period. From yours truly. I got out my calculator and figured out that it would take 333 years for the potential savings from going to ambulance billing, to equal what I personally am going to have to pay for the Iraq War. I find it ironic that we are trying so hard to save so little, when the elephant in the room is the criminality of the Bush administration.

2-16-40 Geoffrey Hart's comment. He objects to my continuing effort to get the Board to pass a resolution to encourage our representatives to investigate impeachment of Bush and Cheney. He claims that I have contradicted myself and therefore shouldn't be taken seriously. He quotes my blog (trumansburgimpeachment.blogspot.com) of July 07 "The impeachment of a president tends to be a partisan issue, but it shouldn't be"

then a month later "Pelosi said that the American people turned against Congressional Republicans in the 90's for impeaching Clinton, so she worries that they would judge her Democratic Party harshly if she were to allow impeachment to proceed now. She underestimates us. We realized that the impeachment of Clinton was purely political. The Republicans saw the opportunity to capitalize on a sex scandal to promote their political agenda. The impeachment of Bush and Cheney is necessary to protect against serious abuse of power and the subversion of constitutional government. "

then at a Village Board meeting in November - " One last item for Trustees Thomas and Hrubos. You are Democrats. Here's an important memo if you want your party to succeed. Nine attempts have been made to impeach a president in US history. None of these attempts actually resulted in removal of a president from office. They were very important none the less. In all nine instances the party that attempted to impeach, either held or increased it's majority in Congress, and every time that an opposition party attempted to impeach, they took the presidency at the next election. If you don't believe that impeachment can possibly succeed in the time we have left, that is not a reason to ignore your oath of office to protect and defend the Constitution. Stand up for justice. The rewards are great for you and your party and the country."

Mr. Hart says I'm clearly invoking party loyalty in the most recent of these three quotes and finds this a huge contradiction, and says that I have forfeited my right to be taken seriously.

I try to defend myself and Chris Thomas interrupts and suggests we take it outside. Which we do. I find no contradiction in the three quotes that Mr. Hart took the time to find. In the last one, I am appealing to Thomas and Hrubos to stand up for justice, and the Constitution, and the Democratic Party, all at the same time. In an ideal world, there is no conflict in doing all at the same time, because the goals of the Democratic Party align nicely with justice and the Constitution. The same can not be said of the Republican Party, whose goals align nicely with Corporate control, increasing the wealth of the rich, and expanding the American empire. The Republicans impeached Bill Clinton for partisan reasons. They felt that they could accomplish their goals faster with complete fascists like Bush and Cheney, and they were right. The Democrats should impeach Bush and Cheney on behalf of we the people. To be perfectly honest, the Democratic Party often disgusts me. I am not a partisan. I am a Democrat, because they are by far, the lesser of two evils, and the way the game is rigged, they are our only realistic hope until we can get campaign finance reform and fair elections.

2-20-50 Meeting is adjourned, and Mr. Hart and I continue our discussion, first inside, and then outside in the parking lot. I wrote to Mr. Hart, and he said that he does not object to my posting this.

At one point Mr. Hart says, in defense of Bush's warrantless surveillance program, that FDR did the same thing during WW2. I was skeptical. I wrote this later and sent it to him -

I've tried to find info on FDR infringing on our Fourth Amendment rights during WW2, and I've not found much. There may have been an increase in government surveillance of citizens, but it wasn't codified. Bush, with his "Fisa Amendments Act" and the "Patriot Act" and the "Military Commissions Act", has actually passed legislation which takes habeas corpus and posse comitatus away, and legalizes warrant-less surveillance.

FDR never suspended habeas corpus, even when under attack by very powerful armies, that would make our current adversaries look like amateurs. James Madison never suspended habeas corpus even when the British Navy (the most powerful military force in the world at the time) sailed across the Atlantic, came ashore, marched to Washington, and burned down the White House. Benjamin Franklin said "They who would give up essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security."

If you could document illegal FDR spying, I'd like to see that, but even more interesting would be if you could show that it helped us win the war. I'll bet that what helped us win the war, much more than any domestic spying, would be the decency that was characteristic of FDR's administration, and completely lacking in the Bush Administration. Bush condones torture. Many German soldiers surrendered to US troops in WW2, because we had a reputation for good treatment of prisoners. America had a reputation as a beacon of liberty then, and now the world fears and distrusts and hates us for torturing prisoners in Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib and Bagram. (Not to mention incinerating thousands of their loved ones)

We know what happens when a population is manipulated by fear tactics to "give up essential liberty for temporary security". This is exactly what happened to the good Germans in the 30's.

At one point Mr. Hart says that the NY Times recently wrote that no amount of recounting would have changed the results in Florida in 2000. I said please send that to me, because I have heard just the opposite. http://www.bushwatch.com/gorebush.htm

Then Mr. Hart gets all religious on me. I'm out of my element here, but I think I'm seeing more fundamental contradictions than Mr. Hart was accusing me of during the meeting. He claims that the Muslims are trying to take over the world, I say chill out, he says the Koran is terribly violent, I say so is the Bible, he admits the Old Testament is a bit harsh, but when Jesus came along he said we (father, son, holy ghost) are introducing a new covenant, a covenant of love, a covenant which has no prescriptions for punishment, except excommunication. He says if you're a Christian you follow the laws of Christ. Love your neighbor, be good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you.... OK. This sounds good. But Mr. Hart is an advocate for continuing the horrific killing of Muslims in the Middle East. He excuses this contradiction by saying the Muslims are trying to kill us, and we are acting in self defense. This seems absurd if you look at the score card. Islam 3000 on 9/11, and 5000 US soldiers since then, VS America - 1 million dead Muslims and 4 million refugees! Our imperialistic wars are bankrupting us, while we increase the incidents of terrorism worldwide. Christ had a much better idea. He would advocate for more humanitarian aid, and development aid, and honoring our commitment to the United Nations Millennium Goals. This would be far more effective in reducing terrorism, and far less expensive at the same time. It's just common sense.