"Reality TV, Commission Approves Broadcast"

No, not the Stern show, sorry to disappoint some of you.

Last night at the Commission meeting under citizens comments, Dr. Mel Antrim presented the issue of returning to televising the City Commission meetings again in the best interest of keeping the public informed.

City Manager Joe Turner told the Commission that he had Bob Johnson research costs associated with the purchase of equipment and provided that report to the Commission and the Public. Following some discussion Nick Graham made a motion to allow the CM to proceed to obtain the equipment with an allocation of $1600, which was seconded by Commissioner Jim Adams.

During the vote call there was a pause when Barbara Woods name was called. At that point she said;

"What about the County or the Juco?"

To which the Commission gave a blank look.

She followed with "they're taxing entities too."

She looked to the citizens at the meeting so I said "I think a local government channel would be great!"

Then she went on to say, "I know I didn't like the bad meetings when they were on TV, and I haven't missed them when they have been off."

"I guess yes, but with reservations, I just hope we can all act like adults."

When his name was called Adams responded, "Yes, with NO reservations.

Ultimately the entire Commission voted to resume the televised meetings.

To me this is a good thing.

It's just too bad the public wasn't able to see Mrs. Woods attitude last night.

"Back to Blogging"

I am surprised that I still have this blog. I guess the host doesn't cut you off for not posting in over a year. But that's not why I'm posting tonight. I just have a lot on my mind concerning local and National politics. I know I probably better not get started on the National stuff, I might not have enough webspace alotment for all of my opinions here. There should however be enough room for my most recent concerns on the local political scene.

It concerns me that our local newspaper has not been covering City Government news for sometime now. Especially with budget hearings going on, tax and utility increases being proposed etc. It also concerns me that the City itself seems to obviously not want to resume the recording and televising of their meetings.

Well, I guess that wasn't as much of a vent as I thought it would be. I can't believe I summed it up in one paragraph. I guess if I'll be resuming this blog, and potentially being the only medium for timely political coverage, that's a start.

I think for now I will just leave it at that and get back into this blogging thing slowly.

So, "that's all I have to say about that." -for now.

Miller/Nelson Block finally coming down!!!

Details to follow....

"Where in the World is Bourban County?"

Can anybody tell me where this place is?

"Another Law Broken by our City Commissioners?"

12-16,121

Chapter 12.--CITIES AND MUNICIPALITIES

Article 16.--MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

12-16,121.

Paving material's provided by cities and counties; limitations.

(a) As used in this section and K.S.A. 12-16,122, and amendments thereto:

(1) "City" means any city.

(2) "County" means any county.

(3) "Governing body" means the governing body of any city and the board of county commissioners of any county.

(4) "Paving material" means crushed rock, asphalt, gravel, aggregate sand or other materials used to pave roads, streets and drives.

(b) Except as provided in subsection (c), the governing body of any city or county shall not sell or otherwise provide paving material to any private person or private entity.

(c) The provisions of subsection (b) shall not apply if the governing body has:

(1) Made a determination that such paving materials are not readily available from a nongovernmental entity; or

(2) adopted a resolution declaring the existence of a disaster, emergency or the threat of disaster or emergency.

History: L. 2001, ch. 111, § 1; July 1.

(emphasis above mine.)

When choosing to do $160,000 worth of paving for the theater did the city violate this law?

If they made a determination that such paving materials are not readily available from a nongovernmental entity then they must have forgotten that not long ago a case regarding this was taken before the state appellate court by Heckert and Se-Kan Asphalt Services. City Attorney Bob Farmer was there, didn't he remember?

Here is a link to the courts decision: http://www.kscourts.org/kscases/supct/2004/20040625/90872.htm

Here are a few sections of the courts findings, (again, emphasis mine):

The opinion of the court was delivered by GERNON, J.: Heckert Construction Company, Inc., (Heckert) and SE-KAN Asphalt Services, Inc., (SE-KAN) challenge the sale of asphalt paving materials by the City of Fort Scott (City) to private citizens and entities. Heckert and SE-KAN claim that the City is selling asphalt paving materials from its municipal asphalt plant in violation of K.S.A. 12-16,121. We agree.

The language of K.S.A. 12-16,121 is unambiguous. The legislature's clear intention for K.S.A. 12-16,121 is to prevent local governments from competing with the private paving material industry as long as paving material is readily available from a private company. The key question to resolving this dispute is the meaning of the phrase "readily available from a nongovernmental entity" in K.S.A. 12-16,121.

Also I noticed in the "Countryside" edition of the Fort Scott Tribune, a paving company from Prescott, Kansas who is advertising that they do city streets, airports, parking lots etc. It certainly appears to me to be against the law, and I don't think that the commission can use the excuse that "they didn't realize it." Their attorney should have let them know, and the long term commissioners WOULD HAVE KNOWN.

What do you think?

Grand Jury Purpose and Functions

There is an interesting article online about a Lake County California Grand Jury that is always in session. I thought it was interesting and timely. Here is a synopsis from that site.

HISTORY

The institution of the Grand Jury is of ancient origin. Its use as an instrument of government predates its introduction into our country during colonial times. It has been continued and used throughout American history.
As constituted today, the Grand Jury is a part of the judicial branch of government — “an arm of the court.” It does not have the functions of either the legislative or executive branches, and it is not a police agency. Additionally, it does not mandate policy changes. It is an examining and investigative body that makes recommendations to improve systems, procedures, and methods of operations in designated local government.

FUNCTION

A California Grand Jury has three basic functions: weighing criminal charges and determining whether indictments should be returned; weighing citizens’ complaints of misconduct against public officials to determine whether to present formal accusations requesting their removal from office; and acting as the public’s “watchdog” by investigating and reporting upon the affairs of local government. The “watchdog” role is the one played most often. (McClatchy Newspapers v. Superior Court (1988) 44 Cal.3d 1162, 1170.)

Watchdog Responsibilities

The major function of the Lake County Grand Jury is to examine county and city government and special districts to ensure that their duties are being lawfully carried out. The Grand Jury reviews and evaluates procedures, methods, and systems utilized by these entities to determine whether more efficient and economical programs may be employed. The Grand Jury also is authorized to:

1. Inspect and audit books, records, and financial expenditures to ensure that public funds are properly accounted for and legally spent.

2. Inspect books and records of special districts in Lake County.

3. Examine the books and records of any nonprofit organization receiving county or city funds.

4. Inquire into the conditions of jails and detention facilities.

5. Inquire into any charges of willful misconduct in an office by public officials or employees.

Response to Citizens’ Complaints:

The Grand Jury receives letters from citizens alleging mistreatment by officials, suspicions of misconduct, or governmental inefficiencies. Anyone may ask the Grand Jury to conduct an investigation. All complaints are confidential. The jury generally limits investigations to the operations of governmental agencies, charges of wrongdoing within public agencies, or the performance of unlawful acts by public officials. The Grand Jury cannot investigate disputes between private parties.

Criminal Investigations:

The Grand Jury, in cooperation with the District Attorney, may investigate allegations of criminal activity. Criminal cases commonly presented to the Grand Jury by the District Attorney include, but are not limited to:

1. Cases involving multiple defendants;

2. Cases with special witnesses, such as children, informants, or undercover agents;

3. Cases involving public officials;

4. Cases in which adverse publicity could hurt the accused, and

5. Cases in which the statute of limitations is about to expire.

If it is determined that there is probable cause that the accused has committed a crime and to hold the accused for trial, the Grand Jury issues an indictment. An indictment is only an accusation, not a finding of guilt. A minimum of 12 jurors must vote for an indictment in any criminal proceeding.

In Lake County, the Grand Jury generally performs only civil functions.

There is more information on this at this link: http://www.co.lake.ca.us/generalinformation/grandjury/aboutus.asp

"So what's the big hold up?"

When it comes to an overpass, underpass or whatever to help cover the Eastside vulnerability, can anyone tell me why this state law cannot be applied?...City Attorney?....

13-1903
Chapter 13.--CITIES OF THE FIRST CLASS

PART II.--COMMISSION GOVERNMENT

Article 19.--GENERAL POWERS OF BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS

13-1903. Viaducts over or tunnels under streets; proceeding to require railroads to construct; costs; penalty for violation. The board of commissioners shall have power to require any railroad company or companies owning or operating any railroad or street-railway track or tracks upon or across any public street or streets of the city to erect, construct, reconstruct, complete and keep in repair any viaduct or viaducts over or tunnels under such street or streets and over or under any such track or tracks, including the approaches of such viaduct or viaducts, as may be deemed and declared by the board of commissioners necessary for the safety and protection of the public. Whenever any such viaduct shall be deemed and declared by ordinance necessary for the safety and protection of the public, the board of commissioners shall provide for appraising, assessing and determining the damage, if any, which may be caused to any property by reason of the construction of such viaduct and its approaches.

The proceedings for such purpose shall be the same as provided by law for the purpose of determining damages to property owners by reason of the change in grade of a street, and such damage shall be paid by said railway companies. The width, height and strength of any such viaduct, and the approaches thereto, the material therefor and the manner of construction thereof, shall be as required by the board of commissioners. When two or more railroad companies own or operate separate lines of track to be crossed by any such viaduct, or where any street-railway company intersects and crosses the track or tracks of any railroad company, the proportion thereof, and the approaches thereto, to be constructed by each, or the cost to be borne by each, shall be determined by the board of commissioners.

It shall be the duty of any railroad company or companies or street-railway company, upon being required, as herein provided, to erect, construct, reconstruct or repair any viaduct, to proceed within the time and in the manner required by the board of commissioners to erect, construct, reconstruct or repair the same; and it shall be a misdemeanor for any railroad company or companies or street-railway company to fail, neglect or refuse to perform such duty, and upon conviction any such company or companies shall be fined one hundred dollars, and each day any such company or companies shall fail, neglect or refuse to perform such duty shall be deemed and held to be a separate and distinct offense; and in addition to the penalty herein provided, any such company or companies shall be compelled by mandamus or other appropriate proceedings to erect, construct, reconstruct or repair any viaduct as may be required by ordinance as herein provided.

The board of commissioners shall also have power, whenever any railroad company or companies or street-railway company shall fail, neglect or refuse to erect, construct, reconstruct or repair any viaduct or viaducts, after having been required so to do as herein provided, to proceed with the erection, construction, reconstruction or repair of such viaduct or viaducts by contract, or in such other manner as may be provided by ordinance, and assess the costs thereof against the property of such railroad company or companies or street-railway company, and such cost shall be a valid and subsisting lien against such property, and shall also be a legal indebtedness of said company or companies in favor of such city, and may be enforced and collected by suit in the proper court.

History: L. 1907, ch. 114, § 73; May 27; R.S. 1923, § 13-1903.