Opening this month's Villager, I found it much improved compared to last month's issue. The bias is less apparent, I suppose.
The issue can be found online, here.
While I encourage you to read it in full or at least an overview, here are my thoughts, as a resident, on it.
Lynn's Mayor's Report included a piece on the Yard Waste pick up. It was a good clarification of the "regulations" as she said, however I found it interesting that they claim the "garbage drivers think it is yard waste and leave it for the yard waste drivers and vice versa" when a can contains both some garbage and some yard waste or vice versa. I found this interesting because almost every week, yard waste comes through first, then the recycling truck, and then, much later in the day, garbage pick up. How could the garbage people think it's going to be picked up by the yard waste truck, when they've already been through and neighboring cans are empty of yard waste? Either way, she gave us a clarification of the regs. and I suppose we can easily enough follow them. There are labels at the Community Building if you need/desire any for your cans.
The Mayor's Report also included a piece from the Council Meeting on Finance, in which they sum up the happenings in the Public Hearing of the Budget that was held 30 minutes before the regular council meeting. I have to say, I don't believe this short collection of sentences is a full and accurate account of what happened or what was questioned or said, but at least it was acknowledged, I suppose.
The report of the Council Meeting ends with a note that the Council Meeting retired into Executive session, which seems to be an "as usual" recently. There have been at least three executive sessions in the last four months that I am aware of. Hmm....something with "personnel" is going on. More on this with the Police Chief's piece....
Also, "Where are You?" is interesting. I'm glad it was included, because we need more residents to get involved. But I have to wonder if this was included because they need more residents involved. Lynn is up for re-election this year, and she won by little in the last race. This year the Late Jack Murray will not be running, and if one should run against her she stands a chance at losing. Considering the source, this doesn't feel sincere. The facts on the 2007 election are sobering though, only 35.5% of Minerva Park residents voted in our races.
Of note: the Minerva Park Green Team is on Facebook, check 'em out if you're interested.
Now, to Chief Nuesse's piece, "On the Beat". I think this was filled with valuable information for residents. I myself have wondered what constitutes a 9-1-1 call or a call to the non-emergency line (882-1223).
I did notice the "New Officers" paragraph as well. These are the officers replacing the two recently fired. Supposedly what those "Executive Sessions on Personnel matters" were about. I hope these new recruits will prove as valuable to the Village as their predecessors have, but I'd like to see less Executive session and more value of the officers who know this village and have served here for years.
I also found it a bit ironic that she states "Would you like to meet your officers and get to know what the crime trends are to better protect you and your family?" when just weeks ago there was an order put out basically stating that officers were not to speak to residents for "a prolonged period". The Chief states residents can call her to set up a time and place, in the Villager.
Otherwise, I did find her piece informative and useful.
The Garage Sale Fund Raiser is coming up next month, something I and many I know look forward to every year. Registrations are due August 10th, 7:00pm to Dianne Poncinie.
Also of note, Suzanne Coulter, resigned Clerk-Treasurer, is still managing the Village finances. While I disagree with her attitude and some of her opinions, and previously how involved she managed to make her opinions though her position did not merit it, the Village does owe her some gratitude for maintaining the Village accounts. She could have left us high and dry in immediate need of a replacement, and she has chosen not to. Though I don't typically have much nice to say about her because of what I have seen in the Community Building out of her, I do realize the value of her work, particularly now that she is choosing to do so when she doesn't have to.
Overall, I felt this issue of the Villager was less propaganda, less opinionated, and less biased, though we still have to consider the source.
I do not quite agree with the blurb about the clerk-treasurer. She did not have to do it before since she choose to run, and another is one function of the position is to manage/maintain the village finances so it seems reasonable she should do it while in that position. It does seem odd and on the shady side for her to resign and then stay on and likely be part of selecting and training a new fiscal officer that could possibly extend as long as the clerk-treasurer term is.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the above comment, and perhaps I should clarify, the part her position did not merit was how involved or opinionated she made herself.
ReplyDeleteHer continued involvement could be a risk if she mishandles the funds or improperly trains a new Fiscal Officer. Perhaps she should have just stayed in her position if she will continue to "do the job", but then there wouldn't have been such a dire need for the creation of the Fiscal Officer position, would there?
These issues are very valid and concerning, and if residents don't continue to look deeper than the surface of what is presented to them, we are all in a lot of trouble.
The Villager is always going to be propaganda as long as Sharon Bierman is editor. Oh wait, she's NOT the editor but one would never know it by the way she claims total control over it.
ReplyDelete