Post by Venter on Aug 1, 2015 18:55:25 GMT -5
***** "Adams County Commissioners Meeting - You Cannot Believe Everything You Read in the [Newspapers] " *****
I attended my first Adams County Commissioners Meeting on July 29, 2015, and it was nothing short of educational:
I arrived a tad late, but luckily, just before the "Public Comment" time began.
I was accompanied by my wife, Debi (after she found a parking space) and I really appreciated her "last minute support", after she realized there would be no one else attending from our group.
Before I could actually "catch my breath", and collect my thoughts, I was up and speaking before the Board - and if I had had just two more minutes, at least I could have provided audio - sorry about that BoroVENTers, but, actually... you should have been there frown emoticon .
My words, although babbling a bit, eventually came flowing out (minus my customary BoroVENT expletives) - Yes, a minor miracle... and I know you're all surprised. Thank you
Sure, I should have been a bit more prepared, as I spoke more or less "off-the-cuff", but at least some of my intentions were understood by the Commissioners, so I must have said something right.
I certainly know better than to be combative while speaking to a Board, yet I felt that they were in a slightly "defensive mode" (maybe due to our continuing discussions, and my comments on BoroVENT?)
They had "done their homework", and were relatively aware of my concerns in advance.
I do applaud them for being prepared, and I think it made my presentation efforts worthwhile.
BUT, I truly believe that their preparedness may have clouded their perception of my true intentions, and caused them to become more defensive than necessary - and THAT'S exactly where a DISCUSSION would have been MUCH MORE EFFECTIVE!
In a Discussion/Dialogue, I'd have the ability to Counter their comments, and they'd be able to ask me to Clarify my statements - but that didn't really occur, except when I just HAD to interject a slight correction, or agree with a comment by nodding... or even vocally at times.
Since I know both Commissioner Phiel and Qually on a more familiar/personal level, and I believe that made it easier for them to understand where I'm coming from, and therefore, easier to respond to me.
That may have paved the way to the "Response Activity" that occurred after I finished speaking.
And, I certainly appreciate that I did not receive the obligatory, "Thank you for your comments, we'll take them under consideration" response
I appreciate that reporter, Lillian Reed, of the Evening Sun, seemed to grasp a lot more of the true interaction that occurred, and I believe her article was more reflective of the ACTUAL Meeting that the rest of us attended - rather than the "editorialized" version that Alex Hayes, of the Gettysburg Times, decided to run with.
Unfortunately, Alex twisted my words, and clipped a portion of my "pleased and surprised" remark.
He omitted a Crucial Part of my quote, which pretty much continued, "I'm pleased and surprised... at how much the Commissioners spoke about the issue, and responded to my concerns... BUT it was STILL , in no sense, a meaningful 'DIALOGUE'! "
Alex inserts Charles Strauss into his article, in spite of the fact that Charles was unable to attend the meeting, and therefore did not speak.
Hayes's "Choice to Omit", therefore, seems to implicate that I am evidently a part of some "Political Motive".
EVEN after I assured Judge George VERBALLY that my motives are not Political - Hayes went with an "unfounded conspiracy theory" anyway.
THAT pisses me off Alex!
I'm sure there must be some reason for Alex to make it appear as if "All is well!", but I'm not sure what his motives were.
By omitting my true concerns, he made it seem as if I was "SATISFIED" with the process, and everything was hunky-dory.
Far from it... although it IS a step in the right direction, it falls FAR SHORT of speaking with constituents.
"Allowing" people to speak, and then "speaking back at them", cannot be confused with Actual Conversation.
Especially considering that I have been the ONLY constituent out of 105,000, over a period of 2 years to have ANY Remark about this issue, perhaps Alex could have concentrated just a bit more on MY concerns, rather than filling up space with info about a "Political Conspiracy with Strauss", and giving ink to some kiss-up old fart, who just HAD to proclaim that "... the Commissioners DO listen to the citizens and allow public comment...". I love you guys, Kiss, Kiss, Kiss. Brownie points, I guess unsure emoticon Wipe that stuff off your nose buddy.
If the Commissioners, and Judge George, had actually LISTENED to what I was saying - rather than what they had EXPECTED me to say - their responses most likely would have been a bit different.
And, although their responses WERE of interest, they were off the mark a good bit - but I couldn't tell THEM that - it wasn't a discussion after all.
IF I had had the opportunity to counter the claims that Judge George directed at me, then they would have understood a LOT more about my intentions.
In reality, I was being chided for things that I hadn't even brought up in my comments, and my true intentions were never actually "discussed".
So much for dialogue.
IF they had been listening, or really cared to respond to my concerns, they would have realized that my main concerns centered about the way this PROCESS has been handled.
About the way that it initially appeared to be a project of the Court System (Judge George), using money from the Courts - but THEN it has evolved into a more encompassing project which will be payed for using considerably more of our tax money.
It seemed as if the entire SCOPE of the project had expanded considerably - beyond the initial requests and proposals, and THAT is what grabbed my attention, and caused my interest to become piqued.
[Thanks to Charles Strauss for bringing this issue to the forefront, even at the eleventh hour.]
I feel as though the well-intentioned concern for mental health and human service facilities has FAR exceeded the initial impetus for this project.
I feel that the "cups have been shuffled" SO many times, that it is time to step back, and reassess the entire project - BEFORE it is a "done deal".
Just because 8 selected people discussed this for a WHOLE EIGHT HOURS, 2 years ago, that does NOT mean that the Commissioners and Judge should be allowed Carte Blanche to continue this process unimpeded and unquestioned! [especially by us peons]
I reasoned that SINCE the "Public" has misconceptions about the needs and plans for this facility, especially since it's been modified significantly over two years, that there should be an opportunity to have this hashed out in a Community Forum.
I indicated that (from what I could figure out) the next Public Forum was in November - to which Randy countered "it's in September".
[BTW, if ANYONE can find the dates of Public Forums on their "Award-Winning Website" PLEASE let me know, and post them here.]
Finally, since "public comment" allows 5 minutes to speak, and they had more than 30 minutes of "rebuttal" with whatever they wanted to say (although interesting and pertinent), my questions have STILL not been answered.
One thing that occurs in DIALOGUE, is that, as a question is asked and answered, there is USUALLY another follow-up question that will come to mind - until each party is satisfied, at least for the time being.
It also allows for a process to continue the dialogue at a later date, IF there are circumstances that warrant it, and to keep the channels open.
This was more like a call-in talk show, where the questioner was allowed a question, and then hung up on.
So, in reality, it ain't over
I hope that the Commissioners and Judge George realize that this expanded project has serious effects on the Citizens of the region, and especially the Citizens of Gettysburg, for the near and distant future.
It certainly deserves much more than the Eight-Hour-Citizen-Panel that has already been dedicated to it.
Hell, I'll give you 24 hours of my own time toward making this work.
I'll bet we can find a few other souls somewhere that would be willing - AND able to shine additional light on this, and not just rubber-stamp it.
The repercussions of introducing, or expanding these facilities into a region like this, are far-reaching.
As well-intentioned and necessary as they may be, there should be further investigation, and more PUBLIC Procedure utilized to bring it to fruition.
3 Final Notes:
· MY concern for this issue is NOT AT ALL Politically Motivated
· I appreciated the opportunity to bring this up in Public Comment - but...
· I anticipate having an opportunity to discuss this Specific Project in a Public Forum.
That's it for now.
Ask me questions about it, and I'll try to DISCUSS it further.
Gene
I attended my first Adams County Commissioners Meeting on July 29, 2015, and it was nothing short of educational:
I arrived a tad late, but luckily, just before the "Public Comment" time began.
I was accompanied by my wife, Debi (after she found a parking space) and I really appreciated her "last minute support", after she realized there would be no one else attending from our group.
Before I could actually "catch my breath", and collect my thoughts, I was up and speaking before the Board - and if I had had just two more minutes, at least I could have provided audio - sorry about that BoroVENTers, but, actually... you should have been there frown emoticon .
My words, although babbling a bit, eventually came flowing out (minus my customary BoroVENT expletives) - Yes, a minor miracle... and I know you're all surprised. Thank you
Sure, I should have been a bit more prepared, as I spoke more or less "off-the-cuff", but at least some of my intentions were understood by the Commissioners, so I must have said something right.
I certainly know better than to be combative while speaking to a Board, yet I felt that they were in a slightly "defensive mode" (maybe due to our continuing discussions, and my comments on BoroVENT?)
They had "done their homework", and were relatively aware of my concerns in advance.
I do applaud them for being prepared, and I think it made my presentation efforts worthwhile.
BUT, I truly believe that their preparedness may have clouded their perception of my true intentions, and caused them to become more defensive than necessary - and THAT'S exactly where a DISCUSSION would have been MUCH MORE EFFECTIVE!
In a Discussion/Dialogue, I'd have the ability to Counter their comments, and they'd be able to ask me to Clarify my statements - but that didn't really occur, except when I just HAD to interject a slight correction, or agree with a comment by nodding... or even vocally at times.
Since I know both Commissioner Phiel and Qually on a more familiar/personal level, and I believe that made it easier for them to understand where I'm coming from, and therefore, easier to respond to me.
That may have paved the way to the "Response Activity" that occurred after I finished speaking.
And, I certainly appreciate that I did not receive the obligatory, "Thank you for your comments, we'll take them under consideration" response
I appreciate that reporter, Lillian Reed, of the Evening Sun, seemed to grasp a lot more of the true interaction that occurred, and I believe her article was more reflective of the ACTUAL Meeting that the rest of us attended - rather than the "editorialized" version that Alex Hayes, of the Gettysburg Times, decided to run with.
Unfortunately, Alex twisted my words, and clipped a portion of my "pleased and surprised" remark.
He omitted a Crucial Part of my quote, which pretty much continued, "I'm pleased and surprised... at how much the Commissioners spoke about the issue, and responded to my concerns... BUT it was STILL , in no sense, a meaningful 'DIALOGUE'! "
Alex inserts Charles Strauss into his article, in spite of the fact that Charles was unable to attend the meeting, and therefore did not speak.
Hayes's "Choice to Omit", therefore, seems to implicate that I am evidently a part of some "Political Motive".
EVEN after I assured Judge George VERBALLY that my motives are not Political - Hayes went with an "unfounded conspiracy theory" anyway.
THAT pisses me off Alex!
I'm sure there must be some reason for Alex to make it appear as if "All is well!", but I'm not sure what his motives were.
By omitting my true concerns, he made it seem as if I was "SATISFIED" with the process, and everything was hunky-dory.
Far from it... although it IS a step in the right direction, it falls FAR SHORT of speaking with constituents.
"Allowing" people to speak, and then "speaking back at them", cannot be confused with Actual Conversation.
Especially considering that I have been the ONLY constituent out of 105,000, over a period of 2 years to have ANY Remark about this issue, perhaps Alex could have concentrated just a bit more on MY concerns, rather than filling up space with info about a "Political Conspiracy with Strauss", and giving ink to some kiss-up old fart, who just HAD to proclaim that "... the Commissioners DO listen to the citizens and allow public comment...". I love you guys, Kiss, Kiss, Kiss. Brownie points, I guess unsure emoticon Wipe that stuff off your nose buddy.
If the Commissioners, and Judge George, had actually LISTENED to what I was saying - rather than what they had EXPECTED me to say - their responses most likely would have been a bit different.
And, although their responses WERE of interest, they were off the mark a good bit - but I couldn't tell THEM that - it wasn't a discussion after all.
IF I had had the opportunity to counter the claims that Judge George directed at me, then they would have understood a LOT more about my intentions.
In reality, I was being chided for things that I hadn't even brought up in my comments, and my true intentions were never actually "discussed".
So much for dialogue.
IF they had been listening, or really cared to respond to my concerns, they would have realized that my main concerns centered about the way this PROCESS has been handled.
About the way that it initially appeared to be a project of the Court System (Judge George), using money from the Courts - but THEN it has evolved into a more encompassing project which will be payed for using considerably more of our tax money.
It seemed as if the entire SCOPE of the project had expanded considerably - beyond the initial requests and proposals, and THAT is what grabbed my attention, and caused my interest to become piqued.
[Thanks to Charles Strauss for bringing this issue to the forefront, even at the eleventh hour.]
I feel as though the well-intentioned concern for mental health and human service facilities has FAR exceeded the initial impetus for this project.
I feel that the "cups have been shuffled" SO many times, that it is time to step back, and reassess the entire project - BEFORE it is a "done deal".
Just because 8 selected people discussed this for a WHOLE EIGHT HOURS, 2 years ago, that does NOT mean that the Commissioners and Judge should be allowed Carte Blanche to continue this process unimpeded and unquestioned! [especially by us peons]
I reasoned that SINCE the "Public" has misconceptions about the needs and plans for this facility, especially since it's been modified significantly over two years, that there should be an opportunity to have this hashed out in a Community Forum.
I indicated that (from what I could figure out) the next Public Forum was in November - to which Randy countered "it's in September".
[BTW, if ANYONE can find the dates of Public Forums on their "Award-Winning Website" PLEASE let me know, and post them here.]
Finally, since "public comment" allows 5 minutes to speak, and they had more than 30 minutes of "rebuttal" with whatever they wanted to say (although interesting and pertinent), my questions have STILL not been answered.
One thing that occurs in DIALOGUE, is that, as a question is asked and answered, there is USUALLY another follow-up question that will come to mind - until each party is satisfied, at least for the time being.
It also allows for a process to continue the dialogue at a later date, IF there are circumstances that warrant it, and to keep the channels open.
This was more like a call-in talk show, where the questioner was allowed a question, and then hung up on.
So, in reality, it ain't over
I hope that the Commissioners and Judge George realize that this expanded project has serious effects on the Citizens of the region, and especially the Citizens of Gettysburg, for the near and distant future.
It certainly deserves much more than the Eight-Hour-Citizen-Panel that has already been dedicated to it.
Hell, I'll give you 24 hours of my own time toward making this work.
I'll bet we can find a few other souls somewhere that would be willing - AND able to shine additional light on this, and not just rubber-stamp it.
The repercussions of introducing, or expanding these facilities into a region like this, are far-reaching.
As well-intentioned and necessary as they may be, there should be further investigation, and more PUBLIC Procedure utilized to bring it to fruition.
3 Final Notes:
· MY concern for this issue is NOT AT ALL Politically Motivated
· I appreciated the opportunity to bring this up in Public Comment - but...
· I anticipate having an opportunity to discuss this Specific Project in a Public Forum.
That's it for now.
Ask me questions about it, and I'll try to DISCUSS it further.
Gene