|
|
Post by Kyle Mitchell on Sept 15, 2013 18:57:26 GMT -6
On the chicken issue, a councilman said that the intention of the current law was to not allow any farm animals in commercial or industrial zoned areas as well. Why wasn't it written that way then and why didn't they take the time to change it before approving it? Citizens can't be expected to understand their intention of the laws unless they are written that way.
They were recently going to pass a ban at a special meeting without any prior discussion, public input or much of any notification to the public. Why were they trying to push it through so quick? They didn't even take into consideration that a company that sells farm animals and supplies was planning to come here.
Why do they even need to have special meetings where no public input is allowed? In my opinion, they shouldn't be able to just push an ordinance through like that.
We have a law that bans outside sales without a special use permit, outlawing sidewalk sales, but they are allowed to go on every year and some merchants are allowed the rest of the year, while others aren't.
I thought an ordinance was passed that banned vehicles in the park. There was a front page article saying that we wouldn't be having a carnival on the fourth, because of it. However, I continually see vehicles in the park and don't know if they are allowed or not. Was it just another law with a lack of thought?
Shouldn't we put in more time, thought and input from others before passing our laws?
They should be equal for everyone.
|
|
|
|
Post by greekgod on Sept 15, 2013 19:18:48 GMT -6
Kyle,
I do believe there is an "Illinois Open Meetings Act".
If you believe there was a violation you can contact the Attorney General of Illinois Lisa Madigan to answer your questions.
There could be a difference in what you believe should happen, and actual law.
Get back when you know the difference.
g
|
|
|
|
Post by father of two on Sept 15, 2013 19:24:01 GMT -6
Before an item can go for a vote it has to go through a meeting as a discussion item. The next meeting it can be brought up as an action item. Public comments are not always guaranteed at a meeting. You must remember, council meetings are meetings in the public, not public meetings. They can have restrictions regarding length of time to speak and to prohibit a person from speaking about the same things continually.
|
|
|
|
Post by chevypower on Sept 15, 2013 19:35:20 GMT -6
That puts Kyle out I suppose.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kyle Mitchell on Sept 15, 2013 19:37:11 GMT -6
No need to contact the AG. I was clearly just stating my opinions of what should happen.
Restricting dialogue with the public just doesn't seem to have the best results in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
Post by greekgod on Sept 15, 2013 19:43:57 GMT -6
No need to contact the AG. I was clearly just stating my opinions of what should happen. Restricting dialogue with the public just doesn't seem to have the best results in my opinion. Kyle, Oh, then you do not really believe the "Old Boys Club" are doing anything illegal, correct? g |
|
|
|
Post by Kyle Mitchell on Sept 15, 2013 20:02:45 GMT -6
You know that I feel that our laws haven't been followed in the past.
You also know that I have chosen to just expose what goes on instead of getting attorneys to force our laws to be followed.
I would hope that they would follow our laws in the future.
They may be able to legally get away with not allowing public comment at these "special" meetings, but that doesn't mean that everyone has to think that it is right.
Do we want more poorly conceived laws that are only applied to some?
|
|
|
|
Post by greekgod on Sept 15, 2013 20:20:01 GMT -6
You know that I feel that our laws haven't been followed in the past. You also know that I have chosen to just expose what goes on instead of getting attorneys to force our laws to be followed. I would hope that they would follow our laws in the future. They may be able to legally get away with not allowing public comment at these "special" meetings, but that doesn't mean that everyone has to think that it is right. Do we want more poorly conceived laws that are only applied to some? Kyle, 1. If you believe you "just expose what goes on", does not exhibit any proof that laws were broken. does it? 2. Yep, there is nothing worse than for elected officials to ''LEGALLY GET AWAY" with something is there? g |
|
|
|
Post by Kyle Mitchell on Sept 16, 2013 6:14:50 GMT -6
Greek, This is not a courtroom, I don't have to provide proof.
If you feel compelled, you can certainly provide proof that our laws have been followed. Perhaps you could start by showing how the industrial zoning requirement for Aquaponics is justified by our laws.
They already have a legal team, if I say something that is not true, they can certainly stop me.
I sure hope that our City can start writing better laws that will be equally enforced for everyone.
|
|
|
|
Post by father of two on Sept 16, 2013 6:35:04 GMT -6
I think that goes from local level all the way to federal.
|
|
|
|
Post by OutlawwithaSnipeSniper on Sept 16, 2013 6:40:05 GMT -6
Kyle, Oh, then you do not really believe the "Old Boys Club" are doing anything illegal, correct? g Greek, you don't really believe they do much that is legal, do you? Given the history of Streator, we have just a weeeeeeee bit of precedent. |
|
|
|
Post by father of two on Sept 16, 2013 7:01:52 GMT -6
So Sniper you're saying that they are doing things illegally? If there is all this illegal activity going on at City Hall then why not either report it to Attorney General or find a lawyer and challenge it. Talk is cheap, I'd like to see someone prove it in a court.
|
|
|
|
Post by rukidding (towns local troll) on Sept 16, 2013 8:28:26 GMT -6
So Sniper you're saying that they are doing things illegally? If there is all this illegal activity going on at City Hall then why not either report it to Attorney General or find a lawyer and challenge it. Talk is cheap, I'd like to see someone prove it in a court. I MYSELF have reported things to the Attorney General just to be turned FULL CIRCLE back to the PROBLEM.  Which was the City.  I TRIED to find an Attorney to take on "THE CITY" no Attorney even in Chicago would take on a Town as They told Me.  It's SMALL TOWN Politics at it's best.  Now I'll just sit back and watch the Show. |
|
|
|
Post by hawk on Sept 16, 2013 8:48:12 GMT -6
Greek, This is not a courtroom, I don't have to provide proof. If you feel compelled, you can certainly provide proof that our laws have been followed. Perhaps you could start by showing how the industrial zoning requirement for Aquaponics is justified by our laws. Have you put together a presentation and submitted it to them and the planning and Zoning that says otherwise? |
|
|
|
Post by Kyle Mitchell on Sept 16, 2013 10:09:41 GMT -6
I put together an oral presentation accompanied by written information with online sources for much more and explained that greenhouses were what we thought was the closest business activity, but asked for clarification.
They did not offer us any choice for appealing their requirement or even suggest that we take it to P&Z for their determination of where it falls in our zoning ordinance.
At this point there is no sense in taking it to them because the project has already been stopped.
That doesn't mean that it isn't what happened though; our laws should have been followed.
I didn't start this thread to talk about Aquaponics.
I think our laws not being followed creates the "appearance of a Good Ol' Boy Club" that OT talks about, more than appointing someone that may volunteer on the same group.
Maybe if we didn't rush into passing laws and put more thought and input into the decisions, we wouldn't have to break the law to have a sidewalk sale or events in the park.
|
|
