Mountain Park Life
   
 
Welcome

Username:

Password:


Remember me


Main Menu
 · Home
 · The Stand
 · News
 · Traffic
 · Community
 · Members
 · Forum
 · Recipes
 · Polls
 · About
 ·
 ·
 ·

Chatbox
bullet editor
Jun 01 : 17:00
Members, post announcements in the Chat that don't seem to fit in the Forum such as Happy Birthday, Welcome New Baby, etc. Get "social."

Forums
Mountain Park Life :: Forums :: Guest Editorials
<< Previous thread | Next thread >>   

Actual Police Report names Councilman. Was he intoxicated during meeting?

Go to page   <<        >>  
Author Post
editor
Thu Oct 18 2007, 07:15PM

Joined: Tue Jul 12 2005, 10:03PM
{LOCATION}Posts: 236
mntpkdead,
You will note that your most recent post has been deleted. Much thought was given to your words because we support free speech and encourage open dialogue on mpl. However, the final analysis was that your post attacked an individual -- not an issue. We sincerely invite you to post again about issues that support your feelings. An election time is ideal for discussing issues, from all sides, to stimulate informed decisions at the polls!
Back to top
mntpkdead
Thu Oct 18 2007, 07:48PM
Registered Member #223
Joined: Mon Jul 02 2007, 03:03PM
{LOCATION}Posts: 39
must
Back to top
Jim Wright
Thu Oct 18 2007, 10:12PM
Registered Member #70
Joined: Sat Sep 17 2005, 01:10AM
{LOCATION}Posts: 246
"dead":
I've got to say I am coming down on the side of the Editor on this one. I like to read the opinions here on the forums, yours included, but the message seems to get lost in the personal insults sometimes. Elected officials are "fair game" to a greater degree than private citizens, at least that's what some posters told me, but let's get back on track with the real issues at hand in this thread.

There is a serious breach of the public trust looming overhead that needs attention. I am left to believe that the present mayor and council are willing to accept the apparent intoxication of a colleague at a council meeting. Maybe this explains the dark glasses, lack of focus and preparation, and downright rude behavior we have seen at too many meetings.

Bill Schmidt has tried to shift the debate to one focused on the verbiage of the Ethics Code and away from the mayor and council ignoring abhorrent behavior. Bill is quite skilled at this tactic and seems to be the spokesman for the mayor and council, certainly here on the forum. The question that still begs an honest answer is why Mayor Upham investigated some without the sworn complaint but not this one, her friend and ally? She acted without a sworn complaint in my case and in Frank Baia's case, both such actions violated the code and were an abuse of power or malfeasance.

And to address the query from Bill Schmidt about the "competing sentences" in the Ethics Code, which for the record was written in collaboration with the city attorney; fashioned after GMA model ordinance examples; and passed unanimously by a previous council in late 2003, the first sentence in Code Section 2-215 makes it very clear that an investigation commences upon the receipt of a sworn written complaint. The later sentence makes an accommodation for circumstances arising after the initial sworn complaint. Keep in mind that there would be no investigating committee, lawfully appointed, absent the initial triggering complaint. It would also allow that during the course of the investigation that the council investigating committee could require certain statements be reduced to writing in case the investigation was subsequently forwarded to a citizen panel.

Back to top
Bill Schmidt
Thu Oct 18 2007, 11:52PM
Registered Member #68
Joined: Fri Sep 16 2005, 09:14PM
{LOCATION}Posts: 141
Jim,

You give me too much credit. I speak for no one but myself.

If a formal complaint about Bill Pulling, however that is defined, is received at city hall, i am confident it will be handled properly. And I am sure that whatever form the complaint takes it will be forwarded to the city attorney to make sure it meets ordinance requirements.

As far as shifting the debate, I responded to Parkers charges that the Baia complaint was not sufficient to impanel an investigating committee. My reading caused me to come to a different conclusion. I will check with Brandon next opportunity.


Back to top
natasha
Fri Oct 19 2007, 12:32AM
Registered Member #31
Joined: Mon Jul 25 2005, 10:04PM
{LOCATION}Posts: 50
Bill,
It appears your words are meant to lead readers to believe there was a formal or sworn complaint against Frank Baia. There was no formal or sworn complaint filed against him. I find it curious that you posted on page one of this thread that Frank was paid the “courtesy” of a council committee review. Just as the mayor paid Frank the courtesy, I wonder why she isn’t offering Bill Pulling the same courtesy. Just as Frank experienced dismissal when reviewed by the council committee, Bill Pulling might appreciate the same.


Back to top
Bill Schmidt
Fri Oct 19 2007, 01:19AM
Registered Member #68
Joined: Fri Sep 16 2005, 09:14PM
{LOCATION}Posts: 141
Natasha,

A signed letter complaining about actions made by Frank Baia was submitted to city hall. I don't think that fact is in dispute.

I think what is in dispute is whether that letter constitutes a formal sworn complaint.

I find it curious that you posted on page one of this thread that Frank was paid the “courtesy” of a council committee review. Just as the mayor paid Frank the courtesy, I wonder why she isn’t offering Bill Pulling the same courtesy. Just as Frank experienced dismissal when reviewed by the council committee, Bill Pulling might appreciate the same.


I'm sure he would.

The courtesy afforded to Pulling would be to move the investigation to a more appropriate venue than a trial by anonymous posters on an internet forum, and the best i can tell a formal complaint, in whatever form is deemed sufficient by the city attorney, needs to be received at city hall for that to happen.



Back to top
mntpkdead
Fri Oct 19 2007, 01:51AM
Registered Member #223
Joined: Mon Jul 02 2007, 03:03PM
{LOCATION}Posts: 39
back bone
Back to top
Bill Schmidt
Fri Oct 19 2007, 02:14AM
Registered Member #68
Joined: Fri Sep 16 2005, 09:14PM
{LOCATION}Posts: 141
mntpkdead wrote ...

Bill, You are our leader have some morals and get a back bone and file the complaint. It is far better that it come from the council who know the facts!!!


In order to file a sworn complaint, i would have to have personal knowledge of the transgression.

I don't.


Back to top
Jim Wright
Sat Oct 20 2007, 04:01PM
Registered Member #70
Joined: Sat Sep 17 2005, 01:10AM
{LOCATION}Posts: 246
Bill Schmidt:
Are you saying you have not received or read a copy of the police incident report? Did you see whatever Frank supposedly did as reported in the citizen's letter?
Back to top
Bill Schmidt
Sat Oct 20 2007, 06:46PM
Registered Member #68
Joined: Fri Sep 16 2005, 09:14PM
{LOCATION}Posts: 141
Jim Wright,

Of course i read the incident report.

That does not change the fact that i have no personal knowledge of Bill Pulling being intoxicated that night. Are you stating that i should file a complaint based on hearsay?

As you may recall the report referred to Clerk Susan Smith as Council member Susan Smith. Am I to assume she has been appointed to council?

Back to top
Moderators: bt, Archive, editor

Jump:     Back to top

Go to page   <<        >>  
Forum theme loosely based on Invision Power Board

 
© Mountain Park Life 2006 All Rights Reserved

mountainparklife.com is a community site for the City of Mountain Park.
 
Render time: 0.0705 sec, 0.0171 of that for queries.