Backfire: very revealing

By:  Diane Benjamin

In addition to approving minutes from a meeting held 9/21/2015, Monday the Council will be asked to approve minutes from a meeting held:

March 20, 2010

Only THREE Aldermen are still on the Council:  Schmidt, Sage, Fruin

The minutes are interesting reading since not much has changed.  The Council is still dwelling on the same issues.  Sage and Fruin are still making great points but when votes are taken later, they vote against  their points.  See the minutes here:  3-20-2010

If the minutes had been approved clear back in 2010, they would have long been forgotten.  Instead, they are being read now.  Major backfire on the City’s part.

Here’s an example:

Remember the discussion last December about rental inspections?  Remember the claims that fees had to be increased so inspections could take place every year?  Remember the claims made by Alderman Buragas on WJBC that 85% of rental properties get a failing grade:

Property registration fees had to be increased so another inspector could be hired!  Now read what was reported in 2010:

Alderman Stearns questioned the number of rentals. Mr. Huber stated approximately 12,000 units. Each unit was inspected at least once and depending on results every seven (7) years thereafter. He noted that seventy to eighty percent (70 – 80 %) obtained a B rating. Inspections were conducted by region.

Six years passes and slum landlords now own 85% of the properties?  Or, maybe CONTROL was the real agenda.

One more example:

The Downtown Bloomington Association (DBA) was supposed to be cut off from funding years ago.  Back in 2010 the Aldermen were saying the same thing.  Every year the funding is still in the budget.

Remind you of a mom and pop who can’t understand why their adult kid still lives at home?

Alderman Schmidt perceived that the true funding reduction to the DBA would be $60,000. Mr. Hales questioned if the Council’s intention was to give the DBA $195,000 plus $20,000 for the SSA study. He had budgeted $156,000. This figure included $20,000 for the SSA study. The DBA would need to make their own budget adjustments. He acknowledged that the DBA needed to find a permanent funding source.

I wonder if the Alderman will even notice 2010 minutes are on the consent agenda.

Maybe one of them will ask why the minutes weren’t approved in 2010.  Maybe somebody will ask how many more minutes are sitting in the Clerk’s file waiting for approval.

Maybe somebody will believe laws matter for government too, or maybe not.





One thought on “Backfire: very revealing

  1. I wonder if these or other unapproved minutes will show up on the website under the month and year the meeting occurred or if they will be buried in current or future consent agendas.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s