By: Diane Benjamin
For a long time we have known that much of what happens at Council meetings is pre-determined. This email proves it – the council members have 3 on 1 meetings with the City Manager:
Hold on before you think this is a problem!
They meet three on one to keep from violating the Open Meetings Act. As long as the opinions of all 9 alderman are heard, there is nothing wrong with getting a sense of where they all stand before meetings. It keeps meetings on track since items the majority are against will not be on the agenda.
Here’s where a problem can arise:
The three council members don’t know what the other 6 said in their meetings. It’s possible they could be told consensus exists when it really doesn’t.
Transparency requires discussions in public. All council members needs to guard against hard decisions reached behind closed doors.
I remember council meetings where members voted no but they never said why. That should not happen. If any member doesn’t approve, the people they represent deserve to know why – even if they are the only NO vote.
.
.
.
.
.
I likely hold the record for no votes on Bloomington City Council. After the first six months service Mr Renner just looked for enough yes votes to pass his plans, most of which clearly did not represent the will of the Citizens of Bloomington.
I would like to personally thank you for attempting to bring common sense to the council when you served and trying to protect the taxpayer. All this current nonsense in both towns will cease when a majority of the voting public decides to get off their cans and vote in local elections. It’s voter apathy that allows political radicals to get elected and make decisions for the rest of us. No one can possibly take this community seriously when they see certain nut jobs representing the population.