Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 567
Results 61 to 70 of 70

Thread: The Pueblo City Council

  1. #61
    Forum Royalty large's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Pueblo, Colorado
    Posts
    14,078

    Default

    Sorry, got 'em mixed up . . There was a Retired Educator among the final applicants . . If Brown is a retired Fireman then he's still a "Unionista" . .


    You can't be a "Person first and a Democrat 2nd" in Pueblo County, or for that matter, any place else, anymore, it's all about Partisan Politics. Or at least, "Partisan Agendas" . .

    And although, by charter law, Partisan Politics have no place on the City Council, you see the partisan lines being drawn and party affilliation referred to more frequently. As well as, in the last couple elections, the Pueblo County Democratic Party has endorsed specific City Council Candidates openly . .


    On another note . . This morning's Paper stated that currently, the Pueblo Police Department is short "24 Sworn Officers" . . because of shortages in the budget . .

    One would tend to think that the City Council could look at the City Charter, under whose guidelines they function, and note, Police Protection is one of the primary reasons for the existence of the City Government. Not social issues. I don't have a thing against the handicapped, seniors (I'm one of them) or poor people (I'm one of those, too), but when the city cannot afford Police, Fire protection and infrastructure upkeep because they're buying votes from the aforementioned, it's time to make some serious changes in priorities or Council members. One of the two . .


    And on a third note, the Pueblo Chieftain is still whining about Pueblo Motorsports Park and the choice of council to reject NEK as a leasor of PMP in 2009.

    First it's water under the bridge.

    Secondly, NEK had little or no intention of maintaining the racing facility as an "Asset" to the community. Their intent, as far as could be discerned, was to "Use it up, Wear it out, Eat it All" and then leave before they would have to live up to their end of the agreement. And based on the fact that they were in arrears on 3 months rent at the time they were making application, this surely sent a message to any Council Members who were listening . . Apparently the Chieftain wasn't, either.

    As far as the new "Successful Bidder", Judy Faass, owner and CEO of Faasstt Performance, a drivers education and certification operation (befitting the use of the road course) goes, she was the "ONLY" bidder and the details of the lease have yet to be disclosed. She's getting a very late start for scheduling and the hiring of operators. But, there's one thing that has improved over the nearly 40 years of PMP operation if nothing else. The City finally let a 5 year lease rather than the "one year conditionals" they have stuck to and hindered operations with since the inception of the park. Based on that alone, the lady has a good chance of making the operation a success. I wish her luck and good attendence . .
    "A man with a firearm is a citizen... a man without one is a subject"

  2. #62
    Forum Royalty large's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Pueblo, Colorado
    Posts
    14,078

    Default

    Well, here we go again . . Community activists "Doing Good" at the expense of the citizens who "Can Pay' . .

    Back to the "Mandated trash Service(s)" that the busy body girls at the City-County Health Department are still advocating.

    It seems that because they cannot enforce the "No Dumping" laws in the City and County, the Health Department and the City Council intends to levy another tax upon us, and it will be called (again) . . A "FEE" . . They will do this by . . RFB (Requests for Bids) from trash services currently permitted to work within the City. It would be divided into four quadrants so, hypothetically, four different services could be "Approved" . . They will also mandate "Recycling" of specific trash Items. So no more single white (or black) garbage bags . . And, according to past recommendations, your trash amounts will be weighed and you will be charged accordingly.


    Also, in the fine print of the past recommendations were little rejections of certain things or amounts of things that normally get put into the trash seasonally or per holiday . . Like sticks and branches from trees (spring) or bags of leaves (Fall), all of which will either not be picked up, or you will be charged an arm and a leg. E.G: Leaves at $5 per 30 gal. bag, or Dog Crap (extra heavy in a 13 gal) @ $10 . .

    And if it doesn't fit into a specific bag, it doesn't get picked up. According to facts presented in the discussions last year, your recyclable trash will be presented to your hauling contractor in separated containers with general trash being bagged in particular bags so that it can be weighed, thus making any non approved bag or container either an extra charge or a non-pickup item . .

    Wonderful . .

    First of all . . there's nothing "FAIR" about any of this. It's not fair to the many Trash hauling buusinesses that work in the city and county. Simply because in all likelyhood, only ONE service will be a/the successful bidder. And that one, in all probability will be "Waste Connections" because:

    [I]1) They own the landfill where the trash is dumped and can manipulate the fees to the other users or bidders.

    2) They were/are the consulting service when the recommendations I referred to above were provided to the City Council.

    3) They already are using the service(s) in other cities and town they have come into and established a monoply on the services in those ares. Then, once the competiton is effectively out of business, they can, quite like Comcast, Black Hills and other monoplized utility services, change their rates to suit themselves. In the case of trash service, it's not overseen by any state agency as are other utilities, so there's no control.

    BUT . . While the "busy body girls at the City-County Health Department" are mandating this wonderful idea, those who don't/won't pay for the little "Extras" the trash hauler(s) are going to strap on all of us will continue to do what they have done for 50 years. Put their illegal trash in other people's containers, dump it in alleys behind other people's property, or throw it in the ditches on Overton Road, Burnt Mill Road or Red Creek Road, just to mention a few . . And with the mandate, then comes the problem . .

    IS THE CITY-COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT AND THE PUEBLO CITY COUNCIL GOING TO FIND AND PROSECUTE THE MISCREANTS?

    Nope, they're going to bill or fine the property owner whose property the trash gets dumped on. And the contracted Trash Hauler also gets in on the act by adding to that property owner's (who is trying to obey the law) trash collection bill, for non separation and improperly bagged trash. (In all probability)

    And . . . . . . WHO'S GOING TO ENFORCE THESE NEW LAWS? Where's the money going to come from to send out the "Trash Police" when illegal dumping occurs, or someone decides they can't afford Waste Connections $45 a month? If they can't afford to pay for a trash service, where are they going to find money to pay the fines the city will gladly levee on them? Will failure to pay your trash hauler be a Misdemeanor or a Felony? As will failing to "Sort" your trash? Because I certainly don't intend to. You want it recycled, you sort it . .

    Another "Money" thing that will come up and has already been asked about, Who's going to pay for the maintenance on the alleys the trash trucks won't use currently? In the last 20 years, getting the alley behind our property to drain correctly has been an issue, partly because the alley is nearly perfectly level from end to end, and the fact that it's really hard to convince the Public works guys that water runs downhill . . Are we going to have to pay new people to either learn to grade the alleys correctly, or are we going to have to have the wizards at the health department figure out how to make water and the resulting mud run uphill ? . . And then charge us a fee for that feat . . ?

    Considering one simple fact . . THE CITY HAS NO MONEY! so it's probably not a good idea of incorporating more ideas to spend money. And as the city isn't (proven fact) in the business of "Making Money" or in their parlance, "Raising Revenue", I'd recommend that the City Council not only table any talk of mandating Trash Service, they should round file the whole idea and do something that will cost the citizens LESS instead of MORE !

    If they'd do that, then probably some of those who cannot afford a trash service now, might be able to afford one in the future . .
    Last edited by large; 04-26-2013 at 07:35 AM.
    "A man with a firearm is a citizen... a man without one is a subject"

  3. #63
    Forum Royalty large's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Pueblo, Colorado
    Posts
    14,078

    Default

    Gotta ask . . Regarding the Pueblo City Council and it's spending agendas . .

    Hows the Non Profit spending working out for you?

    Obviously not too well, because, according to Police Chief Velez, our Police Department is down to the bare bones as far as Patrol Officers go, and it doesn't look like too many new ones are in the pipeline . .

    I suppose the next Chartered Government service to go will be the Fire department and it's Medical Response teams . .

    They've already done away with the "public service" crew as we've known it. Getting an alley graded or a hole in the street fixed requires months of begging and being told there's no money or people to do it with.

    Again . . Hows the Non Profit spending working out for you?

    I guess it buys votes for the "Community Activists" that are our City Councilpersons . . .
    "A man with a firearm is a citizen... a man without one is a subject"

  4. #64
    Forum Royalty large's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Pueblo, Colorado
    Posts
    14,078

    Default

    And now . . er . . AGAIN . .

    The City Council got more news that the Socialists (and Community activists) hate . . They're another $6.5 Million in the hole . . . They can't afford Police, and now we'll see if they're gonna start cutting the Fire dept. That seems to be the only place they haven't taken a sword to yet . .

    But they're still kissing up to the Unions that got them all elected . . Betcha one of them (Unions or Activists) are gonna leave this Bro'mance pissed off . .

    And we still haven't finished the City Hall . . 'spose they'll be having their Council meetings in that old REA warehouse for the next millenia?
    "A man with a firearm is a citizen... a man without one is a subject"

  5. #65
    Forum Royalty large's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Pueblo, Colorado
    Posts
    14,078

    Default

    Last week, I sent the "Mandated Trash Service" post above (#62) to my City Councilperson, Sandy Daff, and the three at large Council members. At the bottom I added that I would appreciate a receipt email or acknowledgement of same.

    As I receive those courtesies from both of my Federal Senators, My Congressman, my State Legislators and several of the Councilpersons formerly on the City Council, one would think that our "Community Activists in Power" could, at least, acknowledge communication from the Peons and lower classes they feel a need to subjugate.

    Not a word . . . .

    Apparently, subjugate is the operative word . .

    Again, this is an example of Politicians doing "Something" by mandating a corrupt agenda rather than finding a real solution to a fairly simple problem. And that problem is the lack of enforcement of the current laws regarding dumping on public and private property. It's a Health Department issue so one would think that the Health Department should enforce (or attempt to) the laws they want in place. If they don't have the manpower or the budget in place to do that, then one would think they would cease and desist pushing agendas that the rest of the local governments cannot afford either. And I'd use the No Smoking Ordnances they pushed and said they'd enforce when made law . . but then pushed it off on the Pueblo City Police, because the Health Department didn't have the manpower . . Or didn't want to go out to the bars at 2 AM to write tickets, dunno which . . .
    "A man with a firearm is a citizen... a man without one is a subject"

  6. #66
    Administrator Sandra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,683

    Default

    I will retain the right to keep my trash service - whether the city likes it or not. I will hire who I want to hire - whether the city likes it or not. I have good credit with the trash company and I like them - have never had a problem with my trash - and I won't allow the city to "punish" me by forcing me to use a trash service THEY want. And if they don't like it, too bad. They have no right to interfere with fair trade.
    Opinions expressed by me are mine only and are not in any way, shape, or form representative of the Pueblo Chieftain or Pueblo Community Forums.

  7. #67
    Forum Royalty large's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Pueblo, Colorado
    Posts
    14,078

    Default

    Actually, if they do this, you, or I, will have no choice. Because? They will, for all practical purposes, put all the rest of the haulers out of business. There might be a few who have enough Mesa and Pueblo West Business to keep them afloat, but the low priced and the marginal will go down the tubes because the city will take all their customers within the city limits. Add to the fact that once most of the haulers are gone, Waste Connections can increase the dumping fees and make the county haulers who became marginal when their city customers were lost, now incapable of net gain.

    Everybody ends up with Waste Connections.

    I still have yet to hear from either my City Councilperson or any of the At Large Councilmembers. And I'm not holding my breath . . . . . . .
    "A man with a firearm is a citizen... a man without one is a subject"

  8. #68
    Forum Royalty large's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Pueblo, Colorado
    Posts
    14,078

    Default

    Lessee, it was $2.5 million at the start, estimated by the then City manager Jerry Pacheco, a Planner turned Manager. Because City Council had just "negotiated' a deal with Black Hills and took $7.5 million so that Black Hills could raise the rates of Southern Colorado Power rates by 33%, the Council was, apparently, feeling flush, they opted to build the "Taj Mahal of the West" for that estimated $2.5 million.

    However, before a single nail was pulled or driven, Council was told (I was there) by their Architects that to remodel according to the projected plans and voiced needs of the Council, the minimum estimate was $5.2 million, with the "State of Art" IT system they had asked for, requiring another $1.2 million. During that meeting and presentation, there was little dissent to the cost, and there was no discussion of review of the plans to eliminate unnecessary or costly wants. The only point of discussion where dissent might have been displayed was the expressed need for both Men's and Women's Bathrooms for the Council itself. The plans had a single unisex Bathroom behind the council's chambers, expressly for the seven member council. It certainly wasn't designed for the public as it was both inacessable to the public and did not comply with codes for capacity of the designed Council Chambers. Actually, according to Amy Hurtig, the lead Architect, on that evening, it was a stretch to even get a Bathroom into the design because of the limited space available. The discussion about the additional cost of the IT system was literally blown off . .

    And, as time has "Slipped By", the old Council, and now the new Council, has done nothing to modify either their "Needs" (which translates, actually, to "WANTS") or apparently show much concern about the mounting costs of the Third Floor Council Chambers (or perhaps we should call them, "the Throne Room") because it really appears that based on the still rising cost (Now $7.5 Million) no omne has expressed any desire to cut back on the expenses, even when faced with the hard fact that they're "Out of Money" . . Matter of fact, while they (Council, apparently) decided that the "Desk" that Council sits behind during meetings was "Too Tall" and would have to be modified or a second floor would have to be built, further elevating thse "Community Activists" above the Peons whom they tend to "Rule" rather than represent, they are perfectly willing to leave the Second Floor, where the Public does business with the Council's Bureaucrats, literally unfinished . . And it must be really "Unfinished" because the estimate to "Finish it" is around $700,000 dollars . . That's a lot of "Finishing" . . !

    Now, how could rational people look at plans drawn, at their request, then hear the cost estimates from the architects themselves, and continue ? Further, how could other rational people allow this to continue?

    It would appear that few, if any of the people ordering these designs, were rational . . 'spose? In the private sector, when you run out of money, you STOP, or you modify the project to make it feasable.

    The Pueblo City Council did neither!
    "A man with a firearm is a citizen... a man without one is a subject"

  9. #69
    Forum Royalty large's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Pueblo, Colorado
    Posts
    14,078

    Default

    Big minus and potentially, a big plus . . .

    This morning's paper once again underlined how badly the City Council continues to violate the original city charter. They continue to fund the non profits at the levels they are accustomed to, while laying off employees, failing to replace those who have died or retired or just failing to enforce the ordinances the current and past Councils have passed into law. And, while cutting employees and thus services, they still maintained the salaries of the upper management. It causes one to wonder, that If, we are continuing to lay off those who are supposed to be providing the services that the charter demands, but still maintaining both the supervisors and their current salaries, what are those supervisors and managers supervising or managing?

    Do we need a "Planning Department" if we have no money to change or build?

    Why are we funding non contracted non profits yet defaulting on contractual agreements like the YMCA?

    And while I'm asking stupid questions, if Ballot issue 1A (county tax increase for HARP, Zoo, Art Center, State Fair, Nature Center and Animal Shelter) passes, will we then no longer have to pay a tax on our pets within the City Limits? Or do I just have to pay a double tax on my dog?

    Now for the "Plus" . . .

    The County has created laws concerning the growth and sale of Recreational Marijuana, making Pueblo County one of the few counties (and/or cities) in the state to actually legalize both growing of and retail sales of recreational marijuana. Hopefully the city will modify it's zoning laws to embrace, at least, the sale of same. Simply because this can become a very lucrative local industry, and the city and county can (or should) enjoy a windfall of taxes, both from direct sales taxes and also from the "Tourist Industry" it will create . . .

    While I was (and still am) against legalizing marijuana, either Medical or Recreational, if it's the law, and most cities and counties in the state declare a moritorium on it in their locales, "TAKE THE MONEY AND RUN!"

    However, I do also believe that it might be more trouble than it's worth, just because, over the years, about half the Stoners I've known were more than "Undesirable" and weren't people you'd want visiting or habitating your home town . . We might not have enough Cops even if we could afford to double the force.
    "A man with a firearm is a citizen... a man without one is a subject"

  10. #70
    Administrator Sandra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,683

    Default

    :-\
    Opinions expressed by me are mine only and are not in any way, shape, or form representative of the Pueblo Chieftain or Pueblo Community Forums.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •