PDA

View Full Version : City Council's CLOSED DOOR POLICY



large
08-26-2008, 08:02 AM
When City Council passed the Resolution making Waste Connections the owner/operator of the South Side Landfill they literally clinched the likelyhood that the Trash Collection/disposal business in Pueblo would (or will) become a monopoly. but they, in their infinite wisdom, said that there wouldn't be a monopoly . . which is the publicly stated intent of Waste Connections!

And they did it, apparently without asking ANY citizen of Pueblo . . All the while assuring us that they don't do Business behind Closed Doors!

And currently, another laugh concerning, again, their "Open Doors"(?) Policy. Pueblo Motorsports Park has operated for 34 years at literally NO COST to the City of Pueblo. And while in the original agreement the City of Pueblo, more Specifically the Parks Department was to assist in maintaining the Park and it's access . . None was given.

Now, after spending taxes generated by the track, they have GIVEN the track, with no input (Again) to a company who has no idea of how to operate or promote the total operation. Not only that, they GAVE it to a company that while promising to spend a Million dollars, had problems paying their Rent Bills for using the Facility under Pueblo Motorsports inc's. management.

And they (Basically, Randy Thurston) continue to insist that NEK is going to "Invest" money in a facility that they don't own and using a "Spin Off" Front Company (Front Range Motorsports) they have set up , literally, a "Walk Away" Liability, wherein, once they have used up the facility or not lived up to their obligations, whatever they are, they can declare insolvency of FRM, and just walk away, leaving the City of Pueblo twisting in the wind.

There is outside interest from other Track Operators, both in the region and from outside, but the City Council, Randy Thurston, and Dave Galli are not interested. They have their answer, and whatever the plan or agenda is, they sure as hell aren't telling anyone about it . .

Again, I would either Challenge or welcome input or explanation from any City Council Member explaining just what NEK/FRM plans to do, and why they would spend even 75 cents on something they will never own. Having "Backdoored" information from several Council persons, I haven't been satisfied that any of the Council even understands what Pueblo Motorsports Park does, stands for or the asset that it can be . . So how is it that they can just give it away without any input from anyone who knows a damn thing about auto racing or the promotion of same.

So . . if the PMI/NEK deal wasn't done behind "CLOSED DOORS" then it was done completely UNDER THE TABLE by less than half the City Council . . and those Operators who expected a "Request For Proposal" are ready to step up and state that they too would like an explanation, I'm sure . .

After all, as I said in another thread, what happens to Pueblo's Facility affects tracks all over the country!

Loren Swelk
08-26-2008, 01:49 PM
While we are talking about closed door policies, I find it interesting that Vestas and PEDCO announced last Friday the Vestas plant construction and the employment of 500 people +/-. Yesterday the city council voted to release 11.5 million dollars in sales tax funds to Vestas. Shouldn't this have been done in reverse order, or had a decision already been made BEHIND CLOSED DOORS and voted on in secret? I believe that neither PEDCO or Vestas would have held their dog and pony show and even had the Vestas President riding on a float in the State Fair Parade Saturday morning (a float that wasn't constructed between 3:00pm Friday and 7:00am Saturday morning). Just another example of the city council making decisions and then holding a sham vote in public.

large
08-26-2008, 03:34 PM
Just another notch on th' ole Bedstead. Another screwing by the Council and we didn't even get into the heavy breathing part . .

But then, as we have seen on another thread, few understand that . .

Sandra
08-26-2008, 04:50 PM
Are you still at it, Large? City Council had nothing to do with the sale of the business, that was Zupan's doing.

I could be wrong on this, but it's my understanding from the folks in the industry that Zupan owned the business and had a contract with the city. Zupan decided to sell to Waste Connections. Since he did that the City had to create a contract, then, with the new owner.

It wasn't up to the city who to sell the landfill to, it was up to Zupan.

Because of the contract with Zupan, when Zupan sold his business, the City was bound by that conract to act on that - and if you were in that situation don't tell me you wouldn't have contracted with the new owner for your rubbish removal.

As far as not getting to the heavy breathing part - well, now maybe you know how your wives felt a time or two...

large
08-26-2008, 05:27 PM
Zupan's deal was kind of like the PMI deal . . Jay Gilman resigned and PMI cancelled a contract they've had for years, willingly . . sure they did . . Wanta buy some beach at Stem Beach?

And . . . IF it was strictly between Zupan . . . and Waste Connections, why did the City Council need to pass any "Resolutions" . . and declare them a "Non-monopoly" . . to the public?

I think YOU and Randy are Bullsh*tting the folks!

Sandra
08-27-2008, 01:27 AM
Stop bringing Randy into this, Large, I haven't even talked to him about this matter other than to ask him when the landfill will re-open, and how it's being closed affects the trash cleanup efforts, and at the time I asked he didn't know when it would re-open. I haven't discussed the matter with him since.

As I've already stated in my post, I spoke with other people in the industry - the trash industry - and some folks who know Zupan. I've never met him, myself, but he sounds like a really nice guy.


And . . . IF it was strictly between Zupan . . . and Waste Connections, why did the City Council need to pass any "Resolutions" . . and declare them a "Non-monopoly" . . to the public?

Are you REALLY that thick? or are you trying to be funny? The landfill closed almost on a whim, and it pretty much put the city in a state of urgency - similar to an emergency - concerning what to do with the trash. It was the city's legal place to act on that. Do you think they should have just let it all pile up? I look at it like a kind of emergency response. Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems to me that when something like this happens SOMEONE's gotta step in, and by golly it sure wasn't you or your friends stepping up to the plate, now, was it? As I've stated several times before, the news reported that the city was under contractual obligation to step in and act, so that's what they did. Why is that so hard for you to understand? Maybe you should call your councilperson whoever that is and ask them about it?

Anyway, I'm getting just a wee bit tired of you trying to use me to get to Randy or any other City Council person. Contrary to how that pea-sized brain of yours works, I'm not in close contact with city officials for anything other than to take care of clean up committee business. I don't depend on them to do my thinking for me and they certainly don't depend on me to do their thinking for them.

As for the rest of your post, I've reported it as abusive. That kind of behavior really isn't warranted or deserved, you need to cool it.

large
08-27-2008, 07:50 AM
As for the rest of your post, I've reported it as abusive. That kind of behavior really isn't warranted or deserved, you need to cool it.

Heh, heh, quite like "My Dog, Rover" you can dish it out but you can't take it, huh? It was your comment that led to the fitting reply . . Again, you can insult either by innuendo or directly, but Ole Queen Sandra/Lexi can't handle any reply of the same sort . . Cry me a river . .

As for the "Whim" that Zupan closed the South Landfill on . . Say What? A "Whim" . . Hardly.

Who, actually do you know, besides Thurston, in the whole mix? Do you know Mike Zupan? Or anyone who works for him? Any of his family? Or even any of his friends? probably not, or you might understand that there were several problems, some created by the city . . As well as the hail storm no one foresaw.

Nor did it put the city in any sort of "Emergency". At least not to the degree that the City council and The City Manager expressed it to be, right up to the time they declared their deal with "Waste Connections' by declaring that a monopoly wasn't possible because there was a "Competitive" Landfill nearby at Midway . . .

Council persons have been contacted and quite a few of those who have asked about the above, but have received no answer whatsoever. Those who have received an answer, found it to be either obfuscation or plain old Bullsh*t . .

In three cases, when asked about Waste Connections and their stated intent to monopolize their operation in Pueblo County, the answer was; "I have never read that!" . . apparently lots of research went into the decision . . Very similar to the same study by Nunez when voting on the Wal Mart Distribution Warehouse Issue . .

And while you can quibble about this till Hell freezes over . . nothing YOU can ever say will take the place of a valid statement from the council members themselves. They haven't made one and aren't about to!

Sandra
08-27-2008, 08:53 AM
Heh, heh, quite like "My Dog, Rover" you can dish it out

I don't dish that kind of stuff out, Large.

Loren Swelk
08-27-2008, 10:54 AM
I see the County took action on the Vestas project yesterday. I am surprised that neither Vestas nor PEDCO had any conversations with the county prior to the Vestas announcement. (Ha) Another governmental organization making decisions BEHIND COLSED DOORS and then fooling the public by their public action on Tuesday.

large
08-27-2008, 05:49 PM
Yeah, but $4 Million is chump change compared to the $33 million the City Council has put up without any voter's approval . . while telling us hard times is upon us . . they can't fix the streets, or do the things the Parks Department is supposed to do . . or for the most part, do much of anything the City Charter says they're responsible for . .

But, I suppose we're regressing back to the "Smoke Filled Room" style of government. Voters are dumb, and with the right expenditure of funds, the Politicians could get them to vote for whatever anyway . . so they just save the money and the time . .

Loren Swelk
08-27-2008, 07:15 PM
I was in the Thatcher building today and noticed a huge office on the second floor that read Vestas Towers USA on the door. Boy they move fast considering the The city council approved the transaction less than 48 hours ago and the County Commissioners less than 24 hours ago. Unless of course the decision had been made much earlier in private BEHIND CLOSED DOORS and the sham vote saved for a public meeting.

artie
08-27-2008, 07:18 PM
Perhaps this is naive, and I am obviously not in the know, but how often does Council use exec session?

Loren Swelk
08-27-2008, 07:54 PM
The council uses the executive sessions on occasion, sometimes before during or after a regular meeting, they are bound by certain rules that an executive session can apply to, things such as legal matters, personnel issues, etc. That is not what is being levied here. It is the meetings that no one knows about, meetings that are held in secret decisions being made all without the public's knowledge.

large
08-28-2008, 08:37 AM
The "Closed Doors" deal doesn't really apply to "Executive Session" . . Because of the Colorado "Sunshine Law" . .

For years, under Fred Weisbrod, a lot of arrangements and decisions were founded at a little private club called the "Bird Watchers", out on Fountain Creek . . and later when the "Bird Watchers" was closed and torn down, Patti's Restaurant, at breakfast, was a kind of meeting place for those who wanted/needed an informal but private (?) hearing with Fred and those Councilmen who Fred held close . . A hell of a lot of City business got done in those places . . and there was always an agreeable quorum of Council there, often, a couple of County Commissioners, were their approval needed . . That's pretty much how it was, and Fred made damned sure the city was looked out for, he was a very unselfish old Politician.

Now, it looks like it's going that way again, with decisions being made outside of the Council's legal domain, but very little thought about the real needs of the city, but we're strong on the gingerbread and the sleight of hand . . Thus . . "Closed Doors" . . "Under the Table" . . who knows?

We have no lead up, no proposals given publicly, no discussion and no explanations, other than . . "It was no more than a "Resolution"!"

artie
08-28-2008, 05:06 PM
From what little I know about the Sunshine Laws, the deals that are being discussed here should have been specifically discussed at specific meetings, probably in exec session. Minutes would have been kept.
Perhaps an enquiring news organization could help you ascertain (Fof I Act) if those exec sessions happened, and if not, your point of clandestine meetings gains traction. Just a thought.

Sandra
08-28-2008, 06:04 PM
artie, don't pay attention to Large and Loren Swelk. They bark at the city council on a regular basis because city council isn't asking their permission for everything they do.

From what I was able to gather from various worldwide news reports dating back to December of 1999, Vestas and Pueblo had been negotiating. In 2000 Vestas apparently decided to either put things off or wait until the time was right to proceed. I've read two different stories, one says Vestas changed it's mind and others said Vestas was waiting.

More recent world wide news reports indicate that Vestas recently decided they were ready to follow through on deals made years ago, so basically it sounds to me like these alleged closed door sessions never existed because these are things that were worked out almost a decade ago. Whether these were worked out a decade ago behind closed doors, I don't know. But, if that's the case (and I could be wrong), then it's a little late to be barking about it now, we don't even have the same Council today that we had then.

If what I've read in the news reports and news releases dating back almost 10 years is true, then this certainly debunks Large's "closed door meetings" myth.

Even so, some people just aren't happy unless they are scheming and coming up with absurd and paranoid conspiracy theories. Best to just take it with a grain of salt.

Loren Swelk
08-28-2008, 07:37 PM
Thanks for your alibi Randy.

Sandra
08-28-2008, 08:50 PM
Loren Swelk wrote:

Thanks for your alibi Randy.

Put a sock in it, Loren. I haven't even discussed those details with him or any other council members, nor am I going to.

Vestas is probably going to be the best thing that's ever happened to Pueblo so far - have you seen this company's profile??? And here you are complaining about this? What's wrong with you?!

Loren Swelk
08-28-2008, 10:30 PM
Sandra,
You are so busy protecting your benefactor that you are not reading correctly. Never have I said that Vestas isn't a great find for Pueblo and that they will be great for the community. All I have said is that I am sick and tired of THIS city council making decisions behind closed doors and then pretending to vote on them in public.

Sandra
08-28-2008, 11:24 PM
Grow up, Loren!

Has it ever occurred to you to look into things to see what's really happening or if there is a reasonable explanation about them before jumping to conclusions and badmouthing people? Apparently not...

ho hum...

Loren Swelk
08-28-2008, 11:38 PM
I am sorry Sandra, but I stopped drinking the Kool Aid long ago. I have grown up, and that is what makes me so disappointed in the current City Council, they no longer feel they represent the people of Pueblo, but they are above the people of Pueblo.

Sandra
08-29-2008, 09:15 AM
I am sorry Sandra, but I stopped drinking the Kool Aid long ago. I have grown up,

Your posts on this forum haven't convinced me of that, Loren. Try again. You're making blanket statements that you've picked up from the likes of Large not just about council, but about me, as well.

If you're so grown up why aren't you doing some of your own fact finding rather than relying solely on the gossip of people who have too much time on their hands? Rather than falsely accusing people of things, you would do well to go directly to the source of your concern and ask a few questions.

How would you like it if people were so irresponsible as to sit there and accuse you falsely based on someone else's gossip or anal outlook on life in general? I don't think you'd like that at all, so why are you doing it to others? And you say you've grown up?

There are no words to describe just how disgusted I am right now. There's no need for me to engage in this further.

large
08-29-2008, 12:29 PM
artie, don't pay attention to Large and Loren Swelk. They bark at the city council on a regular basis because city council isn't asking their permission for everything they do.

I really don't give a rat's a$$ if they ever call ME . . But it certainly is in the best interest of the citizens of Pueblo for them to call SOMEBODY!

It would even be better, when making decisions that will clearly affect not just MY wallet, but the wallets of my grandchildren, they would ask the citizens permission . . We're $33 million dollars farther in debt than we were when these carpetbaggers came into power, and no one has granted them the public permission to do so . . and we aren't even retaining the amenities that affect our quality of life . . But trading them off for Development, Development, Development, with no thought as to where they're going with it! or any real way of paying for it . .

The citizen has lost all input, because eMails and phone calls either go unheeded or worse, when answered are either smoke and mirrors or plain lies . . I don't (again) care whether they have TV in their damned meetings, because it's all "After the Fact" anyway . . The City Council hasn't earned any respect and they won't receive any . . Respect is a two way street . . Apparently, they either don't understand that or don't care . . and their actions indicate the Latter . .

Sandra, if you can't understand that, and you believe that the council is actually doing the bidding of the Populace, then SHOW ME SOME PROOF! You have done nothing than take up the side of the Council with absolutely no facts or repudiations other than to say "I'm Full of Sh*t!" . . and while that could be a possibility, you haven't proven either!

large
08-30-2008, 09:10 AM
I have fielded several phone calls from associates who continue to insist that the $11.8 million dollars (US) that we have agreed(?) to give Vestas to build their windmill towers . . They insist that the $11.8 mil is "PEDCO" Money, so it's already been approved by the Taxpayer and voters . .

Don't think so folks . . I believe, if you read the fine print, you'll find we ARE funding a "Business Recruiting Group" whose job is to "lure" new businesses into the area, City of Pueblo, preferably. Not to share in their mortgage and assume the liabilities of furnishing them with a Physical plant. Tax deferment (where it started) is one thing . . Putting them in a new factory is another thing altogether . .

We have gone from offering a long term reward for coming here to a lump of cash, which, more often than not, was taken, and then the company that was bribed has closed it's doors, with the Execs leaving with the wad of cash the City gave them in their briefcases . . and we had another empty building!

Vestas is a NEW, High Tech company, coming with new technologies and new logistical needs . . But if the people of Pueblo buy their physical plant and train their labor, then Vestas has no more than a partial interest in the Plant we have "Given" them . . They have no anchor, and could leave on a moment's notice . . as many before them with much the same investment has done . .

But, from the gitgo, PEDCO was a group of "Scouts' looking for companies wanting to relocate or expand, and offered, perhaps a "Discount" building costing a couple of hundred thousand, with future tax breaks and credits attached, should the new company employ a specific number of people after a specific time. Agreements were made with both the City Council and the County to do or allow those things . . . And the City Council or County Commissioners asked the citizens or made them aware of the deals before they were "done deals' . .

Not so anymore, and $11 million is a whole bunch bigger than a "Couple of Hundred Thousand" . . !

And . . several times in the last two years, the Pueblo Chieftain has published short editorials about the possibility of Vestas building a facility in the area, but it's certainly odd that the City kept the price of bribing them to come here under the Table or behind Closed Doors . .

That's my problem with it . . It's not Vestas, but the cost of the bribe . . will we see a ROI? Ever?

Or . . in three or four years, will technology just have created another large unoccupied building?

Dean.Barnett
09-01-2008, 10:15 PM
Don't think so folks . . I believe, if you read the fine print, you'll find we ARE funding a "Business Recruiting Group" whose job is to "lure" new businesses into the area, City of Pueblo, preferably.Wanna quote that "fine print" here, or should we also "believe" you aren't talking out of your ***? Maybe you could even link to the source document, so everyone could see you're an honest contributor.

Which you are, right?

large
09-02-2008, 09:43 AM
Again, go read the PEDCO agreement with the city . . While it's a little "Vague" about the actual expenditures, it's a "recruiting tool" not a Financing Resource.

You want to argue it? Go find your "link" . . You're the one who's being dishonest, by arguing something without factual contradiction.

You're a small person, with even a smaller mind, who cannot argue anything successfully without wikipedia at your side. Your general knowledge is apparently nonexistent and your knowledge of the people in this community is about as narrow as angel hair pasta . .

You choose to argue things (Such as the PMI deal) when you have no knowledge of either the stakes or the people involved, or, what those people think.

And as I said, you don't know a "Drag Race" from a "Drag Queen", but you stuck your nose in, made an assumption, tossed an insult and made about 40 "friends" . .

That's pretty much the level of your input, which certainly is no more than shouting liar, liar, each time someone posts something . . or you degrade whoever a quote or link is authored by . . No source is good enough for you, because you can always google a contradictory source who, often as not, is totally lame or out in left field . .

Bottom line . . And you can argue this until you're Blue in the Face, We get to vote on whether we can have "Public Comment" in Televised City Council meetings (which, to me, means diddly squat), but we don't get to vote on an $11.8 million dollar Expenditure of Public Funds to a for Profit Corporation . . Or a $27 Million dollar deal on the Police Building . . again . . NO VOTE!

And if they can ask us to approve the initial $18.7 Million dollars by vote, then one would think the next $38 Million plus should be approved by the same process. Suppose?

Or did I miss something "in the fine print"?

Dean.Barnett
09-06-2008, 09:01 PM
Wanna quote that "fine print" here, or should we also "believe" you aren't talking out of your ***? Maybe you could even link to the source document, so everyone could see you're an honest contributor.
So I didn't see an answer to this question. Too much for you to provide? I'm getting the sense that whenever you retreat to personal insults it's because you can't deliver the goods, which would make you just another meat puppet.

Make me wrong. "quote that 'fine print' here" or " link to the source document, so everyone could see you're an honest contributor."

Otherwise, I'll just assume you're dishonest (read that as "liar" if your sore conscience requires it), as you have demonstrated amply.

Back it up, or STFU. Can you meet that challenge? I'm betting not. Quote or link, large. It's just that simple.

large
09-10-2008, 09:46 AM
Go dig it up, girlie boy . . or . . would you like to show up and require me to STFU in person?

I don't think you have either the balls or the ability!

Apparently you can't find anything to contradict my statement so you just sit and insult . . all the while hiding . .

I made a statement, and in it I said "I believe" . . Disprove it!

large
09-10-2008, 01:12 PM
And, to further rain on your parades about Vestas, and "Renewable Energy". .

The greatest share of the money generated by constructing elements of the Wind turbines will be taken out of this country as profits by the builder (Denmark) who now unload their "Built in EU" parts in Galveston and Corpus Christi, Tx and trucks them to several destinations . . And this is a big bucks operation . . In the Corpus Yards I have seen subassemblies that would build probably 50 Wind Turbines, witnessed several on the road North, and it's quite an operation . . Building them closer to their installation points, of course would be far more profitable for their manufacturer, and of course, with locals providing the labor, probably cheaper in the long run . .

Especially when the taxpayer subsidizes the factory, the installation and the operation . .

Currently, less than 16% of our "Foreign Oil Imports" come from the Middle East, while 98% of the subsidies and profits for the "Wind Turbines", go back to the owners of those businesses in the EU . . I believe it's time you people wearing those rosy glasses got a look at reality!

That's the "International" and "Green" take on all this . . Many not only do not know this, they will argue it without any other facts than the belief that "Renewable Energy" and local jobs are the only thing . . They need to reach down and pull their heads out . . They will pay more than they get in the long run . . There is no free lunch!

And as for PEDCO, it has never been a financing agency nor was it ever intended to be . . The Bylaws are public record . .

large
09-14-2008, 07:53 AM
Read Steve Henson's Editorial In Today's Chieftain. If You Desire To Argue In This Thread, And Maintain Any Creditable Standing, It Is Required Reading.

Loren Swelk
09-15-2008, 03:57 AM
Sandra, I hope to see your "letter to the Chieftain" response to the Steve Henson column, calling him untruthful and some of the other names you have heaped on Large and myself over this closed door issue. Evidently the Pueblo Chieftain seems to feel the way that I do that THIS council is not making their decisions in public.

large
09-15-2008, 07:46 AM
I'd rather hear from one of our City Council members . .

If you notice, Galli has tried to tie all the money the City is giving away to some Voter mandated action or other . . in his news releases to the paper after Council meetings. Last Tuesdays sounded more like double talk than a valid explanation . .

But, on the subject of Council recognizing any criticism, I believe their attitude has gone beyond public accountability and directly to arrogance.

Loren Swelk
09-15-2008, 10:46 AM
Not unlike Pueblo City Schools Emperor John Covington needing an additional bond issue for another 75 millon or so, "because the citizen committee" told him so.

large
09-15-2008, 03:05 PM
OK . . just got a breeze . . I hear that Waste connection is making plans to further monopolize the Trash business . . You pay for 2 containers (theirs) one's recyclable and the other's general trash . . and it will be weighed by the truck as it's loaded and you will be billed by the weight . . and the city will mandate your subservience to the holy alliance of City of Pueblo/Waste Connection . . With no options . . I will have hard copy soon.

This has been presented and is in the chain of documents to City Council and their approval . .

Was it a promise, or were they just pulling our extremities when they (Council) assured us there was no danger of a monopoly taking over our trash system?

I think I'd rather deal with the Bureau of Indian Affairs . . .

large
09-15-2008, 03:54 PM
OK . . I can call somebody in City Management or Council (or all of them) Liars . . I hold in my hands a copy of an Executive Summary, recommendation to Council to enact a MANDATORY "Pay as you throw" concept from the PACOG Environmental Policy Advisory Committee.

It is looking very hard in the direction of "Waste Collection by Single Contracted Hauler" with "Waste Connections" making the presentation to PACOG . . Next in line would be City Council Action.

And Waste Connection's plan is very similar to the one I outlined in my last post . .

Anybody out there wanna argue that City Council is selling the Pueblo Citizen down the river under the guise of "Helping us, at our expense"!

Sandra? Dean Barnett? Anybody?

Dean.Barnett
09-17-2008, 09:20 PM
.

I made a statement, and in it I said "I believe" . . Disprove it!"Quote or link, large. It's just that simple."

So, you can't "quote or link." Gee, seems like such a simple standard for an honest man to meet.

large
09-18-2008, 06:58 AM
Quote What? The entire "Executive Summary"? Why bother, then you'd want a "Link" because you apparently aren't smart enough to find a counter argument . . as I've said before, if you doubt my word, DISPROVE IT!

There are no links, or even references to this summary or the presentations given to PACOG . . While you can call me a liar (or whatever) you cannot prove that this does not exist, nor that the presentation wasn't made . .

This is the point . . these things are being discussed behind doors of "Executive Session" and, in all probability, the first the public will hear about it, is when it's enacted! As has been the recent custom . .

Dean.Barnett
09-25-2008, 09:41 PM
Quote What? The entire "Executive Summary"? Why bother, then you'd want a "Link" because you apparently aren't smart enough to find a counter argument . . as I've said before, if you doubt my word, DISPROVE IT!

There are no links, or even references to this summary or the presentations given to PACOG . . While you can call me a liar (or whatever) you cannot prove that this does not exist, nor that the presentation wasn't made . .

This is the point . . these things are being discussed behind doors of "Executive Session" and, in all probability, the first the public will hear about it, is when it's enacted! As has been the recent custom . .
Always pleasant to deal with you, large - and your consistent inability to back up your factual claims with facts. There are times when I envision you as a bulldog - lots of jaw, no ***.

Y'know, if you insist on running your mouth, at least be honest enough to admit there's nothing under the hood. Your presumptuous blowhard status would be in no danger, your acolytes would still echo your latest talking points, you'd still feel like you have relevant views, and the majority of us who can actually define "spam" could safely put you in the ignore list and move away to places where racist liars (such as yourself) are routinely derided, sliced, diced, and assigned to the "wow, I had no idea so many dementia sufferers have access to the Internet" category.

Obsolescence is rarely pretty. You might still salvage some grace.

But I doubt it. You'll undoubtedly respond with personal attacks, non sequitur, and fabricated ********. You'll try to change the subject. You won't acknowledge that you authored this phrase about an Obama speech, claiming Barrack favored "literally declaring war on Iran", a complete LIE on your part, and you'll fabricate some pseudo rational crap plagiarized from Fox News. How many times have I taunted you with this and how many times have you responded exactly as predicted?

B. F. Skinner would love you. But then again, he's dead, and thus has a reason to be so completely out of touch.

What's your excuse, large? Reality too tough for your atrophied cerebral cortex to handle?

davide
09-25-2008, 10:19 PM
What he said ! Large mouth.

large
09-26-2008, 10:25 AM
Dipsh*t, it was presented, in it's entirety a week ago last Monday to the City Council . . and it was tabled for "further Study" and possible input . . what's to "back up" ?

My sources were correct, and you aren't . .

And, again, you got a bone to pick . . look me up . . or is it a lack of balls problem on your whiney a$$ed part?

Digger Dan
09-27-2008, 06:24 AM
When elected officials meet behind closed doors it generally means the taxpayer is getting you know what.

Digger Dan
09-28-2008, 09:00 AM
As an old, in-the-past, newspaperman, I remember when newspapers raised cane when local politicians held closed-door meetings--now they seem to be too meek or well connected to raise a fuss, let alone cane. There are a few exceptions, but sure hard to find them.

Loren Swelk
09-28-2008, 12:06 PM
Exactly Digger Dan, When I started this thread I knew that my concern and complaining about the current city council and their pattern of making decisions behind closed doors and then announcing them in public in a public meeting was wrong. In the past the press would have jumped all over their actions, but now they seem not to care about it and rarely if ever question it. Steve Henson talked about it in a column in the Chieftain several weeks ago, but that has been the extent of the questioning, that was a slap on the writst with a feather, if even that. The YMCA public hearing was a fiasco, they would not let the opponents have the podium and from the get go, everyone present knew that the decision had been made and this was a sham. Same for the Pueblo Motorsports Park, same for the.... you name it and if would have been the least bit controversial, then you can bet the decision was made before anyone could say, Whoa, wait a minute, are you sure this is in the best interests of all Puebloan's or just in the best interest of a few?

large
09-28-2008, 12:27 PM
Problem with even providing input at their "Work sessions" is . . Lack of ability to prepare. Often you don't know the full agenda of a meeting until right before the meeting. The council has usually been involved in whatever they intend to op on the public for several months and has had any number of committees and legal eagles preparing it . .

Any opposition either has to be clairvoyant or have the word skills of F. Lee Bailey. Kind of like defending a criminal with no rights of discovery. You're in court, and blind . .

And while quite a bit of the past "resolutions" and votes has been done behind closed doors, others have been discussed in "Public Meetings" held in the mornings (or afternoons) of work days when most people who might be concerned have to be at work, or are aware that some committee with initials is meeting at 1425 on N. Santa Fe Avenue in a county building few know about . . and then presented to the City Council (Or County Commission) with no or little fanfare . .

All too often, the average citizen is either second guessing Council or reacting to what's been done to him . . .

Digger Dan
09-29-2008, 05:47 AM
......then they need bigger ears and a better hearing vocabulary. heehaa

large
12-08-2008, 01:48 PM
Just resurrecting this thread as "required reading" . .

heh, heh . . . And as the paper has reported, the Galli fiasco will be debated and solved "Behind Closed Doors".

Hmmm . . deja Vue all over again!

large
05-09-2011, 05:23 PM
Back again . . Read it and weep! What's the big panic at tonight's City Council meeting?

TRASH!

Trash being dumped in alleys, trash being dumped in parks, on streets and other people's dumpsters or trash receptacles, in the shiny new "Recycle" bins that they have spent money they didn't have to place for public use, and generally, just about anyplace they can do it . .

Vera Ortegon is asking for the city to set aside a place for the "poor People" who can't afford to pay WASTE CONNECTIONS $30 to $60 per pickupload at the "Public" landfill that the City Council literally gave to WASTE CONNECTIONS! She wants the city to provide a "DUMP" outside the DUMP . .

Something's wrong here . . 'Spose?

Naaaaahhhh, Just go back to post #1, written 4 years ago, read it again and award me with a gentile head pat . . instead of all the crap that was said. What I said was going to happen, has. A "City Dump" on YOUR dollar, because more than a couple of council members lined their pockets 4 years back.

Sandra
05-09-2011, 06:40 PM
So....um....whatever happened to the cleanup advisory and planning committee? After I resigned (due to health problems) I have no idea of what became of it. Was there any word about that at all? Maybe they need me back?

Also - Waste Connections has put a lot of effort into the city and I'll bet that's why Vera came up with that. The effort is both monetary and otherwise, and it's with the purpose of forcing the smaller companies out of business or the idea of someday buying them out. That's how WC operates.

Personally - I'm no fan of WC. Seriously. I don't like their style. They came to this community with the intent to take it over and push the little guys out of business. I happen to like the little guys - they do better business for a lot less money, and their customer service rocks. WC customer service is worse than Waste Management's, which is pretty durn bad.

large
05-09-2011, 07:18 PM
Lessee, Waste Connections went from $5 a level pickup to $30, and from $25 to $300 for a commercial 12 yard dump (avg. trash truck). They sure as hell ought to do "Something" for the community! Of course, that's considering they raised the prices well over 250% and have taken a hell of a lot more (in Dollars) than they'll ever put back.

Annnddd . .
The effort is both monetary and otherwise, and it's with the purpose of forcing the smaller companies out of business or the idea of someday buying them out. That's how WC operates.

I said that Four Years ago, as a warning. Now I guess it's OK for them to raise their prices that much, without so much explanation other than "Screw You, Pueblo!" But currently people like those who sell gasoline are being berated hourly for their greed. And . . How much has changed for the good? Nothing. As I predicted, it got worse instead. It usually does when someone tries to monopolize a service.

As far as civilian efforts, while they're appreciated, they don't have a lot of impact. Bessemer had it's annual clean up and according to both the paper and the City, people just piled their crap in the alleys and hoped someone would come and pick it up. Zoning has been after the owner of the Duplex next door to clean up the tree branches and debris next to the cedar fence I share. Zoning was there again this morning and apparently, nothing's gonna happen until some kids come down the alley and set it afire . . there goes my garage and Hot Rod if I'm not home . .

Bottom line, poor people don't pay trash haulers to take it away. They make it somebody else's problem. I said that previously too!

City Council isn't composed of dreamers or idealists, it's composed of Idiots!

Sandra
05-09-2011, 08:15 PM
If I were still chair of that committee, Large, you can rest assured I'd be weighing in on that issue with Council, and I'd have also been fighting WC tooth and nail.

Back to my original question, though - the trash dumping is something that the Clean Up Committee should be addressing - if it's still in existence.

large
05-09-2011, 08:25 PM
Well, I dunno. I haven't heard any references to any outside committees or individuals. The recalling of this thread took a little digging even, but when I saw today's paper this AM I just knew I had to go dig it up . . Old bones have a habit of turning back up if they weren't buried correctly.

And it isn't Karma . . I'm no rocket scientist, but I think I pretty well put it out there four years ago . . I calls 'em like I sees them and that was a correct call. Common sense and an ear to the ground is usually all it takes . .

Hopefully, I assisted in pounding a stake through the heart of Christine and her "Recycling Communists" . . It would have cost even more and there would be many more people dumping in alleys, parks and Goodwill Boxes!

And more City Council Members wringing their hands!

Sandra
05-09-2011, 08:55 PM
I looked up the clean up committee websites, the last posted meeting date was for February. I'll have to make a phone call or two to see what the deal is just because I'm curious now.

As for the dumping - you know, I hate to sound mean, but Goodwill and Salvation Army are responsible for their own boxes. If there's that much dumping going on, then remove the drop sites and just let the truck go out to pick up items. Those drivers will refuse items that look like trash or garbage.

When I was on the committee we were considering annual neighborhood cleanups - they tentatively gave it the name "roundup" - but it didn't seem to actually happen, sadly. An annual one of those might have helped the dumping situation if even only just a little.

large
05-10-2011, 05:09 AM
The Goodwill and Salvation Army Boxes shouldn't be treated as "Dump sites". and the people who dump their crap there know better, and in all probability, the people who dump there, in the alleys and other places won't quit doing it even if the laws begin to be enforced.

But, because of the terrific cost increases at the Landfill, those people who used to haul their trash to the dump, now throw it in an alleys, etc. Council, and the Health Department, in their elitist way, ignored basic economics once again, to the detriment of the city they're supposed to govern.

The other thing lacking, in Pueblo, is the mindset. There's a certain class of people who have No Class. They literally exist at the generosity of others, and use race and the fact that they're poor and it's somebody else's fault to get by with all that they do (or don't do might be closer). Pueblo seems to have a pretty large contingent of those, and always has.

And there's the implied tolerance by government. About two months ago, I was out in my back yard, doing something or other to the yard when I heard the next door dumpster doors slam. I looked up and there was a woman unloading trash bags from her car and filling the dumpster. I just made a mental note to ask the neighbor if she was a relative, friend or what. Nope, turns out she was a "Dumper" . . A week or so later, she showed up again, and I hollered at her, told her that what she was doing was illegal. She shot me a "Go to Hell" look and just kept on keeping on. I took her license plate number and called the cops. I might as well have called the President, at least he'd have made a speech. Nada. And last Friday, she was back, and because the dumpster was full, she just piled her trash up beside it . . she has no fear of prosecution, or even encountering a cop. And if she did, the cop probably would be in between calls and not have a clue as to what he(she) is supposed to do.

Sandra
05-10-2011, 05:34 AM
The Goodwill and Salvation Army Boxes shouldn't be treated as "Dump sites". and the people who dump their crap there know better, and in all probability, the people who dump there, in the alleys and other places won't quit doing it even if the laws begin to be enforced.

This is why I say those boxes are their responsibility. Either they deal with that or they should be forced to remove them and just pick up all donations instead. If they remove the drop sites, then they won't be there to be used for dumping grounds.


But, because of the terrific cost increases at the Landfill, those people who used to haul their trash to the dump, now throw it in an alleys, etc. Council, and the Health Department, in their elitist way, ignored basic economics once again, to the detriment of the city they're supposed to govern.

You can thank Waste Connections for that. I knew this was going to happen from the get-go - I even predicted this.


The other thing lacking, in Pueblo, is the mindset. There's a certain class of people who have No Class. They literally exist at the generosity of others, and use race and the fact that they're poor and it's somebody else's fault to get by with all that they do (or don't do might be closer). Pueblo seems to have a pretty large contingent of those, and always has.

Every city has this problem. Have you seen Colorado Springs lately?

Funny about the dumper incident - what you should do is give your neighbor that information you took down and let them call and see if they deal with it then.

large
05-10-2011, 05:49 AM
According to today's Paper, Council's solution is to pass another law regarding upkeep of properties within the City. Why pass more laws when they can't (Won't) enforce those they already have on the books?

Regarding the goodwill Boxes, I believe they have removed them. On the other hand, as I said, the City has gone around and installed a bunch of three basket "Recycleable" trash bins on (seemingly) every corner, and is now complaining that the "Dumpers' are using THEM! Perish the thought . . .

Needless to say, they aren't going to solve any of the problems they've created by their past actions!

Sandra
05-10-2011, 07:05 AM
I agree, large. Unless they man those recycle bins with security teams they're only defeating their purpose.

Buster.Tripp@Gmail.com
05-10-2011, 11:55 AM
Does not matter how many committies there are,and how many laws are passed. Its up to the people to make a difference and Pueblo does not have enough people who gives a dam. As long as it stays out of the rich hoods who cares?

large
05-10-2011, 01:00 PM
Problem is, it has become the city's problem of their own making, or at least they accelerated it by raising the cost of disposal.

Now, as elitists will, they want to pass more laws that they cannot/will not enforce.

large
05-11-2011, 07:33 AM
Hahahahahahahahahahaha ha ha ha ha ahem . . . .

Yesterday the City Council and the Three Stooges (County Commissioners) got together. If any of you noticed an immediate drop in general IQ around you, that's what caused it . . A "Gathering of Idiots" . . And . . they fessed up. The City Council (and the Commissioners) are now deciding that the Council shot themselves in the foot (or the A$$) four years ago when they "Awarded" Waste Connections ownership of the City-County Landfill. While "WC's Mission Statement" was available to anyone brilliant enough to Google their website and read it, apparently no one associated with the City Council or Government did . . ever . . . But they did sign a "No Compete" agreement, effective, according to the City Attorney, till 2023.

Now that's a long time . . .

Soooo . . Yesterday, with hats in hand, they sat down with the Commissioners and asked them to build and operate a "Competing" landfill because Waste Connection's prices were "unreasonable" . . And they offered property that had been purchased, years ago, for the purpose of establishing another Landfill once the current one was used up.

Question being . . Who's gonna run it? Private enterprise (as before Waste Connections) or the City and County? If the City and County does, within a very short time, we'll be seeing the same dumping fees that WC currently charges, because that's what unionized government agencies do.

I'll leave the rest up to discussion . .

Buster.Tripp@Gmail.com
05-11-2011, 12:54 PM
AMEN large AMEN

large
05-12-2011, 06:41 AM
And now . . In this morning's paper, The Waste Connections manager said, literally, "Get Over It" . . He stated that the City, literally, had no choice. "The Landfill operator, Zupan, was going broke", he said, ignoring the facts that for some odd reason, back then, Zupan's Applications for State Permits mysteriously got stonewalled at the state level, with help from within the City management, the Council and the County Health Department.

City Council couldn't wait to throw Zupan to the dogs and get Waste Connections on board. They were going to do so many wonderful things that the liberals in City Government desired for the rest of us, like Mandatory Trash Collection and Recycling (at our expense, of course) and they were going to eliminate all the trash truck traffic on the streets, etc . .

Apparently, as with any public office holder, they left any economic acumen they may have had, at the door when they took the oath of office! Like the fact that the City and County of Pueblo has the highest poverty level in the state per capita, and that Pueblo has a lower standard of living than any other city of comparable size in the state. Or . . That the city, up to that time, had been dictating the landfill rates, thus establishing a reason for Zupan not raising his rates at the landfill.

Minor . . History is best remembered by the victims. Not the profiteer.

ButwotthehelldoIknow?

Buster.Tripp@Gmail.com
05-12-2011, 11:34 AM
Do I hear recall? Zupan was good for Pueblo it treated people fair. Everytime we needed them they came forward when my kids would clean up the city or some old persons yard. But this has been the plan for about the last 15 years I belive. What happened to the last methane plant that was out out at the dump? Didnt they spend millions with no returns at tax payers expense.

Marc.N
05-12-2011, 12:06 PM
Did somone get a payoff? Did some non-Puebloan bribe their way into Pueblo and get the home boys "trashed"?

Buster.Tripp@Gmail.com
05-25-2011, 03:40 PM
Who is this person come on CF