MsKreed

1 hour ago, Chris said:

So according to the 2018 candidate survey responses, McCarthy and Drake indicated they would support term limits, and you said Morse would as well. We know Sweet doesn't. The rest are unknowns as far as I can tell. 

Correct, and my impression is that Drake and McCarthy have both been as consistent in there support as Sweet has been against it. 

Although, as Chair of this Committee, Burin has remained fair and neutral in his voice on the issue.....when he was a member of the previous Committee in 2019-20, he was on record in the meetings that he'd like to see the Full Legislature vote on it. 

In Jan 2020, when the matter was presented in the Multi Services Committee , McCarthy made the motion to move it forward..... here is part of the exchange that ensued after it failed:

Quote

NEW BUSINESS: Mr. Burin suggested that a Local Law regarding Term Limits for the County Executive and County Legislature be reconsidered.  He suggested amending the Local Law to include a public referendum.  This would allow the  public to decide if the County Executive and the County Legislature should have term limits. 

Mr. Chalk stated that he fully agrees with Mr. Burin's comments. 

Mrs. Sonsire stated that by not moving items out of committee, it prohibits all Legislators to have a vote. 

Mr. Drake stated that a Local Law deserves to be brought to the Full Legislative Board for a vote. 

Mr. Briggs noted that he  did not second this Local Law  because he already put term limits on himself as he intends to only run for two terms.  Mr. Briggs stated he would abstain from any vote and he didn't feel it was right to limiting anyone's terms. 

Mr. Margeson stated he would like to see this Local Law  be brought back to discussion again as a public referendum to be voted on by the public.   

Mr. Strange stated that he is not a big supporter of term limits but does support a public referendum.

Mr. Chalk asked how can this item be brought back to the table as a public referendum.  Attorney Maggs responded that all items need to be put on an agenda which is approved through the Chairman. 

Mr. Brennan stated that he would like to see the Term Limits Advisory Committee reconvene to continue to gather information. 

Mr. Sweet stated he is not for term limits because he believes  term limits already exist every four years.  He also stated length of service creates experience and knowledge.  Mr. Sweet stated he believes Term Limits takes away the right of the voters. 

Mrs. Woodard stated she feels that length of service obtains experience and knowledge.  She noted that there are no term limits on other elected official and questions why there is a sense of urgency to have term limits for County Legislators and County Executive.  

This is interesting....

In my earlier post I expected to the Multi-Services Committee to vote on whether to present to the Full Legislature..... because that is where the Term Limits Advisory Committee's recommendation was sent in 2020. 

However......the Agenda for this Monday (4/24/23) has the issue going to the Personnel Committee (with separate resolutions to amend the Charter for Executive and Legislative Term Limits).

That means these members will be voting whether to move it to the Full Legislature:

Martin Chalk (Chairman), Lawana Morse, L. Thomas Sweet, Steven Pickering, John Burin, William McCarthy, Scott Drake

12 hours ago, Chris said:

Although admittedly if you’re not familiar with “Clone Wars” and “Rebels” ( the latter of which I only casually watched and can’t say I’ve seen all of ) you may not get the full experience like some of us would.

12 hours ago, Kevin said:

You can watch it and enjoy it without knowing all of the backstory. 

This. 100%

I haven't watched any cartoon series and have enjoyed the Mandalorian very much.....Other than some confusion at the gap between seasons 2 and 3 that picked up where Boba Fett left left off. 

8 minutes ago, Chris said:

I can't find it anywhere, but I believe there was discussion about this and that Smith had changed his thinking about term limits. 

If that is the case, then Donovan may be the “tie-breaker” on the committee.

I doubt McCarthy has done a flip; he seems consistent, humble and honest in any issue he addresses.   

Hopefully and Donovan will hear from voters to understand that as “quiet” as the Legislature’s coverage on this issue is, it is something supported by voters (and his predecessor).

And it would be nice  (wishful thinking) that someone can “remind” Smith of his views when he campaigned....

Although the Minutes have only been posted for posted for the March 3, 2023 meeting, the Term Limit Review Advisory Committee held two in depth meetings on March 30th  and  April 13th, and a final meeting today  recommending to send a draft and recommendation for Term Limits to the Standing Committee to vote on Monday (April 24th) 

The recommendation outlines three consecutive 4 year terms for Legislators and the County Executive.  It will be retroactive to Jan 1, 2023......so the current term would be the first counted in the Term Limits.

Partial unexpired terms would not count toward that maximum, and after sitting out for a full term, a Term Limited official would be eligible to run again. 

They also plan to recommend a resolution be passed that will put the Law to public referendum in November. To meet the BOE timeline, it will be presented in the May 8th  Full Legislature.

Before the Full Board receives it, this will be voted on by the Multi-Services Committee that is comprised of the following members: Michael Smith (Chairman), Lawana Morse, L. Thomas Sweet, Joseph Donovan, William McCarthy.

When asked about Term Limits in a 2018 survey, (HERE) Mr. Smith said: "I think that 3 terms as a legislator (12 years) is probably adequate. Steuben County has term limits and they seem to be making it work."

Mrs. Morse was a strong advocate for term limits in her 2022 campaign, and has indicated she will support this.

As a member of the Advisory Committee, Mr Sweet has been very consistent in opposition to Term Limits as noted in the 2018 survey (HERE) 

Mr Donovan had a rather short campaign and it's not clear where he stands on the issue.

Mr McCarthy was in favor of Term Limits in his 2018 survey (HERE) "Yes , I would be in favor of term limits say 3 or 4 terms ( 4 terms being 16 years ) I don't believe it is healthy to have any board be made up of the same people for decades . Just as the county has to continue to grow and change I believe it is in everyone's best interest to have the legislature do the same."

There seems to be a good possibility the Multi Services Committee will move it to the Full Legislature ....but I'd certainly encourage any voters who have a line of communication with any of those Committee members make their views clear before Monday's stand committee meetings. 

I agree.

And it's further disturbing how many of those charges are Class D.....which could be a sentence as short as 2 years (18 months with "good" time). 

🤮

47 minutes ago, Chris said:

I’m not gonna copy and paste all the hubbub that led up to this because honestly, I question somewhat the motives of the person that started it all back up. I get a sense of self-aggrandizement, or looking to make a name for one’s self but hey, I could be wrong.

Anyhow, today’s firestorm on social media did prompt Pastor Spencer to address the situation. This in itself is highly unusual. You can see it here: https://www.facebook.com/HisTabernacle/videos/251349457337421/?app=fbl

I watched the video.

I may be lacking some context since I didn't see the "firestorm", but his point about the red flags and hurdles of a church running "for profit" enterprise make me wonder how "renting" fits into the whole 501c formula. 

And his remark about a very low revenue limit if a church does operate a for profit business....... makes me wonder even more about the Journey Church operating The L

22 minutes ago, Chris said:

Isn't this the same guy who was never in town or never attended meetings?

Yes

Quote

 

In a statement, Chemung County Democratic Committee Chair Dora Leland says, "The people of his district expect a representative to listen to their concerns and share them in the city council. He's not doing that. Worse yet, he's collecting a paycheck from the taxpayers of the City of Elmira for work he's not doing."

Mayor Mandell spoke on the matter as well saying, "The bottom line is he's an elected official. He doesn't have to show up to meetings, he doesn't have to go to council meetings. There's nothing that compels him to do that. Am I frustrated like the Democratic Committee? You're darn right."

 

Source

On 1/27/2023 at 2:22 PM, Chris said:

Targeted to a particular troublesome neighborhood with a purpose in mind? Perhaps. But this casting a wide net “just in case” bothers me some.

These Flock cameras are so outdated.....the just sit there mounted on a pole?

Instead, they should add "patrolling" with continuous video, audio to their standard license plate reading capability....as is being implemented  NYC:

Source

Quote

“Mayor Adams continues to pour money into the NYPD’s bloated budget, enabling police to impose new, dystopian surveillance technologies throughout the city without meaningfully engaging New Yorkers in a conversation about whether this is how we want to live," the Legal Aid Society's statement said.

These look like the same model that has done such a stellar job in private security applications. I'm sure it won't run into any problems in The Big Apple. 

I thought Smith’s (and others’) premise that this performance wouldn’t serve all county residents was disingenuous at best considering the millions we’ve dumped into a hockey arena that only serves a small segment of the population. As Legislator Strange pointed out.... taxpayer money supports all kinds of things that are not utilized by everyone.  

On the other hand, as Legislator McCarthy noted, the timing and format of the request doesn’t seem appropriate. "Prior Preparation and Planning Prevents Piss Poor Performance"

Is this the same band that is already booked for the Fair, or an additional event? 

What precedent do we have for taxpayers to front money for Fair performances?

I might understand if the Ag Society outlined some ledger numbers that show that they lost revenue during the pandemic and need a little cushion to recover, etc. But if that were the case, the report, numbers, and plan should have been presented a long time ago. Instead it appears that they suddenly got the idea to request the county to “sponsor” the show barely five months from the date.

Wow. 

This guy claimed to live in Veteran so he could run for Chemung County 1st Legislative District last year. Sadly, he's apparently free to run in any race with the dem primary being unchallenged.

He made no attempt to introduce any platform and had a blank FB page with no posts. And made a few public comments about redistricting at a Legislative meeting that clearly showed he'd not done any research or followed the topic.  

This guy needs a hobby besides changing his postal address to qualify for bogus political campaigns. 

39 minutes ago, Chris said:

One, talk about an upstart. She picks up a lightsaber and suddenly she’s Master Jedi Rey. Not to mention everyone else around her is suddenly Force sensitive.

I didn’t quite get how Rey or Luke achieved Jedi-hood, starting out as young adults. How is that when the premise was that a 7 yr old Anakin was “too old” to train as a Jedi? 

I just have to chalk it up to the idea that once we buy into the rest of the sci-fi fantasy.....there's some requirement to "suspend disbelief" about the minutia. LOL

As a side note......if she out-lives Charles, I can’t see her ever being called “Queen Mother”.  But I think William could let her go by Queen “Dowager” if he wants.

2 hours ago, Ann said:

I believe in the past, the King’s wife was also crowned Queen, not just referred to as Queen Consort.  Perhaps because the women were usually daughters of other Kings.  I thought Queen Elizabeth II approved Camilla to be referred to as Queen Consort but I guess Charles can do what he wants now that he is in charge.

You are correct, that others were called "Queen".....but I don't think it was because of their previous station. Queen "consort" is the specific technical title of whoever is married to the King, as opposed to a Queen "Monarch" (who has ascended to the throne herself), but they have historically been shortened to just "Queen" as a title. 

Once her daughter ascended to the throne, Duchess Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon became Queen Mother. She was the daughter of some minor nobility, not a king, but while her husband was King, she was technically considered Queen consort. However, The Official Royal website repeatedly uses just 'Queen' when referring to her.

Quote

Accession

King George V died in January 1936. When King Edward VIII abdicated on 11 December the same year, his brother, Albert, Duke of York, was proclaimed King George VI, and his Duchess became Queen Elizabeth, the first British-born Queen consort since Tudor times.  

Activities as Queen

The King and Queen continued to visit other Commonwealth nations and overseas countries. Between the coronation and the outbreak of war in September 1939 they made two important visits: in July 1938 to France, and May and June 1939 to Canada and the USA.

With the outbreak of war in 1939, there was some suggestion that the Queen and her daughters should evacuate to North America or Canada. To this the Queen made her famous reply: 'The children won't go without me. I won't leave the King. And the King will never leave.' Thus throughout the Second World War the Queen and her children shared the dangers and difficulties of the rest of the nation. She was in Buckingham Palace when it was bombed in September 1940. She and the King visited badly damaged areas throughout the country after the air-raids, and toured Britain visiting hospitals, factories and troops.

Granted, I "feel" like city management's refusal to disclose any details until forced by FOIL and cagey back-pedalling seems like they were looking for some way to get rid of hin (and hoped to get him to resign voluntarily).....but haven't found any proof. If someone can cite "well known" facts that point to that, I'd like to know about it, too.

10 hours ago, Adam said:

easy fix would be to no longer offer protection to any ex-elected official, particularly since majority come out millionaires, they can pay for it themselves

I don't disagree that they can generally afford their own security which wouldn't be allowed to offer protection in jail. But I imagine former living presidents (and their spouses) feeling "safer" because SS has authority and jurisdiction over state and local law enforcement, that their private details wouldn't.

For instance, when Obama visited Central NYS (back in 2012 or 13), he stayed at (commandeered) the Holiday Inn in Auburn.  A couple of the "Wall" towers at Auburn Correctional were visible from the roof and top floor of the hotel.  Those towers have armed COs and if SS can see the weapons, then the weapons had a line of site close enough to POTUS's "bubble" to be a danger. SS ordered NYS to disarm those posts during Obama's visit.

The lifetime protection, after leaving office, is only provided for former POTUS and FLOTUS, I assume because there's only one at any given time with 4-5 former POTUSes at most. As opposed to the 535 members of the Senate and House in office, which would be thousands of individuals after leaving office. 

With this indictment (and others that may follow for classified docs or the GA election, etc), my mind keeps wandering off on a tangent:

How exactly is Secret Service protection going to work if their “protectee” is incarcerated?

It’s not like the Treasury is going to grant SS Agent status to correctional staff.

My husband and I spent a combined 40 yrs working in NY State prisons. I don’t see how Trump (or Hillary, or anyone else under SS protection) can spend time inside where no guns or radios are allowed. Those are necessary for SS to perform their duties. But they sure as hell can’t carry around prison contraband like weapons and communications devices while escorting Trump around the facility.

And if SS has to always have eyes on the “protectee”, what does that look like? Do agents take shifts being locked inside a cell with Trump?

16 minutes ago, Kevin said:

I don't know how to hide my comments so I will just say I am so happy to see that.  Now I just want a live action version of Hondo.

It took me a while to figure out when the feature was added.

You highlight the content, then click the "eyeball" in the editing bar above.

1 minute ago, KarenK said:

I don't know if you can file for wrongful termination if you resign but there is definitely something shady going on with the city Admin right now.

He did not tender his resignation. In the audio tape a few weeks ago, Collins gave him the option of resigning and retaining some accrual payments or he'd be terminated - he (wisely) said "I'll take the termination".

8 minutes ago, Adam said:

at about 13 seconds in, you can here someone say "muffle...shoot you in the/your fuc*ing face"

I re-re-played and it sounds like you are correct, that seems to be the muffled comment as the bodycam PO approached. 

However...... before he alluded that it was a consideration in the termination, the Mayor said is wasn't: 

“…the reason why he was terminated was not because of this incident or what he did or didn't do. This incident prompted an investigation, it's what he did while the investigation was ongoing that caused his termination," Mayor Mandell said. 

The whole thing stinks of an administration that was looking for a chance to get rid of him and arrogantly assumed he'd resign when pressed to over a trivial excuse. His taking the termination hopefully screwed their plan.

So, when offering resignation or termination, Collins explicitly said the bodycam and incident it showed were relevant factors in the "determination". 

Now Mandell claims the "determination" was based solely on the Chief's conduct 're' the investigation. But then immediately pointed to (irrelevant?) minutiae from the bodycam, like drawing a weapon, and gawd forbid.....driving partially onto a lawn instead of just the sidewalk???

Backpedal much? LOL

Also....I replayed the video again and still can't hear any threat to "shoot him in the face" or anything other than ordering him to get on the ground.

I stand by my belief that Tony should prevail in a wrongful termination suit.

How is this just a misdemeanor? 

**shaking my head**

7 minutes ago, Chris said:

Sounds to me like there was no contact. You can hear someone ( perhaps Alvernaz )say, "I don't how in the hell you cleared that car."

I'm doubtful there was contact, although one of the two reports seems to indicate one opinion was that he "attempted to jump the vehicle but fell"....and another said he "jumped and cleared the vehicle". The video doesn't "prove" one way or the other whether there was contact. Either way, both indicated that it was the suspect who took the jump.

I'd guess that the first was from the PO running with bodycam and the second was Alvernaz himself (who would have had a clear view from the driver's seat). 

I think the Chief will likely prevail in a wrongful termination suit. 

Watching the raw video footage at regular speed at a distance, it's hard to see the suspect's encounter with the unmarked vehicle clearly. 

If someone was trying to allege that the Chief struck the suspect, then I would hope a competent and thorough "internal investigation" would have entailed some technology that zooming in and slowing frames (like WETM had the ability to do).

Their clearer "close-up" video clip confirms that the suspect was off the ground to jump the hood before Alvernaz's vehicle reached him.

Instead of stopping or veering off as the vehicle pulled up, the fleeing suspect either brushed over the hood while he was jumping, or cleared it completely. 

I think it's very possible that Alvernaz's integrity and standards have ruffled feathers and officials that that felt threatened wanted him gone. 

If so, perhaps this call/defendant were just the first thing someone thought they could make some flimsy case out of and use the "internal investigation" as an excuse to ask for his resignation.

Anyone ignoring an SOS was a real irritant for me working in the prison system as a civilian when protocol wasn’t followed.....even at “safe” li’l old Monterey Shock with (allegedly) non-violent inmates.  

At the Hill we had personal alarms, and in all prisons if any phone is left off the hook it alerts the Watch Command. Any number of situations could accidentally send an alert or bump a receiver off its cradle. But no matter how clumsy an employee may be or how regularly they may accidentally set it off....simply calling the office that sent the alert and getting a verbal “OK” over the phone was not sufficient.

Security needed to go to the location and lay eyes on them. As they should. Period.