Danaus was Right

[nonseq]

I'm looking at past meeting minutes. There have been several common sense proposals shot down by City Council after a majority of people were recorded as being in favor of them. Recycling for one. 97% of our residents were recorded as being in favor of a mandatory recycling program that would cost each household $3/month more in garbage fees. A vocal minority made a huge stink. So now to have curbside pick-up of recycling it costs $12/month. There have been a few other things, too. I suspect one person of being the agitator. I would like to know why his opinion counts so much. Everything is of a piece. This is a small town. I need to do some digging.

The no votes were 1) "because most people don't want chickens." Two spoke against. Two spoke for. I had three pages of signatures and five letters of support. Larry had none. 2) Because we can't change laws for a few people. 3) "I just agree with them."

This wasn't before the whole Council. Just a committee.

Fox - I expected better information from the committee and reasons for "no" that made sense.

 

[Danaus29]

thefox, as long as you are allowed to fire a gun on your property in Ohio you are allowed to trap, hunt and shoot on your property without a license. On my 1/4 acre I have never had a problem with anyone calling the police when I am doing target practice and if the close neighbors hear a single gunshot early in the morning they ask me later that day if it was a groundhog or raccoon. Right now I am baiting squirrel into the yard. Season on them opens Sept 1. Since I don't have my ducks I'll have to get enough squirrels to provide a few meals.

 

[theFox]

Quote:
In a lot of states you can not hunt or trap even on your own land without a license or the land being larger than X acres. In Maine the first barrier is 10 acres then the land must be used for agricultural purposes, you can then hunt and trap in season species except turkey, in order to hunt turkey without a license you need 25 acres.

In addition it is possible that you may not be able to discharge a firearm with or without hunting or trapping licenses, then there are the places that allow only shotgun usage while hunting. In addition you can not legally discharge a firearm within 100 yards of any occupied dwelling unit without the residents permission.

So on some parts of my lot I can shoot with a license and other parts (a narrow strip on the southwest side) I can not. I have permission from the neighbor on the other side, with a dwelling unit. I've never asked the neighbor on the southwest side as it only affects about a 10 foot wide strip.

There are exceptions to these rules however they require conditions to exist that don't normally exist and in these cases the target may or may not be a wild or domestic animal.

I won't discuss trapping as that can get quite complicated as can fishing in this state.

 

[theFox]

Quote:
I love reason 2 because I'm willing to bet that they never even asked for a majority vote on each part of their ordinance and even further that they didn't draft an original set of ordnances.

Sounds like someone has already stacked the council so the recourse you have is to re-stack it or dig up enough dirt to unravel the current sitting council.

Check to see if there is a public meeting law in your state that prevents X or more council members from being together at the same place without public notice. It has been known for the publics' business to sometimes get conducted at such a gathering in violation of such laws.

The formal vote gets taken at the noticed meeting but they don't actually decide there.

The town three towns over from me went through this a couple of years ago. Oopsie, someone was paying attention and some fun ensued.

 

[nonseq]

Quote:
I love reason 2 because I'm willing to bet that they never even asked for a majority vote on each part of their ordinance and even further that they didn't draft an original set of ordnances.

Sounds like someone has already stacked the council so the recourse you have is to re-stack it or dig up enough dirt to unravel the current sitting council.

Check to see if there is a public meeting law in your state that prevents X or more council members from being together at the same place without public notice. It has been known for the publics' business to sometimes get conducted at such a gathering in violation of such laws.

The formal vote gets taken at the noticed meeting but they don't actually decide there.




The town three towns over from me went through this a couple of years ago. Oopsie, someone was paying attention and some fun ensued.

I won't take that bet. Either of your bets. I am checking into rules on public meetings. I seem to recall a bit of brouhaha with that a few years ago. I've been checking minutes of meetings to see who shows up at those, too. And I am dirt digging.

Mr. Fox - Looks like they can't discuss business outside of scheduled public meetings. http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/121.22

Unless I'm missing something........

"All regular and special meetings of Council shall be open to the public, except as provided for in Ohio's open meeting laws." The link is to the applicable ORC. I can't see where chickens come into the exceptions.

 

[PineappleMama]

^Sheesh that kind of stuff even happens on the PTA level... all meetings supposed to be public, as in open to ANY parent, teacher or educator who would like to witness (though not necessary be allowed to speak)... and yet Board meetings, with votes taken, are held at private homes with no notice given to anyone.

If PTA moms, supposedly only on the board to support their kids, are willing to be this sneaky, why wouldn't a politician?

I'd definitely snoop into the backroom laws...

And as the other suggested, if they are a SAFETY board and didn't vote based on SAFETY then they're out of their league. I don't see how this landed on their docket at all? Is there any way to figure out how that happened? And who the right board is? If this isn't their area then seems like their ruling would be null and void. Particularly if you can get a ruling from the board who IS in control of zoning/animal codes or whatever.

It's good that you have those previous examples, ie recycling, that have NOTHING to do with your situation/animals. It shows that in ALL areas they are ignoring the public's majority opinion and voting WRONG. So, when you mention those examples AND yours... well all of them might be fixed.

Like others said... find the weak link... all it usually takes is ONE asking for the thing to be reopened... get the community on your side... talk to your neighbors that are paying that $12 instead of $3... show them the facts, the paper trail. Don't even have to mention your birds at all. Get them on your side with something that effects them directly... and then throw in the other examples... and ask for their help... flood their offices with communications from angry citizens on a variety of issues.

And of course... call in the troops in the local paper too (assuming they aren't the loudmouth)... show them the facts of their voting... 97% for and they still vote no... make sure the citizens know that with this board their opinion doesn't mean squat.

 

[nonseq]

Oh I found this!

http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway....n=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlegal:pickerington_oh

Larry Larry Larry! I see your RV sticking out. It's waaaaay longer than the adjacent wall in the side yard.

Just the knowledge of this makes me happy......I don't know if I'll do anything with it.

How did you get permission for that RV? And the 8' fence? hmmmmm........To the zoning permits!

 

[theFox]

ROTFLMAO.

In a small town just a few miles from here was an Assistant CEO (Code .... Officer) who was busy doing his thing while violating his town's codes (and I do believe state law).

He left his job at the town he lived in to become CEO of another town.

Then what he was doing came to light and was made the topic of a couple of small regional newspapers (of the free variety) this got word back to the town he was working in as CEO, that town handed him his walking papers.

My, my, one never knows what one might find with a little digging.

 

[spoggy]

Geez Nonseq, I really believed you would have won them over, had you been allowed to speak. I really liked what you had. Now, go and be the biggest gadfly you can! Make them regret their decision!

 

[huntercf]

It sounds like the city council might be just puppetheads for a large financial donor who is really calling the shots. You might look into who donates to the campaigns of all the council members and find out the position of that donor, you might just find that the donor has parallel views on how the council votes every time and you could send your results to the the state AG.
Have you considered a run for council yourself?, you could start with the recycling issue and then if you are elected bring up the chicken issue...at every council meeting.