Toledo City Councilman Betty Shultz raised suspicions yesterday about whether a closed gathering that preceded the ouster of Republican Rob Ludeman as council president violated the state open-meetings law.
Council
Ashford selected illegally? D's may be in hot water
Looks like good ole' Betty still got plenty of fire. :-) Atta Girl!
107.02. Notice of regular and organizational meetings.
(b) The Clerk shall post a statement of the time and place of any organizational meeting of a municipal body at least twenty-four hours before the time of such organizational meeting.
Section 32A. President of Council.
At the organizational meeting on the first business day of January following each regular City election, the Council shall elect one of its members as President who shall serve as President at the pleasure of Council. The President shall preside at meetings of the Council, perform such duties as presiding officer as may be conferred upon him or her by Council, and shall prepare the agenda for the meetings of Council in consultation with the Mayor, or the Mayor
Reading Redfern's comments is laughable. He cares nothing for Toledo or it's people.
Ive posted on a couple forums and written to Szolousy and my own councilperson asking what good this business will do for the City, and have yet to be answered.
...in a teapot. Perhaps it violates some law or rule (which to me doesn't make sense). The Democrats should pay the $500 fine, and vote again (in public). Redferm got the Democrats together in a meeting to make a decision. I don't know how anyone could make such a decision without such a meeting. Apparently it violates some silly-*ss law (on par with making pi equal to 3 in Arkansas), but promoted party unity. Now the other party is crying "foul". Par for the course. As for bringing up Noe it is a good thing to remember, but certainly Republicans wish we'd forget. I don't think we will.
Sounds like sour grapes from one of the conduits. If the Repubs are crying partisan politics with the dismissal of Ludeman, than this attempt by Schultz could be construed as exactly the same thing.
The Blade article seems fairly clear to me...discussion at the meeting w/Redfern was general - strong party, influence on local politics, blah blah blah. They worked out the votes for Ashford via one-on-one phone calls later.
The City Charter makes it clear what the process is for reorganizing the City Council.
So, there could be an allegation of a violation that chapter, also.
http://toledoohioneighborhoodconcerns.com/blog
It is a law and it was for a purpose - open and transparent government!!
Overlook the little stuff, nitpick the technicalities, and the slope gets slippery. It gets easier to overlook the bigger stuff.
There were a whole lot of us that questioned this - Schultz just happens to be on city council and the story has more interest, as is shown here and on other blogs, if they pick Schultz to be the poster child for this issue.
There were other ways that this could have been handled by Redfern without raising these questions. And if anyone should know that this was questionable, it should be an elected official.
It was very poor judgment to hold this meeting as they did. Given the environment in Toledo, the D's just added more fuel to the fire of cynicism and skepticism already prevalent here about local government.
Anybody want to elect those that show poor judgment? Raise your hand or your voice!
He used the tried and true political tactic to shift the news away from the allegations and tries to move the argument.
This tactic does really old after awhile.
Which party is the party of change, again, I cannot keep track.
http://toledoohioneighborhoodconcerns.com/blog
Until someone turns on the light; "Mr. Redfern was dismissive of the allegations that Democrats intentionally subverted the open-meetings law. He said Ms. Shultz should consider her own ethics, after helping the now-imprisoned GOP fund-raiser Tom Noe launder donations to President Bush
You're very correct neighborhood.
By throwing Schultz' ethical lapse into the fray doesn't absolve Mr. Redfern of his apparent ethical lapse. That is something children do to try to push the blame off themselves.
The Republicans faced massive problems getting any candidate elected after the Noe scandal. Even those who weren't involved dealt with the issue. As Redfern pointed out in the article '"I don