| Author |
Message |
    
Mayhewdrive
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 722
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 21, 2004 - 1:38 pm: | 
|
As some of you may know, Mark Rosner has created a "blog" on the nj.com site called "Rosner Writes"
http://www.nj.com/weblogs/rosner/
Since Mark takes the time to put it together, I figured it should at least get some more visibility here on MOL (along with Tracey's blog at http://www.nj.com/weblogs/southorange/) and we could respond to it here (since there is little meaninful debate on nj.com...sorry John)
As for my opinion on the latest post on "Communication"....certainly I commend Mark for making himself so available here, on nj.com & via email. I don't always agree with him, but Mark does make communication possible between residents & the BOT. Allen & Patrick also try, but I'd certainly like to see them even more here on MOL.
It is shameful that none of the other Trustees publicly participate here, since they obviously do have the time to READ the posts here...it would be "interesting" to see them also POST.
As for the Village website....I'm glad it exists & the agendas are a great service (especially since it was an idea I suggested repeatedly). I wish the meeting minutes were updated online more frequently (especially the Closed Session minutes). I also wish the website would be less "political" & would show a clear & accurate status report of the major redevelopment project milestones on the front home page (i.e. Beifus - construction scheduled to begin 4/15 (on schedule) Village Market - awaiting signing of developer's agreement on 11/15/03 (behind schedule) etc etc )
Ditto for the Gaslight.
As for BOT Meetings - the BOT must learn to ask questions (active listening) of residents and stop lecturing residents when they speak. It's very demotivating for people who get up the courage to speak publicly only to be lectured to by Art Taylor, or to be ridiculed by Steglitz. I think Patrick Joyce exemplifies how residents should be treated at meetings. It's not terribly surprising, since that is the way he treats people in everyday life. It's a matter of respect. Some of Trustees act as if they are entitled to respect because of where they are sitting. They need to understand that respect needs to be earned.
My 2 cents. Anyone else? |
gozerbrown
Citizen
Username: Gozerbrown
Post Number: 310
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 21, 2004 - 3:52 pm: |
|
Mayhew,
I have to agree with you on this. I am always shocked at the lack of professionality among members of the BOT at the meetings. It's really pretty disappointing...and even more so that these folks keep getting re-elected year after year. |
Dan Shelffo
Citizen
Username: Openspacer
Post Number: 87
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 21, 2004 - 7:57 pm: |
|
I think it is pretty intimidating for people to go up to the podium at BOT meetings and address the board given the way they are treated. I notice that a lot of times a person starts out addressing the Trustees and quickly ends up dealing with the Administrator or the Village Attorney. Then excuses are given or the person is attacked. This makes it look like the BOT is not really on top of things or the Village is actually run by Mrrs. Gross and Matthews.
This contrasts with the way the Maplewood meetings are run. There, while the Commitee members often disagree, they treat each other with respect, even refering to each other by Mr. or Ms. This treatment of respect is extended to the public as well. Township counsel and administrator only speak when spoken to.
I think that the BOT members who do not post here (under their own names) hesitate because it is a more level playing field than a BOT meeting. I can disagree with Allan, Patrick and Mark (especially) but at least we can have a dialog.
One of the Trustees even said in the website bios that they enjoy lurking on MOL but I have never seen them post. To me, that is scarry.
|
Washashore
Citizen
Username: Washashore
Post Number: 126
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 24, 2004 - 10:38 pm: |
|
Based on their Jan 21 and Jan 22 posts, above, concerning respect, and proper treatment of fellow BOTs and residents, I say
MAYHEWDRIVE FOR BOT!
GOZERBROWN FOR BOT!
DAN SHELFFO FOR BOT! |
thegoodsgt
Citizen
Username: Thegoodsgt
Post Number: 368
Registered: 2-2002
| | Posted on Monday, January 26, 2004 - 11:13 am: |
|
I watched a "re-run" of a BOT meeting over the weekend, and noticed that body language is just as important as language. It, too, implies a level of respect for the speaker. Several of the trustees looked bored, tired, or indifferent to the proceedings.
It would be helpful (for anyone, in fairness, not just the SO BOT) to take refresher classes on critical thinking, mediation, and listening skills, particularly when the stakes are as high as they are in community governance. Likewise, it would be good if those who address the BOT to be direct and concise in their comments. |
gozerbrown
Citizen
Username: Gozerbrown
Post Number: 316
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Monday, January 26, 2004 - 12:52 pm: |
|
I'm always suprised that residents are allowed to ramble on so much at the meetings. I know in my own work, I tend to zone out when someone goes of on a myriad of tangents. It would be nice to set some standards for those residents commenting at meetings, too (is a time limit appropriate?). |
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 921
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Monday, January 26, 2004 - 1:42 pm: |
|
While not trying to make an excuse for not being polite, sometimes when the same resident comes to meetings and asks the same questions or make the same statements again and again, it does get tiresome.
Some people (residents and trustees) seem to feel a need to ramble on forever when one or two sentences can be enough. A time limit would be wonderful and I have always felt we should have one in place. Eveyone should be able to get a chance to speak, especially when several people want to voice thier comments on the same issue.
The most irritating is when people sit in the back and yell out a question. I would also like to see that all questions and comments should be limited to village issues (we have one resident who feels the need to give a state of the state address).
One thing for sure is that it would help if people who want to speak at a meeting find out what had been discussed and reviewed previously before asking a question that might have been asked at a previous meeting. Usually several of us are at the meetings before they begin and all of us are available through email (they can always be sent to village hall and forwarded to us) and I think all of us are listed in the phone book.
|
Brett
Citizen
Username: Bmalibashksa
Post Number: 626
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 26, 2004 - 2:12 pm: |
|
I lived in a small town in Florida and a friend of mine wanted to run for Town Council. Obviously he attended all of the meetings and knew about almost everything that was going on. He formed a small group (6) of people that acted as citizen advisors.
Before every meeting the people of the town would meet with the group and express their concerns. 90% of these problems had been brought up already and the group could answer the question or bring it up again during the meeting. The result was that the only people that really talked during the meeting was the advisors, they knew what they were doing and what needed to be covered. They also kept track of the minutes and could easily point the town’s people to the text of a previous meeting.
Of course if you wanted to you could always get up and speak but most people were just happy to see that it got voiced by a competed “regular”. I don’t know if it helped the length, success of the meetings but my friend did get elected.
|
thegoodsgt
Citizen
Username: Thegoodsgt
Post Number: 369
Registered: 2-2002
| | Posted on Monday, January 26, 2004 - 3:25 pm: |
|
Mr. Rosner, good points! A few random thoughts.
Does the BOT follow Roberts Rules of Order? I would think that strict adherence to them, while tedious, would go a long way to creating a productive and efficient atmosphere and create a sense of fairness to everyone (BOT members and citizens).
http://www.robertsrules.com/
I'm not familiar with RRO, but I would think that one of them requires a speaker in the audience to be at a podium in order to be recognized by the floor. Another point of order might be to always address everyone as Mr. or Ms.
The issue of citizens coming prepared is, IMHO, the most challenging aspect of running the meeting. I've seen the "been there, done that" mentality on Internet discussion forums dozens of times. It's difficult for someone, who may become involved in BOT meetings only for select issues, to know what's been discussed in the past. If I were passionate about an issue, I'm really not sure how I'd approach the BOT -- whether one-on-one or at a meeting.
If I were the king, I'd create a series of frequently asked questions (FAQs) on the village web site. The first set would address popular topics (e.g., the market development, SOPAC, dugouts, etc.). Having sat through endless questions on these issues, you can probably come up with these quite easily. When you open the BOT meeting to questions, you can preface it by urging that anyone who plans to address the board FIRST review the web site.
Another set would offer suggestions about how to come up to speed on these issues. Should citizens call a particular trustee? Should they schedule a private meeting? Can we communicate via email? Or just drop by a BOT meeting? Does each trustee more or less "specialize" in certain issues? These are just a few questions a can come up with, and I'm sure there are more.
The Internet is a powerful resource. The village can really leverage it.
|
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 922
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Monday, January 26, 2004 - 3:39 pm: |
|
thegoodsgt : It has been a long time since I was given my packet on rules for the meetings, but if it was not Roberts, it was very similar. Bill Calabrese likes to be less formal and as village president, he runs the meetings.
We are currently exploring adding a new section to the webpage which would allow for a hot topics/issues area with FAQ's on those issues. I agree it would be fairly easy to do but someone will have to monitor regularly and answer any questions that are emailed.
Almost every topic can be directed to one of the trustees. Each trustee chairs a committee or is liason to a village related/sponsored group (planning board, CCR, Parking Authority, etc). The info is on the website but all questions could be sent to the village clerk with instructions to send on to the appropiate trustee.
I feel that the best way to address an issue is to attend one of the committee meetings. Usually someone can get the answers they need but can always still address the full board. In fact, many residents choose this method and is much less formal and one does not have to go up to the podium (and be on TV).
Any citizen who does want to talk at a meeting is supposed to go up to the podium.
As far as I am concerned anyone can email me and I will either get the person the answer or the correct person to respond (different trustee, administrator, attorney, etc). (markrosner@earthlink.net)
|
Allan J Rosen
Citizen
Username: Allanrosen
Post Number: 58
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 26, 2004 - 4:25 pm: |
|
Technically the BoT is supposed to be governed by both Roberts Rules of Order and the bylaws of the BoT. |
doublea
Citizen
Username: Doublea
Post Number: 415
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 30, 2004 - 12:13 pm: |
|
There's a little discussion going on in another thread, and maybe this thread is the proper place for my comments.
First of all, I think that there should be a little more (maybe a lot at times) order in the BOT meetings. Many times there are several conversations going on at the same time. If nothing else, it's just rude to be carrying on a conversation when someone else supposedly has the floor.
Without getting too formal, some procedure should be adopted that insures one speaker at a time. Whether it's by raising one's hand, called in order by the Village President or anything to try to instill some sense of order, rather than a free for all. Many years ago I was a trustee of my synagogue, and you can imagine what the trustees' meetings were like. Finally, the then president instituted some sense of order and it actually worked.
The BOT members, with all the criticism at times, are dedicated and serious. Certainly I am not implying that there can't be some lighter moments in the meetings. It's just that with all the issues facing us, e.g. taxes, redevelopment and so on, I think that the residents of S.O. deserve a little more in the BOT meetings.
I also agree with those who suggest that there should be some time limit for speakers. I have a house in another community where the limit is 3 minutes, but there no responses are given by the council members. I think it's great that in S.O. there is some back and forth discussion between BOT and speaker. Maybe there can be something like a "loose" 10-15 minute limit.
It's quite likely that if something along the lines suggested were adopted, the BOT meetings might be substantially shorter.
|
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page