Joe Says I've Been Sack'ed: Term Limits Prop DOA

 

Item #12 on Wednesday night's Rye City Council agenda is a proposal by Councilman Joseph Sack to approve term limits for members of the City Council, as well as for the Boards and Commissions. The proposal would include terms be limited to 2 terms or 8 years, whichever is greater.

In a guest column for MyRye.com, Joe says his proposal has been Sack'ed - that challengers like term limits until they are incumbents and that incumbents never liked them in the first place.

“Dead On Arrival” - By Rye Councilman Joe Sack

It’s been said that the term limits proposal is very political.

I don’t think the issue itself is political.

But the way people react to it is very political.

Before the election, supporters of the candidates who ended up losing didn’t like term limits, because they perceived that it drew attention to the long tenure at the top of their ticket, and cast it as a potential weakness.

After the election, they still don’t like term limits, and it’s only human nature for them to not want to be reminded of anti-incumbency as one of the reasons for why they lost.

Before the election, supporters of the candidates who ended up winning liked term limits, because it was consistent with their theme of change and all those flyers that said “12 years is enough.”

After the election, they don’t like term limits so much anymore, and it’s only human nature for them to want to stress all the other reasons other than anti-incumbency for why they won.

Either way, the term limits proposal is DOA, dead on arrival.  And I think that’s too bad.  But I also think that’s reality.

Comments

[tedc]

Dear Legal Committee – is this kind of thing going to be allowed continue in our city? I sure hope not.

May 24, 2010

Camille S. Jobin-Davis
Assistant Director
State of New York, Department of State
Committee on Open Government
99 Washington Avenue
Albany, New York 12231

---In short, that the records are “predecisional”, “draft” or “non-final” would not represent an end of an analysis of rights of access or an agency’s obligation to review to entirety of their contents to determine rights of access. Based on the direction of the states highest court, we believe that insofar as the records prepared by the architect for the City consist of “statistical or factual tabulations or data”, they must be disclosed even though they may be “pre-decisional”, “draft” or “non-final.”---

[Environmental Terrorist]

Matt Fahey is absolutely correct. You do not negotiate with terrorists. There are 2 rules when dealing with environmental terrorists.

1. You do not negotiate with them ( especially if their lawyer is the same as Mr. Floatie's bewcause he ain't the sharpest knife in the draw)

2. You are either with us or against us. (Right now Joe Sack is against Rye. He is attempting to negotiate with environmental terrorists. Mr. Sack could be a traitor.)

[Matt Fahey]

John Jones -

Your mistake is that you assume 1) the case of violated civil rights has merit and 2) a judge will agree with the Schuberts that their pain and anguish is worth $5 million.
These are two very big ifs, and from what I've heard, the argument is without merit. It would be a mistake for the city to settle now, as it would encourage a rash of similar nuisance suits.

[John Jones]

Matt,

5 million....ring a bell?
If the city loses their request for dismissal I hope you will step forward and tell Mayor French your opinion!
http://www.myryesoundshore.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=752:city-files-motion-to-dismiss-in-schubert-court-case-&catid=34:news&Itemid=53

[John Jones]

Matt,

Like I said, the opportunity is before the Council to settle this matter with "LITTLE or NO COST" to the tax payers.....I ask again...Why don't they?

Since you have such an abundance of interest in our taxes why are you not asking the same question?

google.com,

Mayor French cut that man off 1 minute in and told him "you have 4 minutes". Maybe Mr.Pateman was allowed to speak past the 5 minutes because he was repeatedly interrupted!
If it is not on the tape then it has been EDITED!

[Environmental Terrorist]

Why does Mr. Floatie lie to the people? I recommend everyone following the Hen Island case to FOIL Ron Gatto's report included in a packet given to the city of Rye by Mr. Floatie. You will see that Ron Gatto never recommended condemming Hen Island in his report. The only written account of Mr. Gatto's opinion says nothing of condemning of Hen Island. Look it up yourselves.

[Environmental Terrorist]

Here we go again. I'd like Rye to counter sue Shubert for 10 million. If his pond is such fragile wetlands, what the hell is he digging a pond in it in the first place?

[tedc]

Don’t know you “Mr. Jones” but in checking around seems nobody else involved in getting Schubert’s Wetlands restoration does either. So thanks for your comments – they seem accurate. Here are some other points.

The new proposal to clean up this mess was submitted to The Planning Commission on March 5th. (Remember the Schubert Wetland matter never came before them as provided for by the Rye City code.) I was provided a copy of this 25 page (before exhibits) submission about a week later and sent a copy of it to local media – Jay, Robin and Chris – on March 12th.

From what I understand, The Planning Commission has refused to put the matter on their agenda – even though two Planning Commission meeting dates have come and gone and all procedures for getting the matter aired before the commission were followed.

And from my perspective – a more informed perspective – I believe Mr. Schubert is not dealing from weakness as far as the legal case goes. The city’s insurance company would probably agree with this view if you could get them to comment. Schubert’s settlement effort is rooted rather in the desire to see the environmental laws on the books put to use by the newly elected council. I have faith that they will do just this.

[www.google.com/accounts/o8/id?id=AItOawnQb2n_vi1h9QrKqoZsq_ZAyAIsd9alV-0]

"John Jones".....The fellow's name is Chuck PATEMAN...Not Bateman...And, I'm not sure what channel you were watching...but, he was NOT cut off "1 minute into his presentation"...as a matter of fact, he was allowed to speak much longer than the usual 3-5 minutes......Are you REALLY a Rye resident?....Is this John Jones related?...I don't think so... http://74.125.45.132/search?q=cache:xUAzMPNz3m8J:www.legacy.com/obituaries/orangecounty/obituary.aspx%3Fn%3Djohn-edward-jones%26pid%3D141736898+john+jones+rye+ny&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

[Matt Fahey]

Mr. Jones -

I don't have a dog in this fight, and I don't see what I could add or detract by taking any side. I'm what you'd call a "dis-interested outside party". The result of Bob's lawsuit is only of interest to me as to how it impacts Rye financially. For that reason alone, I'd really be interested in the the source of your information.
Outside of the financial repercussions to the city of Rye, I have little interest in the outcome of Bob's lawsuit, as it won't impact me in the slightest. Can you make the same claim?