Northern Mich~Mash Preserve
~ ORGANIZATION ~
(Including agendas, buildings, committees, schedules)
~ PUBLICLY SPEAKING ~
The design and compilation of the text and photos on this site are copyrighted 2017.
Most posted items will enlarge by "clicking" on them.
"Clicking" on some color highlighted words may access additional information.
Most posted items will enlarge by "clicking" on them.
"Clicking" on some color highlighted words may access additional information.
Please do not copy the photos on this site, many of which have been submitted by private individuals...
just come back and visit the site often to view the photos.
just come back and visit the site often to view the photos.
Photo Labels Include:
B&G = Building and Grounds Committee ~ Dissolved in January 2017 (Minutes~Legal Documents)
ECBOC = Emmet County Board of Commissioners (Minutes~Legal Documents)
ECBOC Ad-Min = Emmet County Board of Commissioners Administrative (Minutes~Legal Documents)
E-mail = My personal FOIAed e-mail already made public in 2017, so now posted on "Publicly Speaking"
B&G = Building and Grounds Committee ~ Dissolved in January 2017 (Minutes~Legal Documents)
ECBOC = Emmet County Board of Commissioners (Minutes~Legal Documents)
ECBOC Ad-Min = Emmet County Board of Commissioners Administrative (Minutes~Legal Documents)
E-mail = My personal FOIAed e-mail already made public in 2017, so now posted on "Publicly Speaking"
Emmet county's Commissioners were previously called Supervisors...
until 1969.
until 1969.
Attachment #8 above was not included in the digital minutes by the Emmet County Recording Secretary.
The Petoskey News Review reported in an article... "Commissioners hold off on information control rules" for how meetings will be conducted, and included the following:
A local resident, Karla Buckmaster, criticized how the committee meeting system works for the county residents. Because open meeting laws prevent a committee from being more than three commissioners, that means four commissioners rely completely on the other three to make recommendations, without issuing a full report.
"What if you're constituents' ideas weren't even considered during the meeting," she said, noting that the commissioners were elected to represent their constituents in county policy decisions.
She was also concerned about how the finance committee could be bypassed when making decisions.
"You could solve this by putting the finance committee meetings after all the other committee meetings, so they can review any appropriations," she said.
A local resident, Karla Buckmaster, criticized how the committee meeting system works for the county residents. Because open meeting laws prevent a committee from being more than three commissioners, that means four commissioners rely completely on the other three to make recommendations, without issuing a full report.
"What if you're constituents' ideas weren't even considered during the meeting," she said, noting that the commissioners were elected to represent their constituents in county policy decisions.
She was also concerned about how the finance committee could be bypassed when making decisions.
"You could solve this by putting the finance committee meetings after all the other committee meetings, so they can review any appropriations," she said.
The following quotation is from a Facebook posting which has aptly stated the situation with COMMITTEES; "It seems like a committee, seeking to look like they are doing something, establishing another committee, in order to discuss the needs of another committee. Used to call this a circular firing squad. Anyone want to bet that this leads to exactly... nothing actually getting done?!?!"
Photo Below: The Building &Grounds meetings were always scheduled right at noon time so
committee members, staff, and attendees had a FREE Lunch.
FREE evening meals with the 6 o'clock ECBOC monthly meetings
were finally cut out after numerous complaints (from me) after determining each meal cost $225.00.
committee members, staff, and attendees had a FREE Lunch.
FREE evening meals with the 6 o'clock ECBOC monthly meetings
were finally cut out after numerous complaints (from me) after determining each meal cost $225.00.
~ 1901 Moving of the County Seat from Harbor Springs to Petoskey ~
Karla Buckmaster wrote the following to Administrator Reaves on 2 December 2020.
"Another way the Public could be made more welcome is to consider the meeting time of county commissioners’ meetings considering a majority of the working public; change the meetings' times from 6PM to 7PM. About 10 years ago, the meetings were held at 6PM because the county furnished food before the meetings so the county staff, and controller, did not have to go anywhere else to eat before returning for a meeting… for their convenience. I complained, that as a taxpayer, I did not think that I needed to be providing food for anyone/everyone before the county meetings. Finally, following my complaint, Controller Lynn Johnson and Finance Director Cynthia Allen announced at a meeting they had decided that they would save the county $2500.00 per year (the approximate cost at that time) for the pre-meeting food they had been buying, and eliminate the expense, and the “free” food. The time of the meetings, however, never changed.
That timing took NO consideration for the general public who may wish to attend a meeting. Consider a county taxpayer who works until 5 or 5:30PM. It would be impossible to get home to a family, eat a meal, and then get to a county meeting by 6PM. Change the meeting times from 6PM to 7PM."
That timing took NO consideration for the general public who may wish to attend a meeting. Consider a county taxpayer who works until 5 or 5:30PM. It would be impossible to get home to a family, eat a meal, and then get to a county meeting by 6PM. Change the meeting times from 6PM to 7PM."
Below minutes state the result of the above letter seeking at time change of meeting times from 6PM to 7PM.
NO CHANGE. PUBLIC BE DAMNED!
NO CHANGE. PUBLIC BE DAMNED!
To further clarify the above public comment, Karla Buckmaster addressed in the below email,
the Emmet County Clerk who recorded the above minutes for the 15 June 2023 ECBOC meeting.
the Emmet County Clerk who recorded the above minutes for the 15 June 2023 ECBOC meeting.
Per the 5 June 2023 Agenda the following resolution was introduced for discussion as a resolution prepared by the administrator and the Civil Council as asked by the ECBOC.
This following resolution posted on the 5 June 2023 AGENDA containing #1-7 immediately was made by Dave White (to then "get discussion moving” he said), seconded by Ahrens. So that was for the original resolution with #1-7, BUT, no mention made of that resolution in the minutes.
Minutes skipped the resolution, just started with discussion. White said he would withdraw #7. Koontz agreed to change the motion with "#7 stricken" and #4 wording changed to "take under consideration legal advice" instead of "heed legal advice". Seconded by Ahrens. Discussion followed. WHO made any "motion to amend" the original resolution?
This unstated amendment (change) was not discussed by the full board, nor approved as an amendment.
Koontz then said, "If we vote on this we have stricken #7 and we have changed the wording to take under consideration legal advice instead of 'heed the advice'.” Ginop said, “Correct.” Ahrens supported that with his second. WHO made any motion for an amended resolution?
No motion/resolution ever was read, after the assumed amended resolution. Whatever? resolution passed 4-3.
I just question the “Parliamentary Procedure."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The 5 June 2023 legal minutes for the original resolution do not include the ORIGINAL resolution which included #1-7) which was made by White as can be heard on the audio. No hint to the public as to what even is being discussed. The legal minutes skipped that part… just began with discussion…LATER, followed by a different resolution which is all that was posted. No attachments are included with the posted legal minutes as below.
However, tonight’s 15 June 2023 ECBOC’s approved minutes from the 5 June 2023 included the NEW #1-6 points resolution, still with no mention of the original #1-7 points resolution.
This following resolution posted on the 5 June 2023 AGENDA containing #1-7 immediately was made by Dave White (to then "get discussion moving” he said), seconded by Ahrens. So that was for the original resolution with #1-7, BUT, no mention made of that resolution in the minutes.
Minutes skipped the resolution, just started with discussion. White said he would withdraw #7. Koontz agreed to change the motion with "#7 stricken" and #4 wording changed to "take under consideration legal advice" instead of "heed legal advice". Seconded by Ahrens. Discussion followed. WHO made any "motion to amend" the original resolution?
This unstated amendment (change) was not discussed by the full board, nor approved as an amendment.
Koontz then said, "If we vote on this we have stricken #7 and we have changed the wording to take under consideration legal advice instead of 'heed the advice'.” Ginop said, “Correct.” Ahrens supported that with his second. WHO made any motion for an amended resolution?
No motion/resolution ever was read, after the assumed amended resolution. Whatever? resolution passed 4-3.
I just question the “Parliamentary Procedure."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The 5 June 2023 legal minutes for the original resolution do not include the ORIGINAL resolution which included #1-7) which was made by White as can be heard on the audio. No hint to the public as to what even is being discussed. The legal minutes skipped that part… just began with discussion…LATER, followed by a different resolution which is all that was posted. No attachments are included with the posted legal minutes as below.
However, tonight’s 15 June 2023 ECBOC’s approved minutes from the 5 June 2023 included the NEW #1-6 points resolution, still with no mention of the original #1-7 points resolution.
To further clarify, the following 20 June 2023 e-mail also was addressed to the county clerk:
Regarding the 5 June 2023 minutes… my concern is that the MINUTES completely skipped inclusion of the initial “resolution", and its “second” as were made, and just began with the discussion. I am curious as to WHY/HOW that omission happened?
Parliamentary procedure calls for a motion for a resolution to be stated, as was done by David White, saying he made the resolution for the sake of discussion. THAT resolution, and second, OR any mention of them, are what is missing in the minutes! THEN, discussion was held, and some of the discussion was noted in the minutes.
When changes are made to a motion, then it needs to be read and seconded, with that requiring a vote. Koontz just stated he would make the changes on his copy, and Ahrens seconded it. Then, Ginop asked for a vote. Was the vote for the amendment? OR for the resolution? This is not clear. So, it was unclear, not stated, what was even being voted. That happening does not have to do with the minutes, in this instance, but with parliamentary procedure not being followed.
The way the meeting proceeded, it should have had three motions: 1) motion for resolution followed by discussion which happened, resolution just was not reported in minutes 2) motion for an amendment to the resolution followed by a vote to accept or deny that amendment ~ not clear if this was what the vote was??? 3) motion for an accepted? resolution followed by a vote to accept or deny the NEW amended resolution ~ so, again, not clear if this was the reason for the vote??? .
Looking to the Future!
Karla
Regarding the 5 June 2023 minutes… my concern is that the MINUTES completely skipped inclusion of the initial “resolution", and its “second” as were made, and just began with the discussion. I am curious as to WHY/HOW that omission happened?
Parliamentary procedure calls for a motion for a resolution to be stated, as was done by David White, saying he made the resolution for the sake of discussion. THAT resolution, and second, OR any mention of them, are what is missing in the minutes! THEN, discussion was held, and some of the discussion was noted in the minutes.
When changes are made to a motion, then it needs to be read and seconded, with that requiring a vote. Koontz just stated he would make the changes on his copy, and Ahrens seconded it. Then, Ginop asked for a vote. Was the vote for the amendment? OR for the resolution? This is not clear. So, it was unclear, not stated, what was even being voted. That happening does not have to do with the minutes, in this instance, but with parliamentary procedure not being followed.
The way the meeting proceeded, it should have had three motions: 1) motion for resolution followed by discussion which happened, resolution just was not reported in minutes 2) motion for an amendment to the resolution followed by a vote to accept or deny that amendment ~ not clear if this was what the vote was??? 3) motion for an accepted? resolution followed by a vote to accept or deny the NEW amended resolution ~ so, again, not clear if this was the reason for the vote??? .
Looking to the Future!
Karla
~ 1964 County Courthouse Literally Falling Apart ~
~ 1965 City–County Building Discussed ~
~ 1965 Emmet County Records go up in Smoke ~
Photo/Text Below: "The 1902 Emmet County Court House built originally as a city hall was to be torn down in a few weeks to make way for the new city-county building at a cost of $1.5 million. The old town clock, and striking bell, purchased by Mrs. William M. Curtis from the E. Howard Watch and Clock Co., of Boston from the Buffalo Exposition of 1902 for $700, is to be taken apart with the clock faces and saved. The clock has been electrified, but once required a man to climb the 87 foot tower and hand crank the heavy weights back up the shaft. The bell was made by the McNelian & West Co., of Troy, N.Y., and carries an inscription of the 1902 gift. A 40 pound hammer hits the bell. Note the slab above the entrance still says 'city hall'. Petoskey fireman will be moved from the present lower level location to the former Resort-Bear Creek fire hall on Elizabeth-st., until the new building is ready."
Emmet County did not always have a "CONTROLLER", but Lyn Johnson was the FIRST and LAST controller
in Emmet County. After Johnson passed away, the position was filled as ADMINISTRATOR.
in Emmet County. After Johnson passed away, the position was filled as ADMINISTRATOR.