Tuesday, January 15, 2008

Jacobs Live People for People

Welcome to my Blog

"Jacobs Live People for People"

This Blog will be an educating and informative tool, to inform and educate the people of the City of Kingston, the County of Ulster and the State of New York. It will give citizens an opportunity to have a voice in their local, county and state government. "I Pledge To You the People", that this BLOG will never be used to attack, discriminate or discredit any individual. My goal will be to work together, listen to the voice of the people and make recommendations, offer suggestions and listen to your concerns. I host a Local Television Show on Kingston Public Access Channel 23 "Jacobs Live People for People" on Wednesday evenings at 6:30 PM. Please tune in and become involved in your community. The power of the people can move mountains and "Together We will make a Difference".


Anthony said...

Hi Jean,

Good luck with your new blog!!

Anonymous said...

suck my dick

Anonymous said...

Good luck in your efforts, you do present a positive voice. We discussed this venue one night in the studio and I respect you for trying it.
It will definitely test your patience. Thanks for both having a voice and using it.

Anonymous said...

Ms. Jacobs,

Good for you! You can zap off the rude folks, ya know. They will always give it a shot, I guess.

I like your show and appreciate your concern for the community.

Keep up the good work!


Anonymous said...

To 8:28 PM--Shame on you. What mentality!! The Community welcomes another "spin" on being informed by someone who has a pulse on just about everything in the City and is a wealth of information. Good luck Jean with your blog "Jacobs Live People for People" and keep up the good work. Truly admire your efforts to educate and keep the community in the know.

Anonymous said...

City of KIngston Charter:The Mayor shall have the power to appoint all employees of the city. The Council has no right to exercise any power expressly reserved for the Mayor.
Oct. 4, 2007(Daily Freeman)(paraphrasing) "The Common Council has agreed/voted to hire John Tuey as the new City Comptroller, as provided in the City Charter".(online article recently taken down from Freeman website--presumably because this Charter assertion is legally in error).
Questions:1)As of Oct. 3, 2007:Had the City Charter been REVISED to ALLOW the hiring process to proceed by order of the COMMON COUNCIL instead of the Mayor or in conjunction with the Mayor and if so, in what way(s), when, and what are those provisions(not seen online IF those revisions WERE ever made!!)
2)Was this process used in the hiring of the City Comptroller to replace Penny Radel merely then a more comfortable manner in which the Mayor avoided any possible criticism or controversy given the election then impending within a month's time?
3)If this procedure WAS illegally done at the time, what OTHER procedures CAN the public reasonably EXPECT from the procedures used at City Hall to proceed in blatantly illegal fashion?
4)I seem to recall that the last City Charter revision STRENGTHENED the powers of the Mayor under the administration of T.R. Gallo. No further revision is seen in the Freeman, ie, "the newspaper of record", from 1999 to the present!
4)WHY isn't the local media interested in pursuing the facts there with regard to proper procedures as per Charter? Do any TRULY "alternative" media EXIST in Kingston/Ulster County on behalf of the PEOPLE?(eg Lincoln Eagle--Michael Marnell, WKNY, both of which were notified of the above apparent discrepancies). Ans.:No Judith Miller/NY Times first amendment advocates around here and ultimately NO GUTS.
5)SUMMARY:a)Who LEGALLY had the power to hire the new comptroller for the city of Kingston;b)Who ACTUALLY hired the new comptroller of the city of Kingston;c) are the answers to a) and b) above the same or different?
Story:Parking Garage in Uptown Kingston starts to deteriorate, shedding blocks of concrete. Portions closed.
Bill Reynolds(interviewed for above story):"We have to abide by our own policies."
"We(ie, the City of Kingston) have to abide by our own policies."
Question: In ALL cases under all circumstances even when it may not be CONVENIENT to do so(as in the above example)? Or are some examples more esoteric and others more uh, um, I can't resist... "CONCRETE"??!!
To Be Continued...

Anonymous said...

I said to be continued and now I shall.
The city finally posted what appears to be the charter in force as of 2007 and the hiring of the new comptroller and that apparently dates in its final form in the relevant parts at least to 1996. Thanks to whomever got this progress in information uptdate done.
Quite obviously if we assume this document posted online is correct, then this change went through in the mid-1990's with the charter reform taken to the voters at that time. The remaining question is:"Did the voters KNOW prior to election day(s) about this change...and was this specific change listed on the ballot for the public?" My recollection is "no" in both cases. If my recollection is correct, what does this say about the legality of this change from the Mayor making all appointments to the council making this particular one? That's question number one. Question number two on the legality of this change derives from the way it is presented or inserted in fact, into the old charter, which is under the section titled "Comptroller" and not under the "Mayor" or the "Common Council". This is uniquely done to grant a power to the council not under the title dealing with the council's power but under the title dealing with the office the council now has the power to appoint. It is quite conceivable that if someone wanted to challenge the legality of this change they could so so also by pointing to the overall confusion as presented in the charter as written with this change in it. The bottom provisions of this charter revision seem to anticipate legal challenges as well by proposing what should be the case for the entire charter if one provision is struck down(it remains intact).
Question number three is this:"Why should this matter to the public?" I can think of one reason it should matter, which is that precisely in such instances where it may be advantageous or expedient for the Mayor to defer involvement in an appointment and have the council take the blame, criticism, or what-have-you for an appointment--particularly when such appointment is made or must be made just prior to a Mayoral election. Another reason it should matter is some concern due to the propriety of paying a Mayor $75,000 per year and at the same time reducing his responsibilities. Granted--as things go not that much of a reduction--but yet now if the holder of such appointed office presents either as performance deficits or malfeasance to the public, then who can the public go to to complain? "Nine people instead of one!" That is called "dissolution of responsibility" along the lines of "when everyone is responsible or more people are responsible then in practice few to none are responsible..." Well you get the idea. The public has little place to turn in such a scenario to focus what could conceivably be righteous indignation.
Those are a couple reasons people OUGHT to be concerned about this issue. Perhaps others can think of more. My prediction:no one will give a church mouse's piece of cheese about it!

Girl Scout Troop 48 said...

Hello Jean!
Girl Scout Troop 48 would love to be a guest on your show.

Anonymous said...

Jean..It is nice to see that you are reactivating your blog after many months of silence. It is an excellent opportunity for you to inform your public of community activities that you do with such finess and flair. Your viewing audience misses your weekly show on Public Access (as well as some of the others) so this is a chance to catch up with your community who welcomed you into their homes during Jacobs Live--People For People. We look forward to your writings, and keep the faith.