2014-06-16 Special - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

stated that she agreed with Mr. Kraft’s standards that were so eloquently stated in his letter and her hope is that every member of Council will begin to hold themselves to these same exact standards. F. CITIZEN’S COMMENTS Eugene Ruth, 7210 Waterman, University City, MO Mr. Ruth noted that his grandfather was once the Mayor of University City. He stated that his grandfather had once told him that people who use profanity and childish behavior have limited vocabularies. So he has no doubt that his grandfather would have never tolerated such outrageous behavior. Mr. Ruth stated that his hope is that the Mayor and City Manager will stand up and bring some sense of civility, graciousness and good humor back to this City Council. He stated that he is ashamed of every member of Council for condoning this type of behavior and would gladly contribute $5,000 to a recall petition. Kathy Meath, 523 Warder Avenue, University City, MO Ms. Meath stated that she has never met any of the firefighters and doesn’t even know what the resolutions are about, but what bothered her is the fact that the resolutions were never even addressed. She stated that she moved to University City because she had read an article in Ms. Magazine in 1981 that advertised University City as the place to live for inclusion, diversity, respect and acceptance. She stated that Council’s rules of silencing, taking items off the agenda, mouthing profanities and throwing water bottles made her think how would we explain all of this behavior to the children of University City? Ms. Meath stated that she is bothered that no sanctions have been taken against Mr. Kraft. Ms. Meath said she does not know politics; what she does know is that she is a minority that lives here and she wants her voice to be heard. Gregory Pace, 7171 Westmoreland, University City, MO Mr. Pace stated that the July 19, 2012 meeting of the University City School Board included agenda Item 13-10, academic firewalls for Grades 5 and 8. This item was placed on the agenda by the Director Rick Salamon and a motion was made by Director Peters to suspend the item indefinitely that carried with a vote of 6 to 1. Mr. Pace stated that Mr. Salamon clearly understood the message from his fellow Directors and respected the decision of the majority, but never waned in his belief of the value of his proposal. He did not run to the media, he did not grandstand on the dais, he did not blog about the decision and he did not email his supporters and claim that his democratic rights had been violated. Mr. Salamon simply went to work quietly selling his proposal to his fellow Directors one member at a time. Mr. Pace stated that the October 17, 2013, meeting of the University City School Board included agenda Item 9-01, academic firewalls for grades 5 and 8. He stated that it had taken fifteen months, but Mr. Salamon never raised this motion again until he was certain that he had successfully changed the minds of three of his fellow Directors. He stated that it should also be noted that Mr. Peters did not engage in any parliamentary skullduggery or anti-democratic maneuvering when blocking Mr. Salamon’s proposal. Mr. Pace stated that these are examples of proper and respectful democracy at work. Paul Schoomer, 7 Princeton, University City, MO Mr. Schoomer stated he wished to remind this Council that the framers of our Constitution set as the very first amendment to the Bill of Rights the requirement of freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and freedom to address or ask redress of wrongs. Mr. Schoomer stated that he also wanted to remind each member of the oath they have taken to protect the Constitution of the United States and how important it is that the measures to restrict that freedom be removed from Council’s consideration. Mr. Schoomer stated that during his years of service he has followed this simple adage, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”. Elliott Porter, 341 Westgate, University City, MO Mr. Porter stated that Council’s proposal to move citizen comments to the end of the meeting could be interpreted as a strategin to cause the death of citizens from boredom. Common decency would be to allow citizens to speak first or on each item as it appears on the agenda. 8