Greensburg IN City Council meeting of 6-21-10 (10 parts). The Airport Discussion starts in part 7 and continues on from there.
PART 1, PART 2, PART 3, PART 4, PART 5, PART 6, PART 7, PART 8, PART 9, PART 10.

Joint Board of Aviation Commissioners and City Council meeting of 7-26-10 (17 parts) The Public was not allowed to speak at this meeting.
PART 1, PART 2, PART 3, PART 4, PART 5, PART 6, PART 7, PART 8, PART 9, PART 10, PART 11, PART 12, PART 13, PART 14, PART 15, PART 16, PART 17.

This is the Specially Called City Council meeting to discuss the hiring of attorney/ attorneys for the City Council in reference to the Airport Expansion. Date of this meeting: 8-19-10 (8 parts)

City Council 11-01-10 - Part 1

City Council 11-01-10 - Part 2

1.) The first thing the City Attorney says….is that he doesn't know what the letter says. While that is an honest remark (as he was not copied by our Attorney) …..would it be wrong to think that perhaps one of the Council members might want to consult the City Attorney when they receive a letter on a controversial issue from another Attorney concerning a response by a City Board?
2.) The mayor said he did not receive his email. How then did he know so much (without reading the letter) about what we were stating or asking, or even who was stating or asking , to make the statements that he obviously does during this meeting? Further yet, he keeps insisting that we need to go the airport board, not the City Council with this…….wouldn't the prudent action be to either read the letter (to comprehend what is being asked and who is asking it) or very courteously reply that they will review it and discuss this further at their next City Council meeting?
3.) The Mayor states "we don't know the answers", " the Council don't know the answers", to the questions that we had submitted in writing to the airport board. As a taxpayer, these were very simple questions about where they are in the FAA process. Wouldn't it make sense that the City Council and Mayor, (our elected officials) know where their City board is in a 32 million dollar project over the next 30 years of our tax money? AND if they didn't know, I would think they would WANT to know on behalf of their constituents. ( I am listing the questions that were asked at the bottom of this page for your observation, you will see these are not complex questions).
4.) The Mayor says " do we need to address another groups attorney, that's fighting us, opposing us, at a public meeting , at this time?" My question who is the "us" the City Council and the Mayor represent? I thought they represented "we the taxpayers" of this community.
5.) The Mayor says "we shouldn't be listening to the opposing council , should we?" The "opposing council" is representing taxpayers of this community who cannot get answers to simple questions. All the attorney is requesting is the answers to these questions on behalf of these concerned citizens. They could have tabled this, consulted their City Attorney, prepared, and responded professionally.
6.) The City Attorney said : " I don't know that the letter itself is out of bounds for public record"…… Why then wasn't Councilman Wenning allowed to simply read the letter and enter it as part of their public record? That is all he initially asked to do. Why did the rest ensue?

BOAC Meeting 09-27-2010 - Part 1

BOAC Meeting 09-27-2010 - Part 2

Greensburg City Council Meeting 09-07-2010

For all other City of Greensburg videos, please see
mjeanj's youtube page.

"It is not the function of our Government to keep the citizen from falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the Government from falling into error."
Justice Robert Houghwout

Marc Haston - - 812.593.1492 - © - All rights reserved.