Last week Mayor Schmidtzkrieg sent out the following email to his supporters list --
Subject: Meeting videosSo faithful PRU readers, it appears management of the city's YouTube channel may still be kinky at this time -- we had hoped the videos from last Saturday's City Council Budget Workshop would be available by today.
Tuesday, March 23, 2010 1:33 PM
From: "Dave Schmidt" dave@parkridgemayor.com
To: supporters (at) electdaveschmidt.com
Good afternoon. I wanted to update you on the situation involving the videos of Council meetings. We were informed last week that motionbox, the company which had been hosting the videos, wanted several thousand dollars to continue doing so. Since motionbox was always meant to be a temporary vehicle for delivering the videos to the community, we immediately began looking for alternatives.
As it turns out, the City purchased a You Tube account in connection with its website upgrade project which may allow us to use the City's website as a host, something we intended to do all along once the new website was ready. The video of last night's meeting will serve as the "guinea pig". I will let you know when I hear it is available for viewing. Just as before when we first started posting the videos on parkridgemayor.com, I ask for your patience while we work out the kinks.
I will let you know as soon as I learn anything more myself. Thanks for staying involved.
The PRU Crew is pleased Mayor Schmidtzkrieg was recently informed about the city's purchase of a YouTube channel last October, but we hope Mayor Schmidtzkrieg doesn't wait until next October to work out a posting schedule for city videos.
22 comments:
Why didn't anyone know Motionbox was pulling the plug? Didn't they give notice or let someone know the terms of the deal from the beginning? Also what is the budget for the new city website?
While everyone who looks at PRU and I would probably agree that a searchable city website, including video, is important, I would bet that the majority of the people in the city would disagree.
Isn't this a good example of something that we should consider cutting in these times?
3:56pm:
NO.
No mention of Monday's meeting? I was also wondering why there is never any talk of fire or police layoffs. Kind of important, no?
Anon@5:04 --
You're right -- we should have mentioned Monday's meeting, but we haven't gotten that far in our schedule.
So now we'll mention it.
Monday night's meeting was a cluster fuck of pandering stupidity, topped off with a hearty helping of dumbass whining.
There. We mentioned it.
And you're right again -- the potential layoff of police and fire personnel are very important issues to be discussing.
The problem for us is, we cannot in good conscience support the retention of public safety personnel without offering an opinion about how to do that within a balanced budget. We note others don't suffer the same pangs of conscience.
We've studiously avoided the subject, as you seem to have noted.
The PRU Crew deeply believes the first job of government is to provide for the safety and protection of citizens.
We sincerely offer that we just aren't sure if the cuts being suggested truly jeopardize that mandate. And unless that mandate is truly jeopardized, we have no reason to oppose the suggested cuts in light of the current budget cluster fuck.
Well said, thanks for your quick response.
Can anyone imagine what we would be going through now if the Frimark had his way and council had committed millions for building a new police station?????????
Thank the Lord for the people who put the police station referendum up for voting. We would have millions committed to a new building and we would be looking at bigger defacits and more police layoffs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Still no videos? WTF?
I believe there is such a thing as "gut feeling" that applies here. As an example, the idea of drastically reducing crossing guards does not feel right to me. As someone who sees what it is like around lower and middle schools in the mornings and afternoons, and considering the costs involved I think crossing guards are important to saftey. Now if you are asking for an exact analysis of how much risk will increase versus cost I cannot provide that but it sure does not feel right.
It reminds me of part of the PADS issue. You had one side saying "oh don't worry. There is no risk. We already have them in schools and there are no issues....etc....etc...etc" To a bunch of other people, even though they could not statictically document the exact risk, it sure as hell did not feel right in their gut to put it in a neighborhood or a school.
The argument has been made that that should be the parents responsiblity. If that is the direction ya'll want to go that is cool with me. We could save a great deal of money. Let's get rid of all the life guards and make pool saftey the parents responsibility. That would reduce the expenses of the PD which come right out of our taxes.
Anon@10:38 --
So far the only differences between Police Dept. crossing guards and the parent volunteer crossing guards is the pay the Police Dept. crossing guards receive and their being overseen by the Police Dept.
Not a soul has bothered to explain what authority the paid Police Dept. crossing guards have that the parent volunteer crossing guards did not have.
As for the risk PADS shelters bring to a community, the health and safety risks have been statistically documented, but maybe your long term memory isn't what you may hope it to be.
Since we are talking about "gut feelings"... any on why the videos haven't been posted yet?
Our gut feeling is --
Maller's on vacation.
Uhlig's preoccupied with updating her resume.
Stempniak doesn't know what she's doing.
Even though somebody on city staff has signed into the city's YouTube account every day since Monday.
Not more than 48 hours after Park Ridge city council voted not to lay off firefighter/paramedics, 3 firefighter/paramedics recieved layoff notices today effective May 1.
4 police officers and 2 CSO's just received their layoff notices......
Should not be a surprise... now they have to negotiate in good faith in order to save those jobs and make bringing them back "budget neutral" like the Alderidiots voted the other night. The budget is due May 1... if this negotiation isn't wrapped up by then the jobs are toast.
I am actually quite surprised Hock took this action... but it certainly makes the negotiation a lot more urgent for the cops and firefighters. Probably not a bad thing given the nature of how things generally unfold around here.
How do things normaly go around there. Does the City or the Unions bargin in bad faith?
It's not bad faith you dolt.
The Alderidiots told Hock to put the jobs back in the budget as long as he could make it budget neutral. It was Wsol who looked out at the crowd of cops and firemen and said... budget neutral means you all have to give (however they were to do it was left unsaid, of course)... and all of the cops and firemen nodded their heads in agreement.
So now the City has set the table. The notices are out. The city and the unions have to negotiate to budget neutral. If they can find a budget neutral way to keep the jobs the notices are recinded and if not the notices stick.
What's the problem?
The city
Pru, even without videos or commentary every day, I get more information here about what's happening in PR than either one of the fish wrappers. Thanks! Keep up the great work!
Anon@7:53 --
Thank you too.
Audio of the meeting is on the City web site.
Where exactly is it on the website?
Having a hard time finding it.
It's on the Calendar and Agendas, they already have yesterday's meeting up. Screw the video, this is way better.
Post a Comment