Replies

[Informed]

Here goes an early outlook and some questions from INFORMED. Would look forward to factual points (and corrections too I suppose if I have miss-stated any of the issues) that can change my mind and perspectives in regard to the following:

MAYOR: Have not decided who to vote for here as I wish to hear the debate of issues first. A bit more than generally pleased with Mayor Oberlie. Most negatives he is attributed with in the media, and especially the anvil chorus, and already from his opposition (which of course is the nature of the beast during campaigns) seem to be a result of or motivated by:
1) Holding him accountable for things he ultimately does not have control of
2) Hidden and personal agendas
3) Focusing on singular modifiers – not the subject, i.e., isolating one point but forgetting to consider the rest of the information and story.
4) Uninformed opinion and innuendo (or where research on the matter would provide fact vs. fiction, i.e., shooting from the hip.)

Biggest personal critique of current Mayor is that I wish he would be more assertive and take a stronger stand of right vs. wrong, and in most cases, flat out clear the untruths that frequently whip through council chambers, and stick up for many of the folks that frequently are under personal attack by a few of the current council members. There seems to be a definite lack of professionalism by some of these council persons, which leads to council meetings sometimes resembling a News & Views episode (now there’s a panel of brain-trusts, but point being information is not factual and tons of deliberate untruths to promote personal and political agendas), and chambers sometimes even resembling a bad Saturday Night Live skit (usually when Paul falls off his soap box during his overtime ramblings) that end up a bit humorous, but ultimately are embarrassing for the City. I feel the Mayor (any Mayor) should address these scenarios as the City’s CEO. I believe this is something that previous Mayor Sheila took to task compared to Mayor Oberlie.

Biggest compliments: About as genuine and honest guy you will find – good people as they say and very intelligent and professional at all times. I believe he is overall an excellent representative of Michigan City on local, state, regional, and National fronts.

OPPENETS:
Jim LaRocco: Know Jim and overall like Jim. From the feedback I am hearing, biggest criticisms seem to be that he has not been actively involved in the community (outside of his tenure on Fire Dept.). Also is being criticized for lack of political experience. Obviously has a name that carries some weight and he will probably do well in debating the issues and running a relatively non-negative campaign and to-the-point platform on the issues.

Joie Winski: Know her too and overall like Joie as well. Personally concerned with the side of the fence she is aligned with in regard to political allies that have already publicly supported her – namely Jankowski and Prezyb. This will more than likely cost her votes and support in that a non-vote for Joie will be equated to a vote against the two before mentioned.

Joie struggled last election during debates and answering questions, which I believe led to the historic landslide victory of current Mayor last election, which saw him sweep 100% of the precincts. As was the case last election, and seems to be starting again, I personally get turned off quick with negative and viscous sort of attacking as the primary campaign strategy. Would prefer a factual debate of the issues vs. slanted perspectives and slamming all the time, but again, I do realize it’s the nature of it all a bit too, so I try not to let it be too much of a distraction and search out the points that are trying to be made in-between all the rhetoric. I do think (and hope) Joie does better than last time in these regards, and only time and her platform will tell.

Enough for now – and council candidate debate will come next time. However, I think I have already alluded to the fact that I feel vital change needs to come at a council level (more so than the Mayor’s office at this point and time) in my estimations to move the City forward in that any of the three candidates for Mayor would have their hands (and stomachs and maybe even trousers) full of a few of the current council members antics and the constant roadblocks and bottlenecks they put up in the council chambers. This holds the city stagnant and in a non-progressive hostage mode in several cases. Need overall more professionalism and less hidden and personal agendas at the council level in my estimations – Do you agree?

[Informed]

Southsider, I feel your approach and feelings towards leadership are apparent. But in this case of your response, I ultimately also feel and must say the focus is pretty narrow if you can only confuse real issues as “personal stuff”. I’m never inclined to avoid real issues, contrary to your conclusion.

No doubt real issues are personal to ALL of us. I think this is obvious in the back-and-forth posting. But I don’t automatically dislike other persons because of such, I just dislike the approach and the fiction involved, and I’ll take others to task whenever there is proof available to do so. I believe that for the most part, most everyone having the courage to express their views – even under a key name – believes in what they are purporting and I applaud and respect them for actually getting involved in an effort to bring about change.

So then, let’s please just accept and not get caught up in any denial of the essence of human nature. If all we had to type about was Utopia and hugs and kisses, I venture a guess that there would be a whole lot of lying going along with it.

Having prefaced with all that, I shall also caution you that what follows may make your “eyes roll” right out of your head this time and you may start to “cringe” all over again, but I will sincerely try to do better and refine my technique in presenting my issues, which are probably the flux of what is really wrong in, and what divides our community so, vs. other variables.

I will attempt to make my personal issues more clear, albeit it and understandably, I have differing personal viewpoints then yours and others. My issues are negativity, approach, professionalism, leadership, decision making, roadblocks to progress, and the vicious attacking of others.

The gauge on professionalism for this forum is best left to the readers of our posts and the many other posts throughout your site here. However, professional leadership towards progress is ultimately determined by ones approach and actions in the various arenas at which our city government and decision making takes place, and then the results that are produced. I do understand you and others question the results produced, or the lack thereof, as sometimes I do myself. I just feel that one person, Mayor or otherwise, cannot do it alone or alone be held accountable.

It takes a team effort and more cooperation as our very form of government structure sets the course for action or inaction. It ALWAYS involves all three branches including judiciary (which is coming into play with north end development and other low income housing development issues, and often times dictates a course of action or inaction), the Mayor (executive), and the City Council (legislative) too. This is where the political debates to come will be of most interest to me.

At the council level, a “high moral ground” would certainly be welcomed as far as I am concerned, and this in my opinion, does have a direct correlation to some council member’s blatantly obvious and self serving motivations, (of which incidentally I did not intend to come off as questioning other people’s posting motivations or views, and I am not so much trying to question yours, as I do believe you are consistent and you strike me as a genuine sort of fellow), rather I truly question some council members in these regards.

Why people are against the Mayor (and a litany of other folks too) are plastered all over the freakin’ place – not just here on your site, but throughout the various media outlets as I indicated in my post, and I even underscored the Anvil Chorus as primary. It is within these various articles and submissions, and again throughout the posts on this site, and most unfortunately within the City Council’s very own chambers where you will find the “information and personal attacks” I refer to. And it is in those chambers where I wish the Mayor (any Mayor) would take the gloves off. I even offered a bit of a critique of the current Mayor himself in my post, along with offering some positives and some qualities he posses that I happen to admire, in that he always takes a professional approach in representing our great city on all fronts – regardless of the hostilities and difficult personalities involved. It is not an easy job.

I have offered plenty of exact details and specific examples of the negativity, personal agendas, and personal attacks in many of my posts on this site, and it is in fact what motivated me to participate on this forum in the first place, so I do not agree that I am “without (said) information”, especially if you read my other posts, and especially in regard to certain council members. This is where the roadblocks primarily exist based on my observations and experiences. This is where change must come first most.

Now, I suppose if I had referenced the attacks, fiction, and information I was speaking of more thoroughly and specifically in my post above, this may have helped to eliminate some of your concerns, so I shall attempt to name more than a few here. Please see “Personalities in Politics” and note the personal criticisms of the McKee’s and the lack of understanding of the factual issues. Please see “Chamber to Hold Interviews” and note the personal attacks of the chamber and Tim Bietry. Please see “Winski wants Oberlie's job” for the negative and attacking political strategy where the current Mayor was actually “upbraided” according to the reporter. Please see ALL “Might as Well Get Started” posts for very specific attacks, the lack of understandings, and ignoring the proof and truth of the matters in regard to the Parks, Sanitary, Mayor’s Office, Port Authority, and the Chamber and Bietry again by a poster and also certain city council members.

Please watch the Feb.13th BZA meeting where its board was attacked by other “twisted” branch representatives as well as some members of the public for simply following the law and their attorney’s advice instead of their own personal wishes and desires, which they must do in fulfilling their professional leadership responsibilities to the city.

I can’t believe I’m even going to encourage this but it stresses my points and issues too, so go ahead and watch any particular episode of Screws & Blues or that Whistle Blowhard nut on public access or listen to the same garbage on the Saturday morning radio show. But note that the shows are designed for promoting political agendas and instigating the rhetoric of those on the panel, and understand the information there is very rarely factual, so if you do so, please give those accused and attacked the common and professional courtesy of responding with the truth of the matters, as you will have done yourself a great service before drawing your own conclusions!!!

And mostly, please remember the multitude of past city council meetings where the attacks frequently flew all over the place from a few council members that were playing out their own personal agendas instead of making sound professional decisions based on what’s best for our city - no matter who was before it – Mayor, department heads, developers and business people, MCAS, or even their own attorney as nobody was immune to the abuse, attacks and unprofessionalism there!

In the end Southsider, I simply see some differences between our conceptual views of what is perhaps professional, and what is issue based vs. personally motivated, who should be held accountable and for what and to what degree, and dare I say, what personally might make me (and perhaps others) as compared to you “Mad as hell and not going to take it anymore”.

VOTE FOR POSITIVE CHANGE AND POSITIVE-PROFESSIONAL LEADERESHIP!

[tonyd]

Southsider, I feel your approach and feelings towards leadership are apparent. But in this case of your response, I ultimately also feel and must say the focus is pretty narrow if you can only confuse real issues as “personal stuff”. I’m never inclined to avoid real issues, contrary to your conclusion.

No doubt real issues are personal to ALL of us. I think this is obvious in the back-and-forth posting. But I don’t automatically dislike other persons because of such, I just dislike the approach and the fiction involved, and I’ll take others to task whenever there is proof available to do so. I believe that for the most part, most everyone having the courage to express their views – even under a key name – believes in what they are purporting and I applaud and respect them for actually getting involved in an effort to bring about change.

So then, let’s please just accept and not get caught up in any denial of the essence of human nature. If all we had to type about was Utopia and hugs and kisses, I venture a guess that there would be a whole lot of lying going along with it.

Having prefaced with all that, I shall also caution you that what follows may make your “eyes roll” right out of your head this time and you may start to “cringe” all over again, but I will sincerely try to do better and refine my technique in presenting my issues, which are probably the flux of what is really wrong in, and what divides our community so, vs. other variables.

I will attempt to make my personal issues more clear, albeit it and understandably, I have differing personal viewpoints then yours and others. My issues are negativity, approach, professionalism, leadership, decision making, roadblocks to progress, and the vicious attacking of others.

The gauge on professionalism for this forum is best left to the readers of our posts and the many other posts throughout your site here. However, professional leadership towards progress is ultimately determined by ones approach and actions in the various arenas at which our city government and decision making takes place, and then the results that are produced. I do understand you and others question the results produced, or the lack thereof, as sometimes I do myself. I just feel that one person, Mayor or otherwise, cannot do it alone or alone be held accountable.

It takes a team effort and more cooperation as our very form of government structure sets the course for action or inaction. It ALWAYS involves all three branches including judiciary (which is coming into play with north end development and other low income housing development issues, and often times dictates a course of action or inaction), the Mayor (executive), and the City Council (legislative) too. This is where the political debates to come will be of most interest to me.

At the council level, a “high moral ground” would certainly be welcomed as far as I am concerned, and this in my opinion, does have a direct correlation to some council member’s blatantly obvious and self serving motivations, (of which incidentally I did not intend to come off as questioning other people’s posting motivations or views, and I am not so much trying to question yours, as I do believe you are consistent and you strike me as a genuine sort of fellow), rather I truly question some council members in these regards.

Why people are against the Mayor (and a litany of other folks too) are plastered all over the freakin’ place – not just here on your site, but throughout the various media outlets as I indicated in my post, and I even underscored the Anvil Chorus as primary. It is within these various articles and submissions, and again throughout the posts on this site, and most unfortunately within the City Council’s very own chambers where you will find the “information and personal attacks” I refer to. And it is in those chambers where I wish the Mayor (any Mayor) would take the gloves off. I even offered a bit of a critique of the current Mayor himself in my post, along with offering some positives and some qualities he posses that I happen to admire, in that he always takes a professional approach in representing our great city on all fronts – regardless of the hostilities and difficult personalities involved. It is not an easy job.

I have offered plenty of exact details and specific examples of the negativity, personal agendas, and personal attacks in many of my posts on this site, and it is in fact what motivated me to participate on this forum in the first place, so I do not agree that I am “without (said) information”, especially if you read my other posts, and especially in regard to certain council members. This is where the roadblocks primarily exist based on my observations and experiences. This is where change must come first most.

Now, I suppose if I had referenced the attacks, fiction, and information I was speaking of more thoroughly and specifically in my post above, this may have helped to eliminate some of your concerns, so I shall attempt to name more than a few here. Please see “Personalities in Politics” and note the personal criticisms of the McKee’s and the lack of understanding of the factual issues. Please see “Chamber to Hold Interviews” and note the personal attacks of the chamber and Tim Bietry. Please see “Winski wants Oberlie's job” for the negative and attacking political strategy where the current Mayor was actually “upbraided” according to the reporter. Please see ALL “Might as Well Get Started” posts for very specific attacks, the lack of understandings, and ignoring the proof and truth of the matters in regard to the Parks, Sanitary, Mayor’s Office, Port Authority, and the Chamber and Bietry again by a poster and also certain city council members.

Please watch the Feb.13th BZA meeting where its board was attacked by other “twisted” branch representatives as well as some members of the public for simply following the law and their attorney’s advice instead of their own personal wishes and desires, which they must do in fulfilling their professional leadership responsibilities to the city.

I can’t believe I’m even going to encourage this but it stresses my points and issues too, so go ahead and watch any particular episode of Screws & Blues or that Whistle Blowhard nut on public access or listen to the same garbage on the Saturday morning radio show. But note that the shows are designed for promoting political agendas and instigating the rhetoric of those on the panel, and understand the information there is very rarely factual, so if you do so, please give those accused and attacked the common and professional courtesy of responding with the truth of the matters, as you will have done yourself a great service before drawing your own conclusions!!!

And mostly, please remember the multitude of past city council meetings where the attacks frequently flew all over the place from a few council members that were playing out their own personal agendas instead of making sound professional decisions based on what’s best for our city - no matter who was before it – Mayor, department heads, developers and business people, MCAS, or even their own attorney as nobody was immune to the abuse, attacks and unprofessionalism there!

In the end Southsider, I simply see some differences between our conceptual views of what is perhaps professional, and what is issue based vs. personally motivated, who should be held accountable and for what and to what degree, and dare I say, what personally might make me (and perhaps others) as compared to you “Mad as hell and not going to take it anymore”.

VOTE FOR POSITIVE CHANGE AND POSITIVE-PROFESSINAL LEADERESHIP![size=6]

I have to agree with Informed in his perspective that the City Council lacks the leadership and proffessionalsim as a govermental body. I also agree that any Mayor is only one person and has to depend on the Council and Boards working together to make PROGRESS. I offer this article from the News Dispatch as how Prospective Developers view our City Leaders.

Przybylinski drones on

Robert's Rules of Order" may be dry reading, but anyone holding public office ought to be familiar with it. Consider this passage on the conduct of the president or chairman of board:
"If the chairman has even the appearance of being a partisan, he loses much of his ability to control those who are on the opposite side of the question. There is nothing to justify the unfortunate habit some chairmen have of constantly speaking on questions before the assembly, even interrupting the member who has the floor. One who expects to take an active part in debate should never accept the chair, or at least should not resume the chair, after having made his speech, until after the pending question is disposed of ...
"The chairman should not only be familiar with parliamentary usage, and set the example of strict conformity thereto, but he should be a man of executive ability, capable of controlling men. He should set an example of courtesy, and should never forget that to control others it is necessary to control one's self."
"Robert's Rules of Order" has been around since 1915 and its long-established rules spell out how to run a public meeting, and who can speak and when. Unfortunately, it appears Michigan City Common Council President Paul Przybylinski has never read it.
Since he took over as council president at the beginning of the year, he appears to be more enamored of the title than he does of carrying out the serious responsibilities that title requires.
Anyone who has been unfortunate enough to sit through a City Council meeting knows exactly what I'm talking about. Przybylinski drones on and on, either saying nothing or going off on a tangent about something that isn't even remotely related to the issue up for discussion.
Consider Tuesday's meeting in which Przybylinski cast the lone vote against the city's 2005 budget. His reason for voting no?
The city budget didn't spend enough money on tutoring programs.
Since when is it the city's responsibility to operate tutoring programs? Isn't that the responsibility of the school board? Isn't that why the Michigan City Public Library and the A.K. Smith Career Center have tutoring classes? Isn't that why the Boys and Girls Club has tutoring classes? How about the tutoring programs sponsored by H.O.P.E. or the after-school programs sponsored by Safe Harbor?
None of that seemed to matter to Przybylinski. He used the lack of tutoring money to bash Mayor Chuck Oberlie.
"There's a significant need to get money for literacy. There's a significant need. Monies need to be targeted within the education system," said Przybylinski. No one disagrees but it is not the city's responsibility.
And I'm not alone in my feelings about Przybylinski's little tirades. Take a look at the eight other council members as he drones on. They roll their eyes. They put their head in their hands. They shake their heads.
One council member told me he has written Przybylinski notes reminding him of points of order (they're spelled out in "Roberts Rules of Order"), but instead of acting professionally, the council member told me, Przybylinski sent the notes back with snide comments that since he's the president he can run the meeting as he sees fit.
That was in evidence Tuesday when he spent 10 minutes harping on Oberlie's budget two weeks after he ambushed Fire Chief Ralph Martin in an incredible display of public disrespect during a budget hearing. But after he finished his tirade, Przybylinski got a sample of his own medicine.
Marge Jamieson, a board member for the Michigan City Housing Authority and a resident of Boulevard Gardens, stood up and railed against Przybylinski and his ally, Councilman Phil Jankowski, calling them an embarrassment because of the way they publicly disrespect city officials (specifically she mentioned Oberlie, Martin and Sanitary District General Manager Al Walus) and don't let them properly do their jobs.
Przybylinski sat there stone-faced and didn't respond.
A few minutes later, after listening to comments from another resident who had a complaint about a barking dog and its droppings, Przybylinski turned childish. He said he was sure the mayor would be happy to handle the problem. "I'll let him do his job," Przybylinski said.
That behavior is inexcusable. Why not turn over the complaint to animal control and move on.
An out-of-town developer was at a recent City Council meeting when Przybylinski went off. The developer said he was shocked.
"Are all meetings like this?"
When told that it wasn't unusual, he replied, "That's so unprofessional."
No kidding.