“Worst City Council Meeting Ever” Video – 4th Most Watched ML Video Ever
May 4th, 2012 by Joe BurgessThe “you’re lying – name-calling” city council video from Monday night reached the 1,000 play mark, less than 24 hours of being posted.
It reached the 1,700 play level in less that two days. The 3rd day produced another 250+ plays. It is expected to break the 2,000 mark mid-morning, Friday
One alderman said that she was “embarrassed that the city has had to go through this.”
Choose another article
Newer article: Holmes Chapel City Council Forum – Senate & State Representive Candiates
Older article: One Monticello Life – Thad, Nikki, & Colton Mitchell – 2012 Drew County Farm Family of the Year
This could all be resolved if Babe Ruth would open its books, provide parents and the city with its Bylaws and allow its members to vote on the board members. I am NOT a Baseball parent this year, but fully understand the parents wanting full disclosure. How many players does Babe Ruth currently have signed up? That was asked in this video and no answer was given.
As for this not being the city council’s business. It is their business to receive a copy of the bylaws and finances and who is on the board of Babe Ruth. Until the city’s rules are followed, Babe Ruth gets no ball fields! Period!
Someone should read the law. The fields belong to the city, not to any sport program. It does not matter if it is Babe Ruth, soccor, softball or whatever.
The Parks Committee has the responsiblity to be sure all programs are administered correctly. This means they have a right to know who is playing on “their” fields, their bylaws, money spent, because in the end the Parks Committee has to answer for is done on or to those fields, buildings, etc.
JUST PLAY BALL !!!!!!!!!!!
can’t we all just get along
If our leaders can’t get along, how can we expect the followers to get along.
So if the city can demand the bylaws and financials of a private membership organization like babe ruth before it can use the ball field, what is to stop it from demanding the same from a church before it can use a pavilion in a city park for a picnic or sunday school party? Or what is to stop it from demanding the tax returns from a private person before that individual can use a park for a child’s birthday under the theory they need to make sure the person has the money to fix any damages they cause? Maybe babe ruth could have done a better job working with the city before things got out of hand, but the City and the Parks and Recreation committee could have done better too. They are asking for information that is none of their business and which they have apparently never needed in all the years they have been running parks, pools and other facilities.