consultants are sandburs

Tuesday, November 26, 2013

You can judge it on your own terms ...

Hat tip to Dan Burns, for this link.

I am not cognizant of any persons behind the names, but readers might see a face that rings a bell.

UPDATE: Strib editorial. From mid-item:

Democrats understand that the political table could turn on them. When they were in the minority in 2005, they resisted the change they just imposed. Since then, says Minnesota senior Sen. Amy Klobuchar, more Democratic senators have come around to her view that any president ought to be allowed wide latitude to fill his administration’s leadership positions as he or she sees fit. That at a minimum is what winning a U.S. presidential election should assure, she says.

A former prosecutor, Klobuchar also argues forcefully that leaving judicial positions vacant for purely partisan reasons is unacceptable. “Everything from criminal cases to consumer cases get delayed,” she said this week. “The most complicated cases end up in federal court. We need every judicial position filled to handle that load.”

It’s notable that the filibuster that went too far in the eyes of Senate Democrats was over three appointees to the District of Columbia Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals. That court is the venue for cases involving the administrative decisions of federal agencies, making it second only to the Supreme Court in influence. Its docket in coming years is likely to include cases that deal with the Environmental Protection Agency’s efforts to curb carbon emissions and various agencies’ implementation of the Dodd-Frank law governing the financial-services industry. Those cases deserve to be assigned to a court at full strength.

As Klobuchar said Nov. 7 on the Senate floor, the three stalled appointees to that court are people with stellar credentials. Two of the three are women; one previously filibustered appointee to the D.C. Circuit was also female. The need for better gender balance is among several reasons why the appointees deserve confirmation.

If the filibuster had not been “nuked,” it’s not clear when or even if the D.C. Circuit would be back to its full 11-judge complement. The same goes for the rest of the federal court system

So, politics and gender can be argued in favor of getting rid of the 60-vote super majority attached to the filibuster in practice, something NOT written into the Constitution. The filibuster grew up as a gentlemens' agreement, in a gentlemens' club, the U.S. Senate. Reform was both overdue and incomplete, in touching only on the appointments question. It is an end-of-term Obama lame duck right of appointment that has been preserved, for now, and for posterity. Obama will take advantage. Successor presidents will also, unless somehow the filibuster practice in its full reach is for some reason reinstalled. Why? Hard to guess any justification for it, past, present, or future. Approval of the Senate for appointments should mean simple majority, without any other procedural tricks up political sleeves.

Eric Hagen of ABC Newspapers reports Ramsey news, as well as news from other Anoka County towns.

For example, Nov. 26 online reporting on road needs/plans in Blaine, by Hagen; online here.

Friday, November 22, 2013

50th anniversary of Kennedy murder. A lone deranged gunman, firing multiple shots.

Oswald, shown in photographs and video, gunned down by Jack Ruby in front of cameras and cops, so as not to ever testify. No conspiracy, the commission said. Who's to doubt such awe-inspiring a cast of commissioners? It was Oswald, acting alone, Allen Dulles, J.Edgar, LBJ, the mob, Clay Shaw, Bay of Pigs, Ruby, and Garrision's inquiry aside,

Oswald. Acting alone.

Oliver Stone was just being un-American to make a few disingenuous box office bucks, from the movie.

I think D.B. Cooper did it. And there was a coverup.

That thing about parachuting from a plane in 1971 with a satchel full of cash was all trumped up, so that with things closing in on D.B. he was not available to testify. Sort of as with Casey during Iran-Contra times. North, acting alone ... (Have you noticed how those police artist renderings of D.B. were deliberately made to not resemble North? That says something, or was it Casey that hijacked the plane and parachuted?)

It gets somewhat nebulous and confused, more so, as time passes.

Wednesday, November 20, 2013

Andy at Residual Forces uses the S__ word.

This link.

RAMSEY FRANCHISE FEES - The city council will hold a Dec. 10 public hearing on the Charter Commission's proposal to amend the charter to crimp city use of franchise fee imposition to fund street upkeep. That meeting will be broadcast, by QCTV, from council chambers, starting at 7 pm.

There is no agenda out yet, but that is the planned date. City Clerk Thieling likely would be the official best able to answer any reader questions.

"The election of Kshama Sawant, a socialist, to the city council of Seattle seems like dropping a pebble in the ocean – particularly given the Tea Party’s inroads into Congress and the Republican hold on state legislatures. With one lone vote, we can’t expect Seattle to collectivize Starbucks and Amazon anytime soon. But her election does show that not only was she not afraid to be a socialist, people were not afraid of electing one. It’s not just that socialism is coming into fashion; people are finding out that maybe they’ve been socialists this whole time and didn’t know it."

Headline language is from here. Think about this, (from the same item):

Further, millennials, a demographic acutely and adversely affected by the economic downturn, have little to no memory of the hammer and sickle, and when one thinks where socialism exists in the world, they don’t think of Russia, they think of social democracies like Denmark. Even Switzerland, a country most closely associated with the banking industry, is considering a universal basic income.

Without the ideological duel with the Soviet Bear, Americans are better able to understand socialism for what it really is: a system that ensures that wealth can provide food, housing, education and basic needs for the population. And more and more people – out of work, in debt and feeling betrayed by the promises of market capitalism – see that as a good thing.

It isn’t just the Fox News anchors of the world who try to denounce any progressive economic policy as dreaded socialism. The American left has also had aversion to go all-in with the term. The 1999 protests against the World Trade Organization meeting in Seattle were called “anti-corporate”, rather than “anti-capitalist” as similar protests Europe were called, broadly stating what activists were against, but not putting forth what kind of alternative economy they wanted to create. Occupy Wall Street, for all its progress in reigniting a conversation about economic equality, marked the ascendence of a brand of anarchist rhetoric that turned its back on unions and sought to avoid making demands on the state.

However, there’s been a realignment. OWS did rekindle interest in Marxist theory. Even the business press is quick to unveil the inequality that exists as a result of financial deregulation. It’s not a coincidence that in the airport town of SeaTac, near Seattle, voters approved a $15 per hour minimum wage, in part inspired by the recent wave of fast-food worker strikes. Kshama Sawant’s ascendence signifies a movement that is tired of the same market solutions to every economic problem, which is the basic platform of both major American political parties.

Try this.

"Musk repeated his criticism that the Tesla car fires receive too much negative attention from the media given that gasoline car fires happen more often, the Model S was given high safety ratings by the NHTSA and there have been "zero" serious injuries in a Tesla car. "Since the Model S went into production last year, there have been more than a quarter million gasoline car fires in the United States alone, resulting in over 400 deaths and approximately 1,200 serious injuries," Musk said, extrapolating 2012 data from the National Fire Protection Association."

This link. The item is about Tesla electric car, battery fires. The Crabgrass headlining is from the item. It seems gasoline powered auto usage has an inherently greater fire injury and risk liklihood, when compared to electric vehicle uses. The question with the Tesla vehicle is whether the battery location is suboptimal, as a road-impact safety consideration. Apparently there is no consensus about the best positioning of battery cells. Weight distribution and handling might favor how Tesla locates the batteries; while impact safety worry might favor something different.

"A $17.8 million city subsidy to support a developer’s plans for a 28-story Downtown Indianapolis apartment tower has won the first of several needed approvals. Flaherty & Collins Properties earlier this year announced an $81 million glassy tower with 300 upscale units, a 500-space parking garage and enough ground-floor retail for a full-service grocery. It could break ground in the spring on the northern half of the former Market Square Arena site, at Market and Alabama streets. Municipal bonds that would provide the city’s subsidy still need approval from the City-County Council and other commissions. On Monday, the Indianapolis Economic Development Commission gave its 3-0 approval for the administration’s proposal to issue 25-year bonds, Deputy Mayor Deron Kintner said."

Same old stuff. This link, source of the headline quote. So much subsidy. All but foodstamps ...

UPDATE: This link. How many in the bushel basket were unsubsidized?

Something short of a million man march. Could'a been a contender ...

This link, Larry's little league extravaganza. Too bad. So sad.

Reporting, and crowd photos, online here.

_______FURTHER UPDATE________
The man explains online:

This week, in the wake of revelations that millions of Americans have lost their health insurance as a result of Obamacare, Republicans of all stripes – and in particular their leaders, like House Speaker John Boehner, guided by sleazy political consultants like Karl Rove – appeared on television to gloat over the disaster and predict that they would retake control of the U.S. Senate in 2014 and the White House in 2016. In short, the tragedy of Obamacare, and the suffering it has now caused to cancer patients and others who have lost their coverage and their doctors, brought smiles to Republican faces. This disgusting display was enough to make any thinking and caring human sick to his or her stomach.

Indeed, how is it that Republicans, with all of their corporate connections and "expertise," could not themselves have known that millions of Americans would lose health insurance coverage as a result of a communist-inspired healthcare system conceived of and implicated by a Marxist president who latently hates the average white middle- and upper-class American and thinks that they need to pay what in effect are reparations to "his" people? Yes, Obama is a racist despot, and an incompetent one to boot. But the cynical gamesmanship of the Republican leadership – which is bent on political positioning and enriching itself, but lacked the courage to kill Obamacare in the cradle – is to blame for empowering Obama and his leftist comrades to rape the nation not only of its wealth but its moral, ethical sense of right and wrong.

These compromised and slimy Republican leaders like Boehner are not the only problem, however. Our so-called tea-party representatives have themselves proven compromised and unwilling to take on leadership. They may enjoy the notoriety of appearing on Fox News and at public events they deem politically safe, but when push comes to shove they are not willing to stick their necks out in any major way. It is no coincidence that not one of them is willing or has the courage to appear with us to demand Obama's and Boehner's resignation in Lafayette Park on Tuesday, despite our having invited several of them. This is telling as it reveals and confirms that we must wage the revolution by ourselves and cannot rely on them to reclaim freedom for the masses.

Take our Reclaim America Coalition, for instance, which is proving to be a big success. For virtually the first time in modern history, we have assembled a host of conservative, libertarian, and other public-interest groups and activists to work together for a common goal: to wage a Second American Revolution and peacefully and ultimately remove the tyrant evil fool in the White House, as well as corrupt Republican leaders like Boehner and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. This coalition is unique: for years I had been trying to get these groups and activists to work together, but egos and other cynical calculations got in the way.

A kind word for ... Well, for those who agree with Larry. Those for whom his rhetoric resonates so that they crowded his Nov. 19 confab to where the massive crowd presence brought DC to a virtual standstill [at least Klayman's folks, in the photos, appear to have stood still; never mind any more of DC denizens]. And that was enough of a standstill for Larry, being how it was all he could get ...

FURTHER UPDATE: Bluestem Prairie, here.

Trash at the Watchdog. Not trashing the Watchdog. The pup having a mindful about trash.

This link.

I suppose the dog will bark until every road is a toll road, privately owned, for profit; a toll booth at every intersection.

And municipal water? Why pipe that to a home, when they can buy it by the spring-water bottle twelve-pack, private sector, Coborns or Cub.

The fact is municipalities in Minnesota can form and manage utilities. It's entirely legal. Indeed, Ramsey has a charter provision on the question, this link, beginning:

Sec. 11.1. - Acquisition and operation of utilities.

The city may own and operate any gas, water, heat, power, light, telephone or other public utility for supplying its own needs for utility service, or for supplying utility service to private consumers or both. It may construct all facilities reasonably needed for that purpose, and may acquire any existing utility properties so needed; but such action shall only be taken by ordinance, which shall not be an emergency ordinance. The operation of all public utilities owned by the city shall be under the supervision of the city council.

Sec. 11.2. - Rates and finances.

The council may, by ordinance, fix rates, fares and prices for municipal utilities, but such rates, fares and prices shall be just and reasonable. The council shall make each municipal utility financially self sustaining. Before any rates, fares or prices for municipal utilities shall be fixed by the council, the council shall hold a public hearing on the matter in accordance with section 11.6 of this chapter. The council shall prescribe the time and the manner in which payments for all such utility services shall be made, and may make such other regulations as may be necessary, and prescribe penalties for violations of such regulations.


Again, this link.

Feed that to the dog ...

Along with the homework ...

UPDATE: Ramsey could form, for example, a street maintenance utility, or a last-mile fiber to the home gigabit broadband utility. Either would be a lawful exercise of express charter power. As noted above.

A profile in something other than courage. In anonymity, that certainly, as well as in personal hostile animus. And name-calling.

John LeTourneau is targeted, this link.

That title, "Reflections in Ramsey," is suggestive of a mirror. But a mirror images somebody else's act. Who?

Who seeded this item, this place?

Friday, November 15, 2013

Archbishop Nienstedt losing support.

Strib reporting, this link. If Nienstedt is replaced, Francis and not Ratzinger would make the appointment. It might be an act of enlightenment, if it ever happens. Nienstedt's policy positions are what rankle most, not his blind eye to clergy abuse of young boys. Yet given Strib's present focus upon Catholic issues, Nienstedt hanging around seems to embarrass the church more and more as time passes, especially on the abuse of young boys issue. That IS Strib's hot-button-for-a-change issue.

Bigger question -- Is Nienstedt staying good or bad, for the Roman Church, in Minnesota; and who besides Francis is tasked to judge that? Are there review boards and such within Rome's hierarchy? Is is official, or wholly behind closed doors power-broker factional decision making? Strib does not address that consideration in reporting. Strib stays focused locally, not on the process of review and change within the Church's inner ranks and powerful persons. That latter consideration is more interesting but harder to reach in fact-finding previous to having something to report. It is especially difficult to unravel without reporters on staff based in Europe and the Vatican, something news agencies are avoiding as a cost-consciousness measure.

Monday, November 11, 2013

New Republic, Mother Jones, and now Crabgrass. Each realizing Hillary Clinton is not inevitable as the 2016 Dem presidential candidate. Elizabeth Warren is the better woman for the office. The better person.

MoJo, here. New Republic, here. Warren has such a politive untarnished presence. Sleaze free. All a Democrat should be. Closer to Wellstone than Hillary is to Wellstone.

we’re three years from the next presidential election, and Hillary Clinton is, once again, the inevitable Democratic nominee. Congressional Republicans have spent months investigating her like she already resides in the White House. The New York Times has its own dedicated Clinton correspondent, whose job it is to chronicle everything from Hillary’s summer accommodations (“CLINTONS FIND A NEW PLACE TO VACATION IN THE HAMPTONS”) to her distinct style of buckraking (“IN CLINTON FUNDRAISING, EXPECT A FULL EMBRACE”). There is a feature-length Hillary biopic in the works, and a well-funded super PAC—“Ready for Hillary”—bent on easing her way into the race. And then there is Clinton herself, who sounds increasingly candidential. Since leaving the State Department, Clinton has already delivered meaty, headline-grabbing orations on voting rights and Syria.

Yet for all the astrophysical force of these developments, anyone who lived through 2008 knows that inevitable candidates have a way of becoming distinctly evitable. [...]

The last time Clinton ran, of course, the issue was Iraq and the gleaming new mug was Barack Obama’s. This time the debate will be about the power of America’s wealthiest. And, far more than with foreign policy, which most Democrats agreed on by 2008, this disagreement will cut to the very core of the party: what it stands for and who it represents.

On one side is a majority of Democratic voters, who are angrier, more disaffected, and altogether more populist than they’ve been in years. They are more attuned to income inequality than before the Obama presidency and more supportive of Social Security and Medicare. They’ve grown fonder of regulation and more skeptical of big business. A recent Pew poll showed that voters under 30—who skew overwhelmingly Democratic—view socialism more favorably than capitalism. Above all, Democrats are increasingly hostile to Wall Street and believe the government should rein it in.

On the other side is a group of Democratic elites associated with the Clinton era who, though they may have moved somewhat leftward in response to the recession—happily supporting economic stimulus and generous unemployment benefits—still fundamentally believe the economy functions best with a large, powerful, highly complex financial sector. Many members of this group have either made or raised enormous amounts of cash on Wall Street. They were deeply influential in limiting the reach of Dodd-Frank, the financial reform measure Obama signed in July of 2010.

But as central as this debate is to the identity of the party, Democrats won’t openly litigate it until they’re forced to ponder life after Obama

That's the New Republic lead in, links omitted, so have a look at the entire thing. It is speculative. But I would gladly support Warren over Clinton in an eye blink. As in favoring daylight over a dark night. I would have no hesitation ever, voting Warren. Clinton, it would be like the second Obama run, after he became known. Well, it's him or Mitt Romney, is how that vote shook out.

Surely Hillary Clinton would be more appealing than a Bobby Jindal candidacy. Or over Rick Santorum. But you get to Hillary vs Rand Paul, and Rand is a bank skeptic, unlike Clinton. Warren, as big a bank skeptic as Rand Paul, is a populist too. What's not to like? She'd disarm Rand Paul's stronger points better than Clinton ever could.

Sunday, November 10, 2013

NSA Spying on us in the US. What about this set of folks?

Here and here. Responses, if any, would be informative.

Land use in Ramsey. Especially including City land. Fallow or somehow productive of tax base growth and jobs.

Eric Hagen of ABC Newspapers, online here, writing in part:

Old municipal center site

Since residents packed the council chambers this summer to voice their opinions on a potential data center development at the old municipal center site at the southeast corner of Nowthen Boulevard and Alpine Drive, the council has appointed 16 people to a study group that will evaluate all options over the course of four to six meetings from November to January that would be open to the public.

“Although a study group consisting of seven to 10 participants would be an ideal size for the proposed process, staff believes 16 participants is manageable and will still be productive,” Brama said.

Brama and Gladhill will facilitate the meeting, but the 13 residents who mostly live near the site would set the agenda. A councilmember, planning commissioner and economic development authority member would also be part of the 16-member study group.

Neighbors have said they prefer more residential development and not a data center, but Brama said that was to be expected because change is difficult. While a data center may end up not being the best solution, the study group will be asked to objectively look at the facts and not just immediately discount it, he said.

“The purpose of the study group is to consider under what circumstances would a data center development be an appropriate land use,” Brama said.

167th/St. Francis Boulevard

The city has been evaluating options for redevelopment in this area since 2004, according to Gladhill, who said the city is reviewing acceptable land use and zoning changes as well as the feasibility of future sewer line extensions, but stressed there is much more research to be done and the city’s policy has been to encourage development by working with current property owners to identify appropriate future land uses and zoning designations.

That is only a part. Read the entire item, again, here.

NSA SURVEILLANCE ABUSES - Look who's filing amicus briefs in the ACLU's lawsuit for equitable relief [not Larry's litigation for dollars, he gets no respect?].

SURVEILLANCE - The story is circulating with different levels of abuse identified helter-skelter, day-by-day, roughly speaking. Elementary websearch skill can reach much detail, so that's left for readers as a general thing, with this post more narrowed.

Who but a PATRIOT would have authored something entitled in a way Orwell would have understood, "The PATRIOT Act?"

And after that stain on record, then say, "But what is now being disclosed, that's not what I intended ..."?

At least, if not conceding PATRIOT status so easily, you can call him a conservative military-industrial hawk, but despite that mind-set, Sensenbrenner briefed.

Then, NRA briefed, wanting gun data held higher and better than being NSA fodder like your banking records, onshore or off. Think that one over. Only a mere letter apart in abbreviated terms, NRA and NSA, but a world apart on you and your gun fetishes and who should know your ownership/holding/carrying detail when you've lived a life of fighting against registration, of your guns, but what about your registered cell phone and account? Oh --- read both of those amicus items at the ACLU site, and decide whether either touches and respects whatever worries you may hold about how the NSA has acted [and will act, assure yourself, no permanant reform will ensue, business as usual will again be just as quietly usual as NSA would have prefered maintaining - the Snowden haters being who they are].

UPDATE - NRA briefing, opening paragraphs state an intent and a history:

The National Rifle Association is a New York not-for-profit corporation. First among the “Purposes and Objectives” listed in its Bylaws is “[t]o protect and defend the Constitution of the United States,” and especially the right to keep and bear arms guaranteed by the Constitution. NRA Bylaws art. II. The NRA’s activities in support of that purpose have long included legislative advocacy and litigation concerning two issues relevant to this litigation: (1) the rights of the NRA and its members to associate and communicate freely under the First Amendment, and (2) the protection of gun owners against intrusive government surveillance or recordkeeping, such as the establishment of systems to register or compile lists of firearms or the owners of firearms. The NRA’s history of involvement in these issues—including direct lobbying on predecessor language to the statute at issue in this case—allows the NRA to offer a unique perspective in support of the injunction sought.

The NRA also stands second to no organization in its support for legitimate law enforcement, military, and national security activities to defend our nation against terrorism. Countless NRA members, including NRA employees, have served overseas in that fight since 2001. See Jeff Johnston, NRA’s New Generation of Freedom Fighters, American Rifleman, June 2003, at 47. Indeed, the NRA was originally formed to promote improved military training, and today, the “Purposes and Objectives” described in the NRA’s bylaws include the goals of “promot[ing] public safety, law and order, and the national defense,” as well as “train[ing] members of law enforcement agencies [and] the armed forces … in marksmanship and in the safe handling and efficient use of small arms.” [... yawn]

So it goes. Sensenbrenner's item has more serious weight, opening:

Amicus curiae F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr. is a Member of Congress who was the author the USA PATRIOT (“Patriot Act”) in its original passage in 2001, and supported its revision in 2006 and its reauthorizations in 2009 and 2011. Rep. Sensenbrenner has represented the Fifth Congressional District of Wisconsin since 1978. He is a long-serving member of the House Judiciary Committee and the Committee on Science and Technology. Rep. Sensenbrenner was chairman of the judiciary committee when the United States was attacked on September 11, 2001. Five days later, he received a first draft of the Patriot Act from the Justice Department. Firmly believing that that original draft granted the government too much investigative power, he asked then-House Speaker Dennis Hastert for time to redraft the legislation. Following numerous meetings and negotiations with the White House, the FBI, and the intelligence community, Rep. Sensenbrenner authored a revised version of the Act that was ultimately adopted as law. Rep. Sensenbrenner also voted to amend the Patriot Act in 2006 and voted to reauthorize certain provisions of the law, including Section 215, in 2009 and 2011.

The Defendants attempt to justify their practice of collecting the records of every telephone call made to or from the United States, including purely domestic calls, by claiming that Congress intended to authorize precisely such a program when it enacted and reauthorized Section 215 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. § 1861 (“Section 215”). Defs’ Mot. to Dismiss (ECF No. 33) at 21-28. But Congress intended no such thing.

Amicus curiae is a Member of Congress who was the author of the original Patriot Act, in 2001, and supported its revision in 2006 and its reauthorizations in 2009 and 2011. Amicus agrees with Defendants that in enacting Section 215, Congress granted the Executive branch broad investigative powers relating to investigations of suspected foreign terrorist activities. However, amicus vehemently disputes that Congress intended to authorize the program challenged by this lawsuit, namely, the unprecedented, massive collection of the telecommunications data of millions of innocent Americans. Indeed, the unfocused dragnet undertaken by Defendants is exactly the type of unrestrained surveillance Congress, including amicus, tried to prevent.

Amicus thus urges the Court to find that the bulk data collection program challenged in this lawsuit is not authorized by Section 215 or any other provision of law.

There is more weight to saying "Whoa folks, I know legislative intent " than to saying "exempt firearms;" with NRA, of course, saying something more than that, too. Read the briefing. Hope for the ACLU to prevail. Heads rolling seems already quite overdue. Why, do you figure that remains so?

FURTHER UPDATE - A report-&-analysis on both ACLU and Larry Klayman litigation against NSA's practices -- extent and intent -- with Klayman seeking billions in class action damages basically for a massive invasion of privacy by our government and cooperative-collusive firms -&- disrespect for the Fourth Amendment.

Whose game: Contemplate an extent of cooperation alone as far and as secret as the law compels, voluntary adherence to law independent of judgments we may hold on the wisdom of such law; that vs collusion, if any, with the rebuttable presumption being absence of any wrongfulness for which the word "collusion" might apply. The Klayman litigation at least attempts to rope in corporate defendants in parallel with NSA top leadership, and higher-ups, in terms of authority and decisional discretion.

Corporatism of communication: The worry being corporate preemption of or interference with or complicity over narrow goal overlaps the profiting firms hold in common with our government's policy formulation and implementation (at its most questionable when mandated to be behind an Iron Curtain of secrecy, in ways that spawned or inflamed the NSA's overreaching). That is, in the context of what we so-far understand about such overreach, in detail. With all detail so far appearing in the public domain being there thanks to Snowden's whistle-blowing and Guardian's publishing.

With what is so-far public (and in anticipation of more detail to emerge in public reporting and editorializing and via public hearings and floor debate in DC and abroad), allies have cause to claque the whistle-blowing event, as do each and every one of us have equal cause. What long term good, if any, will emerge from all this is hard to foresee or forecast.

Saturday, November 02, 2013

RAMSEY FRANCHISE FEES - A date has been set for Ramsey's Charter Commission and the City Council to have a joint work session on the franchise fee question.

The City Clerk noted that at the Charter Commission October 21 meeting, a Charter amendment was proposed and by vote was set to be forwarded to the Council. Council was presented the proposed change in Charter language at their regular televised meeting on Tuesday, October 22. Council asked staff to schedule a joint meeting with the City Council and the Charter Commission.

That meeting has been scheduled now for Tuesday, November 19, beginning at 6:00 p.m., in the Lake Itasca Room at City Hall. As with other worksessions it will be untelevised. An agenda for the meeting will be posted on the City’s website the Thursday prior to the meeting (November 14).

Until then, if you have any questions City Clerk Thieling would be the staff contact person, this link.