Years ago I called Syringa who is responsible for who gets apartments at Northwood Place they will also take care of Bluebird. I got nowhere. They refused to answer any questions. I also learned that one apartment was occupied by a trust fund kid who admitted that he was only here to ski not to work. In a City council meeting Michael David said he didn't care if someone like that was in an apartment at Northwood. As for a recall of the Mayor or a City Council member, it is a very difficult thing to do you basically need an army of volunteers who are willing to follow the process very carefully. As the difficult forms are filled with signature, ten on a form, they are turned into a department in Hailey where they verify the signatures. The forms become can become public information.
What provisions are there for reviewing and reporting on the actual occupancy of Bluebird once the units are rented? Everyone including city government should be keenly interested in what actually happens relative to plans and hopes.
None. I am not kidding. We have had Northwood Place for over 10 years. Bluebird is a clone of it in many respects. There has been zero reporting on how Northwood Place has achieved workforce housing goals, even though Councillor Hamilton is the delegate to KCDC, which nominally owns Northwood Place. It begs the question what they are hiding. I did a FOIA request from IFHA to get their Northwood Place compliance reports. They were so redacted (blacked out) to be useless. One thing I gleaned: last year at least 4 apartments appeared occupied by people with no employment at all. I think that is why Ketchum's Housing Action Plan redefined the English word "workforce" to include people who choose not to work. I kid you not. It is there on page 7 of the HAP.
Perhaps, but I don't see the Council changing the form of their government as it would reduce the power of the Troika. On the other hand, a recall petition would be highly visible and send a signal to this Council that what they are doing is not supported by the community. That assumes, of course, that sufficient folks will step up to sign it...
Something needs to be done to stop this destruction of Ketchum. We cannot wait eighteen months for an election as there will be more damage that will be permanent. The time for the constant complaining is over. There needs to be some assertive action to stop the "Aspenization" of Ketchum.
I have a list of registered voters in Ketchum, that include some phone numbers and email addresses. I'm not a resident and started to help on the last recall effort. As Gwen mentioned, we need some new volunteers and a week's worth of hard work. I believe she has a copy of the last petition that people signed. Also, we should email Bradshaw, Breen and Hamilton asking the questions related to Bluebird. They need to answer.
I concur. The easiest solution is to require a runoff if no candidate receives more than 50% of the vote, a runoff is held between the top two candidates. (The present mayor was twice elected given with merely 31%.) As for the council, the city should have two precincts (North and South Ketchum, respectively) with alternating terms for each of two councilpersons, who must live in the respective precincts. Again, runoffs between the top two vote getters if no candidate receives more than 50%. ABOLISH the present one person-two vote systems, as it can be "rigged" unfairly.
A recall IS a heavy lift, and as Gwen commented, while people are not happy and want to vote someone out, they generally aren't comfortable signing the petition needed to get whoever is the target on a ballot.
But there is an option for a more accountable government! The Council-Manager Form of Government...
You're right, the designated seats and 50% to win you suggest can be made by a majority vote of the council. This was tried in 2001. In the fall election that year, one of the council seats had three contestants and resulted in the need for a runoff. (Full disclosure, I was one of the candidates) The runoff was in December. The result was prolonged campaigning and low voter turnout. After that experiment, the council returned to open seat elections.
I'm not in favor of the designated seats and 50% for council but definitely think we're overdue for a 50% win for Mayor. In 2001, they were only looking at the council vote, not the mayor, I'm not sure why...
For me, the bottom line is in the current form of government, we still have to trust that whoever gets elected has the expertise and integrity to engage the staff in doing their jobs.
At this time the staff, primarily the department heads and city administrator work at the pleasure of the mayor, not the full council. The Council-Manager Form of Government would change that dynamic. The professional, educated, non-political, ethical city manager would manage the department heads, provide complete and objective guidance, identify long-term consequences and carry out the policies of the governing body. The manager would be responsible to all 5 elected officials and is an at-will employee.
Under the Manager-Council Form of Government, all 5 elected officials are the legislative body. They have equal voting rights, the power and responsibility to approve and oversee the budget and can focus on policy making on behalf of the people who elect them without the minutia of the day to day running of the city. Within those 5, there is still a mayor who is the public face of the community who presides at meetings, advocates policy decisions etc.
Like your perspective...and I'm on-the-road and will comment further, if I survive getting through Dallas "bumper to bumper" @ 80 mph. Texas is a Nuthouse. See ya' in a few...?
Great assessment of an untenable direction the city council has pushed the city towards.
Years ago I called Syringa who is responsible for who gets apartments at Northwood Place they will also take care of Bluebird. I got nowhere. They refused to answer any questions. I also learned that one apartment was occupied by a trust fund kid who admitted that he was only here to ski not to work. In a City council meeting Michael David said he didn't care if someone like that was in an apartment at Northwood. As for a recall of the Mayor or a City Council member, it is a very difficult thing to do you basically need an army of volunteers who are willing to follow the process very carefully. As the difficult forms are filled with signature, ten on a form, they are turned into a department in Hailey where they verify the signatures. The forms become can become public information.
Well researched and compellingly presented. Thank you for bringing this to our attention.
What provisions are there for reviewing and reporting on the actual occupancy of Bluebird once the units are rented? Everyone including city government should be keenly interested in what actually happens relative to plans and hopes.
None. I am not kidding. We have had Northwood Place for over 10 years. Bluebird is a clone of it in many respects. There has been zero reporting on how Northwood Place has achieved workforce housing goals, even though Councillor Hamilton is the delegate to KCDC, which nominally owns Northwood Place. It begs the question what they are hiding. I did a FOIA request from IFHA to get their Northwood Place compliance reports. They were so redacted (blacked out) to be useless. One thing I gleaned: last year at least 4 apartments appeared occupied by people with no employment at all. I think that is why Ketchum's Housing Action Plan redefined the English word "workforce" to include people who choose not to work. I kid you not. It is there on page 7 of the HAP.
.........."so many of us working class folks"............??
Is impeachment a possibility?
Yes, a recall. But it is a heavy lift!
Perhaps, but I don't see the Council changing the form of their government as it would reduce the power of the Troika. On the other hand, a recall petition would be highly visible and send a signal to this Council that what they are doing is not supported by the community. That assumes, of course, that sufficient folks will step up to sign it...
Something needs to be done to stop this destruction of Ketchum. We cannot wait eighteen months for an election as there will be more damage that will be permanent. The time for the constant complaining is over. There needs to be some assertive action to stop the "Aspenization" of Ketchum.
I have a list of registered voters in Ketchum, that include some phone numbers and email addresses. I'm not a resident and started to help on the last recall effort. As Gwen mentioned, we need some new volunteers and a week's worth of hard work. I believe she has a copy of the last petition that people signed. Also, we should email Bradshaw, Breen and Hamilton asking the questions related to Bluebird. They need to answer.
I concur. The easiest solution is to require a runoff if no candidate receives more than 50% of the vote, a runoff is held between the top two candidates. (The present mayor was twice elected given with merely 31%.) As for the council, the city should have two precincts (North and South Ketchum, respectively) with alternating terms for each of two councilpersons, who must live in the respective precincts. Again, runoffs between the top two vote getters if no candidate receives more than 50%. ABOLISH the present one person-two vote systems, as it can be "rigged" unfairly.
A recall IS a heavy lift, and as Gwen commented, while people are not happy and want to vote someone out, they generally aren't comfortable signing the petition needed to get whoever is the target on a ballot.
But there is an option for a more accountable government! The Council-Manager Form of Government...
Hi, Pal....do tell us more....
Hey Craven!
You're right, the designated seats and 50% to win you suggest can be made by a majority vote of the council. This was tried in 2001. In the fall election that year, one of the council seats had three contestants and resulted in the need for a runoff. (Full disclosure, I was one of the candidates) The runoff was in December. The result was prolonged campaigning and low voter turnout. After that experiment, the council returned to open seat elections.
I'm not in favor of the designated seats and 50% for council but definitely think we're overdue for a 50% win for Mayor. In 2001, they were only looking at the council vote, not the mayor, I'm not sure why...
For me, the bottom line is in the current form of government, we still have to trust that whoever gets elected has the expertise and integrity to engage the staff in doing their jobs.
At this time the staff, primarily the department heads and city administrator work at the pleasure of the mayor, not the full council. The Council-Manager Form of Government would change that dynamic. The professional, educated, non-political, ethical city manager would manage the department heads, provide complete and objective guidance, identify long-term consequences and carry out the policies of the governing body. The manager would be responsible to all 5 elected officials and is an at-will employee.
Under the Manager-Council Form of Government, all 5 elected officials are the legislative body. They have equal voting rights, the power and responsibility to approve and oversee the budget and can focus on policy making on behalf of the people who elect them without the minutia of the day to day running of the city. Within those 5, there is still a mayor who is the public face of the community who presides at meetings, advocates policy decisions etc.
Like your perspective...and I'm on-the-road and will comment further, if I survive getting through Dallas "bumper to bumper" @ 80 mph. Texas is a Nuthouse. See ya' in a few...?
How many subscribers do you have now?
535
Anyone reading the comments from Perry's blog should encourage friends that are voters to subscribe.