Tag: ted phelps
-

Loveland Community Heartbeat PAC responds to Mr. Kulik
Upon scrutiny, Ryan Kulik’s arguments fail due to his oversimplification and outright error.
by Halie RebeccaschildMr. Kulik made the following claims at the September 12th City Council meeting, which warrant scrutiny. (Ryan Kulik: Political motivated amateurs have taken over)
Halie Rebeccaschild is the Secretary of the Loveland Community Heartbeat PAC First, In his argument that certain sitting City Council members are “anti-business,” Kulik stated, “Legally required public hearings were voted down by this Council to stop positive business growth.” It appears that Mr. Kulik has over simplified the matter, as Council has stopped a public hearing from proceeding only in one case this year, that of the city hall project. The city never moved to a public hearing because residents expressed outrage at multiple City Council meetings in May and June of this year over the planned demolition of Loveland City Hall. In fact, On May 9th, City Council deadlocked on the nature of public engagement. After Community Improvement Corporation (CIC) President Jay Stewart recommended involving residents and holding a work session with Ken Geis, Vice Mayor Angie Settell immediately motioned for a public hearing (1). Such a move would have then fulfilled the legal requirement for a single hearing prior to transferring the city hall property to the autonomous CIC, ensuring demolition of our city hall building in July, as planned.
Mayor Mark Fitzgerald, Vice Mayor Angie Settell, and Pam Gross voted no on these public engagement forums.
Residents had expressed great concern about the city hall project moving too quickly, which may be seen in both April and May City Council meeting minutes. Rob Weisgerber, Kathy Bailey, and Ted Phelps responded to residents by opposing the vote to immediately move to fulfill the single public hearing requirement. Then, Council Member Rob Weisgerber motioned for no less than three resident engagement sessions, which would have brought residents into the planning process on either a 2-story, 2.5 story, or 4-story building. Mayor Mark Fitzgerald, Vice Mayor Angie Settell, and Pam Gross voted no on these public engagement forums, while Council Members Rob Weisgerber, Kathy Bailey, and Ted Phelps voted yes. The deadlocked votes reflect a difference in how much emphasis was placed on resident engagement.Not a single resident has come to address Council to demand that the city hall demolition move forward, so who does Mr. Kulik represent?
Mr. Kulik spoke of the public hearing requirement completely out of context of the planned demolition of City Hall, and in such a way that suggested a law was somehow broken in slowing down the city hall project for residents to give necessary sanction. Indeed, if the public hearing had occurred as pushed by Mark Fitzgerald, Angie Settell, and Pam Gross, the transfer of our city hall to the CIC would have been final. Once in possession of the CIC, residents would have had no further input. This process would have prevented residents from thoroughly engaging in the planning for our new, city hall building in Old Loveland. Instead of anti-business, as Mr. Kulik suggests, Rob Weisgerber, Ted Phelps, and Kathy Bailey’s vote for multiple hearings reflect their duty as public servants to residents of Loveland. Residents have been relieved that the planned demolition and any repurposing of city hall will wait until after elections when residents will have their say with their votes. Not a single resident has come to address Council to demand that the city hall demolition move forward, so who does Mr. Kulik represent?Next, Mr. Ryan Kulik went on to claim that City Council acted wrongly by cancelling Mr. Stansel’s contract. Kulik said, “What is it Mr. Stansel did wrong? I can see where council should have had the discussion on his services, but we never had that discussion. Rob Stansel was hired by the City Manager, not council. Stop lying. This is what the city manager does. The council should have had a chance to vote on his contract when the spending limit was exceeded. We never had this discussion.”Yet again, Mr. Kulik is mistaken.
Yet again, Mr. Kulik is mistaken. City Council did have a discussion about cancelling Rob Stansel’s contract just prior to their vote that terminated it on May 9th. Mr. Kulik asks, “What was illegal about the contract? Was it because the spending limit was exceeded? Okay, I understand that.” If Mr. Kulik understands that City Council voted after a discussion to cancel the contract because it violated the City Manager’s spending authority, then what’s his agenda? Why would he want Council to violate our city charter?Then, Mr. Kulik goes on to say, “[Stansel] secured over $600,000 for, I believe, the Chestnut property.” Not exactly. The “letter of intent” brought by Mr. Stansel to the city died upon expiration on May 5th, 2017, four days prior to City Council voting to terminate Stansel’s contract on May 9th (2,3). Perhaps Mr. Kulik should speak with City Manager Dave Kennedy about why the offer wasn’t pursued. Because at this point, it appears that Mr. Kulik is speaking beyond his knowledge and expertise.it appears that Mr. Kulik is speaking beyond his knowledge and expertise.
Last, Kulik goes on to say, “[Rob Stansel] was working on the Christman property that we’ve heard a lot about.” Yet, again, Mr. Kulik references a development project that brought Loveland residents out in droves against it. Residents from the Brandywine and Butterworth Glen neighborhoods overflowed Loveland City Hall at the public hearing on June 13th when City Council was expected to vote on an ordinance to transfer city land to the Community Improvement Corporation that would have then been sold to Drees Co. and ultimately culminated in a Drees Homes development of 10 acres nearby. Apparently, the residents of those neighborhoods believed the city years ago when it claimed to have bought the Christman property to be a park, and they weren’t too excited about the pending development deal. That’s why the city did not transfer the land to the Community Improvement Corporation, and the private deal between the developer and the commercial real estate firm dissolved.Upon scrutiny, Ryan Kulik’s arguments fail due to his oversimplification and outright error. In any regard, I appreciate him bringing up three very important topics to Loveland residents, and hope everyone registers to vote by October 10th and comes out to vote this November 7th.Halie Rebeccaschild is the Secretary of the Loveland Community Heartbeat PAC.Citations:(1) Loveland City Council Meeting, May 9, 2017. Available at http://www.lovelandoh.com/public-meetings(2) Loveland City Council Meeting, June 13, 2017. Available at http://www.lovelandoh.com/public-meetings(3) SqFt Commercial Letter to Mark Fitzgerald and Rob Stansel titled “Chestnut Land Document,” 4/27/2017.
Take Home Tano is about fresh, wholesome food for the frenzied family.
-

Mayor’s Kumbaya Moment pivots to Bye Y’all as Council meeting abruptly ends
“Why is this so?” his voice cracking, almost reaching falsetto. “Why can’t there be civil discussion instead of personal attacks?
– Loveland Mayor Mark Fitzgerald
by David Miller
Loveland, Ohio – Mayor Mark Fitzgerald called the June 27 Council meeting to order. He led those gathered in the Pledge of Allegiance. In unison, everyone said, “Indivisible.”
[quote_box_left]
The Mayor quoted Dr. King saying, “We must live together as brothers or perish together as fools.”[/quote_box_left]
He asked for a roll call and found that all Council members were present. He quoted the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and asked why the love for the community often turns to hatred on the second and fourth Tuesday of each month. “Why is this so?” his voice cracking, almost reaching falsetto. “Why can’t there be civil discussion rather than personal attacks?”
Then, he laid into the audience and Councilmember Rob Weisgerber.
He said there were community agitators infiltrating the City and spreading lies.
[quote_box_right]
THE FACEBOOK POST THAT PROMPTED PAM GROSS’ CALL TO THE POLICE:
You dont [Sic] have to give her anything. Thats [Sic] a violation. Does she have a subpeona [Sic] ? She can request all day long. Lol who does she think she is? Trying to pull another fast one with intimidation. She nerds a good old fashion loveland [Sic] ass kicking 80s style lol.
[/quote_box_right]
He said vitriolic rhetoric had taken an “even darker turn” when a post (Read the post below) appeared on Weisgerber’s Facebook page where a threat to Councilmember Pam Gross could be found. He said that Weisgerber had made no attempt to admonish the person who wrote the comment. At that point, Weisgerber asked City Solicitor Joe Braun for a “point of order” where Council rules would dictate that Fitzgerald yields the floor to the Solicitor so he could address the “point of order”.
“Point of order,” could be heard at least ten more times during Fitzgerald’s four-minute barrage of charges leveled at Weisgerber and the community. Councilman Ted Phelps joined in asking for a point of order.
Fitzgerald to Weisgerber, “You are contributing to this misinformation and innuendos throughout our City. And, you routinely impugn the reputations of our citizens who volunteer their time and unselfishly serve our City.”
“False. False,” Weisgerber told the Mayor who was not deterred from finishing his speech without interruption.
Fitzgerald to Weisgerber, “You have created and fueled a toxic environment in our City – spawning threatened violence”
“At the minimum, you should be sanctioned,” Fitzgerald said waving his hand toward Weisgerber. “All this talk about resignation, you’re the one who should resign,” he continued with another wave of the hand in Weisgerber’s direction.
“Then, give me a chance to explain,” Weisgerber pleaded.
Fitzgerald continued his prepared speech – his speech pattern unbroken and gathering speed.
Fitzgerald only yielded the floor when as he finished his speech, he looked toward Vice-Mayor Angie Settell who had practiced the next line. In a fraction of a second she said, “Mayor, I move to adjourn.” Gross knew the next line and immediately seconded the motion, twice nodding in the direction of Fitzgerald, making sure he saw the ball coming back in his direction.
Weisgerber said, ‘Point of order” one more time.
The City Solicitor finally got a chance. He said, “There is no discussion on a motion to adjourn.”
The Mayor, who can count to four, called for the vote on the motion to immediately close the meeting.
Fitzgerald, Settle, Gross, voted, “Yes.”
Weisgerber said a defiant, rather loud, “No”
Kathy Bailey voted, “No.”
[quote_left]Phelps’, “No,” was said emphatically in comic disbelief.[/quote_left]Phelps’, “No,” was said emphatically in comic disbelief.
The 3-3 tie vote was broken when Stephen Zamagias cast the deciding, “Yes.”
Down came the Mayor’s gavel, placing the 14-minute meeting in the history books, enshrined in the official City Journal.
Zamagias and Gross had already packed their belongings in a neat stack before the motion was made. Gross had already grabbed her handbag from the floor and leaving her seat before the vote was tallied by the Clerk. She was through the side door within eight seconds. The other “Yes” voters quickly followed Gross’ exit out the side door, leaving the three “No” voting Councilmembers stunned. The three had expected to go through the full agenda of City business.
The dazed, angry, audience responded, “Boo! Who do you work for? Wrong! Who do you work for? Who do you work for people?” At least three of them had wanted to use the open forum portion section item on the agenda to speak of their community concerns.
Weisgerber, remaining in his seat, calmly stating his case for not deleting the Facebook comment. He also told the audience about the conversation he had with Sean Rahe, the Loveland Police Chief the next day. Rahe got involved after Gross called him to investigate, according to Weisgerber’s account. Weisgerber also said that he was told by Rahe that the comment didn’t rise to the level of a threat and Rahe had also consulted with the Clermont County Prosecutor for a second opinion. According to Weisgerber, the Prosecutor was not convinced the post constituted a threat.
In an email to the Police Chief that Weisgerber sent about seven hours before the council meeting, he said, “I understand Pam’s concerns and I am strongly against hate or threatening speech yet I will not censor free speech. Having said that, I don’t see what was said as a threat but that is not my call.”
Rahe responded by saying, “Rob, thank you for your time, and this response. I understand your position. Sean.”
While the Solicitor was still in the room, former Councilmember, Todd Osborne rose and said, “As a taxpayer, I asked the City Solicitor… We have not had a meeting. This meeting has not been adjourned properly. It has to be adjourned correctly, and, there has to be public business.”
[quote_left]Hearing this, Mays crumpled the meeting agenda she was holding. Resident Patti Sandmayr Horton , ripped the agenda in half then placed it at the empty spot where Pam Gross had been sitting a few moments before.[/quote_left]The solicitor returned to his seat, was about to speak, but just shook his head as if to say, I don’t know when he realized the microphone had been turned off? When a member of the audience asked, “Are they coming back, he simply said, “No, they adjourned. They adjourned.”
Pat Mays, a former member of Council was sitting in the audience, she held up the meeting agenda and asked, “So, this is mute, so, none of this is going to happen?
The Solicitor answered by saying, “The meeting was called to order and it was adjourned.”
Hearing this, Mays crumpled the meeting agenda she was holding. Resident Patti Sandmayr Horton , ripped the agenda in half then placed it at the empty spot where Pam Gross had been sitting a few moments before.
After the meeting, Bailey went on camera to respond to what had happened. She said Fitzgerald’s prepared statement, “Was really nothing more than an attack on Councilmember Rob Weisgerber.”
Bailey described the meeting end, “As soon as he finished his speech, in clearly what was a practiced and rehearsed and already decided move,” the meeting was adjourned. “So, all of us council members, the staff, dozens of citizens that were here – all for nothing because they took their ball and went home.” Bailey [quote_right]Bailey said it was clearly practiced and rehearsed.[/quote_right]said they had a full agenda for the meeting, including working on a collective bargaining agreement that, “Has to be dealt with in the next couple of days or we have a problem.” She said the four majority members who closed the meeting had no concern for the business of the City or for the citizens or anyone else who showed up.
Fitzgerald, Gross, Settell, and Zamagias had left the meeting room, so were not available for any rebuttal to Bailey’s allegation of a scripted shut-down of the meeting.
The next regularly scheduled Council meeting is in three weeks on July 11. The “second” Tuesday of the month.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Loveland Magazine sent an email the next morning to the Councilmembers who voted to shut down the meeting asking for their response regarding Kathy Bailey’s accusation that the abrupt closing down of the council meeting was pre-planned. None have responded.
The post on Rob Weisgerber’s Facebook page on June 21 at 9:50 PM ·that Fitzgerald and Gross say condones violence towards Gross
Rob Weisgerber
To all my friends out there and especially for those who have spoken out against Mark Fitzgerald and Pam Gross on Loveland City Council. Pam Gross today submitted 9 separate public documents requests for all emails and documents between me and a host of private citizens. The magnitude of the list of names is very disturbing. She had also made the same request of Ted Phelps and Kathy Bailey included in those 9 requests.
I will be clear that her request looks to be so broad and ill defined that no one can respond. Legal council now has to be involved to resolve. Pam is costing you the residents of Loveland by wasting your tax dollars on petty requests.
The depth Pam Gross is willing to stoop to for her campaign is embarrassing
(Name Redacted by Loveland Magazine) You dont [Sic] have to give her anything. Thats [Sic] a violation. Does she have a subpeona [Sic] ? She can request all day long. Lol who does she think she is? Trying to pull another fast one with intimidation. She nerds [Sic] a good old fashion loveland ass kicking 80s style lol.




