Sunday, March 8, 2020

Citizen Comment Recap- Feb. 4, 2020, part 1

I broke this meeting's comments up into two, more easily digestible posts. There were many important issues discussed.

Before meeting comments: 10
After meeting comments: 0

Speaker #1 (male, general comment not on agenda)- He wants the city to revisit Airport Road's lack of connections even though there were public hearings and citizens at the time didn't want it connected. He went over the history of the decision and the "historical disenfranchisement" of District 1 residents. So, he offered to speak for them.

I don't understand the disenfranchisement comment considering the fact that there were public hearings and it sounds like the wishes of the public were listened to at the time. I could be missing something in relation to this specific decision.

Speaker #2 (male, general comment not on agenda)- He runs a long-time boxing business. He brought a 17 year old who just won a title in his division. The 17 year old, Christian, is also in the ROTC at McKinney High. He went over the long history in the city of this establishment. It was a feel good story about the city and some of its residents. City Council paused to get their picture taken with both speakers.

Speaker #3 (male, general comment not on agenda)- He brought up the problem of trash being left out around the square downtown in front of businesses. He said trash collection happens at night when people are sitting around eating on the patios. He's hoping for dumpsters or something different. He also liked the atmosphere of the meeting and how it looked like there were many citizens there participating in the process.

I was at the meeting and I agree with what he said about citizen participation. I learn a lot more about the city and its residents when people are participating in the process. 

Speaker #4 (male, comment on agenda item)- He came to thank City Council and staff for helping him with ETJ platting issue from the last meeting. He said that after expressing his complete frustration with the whole platting process trying to work with the planning department, he got the help he needed.

Backstory- his frustration with the city revolved around the fact that the planning department was wanting to force him to get a flood study done on his land in the ETJ so he could build his mother a small house on his land. Flood studies can be very expensive and it was deemed to be unnecessary. He was very happy with the resolution. 

Speaker #5 (male, general comment not on agenda)- He was at the last meeting complaining about the city not doing anything about the homeless near his house. He said he's incredibly frustrated. He said he sent emails, called everyone, and came to the last meeting to complain (yes, he did). Still no help. He said the homeless have been near his house on the east side for about six months littering in people's yards, debris all over, setting fires, etc. He said that they even knocked on his door to ask if he was the one who called the police on them. He was very upset. He asked if could start fires in Craig Ranch or pitch a tent there. He was pretty mad. He said everyone kept passing the buck.

The homeless camps are new here or at least more visible due to the larger amounts of homeless. It is important to get it established DART land vs city land and who is responsible for what.

The speaker did tell his city representative that he didn't do anything to help him. Watching the video, it was pretty clear that said city representative made this whole thing go on much longer than it needed to because he (the city representative) had to be right and he had to "educate" the speaker. I believe this is why City Council is not supposed to respond to general comments. In the speaker's defense, he actually left the chambers and had to come back because the city representative wouldn't stop talking about him. 

Speaker #6 (male, Plano resident, general comment not on the agenda)- He told the Mayor that  at the last session there was a reference to Dr. King calling him [the mayor] a klansman or something. He then clarified? that what Dr. King called him was not a klansman, but that Dr. King called him worse than a klansman. He then read a quote from Dr. King.

No comment. 

No comments:

Post a Comment