Thứ Năm, 4 tháng 10, 2018

News on Youtube Oct 5 2018

Christine Blasey Ford is still adamant that Brett Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her 36

years ago. However, her story is full of holes and inconsistencies big enough to drive a

semi through. Now, her ex-boyfriend just blew up her story in a spectacular way.

The ex-boyfriend has submitted a sworn statement casting serious doubt on her testimony against

Brett Kavanaugh. He contends that in the six years they dated, she never once mentioned

the incident. Not once. This was in the late 1990's. She has hidden this information

from the beginning. He also says that not only did she not have

a fear of flying or tight spaces… she flew all the time. Oopsie.

But the last nail in the coffin, in my opinion, is where he swears she coached her best friend

on how to pass a polygraph for a job at the FBI and US Attorney's office. That means

that Ford perjured herself when she was asked directly in the hearing the other day if she

had given tips on how to pass a polygraph. Case closed if you ask me.

They evidently broke up because Ford cheated on him and then she used his credit card for

a year after they parted ways. He had to confront her on it because at first, she lied about

it. When he threatened to notify fraud prevention, she came clean. Does this sound to you like

a credible witness or a person that can be believed at face value? Nope, it sure doesn't

to me. Ford sounds like a real winner to me. Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Chuck

Grassley pounced on this and is pursuing it. "The Senate Judiciary Committee chairman

sent a letter on Tuesday to Christine Blasey Ford's attorneys, requesting evidence to

buttress her sexual assault claim that has "put Judge (Brett) Kavanaugh on trial before

the nation." "In his letter, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R.,

Iowa) said that Dr. Ford's attorneys have withheld evidence that senators need to evaluate

the allegations before voting on the nomination of President Trump's Supreme Court pick.

"Mr. Grassley requested notes from Dr. Ford's therapy sessions, recordings of the lie detector

test she took, and exchanges she had with the news media.

"The two-page letter also questioned Dr. Ford's truthfulness.

"When she testified before the Judiciary Committee last week about the alleged decades-old

attack, Dr. Ford was asked if she had ever spoken to anyone besides her attorneys on

how to take a lie-detector test. "Never," she said.

"When asked if she had discussed with anyone tips on taking a polygraph, she said, "No."

"In seeking the lie-detector records, Mr. Grassley said that the committee had gotten

a sworn statement from an unnamed former boyfriend of Dr. Ford."

California. I first met Christine Blasey (now Dr. Christine

Blasey Ford) in 1989 or 1990 in California. From 1990-91, I was just friends with Ford.

From approximately 1992 to 1998, I was in a relationship with Dr. Ford. I found her

truthful and maintain no animus towards her. During our time dating, Dr. Ford never brought

up anything regarding her experience as a victim of sexual assault, harassment, or misconduct.

Dr. Ford never mentioned Brett Kavanaugh. During some of the time we were dating, Dr.

Ford lived with Monica L. McLean, who 1 understood to be her life-long best friend. During that

time, it was my understanding that McLean was interviewing for jobs with the FBI and

the US Attorney's Office. I witnessed Dr. Ford help McLean prepare for a potential polygraph

exam. Dr. Ford explained in detail what to expect, how polygraphs worked and helped McLean

become familiar and less nervous about the exam. Dr. Ford was able to help because of

her background in psychology. Dr. Ford and I lived together while we were

dating and stayed together in a long-distance relationship when Dr. Ford moved to Hawaii

sometime around 1998, although I am not sure of the particular year and it might have been

a bit earlier or later. While visiting Ford in Hawaii, we traveled

around the Hawaiian islands including one time on a propeller plane. Dr. Ford never

indicated a fear of flying. To the best of my recollection Dr. Ford never expressed a

fear of closed quarters, tight spaces, or places with only one exit. I assisted Dr.

Ford with finding a place to live in CA. She ended up living in a very small, 500

sq. ft. house

with one door.

Christine Blasey Ford: "Never."

For more infomation >> Ford's Ex-Boyfriend Had Enough Of Her Lies – Makes Public Statement, 'She's GUILTY Of Perjury' - Duration: 8:40.

-------------------------------------------

DANCE IN PUBLIC INDONESIA - Duration: 2:46.

DANCE IN PUBLIC INDONESIA

For more infomation >> DANCE IN PUBLIC INDONESIA - Duration: 2:46.

-------------------------------------------

Sudden Turn Of Events: Feinstein Sealing FBI Investigation from Public As Allegations Collapse - Duration: 6:47.

Sudden Turn Of Events: Feinstein Sealing FBI Investigation from Public As Allegations Collapse

Just keep repeating to yourself: The darkness hates the light, the darkness hates the light…

That would seem to be the lesson from the latest turn in the Democrats' scheme to

annihilate Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, his family and Republican hopes for a more

constitutionally framed U.S. high court.

Over at YoungConservatives, Nick Arama writes:

"Sen. Dianne Feinstein just made a move that shows how hypocritical the Democrats

can be after all this drama.

"Democrats have gone out of their way to throw all kinds of dirt at Judge Kavanaugh

in the hopes that something would stick and they'd be able to stop his confirmation

… [T]hey were all about disruption, delay and 'Spartacus' moments … [and] the

letter from Christine Blasey Ford, dropping it at the last minute to delay the first vote.

"Then as the allegations remained uncorroborated, they started to move the goalposts, talking

about Kavanaugh's drinking in school 30 years ago.

"Now Feinstein is moving to have the FBI report sealed and not made public."

.@SenFeinstein indicates that the FBI report on Kavanaugh should NOT be made public: "It

would seem to me that if people are going to be identified this ought to be held very

close and not."

"I think the investigation ought to be closely held," she reiterated.

— Elizabeth Landers

More details from the Conservative Tribune stating that CNN reporter Elizabeth Landers

has tweeted:

"(Feinstein) indicates that the FBI report on Kavanaugh should NOT be made public: 'It

would seem to me that if people are going to be identified this ought to be held very

close …"

"Funny, Feinstein didn't seem all that concerned about keeping people's identities

'closely held' when the letter sent to her from Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey

Ford was leaked to the media, nor did she exhibit any such concern when she publicly

spoke about some of the other individuals named by Ford, or the other accusers who have

popped out of the woodwork in Ford's wake."

YoungConservatives' Arama echoes the puzzlement, quipping: "Wait, didn't the Democrats

demand that there be an FBI investigation and now they don't want the public to know

the results?"

Yep, knowing Feinstein and Co.'s track record, it should indeed be no surprise they seem

determined to have it both ways — heads they win, tails Kavanaugh (and the GOP and

America) lose:

"So in other words, if the FBI report isn't good for them, sit on it.

If there's anything they can spin, let it out.

Smear him in public, but clear him in private."

(Arama)

"Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE), who supposedly played a role in getting Republican Sen. Jeff

Flake to back off from his initial support of Kavanaugh, threw in these thoughts:

"'I think that the work product of the FBI should be kept confidential to the Senate,

but all senators should be able to review it,' Coons told reporters.

"'That's typically what's the case in any background investigation, the FBI delivers

investigatory work — facts, not conclusions — and then senators review those files.

But those are committee confidential files typically,' he added.

"Also "typical" would be for the Senate Judiciary Committee to quietly investigate

allegations against a nominee by itself, without dumping all of the disgusting details into

public view via a coordinated media campaign."

Don't miss that last observation from CT's Ben Marquis; it's crucial: There has already

been in place a process by which those original, scandalous, potentially ruinous – and now

increasingly dubious — charges against Kavanaugh could have been vetted and brought before

him discreetly by concerned senatorial parties.

This would have occurred IN PRIVATE and WEEKS BEFORE the potentially defamatory information

about the fifty-three-year-old jurist leaked.

Moreover, it may have forestalled last week's incriminating Senate Judiciary Committee circus

which broadcast before millions of TV viewing Americans (and likely a hefty global audience,

to boot.

Lovely PR for the American system, by the way!)

"But," wraps Arama, "because the Democrats leaked confidential information into the media

and blew this whole thing up into a drama with the explicit purpose of stopping Kavanaugh,

they don't get to dictate now how he should be cleared."

Indeed, as Boston radio talker Howie Carr might say, a "standing headline" could

well be: Democrats' Double Dealing Raises Its Head Again!

Or: Lefts' Hypocritical Standards Keep Changing the Terms of the Discussion!

Or: 'Party of Transparency' Wants to Keep Info Hidden from American People.

Don't forget, just short weeks ago the news cycle was dominated by Democrats' complaints

that not every grocery list and doodle Kavanaugh had ever generated — "100,000 pages of

documents" — wasn't made available to the committee.

Early in the prospective Justice's hearings, Fox News quoted Sen. Patrick Leahy, (D-VT),

"We don't know what is being hidden."

Then, these mordant musings from Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer: "President Trump's

decision to step in at the last moment and hide [100,000] pages of Judge Kavanaugh's

records from the American public is not only unprecedented in the history of [Supreme Court

nominees], it has all the makings of a cover-up."

We're witnessing a Friday night document massacre.

President Trump's decision to step in at the last moment and hide 100k pages of Judge

Kavanaugh's records from the American public is not only unprecedented in the history of

SCOTUS noms, it has all the makings of a cover up.

— Chuck Schumer

Today's Dems?

Shhhh — keep the FBI findings shuttered away from the regular folks.

No denying, those Dem "goal posts" keep moving around like a Las Vegas chorus line

on crack:

— Kavanaugh is a sleazy rapist – a gang rapist, in fact!

Oops, well, never mind …

— But he WAS a high-school and college-age drunk, who'll threaten the security of the

Republic because he once allegedly threw ice on a fellow imbiber.

Oh, not buying that, either?

— Okay, would you believe he was a belligerent maker of fart jokes when he was seventeen,

eighteen?

— Hey, we need to bruit all this stuff around for those who might take it seriously – until

it's better to keep the details in the shadows, away from the delicate eyes of John and Jane

Q Public.

(They might decide wrongly, after all.

Leave the deciding up to us, thank you very much.)

How do these characters reconcile themselves to their whipsawing lack of intellectual and

moral integrity?

How do they sleep at night?

(Maybe they're suffering exhaustion from all that never-ceasing, ruthless scheming,

and scrambling.)

Meanwhile, American patriots DO need to reconcile themselves to something else: Leftist bad

faith and duplicity ain't going away anytime soon.

It's not that good people should grow to tolerate it, but they must be prepped to expose

and meet it when it surfaces.

For more infomation >> Sudden Turn Of Events: Feinstein Sealing FBI Investigation from Public As Allegations Collapse - Duration: 6:47.

-------------------------------------------

DANCE IN PUBLIC INDONESIA - Duration: 1:25.

DANCE IN PUBLIC INDONESIA

For more infomation >> DANCE IN PUBLIC INDONESIA - Duration: 1:25.

-------------------------------------------

[KPOP IN PUBLIC CHALLENGE - SYDNEY] BTS (방탄소년단) - FAKE LOVE Dance Cover || SELLOUTS - Duration: 4:31.

If it's for you

I can act like I'm happy even when I'm sad

If it's for you

I can act strong even when it hurts

Hoping love will be perfected with only love

Hoping that all my weaknesses will be hidden

In this dream that won't ever come true

I grew a flower that couldn't be blossomed

I'm so sick of this fake love

Fake love

Fake love

I'm so sorry but it's fake love

Fake love

Fake love

I wanna be a good man

Just for you

I gave you the world

Just for you

I changed everything

Just for you

Now I dunno me

Who are you?

In our forest

You weren't there

I forgot the route that I came on

Now I don't even know who I used to be

So I ask the mirror, who are you?

If it's for you

I can act like I'm happy even when I'm sad

If it's for you

I can act strong even when it hurts

Hoping love will be perfected with only love

Hoping that all my weaknesses will be hidden

In this dream that won't ever come true

I grew a flower that couldn't be blossomed

Love you so bad, love you so bad

For you, I'm enacting a pretty lie

Love it's so mad, love it's so mad

I'm erasing myself to become your doll

Love you so bad, love you so bad

For you, I'm enacting a pretty lie

Love it's so mad, love it's so mad

I'm erasing myself to become your doll

I'm so sick of this fake love

Fake love

Fake love

I'm so sorry but its fake love

Fake love

Fake love

Why you sad

I don't know, I don't know

Smile

Tell me you love me

Look at me

I threw myself away

Not even you can understand me

You say I'm strange when I changed into the person you liked

You say I'm not the person you used to know

What do you mean?

No, I've grown blind

What do you mean this is love

It's all fake love

Woo, I dunno, I dunno, I dunno why

Woo, I don't even know myself

Woo, I just know, I just know, I just know why

'cause it's all fake love

Fake love

Fake love

Love you so bad, love you so bad

For you, I'm enacting a pretty lie

Love it's so mad, love it's so mad

I'm erasing myself to become your doll

Love you so bad, love you so bad

For you, I'm enacting a pretty lie

Love it's so mad, love it's so mad

I'm erasing myself to become your doll

I'm so sick of this fake love

Fake love

Fake love

I'm so sorry but it's fake love

Fake love

Fake love

If it's for you

I can act like I'm happy even when I'm sad

If it's for you

I can act strong even when it hurts

Hoping love will be perfected with only love

Hoping that all my weaknesses will be hidden

In this dream that won't ever come true

I grew a flower that couldn't be blossomed

Three

Two

One

Cut

Visuals *^*

Can oUR MemBerS Stop bEINg so CuTE

Only time they're wholesome tbh

We're on your side :p

For more infomation >> [KPOP IN PUBLIC CHALLENGE - SYDNEY] BTS (방탄소년단) - FAKE LOVE Dance Cover || SELLOUTS - Duration: 4:31.

-------------------------------------------

Napolitano: FBI report on Kavanaugh should be public - Duration: 6:47.

For more infomation >> Napolitano: FBI report on Kavanaugh should be public - Duration: 6:47.

-------------------------------------------

Should the FBI's Kavanaugh report be released to the public? - Duration: 5:48.

For more infomation >> Should the FBI's Kavanaugh report be released to the public? - Duration: 5:48.

-------------------------------------------

Sudden Turn Of Events: Feinstein Sealing FBI Investigation from Public As Allegations Collapse - Duration: 7:00.

Sudden Turn Of Events: Feinstein Sealing FBI Investigation from Public As Allegations Collapse

Just keep repeating to yourself: The darkness hates the light, the darkness hates the light…

That would seem to be the lesson from the latest turn in the Democrats' scheme to

annihilate Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, his family and Republican hopes for a more

constitutionally framed U.S. high court.

Over at YoungConservatives, Nick Arama writes:

"Sen. Dianne Feinstein just made a move that shows how hypocritical the Democrats

can be after all this drama."Democrats have gone out of their way to throw all kinds of

dirt at Judge Kavanaugh in the hopes that something would stick and they'd be able

to stop his confirmation … [T]hey were all about disruption, delay and 'Spartacus'

moments … [and] the letter from Christine Blasey Ford, dropping it at the last minute

to delay the first vote.

"Then as the allegations remained uncorroborated, they started to move the goalposts, talking

about Kavanaugh's drinking in school 30 years ago.

"Now Feinstein is moving to have the FBI report sealed and not made public."More

details from the Conservative Tribune stating that CNN reporter Elizabeth Landers has tweeted:

"(Feinstein) indicates that the FBI report on Kavanaugh should NOT be made public: 'It

would seem to me that if people are going to be identified this ought to be held very

close …"

"Funny, Feinstein didn't seem all that concerned about keeping people's identities

'closely held' when the letter sent to her from Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey

Ford was leaked to the media, nor did she exhibit any such concern when she publicly

spoke about some of the other individuals named by Ford, or the other accusers who have

popped out of the woodwork in Ford's wake."

YoungConservatives' Arama echoes the puzzlement, quipping: "Wait, didn't the Democrats

demand that there be an FBI investigation and now they don't want the public to know

the results?"Yep, knowing Feinstein and Co.'s track record, it should indeed be

no surprise they seem determined to have it both ways — heads they win, tails Kavanaugh

(and the GOP and America) lose:

"So in other words, if the FBI report isn't good for them, sit on it.

If there's anything they can spin, let it out.

Smear him in public, but clear him in private."

(Arama)

"Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE), who supposedly played a role in getting Republican Sen. Jeff

Flake to back off from his initial support of Kavanaugh, threw in these thoughts:

"'I think that the work product of the FBI should be kept confidential to the Senate,

but all senators should be able to review it,' Coons told reporters.

"'That's typically what's the case in any background investigation, the FBI delivers

investigatory work — facts, not conclusions — and then senators review those files.

But those are committee confidential files typically,' he added.

"Also "typical" would be for the Senate Judiciary Committee to quietly investigate

allegations against a nominee by itself, without dumping all of the disgusting details into

public view via a coordinated media campaign."

Don't miss that last observation from CT's Ben Marquis; it's crucial: There has already

been in place a process by which those original, scandalous, potentially ruinous – and now

increasingly dubious — charges against Kavanaugh could have been vetted and brought before

him discreetly by concerned senatorial parties.

This would have occurred IN PRIVATE and WEEKS BEFORE the potentially defamatory information

about the fifty-three-year-old jurist leaked.

Moreover, it may have forestalled last week's incriminating Senate Judiciary Committee circus

which broadcast before millions of TV viewing Americans (and likely a hefty global audience,

to boot.

Lovely PR for the American system, by the way!)

"But," wraps Arama, "because the Democrats leaked confidential information into the media

and blew this whole thing up into a drama with the explicit purpose of stopping Kavanaugh,

they don't get to dictate now how he should be cleared."

Indeed, as Boston radio talker Howie Carr might say, a "standing headline" could

well be: Democrats' Double Dealing Raises Its Head Again!

Or: Lefts' Hypocritical Standards Keep Changing the Terms of the Discussion!

Or: 'Party of Transparency' Wants to Keep Info Hidden from American People.

Don't forget, just short weeks ago the news cycle was dominated by Democrats' complaints

that not every grocery list and doodle Kavanaugh had ever generated — "100,000 pages of

documents" — wasn't made available to the committee.

Early in the prospective Justice's hearings, Fox News quoted Sen. Patrick Leahy, (D-VT),

"We don't know what is being hidden."

Then, these mordant musings from Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer: "President Trump's

decision to step in at the last moment and hide [100,000] pages of Judge Kavanaugh's

records from the American public is not only unprecedented in the history of [Supreme Court

nominees], it has all the makings of a cover-up."Today's Dems?

Shhhh — keep the FBI findings shuttered away from the regular folks.

No denying, those Dem "goal posts" keep moving around like a Las Vegas chorus line

on crack:

— Kavanaugh is a sleazy rapist – a gang rapist, in fact!

Oops, well, never mind …

— But he WAS a high-school and college-age drunk, who'll threaten the security of the

Republic because he once allegedly threw ice on a fellow imbiber.

Oh, not buying that, either?

— Okay, would you believe he was a belligerent maker of fart jokes when he was seventeen,

eighteen?

— Hey, we need to bruit all this stuff around for those who might take it seriously – until

it's better to keep the details in the shadows, away from the delicate eyes of John and Jane

Q Public.

(They might decide wrongly, after all.

Leave the deciding up to us, thank you very much.)

How do these characters reconcile themselves to their whipsawing lack of intellectual and

moral integrity?

How do they sleep at night?

(Maybe they're suffering exhaustion from all that never-ceasing, ruthless scheming,

and scrambling.)

Meanwhile, American patriots DO need to reconcile themselves to something else: Leftist bad

faith and duplicity ain't going away anytime soon.

It's not that good people should grow to tolerate it, but they must be prepped to expose

and meet it when it surfaces.

Or when the Democrats try to keep it from surfacing.

For more infomation >> Sudden Turn Of Events: Feinstein Sealing FBI Investigation from Public As Allegations Collapse - Duration: 7:00.

-------------------------------------------

Discover something new at Jacksonville Public Library! - Duration: 0:31.

We all know the Library's got books.

What else you got?

We have coding classes.

Stream movies on the go.

Watch DVDs from the comfort of your home.

Or make your own movie using our green screen.

learn a new language like Spanish.

Or listen to your favorite stories on audio.

Keep your kids entertained.

Go to another world.

Whatever it is you want to do, where ever it is you want to go.

Start here.

Go Anywhere.

For more infomation >> Discover something new at Jacksonville Public Library! - Duration: 0:31.

-------------------------------------------

Depot project finally to go public - Duration: 0:39.

For more infomation >> Depot project finally to go public - Duration: 0:39.

-------------------------------------------

Rejoignez-nous: dites stop au harcèlement sexuel dans l'espace public! - Duration: 1:53.

For more infomation >> Rejoignez-nous: dites stop au harcèlement sexuel dans l'espace public! - Duration: 1:53.

-------------------------------------------

Public forum slams FEMA on recovery efforts - Duration: 1:06.

For more infomation >> Public forum slams FEMA on recovery efforts - Duration: 1:06.

-------------------------------------------

Public Lands Council celebrates 50 years of ranching advocacy - Duration: 2:45.

For more infomation >> Public Lands Council celebrates 50 years of ranching advocacy - Duration: 2:45.

-------------------------------------------

Wildlife Officials Want To Hear From Public On Fish Kill - Duration: 0:20.

For more infomation >> Wildlife Officials Want To Hear From Public On Fish Kill - Duration: 0:20.

-------------------------------------------

Kent Co. public meeting change-up: Legit or illegal? - Duration: 2:40.

For more infomation >> Kent Co. public meeting change-up: Legit or illegal? - Duration: 2:40.

-------------------------------------------

Family pleads for public's help after brother found in Mon River - Duration: 2:59.

For more infomation >> Family pleads for public's help after brother found in Mon River - Duration: 2:59.

-------------------------------------------

VOA - Public Works & Protection Committee - 9/2/18 - Duration: 18:35.

- [Joann] We're ready.

- We will call to order the village

of Aswaubenon Public Works and Protection Committee

for Tuesday, October 2nd, 2018.

Role call please.

- [Woman] Mike Malcheski?

- [Michael] Here.

- [Woman] Allison Williams?

- [Allison] Here.

- [Woman] Ken Bukowski?

- [Ken] Here.

- [Woman] Josh Kohnhorst?

- [Josh] Here.

- [Woman] And Joann Euclide.

- [Joann] Here.

- It is customary to recite the pledge.

- [Congregation] I pledge allegiance

to the flag of the United States of America

and to the Republic for which it stands,

one Nation under God, indivisible,

with liberty and justice for all.

- I'll take action on the agenda.

- [Man & Woman] Move to approve

- Motion to approve. Do we have a second?

- [Josh] Second.

- Motion and a second, all in favor?

- [Congregation] I.

- I, motion carries.

Action on the minutes

from the Public Works and Protection Committee

regular meeting September 4, 2018, 6 p.m.

- [Man] Move to approve?

- [Josh] Second.

- We have motion and a second to approve

the September 4th minutes.

All in favor?

- [Congregation] I.

- I. Motion carries.

- Comments from the public.

We have our faithful clerk and a faithful reporter.

I see no others from the public.

We can dispense with that.

- [Ken] Who said he was faithful?

- [Clerk] Always.

- I call him that cause-

- [Ken] Oh, okay.

- [Clerk] Always faithful.

- It helps me get things-

- [Clerk] Yep.

- Get things done when I need them.

- [Ken & Clerk] Oh!

- Which I never need.

I do it all myself anyway.

Uh, seven action items.

7A Action on ordinance number

zero one zero dash one dash 18 amending section

three dash two 100, sub A sub three.

Class A liquor license quota

- [Clerk] Thank you Mr.Chairman and committee members,

Good evening.

As noted in your informational sheet,

last week when the building board approved

Two Class A liquor licenses.

We as a village have now met

our self-imposed quota of eight.

Thus, I thought It'd be advantageous to bring

that to this committee and ultimately the village board

with that knowledge that if, as an example,

as, let's say we get a six story hotel request

and they're looking for a Class A liquor to sell wine

out of a, like a pantry as this village has approved

in the past; there are no Class A liquor licenses available.

The number as I had mentioned is self-imposed.

I couldn't tell you what year the village

went down that road, but it's not a state mandate.

The village did it on their own means.

So I bring it before you to lift it.

Change the number or unlimited as noted

in the informational sheet.

- [Michael] Is there maximum or statute or anything that

- Nothing

- covers this at all?

- The only quota system is the Class B Beer

Class B liquor which was, I think,

the quota system came in September 1st of '97.

But with this type of license there are

no quotas per state statute.

Now why in the past the village felt or township felt

to go that way, I can't speak to that.

But we are at our quota number now.

- Do we really have it researched the minutes

of years and years of meetings to

see any logic on why number eight was picked or anything

- No, I haven't drilled down that far with election

and various other things.

I didn't look.

All I know is we're at that number.

So I thought I'd just bring it to attention

of this agus body and of course the village board.

- [Chair] Discussion.

- I don't know, I kinda like

it's all I understand that Mr.Clerk.

The word "unlimited' just gives me some cause to pause.

- [Clerk] We, if I may-

- I wouldn't mind increasing it up to ten for example

and see what the future holds, but

- We do use that term for other licenses

in our ordinance.

"Unlimited".

- Yeah, okay well I, yeah okay, that's fine.

Although I think Class A liquor is just

a little different than other licenses,

but it's not life and death but I

that's almost too open-ended for me.

I would just, I'd prefer going from eight to ten

But I don't know what the rest of the members feel.

- [Allsion] I agree with that.

- [Josh] Do we typically, how many applications

do we see here?

It seems maybe a handful.

- [Allison] I feel like it's been increasing

with the development in the area.

- Well that's just it.

That's why I bring it forth as I just alluded to.

You could have someone come in to see Mr.Shutey,

"Hey I wanna build a six story hotel over here

on Mike McCarthy.

I'd like to put a little pantry in".

Not unlike Home2 Suites last year was approved.

- [Josh] Yeah

- But now we can't.

- [Ken] And they need a Class A for something like that?

- Well if they wanna sell wine.

- For a pantry.

- Or liquor. Yep.

- [Joann] There's a part of me that says

if we're gonna up it to ten, and then

when we hit 10 we're gonna up it to 12,

and when we hit 12, you know?

If we do unlimited doesn't mean we're going

to approve all of them, it just means

- Right

we're not having a self-imposed restriction anymore.

- So that everything can still come to board.

That all of the people who would like

to develop in our area can still bring it to

our attention and we can vote against it.

If we so choose, but I don't want someone,

in a way I don't want a developer to

not want to develop in our area because

they can't get a Class A liquor license.

That's a small concern.

I'd rather say no and see it come forward than we're

at our limits, not an option.

- [Clerk] And I had no horse in the race,

I just felt it was incumbent in my office

- [Allison] Yep

to notify you of that.

- [Ken] I just think from a legal point of view,

you can say "unlimited" and say "no we won't give you one".

Well that's tough to do. You need some,

you need some darn good reasons why you're saying

no to A and yes to B.

Whereas if we have somewhat of a limit here,

to me, that makes it a bit easier.

If someone comes in who we want to give

a Class A license to, but it's difficult

to articulate the reasons and I don't know

if an imposed, self-imposed limit would

(chuckles) would help legally or not,

but I'd feel a lot more comfortable with that.

Turning someone down with a limit in here.

Rather than having it unlimited and somebody comes in

that we don't want and how do you turn it down?

Very difficult to do.

It's like we had the gas station on Waube there.

There's no reason that we couldn't turn them down, so.

I'm gonna make a motion to amend the number eight

to a 10 and cross off the word unlimited.

- [Allison] I'll second it.

- We have motion and a second

to change the quota from eight to 10

and strike the word unlimited.

Any further discussion?

``- I would rather see us go a higher number than ten.

I don't wanna have a sit-in position

where we're a year from now doing the same thing.

I would, I don't know what anyone else's thoughts

are on that but I would

- [Allison] I agree.

- I would at least feel comfortable if we doubled it

to 16 and then we don't restrict ourselves

and have to redo this in a year or two.

- [Ken] Well, I've been here 9 years

and this hasn't been a problem.

So I don't know if, but we could get three tomorrow.

- [Clerk] Absolutely.

- You don't know. You don't know

what's coming down the pipe.

- [Allsion] And that's my concern

with the development in the area.

That just my concern is we're going

to get there sooner rather than later, in my opinion.

- [Michael] I'll call a question.

All in favor of the motion as put forward.

- [Ken] I.

- [Joann] I.

- [Josh] No.

- [Allison] No.

- [Michael] No, three no's.

Motion fails.

- [Ken] The I's are not above the no's.

- [Clerk] To the main motion then?

- [Josh] I am not very familiar with the process here,

but I would like to make a motion then

to approve the ordinance striking the "unlimited"

and changing that to a self-imposed quota limit

of 16 Class A liquor licenses available in the village.

- Okay, we have a motion.

Do we have a second?

- [Allsion] Second.

- We have a motion and a second.

Striking the unlimited and raising the quota to 16.

Now reminder, this will go to the village board

and it could possibly have a number reduced there.

All in favor?

- [Josh] I.

- [Allsion] I.

- [Michael] I.

- [Ken] Nope. No, I thought you were going

to ask for those opposed.

- Those opposed?

- [Ken & Joann] No.

- Two no's three aye's

- [Man] Thank you folks.

Thank you for bringing it to our attention Mr. Clerk.

- [Clerk] That's why I'm your faithful clerk.

(chuckles)

- And this will go to village board for further action.

- [Man] And don't break you arm.

(laughs)

(congregation mumbles)

- Action item 7B. Action on the Fox River

Fire District Automatic Aid Agreement.

Now is this to automatically put fires out Eric or?

- [Eric] Yeah, it automatically gets us dispatched.

(laughs)

- No, what we have before you tonight

is the Fox River Auto Aid Agreement.

This has been in the works, actually we've

been practicing this since 2015.

This is the legal contract that's

been reviewed by all the municipal attorneys,

including ours and that's why we're

going through the process now going before

each municipality's getting the agreement.

But we have been practicing this since 2015

and simply said is that underneath

the old dispatching procedure Aswaubenon received

fire call, Aswaubenon public safety would go

out the doors with their fire trucks on scene

and go "yep, we got a fire here".

And we'd call out neighbors to help us with auto aid

to get other fire apparatus there.

With this agreement, when a caller calls in and says

"I got smoke or flames", when the page goes out,

it goes to us and then goes to

our three neighboring jurisdictions.

All three of us get dispatched, or all four of us

get dispatched at the same time.

Now depending on where the fire is in the village,

I.E. Where you live, De Pere could show up

on the scene first because of proximity

and what not and same thing,

we can end up in Hobart and Lawrence

before their units arrive there,

so basically we're getting four units on scene

being dispatched at the same time.

More efficiency and getting personnel

there in a faster manner.

And this is for actual smoke and flames.

Not alarms, if someone's actually visualized or smelled it.

And that's why we're being dispatched with the four units.

And along with our, wherever is the home,

we call it the host, whoever the municipality is

their dispatching all of there fire units so

if we can staff two out of station one

and our paid on-call station will

be bringing additional units that way.

But at least we'll be getting one unit

from Hobart, Lawrence and the city of De Pere.

- [Ken] Wait a minute, he gets four I get one?

What is that?

- Depends how you vote, so.

(laughs loudly)

- Holy man

- Is there, just out of curiosity,

is there anything that, let's say

the smoke is not as large as anticipated or like

if other units haven't made it on scene,

you can call them off?

- Yes exactly.

I can tell you for our standard

operating guidelines 90% of the time

one of our public safety officers

in a police car will show up and what happens is

know, in an apartment complex there's smoke,

don't know where it's at; they locate it,

it's someone cooking a pizza in an oven.

We call it off and then just Aswaubenon

will go on scene and take care of what need to be done.

But as soon as we find out there's not

an emergency we call off surrounding departments.

- Okay.

Thank you.

- [Joann] But isn't it expensive

just to get those units on the road?

Because I'm thinking, who's there

telling you there's smoke and flames

when they get the dispatch call?

- The actual callers.

I mean that's what we're going by is

that whoever's calling in is actually

seeing smoke and flames, where underneath the old system,

you call in, you get one truck company arriving there

and they get there and they go, "We got flames".

Now it's gonna probably it could be

up to five to 10 minute before we get

the other municipalities there.

So the efficiency is in life safety

and property preservation by arriving on scene

with four units at one dispatch time.

- But it's gonna be a police unit

then that's gonna really be the authority

or is gonna be the caller.

If I call in, say I have smoke and flames in my house.

- [Eric] Yep.

- But sometimes I won't know that.

Maybe I just have, you know, heat problem.

- [Eric] Well, I mean some of the essence that they

like with electrical storms.

If someone's house

gets struck by lightning, you know,

they smell something, they don't know where it's at,

then they'll call us in cause there's a smell of smoke.

It could take multiple fire units to

go throughout the house with the thermal imaging cameras

to locate where that source is at.

- [Ken] It's not really a cost factor

because those firemen are working, firefighters

are working no matter what. I mean

whether a call to a fire, a unit or not,

they're gonna get paid. So it's not really

a cost thing.

Right?

Yeah.

No and the thing is that.

- Excuse me.

Like I said we're with the cellular phones now,

we're getting reliable information and the callers

on the line with the dispatch center,

you know, they're asking the different questions,

you know especially in an apartment complex you know,

or a hotel you know, they smell smoke in the hallway.

Now we gotta locate where it is exactly

and until we can get another public safety official

on scene, like I said, for us it would be

the public safety officers, you know to verify

whether or not there's a true emergency or not.

- A move for approve the Fox River

Fire District Automatic Aid Agreement

as presented in item 7B.

- [Josh] I'll second that motion.

- We have a motion and a second to approve action

on the Fox River Fire District Automatic Aide Agreement.

- [President] Mike?

- Yeah?

Before you take a vote could I just say something?

- Sure.

- I have one question, first of all,

I'd like to say that's the one really unique thing

with our public safety when the chief explained

that when our guy gets there, he's in a cop car

but he is also a fireman, so he knows

you know, they've got a head's up right there.

That's the cool thing about our public safety.

But, my question: Chief, what's the difference

between this and that MOB, MABIS?

- [Eric] MABAS

- MABAS. MABIS, MABAS

- What the president's talking about is

the MABAS Mutual-Aide Box Alarm System.

That's the next level up.

That's in the next higher level

we need more resources on scene.

And when we call for that we're going

to get additional resources for

the city of Green Bay and some other municipalities.

And basically, we have a bigger emergency,

maybe an apartment complex fire, a warehouse fire

where we need the additional people in there.

And where this is, this is ensuring the step

before we go to a MABAS call and MABAS

is covered under state authority

for protections and mutual-aide agreements

and this here is a compact amongst

the agencies you see here in the agreement

of an auto-aide that will be automatically dispatched

on a MABAS call, a MABAS call is called up

by the chief.

I arrive on scene

and I can go to a Fox River district fire

and I say "I need more resources".

As a chief that I call in a box card

that I need a box card to a certain level

for more resources to come in.

We are not dispatched through MABAS,

we're not dispatched on a MABAS card.

This here automatically gets the resources out the door.

- [Michael] Okay.

As someone who had a house fire

a few years ago and saw this first hand,

this is a good deal because our house was preserved

because of the immediate response.

- The Green Bay, just for an example,

the Green Bay Metro Fire Department when they

had the floods on the East side, they went up to,

they called a box card up to a certain level

because they needed a number resources out there.

It overwhelmed their resources

for the many firefighters they had on scene.

But they ended up calling special box cards

cause they needed boats, they needed flotation devices

and whatnot and that how the MABAS cards works.

And with MABAS you're also, there's a protection

that you're not taking all the resources

from one municipality of several municipalities.

You leave some fire, or you leave a coverage

of fire departments with apparatus and people.

Before MABAS, we had a fire, we called De Pere

and De Pere'd bring everybody over

if something happened to De Pere,

there's no one there and so when we ask for assistance,

we get one firetruck from De Pere,

one from Hobart and one from Lawrence.

Same thing, when we get called over there

we send them one unit.

- [Joann] So Green Bay is not included in this group?

- In this Auto-Aide Agreement, they are not.

- [Josh] Well I think this is fantastic

and I think it serves our citizens very well

so thank you for your help with this.

- [Michael] Okay, we have a motion and a second

for an approval.

All in favor?

- [Congregation] I.

- I. Motion carries unanimous.

- [Eric] Thank you.

- Items for next agenda, I have none.

[President] Do we wanna move public works

to Monday, November 5th also?

[Joann] That works for me.

[Allison] I'm fine with that.

- Yep.

- [Allsion] Will you let us know

if it's like 5:45 or 6:00?

- [President] Yep.

- [Allison] Whatever? Okay.

Do we need to move to?

- Motion to adjourn?

- [Joann] I move to adjourn.

- [Ken] I've got people showing up at my house.

- Okay we have motion and?

- [Josh & Allison] Second.

- And another motion and a second

- [Allison] Yeah

- All in favor?

- [Congregation] Aye.

- Motion carried.

We stand adjourned.

Không có nhận xét nào:

Đăng nhận xét