Notes on a scandal - the Public Defender scandal - another name for ugly government
You saw how it ended - Here are my observations:.
You already know the story - you know how the D&C editorial board, Rochesterturning, the local Democratic Legislators, well, basically everyone, but the local GOP legislators, wants community involvement in the Public Defender selection process. What do people want? An apolitical selection process that was like the previous selection process. The same process that produced Ed Nowak. Maybe we simply just got lucky with Nowak - maybe - but that is immaterial. Failure to involve the community in a position as important as the Public Defender is simply wrong.
So I’ll describe my observations at Saturday’s Public Defender session in a series of posts this weekend. They say first impressions are lasting so let’s start there.
Large Police Presence and convenient enforcement of laws.
Read on and you will see what I mean and I’m not dissing our fine police force.
I got to the meeting just before 8:00 and was one of the last people allowed in. There was a capacity group of people inside the chamber (only 75 are allowed). The first thing that struck me was the large police presence. I mean, a large police presence. Over time I counted 15 in the chamber. There were Rochester Police and Monroe County Sheriffs Deputies (no State troopers that I saw).
Have a look…
At 08:05 - the meeting just got underway - there were procedural motions to move to executive committee.
So, we have a line of Sheriff’s deputies between the public gallery and the Legislative Chambers. Does anyone think this is wrong? Who put them there - who ordered the extra security? I mean, the public brought their voices and bodies. The GOP brought the instrument of power - the Police. It was really eerie - something I wasn’t comfortable with.
08:20
Here is the line of deputies after the Republican leadership moved to caucus. The Dems went into their room and the Republicans went into their area. Notice that there are more deputies.
Now, I spoke of convenient law enforcement…
There was 70-75 people inside the chambers - a bunch of people outside the door (an accurate count wasn’t possible because if you left the chambers you couldn’t come back inside and the deputy would not allow people to stand near the door to count). The deputy at the door refused to allow others inside the chamber, due to fire code rules.
OK - fair enough- there are fire code rules. What are they?
Well, not really - there is a sign outside the chambers that says:
See, the public gets 18 square inches per person. A legislator gets 40 sq feet per person. The fixed seating, where the press and Administration sit - they get 15 Sq Ft per person.
Damn, the Public is getting shorted on space!
But my point, with the selective enforcement, is this,
How many readers have gone to a legislature meeting, say, on the Budget or the unFAIR plan or something else. How packed was the gallery? I’ve been there when the aisles were clear, but people were standing against the walls.
The GOP was in charge of those meetings too. Suddenly, they care about the fire code? No - it is a matter of convenience. When the laws suit them - they are enforced - There is a word, well , a series of phrases that come to mind but being a family blog I won’t say.
Sorry - Laws are not a matter of convenience.
More later - my non-virtual life is calling.
Well on the plus side it seems that any decision that comes out of this meeting would be invalid.
One can hope.
The room was cleared and the session was not in executive session.
We need to look at the open meeting laws
§102. Definitions. As used in this article: 1. “Meeting” means the official convening of a public body for the purpose of conducting public business, including the use of videoconferencing for attendance and participation by the members of the public body. 2. “Public body” means any entity, for which a quorum is required in order to conduct public business and which consists of two or more members, performing a governmental function for the state or for an agency or department thereof, or for a public corporation as defined in section sixty-six of the general construction law, or committee or subcommittee or other similar body of such public body. 3. “Executive session” means that portion of a meeting not open to the general public.
What law is this? The open meeting law?
The meeting was not in exec session - (It was not voting one) when the room was cleared.
They can clear the room if they feel threatened or for a few other public safety related reasons. That’s what they did today.
OK - so now you have to watch the unedited news footage and actually look for threats. People were shouting out - having been to both - no different than the unFAIR plan meetings or the Budget meetings.
What defines threatened or other pubic safety reasons? Fire Code violations?
Trouble is - when all to have is a hammer - ever problem is a nail. in this case - The hammer is stifling of pubic input.
Yeah, threatened by 3 70+ year old men. It’s the TRUTH they fear, not the people.
Very nice work stlo7.
and at 8 am on a Saturday even.
The use of police at this meeting reminds me of the scene in East Rochester when Koon tried to deliver his message.
This is BS. These so-called “elected” officials have now decided to put themselves ABOVE the law, and use the law to keep us down.
I note the story below with Gantt…if this is anarchy - count me in!
This is crazy. the republicans need a police force to block public accesstoa public meeting. sounds like the stasi
Executive Session is permitted under certain limited circumstances, which include employment applications. But it sounds like they may have exceeded the narrow exception.
Rememberr - the chamber did not go into executive session UNTIL AFTER THE ROOM WAS CLEARED.
Could the St. Louis shooting incident have any bearing on the large police presence? You know how public officials overreact when there is a tragedy elsewhere in the country.
Excuse me?
But since you brought it up. In discussion with various officers - this was never mentioned. This is a stretch to say the lest, a huge stretch, - I mean having been at the East Rochester board meetings there was also a large police presence - actually uniformed presence (all the fire and Ambulance crews).
So, no.
I think this was simply about intimidation. Remember - Gantt was almost arrested last time.
With that said, if there was one good thing to come out of this it was the ARREST of Gantt. I hope the ship hits the fan and the lawsuits start flying. This cannot be the way OPEN MEETINGS LAW will be controverted by Brooks and MINARIK. It’s our government, those are our offices, and we pay THEIR salaries.
That makes us the EMPLOYER. We need to fire our incompetent workers NOW.
I’m calling Gantt to offer my support. 454-3670
I’m calling my Legislator as well to voice my anger. They need to grow a set, man up and do the right thing here.
I’m not saying that was the actual reason, I meant were they using the St. Louis incident as an excuse to stifle open meetings? Thanks for the clarification.
The large police presence shows only that they were planning on removing the public. Those police officers cost money, and unless the GOPhers were expecting people in the audience to attack them during the meeting for kicking them out of the room, the costs would not be supportable. There is almost no day when some scary event doesn’t take place somewhere in the U.S. Not as serious as St. Louis, but still a scary incident which can be used by repressors as an excuse.
One might say that GOPher officials are always justified in increasing the police presence because of the NYC “incident” in 2001, but one would be wrong, unless one is actually terrified by the domestic terrorists within our own government.
The only reason for this many officers is to carry out planned actions, such as separating the public from its rightful place during a decision about who will defend them when the GOPher police forces arrest them for made-up, created “crimes” - such as refusing to leave this particular public meeting, when the officials can leave any time they like, as they did.
This incident shows there is no such thing as open and transparent government in Rochester, unless the citizens demand it and stand up for it. I’m so proud of y’all for the part that says the public was ordered to leave the room and refused. SO DAMN PROUD!
The D&C has the video up on the arrests. They show Suzi Quattro saying that they were shouting out the Majority, and that’s why they were arrested.
Then it shows the crowd, mostly senior citizens, singing “We shall overcome…”
The only part missing is where Maggie does the “Hokey Pokey”
Here’s the link to the video:
http://www.democratandchronicle.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080209/VIDEO/80209010
WHEC has a long unedited video of the meeting.
http://www.whec.com/article/stories/S341800.shtml?cat=566
Here is Public Officer’s Law:
Where was the notice? It’s my understanding this was called at the last minute in an attempt to keep it secret and Gantt and company blew the doors open on them. That’s why they had the police there - to make certain they could have their way with the public.
With that being said, looks like they have violated many sections of the law, not to mention that the Monroe County Bar Association ITSELF has made numerous requests to these self-appointed power mongers requesting face time and consideration, all of which have been denied.
Here is the link to the Public Officer’s Law online:
http://www.dos.state.ny.us/COOG/openmeetlaw.htm
The really strange thing about all of this is that because of the balance of power in the legislature, the Republicants could have annointed who they wanted openly.
Is it that they just love war so much at every level?
[...] I was walking through the crowd inside the legislature public gallery on Saturday I asked a few folks what they thought. One of them said he didn’t understand why the [...]
[...] There were some meetings recently where something like this happened. Now what were they again? GOP-commissioned ‘Wall o’ [...]
[...] in front of the media, full steam ahead, changing seating capacity notices with full knowledge that the sign was documented just days prior. Photographers, protesters and Democratic leaders are tossed out and sometimes [...]