HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - March 19, 2008 Public CommentsContinued March 19,2008
E-9 Authorized the City Manager to renew revised Memorandum of Understanding with
People Assisting the Lodi Shelter and to retain the temporary building moved to the Lodi
Animal Shelter.
E-10 Adopted Resolution No. 2008-44 authorizing destruction of certain Citywide records in
accordance with the Government Code and the City's Records Management Policy.
F. COMMENTS BY THE PUBLIC ON NON -AGENDA ITEMS
• Dave Hinchman spoke in opposition to redevelopment based on concerns regarding debt
obligations, the lack of an official endorsement by the Lodi Unified School District, the need
for additional public outreach meetings, Planning Commission and Budget Committee
involvement, and the lack of City Council meetings on the subject matter.
• Cynthia Neely spoke in opposition to the Iraq War and requested that the City Council support
a resolution opposing the same based on concerns regarding the loss of life and economic
costs. Ms. Neely also submitted several speaker cards in favor of her position of individuals
who were in support of the resolution, but chose not to speak.
• Ann Cerney spoke in opposition to the Iraq War and read the resolution opposing the same.
• Eileen St. Yves spoke in favor of and encouraged citizen participation in the U.S. Census
dress rehearsal for San Joaquin County.
• Wayne Knauf spoke in opposition to redevelopment based on concerns regardingthe size of
the project area.
G. COMMENTS BY CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS ON NON -AGENDA ITEMS
• Council Member Johnson requested that staff compile a list of meetings, newsletters, and/or
articles where redevelopment was discussed.
• Mayor Pro Tempore Hansen requested that the City Council meeting be adjourned in memory
of Jim Areida. He also reported on his attendance at the San Joaquin Council of Governments
executive meeting and specifically discussed Proposition 113 funding, funding
recommendation for vehicles, funding requests for the Lodi Unified School District, traffic
corridor funding for the Stockton Port for approximately $17.5 million, Measure K funds
making up the difference at $35 million, and the possible affect on other projects as a result.
Mayor Mounce stated she received some citizen concerns regarding mistletoe in trees,
thanked staff for addressing concerns regarding the Animal Shelter at the Shirtsleeve
Session, and expressed concerns regarding redevelopment meeting attendance and public
outreach.
H. COMMENTS BY THE CITY MANAGER ON NON -AGENDA ITEMS
• City Manager King stated redevelopment does not have a bond issuance obligation and the
Council to date has not considered a related bond issuance. Mr. King also stated that a
majority of municipalities do have redevelopment agencies, the school district has not officially
endorsed redevelopment although there have been preliminary discussion regarding the
same, and public meetings are an ongoing effort with a willingness to do the best job possible
in reaching as many people as possible.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
I-1 Notice thereof having been published according to law, an affidavit of which publication is
on file in the office of the City Clerk, Mayor Mounce called for the public hearing to
consider resolution approving new rates for solid waste collection.
City Manager King briefly introduced the subject matter of new rates for solid waste
collection.
3
LODI RESOLUTION AGAINST THE IRAQ WAR
WHEREAS, a group of Lodi citizens has called upon the City Council to advise the Federal
Government on its policies in Iraq,
WHEREAS, the Lodi City Counciljoins many Lodi citizens in lamenting the injury and loss of life
suffered by United States troops as well as Iraqi non-combatants in the Iraq War; and
WHEREAS. the members of the Lodi City Council acknowledge that they have no expertise,
power, or authority to direct matters of international diplomatic and military policy, and
WHEREAS, the members of the Lodi City Council are experts in and especially competent to
speak about the problems and the needs of the cities of America. and
WHEREAS, continued expenditures of the Federal Government on the Iraq War impact the
available federal resources required to provide for the urgent needs of the most vulnerable
portions of the American population, including the need to provide for the health, education, and
homeland security of the citizens of the City of Lodi and of urban areas within the United States;
and
WHEREAS, in excess of $250 billion has been appropriated by Congress to fund military
operations and reconstruction in Iraq, while in contrast, the decrease in Community Development
Block Grant funds received by the City of Lodi severely lessens the ability of the City to revitalize
its neighborhoods, promote homeownership opportunities, and provide critical services for the
poor, seniors, children. the disabled, and most vulnerable members of our community, and
WHEREAS, loss of funding for police officers and firefighters severely limits the city's ability to
provide for first responders who are our first line of defense against terrorism as well as other
disasters and threats to our security, and
WHEREAS, the Lodi City Council expresses its complete support for the United States troops
currently serving in Iraq, as well as those who have previously served, and their families; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Lodi City Council that
. We salute the courage and commitment of the more than one million United States military
personnel, including Lodi citizens who have served in the war and occupation in Iraq. These men
and women of the United States military, including our own members of the California National
Guard, our neighbors and friends, have suffered extraordinary danger and the loneliness of long
separations from home and family on our behalfand the nation's. We now ask that these valiant
warriors be returned home, safe and intact, to resume their lives, with our thanks for their
sacrifices on our behalf and for the courage of their families who have waited and watched from
home, and the Lodi City Council calls upon the United States government to establish clear and
aggressive timelines for the full transfer of governmental decision-making and internal security to
the legitimate government of Iraq and withdraw United States troops from the country.
2. We call upon the President and Congress to fully fund all federal health care, job training,
educational, housing, and other programs aiding veterans and their families to ensure their well
being and to express the clearly earned thanks of a grateful nation.
3. The Lodi City Council calls upon the citizens of Lodi to welcome returning veterans of the
Iraq War and to promptly re-engage them in the life of the community.
4. The Lodi City Council respectfully urges the President and Congress to begin reversing the
priorities established by this war by increasing the funding of Community Development Block
Grant money, and allocating new money directly to our cities to provide for the hiring of more
police officers and firefighters, our first responders and the key element in protecting our country
from terrorism, disasters, and other threats to our security. Such allocations would represent
money previously spent in Iraq which would now be spend in solving our domestic problems.
5 The Lodi City Council in gratitude to our heroic servicemen and women, pledges it will
expeditiously and strongly consider a veteran's preference provision in its goods, services and
construction policies, and furthermore, that the City Will review its policies and procedure to
ensure that employees currently service in our military and their families will not suffer hardship
when they are called to duty.
6 A copy of this Resolution will be send to the President of the United States and our California
delegation to the United States Senate and the House of Representatives.
WaN?
Iraq theory little
more than latest
bogeyman rhetoric
Prior to the Vietnam War, I recall
various groups inspiring fear in
Americans by alleging that the
"domino theory" ofcommunismwas
going to eat us all up ifwe did not go
to Southeast Asia and stop the
threat. So we went in to Vietnam
blindly, and foryears our leaders lied
to the American people. Remember
the Pentagon Papers? We now know
that the big bogeyman of commu-
nism died a natural death in mast of
the world and that our involvement
in Vietnam had little relationship to
the demise of communism.
Now we have another theory and
another bogeyman. The new theory is
the "weapons ofmass destruction'
theory. which a few of our leaders are
using to promote our entrance into
another pointless, politically motivat-
ed war in Iraq. The bogeyman. of
come. is one of the triumvirate of the
Axis of Evil: Saddam Hussein.
No one in the administration has
thus far shown any evidence cf
weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
According to unbiased news reports,
weapons inspectors are hard pressed
to find the evidence required to sup-
port an invasion. In addition. no one
Il a ver,
VM
let Itme a
= Sw2'ciFhed
MAWN15S
�s„�st�c www w.�wq!
ww«,.+oMyase�.�s
in the administration denies that
even if Iraq did have such weapons.
the capabilities of such weapons
only extend to a target 400 miles
away from Iraq at most. The last time
that I looked at a map, l noticed that
the United States is quite a bit far-
ther from Iraq than 400 miles. Thou-
sands of miles is more like it.
The latest admission by the tai
Koreans that they intend to imple-
ment a nuclear weapons program is
clearly much more of a threat to the
United States than Saddam Hussein.
There is credible information that the
North Koreans are quite close to
developing nuclear weapons which
could indeed reach the United States.
Weapons experts say that the time
line for the implement;ition of their
program is not much more than a
year away. If the true goal of the
United States is to rid weapons of
mass destruction from rogue dicta-
tors, why are we following a policy of
aggression against Iraq and one of
diplomacywithNorth Korea?
One answer could be that there
are no oil reserves in North Korea.
And it cannotbe denied that many
in this administration are not only
tied to big business but to big oil.
If the United States were invaded
by Iraq or anv other nation, very few
of us would refuse to serve our coun -
try in any way that we Could, fiowev-
er, this administration should give
the American people a reason other
than "riddinglraq ofweapons of
mass destruction before involving
us in a war that will cause many
casualties and cost billions of dollars.
It will be awar easy to start but
difficult to finish.
In Washington, D.C., a large black
piece ofgratute inscribed with thou-
sands of names is a monument ofthe
"domino theory." Who will he listed
on the monument to the "weapons of
mass destruction" theory? Informed
Americans shoWd not be frightened
h)- alarmist rhetoric and bogeymen.
Cynthia N ee Fy
Lodi
YEAR LATER...
,,Dark. side to Iraq attack
Bush cant give
,me good reason
fOt startingwar
Auwricans anduding the Bush
administration) shouldtalce a
deed breath,stepbadk, and
examine the consequences ini-
Mft
a war with IIr�k The bright
,§*, Getting rid cf'Saddam Hus-
sern� Maybe. The colic side:
f� unprovoked attack oa
awther nadon is rnorady inde-
fe•tsihle. What gives the United
Srates the right to unilaterally
attack anycountry unless we
IpWbeen attacked?Ls there any
n-idence thar Iraq has oris
Ruing to attack America? Is
there any evidence thatIraqis
stiihnaking biological, chemical
and nuclear weapons?If there
is, 1P 's show it to the American
people When John F. Kennedy
was president, he shcnved evi•
dunce of tntss0e sites before he
imLiated thesuccessful blockade
W Caaba- It sshQuldbe noted that
marry fopY leaders at tib
ume tried to convince Kennedy
to -attack instead. Thank God,
seawnableness rather than rew
tip prevailed.
■ re are other countries. ie.,
Bu.cHs "axis orevil" which have
weapons of mass destruction.
Does this give the U.S. the tight
to unilweralty determine that
those countries are enemies and
that we can attack with impuni-
ty? By the way, the U.S. has
weapons of mass desmzcuon.
t to attack us on that =hi
hi-tU countries see this as
U:1Merican aunce" which only
adds.10
ds.tu thetrna
0 M unprcmked attack At
destabilize nor only the Mideast,
h u t will affect the world need
Mel a UtrMyo rheea0IL
wiwu stwports oto position.
osi EuTipeari nations con
do nn this Bush poUcy. All of the
Arab nations ,u -e violently
o fix)sed to an invasionAm we
preparedro pursue inilstary
action againstotherArabs?
tbilNMVAvM –9HG1F"Crow
IRAQ IFTC=tAl411:,M: AL1.E OVIVvvIX
QXfir.ANl'A> CA5WC6P I Offmow ficnci%?
WACAOM IF IfALSO
�
�T?IIilfiE
_APIDIFITI1tE4lKs�s Jam"""'
�HGTI�'I�GIILRk]S � �s
J11N/Pi�.�ri 7✓� i17%f Yyi�f b
■ In Afghanistan we see only a
microcosm of the type of political.
instabgity that would omrr M
Iraq — political [actions
na one another, and our
qa.to which "M�e we
should support. How do we know
that the leader that will em erge
will nor he even worse than Sad-
dam? Besides,
no�''�atio
JITh
tio■ We have not f shed our
in Af�istan. 11e spread
Pur ' Y forces SAMPlies
theMR05 °�j our efforts in
the war on terror? After all, it was
Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida,
not Iraq, who attackedAmerica
N Can our economy support Ns
eft'ort, especially in reh�etsmte it is
prgdunuri and d sdtriLn 000il
alone will be monumental — we
rely heavily on oil from rhe
Mideast.
■ It is easy to start a war, but
quite difficult to and one Do we
really want anotherViOnarn?
■WIn do we object to returning
to inspections? -
■ If we have known for years that
Saddam has these weapons, why
ase we going to attackNOWT Is
the rush to military action to
buoyup Bush's failing support
among many Americans because
of the poor economy? Bush
should considerthe fact that an
ill-consideredwar arra all ofits
consequences will damage his
reputation far more than the
le€€ ofapoor economy,his
administration's assault ondW
rights, and his fid 11 lead on
such important issues as health
rate and education
■ Why don't we let the Iraqis
decide for themselves? What
happened when we interfered in
a civil war in Somalia where peo-
ple were suffering under a ca r-
rupt d e r ?Ou rhumanttartan
efforts toward the Somalis were
rewarded by disaster. The Scrna-
lis rose up against us. Canwe
really believe the majority of
Iraqis will welcome a US. hwa-
sion?
■ Bush's success has only been
as a "wartimepresident." There-
fore. one questions his motives in
sendingRice,Cheney, and Powell
to promote mass -media "fren-
zy" priorto t -eSept 11 anniver-
sary for the purpose of firing up
support for an unsupportable
wac F ftswas one of the
motives forhis "timely" r eclia
barrage by the add ni stm*i n+, to
exploit the patriotism ofthe
Americanpublic in thisnerner
is anoutrage.
■ The final objection, and realty
the primary objection, is to send-
ing ouryoung men andwomen
to aplacewherethe administm-
tion alleges that there are biologi-
cal, chemical and nuclear
weapons. Are we really willing to
send our young Americans to
invade Iraq? It would sE enthat
we are farmore vulnerable to ter-
rorist attacks here. Inidatinga
war with Iraq will lead to many
American casualties.
When the Bush administra-
tion questions the patriotism o1
those of us who do not wish to
start a global conflict. he might
remember that several of the
Narhawks" in his administra-
tion (including hirrt)have neve,
served a day on the front line it
wartime. Where was their patri-
Cti..sn d Luing V-te to am?
cynd"Nmh
Lod
Resolution to End War in Iraq
Names presented on Speaker Cards
Karen Arnold
Kathleen Cechini
C. Cerney
Reid Cerney
Pam Clark
Janice Dennis
Lloyd Dennis
Stan Ellsworth
Betsy Fiske
Levi Huffman
Taj Khan
Sharon Larson
Delores Levy
Cynthia Neely
Bill Neumann
Bonnie Neumann
Nora Olsen
Dr. Bob Olson
Frank Pesco
Deane Savage
Marcia Savage
Jane Thomas
Ben Waddle
Wendy Woodruff