http://www.youtube.com/cjot1
Oh, you've just got to see yet another failed..no not even failed...annihilated, yes annihilated attempt at back pedaling by Leslie LaCorte. In videos posted today of last night's Committee Meeting, you'll hear and see her say what the "purpose" of her ballot questions really were. NOT she says to ban pit bulls. No? Um....see below. Leslie says she was asking if the people feel safe in their homes and if Council is doing their job. Er...um...funny...NOTHING like THAT is on her proposal. The look on Councils faces (except Jackie- she has taken to hiding from the camera) was priceless! They kept asking her what she meant because what she was saying was not anything at all of what she had written. Enter more brilliance from Jim Graham and his
awesome analogies! Wait! What? While Jackie was hiding from the camera...she made one of those "faces" she makes when she disagrees. Thank you Chris Rodriguez for pointing that out! At one point, Leslie expressed her disappointment that she "didn't bring her folder" containing h her ballot question paperwork with her. H-E-L-L-O! Earth to Leslie. It goes to vote next week!!! When did you think you might just bring that folder with you?? Leslie said her purpose is not to ban pit bulls. Well Leslie...what do you think TWO "YES" votes from you on TWO legislation proposals to ban breed specific really means??
RESOLUTION NO. -09
RECOMMENDING THE ISSUE BE PLACED ON THE NOVEMBER 3, 2009 ELECTION BALLOT FOR THE CITY OF WHITEHALL FOR THE RESIDENTS TO VOTE ON WHETHER THE CITY OF WHITEHALL SHALL PROHIBIT THE HARBORING OF BREED SPECIFIC DOGS AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY.
WHEREAS, this Council, has engaged in detailed discussions for the last year regarding the harboring of dogs; and
WHEREAS, this Council has decided that the issue of whether or not the City of Whitehall should prohibit the harboring of breed specific dogs should be placed for an advisory election on the November 3, 2009 election ballot; NOW, THEREFORE,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE WHITEHALL, OHIO:
SECTION 1: That the City of Whitehall shall file appropriate paperwork with the Franklin County Board of Elections which will allow for an advisory election on the issue to prohibit the harboring of breed specific dogs to be placed on the November 3, 2009 election ballot as follows:
1. Shall the City of Whitehall prohibit the harboring of a dog that has been involved in an incident in which it has been declared vicious by a Court of Law and/or the Dangerous and Vicious Dog Appeals Board of the City of Whitehall?
YES NO
2. Shall the City of Whitehall prohibit the harboring of:
A. American Pit Bull Terrier;
B. Staffordshire Bull Terrier;
C. American Staffordshire Terrier;
D. American Bulldog;
E. Any other pure bred or mixed breed dog whose appearance and physicalcharacteristics are dominantly those of any of the dogs listed above, or is acombination of any of the dogs listed above, even if the dog has not beeninvolved in an incident in which it has been declared to be a vicious dogby a Court of Law and/or the Dangerous and Vicious Dog Appeals Boardfor the City of Whitehall?
YES NO
SECTION 2: That the ballot would provide that in the event the voters approve prohibiting the harboring of breed specific dogs, City Council could then enact legislation to enforce said prohibition effective January 1, 2010.
RESOLUTION NO. -09 -2-
SECTION 3: That this Resolution is hereby declared to be an emergency measure immediately necessary for the preservation of the public health, peace, safety and welfare and for the further reason that is immediately necessary to complete the required documents to have said issue placed on the November 3, 2009 election ballot; WHEREFORE, this Ordinance shall go into full force and effect immediately upon its passage and approval by the Mayor.
PASSED this ___ day of_____________________________ , 2009.
President of Council ATTEST:
Clerk of Council
APPROVED this____ day of___________________________ , 2009.
Mayor
Requested by: Leslie LaCorte, Councilperson
Approved as for form: Matthew R. Roth, Assistant City Attorney
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Wow, I'll have to watch this a few times before I can figure out exactly what it is Ms. LL is trying to say, just a bunch of "you know" doggie doo doo...no, I'm sorry, "I don't know" and I don't think she does either. I'll post more, once I can find my damn folder that I should have had with me when I sat down to listen to this....
ReplyDeleteThis Leslie chick is a real piece of work. Hard to believe someone like her is a government official. Just goes to prove my theory that government is made up of more dumb people vs. common sense folks.
ReplyDeleteMy 8 year old daughter makes more sense when she talks than Leslie girl. I guess I don't know what Leslie girl is trying to do. Keeps on changing her story. Hard to follow her kind of logic. I'll keep trying though and try not to laugh too hard.
What Leslie is "trying" to do is ban specific breeds without coming out and saying "I want to ban pit bulls". Like the other comments said, it's just a bunch of bull****. After all, she did vote YES on JT's ban, twice!!! She says she's not trying to pick on the "pitbull people". Guess what Leslie, we are not "pitbull people" We ARE citizens of this town, whether we rent or own, and guess what? We all vote and so do our friends and families.
ReplyDeleteA little birdy told me Jackie requested a jury trial for her dog citation. She licensed a few dogs more than the law allows.
ReplyDeleteJury trial is scheduled for Sept. 23 in Judge Hale's courtroom.
Go to the Franklin County municipal court site - public access - for details.
Wonder how much this trial is gonna cost the taxpayers?
Probably, alot, and everyone might also like to know that she requested Judge Hale. Why? He is an opponent of Pit Bulls. She's hoping once again to get a free pass from someone who thinks the way she does. It will be interesting to see this play out. Everyone mark their calendars, and if one can, maybe they should try to go to court that day as well . . .
ReplyDelete8 minutes and 24 seconds into the first video, Jackie states that her problem with Leo's wording of the ballot question was that people would be wondering what would stop council from banning just any breed, from pit bulls to poodles. Well, Jackie, if council went ahead and banned pit bulls, what would stop them from banning chihuahuas, cocker spaniels, beagles, or any other type of dog. Heck, what would stop them from banning any pets at all? How about just banning anyone from living in Whitehall who doesn't agree chapter and verse with Jackie Thompson? Puh--lease!!! But, that would never happen, because the majority of council has some sense and dignity.
ReplyDeleteTidbit...that's exactly what Jackie is afraid of...that is why she wants it to be "Breed Specific", so that if one of her little ankle biters harms someone or something, it will not be banned from the City. Can you believe that LL says she doesn't want this to be breed specific legislation, but her proposal is nothing but? "Well, you know", "you know what I mean", "you know"....that is her way out of saying....please tell me what it is I'm trying to say....hilarious!
ReplyDeleteLeslie keeps saying the legislation will help our city be done with this question once and for all. OKAY -- I HAVE THE PERFECT IDIOT PROOF WORDING -- Read this carefully.
ReplyDeletePart I -- Citizens of Whitehall, if you want to see this version of the debate over pitbulls end, please mark your ballot "Yes"
Part II -- Citizens of Whitehall, if you want to make sure the debate over pitbulls never returns, please mark your ballot "Yes, Jackie Thompson should be removed from her current office and never allowed to hold office again."
Oh yeah, and by the way ... Nice letter from Cindy Stewart in the Whitehall News.
ReplyDeleteTidbit, idiot proof wording is cool.
ReplyDeleteLeslie chick, still trying to figure what "you know" means. You really confuse me when I watch the youtube stuff. Does Leslie chick know what "you know" means? No man, I don't think so.
Don't level yourself to the comment poop written in the Whitehall News...just trying to get your dander up. This is what I say, "you know what I mean", "you know"....I know what I mean, do you know what you mean. I mean really. I mean what you mean. You know. Don't you know?
ReplyDeleteIt's all starting to make sense to me now. :) (sorry, couldn't help myself)
ReplyDeleteReally? I thought it was great that she publicly defended the male members of council against the allegations of disrespect toward the female council members. I believe they show great restraint with some of the volatile, or in some cases, incomprehensible dialogue that occurs.
ReplyDeleteTidbit....Oh, you are right.....sorry....I was looking at the Susan and Michael poop.....Cindy Stewart was right on! That was a fine letter to the editor and like I said, she is "right on".
ReplyDeleteMrs. Stewart's letter was well written and positive. It gave hope that City Council is not being contaminated by a couple of bad apples.
ReplyDelete'salright, Anon-Steph ... I shifted from snarky to sincere without using the clutch. No wonder I confused you, ya'know?
ReplyDeleteThis comment is directed to Jackie and Leslie...When you think of the citizens of This Great City of Whitehall, you should remember the Song by Frank Sinatra...We are UNBULLSHITABLE.....sorry I havent been posting much, but I have been trying to get back to work...I will catch up on the whitehall news stories and the videos monday,
ReplyDelete