The Public Hearing in-spite of what is being put out ended badly if for no other reason than that of Public involvement. I have posted some on it the night it happened. But will ask a bit more on what did or did not happen. For example, Ms. Smith and Mr. Bibbee were both absent yet were all in from the beginning to take on this project. Why not there to see it ending?
I am going to continue to believe that the format followed is not really as good as letting the folks ask questions and everyone getting to hear the answer to it. People across a room or the end of it will miss what could be a trigger to them on something that would be interesting to the group if they could all participate? It may well be a good format in Charleston, Huntington, Morgantown or some big location? But for little old Vienna, it is not the best choice. Still seemed a poor choice of a process for passing info back and forth?
Will still say the film that was about a bit over 11 minutes long was a slick well done display.
After the film ended, Mr. Leach noted a Text from Mr. Hancock that he would not be there and contact info would be made available. (There was no comment on why he did not choose to attend during the Hearing from the City Staff).
When it was stated that there would be the Video than to go to whatever table one wished to asked questions, Mr. Conley expressed his discontent with the Format.
Mr. Conley: We all need to be able to hear the questions and answers. One can not do that in a structure as has been set up? That is what the people came for, that is what these people these people need to be able to leave with. Can't do that going around these tables individually.
Mr. Rapp: When Mr. Hancock set this meeting up, he asked for this format and am going to respect his wishes. If some people don't feel comfortable asking questions than can stand across from a table and we will answer the question.
Mr. Conley: I think the people in the room should make that decision, shouldn't they?
Mr. Rapp: That is how this meeting is going to be run.
Mr. Conley: this is a terrible way to run a meeting. This is not a meeting.
Mr. Rapp: You have evidently never been to one at the Dept. of Hwy's or the DEP.
Mr. Conley: This is the City of Vienna and just another game.
Mr. Rapp: You are welcome to your opinion, but this project will be ran in this fashion. We will answer any questions you have, but across a table face to face.
I am not sure about who “stormed out” or not? I did ask Mr. Thornton a question on the drawing/ schematic/ blue print of the site, but it had little value for what I was trying to find?
When I went outside to leave, there were a lot more than five people there and Mr. Conley and I guess Mr. Elam had already left? Mr. Conley for sure had.
Seems very much that the folks got misinformed and mislead by City Administration in order to satisfy a requirement versus an obligation to the City Residents called the Truth.
Will move on to the "City Council" Meeting of the 25th if I may.
Mr. Rapp made one of his infamous child presentations by bringing up the daughter of the Greenmont Elementary School Principal and commenting on her idea to turn on the Xmas Lights earlier as it made "People Happy". He agreed as he too noted he likes to be Happy. (and we must not forget things that twinkle and shine).
Than Mr. Sasyn stood for the Public Forum and commented that he was sorry he missed the Hearing, but had heard it was not a good format for asking questions and getting answers? The City made such a hoopla when the project began, why not the same as it was ending? Why was there no media there either? With all the issues, it gave the perception that it smelled? (Seems that WTAP/ PN&S was piled up at the Grande Pointe Conference Center where the City of Belpre was having a yearly Chamber of Commerce Dinner. Was surprised at first that it was being held by Belpre in Vienna ? Than saw who some of the Vienna/ Wood County players are?).
Mr. Rapp: The stories you have heard are not the same as if you had been there to see it. The Format that was followed was the one prescribed by Mr. Hancock from DEP, who is the Project Manager for the JM site. It was his advice to set up stations so that people could ask questions face to face as they don't like to speak in a group setting.
He noted that He, Mr. Leach, Mr. Rebar and Mr. Thornton all stayed until everyone else had left after asking their questions?
There was also a Video that covered from the beginning to where the Project is now. We had everything on hand from the Repository at the Library. Every Document, application, scientific data, everything to answer questions.
I followed an email from Mr. Hancock. Would not have made a difference if the Hearing was in Charleston or Vienna, it would have been done the same way. Dep likes the way it works. You get to go to the area that interests you and ask questions one on one.
DEP stated, we did it exactly as done. There was a person who stood up saying we don't like this. We don't get to pick and choose. We did it exactly as DEP instructed. I really don't care. When I get instructions, I follow them. (Wait till Monday and find out how he has followed instructions?) During the Meeting only five people walked out. The rest stayed to ask questions.
We have no control over the Media on when they come. Meeting was advertised for four weeks in a row (but only three including the day before by time of Hearing).
Just because you are unhappy with the Format, you can't tell DEP what to do. From their response back, we did everything we were supposed to do.
As this is getting a bit long, will finish tomorrow. 'nuff said'.