The BatBlog has been informed and has received the documentation that Clarksville town council Dist. 2 candidate Russell Brooksbank has filed a State of Indiana , Open Door Law Violation against the Clarksville Redevelopment Director and the Redevelopment Dept. His complaint is detailed below... or to see the full complaint and documentation CLICK HERE also here is a link to the OLD CLARKSVILLE UNITED page...
****************************************************************************************
On March 19 2015 there was a special meeting of the Town Council, Redevelopment Commission and Plan Commission of the Town of Clarksville. At this meeting, Mr. Lawrence announced the kickoff of the South Clarksville Redevelopment Plan was taking place at this meeting, It was also noted that a steering committee tasked with working with consultants through a 5 stage planning process for the future development of the South Clarksville Redevelopment project was formed. Members of the public were in attendance at this meeting to observe it.
On March 31, 2015 a meeting of the Steering Committee was called to order at 12:01 pm in the executive conference room of the Clarksville Municipal Center Administration Bldg.by Redevelopment Director Nick Lawrence. Members who were present were- Nick Lawrence - Redevelopment Director, Tim Hauber Town Council Member, Sharon Handy- Clarksville Plan Commission Member,Bob McIntosh -property owner, Brad Cummings- Clarksville Street Commissioner, Corey Hoehn- Water Tower Square, Cindy Knopp- Derby Dinner Playhouse, Dr. Jayesh Seths- Clarks Landing Enterprise Investments, Sharon Wilson- Clarksville Planning Director,Cary Stemle- Clarksville Plan Comission Member, Andy Bremmer- Clarksville Community School Corp. Jane Sales- Town Historian, Brian Kaluzny- Clarksville Parks Dept.Superintendent, Wendy Dant Chesser – One Southern Indiana, Town Attorney’s Chris Sturgeon and Rebecca Lockard. Members of the public were at this meeting to observe it.
On May 28, 2015 and July 16, 2015 two more steering committee meetings were held. Both were also open to the public. On August 17, 2015, following a Town Council meeting, Nick Lawrence was asked when the next steering committee meeting was going to be held. He responded that these are “private meetings,” and that he had not called a meeting yet, but planned on calling one before the end of August. (There is an audio recording of this conversation). In trying to find out the date, two calls were made to Nick Lawrence on August 25 with voice mail answering, no message left. An email was sent to him that same day. Nick responded on August 26, giving the date only. He would not provide the location or time, which was requested on August 26. Mr. Lawrence’s response in an email on August 27 was:
“Indeed, these are not public meetings. Several members of the public did attend last meeting, and that was unexpected. I made a decision at that time that I was not going to ask anyone to leave in that particular meeting since it appeared we had the space to accommodate, and said as much in my opening remarks. Private meeting space is being donated to us for these meetings. Lunch is being donated going forward as well.
Thank you for your interest in the creation of this planning document!”
After getting the time and location from a steering committee member, I found the meeting and proceeded to walk in and sit in the corner without saying a word. Nick Lawrence called me into the hallway and proceeded to ask me to leave. (There is audio of this encounter as well) He did not force me to leave but kept trying to state that this was a private meeting and not a public one, to which I voiced my opinion that he was wrong. It is my opinion, that, since this committee was formed by our governing body and is manned by more than 3 people who are either elected or appointed officials of our town government, any meeting that is conducted by this committee is, in fact, a public meeting regardless of venue, and is thus subject to Indiana's Open Door laws. Mr. Lawrence is in violation of these laws by refusing to post the date, time and location of these meetings and by asking citizens to leave. I request that this be reviewed on a priotity status because at the last meeting it was mentioned that the next meeting would be scheduled for sometime at the beginning of October. The next meeting will have taken place before the usual 30 day period had lapsed.
Attached Exhibits:
Exhibit A- Minutes from 3-19-2015 kickoff meeting
Exhibit B- Minutes from 3-31-2015 steering committee meeting
Exhibit C- Minutes from 5-28-2015 steering committee meeting
Exhibit D- Excerpts from steering committee presentation on 7-16-2015
Exhibit E- Email messages to and from Nick Lawrence
Exhibit F- Transcript of conversation with Nick Lawrence at August 27, 2015 steering committee
meeting
Exhibit G- Links
I agree with Russell and applaud his actions for filing a complaint. Regardless of political affiliations, government and meetings that effect residents and taxpayers and using tax dollars should be held to the highest level of openness and transparency....
ReplyDeleteThanks for publishing this.
ReplyDeleteSo, they are trying to help a run down and blighted area of Clarksville, and this yuppie is trying to hinder them?
ReplyDeleteGreat horse you're backing here HT.
It doesn't sound particularly like a hindrance to me, just wanting information... There are laws to protect against this type of thing and it appears Russell is well with in his rights.... I don't agree with a lot of the Libertarian movement but nothing wrong with remaining "Vigilant"....
ReplyDelete1). I never knew I was a yuppie. I'm a diesel mechanic Teamster that lives paycheck to paycheck like most folk who believes in a government of the people, by the people and for the people.
ReplyDelete2). Nobody as against developing that area. We are against development at the expense of those who live there instead of development to benefit those who live there.
3). The complaint isn't about stopping anything. The complaint is about making certain that those affected are made aware of what is going on
I am also a Teamster. And while my wife and I don't live "paycheck to paycheck" because we have properly budgeted ourselves that way. So please don't act like you speak for all working class citizens.
DeleteWhat I see is an area that needs help and attention and some people trying to do that. And I see you trying to make things more difficult on those people. When they have a course of action it will become public and then we can go from there.
But nothing like an election year stunt to help your long shot campaign.
Excellent response. As a union member, I totally agree!
DeleteI am a member of Local 89 and Russell is my shop steward. I can tell you this, the citizens of Clarksville would do well to have him representing them. He is a strong advocate for our rights. He is not afraid to go toe to toe with the powers that be if it is necessary. He has represented me and my brothers very well over the years. Seems to me that is what he's wanting to do for the people in that neighborhood. Union brothers need to support each other.
DeleteThis is no stunt. Go talk to the people living in this redevelopment area. They had no idea any of this was going on until I and some other folks went door to door to tell them. When did I say that I speak for all working class citizens? I was merely pointing out that the "yuppie" characterization was way off base. I'm an average Joe trying to stand up for the rights of those in this redevelopment area. Why is that a bad thing? Again, nobody is against making the area better for those who live there. We are against development at the expense of those who live there.
ReplyDeleteYes, I am running for office, but I am not the only person involved in this. It's not a one man show. I'm the one spearheading this because the other people involved wanted me to. I guess they believe I can do what I set out to do. This complaint would never had to have been filed if our government would have worked to be as transparent about this process as they claimed they wanted to be. What do you have against those people who are affected knowing exactly what their government is talking about doing with their property and tax dollars? Why don't we talk about the government's motive for wanting to keep this behind closed doors?
Nick Lawrence is the one making it hard, not me, the people working with me or the people living in that area. All he has to do is allow daylight into the meetings. That is all anyone has asked for.
ReplyDeleteWow Mr. Brooksbank it looks like you have hit a nerve!
ReplyDeleteIf taxpayer $$ are being spent on anything connected with this issue, I am thankful someone is watching out for the taxpayers of Clarksville.
As far as my affiliation with the Teamsters is concerned, I'll let the President of my local speak for himself. From a press release a few months ago:
ReplyDeleteLibertarian Candidate Russell Brooksbank Wins Teamsters Local 89 Endorsement.
The Executive Board of Teamsters Local 89 has voted unanimously to endorse Russell Brooksbank for Clarksville Town Council District 2. President of Local 89 Fred Zuckerman stated in a letter to Mr. Brooksbank's campaign that he has “proven over the years to be a hard working individual with great integrity, character and intuition.” Mr. Zuckerman also stated that he knows that Mr. Brooksbank will devote himself “to protecting the livelihoods and communities for our Teamster families and all working families in the state of Indiana.”
In response Mr. Brooksbank said,”I have been a Teamster since 2004 and I am honored to have the endorsement of Teamsters Local 89. I'm often asked how I reconcile being a libertarian and a union member. My response to that is that I didn't know that the two were mutually exclusive. The Libertarian Party believes that I should be able to sell my labor at the highest price the market will bear, so does the Union. The Union believes that my rights should be protected, so does the LP. People want and need someone in our government willing to stand with them instead of fighting against them. I'm ready, willing and able to do just that and it has been my time as a Chief Steward that has prepared me.”
I commend Russell for filing this complaint. It all sounds great for the touchy-feely type people, but this is more sinister than what it appears. I am for redevelopment......at the private businesses' expense, NOT taxpayer expense and definitely not for condemning private property for a developer. Some of these families have lived in these homes for decades and do NOT want to move. Furthermore, chances are they would NOT get an amount of money where they could buy an equal home. If they're going to develop that area, they will condemn those peoples' homes. If they want to sell, fine. However, these steering committee meetings should NOT be private.
ReplyDeleteMr. Brooksbank has some very good points,
ReplyDeleteespecially about those affected being involved.
He is rightfully concerned.
The prior really nice concept proposed by former Redevelopment Director
Richard E. Dickman was never implemented because of the economic recession and downturn.
In looking at the map on the Bat Blog,
it appears that not a lot of residential property
is actually inside the proposed revitalization area.
There are quite a bit of "brownfield" areas, commercial, vacant plots, etc.
The location will lend itself to some very nice
infill activity and revitalization.
The current director and town council have been working
on a conceptual plan and hope to be able to start infill activity,
but it will take a lot of planning and effort.
Mr. Rrooksbank is correct that the residents in the area need to be fully involved.
One task that Clarksville needs to complete very badly is a study and analysis of the housing stock in the proposed redevelopment
infill area and the areas close by.
The general location of the entire area south of Brown's Station Way
has the potential to add a lot of residential
housing in addition to the commercial development area.
The Old Clarksville area has a lot of potential.
The Clarksville Community Schools are also suffering
and the addition of housing in the area,
with a solid plan to help existing residents improve their housing,
would be beneficial to everyone.
The view across the Ohio River toward downtown Louisville is spectacular,
ReplyDeleteIt is an excellent area to build very nice high rise buildings in the
Woerner Avenue and Market Street "brownfield" location.
The owner of the rentals on Woerner has been very interested
in a complete new plan for a number of years.
The Woerner Avenue area is long overdue for a major change and makeover.
The Ashland Oil property is a great location,
however the environmental cleanup costs
will be tremendous.
The plan envisioned by Clarksville is long term and it will require very significant private investment capital.
Remember, in looking at the boundaries shown on the map,
ReplyDeletethe residential homes that are involved are limited.
The plan does not encompass most of "Old Clarksville".
That is why the infill, "brownfield area"
is more narrowly designated as South Clarksville.
In many of these types of "infil economic development areas"
the residents have assistance available
from the various governmental entities involved
if they so desire.
Let us hope this concept is followed and they are protected.
Former Redevelopment Director Richard E. Dickman
did have the concerns for those residents in mind.
ReplyDeleteThe plan itself is a very preliminary overlay and initial concept.
It will take a lot of investment and effort to see it undertaken and completed.
Examine the totality of the initial concepts and design.
The residences currently within the overlay district are very limited
in number.
They should be respected.
The major effort is the old commercial areas
and the blighted Woerner Avenue area.
(Again, the owner of those Woerner Avenue properties is very on board with changes and improvements.)
The area south of Stansifer Avenue will not see any significant
housing alteration.
Nor will Lakeshore.
The residential area West of South Clark Blvd
below the Stansford entry corridor
and the area West of the railroad bridge
are not in the area.
The loss of the 6th Street enhanced entrance to the area is due to the new construction of I-65.
Drive the area and look at it.
Check the map.
http://www.townofclarksville.com/pdf/redev/2015/20150604_so_clarksville_progress_report.pdf
It is not to be "changed", but the infrastructure will be enhanced.
Those properties will gain in value.
http://www.townofclarksville.com/pdf/redev/2015/20150604_so_clarksville_progress_report.pdf
When I was first informed of this new redevelopment area thoughts of what had happened recently in Charlestown were still fresh in my mind. My first thought was for the residents living in the boundaries of the area. When I initially received a map of the area, I drove down all the streets. I counted 97 homes. The condominium complex has, I believe, somewhere in the neighborhood of 75 units. So, we are talking about close to 200 families that could possibly be effected. When we organized our Rally for Old Clarksville the stated goal was to inform the residents of what was going on and to inform them of their rights if the government should come knocking. Never was it stated that our goal was to stop development and it still is not our goal. One thing that really saddened me and gave me more resolve to help these people was when we went door to door passing out fliers for the rally. Not a single person knew anything about the plans being made for their neighborhood. Nobody. Not a single person on the council made an effort to make certain that those people were informed. Oh, but when they showed up to the rally they were all in favor of transparency, as long as there were voters there to listen. Well, they had the chance to prove themselves, and they have failed. I was personally subject to verbal abuse and intimidation at the meeting on July 16, even though all I did was show up and observe. Now, they want to exclude the public entirely from their planning sessions only to allow one meeting of public input, after they have it all figured out. I am fighting this fight not because I'm running for office. I'm fighting this fight because it is the right thing to do. I'm running for office so that I can better take the fight to them and protect the rights of the citizens of Clarksville.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteNew plan being developed for Clarksville's south end
March 26, 2015
By MATT KOESTERS
http://www.newsandtribune.com/news/new-plan-being-developed-for-clarksville-s-south-end/article_4fb628e2-d33f-11e4-908c-0f89dc9d07f0.html
I think it’s a way of looking at the southern part of Clarksville and trying to determine what the future of it will be,” Wilson said. “We have so many vacant properties and available properties that it’s an opportune time to look ahead, look forward, and see how to make the best uses available for the area.”
The town has contracted with MKSK, a Columbus, Ohio-based firm that specializes in architecture, planning and urban design, to develop the master plan, which will create a vision for the next 20 to 25 years. MKSK had a hand in developing downtown Louisville’s master plan, said Clarksville Redevelopment Director Nick Lawrence.
The development area spans from Stansifer Avenue to the Ohio River, from Clark Boulevard to the Falls of the Ohio Interpretive Center, Lawrence said. A lot of that area is residential, but much of the residential properties in South Clarksville will not be affected by the master plan, Lawrence said.
“We’re not really looking to remove anybody from their house,” Lawrence said.
“There are some residential areas involved in it, but there’s no plan that I know of to change the character of those,” said Town Council President Bob Polston, one of 15 members on the steering committee helping MKSK to develop the plan. “If you get into a good plan, you may do some revitalization in there to make it nicer.”
One exception could be the rental properties that line Woerner Avenue between South Clark Boulevard and Riverside Drive, which are likely to be impacted because of a plan to extend Court Avenue through Water Tower Square, Lawrence said.
An idea:
Maybe, the Newsandtribune should interview,
and the town council should also talk with,
Mr. Brooksbank
and get him more involved!
He definitely seems like he is really engaged with this!
With HT's permission, here is the link to our Facebook page "Old Clarksville United": https://www.facebook.com/oldclarksvilleunited
ReplyDelete"When we organized our Rally for Old Clarksville the stated goal was to inform the residents of what was going on and to inform them of their rights if the government should come knocking. Never was it stated that our goal was to stop development and it still is not our goal. One thing that really saddened me and gave me more resolve to help these people was when we went door to door passing out fliers for the rally. Not a single person knew anything about the plans being made for their neighborhood. Nobody. Not a single person on the council made an effort to make certain that those people were informed."
ReplyDeleteLooks like Mr. Brooksbank is on the job!
I would recommend putting him on the committee
and getting him fully involved asap!
He has insight and passion!
ReplyDelete3 Libertarian candidates plan to run in Clarksville council race
BY DANIELLE GRADY
Tuesday, July 21, 2015
http://www.newsandtribune.com/news/libertarian-candidates-plan-to-run-in-clarksville-council-race/article_2cad401c-2f3b-11e5-bf44-0f13ec157101.html
Clark County’s Libertarian party has three candidates running for Clarksville Town Council this election cycle — the most that Party Chairman Kelley Curran can remember since becoming involved with the Libertarian Party around 2000.
Russell Brooksbank, who also is the vice chairman for the Clark County Libertarian Party, is running for office himself as a District 2 candidate for Clarksville Town Council. Greg Hertzch is running for District 1 and Thomas Keister recently joined the race as a District 3 candidate.
If a Libertarian candidate wins, it would be the first time in Clarksville and Clark County history, said Curran.
Republican Dee Shelton Jr.
and Democrat John Gilkey
are running in District 2.
They are both very tough political candidates.
This should be quite a race.
Thank you Old Clarksville Resident. While I would definitely accept the opportunity to serve if asked, that was never my intent. My intent was and is simply to make certain the people are informed and their rights are protected. I would still call for someone else from the public who was not a member of the steering committee to be in attendance documenting what went on and reporting it back to the citizens.
ReplyDeleteYou go Russell!! I'm glad to see someone out there fighting the good fight.
ReplyDeleteI see only one valid reason for secrecy: because they know the public may not agree with their visions.
ReplyDeleteAt the very least, the officials of the Town of Clarksville have shown they do not want to be transparent with its citizens. They do not want the citizens to observe this plan being created, and they do not want robust citizen input.
ReplyDeleteWe were told Clarksville has changed.
Doesn't smell like it.
Locally citizen input is pretty much zero...Galligan did everything he could including spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to try and shove his "Canal" down the public's throat...even though the interest was tepid at best.
ReplyDeleteAnd not sure if Julius is elected the cram job wouldn't be finished ....Transparency and citizen input is sadly missing as smug,self serving politicians could care less what the voting public thinks except during the election period when they suddenly are all ears....
The Town does NOT want to be transparent which is why they are wanting these meetings to be "private." Where are the other two candidates running in this area, John Gilkey and Dee Shelton? Why haven't they attempted to inform these citizens being "kept in the dark"? Again, I'm about elected officials being held accountable to the people who elected them. They get in office and do not get back out among their constituents. Sounds like Russell is the ONLY one attempting to hold these people accountable. He should be commended!
ReplyDeleteAgree he should be commended and get his message across to have any chance of being elected....Unfortunately Libertarians are sometimes unfairly depicted as being totally unrealistic (and some are) but to be a viable candidate a Libertarian needs to show his concern to serve the people beyond what they are getting now.
ReplyDeleteRussell seems to me has that concern but faces a formible task of defeating Gilkey and the Democratic machine...
Galligan's fingerprints are all over this S Clarksville plan. He is some kind of consultant with the company that owns Colgate. A canal is proposed for the S Clarksville area. This is the same pattern of the canal sell.
ReplyDeleteOnly show the pretty pictures. Refuse to answer specific questions about the plan. Attack members of the public for not knowing all the details of the plan and say they're spreading information while doing all possible to keep the real details hidden and misrepresented.
I agree HT with the Libertarians being unfairly targeted as unrealistic, but feel that Russell is showing that he truly cares about serving the people and not himself.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the vigilance, Mr. Brooksbank. As a fellow Libertarian, we are unfairly targeted as unrealistic and idealistic vote stealers. Honestly, I just don't like the idea of paying taxes for something that benefits corporations rather than small business owners and residents. We had some shit like this back a couple of years ago here in Greenville, Floyd County, where some dumb bastards wanted to make the town run completely on a sewer system and the guy that owned the sewer company was a town gov't member. They said they'd have the cop throw people out if anyone spoke without permission, even though it was a public meeting.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I don't believe that liberty is an unrealistic goal.
ReplyDelete