Friday, January 05, 2007

Woodbury Town Board Doin's





Rich Cataggio was reappointed as ZBA chair and Tim Egan was appointed to the seat vacated by Ralph. In both cases the vote was 4 to 1, Big John saying no. Make of it what you will.

Also noteworthy, the fellas voted to advertise for a new Town Attorney and Gerri and Lorraine voted no.

Whys and wherefores welcomed.

39 comments:

Anonymous said...

What's Burke's beef with those two?

Anonymous said...

they aint ralph

Anonymous said...

porter house, med. well

Anonymous said...

herny louis stimson was the secertery of war 1911-1913 and also 1940-1945

Anonymous said...

maybe ralph will attempt a Quowarranto to retake the position of chaiman of the zoing board of appeals

Anonymous said...

what are you saying???

Anonymous said...

what are you saying???

Uncle Betty said...

Cook it more than rare and you've ruined it.

I think his name was "Henry"

and

Quo Warranto.

Quo warranto is an extraordinary procedure used to prevent an official or legal entity from exercising its authority in an unlawful manner and to try title to a public office, corporate office or franchise.

The primary question in quo warranto cases is whether some person or corporation has usurped or intruded into another's lawful office or authority, or whether that person is unlawfully holding or executing an office or franchise.

If the person against whom a quo warranto action is brought is found to not have a valid claim to the office or authority he is holding or exercising, he can be ousted from office or prevented from continuing to exercise that authority.

The theory is that the office or franchise has been forfeited by an act of misconduct by the official or corporation and thus is usurping power illegally.

Some examples of the use of quo warranto are:

To determine whether a public official is qualified to hold his office and exercise the functions of the office. Grounds for quo warranto might be corruption in office, willful failure to perform statutory duties, or not having the qualifications prescribed by statute for an office.

To test the legality of an annexation by a municipality. The party challenging the annexation has the burden of proving it is illegal.

To forfeit the charter of a business corporation for such things as criminal violations, conducting business in an unlawful manner, fraudulently issuing stock, etc.

To terminate the franchise of a utility company.

The procedure in quo warranto proceedings is set out in Rule 98 and Chapter 531, RSMo.

The Supreme Court, Court of Appeals and circuit courts have concurrent jurisdiction of quo warranto proceedings. Accordingly, quo warranto may be initiated in either a circuit or appellate court, depending on the nature of the case and the respondent.

Generally, venue in quo warranto is governed by the same rules and statutes governing civil legal cases.

A private citizen cannot initiate a quo warranto proceeding. It is brought by the prosecuting attorney or circuit attorney for matters arising within the county or circuit and by the Attorney General for matters of statewide scope.

The party seeking relief is called the relator and the person against whom relief is sought is the respondent. The action is brought in the name of the State of Missouri.

The Attorney General may bring an action on his own information, in which case the suit would be: "State of Missouri ex inf. John Doe, Attorney General v. John Smith."

The Attorney General may bring the action at the relation of a person who has a special interest in the subject matter of the action, in which case the suit would be: "State of Missouri ex inf. John Doe, Attorney General, ex rel. Richard Roe v. John Smith."

Similar rules are followed for actions brought by the prosecuting or circuit attorney.

The private citizen seeking to have a quo warranto action filed must have a special interest in the matter, an interest greater than that of the general public.

Notice of the filing of a quo warranto information must be given to the respondent similar to cases for writ of prohibition. The respondent then files his answer.

An actual trial in quo warranto is rare. Normally, the parties will stipulate to the facts and argue the law before the court or in briefs. The Supreme Court may appoint a master or commissioner to hear evidence, if required.

The court may oust a corporation from its franchise (in effect, terminate the corporate charter) or remove an official from office, or order less drastic action, such as a fine, or leave an official in office but direct him to cease the unlawful usurpation of power. A fine may, however, be imposed in addition to ouster. Persons disobeying an order in quo warranto may be found in contempt of court.

If quo warranto is sought by the Attorney General or a prosecuting attorney, a preliminary rule (as in prohibition) will be issued as a matter of course. The issuance of a preliminary rule is not "automatic," however, if quo warranto is requested by a private citizen through the Attorney General or prosecuting or circuit attorney.


Your helpful Uncle

Anonymous said...

"Nature, that framed us of four elements,
Warring within our breasts for regiment,
Doth teach us all to have aspiring minds,
Our souls, whose facilities can comprehend,
The wondrous architechure of the world,
And measure every wand'ring planet's course,
Still climbing after knowledge infinite,
And always moving as the restless spheres,
Wills us to wear ourselves and never rest,
Until we reach the ripest fruit of all:
That perfect bliss and sole felicity,
The sweetest fruition of an earthly crown."

Anonymous said...

Speaking of Ralph, this comes to mind:

"It cannot be this weak and writhled shrimp,
Should strike such terror to his enemies."

Uncle Betty said...

Wow, Marlowe AND Shakespeare (or were they one and the same - neh Marlowe died too early).

Anonymous said...

Eureka!! Do you mean that LaBurnt is finally out of here??!!?? Maybe we'll hire someone who will represent the town and not just the Boobsey Twins and Shelia.

Anonymous said...

I am assuming that the eventual winners of the seats were Republicans and John wanted a balanced party committee. I don't believe it had anything to do with what some of out there call "Ralphings syndrome".

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
I am assuming that the eventual winners of the seats were Republicans and John wanted a balanced party committee. I don't believe it had anything to do with what some of out there call "Ralphings syndrome".

Nice try at appearing reasonable.
The person that was appointed instead of Ralph is a member of ???? party. It seems that noone knows.
And your logic is faulty and very telling. If John wanted a "balanced party committee"(whatever that means, because the meeting was about appointing people to various boards) He would not be so pissed off about Ralph not getting reappointed.

Your posting and the one just before it sound alittle too much like the ANKLE BITER DON!!! AHA, a
Ralphing!!!!!

Anonymous said...

Ah Dear Uncle, you do not disappoint! Who else would recognize Shakespere AND Marlowe?
What wisdom in all the "Circulus Lactus"!!!

Uncle Betty said...

Thank you, but the Uncle prefers Bonus Et Abundantia.

Anonymous said...

Etu Betty?

Uncle Betty said...

Not me.

Uncle Betty said...

I just prefer Good 'n' Plenty to Milky Ways. I love the way they yank out my fillings and leave little black bits between my teeth.

What I really want is some Bonomo's Turkish Taffy.

Anonymous said...

Oh my god, this blog sucks!

Uncle Betty said...

Like that's news.

Anonymous said...

Anyone go to the village meeting last night?

Anonymous said...

AT the village meeting in the “house of fire”
Don was acting out his unveiled ire
Carol came and drooled a bit,
At least she didn’t have another fit!
John was there and whispered just so,
into Don’s ear and straight out, it did go!
Don whispered back his latest instructions
John with Don? There are obvious deductions,
Such collusion, how stupid so they think were are?
Surely, Don is now Ralph’s voice carried afar,
WP3, a topic John discussed with a WP3 neighbor,
John would listen to curry favor!
After all, what’s good for Ralph is good for John,
For surely that is the role for a pawn!

Anonymous said...

Your poem sucks too!

Anonymous said...

you suck

Uncle Betty said...

Gee, how nice, we've found a theme. Mutual suckitude.

Anonymous said...

Quid Faciendum?

Uncle Betty said...

minimus vel nusquam

Anonymous said...

Tu ne cede malius sed contra audentior ito!

Uncle Betty said...

These are the voyages of the Starship Woodbury...

Anonymous said...

It seems that the Latin and Hebrew postings lose everyone's attention. How about this? The Starship Woodbury is just at the edge of an event horizion, the event horizion being the public lambasting that the Village Board is going to get, as soon as they televise their meetings.

Anonymous said...

Lamblasting for what? They haven't done anything wrong! I heard that Don Siebold and Carol Mulloly attend the meetings, but who cares. Everyone knows it's just sour grapes.
The people in Woodbury have spoken in the last local town election and last years village election. If these people don't see that they DO NOT SPEAK FOR THE MAJORITY than they will just have to learn yet another lesson in this years town elections.

Anonymous said...

Who will UC like to see run this year?

Anonymous said...

anyone know the cause of death for Mike Levine. It was not in the newspaper.

Anonymous said...

Obituary: Mike Levine
January 15, 2007
Mike Levine, the executive editor of the Times Herald-Record, died Sunday morning at his home following a heart attack. He was 54.

Born in Manhattan on May 2, 1952, Levine began working at the paper in July, 1980, after serving as the editor of Heights-Inwood, the weekly newspaper of north Manhattan. He worked in Sullivan County for years and often laughed at the irony of a New York City boy reporting in what was then a wild and rural county.

“I remember the first time he saw a deer in Sullivan County,” says reporter Steve Israel, who worked with Levine for 20 years. “He saw this big animal in Glen Spey by the side of the road, and he didn’t know what it was.”

Levine loved the area, its people, and working by the journalist’s credo: Afflict the comfortable, and comfort the afflicted.

“He was such an iconoclast,” said reporter Brendan Scott before correcting himself: “Mike wouldn’t like that word; it was too big.”

“He taught me more about reporting, writing and life in five minutes than I’ve learned in a lifetime,” said Israel.

In 1983 Levine became a columnist, combining hard-edged reporting with stories celebrating the spirit of everyday people. His column quickly became a favorite with readers, earning him state and national awards. He reached out to the communities, touching hearts, changing worlds. His stories were featured in Reader's Digest and in "Best Newspaper Stories of 1990," published by the Poynter Institute.

Levine was once described by a reader as someone who had “the three i’s: intelligence, intensity and integrity.”

He served as the newspaper's writing coach and as city editor before becoming executive editor in 1999, and left the Record in 2001 to accept a position as senior editor at ESPN the Magazine in New York City, where his worked helped the magazine earn the 2002 award for General Excellence by the American Society of Magazine Editors.

He returned to the Record as executive editor in 2002, and during his tenure, the newspaper was named New York's Newspaper of Distinction three times by the Asociated Press. The paper's Sunday sports section was also twice named one of the top 10 in the nation by the Associated Press Sports Editors.

Levine also co-authored two children's sports books on family values, published by Simon & Schuster.

Lou Heimbach, a former three-term Orange County executive who often crossed swords with Levine but later became his friend, said, “He had established himself as a very thoughtful, insightful champion of the people. I didn’t always agree with what he said, but you had to respect what he believed.”

On Sunday morning, THR publisher Joe Vanderhoof met with the newsroom staff.

“My thoughts and prayers go out to Mike’s wife, Ellen, and their children,” Vanderhoof said. “I have lost a true friend. And our entire area has lost one of its biggest supporters. Throughout his life, Mike touched so many people with his words and actions. Although he is no longer with us, his memory and heartfelt words will always be. My Wednesday mornings will never be the same, that was the time Mike and I met over coffee to discuss work, his life, friends, hopes and desires. True friends are few and far between and I, and this community, are better off because Mike allowed us to share his life.”

He was a member of Temple Beth El, The Monroe Temple of Liberal Judaism, Monroe.

Survivors include his wife, Ellen P. Levine, at home; sons, Benjamin S. Levine and Samuel W. Levine, both of Middletown, Robert Frank of Monroe; daughter, Victoria Frank of Monroe; step father, Herbert Marx of New York, N.Y.; sister, Tedra Schneider of Orange, Conn.; former wife, Lorraine Crescenzo of Middletown; his close and lifelong friend, Stanley Friedmann; as well as several nieces and nephews.

There will be no visitation. Funeral services will be on Tuesday, January 16, 2007 at 10:30 a.m. in Temple Beth-El, The Monroe Temple of Liberal Judaism, 314 North Main Street, Monroe. Rabbi Garry A. Loeb and Cantor Leon Sher will officiate. Burial will be in Cedar Hill Cemetery, Middlehope.

Donations may be made to People for People Fund, 48 Mill Street, Middletown, NY 10940.

Funeral arrangements by Smith, Seaman and Quackenbush, Inc. Funeral Homes, Monroe. www.ssqfuneralhome.com

Anonymous said...

so does that meen i might get my paper on time now!!

Uncle Betty said...

I believe that Mike Levine died of a heart attack.

Anonymous said...

I believe you are correct Uncle. One of the articles said that his heart gave out. I will miss his writing.

Anonymous said...

who do you say Swiller is an a-hole in latin?????????????