#62 Feb 6, 2013
Quads or dirt bikes in the distance still sound a hell of a lot better than gunshots in the distance on a clear night . No homeowner has the right by simply owning property to believe they are the 'Queen or King' of the hill .
This reminds me of the yuppie types that move from the concrete jungle into the country & then want to file law suits because the 150 year old farm next door is a dairy farm & their sensitive noses are offended by the wafting occasional smells. Why expect others to change their life for you ? Like the song says ,'Hey teacher (lawyer ,whatever)- leave those kids alone !.
#63 Feb 6, 2013
Too much time on her hands as opposed to what, a retired truck driver who's a menace on the roads? If you think Marti is an idiot, then don't patronize Dorothy's Candies.
I would rather deal with a group of informed people who "want their way" than a city employee doofus who isn't adult enough to refrain from cursing about those who are exercising their free speech right to oppose -- not his ATV fantasies -- but HOW he's gone about fulfilling them.
Why should anyone here believe your story about a nasty old lady who knocked on your door asking to sign a petition? How convenient.
#64 Feb 6, 2013
Does anyone know how council voted on the ATV Ban ordinance?
Was the mayor in favor of it? I heard the mayor was siding with the firemen for the firemen's votes.
But the ATV Ban folks had over 175 signatures on their petitions.
#65 Feb 6, 2013
Did the Lady Lawyer prevail tonight and out maneuver those band of bandits with the former school teacher the lead bandito?
#66 Feb 6, 2013
4-3 in favor of ordinance banning special interest buddies. Mikey played hide-and-seek so he wouldn't be responsible.
#67 Feb 6, 2013
Yes she did for now. But Jimmie the Sore Loser is the one who now wants to get a lawyer and fight to the death.
Does he have too much time on his hands?
Is he a young codger who's making a big fuss and trouble for people who just want to have a little peace and quiet?
Should he be able to decide that what he wants to do with his property can be foisted upon his neighbors?
Shoe's on the other foot, Buddy posters.
#68 Feb 6, 2013
Council Bans Most ATV, Dirt Bike Use
Category: News || By Jason Togyer
(More details Thursday in Tube City Almanac.)
City council has outlawed most uses of all-terrain vehicles and dirt bikes in response to complaints from residents of the Haler Heights neighborhood.
But Councilwoman Fawn Walker-Montgomery has asked other members of council to amend the new law to create special zones --- away from residential areas --- where off-road vehicles would be permitted. A special meeting could be called later this month to discuss a proposed amendment, she told the Almanac.
Following a standing-room-only public hearing Wednesday night at the public safety building, council on a split 4-3 vote passed an ordinance banning off-road use of most ATVs, "quads," dirt bikes and other motorized recreational vehicles. Councilors Dan Carr, Dale McCall and Keith Soles voted against the ordinance.
Vehicles used for snow removal, lawn maintenance and other non-recreational purposes are exempt. Violators face fines ranging from $50 to $200 per offense and police have been authorized to impound vehicles.
Mayor Michael Cherepko said last night he would not veto the ordinance. "I left the decision in council's hands," he told the Almanac. "That's the decision they made, and I'll honor it."
The outright ban went further than she would have liked, Walker-Montgomery said, but added that she felt council needed to make some decision. "I don't want residents on either side of this issue to suffer any longer," Walker-Montgomery said. "This has gone on long enough."
The ordinance is a response to complaints from a group of Haler Heights residents who were angered by a dirt-bike trail created last summer on four acres of land behind Arnold and Halsey drives. The property is owned by neighborhood residents Jim and Marcie Young, who had promised to restrict ATV and dirt-bike activity to their family and friends.
Led by Beatrice Longo of Wainwright Drive, who drafted an ordinance for council's consideration and collected nearly 200 signatures on a petition asking the city to ban the vehicles, neighbors complained the bikes and ATVs were creating noise pollution and raising dirt and dust.
But several people who testified at Wednesday's public hearing said the ordinance amounted to city council interfering with the rights of private property owners.
"This is about how we enjoy our own property and what we do with our own property," said Dave Zavetsky of Diehl Drive, who said other noise-generators such as lawn equipment and pool filters are nuisances, as well.
"Some of the people are upset because they liked having the luxury of a buffer zone," Zavetsky said. "Well, for all of those years they were enjoying that wooded area, someone else was paying the taxes."
Jim Young, a city firefighter, said he will continue to fight the law. "I will never buckle to an ordinance that says what I can or cannot do on my own property," he said.
Council should amend the ordinance as soon as possible to lift some of the restrictions, Walker-Montgomery said. She urged her colleagues to consider allowing ATVs, dirt-bikes and other off-road vehicles in industrial or commercial areas, or creating some sort of designated "ATV zones."
Councilman Richard Dellapenna Jr. said he would support such an amendment. "I think there needs to be some sort of a compromise short of a total ban," he said. "I would support restricting them to a certain distance from a residence."
#69 Feb 6, 2013
Mikey not only play hide and seek, he surpassed Senator Brewster in filibustering duration. Does this guy's talking machine every run dry? He recycles the same tales over and over.
It seems like a Raven type victory for the good folks of Arnold/Wainwright, the Lady Lawyer, and Council President Segina who had to tolerate an immature former teacher incessantly vociferating.
#70 Feb 6, 2013
There was extensive talk before the vote and it seemed that ALL council members except for tedesco were leaning towards a compromise than a complete ban since it is such a wide-reaching ordinance addressing a very specific neighborhood issue.(Tedesco very clearly favored the ban.)
To that end, someone motioned for tabling the ordinance so that it could be worked on more but our lady councilwoman said she wanted this done TONIGHT and voted against tabling it, along with 3 others, so the vote went on.
Predictably, the vote was 4-3 for the ban, with the understanding that it will likely come back to be revised. There was extensive discussion on that as well.
This vote result is a 'win' for anyone who can afford attorneys to bully their way into council chambers. Mrs. Longo gets her way. But it not only keeps bad blood between McKeesport neighbors but it also opens up pandora's box for people wanting to have an ordinance to take care of whatever ticks them off in THEIR back yard. A very ugly precedent has been set.....yell loud enough and threaten legal action, and our council president will rush through an ordinance for you and get it crammed down the throat of EVERYONE to quiet a few folks in ONE block of an neighborhood.
Before you know it, we won't be able to do ANYTHING on our property without violating some ordinance.
Ya know, its shame that people have to resort to name calling rather than work together, both here and in the council chambers.
Troublemaker, you can believe my story or not. No skin off my nose. It is true. You talk as though the people looking to ban ATVs for the entire city (no matter WHAT they are being used for, even plowing driveways or hauling yard materials mind you) are angels and that Young is the (only) one calling names. I didnt hear him call anyone names publicly, just the rumours that he did. He was very nicely behaved tonight.
But I DID hear several of the pro-ban people in the audience tonight call him and others who were against the ban "stupid" and "moron".
Neither side was clean in this.
And my God....to watch how Segina and McCall taunted each other and how Malinchak and the Mayor seem to have bad blood and didn't care about letting it show....they are OFFICIALS for God sake, not two kids in a sand lot. If I had not seen it in person I would not have believed that GROWN UPS can act this way. I was ashamed to think that this in "my" city government.
It's downright shameful how "adults" act.
Whatever happened to diplomacy and trying to get along even if you disagree?
The mayor was very well behaved this evening and was respectful in how he put things. You can agree or disagree with him in his tactics to try and revive this dying city, but please refrain from the assanine name calling here....especially if you didnt get off your keyboard to come down to the meeting and hear what happened in person.
Do not believe heresay , even my post, and what your neighbor says happened. Even reading the minutes of these meetings doesn't do it justice. body language and tone of voice, which are not reflected in the printed word, matter SO MUCH to provide context for what is said. GO TO THE MEETINGS before you spout off and criticize how our city is being run. These web forums and neighbor to neighbor gossip only serve to further divide residents who are all probably, on the whole, nice people on both sides.
#71 Feb 7, 2013
Do you mean is was rammed like the then council president Cherepko forced the $24 million deal with MACM down the throats of council without letting them review 10 pages of revision?
#72 Feb 7, 2013
That issue was actually addressed last evening by the Mayor as well.
It was a simple issue.
The city had a chance at a "windfall" of money.
Almost like you or I hitting the lottery.
The first thing many people who win the lottery do is go out and buy a huge house and cars, spending all the money. Then, a few years down the road, with no money to pay the taxes on the house or insure the expensive sports car, they lose it all.
Had the city spend that money on luxuries or just saved it, the city would have been bankrupt in 6 years he says.
The mayor made the decision to pay down the debt we had at the time.......every month we were spending $187,000 (I think that is the number he gave) in debt service alone.
As he said, he could have gone out and blown that money on streets, tearing down abandoned building and the like, but it would have been gone in a flash.
Instead, he paid down debt and reduced the monthly service debt to $50,000 per month. That is a net savings of $130,000 month.
It keeps the city solvent.
I do agree that perhaps the issue was rushed.....
But then, seems like that is the norm these days in any government.
Last night was no different.
VERY FEW people in our city even KNEW about this issue being discussed or that the ordinance was going to be voted on after just one month of "examples" being submitted.
Where was the public referendum or hearings?
The MACM deal should have had public hearings too in my opinion.
NO ordinances or activities that affect a city full of people in a major way should be dealt with as abruptly as either of these issues were dealt with.
Advertising in the daily news is not enough,. Newspapers are going the way of the dinosaur and many people these days get their news from TV or the web.
Public notioces should be posted at intersections, on the firehall notice board outside and such.....at election time there are 4,000 signs for candidates at all corners but NONE when important issues need to be decided.
#73 Feb 7, 2013
Some people may see his comments as showing support for the PROCESS, which he did. ANd that is what a mayor is SUPPOSED to do.
People like you would be complaining that he does nothing at all if he were to just sit there and not comment, or worse yet not be there at all.
He is the man we elected mayor of our city and he SHOULD have a voice at all public meetings in our city.
You complain on one hand that he doesnt do enough to get the city out if its slump but then when he pipes up on matters you criticize him for being verbose.
AT least he has the balls to make his comments publicly with his name attached to them.
Would you be willing to do that with your name calling and childish criticism?
#74 Feb 7, 2013
Take a deep breath...
Too many times I've had to hire an attorney to ensure that the city follows the existing laws. You think I'm the only one? That includes proper procedure of hearings, costs of fees, giving permits. All the little $h!t any other municipality wouldn't think twice about doing.
It's too bad the signature gathers weren't standing outside the Giant Eagle because I would have gladly signed. Haler Heights isn't the only neighborhood with ATVs. Last summer, some jack-ass kids tried to ride up two city blocks of uphill vacant lots in the 4th Ward. I couldn't believe what I was looking at. I guess it was ok because it happened during the day?
You didn't have to hear Jimmy call anyone names at the meeting. An earlier post wrote that Jimmy's facebook page was full of vulgar language regarding the female tormenters that are out to ruin his very life. Do you think they didn't know that going into the meeting? Such a nice coward.
I used to go to plenty of council meetings. We agree about how poorly city officials behave; that's why I pick and choose when I go. Btw, who did you vote for in the last city election? Any of them sitting up there?
Sorry, but if it wasn't for Topix, a lot of us city residents wouldn't know anything about the shenanigans going on in town.
#75 Feb 7, 2013
After reading the comments made to the Trib (below) I can honestly say that
Jimmie just doesn't get it. Kids playing in the woods and kids playing in the woods on ATV's are 2 very different things.
>>>>>>Jimmy Young said he doesn't believe the issue ever truly has been about a dirt bike or ATV.
“In my opinion, this has been a kid issue,” Young said.
Because Young's children and their peers are “playing in the woods where people have quietly enjoyed their backyards,” he said that expected peace is disrupted.“Fortunately, they're my kids and I know where my kids are at when they're down there playing in those woods.”
In response to neighborhood complaints about recreational vehicles violating the state Motor Vehicle Code by spending any time on a roadway, Young said he purchased license plates and registration papers for three of his family's bikes.
“What I will never do is buckle to an ordinance that tells me what I can and cannot do on private property,” Young said.“I'll be doggone if I let someone tell me I can't ride on my property. That would be like somebody saying you can't drive your car onto your own driveway.”
Read more: http://triblive.com/neighborhoods/yourmckeesp...
Follow us:@triblive on Twitter | triblive on Facebook
#76 Feb 7, 2013
Mr. Young has a convoluted sense of logic. He bragged that he will never abide by a city ordinance. Why are you putting Chief Washowich on the spot when he has enough to do with all the city unsolved crimes? Shake that myth that you are above the law because you are a fireman and the mayor will treat you as such. Councilman Mr. Paul Shelly was not above the law when dealing with the City.
What Jimmy he means is that an ordinance that annoys him or if he cannot escape it, then I will obey it.
Do not forget Jimmy that there are ordinances that authorize your pay, authorizesyou health insurance, and authorizes your pension, Now how would Jimmy feel if the city decided to dishonor his participation in these ordinances?
#77 Feb 7, 2013
I want to know why Jimmy needed to buy extra land to ride the ATV's on? He continues to say that if it's his private property he can do what he wants with it. He owns a house with a front and back yard. Why doesn't he let his kids and their friend ruin his property?
#78 Feb 7, 2013
Mikey you want the best on the authorities? Nominate the Lady Lawyer for the MACM chairwomen or chair of the MHA.
#79 Feb 8, 2013
I know she would be a superior candidate to replace our present city solicitor after his non-jury hearing in March.
This could be the first step by the administration to restore respect to the City.
Mikey might not embrace her respect for law.
#80 Feb 8, 2013
That is a much different issue than what Lawyer Lady wanted to solve. What you describe is illegal and yes I am as much against that as you.
The issue is a private property owner using ATVs/bikes on his property, not riding on someone else's property illegally. THAT is already covered under law, state and local.
Lawyer lady was pissed that she had noise in "HER" backyard, which is actually someone else's property.
Different animal altogether.
These "ladies" were targeting him and making his life miserable rather than work something out.
I would call them the same thing frankly, looking at some of their tactics.
Like I said, I know for a FACT that the pro-ban people were name calling and such too...the difference is, Jimmy isnt afraid to say what he thinks publicly online rather than do it under the cover of anonymity here like many do.
Name calling isnt appropriate on EITHER side, but at least Jimmy isn't being a coward about it. Being a coward would be doing it anonymously.
Yeah, I do agree there as far as what is going on. Topix, however, is not the place to look for honest and thorough info. Seems like most posts here are slanted one way or the other, politically motivated, or just plain garbage or vulgarity. People just looking to criticize with no real help in most posts. True, some people like me may read something here and then do further research to know the whole story.....that is asctually how I found out about the ATV ban. But most people do not take the time, or fall prey easily to the "if its on the interweb thingy it must be true, right?" bug.
I personally do not get the paper every day...almost never in fact...because of similar issues. Slanted hournalism these days.
If there was a real site where people gathered to discuss these topics without the cloak of anonymity I think much more could get done city wide.....but as long as people come here for "information", they will be given very very damaging info most of the time cause its not 100% true.
Or what about public town hall meetings once a month where people can gather to disuss these issues in an open forum, with open and frank discussions with council members and the mayor rather than the "you speak for 3 minutes and then shut up" approach used at council meetings now. THAT is what we need. NO WONDER we get nothing done in this town.......we are still using old fashioned ways to deal with new age problems.
#81 Feb 8, 2013
Well, he cant even do that, now that lady lawyer has had her way with the council. Nor can ANYONE in the city.
In her eyes, there is no room in Mckeesport for recreation unless it falls under HER definition of it.
No tolerance whatsoever.
Add your comments below
|I'm Outta Work, Golf & Baseball Equipment for...||43 min||Piccioni||12|
|I love Mckeesport (Aug '16)||12 hr||Swamp Rat||35|
|Marshalls Facebook Messenger||12 hr||Swamp Rat||5|
|Democrat Austin Davis vs. Republican Fawn Walke...||Mon||UnDoc Risha||4|
|Pennsylvania Republican aims to disrupt state D...||Mon||robot||1|
|who was JOEY BERTONE? (Apr '10)||Dec 8||Touchable Swamper||305|
Find what you want!
Search McKeesport Forum Now
Copyright © 2017 Topix LLC