NEWS
Respect for All Resolution Sparks Fierce Debate
Rival Resolution Change Defeated, Original Passes in Split Vote
The meeting began discussing the proposed Resolution #28 entitled “Encouraging Respect for All.” The resolution was discussed at the December meeting and met with a deadlock before being revised. Some county employees and visitors wore red buttons donning the phrase “Respect for All.”
The resolution was offered by Schoharie Supervisor Chris Tague and seconded by Carlisle Supervisor Larry Bradt. Tague worked upon the resolution with Schoharie resident Glen Sanders. The room was filled with approximately 70 residents, most of whom were present for the employee recognition ceremony immediately following.
County Attorney Michael West read the resolution aloud. As he read through a portion of the resolution, he was stopped by Broome Supervisor David Simkins, who asked if it should encourage respect everywhere and not just in the county.
Supervisor Tague said that it was just a start, and asked County Treasurer Bill Cherry to speak. Cherry said that it could be a template for other counties to follow. He also said that he would bring it to a wider state conference for discussion. “If this resolution would be sent to another county, they would put their name in it,” said Cherry. “Either way is a strong message.”
Chair Earl VanWormer said that the Board could adopt it as “the county’s idea to support this effort. To not tolerate this type of behavior.”
Simkins asked if it was meant just for Schoharie County. “What if I want to say something bad about ISIS?” he asked.
“We’re encouraging proper behavior,” said Supervisor VanWormer, and said that terrorist groups could fall under a different category.
“The big key here is teaching our young people how to move on in life,” said Supervisor Tague. “It’s our job as local leaders,” to encourage such behavior. He credited Glen Sanders for writing the resolution draft then re-writing it in a manner intended to gain support of every member of the board.
Simkins made a motion to edit the resolution, seconded by Supervisor Shawn Smith of Blenheim to remove a portion, to state, “based merely on group identity.”
Supervisor Sandra Manko of Sharon spoke next, saying that the resolution would have no effect on the national scene. She said that she did not vote for President Donald Trump, but that the resolution was meant as an affront to the White House. “No one has told the residents how they should act and behave,” she said about her constituents. She added that most local residents voted for the Republican ticket in November. “If you really love the country and want what’s best,” she said, it was important to support leaders.
Supervisor Phil Skowfoe said that he would support the resolution but criticized the Times Journal for writing that it went back to the Rules Committee for a re-write, which he said didn’t occur. Supervisor Bradt said, “There you go again. You can’t always believe what you read in the paper.” He added that he received revisions that led him to support the resolution as it read as presented. Bradt said he took the blame for not going to the full committee.
Chair VanWormer brought Simkins’ revisions to a vote. Supervisor Manko made a motion to move the resolution to the Rules Committee “where it belongs,” but Supervisor Tague asked the Board to press for a vote on Simkins’ resolution. At that moment Supervisor Simkins withdrew the motion to defer to Manko’s motion. Manko said that the motion in December actually sent the resolution to the committee last time but was not followed through. Supervisor Bradt said he agreed to look at it.
The Board voted. Supervisors Simkins, Coppolo, Manko, Bradt, Luniewski, and Skowfoe voted yes. Voting no were Supervisors Bates, Federice, Hait, Lape, McAllister, Tague, VanGlad, VanWormer, and Vroman. The resolution was defeated by about 400 weighted votes.
Next Supervisor Tague asked for a vote on the resolution. All of the Supervisors voted yes except for Supervisors Bradt, Coppolo, Manko, Simkins, and Smith. The resolution passed with a weighted vote of 2134-840.
Supervisor Federice said that he believed the first resolution was brought about because of “political motivations” and that he agreed with Supervisor Manko’s earlier statement.
The meeting began discussing the proposed Resolution #28 entitled “Encouraging Respect for All.” The resolution was discussed at the December meeting and met with a deadlock before being revised. Some county employees and visitors wore red buttons donning the phrase “Respect for All.”
The resolution was offered by Schoharie Supervisor Chris Tague and seconded by Carlisle Supervisor Larry Bradt. Tague worked upon the resolution with Schoharie resident Glen Sanders. The room was filled with approximately 70 residents, most of whom were present for the employee recognition ceremony immediately following.
County Attorney Michael West read the resolution aloud. As he read through a portion of the resolution, he was stopped by Broome Supervisor David Simkins, who asked if it should encourage respect everywhere and not just in the county.
Supervisor Tague said that it was just a start, and asked County Treasurer Bill Cherry to speak. Cherry said that it could be a template for other counties to follow. He also said that he would bring it to a wider state conference for discussion. “If this resolution would be sent to another county, they would put their name in it,” said Cherry. “Either way is a strong message.”
Chair Earl VanWormer said that the Board could adopt it as “the county’s idea to support this effort. To not tolerate this type of behavior.”
Simkins asked if it was meant just for Schoharie County. “What if I want to say something bad about ISIS?” he asked.
“We’re encouraging proper behavior,” said Supervisor VanWormer, and said that terrorist groups could fall under a different category.
“The big key here is teaching our young people how to move on in life,” said Supervisor Tague. “It’s our job as local leaders,” to encourage such behavior. He credited Glen Sanders for writing the resolution draft then re-writing it in a manner intended to gain support of every member of the board.
Simkins made a motion to edit the resolution, seconded by Supervisor Shawn Smith of Blenheim to remove a portion, to state, “based merely on group identity.”
Supervisor Sandra Manko of Sharon spoke next, saying that the resolution would have no effect on the national scene. She said that she did not vote for President Donald Trump, but that the resolution was meant as an affront to the White House. “No one has told the residents how they should act and behave,” she said about her constituents. She added that most local residents voted for the Republican ticket in November. “If you really love the country and want what’s best,” she said, it was important to support leaders.
Supervisor Phil Skowfoe said that he would support the resolution but criticized the Times Journal for writing that it went back to the Rules Committee for a re-write, which he said didn’t occur. Supervisor Bradt said, “There you go again. You can’t always believe what you read in the paper.” He added that he received revisions that led him to support the resolution as it read as presented. Bradt said he took the blame for not going to the full committee.
Chair VanWormer brought Simkins’ revisions to a vote. Supervisor Manko made a motion to move the resolution to the Rules Committee “where it belongs,” but Supervisor Tague asked the Board to press for a vote on Simkins’ resolution. At that moment Supervisor Simkins withdrew the motion to defer to Manko’s motion. Manko said that the motion in December actually sent the resolution to the committee last time but was not followed through. Supervisor Bradt said he agreed to look at it.
The Board voted. Supervisors Simkins, Coppolo, Manko, Bradt, Luniewski, and Skowfoe voted yes. Voting no were Supervisors Bates, Federice, Hait, Lape, McAllister, Tague, VanGlad, VanWormer, and Vroman. The resolution was defeated by about 400 weighted votes.
Next Supervisor Tague asked for a vote on the resolution. All of the Supervisors voted yes except for Supervisors Bradt, Coppolo, Manko, Simkins, and Smith. The resolution passed with a weighted vote of 2134-840.
Supervisor Federice said that he believed the first resolution was brought about because of “political motivations” and that he agreed with Supervisor Manko’s earlier statement.