Copyright 2024 All Rights Reserved.

May 25, 2024

Shelby County – False Public Comments Debunked – Part I

By Kirk Allen & John Kraft

On October 17, 2023

Shelby Co. (ECWd) –

During the public comment portion of the October 2023, regular meeting of the county board there were numerous commenters who unfortunately expressed things that were simply not true or misrepresented.  We urge people to not take our word for it but rather do their own research and let the public records tell the story.

Beleena Boehm was the first to sign up for public comment.  We find it most telling to see a pattern similar to that used on a local social media site, as in providing information in a fashion that casts negativity on people of certain political affiliations while leaving out key information that would disrupt the narrative.

  • Is it true each committee chairman is responsible as stated on the Watchdogs page?

Those not familiar with the dialog that took place on our Facebook page would be led to believe it was us who made the statement, which is not the case at all. However not only was it not us who made such a statement, but Beleena Boehm herself confirmed “no it’s definitely not just her job” (underline added).  That would appear to indicate she is acknowledging the chair has some responsibility.

The truth of the matter is neither the person who claimed it was the chairman’s responsibility nor Boehm’s implication it’s not just the chairman’s responsibility is correct.  Without any policy on the matter, there is no one designated as being responsible.

  • “Aren’t all committees just as important, regardless if we’re dealing with “controversial” issues that have large public attendance as stated on the Watchdogs page?”

Yes, all committees are just as important but to imply we posted what she said is simply not true.  No such “statement” is on the Watchdog page, now or ever.  What was posted was a question to her regarding the live streaming of meetings.  Several people were asking why other meetings were not being live-streamed.  The answer to my question might have been the reason. What is so ironic about this is the original post that generated selective outrage from her, turns into her actually making the case for what we have said for years.  All the meetings need to be recorded, which she confirmed in her response to my question.  We are pleased she believes that but confused as to why she had no problem with a Chairman of a committee directing the camera to be turned off.  Selective outrage?

  • “You chose not to take any steps in this matter.”

The allegation dealt with a letter from the Mayor of Shelbyville.  Reading the minutes from the September meeting indicates steps were taken on the matter. Don’t take our word for it.  Read the minutes at the top of page 4.   How anyone could equate the official record to not taking any steps in the matter is beyond our understanding.  Is it possible what she was reading was prepared for her rather than her own words?  I ask because she was at the last meeting and should have known such a statement is false but if just reading from something given to her she would not have caught that point until it was too late.

Facts matter as does context.



Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on print


1 Comment
  • Paul Kane
    Posted at 15:04h, 18 October Reply

    In review of the most recent PSC meeting, Goofy eyes a new truck to watch his stray family members shuttled back home without any oversight.

    “Watch Dogs Go Home”

    Kudos to each of the committee members who insisted on maintaining a constructive style while managing to accomplish some of the work.

Post A Comment