My Run In with Regulations

a reply to: introvert

If the local community or state is not allowing time for the participants to "review proposed activities and program performance", you and others may have grounds to challenge their actions.

The problem is that typically all that is required for "notifying the public" is a small blurb in the "Public Notices" section of the local newspapers. Nobody ever reads through all those little advertisements but the government (and/or developers) are allowed to "technically" stay on this side of the law.

Gambler, thank you for the story. This is exactly what's wrong with the country, and one of the reasons we have President Trump.

Many years ago, my son came home from school with a problem. The school had started a reading program a few years earlier that was working great! The problem was, they didn't have many books, and he was running out of books to read from school. I visited the library on an open house, and they literally had less books than I did (and still do).

So I started thinking.... I have a pretty substantial library, including plenty of age-appropriate books. I was used to coming across literally boxes of youth-oriented books in yard sales, available for pennies each. I was working steady at the time and could have thrown about $500 at a charity. So why not donate my books, buy up as many as I could to donate, and if they needed more, advertise for donations?

OK, so between books I already had and books I could afford to buy, I figured I could have easily topped 1000 books. Next step, I approach the principal with my idea. Would you like to have over 1000 books to add to your library? No strings, just say go and I'll pull up with a pickup loaded with books... no charge, no restrictions, no questions.

I expected the answer to be "Yes! Thank you! Of course!"

The actual answer was different. "What are the titles of the books? Have they been approved by the AEA? Have you filled out the forms to make this donation?"

My answers: "I don't know, I don't know, and what forms?" Wrong answers; they turned me down cold... turned down a donation, because of regulations.

The reading program was scaled back the following year for lack of books.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: introvert

Hey thanks! Thats really good advice. I just got my letter today and started looking into it, but this is a great start and question to ask the people I call.

You're welcome.

Also, I believe each state has a citizen/consumer advocacy office, much like the IRS, which you can contact for advice or even begin to take actions if your rights are being violated or the city/state are over-stepping their bounds.

Don't be afraid to call around, find out what your rights are and play hard ball if need be.

originally posted by: eluryh22
a reply to: introvert

If the local community or state is not allowing time for the participants to "review proposed activities and program performance", you and others may have grounds to challenge their actions.

The problem is that typically all that is required for "notifying the public" is a small blurb in the "Public Notices" section of the local newspapers. Nobody ever reads through all those little advertisements but the government (and/or developers) are allowed to "technically" stay on this side of the law.

Not entirely true. Most public works programs are required to contact each individual by mail.

In my area, we receive a notice by mail even for small things, like the water being shut off for a few hours for maintenance.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: eluryh22
a reply to: introvert

If the local community or state is not allowing time for the participants to "review proposed activities and program performance", you and others may have grounds to challenge their actions.

The problem is that typically all that is required for "notifying the public" is a small blurb in the "Public Notices" section of the local newspapers. Nobody ever reads through all those little advertisements but the government (and/or developers) are allowed to "technically" stay on this side of the law.

Not entirely true. Most public works programs are required to contact each individual by mail.

In my area, we receive a notice by mail even for small things, like the water being shut off for a few hours for maintenance.

If you don't mind I would like to ask you a little more.

I did receive a notice to reapply for the grant, it was just that I no longer apply, and I would only have 9 days to do so.

However, only 30 out of like 300 households received the second application for the grant.

So would my argument be that it even if I received notice, it was illegal for the other 270 something people to receive no notification whatsoever?

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: eluryh22
a reply to: introvert

If the local community or state is not allowing time for the participants to "review proposed activities and program performance", you and others may have grounds to challenge their actions.

The problem is that typically all that is required for "notifying the public" is a small blurb in the "Public Notices" section of the local newspapers. Nobody ever reads through all those little advertisements but the government (and/or developers) are allowed to "technically" stay on this side of the law.

Not entirely true. Most public works programs are required to contact each individual by mail.

In my area, we receive a notice by mail even for small things, like the water being shut off for a few hours for maintenance.

You know what? In the case described in the OP you are correct because it directly affects the residents (as they have to perform physical work). In other cases in which, say, water service will be cut for a number of hours, the residents would have to be informed as well.

For the generic public works projects though, like upgrading a sewage treatment plant of waste transfer facility, there isn't a proactive outreach.

a reply to: Grambler

2 things my friend: and I have no legal expertise to swear by....but...

1. See if legally the 1st original agreements and requirements can be upheld..again and again and again if you have to...
2. It appears to be a "white elephant" or "black hole" for you...something youll just keep finding out more and more requirements and adjustments to put $$ and time into forever. Just cut your losses and get out.

Good luck....Best, MS

a reply to: introvert

Don't be afraid to call around, find out what your rights are and play hard ball if need be.

Or gather the people together with your second amendment rights and visit the town council ... fully armed.

At that point they will listen. A complaint to the FBI would go down well as well.

P

a reply to: Grambler

I did receive a notice to reapply for the grant, it was just that I no longer apply, and I would only have 9 days to do so

I'd like to see that notice. 9 days is a very short time, unless the notice was delivered by the sheriff's office, which indicates a court order/notice, or certified mail.

However, only 30 out of like 300 households received the second application for the grant.

There is a reason for that. Perhaps income level, grant acceptance, etc. You need to find out why.

Also, I find it hard to believe that you no longer qualify for the grant, considering the income level.

Something is not right here.

So would my argument be that it even if I received notice, it was illegal for the other 270 something people to receive no notification whatsoever?

Again, there is a reason they did not receive notification. You need to find out why.

originally posted by: pheonix358
a reply to: introvert

Don't be afraid to call around, find out what your rights are and play hard ball if need be.

Or gather the people together with your second amendment rights and visit the town council ... fully armed.

Sure. Go ahead.

Let me know how it works out.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Grambler

I did receive a notice to reapply for the grant, it was just that I no longer apply, and I would only have 9 days to do so

I'd like to see that notice. 9 days is a very short time, unless the notice was delivered by the sheriff's office, which indicates a court order/notice, or certified mail.

However, only 30 out of like 300 households received the second application for the grant.

There is a reason for that. Perhaps income level, grant acceptance, etc. You need to find out why.

Also, I find it hard to believe that you no longer qualify for the grant, considering the income level.

Something is not right here.

The income level for a two person household is $36,100, and that is what it was on 2014. I originally made about $30,000 in 2014 when I applied.

I have since been promoted and made around $38,000 in 2016, putting me slightly over the allotted aamount.

My point is the township would have no idea what people income was, so they should of had to send the infromation to everyone.

If they do know peoples income, why do you have to send your tax info, pay stubs and other such info to them too qualify?

And I will clarify that the date mailed of the document was Jan. 24 2014, and the deadline is Feb 10. So I guess we had 17 days to get the info in. However, we intially had 60 days to apply the first time.

a reply to: introvert

If people are interested I can post the letter I got. I don't think it has any of my personal info on it. It doesn't say anything about why the first grant was lost, but it has all of the other info.

Would this violate t and c?

a reply to: Grambler

I find this stuff very interesting (because clearly I'm not right in the head) so I re-read through the thread.

You said....

Around 60 applied, but only around thirty were accepted.

Now on the resend where we had to reapply in 9 days, only the 30 something people that were accepted had the applications sent out.

After reading that again... it sort of makes sense. All grants are different and the way that different municipalities administer them is different as well.

It seem completely plausible that the grant was given a time extension but not an increase in funds so the only people still eligible were the one's that were previously accepted.

Of course, it never hurts to dig a little deeper. In your case, I would look to see if you can be "grandfathered" into the plan. You don't lose much by asking.

a reply to: Grambler

The income level for a two person household is $36,100, and that is what it was on 2014. I originally made about $30,000 in 2014 when I applied. I have since been promoted and made around $38,000 in 2016, putting me slightly over the allotted aamount.

Is that criteria set by the state, local township, the water/sewage company or the federal grant authority?

And I will clarify that the date mailed of the document was Jan. 24 2014, and the deadline is Feb 10. So I guess we had 17 days to get the info in. However, we intially had 60 days to apply the first time.

What were the dates of the new notice? 2014 is when you received the first notice, correct?

a reply to: Grambler

One other thing I forgot to mention (although it is a bit of a side note)....

One of the things that local governments love more than collecting tax money is money that comes from the State or Feds. It allows them to take credit for providing a service while costing them very little in dollars and cents.

Of course all areas are different but it's been my experience that when local governments have access to outside funds, they go out of their way to try to include as many people (as much work) as possible. At times they can provide council on how to fill out forms in order to be as inclusive as possible (for example, using adjusted income versus gross).

I can't speak to your specific situation, but generally if a local government enforcing strict limits on who gets what.... they are either being forced to follow very strict rules or there simply isn't enough money to spread around to everyone (or some combination of the two).

a reply to: eluryh22

But why the second round of acceptance?

here is how I would think it would make sense.

Ok the grant falls through because of some dumb regulation.

There should be two options:

1. Everyone that was accepted the first time should be accepted again because the acceptance should go off the 2014 information.

2. Everyone has to reapply because they are going off of 2016 info. In this case, all of the original people accepted would apply, but so could all of the other people in the township.

I don't understand how they could have like some sort of second round of eliminations.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Grambler


Is that criteria set by the state, local township, the water/sewage company or the federal grant authority?

Again I can post the letter (if I can figure out how to embed pictures) as long as its not against T and C.

From how I am reading, its says the grant is for low-moderate income families (LMI). Its seems the LMI level is set by the Community Development Block Grant, which means the LMI would be set federally I think.

What were the dates of the new notice? 2014 is when you received the first notice, correct?

The first notice was 2014.

This time around I heard nothing about anything, including the first grant falling through until I received this letter date Jan 24.

a reply to: Grambler

Again I can post the letter (if I can figure out how to embed pictures) as long as its not against T and C.

Use the upload feature on the toolbar above.

This time around I heard nothing about anything, including the first grant falling through until I received this letter date Jan 24.

Jan 24th of 2014? You said this earlier.

And I will clarify that the date mailed of the document was Jan. 24 2014, and the deadline is Feb 10. So I guess we had 17 days to get the info in. However, we intially had 60 days to apply the first time.

I'm confused about the dates of the first notice/application and the newer notice.

Can you clarify?

a reply to: Grambler

I couldn't say for sure. I'm thinking that the original group of people that were accepted was the cut-off (meaning those are the ONLY addresses that are part of the program).

Clearly the agency providing the funds has extended the deadline to use the funds but it's reasonable that they would want to make sure those who were originally approved are:

1) Still within the income limits

2) Still alive (not joking here)

That's part of the problem with bureaucracy. Sometimes the rigidness of "the rules" supersedes common sense.

a reply to: introvert

Ok I am mis dating things here. The first notice in 2014 came in September of 2014, and you had until the end of December 2014 to get all of your documents in to apply.

This time around, I received notice on January 24, 2017, and have until Feb 10, 2017.

I am still working on uploading the pics.