[Vision2020] the appearance of impropriety

[Steven Basoa]

The main difference I see here is that when Ms. Pall made her offhand  
remark to (I believe) a member of the Thompson family, she was  
already a member of the city council.  Mr. Ament's comments were made  
in his capacity as a private citizen before he was elected to  
office.   There is a difference there, however slight.

SB


On May 2, 2006, at 7:44 AM, g. crabtree wrote:

Last nights city council meeting had one interesting and unexpected  
moment when the honorable Linda Pall recused herself from involvement  
in the rezone hearing because of a very mildly disparaging offhand  
remark she made regarding the property in questions largest potential  
occupant. She did not refer to Wal-Mart employees as "androids." She  
did not personally insult Sam Walton. She did not disparage Wal-Mart  
shoppers with unnecessary insults. She merely expressed her opinion  
that her preference was that Wal-Mart not locate there. What are the  
odds that this will set a precedent for future council meetings,  
where other council persons may have been even more vocal (and much  
more unpleasant) in the remarks they have made regarding topics that  
come before them? Topic's where it is clear that there will be no  
objectivity in that council persons decision making process and no  
backing down from previously held biases. Anyone for holding their  
breath?

G. Crabtree
_____________________________________________________
  List services made available by First Step Internet,
  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
                http://www.fsr.net
           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20060502/cebfd983/attachment-0001.htm