[Vision2020] Hawkins Mall and Moscow

[J Ford]

Isn't this EXACTLY what happened with the WalMart people a couple of years ago?  When Comstock was still mayor and Joel was still in office?  Anyone remember that one?

Seems like no matter who is mayor, Randy and Gary are in the habit and middle of making and carrying out "meetings of secrecy".  Perhaps it is they that need to be looked at.

J  :]


> To: jampot at roadrunner.com; london at moscow.com; rhayes at turbonet.com; vision2020 at moscow.com; thansen at moscow.com
> From: thansen at moscow.com
> Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 03:09:11 +0000
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Hawkins Mall and Moscow
> 
> By the mere fact that the topic was discussed, and an agreement reached, 
> IN SECRECY give it an odious characteristic of suspicion.
> 
> These are elected officials, receiving pay from city revenues, making 
> decisions concerning the city of Moscow and its residents.  The people 
> have a right to know.
> 
> How can the people of Moscow have any faith or confidence in a city 
> council and mayor that conducts business in privacy outside of a 
> legitimate executive session?
> 
> To answer your question, Mr. Crabtree . . . Yes, they should have refused 
> to proceed after it was determined that a signed statement of non-
> disclosure was a prerequisite to the proceedings.
> 
> We, the people of Moscow, elected them onto the council.  They MOST 
> CERTAINLY owe us their candor and honesty.  Anything short of that is 
> disloyal.
> 
> Tom Hansen
> Moscow, Idaho
> 
> > I admit that I am less than wildly enthusiastic about the perceived lack 
> of 
> > transparency but I am satisfied with the outcome. Some discussions 
> between 
> > public and private entities must, by necessity, be behind closed doors. 
> Now 
> > that I've answered your question how about returning the favor. What is 
> it 
> > that you imagine happened of a nefarious nature that makes the closed 
> > meeting suspect? When closed executive sessions can and can not occur is 
> > governed by Idaho code. Is it your contention that the discussions were 
> > illegal? Just because Hawkins asked for a confidentiality agreement, 
> should 
> > our council have refused to discuss matters of vital regional interest 
> with 
> > them? Would refusing to discuss these matters have been in the best 
> interest 
> > of the city and its residents?
> > 
> > g 
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------
> This message was sent by First Step Internet.
>            http://www.fsr.com/
> 
> 
> =======================================================
>  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
> =======================================================

_________________________________________________________________
Shed those extra pounds with MSN and The Biggest Loser!
http://biggestloser.msn.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20080206/293be164/attachment.html