[Vision2020] Moscow City Council's Megaload Discussion

[Joe Campbell]

A few thoughts on the actions of Steed.

1/ It was rude. I don't care if Steed's acts were "legal" or not. His
behavior was rude and if he can't see that and issue an apology on that
basis alone, then he is as arrogant as he seems to be in the video.

2/ Why is it that so many Republicans are incapable of working with others?
The recent Idaho state legislative session was a disgusting spectacle of a
group trying to shove their own views down the throats of others. No
discussion, no thought that Luna (who has no actually PhD, as required by
Idaho law) might not have a clue about education; they didn't even listen to
members of their own party with differing viewpoints, like Rep. Trail. Is
Steed adopting those same strategies, pushing his own agenda in a way that
thwarts and limits public discussion? Looks like that to me!

3/ What was wrong with the other council members, who looked like a bunch of
cowards? It was almost as if the whole lot of them approve of the Steed way
of doing things: push forth your own ideas and forget about the feelings and
thoughts of the public. What happened to politics being about public
SERVICE?

On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 9:00 AM, Saundra Lund <v2020 at ssl1.fastmail.fm>wrote:

> Sue, I think another point or two or three are perhaps still worthy of
> discussion.
>
> For instance, why did we have two (highly paid) City administrative staff
> --
> both attorneys, BTW -- advising Council members & our Mayor drastically
> different on procedure?  Did either of those attorney-administrators
> consider Idaho's Open Meeting Law, which trumps Robert's Rules, or was it
> only Robert's Rules that was cared about?
>
> Additionally, since according to City Supervisor Gary Riedner it's the
> policy of the Council that Resolutions are included in the Council packet,
> why wasn't Steed's?  IOW, what was the emergency nature Steed's Resolution
> such that it didn't see the public light of day and wasn't included in the
> packet prior to being sprung at the meeting . . . and why did other Council
> members support such a drastic deviation?
>
> Did Steed's stunt comply with Idaho's Open Meeting Law?  I'm not an expert
> by any stretch of the imagination, but my reading indicates that that it
> *might* not.  Steed's Resolution wasn't on the agenda, so it seems to me
> the
> procedure set forth in IC 67-2343 for amending an agenda was the proper
> course.  Needless to say, that procedure wasn't followed.  Does anyone have
> any input about whether or not Steed's stunt complied with Idaho's Open
> Meeting Law?
>
> Similarly, thinking people wonder about a "hidden" agenda since there was
> no
> emergency such that Steed's Resolution needed to be voted on that
> particular
> night with ***no*** notice to the public and with -- presumably -- no prior
> discussion with other Council members (which would be a violation of Open
> Meeting Law, even if Steed did in member-by-member-by-member -- those kind
> of "serial" discussions ARE a violation of the law, no matter how
> "informal").  Yet, with presumably no prior notice, three additional
> Council
> members apparently couldn't *wait* to make such a huge deviation from
> Council policy.  Absent exigent circumstances, such regrettable Council
> behavior certainly gives the *appearance* that Idaho Public Meeting Law
> wasn't followed, which is never a good thing.
>
> IMHO, absent exigent circumstances, it's the *appearance* to the public
> that
> Steed's stunt didn't comply with Idaho's Open Meeting Law that Steed & the
> other Council members owe an apology for to Moscow's citizens.  That
> deviation from the policy of including Resolutions in the agenda *hurts*
> public trust, something that far outweighs whatever coup Steed thought his
> "feel good" Resolution would accomplish.
>
> Sue, I also particularly appreciated your insightful comments about the
> mega-load public meeting/forum -- I, too, wonder what the purpose of the
> public forum was, given that the data gathered hadn't even been "collated
> and distributed" (again, according to Riedner) before Steed's cowardly*
> Resolution was sprung & passed.  Frankly, why should we expect
> representatives of ITD or Imperial Oil/ExxonMobil to consider local
> concerns
> when SOME of our own elected representatives didn't care enough to get the
> fuller local picture before bum-rushing the "feel good" resolution through?
>
> *Note:  I think the Steed's Resolution was cowardly because of the way
> Steed
> went about it:  no prior public notice, no prior ability to read the
> wording, and no action other than accepting & discussing a report was on
> the
> agenda.  Thus, many concerned community members with real lives didn't
> attend that particular Council meeting.  Would have Steed & the rest of the
> sheep have had the stones to pull such a stunt in a packed Council
> chambers?
> We'll never know because Steed -- supported by three other Council members
> -- took the coward's path rather than an open & honest one that good
> government demands.
>
> I had some other questions/comments I've been thinking about (including
> what
> on earth were the Council members thinking in voting in support of a
> Resolution that virtually ***begs*** the IDT to change the night transport
> requirements, would those reports written by City officials that Steed put
> so much weight on be the same if the mega-loads were coming through town at
> 8 AM, noon, 3 PM, or even 8 PM as Steed's Resolution desires, etc. ), but
> since I didn't have a chance to post sooner, I suspect I've missed the
> "interest" window.  Ah, well . . .
>
> Hey -- if anyone reading this knows of any civil disobedience plans for
> if/when the mega-loads come through Moscow, ***please*** let me know.  For
> obvious reasons (including the Council not giving a rip about full input
> from Moscow citizens), I'm not interested in attending public meetings or
> writing letters.  However, Steed's stunt -- along with the other lemming
> Council members' disinterest in the input of their constituents -- has
> annoyed me enough that I'm willing to participate in civil disobedience if
> needed, and I've got some friends who would also probably like to
> participate   :-)  For a variety of reasons (including the fact that even I
> get tired of tilting at windmills, and since our governor & his henchmen
> had
> sold us out *long* before we'd heard a word about the mega-loads defiling
> Idaho qualifies as tilting at windmills), I'd made a conscious decision not
> to get too involved in the issue.  However, given our Council's blatant
> disregard for and disrespect of citizen input on this highly controversial
> issue, I'm ticked enough that I'm willing to express with action my
> absolute
> disgust at the Resolution.
>
>
>
> Saundra Lund
> Moscow, ID
>
> The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do
> nothing.
> ~ Edmund Burke
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com]
> On Behalf Of Sue Hovey
> Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2011 2:43 PM
> To: MoscowCares at moscow.com; Moscow Vision 2020
> Cc: Jane Kauzlarich; Borg Hendrickson; Friends of the Clearwater; Fritz
> Knorr; Jeanne McHale; Marilyn Beckett; Joann Muneta
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Moscow City Council's Megaload Discussion
>
> Somewhere I had a thread in this discussion where I stated Randy Fife had
> teamed up with Walter Steed to blindside the mayor.  Walter sent me an
> email
> to tell me Randy had nothing to do with it.  Yesterday I saw Nancy at
> Farmers' Market and she agreed.  So the video should not be interpreted
> with
> an inference that Fife was helping Walter create council chaos.  He did it
> all by himself, with council members who were willing to support him.
>
> Sue
>
> =======================================================
>  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/20110525/b212fce0/attachment.html