As we have all read, the Argus took the mayor to task about the lack of transparency in their ED board column on Sunday. This line I found the most interesting;
Now the topic is being revisited with a group that includes members of the hotel, construction, architectural and banking industries – all areas where avoiding questions of conflict of interest would be prudent.
This is one of the main reasons these meetings need to be public. When you have a group of powerful business men in town (even if they are volunteers) making recommendations, we need to be clear that their suggestions are for the good of everyone, not just their pocket books. Their is a part of me that wonders if some of the members asked that they be private meetings. We wouldn’t want that pesky Bruce showing up with a camera while we are planning our future investments.
During the informational meeting yesterday, councilors Stehly and Starr reminded the rest of the council about the importance of transparency (while the rest of them just stared into space and made no additional comments. I think even one of them was laughing at Stehly’s comments about ‘loving thy neighbor’). Starr went on to say the obvious, the City Council is the policy making body of the city, not the mayor’s office or his appointed study groups. The city council should be heading up this group, yet only ONE member is invited to attend (Soehl). We seem to be going even further backwards these days when it comes to transparency. Many city hall watchers have even been stating that TenHaken may even worse than the last dude.
What even bothers me more is that we seem to have a majority of the city council that isn’t questioning this. I’m sure Brekke agrees with Starr and Stehly, but where was Erickson and Neitzert who used to rail on the last administration about transparency. Or what about our chairs, Selberg and Erickson allowing TenHaken to usurp the powers of the council? It’s an outrage, and they remain silent.
It’s because they HATE public input and TRANSPARENCY, they proved it this summer while limiting public input.
That’s not the only thing that has disappeared into the night. I guess proclamations are no longer read at the council meetings because TenHaken found them to be a waste of time that takes away from the regular meeting. Part-Time Mayor Beck now handles them internally, I guess. Why don’t we eliminate the invocation to? There is no requirement we have one, the county commission only does the pledge of allegiance. Some of those pastors tend to be winded anyway.
I can’t say it enough, there is never a good excuse to keep government closed. And saying we need candid conversations as one of those excuses is just ludicrous. I think the best conversations about policy happen in the open when feet are held to the fire.
l3wis 