At the March 3, 2009, Coeur d’Alene City Council meeting several citizens spoke on various issues. Two of those citizens, Jim Brannon and Mary Souza, addressed the Council about its duty to oversee the city’s urban renewal agency. Then Councilman Ron Edinger (left) and then Councilwoman Deanna Goodlander (right) responded to Brannon’s and Souza’s comments. The question is, “Had they even listened to Brannon and Souza?”
(Note: Turn on your computer sound. The links have audio. You may want to open links in a new tab.)
These audio excerpts will be played out of order, however they have not been otherwise edited. The councilmembers’ responses will be played first.
Councilman Ron Edinger’s response to Brannon and Souza
Councilwoman Deanna Goodlander’s response to Brannon and Souza
Citizen Jim Brannon’s comment to Mayor and Council
Citizen Mary Souza’s comment to Mayor and Council
Attentive listeners will quickly note that Brannon and Souza were asking the Mayor and City Council to properly exercise their duty to oversee the conduct of the urban renewal agency, the Lake City Development Corporation. The question is, what were the councilmembers responding to? It certainly wasn’t the issue raised by Brannon and Souza.
At the conclusion of Councilwoman Goodlander’s response, listeners will hear one person applauding. That was Councilman Edinger. The Mayor laughingly asked him to stop.
Thanks, Bill. There’s nothing like the actual truth to clear up all those misstatements by our council members!
Comment by mary — March 4, 2009 @ 4:55 pm
Were they listening? Of course they were…to each other!
Comment by Faringdon — March 4, 2009 @ 5:03 pm
It is evident that they took this occasion to vent their frustrations about the issues in general, although they poorly chose to direct them personally at Mary and Jim. Even more interesting is that the LCDC’s own paid PR firm found many of the same complaints that other LCDC detractors commonly note. So this is no LCDC witch hunt by a select group of malcontents. Also, if these Council members feel that only partial information about the LCDC is being covered they are all quite free to fill in the blanks and freely answer peoples questions. But for some reason that does not ever seem to happen. So these remonstrations delivered by these 2 Council members were not well founded. They were emotionally anchored and they were biased.
Comment by Wallypog — March 4, 2009 @ 5:06 pm
Of course Ms Goodlander does not see any problem but tell me this, which way did the boundaries go as far as the LCDC is concerned?
Who OWNS the property in and around the direction of boundary growth?
Who OWNS/owned the land at the corner of Appleway and Ramsey?
Who OWNS the land at Seltice and Northwest?
And NOONE on the city council and/or the mayor does not find conflict of interest?
Comment by concerned citizen — March 4, 2009 @ 5:19 pm
I just posted a lengthy comment on the CDA Website. Don’t feel like doing it all over again here. Go read it if you want to. Bill, you are the computer wizard. OK by me if you can link it back to here.
Comment by Gary Ingram — March 4, 2009 @ 5:26 pm
I was there, but upon listening to the clips again today, I find a common thread. Both Goodinger and Edlander say, “I shouldn’t say this” and “I should keep my mouth shut.” Ah… if only they were wise enough to heed their own good advice!
Comment by Dan — March 4, 2009 @ 5:42 pm
Gary,
It’s Dan, not I, that is the compu-wizard. But thank you for the compliment. I can’t find your comment on the Coeur d’Alene Press. Which article did you comment on?
All,
I posted the councilmembers’ comments first, because it seemed likely that some readers/listeners might not have attended or heard the councilmeeting last night. If you didn’t hear the meeting, Edinger’s and Goodlander’s comments might make someone hearing for the first time think, “Wow! What got them so riled up?” Then listening to Jim’s and Mary’s comments, listeners might wonder if Edinger and Goodlander didn’t over react just a tad. Okay…a lot of tads. And of course, they did. Edinger and Goodlander answered the comments they wish Jim and Mary had made, not the reasonable, rationale requests they did make.
Comment by Bill — March 4, 2009 @ 5:42 pm
E-mail the web page, Gary, and I’ll put up the link: dan@opencda.com
Comment by Dan — March 4, 2009 @ 5:51 pm
It seem to me that some of our attention should go to our Attorney General.
The “reforms” in the Open Meeting Law that are being accepted by him are just not right. To not have a 24 hour pre-posting of the agenda, and being able to discuss issues and make decisions without public notification is just WRONG!
This is the very type of thing going on in Washington, D.C. Nancy Pelosi promised there would be a 48 hour pre-posting of the Stimulus Package”. When this pledge was broken most of us felt it to be wrong. This is just as wrong!
Open Government should apply whether Republicans or Democrats are in power.
Comment by citizen — March 4, 2009 @ 6:11 pm
Well, that was a waste of time and talent. My post on the CDA Press website never was posted and I used my name, too! Phoo on them!
Comment by Gary Ingram — March 4, 2009 @ 6:43 pm
Edinger and Goodlander answered the comments they wish Jim and Mary had made, not the reasonable, rationale requests they did make.
when you’ve been listening to folks cry wolf for so long, sometimes it’s hard to pick out the “reasonable” and “rational” from among the cacophony of shrill sounds.
Comment by reagan — March 4, 2009 @ 7:21 pm
sometimes it’s hard to pick out the “reasonable” and “rational”
bwahahahahahaaaaaaa
what a load of fertilizer. the finger wagging elite have never listened, not to anyone except the folks that bought and paid for their ear. more zero sense from the left.
Comment by TheWiz — March 4, 2009 @ 7:35 pm
Wait…was that a nice comment by “reagan”? Did he say Jim and I were “reasonable and rational”? Thank you!
Comment by mary — March 4, 2009 @ 8:29 pm
Yeah, I don’t think that face-slap by the AG’s reeks of “calling wolf” now. Obviously the AG and several legislators are calling wolf, not to mention the entire Post Falls government. Hmmm. Enough people calling wolf and, by gum, there must be real wolves here!
Comment by Dan — March 4, 2009 @ 9:53 pm
There need to be pressure on the Attorney General in this state to start putting teeth behind his “face slaps”.
It is business as usual for the City’s self serving gang of Council, NIC, and LCDC.
Pressure for more open government and penalties for those violating it are in order.
The A.G. is an elected official and our vote may be the only influence we have.
God Bless, our legislators such as Jorgenson.
God Bless, this Blog for promoting open government.
Comment by citizen — March 5, 2009 @ 7:44 am
citizen,
Thank you for commenting. The best thing for us citizens to do is continue to attend meetings, speak out on issues that concern us, offer constructive criticism, and hold public officials accountable for their actions. Informed, vocal citizens are anathemas to dishonest public officials and to those who would manipulate honest officials for corrupt purposes.
Comment by Bill — March 5, 2009 @ 7:54 am
Dream on Mary! reagan forgot his “” marks. He was quoting from a comment Bill made and then gave his usual answer. I understand and respect differences of opinion. What I don’t understand is slavish adherence to one party no matter what. reagan say he posts here for “balance”. All well and good…except he does what he decries. “They” are always right and “Open CDA” is always wrong. reagan, assumptions aren’t fact. Perhaps Nipps actions didn’t rise to “criminality” under Idaho law, but they were dishonest and did reek of conflict of interest. To say you can indulge in dishonest and unethical behavior because there was no criminal intent, is disingenuous and patronising to the collective intellect. And if Nipp is that stupid, he needs a keeper. As does the entire council in actuality.
Comment by Faringdon — March 5, 2009 @ 10:30 am
Farringdon, Right On! Honest, Open Government should know no party.
Comment by citizen — March 5, 2009 @ 8:04 pm
Mary, Dan, Bill, and Jim – I read your site but rarely comment, but just had to on this. THANK YOU for your work and time you spend on trying to get more open and transparent government. I know it is very time-consuming.
Many of us appreciate all of you.
I found the “esteemed” councilman’s comments on that other blogsite to be very juvenile and demeaning to the position.
Reddy
Comment by reddy — March 5, 2009 @ 9:26 pm
It’s a sad circus when only the performers show up, and then applaud each other.
Comment by Dan — March 5, 2009 @ 9:39 pm
I just do not understand the reaction of the city council in this matter. Clearly Charlie Nipp had a conflict of interest in his failure to publicly disclose. Further, beyond the legal definition, it is the “appearance of impropriety” which is the overriding benchmark in his responsibility to excuse himself from casting his votes.
The dangerous part of this is that city council members are allowed to slap down residents who ask the tough questions and want answers.
To all of you who dare to do this, keep up the good work for people of Coeur d’ Alene.
Comment by steve badraun — March 6, 2009 @ 4:56 am
Dan, Would you ever consider writing a petition to our Attorney General on more open government and asking others to pass it about to be to signed? This should be a non partisan issue.
Comment by citizen — March 6, 2009 @ 8:27 am
citizen,
I would suggest writing letters to our elected state representatives, with a cc to AG Wasden, encouraging them to put some enforcement teeth in Idaho’s open government laws, specifically both the Idaho Open Meeting Law and the Idaho Public Records Law.
There are indications that the proposed revisions to the Idaho Open Meeting Law (see my post When Did They Plan to Tell Us?) will make enforcement less likely rather than more likely. The AG says he would prefer education over enforcement and that’s one reason he’s pushing a more lenient approach to enforcement. He has already done a very admirable job of providing education to public officials. Some of those officials have tried to comply while others have become more clever and evasive. What AG Wasden needs to acknowledge is that not all public officials are honest. Some will evade or violate state law knowingly and intentionally simply because they know that investigation and prosecution are unlikely, and penalties upon conviction are trivial. (That same concern also applies to Idaho’s ethics in government law enforcement and prosecution.)
Deputy Attorney General von Tagen was quoted in the IBR article as saying, “Our goal is to get compliance with the Open Meetings Law, not to assess penalties – although that hammer is out there if we can’t get compliance.” I’d suggest to Mr. von Tagen that a hammer is useless until it’s used by a skilled carpenter. Left unused, a hammer rusts.
Comment by Bill — March 6, 2009 @ 9:05 am