City Councilman Mike Kennedy was arguing with a citizen about the need for public input on the Ed. Corridor issue. It happened today, on a different public forum. The citizen wrote: “…there is a growing public perception that deals are being made, plans are being laid and there’s not yet been public input into the project.”
Mike Kennedy responded with “What do you define as “public input”? Because I get dramatically more input at Costco, the post office, and by email than I ever do at official public hearings and meetings….Public input comes in all forms, and I get a great deal of it just going about my day in town. Should that input be discounted because it isn’t delivered with a 5-minute time limit on camera?… In reality, though, the corridor has been only talk until very recently because the land wasn’t available. Now it apparently will be available and soon, and there will be a lot of decisions to be made. I think the Education Corridor is an exciting vision, idea, and just now maybe – hopefully a real future project. Marshall Chesrown should get a lot of credit for allowing this opportunity to be out there by offering to sell the land at his cost.”
**********
Mike Kennedy never once suggested a public meeting would or should be held. Who is he representing… the citizens?
It seems to me that an informational public meeting to fully disclose plans, agreements and property acquisitions is in order. I would like to see a televised meeting held in the evening. Councilman Kennedy’s private conversations are a component of public opinion; however, conversations outside the formal meeting setting do not constitute a substitute for an open public meeting. The scope of this project calls for formal public approval through an election.
Comment by Susie Snedaker — March 31, 2008 @ 4:18 pm
Kennedy is correct about getting input in public. That’s part of the reason why public officials are called such. But you can also read into his comments that he discounts official meetings and values casual encounters as having more weight. If so, would Mr. Kennedy be willing to make public the hours he will be available at CostCo and the Post Office? Or perhaps he could instead show up at the appointed times that City Code requires him to meet with the public?
And would Mr. Kennedy please address the issue of why public forums are not being held on something he obviously believes to be so important?
Comment by Dan — March 31, 2008 @ 5:02 pm
The very essence of being an elected public official is to air public business in public. That Kennedy receives input in private is just that, in private. He needs, and should desire, to share all that input with the public in a dialogue oriented public forum. The “demos” in democracy is the people, and Mr. Kennedy considers himself a member of the Democratic party. The public forum should be Kennedy’s defined niche, not the bane of his elected existence. Pathetic, hypocritical and hardly unexpected.
Comment by Wallypog — March 31, 2008 @ 5:41 pm
ms. sndedaker wrote: “It seems to me that an informational public meeting to fully disclose plans, agreements and property acquisitions is in order.”
Isn’t one of the reasons that public officials/agencies/bodies can go into executive session, for the discussion of real estate related matters? If so, it would seem premature at best, and detrimental, at worst, to have a hearing where “property acquisitions” are discussed in public. A speculator could step in and buy up the properties that are being considered and then hold out for a higher price, knowing that it was desirable property.
Comment by reagan — March 31, 2008 @ 6:00 pm
You’re correct, Reagan, regarding executive session. But the logic behind going into executive session for real estate matters is to ensure that profiteering doesn’t take place. Once the deal is made public, then it ceases to be material for executive session. At this point, it is no secret that government entities are purchasing the mill site. And if it were still the topic of executive session, then Kennedy, Bloem, Bell, and all the proponents of the Education Corridor would be extremely out of line discussing it in public at all, especially in private at Costco and the Post Office.
Comment by Dan — March 31, 2008 @ 6:05 pm
reagen…… LCDC board members and some their business associates have obtained properties within the LCDC URD. They did it in secret and without disclosure. Do they hold closed door executive sessions to discuss real estate matters to exclude speculators other than themselves? In the case of the education corridor all of the real estate ownership is known. The public discussion is about whether the city should enter into the deal, or not. The Mayor thought that the voters should decide about Hagadone Gardens, and I agree. The voters should have had say so about Kroc and they should have input on this as well.
Comment by Wallypog — March 31, 2008 @ 6:15 pm
Wallypog, that assessment is right on point. As regular citizens, other than posting on forums such as these is there anything we can do to get their attention? I note that both Susie Snedaker and Dan Gookin bring up solid comments and well thought out questions on this forum. Have either of you been asked for your input by anyone on the inside as promised by the status quo after the hotly contested city elections of last November? Why don’t we all meet at Border’s or The Breakfast Nook? Stakeholders and non-stakeholders getting together to get some real business done.
Comment by doubleseetripleeye — March 31, 2008 @ 6:18 pm
I don’t like the idea that our elected leaders hold their written internet opininons exclusive to particular forums. If they want to hold ‘public comment’ on the internet they need to spread their wings so to speak and fly into other territory so they do not appear biased – it kind of looks like a special interest sort of thing when they do that. I have never ran into Mike Kennedy at Costgo, but I do read local opinion on all forums and online news media. Like for instance, what does Mike Kennedy think of BPL – ‘Broadband Power Line’ as a possible internet solution for this area? Would it be cost effective and/or possible? Stuff like that.
Comment by Stebbijo — March 31, 2008 @ 7:53 pm
Sorry, I should have clarified my sentence to read completed property acquisitions.
Comment by Susie Snedaker — April 1, 2008 @ 7:39 am