Former Councilman Reid and Councilman Kennedy
In November 7, 2006, I spoke during the “Public Comments” section of the Coeur d’Alene City Council meeting. My inquiry elicited the admission by then-Councilman Dixie Reid that councilmembers had knowingly and willingly participated in an illegally closed meeting in violation of the Idaho Open Meeting Law. Not wanting to be upstaged, Councilman Kennedy chirped in to confirm his own participation in the illegal meeting.[
[
[
The illegal and unannounced telephonic meeting resulted in a permit being issued to discharge explosives in a residential neighborhood in Coeur d’Alene in violation of the very blasting ordinance Councilman Kennedy had championed. So much for Kennedy’s self-proclaimed commitment to public safety.
[
[
[
[
]
Here’s the question of the day: If Councilman Kennedy is so willing to violate both the Idaho Open Meeting Law and city ordinances, why should anyone believe he won’t violate these and other laws to enrich himself and his friends?
He and his cohorts on the council are more than willing to violate the Open Meeting Law. They did it again a few days ago when they met at Kennedy’s beckon to compose a response to their perception of the content of a political flier they didn’t like. I filed a formal complaint and the city attorney rejected it as saying it was not valid because it didn’t relate to a matter then pending before the city. Interesting, quick and dirty response, when the law says a meeting is convened when they deliberate toward a decision “on any matter”.
Comment by Gary Ingram — November 2, 2009 @ 10:42 am
Gary,
Thanks for the comment.
What I also found interesting is that according to the minutes of the November 7, 2006, council meeting, the City Attorney was present. Yet he did nothing to intervene or correct or even stop Reid from spilling the beans. The City Attorney’s apparent blase attitude toward the open meeting law merely reflects the indifference of the mayor and council toward this and other laws as well. Presumably the City Attorney knew the City was going to sneak the effort to ratify an illegal action into the Consent Calendar.
Comment by Bill — November 2, 2009 @ 11:11 am
Don’t forget the Person Field MOU issue. According to the minutes, it does not appear that any discussion regarding the issue took place in a public meeting. The approval of the MOU was hidden in the Consent Calendar, and, according to the minutes, there was no public discussion of the issue. Where was Mike Gridley and his expertise?
Comment by Susie Snedaker — November 3, 2009 @ 8:02 am