September 2008

The Argus editorial board is correct . . . for now

Just because I posed the question, doesn’t mean I don’t already know the answer. I feel the ethics committee will allow Litz and Jamison to vote. That is not what this is about, it is about setting a precedence with a legal opinion from the ethics committee. What am I getting at? Well, if Jamison and Litz vote on the fee increase, either yes or no, they will have eliminated themselves from ever developing in the areas that are affected. When the ethics committee tells you there is no conflict, that means to me, at the time of the vote. In the future if they benefit from the fee increase in their respective businesses, then an actual complaint can and will be filed.

Don’t think we won’t be watching.

Sarah Munson = Dave Palin

Amazing Parallel

The huge increases in tax revenues during her mayoral administration
weren’t enough to fund everything on her wish list though, borrowed
money was needed, too. She inherited a city with zero debt, but left it
with indebtedness of over $22 million. What did Mayor Palin encourage
the voters to borrow money for? Was it the infrastructure that she said
she supported? The sewage treatment plant that the city lacked? or a
new library? No. $1m for a park. $15m-plus for construction of a
multi-use sports complex which she rushed through to build on a piece
of property that the City didn’t even have clear title to, that was
still in litigation 7 yrs later–to the delight of the lawyers
involved! The sports complex itself is a nice addition to the
community but a huge money pit, not the profit-generator she claimed it
would be. She also supported bonds for $5.5m for road projects that
could have been done in 5-7 yrs without any borrowing.