7/21/2007

$1,400,000.00

Ah, gifts. The City gave SME a gift.

And, as usual, the Tribune got the story about half right. No offense to Mr. Ecke, of course, but if you don't have time to research these stories and come up with the 'right' questions, you might want to start reading the local bloggers, including yours truly. You might be surprised at the level of insight brought to bear on some of these questions by the local non-journalists. Heck, there are even some good questions raised on the Tribune's own forum.

Let's just focus on what the Tribune did report. According to the Tribune, "In this situation, the city is 'not requiring deposits from our customers,' City Manager John Lawton said. Since they were not asked for deposit money up front, the city did not think it would be fair to ask customers for a deposit after the fact, he added."

Someone please tell me, then, why it is "fair" for SME to ask City of Great Falls taxpayers for a deposit after the fact? Did that fairly obvious contradiction not occur to Mr. Ecke? To the City Commission?

The article also states that "city commissioners voted without dissent Tuesday night to set aside $1.4 million in scattered city funds." Did I read that last night? The City has $1.4 million dollars in "scattered" funds? Don't worry, said Mr. Lawton. He "added the city has enough money to cover all its needs." And they just passed a tax increase?

I liked this part, too: "SME, which is hoping to build a coal-fired power plant near Great Falls, has "fluctuating" needs for cash, Lawton said, and decided to quit covering the security deposits itself." Oh reeeeeally. SME just "decided" to quit covering security deposits, huh? Would someone please tell me what would have happened if the City Commission had simply elected to enforce the contractual rights that had been previously negotiated for the benefit of City taxpayers?

Why would the City Commission put SME's interests over the citizens' interests? Why wouldn't the Tribune ask that question? Will someone please tell me who on the City Commission represents the interests of the citizens over all others?

19 comments:

a-fire-fly said...

And right by that article is another one about how the City is going to need more money for street maintenance. Can't gather up any of those "scattered funds" for that, now can they.

Anonymous said...

"Will someone please tell me who on the City Commission represents the interests of the citizens over all others?"

That's to easy. Zip Zilch Nadda. Anymore questions? Cause you ask the tough questions just like the Tribune!

Just kidding. Keep up the excellent work Geeguy.

TL

Anonymous said...

The RIGHT question is, "And what do YOU, Mr Lawton and Commissioners, PERSONALLY get from this "sweet" deal?"
CA

Anonymous said...

It's hopeless. Taxpayers are screwed. The more opposition to stupid city decisions the more is spent.

It's hopeless. Give up. Resistence if futile.

Anonymous said...

But Comrade:

"Earlier anti-liberals directly attacked liberty as an evil. Marx adopted a different stance - to attack liberty under the guise of expanding it. In so doing, he re-packaged despotism to please modern sensibilities - a feat of intellectual marketing which would have profound consequences for hundreds of millions of people in the next century."

Why should Great Falls City Commissioners subject citizens to anything less?

Anonymous said...

The right questions:

Why do Mr. Lawton and Ms. Stebbins and other Commissioners have excessive contempt for facts presented?

Why do they not value taxpayer opinions?

Why do the problems seem to compound with each Commission decision?

It appears the only solution is to vote them out of office and remove their bureaucratic friends as well.

Anonymous said...

I'll second that.

Anonymous said...

Dona's rubber stamp is about worn out.

Anonymous said...

And take chief dorky and his gestapo boys WITH them! It remains unbelievable to me that cops must be at the city council meetings. Instilling fear in the populace is INDEED a gestapo tactic. It's called intimidation. Only nutless wonder public servants need the gestapo to conduct business.


LK

Anonymous said...

LK,

Why such such bitter-"instilling fear" speech?

You are not a stupid person but it is hard to "value" your opinion when you offer "no solutions."

TB

Anonymous said...

I think what LK is saying is throw the rats out. Election day is coming, not soon enough.

Anonymous said...

I dont' think LK is using "fear tactics", I think he pointing out how the mayor and her group use the police to put fear into the people. If we can't speak, then they can do what they want. Bullies and gangs, we have both here in Great Falls and they run the city. November can't get here soon enough.

Anonymous said...

I'd also like to know: Just who does LK want in City Government?

PL

Anonymous said...

True, negativity works but a solid positive message is better.

Anonymous said...

PL, good question. So, I'll answer it. I want someone who will put the PUBLIC back in democracy. Look, I've attended a few city council meetings, and I saw NO wackos disrupting meetings. Whom did I see? Well, I saw people like Cheryl Riechert, a local well-respected doctor; I saw Aart Dolan, a retired university professor; I saw Rich Liebert, a retired Army Colonel; I saw Stuart Lewin, a local attorney and activist; I saw Larry Rezentes, a local CPA who watchdogs the financial shennigans of the city like no one else. And I saw many OTHER people equally educated and terribly motivated and interested in the issues. Now, WHY SHOULD THESE PEOPLE NOT BE ALLOWED TO TESTIFY?! Look, I don't know about you, but the city mothers (mofos), PALE in comparison to the people mentioned above. I mean, I sometimes can't believe that these city council members aren't required to wear bibs to keep the drool on their clothes! And THEN, there's chief dorky and his thugs. My GOD! How MUCH money is spent on having the coppers attend city council meetings instead of fighting crime?! Look, I want the people, the INTELLIGENTSIA put back in the friggin' process! For every mike whitsoe type, there are ten professionals ready to speak. I simply want someone in the city council who is not SO afraid of their constituents that they feel the need to have dorky's boys poised, waiting in the wings ready to spring into action! NO ONE, repeat, NO ONE deserves to be told that they are being charged with a felony if there was no felony crime! That is simply a chief dorky approved tactic to throw people off balance. SO, whom would I support? ANYONE who puts the public back in democracy. Nutless wonders like primadonna and jonny lotten do NOT deserve to be in ANY public decision making body, for cowards make pisspoor leaders. I've looked at and spoken to all the candidates for mayor. I think that ANY of them would be better than what we have. And one more thing. I'm STILL waiting for someone to explain for me in specific detail just WHY chief dorky and his gestapo need to be at city council meetings! I have yet to have an answer. What IS the crime that they are there to prevent? And what WAS the incident that first precipitated their need to be there? I don't get it. Maybe you can help me understand, PL. For you see, I NOT kidding when I say that I've been to hundreds of public meetings, many with emotions running high. (miners, loggers, enviros) And guess what. We NEVER needed a guy like dorky to arrest anyone. Help me understand. PUHHHHLEASE!


LK

Anonymous said...

Let's have a contest and see who comes up with BETTER ways the city could spend $1.4 million for the needs of the Citizens here, NOT
SME's 'cash flow', especially when being sued at every level of Gov't!!

Anonymous said...

LK,

Let me rephrase.

Which candidates currently filed for office in city government do you support?

PL

Anonymous said...

PL, ok. I like Suart Lewin. He's a man of unquestionable integrity and intelligence, and he is a self-less fighter for social justice and the environment. I like Mary Jolley. I think that she is intelligent, committed, and most of all fearless. I have no idea what her politics are, but I respect her tremendously. I like that Knight fella for mayor. He's bright, and he's committed to putting the public back in the process. I like Susie Kahn. She has some great ideas. I think that all of the above would do wonders to improve the functioning of city government. For you see, UNLIKE primadonna who immediately changed stripes upon assuming the mayorship, I am confident that NONE of the people above would fall under the spell of jonny lotten. There you have it. I'm not sure who I'll vote for you for mayor for sure. I'm still deciding. But I can tell you for certian just WHO I won't be voting for. Does this help? For you see, PL, I believe that we MUST have people of substance and character running the show. I know. I know. "Character" is a would coaches just LUV to talk about endlessly. But it's true. Some people have it, some don't. Look at our current council and you decide. See much character there????

LK

Anonymous said...

LK -

This answered my question:

I like Suart Lewin. He's a man of unquestionable integrity and intelligence, and he is a self-less fighter for social justice and the environment. I like Mary Jolley. I think that she is intelligent, committed, and most of all fearless. I have no idea what her politics are, but I respect her tremendously. I like that Knight fella for mayor. He's bright, and he's committed to putting the public back in the process. I like Susie Kahn. She has some great ideas. I think that all of the above would do wonders to improve the functioning of city government.

That's all I want to know.

Thanks, PL