Friends,
I have been out of town on business this past week,
and have been absent when a slate of candidates made
One is about the ravine, and some trees that had to be
removed to accommodate the new transformer.
Here is a link to Construction Report #1 posted on
the city’s website on Oct. 22nd. This report contains City Engineer
Josiah Bilskemper’s October report documenting the process by which minor
changes were made due to aerial imaging inaccuracies and more rubble in the ravine
than previously identified.
The other area of concern deals with accusations of a conflict
of interest regarding the Council members and One University Place. Please allow me to explain this issue, since
there is no time for a candidate’s forum, which would have allowed this to have
been brought to the forefront.
Silvia was interested in exploring the question of whether
any council members were receiving any compensation from the developer in
exchange for their approval of the Maxwell project. Mike Haverkamp, Virginia
Miller, Carla Aldrich and I repeatedly stated that we had not received any
compensation for our vote.
Silvia then brought
forth a resolution and statement that she wanted council members to sign. This
resolution and statement did not match Silvia’s stated inquiry. In addition, it included language dealing
with relatives which was never vetted by our City Attorney. So Silvia was instructed, and she agreed, to correct and revise the statement and
resolution and bring it to the Special Meeting on July 28th. She did not do this.
She did bring a statement to the August 11th
meeting but it was not completely revised and she did not make the recommended
corrections. Instead she brought a
similar version from the one she had presented at the July 14th
meeting. Council did not pass the
resolution or sign the statements because this similar one also did not match
Silvia’s inquiry, and it did not fulfill the agreement she made with Council.
In addition, as part of the discussion regarding this
conflict of interest statement, our city lawyer, Steve Ballard suggested that
signing such a document was redundant.
Each of us took an oath of office when we were sworn in as councilors,
and such an oath was in fact the same as signing a conflict of interest
statement.
Silvia failed to follow through on her own resolution. But rather than continuing to work on the
wording of the resolution for Council’s approval, she has decided to spin it
into a sign of council’s lack of transparency.
And so here we are today with Silvia touting council’s failure to sign
her conflict of interest statement as a sign of council’s corruption, rather
than Silvia’s failure to follow through on a task.
As we close in on Election Day no doubt other possible
misconceptions will arise. Please feel free
to contact me at jimlane@yahoo.com or
319-621-3111; Mike mikehaverkamp1960@gmail.com
, 319-430-0864; or Carla 319-621-7852 if you have any questions. We would be more than happy to clarify
things.
It is my pleasure to honorably serve the citizens of U-Heights.
-Jim Lane
I've read the motion you all failed to sign. I see no reason why an honest person with no conflict of interest would be unwilling to sign it. People will be writing in candidates who have the will and backbone to stand behind their actions, not behind a lawyers statement.
ReplyDeleteNormally I wouldn't allow an anonymous comment. I can't recall getting any before, except for obvious spammers. But I chose to allow this one.
ReplyDeletehttp://silviaq.com/coi.html I am not posting this link anonymously, but to counter the innuendo and half answers on this website. I make no judgement on why the majority of council feels unable to restate their impartiality in this process. I will say that you knowingly signed your constituents up to subsidize a wealthy developer, and one who fails to meet even your own weak guidelines the ravine clearance being a good example. You all owe your constituents an appology for squandering our tax dollars on luxury condos that will increased demand for city services and will pay very little in property taxes for the life of the tif. Duncan Stewart
ReplyDeleteI find any support for Councilwoman Quezada describing anything as innuendo and half answers to be laughable to say the least. There was no member of council who failed to restate their impartiality in the process, the issue has never been being impartiality but the Gestapo tactics which were employed and the accusatory nature of the way in which it was presented. I was informed by a good friend who also pays great attention to the political system, "State Code (Chapter 362) provides the same protections for the community." Which has been several of the candidates justification through this entire process.
DeleteAs to your TIF comments, you seem to be more interested here and in the Press Citizen of relying on misinformation, and fuzzy math than actually understanding the numbers that went into this decision.You have a right to your misguided opinion, but time will set the record straight.