RM 09-16-77 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

7. FLOORIDISCUSSION (CONT'D Barba a Schankerman (cont'd) ...and, hence, were unavailable. She went on to say after I questioned her, that the Redevelopment Commissioners, also, will not have read the documents prior to commencing the meeting. These items are very important governmental business. They concern the proposed downtown mall project. The documents explaining these items in detai should have been available to the public several days before the scheduled vote. The public has the right to scrutinize if it so desires. You Commissioners have a responsibility of voting intelligently and in the best nterests of the citizenry. No one can make a sound decision by glanc ng at the documents for the first time a few minutes before the vote. You should get and study copies of all resolutions, agreements, etc. in advance of the voting day so that you can be prepared for your vote. Regardless of the legality of not having the resolution available to the Commissioners, the press, and concerned citizens until just before the vote, not having the resolution available for the public's inspection is BAD politics. It suggests to me what are they trying to hide? Based on my former comments to this Commission, I urge you to vote NO!! At the least, because the public has not had a chance to read the resolutions and agreement and then remonstrate if they so desire, I say: postpone the vote! I ask that Mr. Brownell, Mr. Nimtz, and also the legal staff reply. I request that this objection be made a part of the record." Mr. N mtz concurred that this would be made part of the official record. Mr. Robinson indicated to Ms. Schankerman that the quotes you made trying to fitid information, if she were my secretary and had told you anything I would have canned her. There are proper places and proper people to talk to without trying to subject secretaries, other personnel, who have no authority to disclose information to anyone. This is a position I would take. Your other comments you are entitled to make, but I think you took the wrong approach. Mr. Nimtz recognized Mr. Chris Overgaard: "I wa t to agree with what has been presented here and I think that perhaps my position on this is as a member of the Odd Fellows Building. I too am particular about the downtown relocation or the perhaps 300 employees who will be out of work. I think probably what really bothers me more than anything else is the manner in which this whole procedure has come forward. The d ctatorial directions from the Mayor...I think it is wrong. Now if we operated our County government in the same manner as this whole procedure is haiidled, then you better throw me out of office, and I agree with Barbara, I don t know if you people come under the "sunshine act" but you have to be open and candid about it. I am concerned about the cost to the citizens of this project downtown. You expect me to pay for three hours of free parking, you don't even give my clients three hours of free parking now. You don't pay for walkways, I have in my pocket an article from Indianapolis.showing the way a mall should be developed without destroying everything. I don't understand why you have o tear everything down for progress. I am not opposed to progress, or the nonce t, but I think we ought to preserve what we have down here and try to build aroun it and rectify the mistakes we have made in the past. Thank you." (8)