Letter To The Editor:
At the Special City Council Meeting of March 6th, the vote to increase the number of council members to request a Special Meeting from two to three was passed, as was expected, by a vote of 3-2.
Get The Latest News!
Don't miss our top stories and need-to-know news everyday in your inbox.
During our discussion, the City Attorney claimed that an Appellate Court case determined it required three council members to request a Special Meeting, and not two. I have asked the City Attorney to forward a copy of the court case and the authority she cited as proof that the state requires three, and not two, council members to hold a Special Meeting. I want to note, that two times in the past a prior City Attorney was proven to be wrong in her opinions, and the City had to take steps to correct actions that were taken by the council based upon her opinions.
In addition, there was an attempt by Mr. Plank, who professes his commitment to transparency, to denigrate the need for Special Meetings. The Special Meeting of February 24th was called because the City Manager, who controls the agenda, refused to add requested items to the February 17th meeting. The only way to add an item to an agenda in this case is through a Special Meeting. Mr. Plank decided to skip this Special Meeting that was to address issues raised by concerned citizens about waste, fraud and abuse causing tens of thousands of dollars to be paid to developers who were in default of their TIF agreements, a TIF agreement that was altered without Council approval, and many other issues. Mr. Plank dismissed these citizen concerns by claiming that these Special Meetings are like the “Jerry Springer Show”.
Finally, Mayor Stalcup recent said that “Mr. Dettmers has had a platform to voice his personal opinion about our city manager,’ but has not given Stalcup a ‘good reason’ to act on them.” I find Mayor Stalcup’s statement intentionally misleading. One can view the City Council meeting of March 3rd in which I never expressed any “personal opinion”. I clearly stated the facts after investigating complaints from concerned citizens. I asked why events occurred and requested an audit and investigation to determine what happened. I never accused Mr. Palen of anything. Mayor Stalcup continues to dismiss attempts to address serious failures of our City management. The question is why is he not concerned about this?
On September 3rd, the Council approved an amended TIF agreement which required Mayor Stalcup’s signature. On September 6th, City Manager Palen signed this agreement, not the mayor, after it had been altered. On February 17th, Councilmember Ayres and I met with the City Attorney who admitted that the payment of $40,000 made under this altered agreement was unauthorized because the developer failed to satisfy any of his obligations under the agreement.
The question I have, why didn’t Mayor Stalcup ask about the altered agreement that he was required to sign? I think Mayor Stalcup knows a lot more than he pretends.
Bill Dettmers
Wood River City Council
Opinions expressed in this section are solely those of the individual authors and do not represent the views of RiverBender.com or its affiliates. We provide a platform for community voices, but the responsibility for opinions rests with their authors.
More like this:
