Thank you for the link to the Davey Crockett story. I have been looking for the text for some time.

http://www.fee.org/library/books/notyours.asp

And please, don’t forget, that the HSCC agreed to the change of management. Once they acquiesced, I found it hard to keep up the fight.

I don’t have time to research every issue that comes up. Susan, or you for that matter, are welcome to go after this one. I certainly gave y’all the lead in with the letter to Mr. Lawton.

My plate’s full.

The City Counsel extends the contract with HSCC and then a few days later John Lawton fires HSCC and hires the Police Department. Now I must say I thought John worked for the City Counsel not the other way around. So we have no input from anyone other than John for an extra 300K per year expenditure.

Susan is arrested for asking what is going on.

The HSCC has financial troubles because of the City refusing to pay or paying late. Did the City ever give HSCC any 5K grant?

Now we have the City giving 5K to the new people on August 21 but have no record that said payment was authorized by anyone until November 6.

Seems to me something is going on here and no one seems to care except Susan.

“Please explain to me how it is NOT acceptable to have a small, select group of individuals receiving reduced utility bills, but acceptable for a small, select group of individuals to receive land, city funds, hand-picked, future employment and more?” Because even if the Foundation is a pet cause (no pun intended), it’s not a personal benefit. They’re not living in the shelter personally. As far as future employment, that’s conjecture right now.

“How it is NOT acceptable for confidentiality as pertains to the behavior of one group, but acceptable when evidenced by another?” What confidentiality are you talking about?

“How it is NOT acceptable to have insider deals which will cost the taxpayers as relates to SME, but totally acceptable when viewed on an issue in which you have no interest?” It’s not.

But I see a distinction here. What I say can be demonstrated with reference to specific documents linked off the blog, can be sourced to an individual, or else I tell the readers I am speculating. I am only talking about the $5,000.00 donation. I was able to source the money, and trace back at least a form of authorization.

And you’re right: This isn’t as important to me as it is to you. You’re going to have to run with this one. I have enough irons in the fire.

The HSCC had an Animal Control contract and received payment for services rendered in that capacity.

The Animal Foundation has what contract? Their original sales pitch and printed statement was “to raise funds to build a new shelter for THE HUMANE SOCIETY OF CASCADE COUNTY.” Would we like to review the campaign against that organization by these SAME people now involved in this mess? What about services now NOT available in the county? The fact that the HSCC, the organization which offered full-county services, now has no shelter, even though many of us donated time, money and services to the Foundation fund-raiser with that intent as the understood outcome.

Please explain to me how it is NOT acceptable to have a small, select group of individuals receiving reduced utility bills, but acceptable for a small, select group of individuals to receive land, city funds, hand-picked, future employment and more? How it is NOT acceptable for confidentiality as pertains to the behavior of one group, but acceptable when evidenced by another? How it is NOT acceptable to have insider deals which will cost the taxpayers as relates to SME, but totally acceptable when viewed on an issue in which you have no interest?

While the City continuously spins the improvements, please don’t forget that the numbers being compared are City-only vs County service numbers offered by the HSCC.

And the City and Foundation are not caring one way or the other about the animals. Merely about their display and the money. If the animals were of concern, they certainly wouldn’t be allowing a dog to sit in the shelter for two days with a fractured pelvis and no veterinary care, as the most recent example.

Spin this as you will Wolfpack, but the reality is it’s all being handled much the same as the coal plant and other issues. I pointed out in June that the bid showed clear conflict of interest with the same people sitting on the review and award committees AND submitting a bid, the lack of open discussion with the public and the pre-approved deals and that there was a decidedly limited number of individuals with special interests involved in every aspect of the situation.

If all of that is not sufficient cause to have askance as to what these people are doing, then why have participatory government at all? Throw the process out and declare Great Falls a fiefdom.

My only questions involve the allocation process. And even that looks like it is pretty well covered.

Sounds the same and you clearly understood the question. Phonics and ebonics are common today amoung the less educated..

Answer the question if you know the answer..

You seemed to take offense when voters discussed the mayor dropping out of school. A legit question about someone seeking office.

Here you are now, the spelling police, attacking the under educated.