1 Comment
Aug 10·edited Aug 10

I'd wondered about that last one a bit. One of the most basic duties of government is to hear and offer an opportunity for redress of grievance. And why is an interested citizen engaging a professional advocate a disqualification for participating in that function of government?

Would you say that you would not treat an illness if the patient consulted a doctor? The city has an attorney. I suspect the developer has an attorney. He certainly has a right to hire one if he chooses and consult him about this matter or any other.

Last I heard, it's an honorable profession.

It is not unreasonable for citizens to expect their government to discuss their concerns.

Like the former city attorney, I do not understand the City's position on the matter of discussion, even - no, especially if they feel they are in the right on the issue that is being discussed. It's not only something they should do, it's something they have a duty to do.

What a shame. Thanks for writing.

Expand full comment