This is not the first time the topic of executive session and the Estes Park abuses of secret closed government have been detailed here at the Estes Parkian.
Our neighbor Boulder (a home rule charter community) is in the midst of a community discussion on the subject of executive sessions. The Boulder home rule charter does not allow for executive sessions and the community has traditionally enjoyed an open and transparent government. The current crop of city council and staff desire executive sessions pleading the same logics we hear in Estes Park all the time. A charter amendment has been suggested that would allow executive sessions in Boulder City Government. This question will be put to the Boulder voters this fall and we suggest following the arguments and out comes closely.
We would encourage the City of Boulder citizenry to examine the menu of abuse and constant storm of legal issues that can be traced directly to shrouded government activities and decision making here in Estes Park. In our opinion there is no need for executive sessions in town government, ever. In Estes Park the citizens have not outlined what level of transparency is desired through the chartering process, so over time the abuse has become standard operating procedure. Anything and everything becomes a negotiation with Estes Park Trustees, which in turn becomes secret for our own good, like playing poker, hide your cards from the people, an interesting and twisted interpretation of state law.
Town trustees are elected to do town business in the public eye. When businesses is done in executive session, all manner of abuses and creativity that would make Huey P. Long proud, can happen when a town employee is in the back room negotiating exclusivity contracts with preferred contractors. Gee, what could go wrong?
In this small town when the same characters keep showing up around the mud puddle making the same impassioned cries of “coincidence” and “prove it” and “show us some fact” and “its legal we’re a statutory town”, have long ago proven hollow. Do we hire friends and relatives, are there exclusivity contracts with commission appointees, trustees and district directors or not? It is a simple yes or no question and the answer is yes we do, it is embarrassing the cavalier attitude that we are willing to except. When your local business is dependent upon “no compete” city work one gets very defensive when the Estes Parkian questions your "no compete" feed bag.
The perceived benefit to the public as described by town staff are issues related to the purchase of property and confidential issues related to negotiations. It has been described by town administrators in Estes Park as playing poker and your opponent knows your hand. Sounds reasonable but legitimate confidential topics mandating secrecy are imposable to define. The world becomes your political oyster when the public must prove a negative concerning a public issue negotiated in private. How many land deals are we talking about here? Buy jamming a bag over the head of the public isn’t everything legal? The political control by town staff over the community is concerning. An elected official in Estes Park claimed recently that unless we hand our local buddies sweetheart deals in private negotiations no one would invest in Estes Park, as an explanation concerning the Lot 4 shenanigans.
The towns attorney can in fact operate without restraint, any issue can be negotiated any law can be broken and bought off in private with public money.
The town’s attorney has used executive sessions to strategize his way out of more lost law suits and ill conceived schemes than you can imagine. Schemes designed to bypass the electorate. Schemes by a broke down government rotten with inefficiencies. Check the record our town government cannot operate with out cheating on the law and brokering intergovernmental agreements just to function. If you have the legal authority why must you operate through other agencies and mayoral appointed commissions and stinky political mischief and changing a word here and a word there in state law leading to more and endless law suits?
Who defines the conditions and topics for executive sessions? Who defines appropriate or inappropriate topics?
Our neighbor Boulder (a home rule charter community) is in the midst of a community discussion on the subject of executive sessions. The Boulder home rule charter does not allow for executive sessions and the community has traditionally enjoyed an open and transparent government. The current crop of city council and staff desire executive sessions pleading the same logics we hear in Estes Park all the time. A charter amendment has been suggested that would allow executive sessions in Boulder City Government. This question will be put to the Boulder voters this fall and we suggest following the arguments and out comes closely.
We would encourage the City of Boulder citizenry to examine the menu of abuse and constant storm of legal issues that can be traced directly to shrouded government activities and decision making here in Estes Park. In our opinion there is no need for executive sessions in town government, ever. In Estes Park the citizens have not outlined what level of transparency is desired through the chartering process, so over time the abuse has become standard operating procedure. Anything and everything becomes a negotiation with Estes Park Trustees, which in turn becomes secret for our own good, like playing poker, hide your cards from the people, an interesting and twisted interpretation of state law.
Town trustees are elected to do town business in the public eye. When businesses is done in executive session, all manner of abuses and creativity that would make Huey P. Long proud, can happen when a town employee is in the back room negotiating exclusivity contracts with preferred contractors. Gee, what could go wrong?
In this small town when the same characters keep showing up around the mud puddle making the same impassioned cries of “coincidence” and “prove it” and “show us some fact” and “its legal we’re a statutory town”, have long ago proven hollow. Do we hire friends and relatives, are there exclusivity contracts with commission appointees, trustees and district directors or not? It is a simple yes or no question and the answer is yes we do, it is embarrassing the cavalier attitude that we are willing to except. When your local business is dependent upon “no compete” city work one gets very defensive when the Estes Parkian questions your "no compete" feed bag.
The perceived benefit to the public as described by town staff are issues related to the purchase of property and confidential issues related to negotiations. It has been described by town administrators in Estes Park as playing poker and your opponent knows your hand. Sounds reasonable but legitimate confidential topics mandating secrecy are imposable to define. The world becomes your political oyster when the public must prove a negative concerning a public issue negotiated in private. How many land deals are we talking about here? Buy jamming a bag over the head of the public isn’t everything legal? The political control by town staff over the community is concerning. An elected official in Estes Park claimed recently that unless we hand our local buddies sweetheart deals in private negotiations no one would invest in Estes Park, as an explanation concerning the Lot 4 shenanigans.
The towns attorney can in fact operate without restraint, any issue can be negotiated any law can be broken and bought off in private with public money.
The town’s attorney has used executive sessions to strategize his way out of more lost law suits and ill conceived schemes than you can imagine. Schemes designed to bypass the electorate. Schemes by a broke down government rotten with inefficiencies. Check the record our town government cannot operate with out cheating on the law and brokering intergovernmental agreements just to function. If you have the legal authority why must you operate through other agencies and mayoral appointed commissions and stinky political mischief and changing a word here and a word there in state law leading to more and endless law suits?
Who defines the conditions and topics for executive sessions? Who defines appropriate or inappropriate topics?
The Towns attorney, who over the past twenty years has authored some very poor legal advice, if the town attorney is allowed to cloak his incompetence in private who’s the wiser, wouldn’t it be appropriate to play out in public the ramifications of poor decision making and often poorly conceived advice and direction? What would decision making in Estes Park look like if your elected trustees would be required to play out the law suits they motivate in the public eye? Executive sessions and cloaked government leads to abuses and deceptive practices. There is nothing like secrets to create distrust in the public eye. We do not benefit, look at all the law suits and citizens initiated ordinances. There seems to be a storm brewing, the serfs are tired of it.
Do officials stray from the announced topic while in executive sessions? How do we know, because executive sessions are confidential and secret?
What is the voting record, who voted NO and who voted YES in executive session, how does an elected official represent me if his record is private concerning important community issues?
When is it determined and who determines what topics are too sensitive for the public eye? And in conjunction are all the elected officials’ duplicitous in advance as to what those topics are? That sequence of determining what topic is public or is not public is never accomplished in public meetings, consequently sequencing has only two possible logics: 1 ) trustees are meeting in private to determine that strategy, or 2 ) staff is determining for the trustees what business is public or private and how to conduct public business, becoming the authors of the public standard, not our elected officials!
The determination of what is a community executive action and what is an administrative maintenance function has been clouded beyond recognition by town staff making any practical governmental protocols useless here in Estes Park, the rule of law being usurped by personal opinions and a self serving staff. Trust us we are secretly working in the best interest of the public is a precarious position. This isn’t the CIA and speed isn’t the issue look at all the law suits the town faces and will face in the future, our town government has slowed to a stop, due in large part to executive sessions gone mad. Stop all the law suits let us continue abusing the law is no argument for bad government! The phrase “trust me” has no place in essential services. The town was recently found guilty of breaking state law in a protracted legal struggle, town staff had two pieces of state legislation altered than claimed the findings of the court moot, negotiated a private settlement prior to sentencing leaving a plethora of community legal questions unanswered littering the back room negotiations floor. That is not responsible government that’s crap politics and this community looses in the long run.
When elected officials begin making strategic decisions in clandestine meetings, gatherings or communications it is unlawful, but that is what is happening because the decision to go into executive session is scheduled in advance and posted on the agenda. Who determines when a topic is appropriate for executive session? The trustees always vote with 100% consensus to enter executive session, it is never discussed if a particular topic should be played out in the public eye. The trustees just get up and leave the room, end of discussion! End of democracy!
Staff is determining what pubic business is, not our elected officials. That is a horse of a completely different color indeed because it is the inherent and exclusive purpose of our elected trustees to over see staff and essential services, not the reverse. We should be entertaining visitors instead of staffing the fire department came from somewhere it came from someone, who, when, where? Executive session!
Finely the question of trustees straying off of the announced topic in executive sessions is fair game for criticism, it obviously happens as the rule. It would be unlawful to do so but that ship sailed years ago backstabbing this community in the process. The town lost a legal battle concerning statutory communities and advertising and marketing, no question. The obvious local solution as applied by dozens of communities in Colorado over the years would have been a Home Rule Charter and local electoral legislative oversight of town hall. Some where in executive sessions, in secrete, state legislators were approached wording agreed upon strategies arranged and state law altered, on two pieces of legislation. The two state legislators that introduced the bill claimed that the law changes were made as a result of a community mandate. The trustees were in on it I saw picture of them at the state capital. How did I miss that community discussion? The one where this community discussed changing state law instead of creating a town charter, who made that decision and what was the trustee vote?
Is it in the best interest of Estes Park to keep strategizing in secret and altering state law or govern our selves locally?
If a range of topics are discussed in executive session any trustee that is in disagreement of any of the off the subjectdiscussions would be obliged to remain moot as executive sessions are confidential, the majority could place the minority in a bind. Executive sessions are secret and records of those proceedings are not public, if trustees strayed from the announced topic or are colluding behind our backs it would take a trustee to file suit against the other trustees to end the abuse. Our trustees are not a principled body they have demonstrated time and time again the propensity to openly break the laws of the State of Colorado in exercises of contempt and demonstrations of control. If this group were constantly being tested in the court of law and prevailing I would be a chained dog barking at shadows but the facts are the town looses legal challenge after legal challenge, time after time.
I would encourage Boulder to maintain their historic transparent government and securely nail down the lid to Pandora’s Box. The benefits are microscopic compared to the loss of your democracy.
Examine the Estes Park record, , , never mind that’s a secret.
Do officials stray from the announced topic while in executive sessions? How do we know, because executive sessions are confidential and secret?
What is the voting record, who voted NO and who voted YES in executive session, how does an elected official represent me if his record is private concerning important community issues?
When is it determined and who determines what topics are too sensitive for the public eye? And in conjunction are all the elected officials’ duplicitous in advance as to what those topics are? That sequence of determining what topic is public or is not public is never accomplished in public meetings, consequently sequencing has only two possible logics: 1 ) trustees are meeting in private to determine that strategy, or 2 ) staff is determining for the trustees what business is public or private and how to conduct public business, becoming the authors of the public standard, not our elected officials!
The determination of what is a community executive action and what is an administrative maintenance function has been clouded beyond recognition by town staff making any practical governmental protocols useless here in Estes Park, the rule of law being usurped by personal opinions and a self serving staff. Trust us we are secretly working in the best interest of the public is a precarious position. This isn’t the CIA and speed isn’t the issue look at all the law suits the town faces and will face in the future, our town government has slowed to a stop, due in large part to executive sessions gone mad. Stop all the law suits let us continue abusing the law is no argument for bad government! The phrase “trust me” has no place in essential services. The town was recently found guilty of breaking state law in a protracted legal struggle, town staff had two pieces of state legislation altered than claimed the findings of the court moot, negotiated a private settlement prior to sentencing leaving a plethora of community legal questions unanswered littering the back room negotiations floor. That is not responsible government that’s crap politics and this community looses in the long run.
When elected officials begin making strategic decisions in clandestine meetings, gatherings or communications it is unlawful, but that is what is happening because the decision to go into executive session is scheduled in advance and posted on the agenda. Who determines when a topic is appropriate for executive session? The trustees always vote with 100% consensus to enter executive session, it is never discussed if a particular topic should be played out in the public eye. The trustees just get up and leave the room, end of discussion! End of democracy!
Staff is determining what pubic business is, not our elected officials. That is a horse of a completely different color indeed because it is the inherent and exclusive purpose of our elected trustees to over see staff and essential services, not the reverse. We should be entertaining visitors instead of staffing the fire department came from somewhere it came from someone, who, when, where? Executive session!
Finely the question of trustees straying off of the announced topic in executive sessions is fair game for criticism, it obviously happens as the rule. It would be unlawful to do so but that ship sailed years ago backstabbing this community in the process. The town lost a legal battle concerning statutory communities and advertising and marketing, no question. The obvious local solution as applied by dozens of communities in Colorado over the years would have been a Home Rule Charter and local electoral legislative oversight of town hall. Some where in executive sessions, in secrete, state legislators were approached wording agreed upon strategies arranged and state law altered, on two pieces of legislation. The two state legislators that introduced the bill claimed that the law changes were made as a result of a community mandate. The trustees were in on it I saw picture of them at the state capital. How did I miss that community discussion? The one where this community discussed changing state law instead of creating a town charter, who made that decision and what was the trustee vote?
Is it in the best interest of Estes Park to keep strategizing in secret and altering state law or govern our selves locally?
If a range of topics are discussed in executive session any trustee that is in disagreement of any of the off the subjectdiscussions would be obliged to remain moot as executive sessions are confidential, the majority could place the minority in a bind. Executive sessions are secret and records of those proceedings are not public, if trustees strayed from the announced topic or are colluding behind our backs it would take a trustee to file suit against the other trustees to end the abuse. Our trustees are not a principled body they have demonstrated time and time again the propensity to openly break the laws of the State of Colorado in exercises of contempt and demonstrations of control. If this group were constantly being tested in the court of law and prevailing I would be a chained dog barking at shadows but the facts are the town looses legal challenge after legal challenge, time after time.
I would encourage Boulder to maintain their historic transparent government and securely nail down the lid to Pandora’s Box. The benefits are microscopic compared to the loss of your democracy.
Examine the Estes Park record, , , never mind that’s a secret.
