$$$ HOW DO THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS DO IT $$$ READ THIS: Below is an exchange that pretty much explains how some of our council members personally benefit legally, but not ethically IMHO!!! Nedra Owens Redditt: I thought when the city does business over a certain $ amount it would be put out for bidding process? When did that process take place. Also, as a council member dont they have to recuse themselves from contracts due to conflict of interest. Oh well, its a new year...Mayor & Council dont have to follow policy this year. Kathy Hurley what is status of the forensic audit? Matthew Tomek: Nedra Redditt, Councilman Conrad did in fact recuse himself from the vote on the Sears Crosstown Building (Not taking up for him, just stating facts. He did what was legally and ethically required of him.). As to the bidding issue, the citys putting forth money for infrastructure improvements around the building. Im sure when they start doing the actual work, theyll have to bid that out. The vote by the council was to appropriate the money for the project, not t assign work to an individual company. Kathy Hurley: But, Matthew Tomek as an active player you will agree that many times the deal is cut before they recuse themselves from a vote which is required if there is a self-interest??? It is still a huge project that he will benefit from personally. If he really wanted to do the right thing he would let another company mange the apartments!!! We have many property management firms in Memphis that are not on the Memphis City Council!!! Matthew Tomek: I dont disagree with your assertion. What he did was the legal and ethical requirement (recusing himself). The previous commenter was talking about him voting on the project (or recusing himself on it). He did in fact recuse himself as required by law. Just a factual statement from me, not an opinionated one. Kathy Hurley: Thanks, Matthew Tomek!!! Please visit more often!!! We want to support the MFD just as much as the MPD!!! Each are heroes and essential to our personal safety!!! Nedra Owens Redditt: @ Matthew...so you agree that Councilman Conrad will be in violation of the policy if he accepts the property management contract involving city funds...right? Certainly with the number of real estate firms who offer property mgt there is absolutely NO reason for Conrad to be awarded the property management contract. Foul: Conflict of Interest if he does. And yes we are paying attention. #justTHEfacts Matthew Tomek: Nedra, I dont think hed be in violation of any city policy or state law if his firm manages any portion of the building. He removed himself from that quagmire when he recused himself from the vote. Its no different from Shea Flinn recusing himself from the AutoZone Park vote. Flinn Broadcasting has a contract with the Memphis Redbirds. Strickland rescues himself from voting on the City Law Divisions annual budget because his law partner has a case(s) against the city. I have no doubt they may have lobbied for passage behind the scenes. Thats probably not illegal. Do I agree with it in general? No. Am I taking up for them individually? No. They did what was legally and ethically obligated of themselves in recusing from votes in which they (or their business) have an interest. Conrad, nor Flinn, will receive any direct city dollars from their involvement with the related properties. Conrad will be paid by whoever owns the building and Flinn will be paid by the St. Louis Cardinals. Nedra Owens Redditt: Matthew..it was my understanding the city is a joint owner of the building or we are providing funding for procurement...if the city does not have any ownership interest - it might pass .... but only time will tell. Its just frustrating with every business opportunity comes alone in Memphis....somehow the politicians are positioned to get paid from the transactions...obstructing the business opportunities to others. The same people over and over continue to profit on the backs of the taxpayers. Its getting very old. Any way you slice it...its underhanded. And to say Shea Flinn is doing it too....two wrongs dont make it right. Matthew Tomek: I would suspect that if this was blatantly illegal as its been suggested, it would have already been addressed. The city, from my best understanding and spending a lot of time at city hall, does not (or will not) have any ownership stake in the building known as Sears Crosstown. As to the the stadium, the city owns the stadium. The Cardinals own the team. Flinn Broadcastings contract would be with the team, not the stadium, which is leased by the Cardinals from the city. I agree thats its getting old and two wrongs dont make a right. Theres a difference between a perceived wrong and an actual illegal wrong. Have a good night. Enough beating a dead horse for me tonight!
Posted on: Sun, 04 Jan 2015 02:34:29 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015