You will notice, I have pulled information from the Utah League of Cities and Towns handbook.
For the record. I was raised in a very small rural town in Southern Minnesota, not a LDS Church in site I grew up Catholic, went to Catholic schools and while attending the U of Minnesota, began practicing more of a non denominational church routine. Nineteen years ago I converted to the LDS Church. So I have spent 19 years of my life as a Catholic, 19 years Christian, 19 years LDS. I moved myself and my family to Utah to be closer to the Church and more LDS people. So, I am most certainly not anit-Mormon. I am pro transparency, communication, speaking up when I see something wrong and asking questions of those who govern over us. I hope no one suggest that I silence my voice or not speak up they believe their LDS beliefs are under attach. For goodness sakes, don't attack me, answer my questions, don't ignore them and don't go silent. Attack me all you like, but answer my questions - all of them. The role of a public official is to hear those they represent, not attack them, ignore and not answer their questions. It appears City Hall is tired of me asking questions, easier to attack then to answer my questions. Easier to attack then to do something about the issues I raise. Easier to attack than to admit, there might be a problem.
So, this post goes out to Chris Condi. I like Chris and value his input. Feel free to answer every single question I have asked my blog post. Lastly, if I ask for information, why doesn't City Hall give it to me?
Hello Gentlemen,
As you are well aware, many residents that live near the Thanksgiving Point golf course oppose the controversial plans of the LDS Church/VCBO Architecture to demolish the driving range and replace it with a massive office building. As a member of the Development Review Committee, you are each instrumental in providing critical information to the Planning Commission. Therefore, I am requesting that each of you reveal your personal relationship with the LDS Church so that there are no questions regarding potential conflict of interest. Specifically, are you a member of the LDS Church, do you attend services on a regular basis, and do you hold a current temple recommend. Revealing this information is actually a requirement in the Ethics section of the Utah League of Cities and Towns, Powers and Duties Handbook (pages 43-47). It states:
1) There is a disclosure requirement of the ethics law as well. Two types of disclosure may be required - written and oral. An officer or employee is required to make a disclosure in writing and file it with the mayor.
2) This written statement must be sworn and include certain minimal information about the conflict of interest.
3) The second required disclosure is oral and must be made in an open meeting to the members of the body of which he is a member immediately before the discussion about the topic involved in the conflict of interest. An appointed officer who is not a member of a public body or municipal employee must also disclose the information required to his or her immediate supervisor.
1) There is a disclosure requirement of the ethics law as well. Two types of disclosure may be required - written and oral. An officer or employee is required to make a disclosure in writing and file it with the mayor.
2) This written statement must be sworn and include certain minimal information about the conflict of interest.
3) The second required disclosure is oral and must be made in an open meeting to the members of the body of which he is a member immediately before the discussion about the topic involved in the conflict of interest. An appointed officer who is not a member of a public body or municipal employee must also disclose the information required to his or her immediate supervisor.
If you have already filed a written statement with the mayor, as is required by point number one, I am requesting a copy.
Second, I also request that any/all discussions you have regarding the proposed development by the LDS Church/VCBO Architecture be revealed publicly prior to each meeting in the interest of total transparency and openness, which is required by point number 3 above.
I look forward to a speedy reply so I can share it with our highly interested community of homeowners and citizens and the media, which is covering this story closely.
Thank you,
Bill Conley
I look forward to a speedy reply so I can share it with our highly interested community of homeowners and citizens and the media, which is covering this story closely.
Thank you,
Bill Conley
Lehi Resident
801 867 7227
801 867 7227
If a law required the revelation of whether or not somebody had a temple recommend, it would be wrong, an invasion of privacy. Where in the law did you find such a requirement, interpretation or spelled out?
ReplyDelete