"I'm going to support it because I can't certainly subscribe to what it was before," Barth said, mentioning that she would like to have the 60-day time-limit to make certain an item gets on the council's agenda quickly.
Others on the council said they didn't see a need for a time limit at this point, saying council-requested items do end up on agendas and very seldom fall through the cracks.
The city council promised several times to agendize a discussion of the disposition of the city's property on Quail Gardens Drive. That discussion has not happened. It won't be heard publicly because the council is too afraid of the public.
Only under pressure, Council Members have spoken as if they have a secret plan for the site. A public discussion of the topic would make them have to dredge up old and secret, if passive, decisions and it could ruin their secret plans.
Kevin C. requested that the city bring up the property for discussion as far back 2007, and the whole council said they were for the sunshine (who could be against a public discussion of a public asset, when put on the spot?).
Well, those in power were against a public discussion of this public asset. The meeting never happened. Yes, Kevin reminded them and they ignored it.
A good retrospective read on why the council should have had the discussion prior to borrowing $20 million, is Matt Walker's 6 points, which explains a whole different financial approach for the city and shows that Kevin C wasn't the only one talking about pension reform before the market crash.