It will be interesting to see the “full report” on the water-bottling plant proposal that was promised for next Monday night’s council meeting.
It will be interesting to see how much is disclosed in the public report. If it gives a full accounting of costs, then the voters will finally know how much was spent on lawyers to work on this file. That might in turn give a ballpark estimate on another unanswered question: how much has been spent by the city on the allegations of defamation against the city, mayor and council?
Back to the water deal though: one resident posted to the Greenwood Soapbox Facebook page that “any deals being made regarding a city resource should be open and transparent. If a company does not wish to come to town and bargain openly, the answer should be immediately a ‘NO’ from the city council.”
“It could have been the goose that laid the golden egg who came to the city looking for water,” they added, “it still would have been doomed for failure because of rumours and secrecy. The city should look at the possibilities of going into the business of bottling and marketing our own water.”
Another resident remarked that it would have been nice to see what council wanted out of the deal and what the company was offering, “or are we the citizens of Greenwood not allowed to know that either? Just asking.”
There are good reasons to take some issues behind closed doors, but best practices should also include a municipal policy for disclosure of the facts after the need for secrecy has passed.
