Let's Look Back

The air of puzzlement over the proposed Monarch tax abatement may have its genesis in events of June 2006.

Here are links to three blog posts from that time frame:

http://plaintalker.blogspot.com/2006/06/ucia-may-redevelop-four-sites.html

http://plaintalker.blogspot.com/2006/06/ucia-deal-approved.html

http://plaintalker.blogspot.com/2006/08/developers-gear-up.html

Note the projected aura of transparency while at the same time pulling what some council members perceived as a fast one.

The more one ponders the new situation, the more one sees a contrast between reassurance, i.e., the City Council is only being asked to approve negotiations toward a five-year tax abatement, and the fact that a set amount (40 percent payment only) is verbally on the table. Is this a classic sleight-of-hand case of misdirection? Look here, the magician says with one hand raised, while I do something you won't notice down here. But in this case, is the council itself expected to pull a rabbit out of the hat while blindfolded?

Somebody needs to explain where the UCIA is in all this. For quite a while, weekly City Hall meetings were held on redevelopment, with yet another consultant getting paid a large sum to guide the process. But what is there to show for it?

This is just one of several instances coming across lately as "fool me once" moments. I for one do not want my elected representatives to be fooled again.

--Bernice Paglia