On 11/17/14 there was a post on this blog in which I said that it appeared that possibly four members of the council were not notified that the deal was dead.
In a November 19 article in the Shawnee Dispatch http://www.shawneedispatch.com/news/2014/nov/19/westbrook-village-developer-terminates-deal/
this appears:
Gonzales is authorized as city manager to make payments up to $50,000 without consent from the city's governing body, although she did notify the City Council of the termination and the amount to be paid in an email dated on Sept. 26.
So, let's see what was said, compliments of a KORA request: From the 9/26/14 email;
Westbrook Village. The ownership of Westbrook Village has not been interested in pursuing a sale of
the property at this point, so I am expecting a letter from Drew Snyder of MDDS requesting to
terminate the agreement with them. They have substantially completed the first element of the
Agreement, but in light of not being successful any further, they have agreed to reduce the payment
for their efforts from $50,000 to $25,000. The project could very well come back at a future date, but
at this time the owner is not very cooperative at this time .
Guess it is a matter of semantics. There was NO definitive statement that the project was over, Just a statement that she was expecting a letter that it would be as such. One would think that certain individuals would know the difference between definitive statements and ones of conjecture. Heck, in a conversation with the Dispatch reporter even he thinks that a conjectural statement is a definitive statement. Was there ever a follow up notice that the letter had been received?
Typical non-definitive statements so that a person can eventually "swing" either way.
