Unbelievable. I also serve on a city commission and we were well briefed that anything that happens at our meetings is public information whether the public attends or not. And no, we never try to discuss business among ourselves over email since is is contrary to the law.
--Dick

This is unfortunate. Tony needs to know that he is talking with city employees about our money not his. These conversations are not private since it is not his money. Thank you LP.com
--Betty H/

Get to the point. Dick, I agree but this website can be very invasive to people who want to serve the community but don't want their comments or image recorded for all the world to see.

Today we have very good people willing to serve this community including the mayor. The CFAC isn't really supposed to advise staff on what to do they advise council. If council wishes to act so be it but the CFAC members have no real authority to tell the council or staff anything. I think this website prevents good people like the ones we have now from running for relection. Tony might be the next best person to run if the current folks decide not to.

As Glenn said the other night - two Walmarts in one town "we done good."
--XX

What part of public meeting does this guy not understand?
--Jim

I don't understand XX's comments nor the complaint of anyone about "intrusion" of the public.
Public meetings are just that. Reporters sit in on meetings, sometimes report comments regardless of whether the speaker wants to be quoted or not. They're open to the public by definition and law.

XX sounds like a Council insider...used to doing "binness" in private, away from the prying eyes of the public. Too many "executive sessions", and private consultations with those he's supposed to regulate, I think.

Tough nuggies, XX...democracy is a messy business and if you and other officials can't stand the scrutiny, you shouldn't be there. (There are other countries where government business is also done in private...maybe you'd feel more comfortable?)
--Ed M.

Ed you don't understand that is for sure. This website may be responsible for some very honest, hard working individuals deciding to stop serving the community on commissions and even the council or mayor. The loss will be everyone's because the work they have done brings jobs and money to this community. I know good people who have served this city and are now terrified of being misquoted or maligned by people in the shadows who record every meeting and take comments out of context to be broadcast. So what if someone nods-off during a long meeting or makes a joke that doesn't go over well - everyone has down time during their job.

Come down to the council meetings if you don't like something and inform the councilors. They are all nice people who really want what is best for their community. Tony had not yet announced his plans to run for council and outing him here was not right since he wasn't ready to release the news. I was told no one at the CFAC meeting discussed his being a candidate for council so that is not public record anyway and not information from that meeting.

I am not going to read your response so please don't bother posting any more of your hate speech Ed.

Maybe the people running this website don't understand the turmoil they have created in local governance. The RTA is falling apart, city employees don't feel comfortable presenting to council anymore and several hard working and good people may no longer continue giving back to this community through their work on city council.
--XX

You really believe that this blog makes any difference to those in office? That's like saying comments in the R-H line shape the decisions of city council.

Every city has the few individuals who will disagree with any government decision and will voice their displeasures in places like this blog and the R-H line. Comments posted here really doesn't bother the city council members and in no way does it have any bearing on who runs for office.

Sorry people but this site just doesn't carry that much weight.


--ouch

Ouch, do you read the stories on LovelandPolitics or just the blog?

I agree with you that XX has greatly overstated the impact of this blog. I disagree with your characterization that this website is critical about everything council does.

I read the stories and editorial in the Repeater-Herald about the trolley. All were extremely negative especially the editorial.

On LovelandPolitics's story I noticed the amendments being proposed to the agreement are really about more than just the trolley. I also saw that councilors objected to those fundamental changes to the agreement (like allowing one contractor) and needed time to research the issue.

In this case, the Repeater-Herald has mislead everyone to believe the only decision before council is whether or not McWhinney can get a trolley paid for with sales taxes.

At first I thought the council shouldn't need time to think about such a simple desicion. When I learned they were asked to make other changes it seems to make more sense that they needed more information because they are considering other changes too.

This blog can be silly sometimes but I like the web stories that seem to cover information I didn't know from anywhere else. Also, the article on the RTA from the Greeley paper I would have never read except that it was provided as a link here. So it is nice to see what other papers are saying about Loveland.

I do wish they would update on a regular basis but not sure who to complain to about that since sometimes they update too much and than one week nothing.
--Carol

Carol: Yes, I read both. The trolley issue makes the best reading so the Reporter-Herald only reports this one issue with the proposed grand station.

So...you are correct, there is additional and needed info on this blog. I just had to comment after XX's comments on how this site makes a difference if someone decides to run again for council.
--ouch

I am considering going to the meeting tonight about Grand Station to see what they have to say. I do like the idea posted by Jay (I think that is Jay Farnham) on the other blog that the trolley would serve the community if it ran between downtown and Centerra. In fact, the more I think about it the more sense it makes. Run a light rail right down the center of 34 between downtown and Centerra. Not too many stops and frequent service so people don't need to study maps and service times like with the bus services.

That is na idea I believe the downtown merchants, westside residents and Centerra advocates could support since it really would be a "public" use of the system.

I thought this was about cfac. Anyway-how do these people get to print emails between cfac commissioners? I thought that was private communications. Has Tony either confirmed or denied whether he made these inane statements?
--George

I don't know the guy but he seems to be letting the accusation hang-out there so it may be he doesn't have a response.

People should attend the next CFAC to demand staff more fully cooperate with the citizen advisory board. This isn't acceptable behavior as far as I am concerned. The oversizing agreements should be public record and available to anyone who asks at the clerk's office.
--Gil

NO NEW TAXES.
--David

Who is talking about taxes?
--Earl

If the McWhinneys get the millions of dollars they want it will have to come from somewhere. The taxpayer, is where. Perhaps you should stop reading the crap and nonsense the white trash functionally illiterate hacks at the Reporter-Herald write and get the facts instead.
--Roger

Does anyone know Chad McWhinneys net worth? I assume it is in the millions of dollars.

That means this whole town is in a tussle over whether or not people making $40,000 a year per household should pay for Chad McWhinneys trolley so he can gain even more personal net worth.

This is absurd. Chad can easily pay for the trolley himself and take the business risk (especially since he benefits). Stop trying to rob working people in Loveland so the McWhineys can bacome even richer. Its not a partnership but Robbin Hood in reverse - steal from the poor to benefit the rich.

I cannot wait to throw thos buggers off the City Council for what they have done!!!
--Grace

XX, in your previous response to me you say I don't understand. Ah, but I do...all too well. If the RTA failed, great. I KNOW what it was about...do you? If so, did you think it such a great idea to raise everyone's sales tax another percent primarily to subsidize Centerra? That was what it was about. So please, spare me the lecture about "hate speech". The only thing I hate is that officials support the greedy instead of the taxpayer. Oh...and their dishonest apologists.
--Ed M.