City Government
He Said, She Said, They Said
November 3, 2005 
New motions filed in court over the Ada County Commishes alleged illegal meeting are going to end up with a legal conclusion that somebody isn’t telling the truth.
The latest filing includes an affidavit of Boise City Councilor Vern Bisterfeldt who flatly says, “There was no discussion of pending litigation…Additionally…I was not aware of pending litigation or general public awareness of probable litigation…” The topic was the county emergency medical services and how to get a future bond issued passed.
The Idaho Attorney General has charged the three commishes with holding the closed meeting June 15 which he says should have been open to the public. It is a civil procedure which could result in fines of no more than $150 on each of three counts and will result in no criminal record–less damning than a speeding ticket.
The commishes have denied the charges and hired a private defense attorney at taxpayer expense (about $3,700 so far).
In a move that can be interpreted as an effort to “stop the bleeding” or “putting a gun to their heads” depending on your point of view, the AG filed a motion for summary judgment claiming the undisputed facts of the meeting along with Bisterfeldt’s sworn statement are sufficient evidence for the court to rule now and preclude a trial.
Is there anyone out there willing to call Vern a liar?
To insure more advertising-free Boise Guardian news, please consider financial support.
Comments & Discussion
Comments are closed for this post.
Nov 3, 2005, 1:53 pm
This is the first I have heard that the meeting involved, “county emergency medical services and how to get a future bond issued passed.”
My understanding in mid July was that the meeting dealt largely, but not exclusively, with issues surrounding a pending application for a large, high density real estate development, in an area of the east Boise foothills known as Hammer Flat.
As to whether or not someone is telling the truth, the Commissioners have some confessions to make. Namely, in their response to the AG’s charges they proclaim their innocence, in part, because, “The subject notes (of the meeting) have not been withheld from public inspection in any way, as best reflected by the fact they are an actual attachment to plaintiff’s complaint”
The trouble with the commissioner’s statement is that, before filing my complaint with the Ada County prosecutors office, my requests to see minutes of the meeting were declined by several members fo the commission staff and two of the commissioners.
The claim that they are innocent of having an illegally secret meeting because, once charges were filed, they willingly provided minutes of the meeting to the investigator, is laughable.
Nov 4, 2005, 9:01 am
I am also rather confused bout the meeting subject. Wasn’t the topic hammer flats and to discuss ways for boise city and ada county to cooperate in development? This is all very confusing.
Ed note–Sounds like Hammer flats was just one of the topics and that was not a legal matter.