InterNeighborhood Council followup
I've also been told that the incoming INC president is uniquely qualified for the position by virtue of his education and experience. I concede that point as well.
Those points are irrelevant, however. The key factor is this: According to published reports, neighborhood opponents and adjacent property owners of the Fairfield rezoning filed a valid petition against the rezoning. The result of that petition meant that supporters of the project needed 6 votes on City Council to get it approved, rather than a simple majority. The incoming INC president, who had a financial stake in having the rezoning approved, then lobbied some of those adjacent property owners to remove their signatures from the petition. This lowered the bar for getting the rezoning approved in Council back to a majority.
No one has yet disputed this account of what happened. As i've said, i am not and was not an opponent of this rezoning. My objections to the actions of the incoming INC president are not based on supporting or opposing his position. They are based on the conflict of interest that his lobbying on behalf of his client exposed. This conflict of interest is damaging to the InterNeighborhood Council. The INC board may choose not to see this or act on it. And i suppose that if they manage to keep people in neighborhoods throughout the city from seeing what has happened, they can minimize the damage to the organization. But i'll be honest. Unless someone steps up with a flat out declaration that the published reports are inaccurate, and provides some evidence to support that, i intend to keep pointing out this conflict of interest.