House candidate Bill Kennedy's withdrawal from the race is unfortunate and disappointing to those who follow politics.  Although he faced a stiff uphill battle, he certainly had the credentials and likeability to mount a competitive campaign.  Regardless of political affiliation, competitive races challenge the candidate, the party, and the citizenry to look at issues that face our State.

Kennedy's withdrawal also highlights the difficulty in mounting credible statewide campaigns.  The candidates family, employment, and general well-being are affected.  The stress of political and financial support is compounded in a State where distance is such a large factor.

So thank you, Mr. Kennedy, for the effort and commitment. 

And thank you to all those seeking statewide office, republican and democrat, incumbent and challenger/s  

When is public, public?  A silly question at one time, but now the lines seem to be becoming more and more blurred.  Technology allows one to have information at our fingertips literally within seconds.  We expect information to be available.  We believe it is our right when it comes to our government.  Our government, for the most part, agrees.  What we don't always agree on is what information is public?  (Rather than delve into JFK conspiracy theory or Roswell visitors, lets keep this discussion to Montana state gov't and our local gov'ts).  What information do we want to have?  What are we entitled to have?

While there are plenty of examples statewide, lets examine a new one.  The Billings Gazette recently reported on issues surrounding Big Sky Economic Development Authority and Economic Development Corporation.  Both articles (here & here) touch on the question raised above.  In order to answer the question, new ones emerge.

Is there a difference in the public (your) "rights" when public money is passed through to another entity?

The Big Sky EDA now receives a total of $859,514 in public monies: $724,446 a year from county taxpayers and another $135,068 from state entitlements. The rest of the authority's $1.5 million budget for fiscal 2008 comes from federal and state grants and fees for services.

One would assume the the citizens of Yellowstone County would want to know the particulars regarding a 800K expenditure.  I would assume they would expect agenda items, public hearings, and access to information surrounding the expenditure.  If the County refused, I would dare say they would be violating Montana law & our Constitution.  But what if they did all of those things (agenda, hearing, info) when they gave the money to the EDA?  Does the EDA then have the same commitment?

Does the answer lie somewhere in between? What was the purpose of the 800K expenditure?  Was that fully discussed and available for public review?  Or was it simply a pass through, a grant to the agency to do with what they choose? Perhaps that could affect one's view of the issue.  Or is the agency providing a service to, on behalf of, or for the County?

What does the County (attorney) think?

After the EDC was established, McClure sought legal advice about holding private meetings with business prospects.

But Chief Deputy County Attorney Dan Schwarz penned three opinions saying it wouldn't be legal.

"The public is paying for the corporation. It is entitled to know what the corporation is doing," Schwarz wrote.

So, are there private meetings occurring? The article doesn't expand any further, but comments by Commissioner Reno indicate the EDA/EDC is not as open as it could or should be.  When pressed, Big Sky seems to be asking why.  You should be asking why not?  If it helps, ask yourself if it (the expenditure or pass through) is for something the county should approve or support, or participate in as a government.  Whether that be development, expansion, salaries, etc.  Now, If you have to ask yourself the question, regardless of the answer, I submit you already know you're entitled.

Simpler yet, the EDA can be seen as an extension of the County.  The EDA was created, is funded, and is governed through the County appointments. The addition of the corporate arm, the EDC, while autonomous, certainly muddles the waters when responsibilities & resources are shared. 

Investment in the EDA/EDC on behalf of the County is positive and sends a strong signal regarding commitment to growth & development in the region.  It is not, however, a blank check or a closed book.  The investment does have strings attached, the citizens are those strings. 

Upcoming When is Public, Public - Part II - fair competition? 

Good government is an appropriate election day topic. It certainly seems, at least lately, that when well meaning, or hell, even those with an agenda, ask for openness in government they seem to hit a wall? Why does it appear the 1^st question wondered aloud is motive, or even worse, being simply assigned one. Why is he/she/they doing this? Something must be afoot!

In the past few weeks there have been plenty of examples: Dillon commission, Missoula emails, Kalispell planning board, Great Falls power arm & airport, Billings law enforcement, and I’m sure others. In many of these issues, it seems the 1^st action of government is to question the action rather than responding to the inquiry.

Certainly some political gamesmanship may be at play, but that is to be expected. The beauty of our system (particularly in Montana) is the ability to ask, question, criticize, and, oh yes, participate. In the long run, these actions ultimately help our society, no matter how ridiculous, vindictive, mundane, or even political.

Now go vote.

Roy Brown entering the Governors’ race is a positive development. Brown really was the strongest candidate the MT GOP could field and will certainly provide a contrast in both style and substance to Governor Schweitzer. His initial talking points comforted his base, cut taxes & govern differently. It is much too early to discuss whether or not Brown can win, he and the GOP must first focus on making the race competitive. So where can he start?

1. No surprise here on MOTTO. Brown needs to reach out to the moderates in both parties. He’ll need to coax the R’s back to his camp, and a few D’s along side
2. Develop and discuss an energy policy that encompasses more than relaxing regulatory restrictions
3. Talk specifics on education, from pre-K through higher ed
4. Embrace, not spin, his voting record
5. Provide a solid plan for workforce retention and recruitment.  Talk, Talk, Talk about workforce.
6. A) take great care in selecting a running mate, and B) upgrade website

As if anyone missed my posts on public policy and views on politics from yet another perspective, it is time to return!  My time has been spent with Montana Business, which is doing extremely well in our initial public roll out, we are also moving forward with a second portal site roll out later this winter, which we will highlight at a later date.

My return was motivated by a couple of different factors.  One, I find it almost impossible not to discuss politics, particularly in the midst of this election cycle.  Second, and more personal, I have been involved with a governmental body at the local level which has been acting like anything but a public body.  I have never been so disappointed in all of my years as a public servant.  I believe it is necessary to shed some light on those frustrations in hopes it assists in moving forward in a positive and constructive manner, something we can all learn from, including myself.      

Remember the time bloggers were seen as less than credible (understatement) by the traditional media?  Mark Cuban smacks both houses around as he contends traditional media now uses the blogosphere as a basis for stories and sensationalism.  He contends traditional media has gone from stretching the truth to outright rumor mongering:

Thats how the media has evolved in 3 years. In 2004 they misused quotes. Today, they don't even require quotes. They just make things up

Ouch.  Sounds like the bloggers stereotype.  No doubt Cuban is right in some instances.  Traditional media sources likely look to the blogoshere for information as they research, and almost probably use information found in blogs.  Heres a thought, perhaps responsible bloggers are to blame for this!  Good news for the blogger who wants to ensure credibility and the respect of peers and readers.  In taking mainstream media to task in the manner Cuban has, he continues to reinforce a negative view of the blogoshere.  

If a malcontent blogger makes a false statement and a traditional news source uses it, a pox on both their houses.  

Friends and Colleagues,

One of my many extra-curricular activities has been advocating our State’s economic development. One of my goals has been to develop a statewide business news & web portal. I believe it is vital that we promote and discuss Montana’s business climate, economic development opportunities, education, and resources such as MATR. Additionally, I want to learn about those businesses, leaders, and happenings outside of my home community. I’ve been working on the concept for some time, and will be launching the site July 5^th, 2007.

My plans for content include company profiles, leadership profiles & interviews, Government updates, profiles, and interviews as well as thumbnail sketches of websites, technology, and local innovation. The site will feature a well rounded and complete web portal with links to governments, resources, education, and economic development information available via the web. The mtbusiness.com blog, econengine, launches as well. Audio & video podcasts are also planned.

I am in the process of compiling the names of companies, business & community leaders to profile and interview. As with all of my projects, I take professionalism very seriously and the product will certainly reflect that commitment. I would like to add you and your company to my list, as well as asking you to recommend companies and individuals for profile & interview consideration, statewide and local. If you can assist in recommendations it would be most appreciated.

The site, Montana Business, can be found at www.mtbusiness.com

I urge you to take a visit and certainly provide any feedback, comments or recommendations. If you are willing, I would like to make arrangements for an interview or please complete and return via email the attached generic profile or conversation template at your leisure.

Please feel free to forward the email to your friends and colleagues. All feedback is appreciated, and don’t hesitate to email comments, links, news, or events. As always, I look forward to hearing from you.

MOTTO will have very light posting through June 15th or so for a variety of reasons, including:

1. Preparing for another Montana news/portal related site launch - stay tuned for details!
2. Still scratching my head over the 60th legislative session.  Did it really happen?
3. People keep telling me to giveitarest., well, you get the picture
4. 4&20 left for the West
5. My golf game is non-existent
6. A) Budge is back and B) repeat

Have a great start to your summer!  Posting regularly in a couple of weeks. Later.

Chris Cillizza at washingtonpost.com (the Fix) added Baucus' Senate seat as one to watch this next election cycle, that is, with the caveat his opponent is Rehberg. 

10. Montana: Until we hear Rep. Denny Rehberg (R) say "no," it's hard not to find a place on The Line for this race. From everything we hear, Rehberg isn't likely to run. But if he does perchance get into the race, his candidacy would make Montana one of the most-watched races of the cycle. Sen. Max Baucus (D) has proved resilient despite the state's Republican tilt; he won a fifth term in 2002 with 63 percent of the vote. In a race against Rehberg, however, Baucus would be pushed to his limit. The political junkie in us is rooting for it, but the pragmatist says it's not likely. (Previous ranking: N/A)

Cillizza's not the only political junkie that would look forward to the race, but don't hold your breath. Rehberg is as comfortable with his incumbency as Baucus is with his.  Maybe someone will start a getintheracedenny.com website. 

MOTTO's perception of some winners and losers from the 60th Legislative session. 

Winners

• Governor Schweitzer - The Governor was so clearly the winner this session, its difficult to know where to start.  For openers, a majority of his "square deal" agenda passed.  The budget impasse allowed for fiscal restraint with every veto a media event.  He managed to squeeze a 10lb stream access bill into a 1 mm local government bill.  His demeanor following the Lange tirade will pay dividends throughout the election cycle.  Finally, he took full advantage of the 151st legislative seat provided by the democratic legislative leadership.
• Steve Daines - The Bozeman businessman gained attention for his giveitback.com website and ads critical of the Governor.  Now heralded by some as a candidate for Governor, this gimmick seems to have grown legs.
• Dept of Corrections - The DOC needed a boost and for the most part they received it. 
• Conservatives - the Conservatives in the House managed to gain key leadership posts & committee assignments, do little but pass the buck during the session, can the scapegoat, and stick true to their ideology in the end.  Can they really be proud of that?

Losers

• Mike Lange - You almost (just almost) feel sorry for the guy.  Can sympathy votes win a statewide election?
• Democratic Legislative Leadership - Its called "leadership" for a reason
• Dept of Revenue - Unlike DOC, the DOR had a difficult time promoting their needs and faltered
• Conservatives - the Conservatives in the House managed to gain key leadership posts & committee assignments, do little but pass the buck during the session, can the scapegoat, and stick true to their ideology in the end.  Can they really be proud of that?