During a recent government meeting, a council member raised serious concerns about the effectiveness of the Business Promotion (BP) committee. The member questioned the committee's purpose, suggesting that it merely follows the council's directives without providing real oversight.
The discussion turned to a credit card program linked to the BP measure. The council member accused a director of profiting significantly from the program, claiming that the city donates $100 to a card that costs the same amount. He expressed frustration over what he described as a scam, where one individual reportedly earned $95,000 through sales that seemed unrealistic for a small restaurant.
The council member demanded transparency, asking for sales sheets and tax returns to verify the claims made by the director. He criticized the city management for not conducting proper oversight and suggested that the council was wasting taxpayer money. He estimated a loss of $130,000 from the BP measure due to mismanagement and a lack of accountability.
After this heated discussion, the meeting moved on to the consent calendar. The council decided to continue one item for future consideration, indicating ongoing deliberations on the issues raised. The meeting concluded without further public comments.