At the Apr. 23 meeting of the Branson Board of Aldermen one thing became very apparent. A lot of people including but not limited to, the media, some downtown merchants, and their association, newly elected alderman, Stephen Marshall, and the Ole Seagull evidently missed what was discussed at certain public meetings. Those were the “public” meetings where, according to Branson City Administrator, Terry Dody, items such as HCW controlling and getting the revenue from over 295 of the 499 parking spaces in the new city owned parking garage and the city getting into the commercial laundry business were discussed “ad nausea.”
At the meeting, after listening to the parking concerns of the downtown merchants and Dody’s explanation of that and what the Ole Seagull calls Branson’s “Laundrygate,” alderman Marshall said, “This is the first time that the public knows about these arrangements, I could be wrong but, you may be shaking your head, but it has not been in the open.” Dody arrogantly responded by saying, “Sir, you are absolutely incorrect.”
Why did Dody say Marshall was incorrect? Well according to Dody, “This is an item that has been discussed ad nausea in public meeting after public meeting after public meeting after public meeting and it is unfortunate if you were not here to hear that but it has been discussed. The plans have been thrown out repeatedly this has been, I can’t even begin to say how often this has been discussed in public meetings. That’s just an incredible statement to make.”
The Ole Seagull certainly hasn’t been to every board of alderman meeting or public meetings that have been held relating to Branson Landing but he has attended a lot of them. He can’t say that the word “laundry” or “parking” wasn’t mentioned. What he can say however is that, to the best of his knowledge, he never attended a public meeting where either a commercial laundry in the convention center or that 295 out of 499 of the spaces in the new garage would inure to the practical and financial benefit of HCW or the Hilton Hotels was discussed specifically, let alone “discussed ad nausea.”
Perhaps Dody could produce the minutes of the public meetings substantiating his “ad nausea” claim? If the written minutes of the public meetings are not sufficient to do so, how about producing transcripts of the portion or portions of the “public meeting after public meeting after public meeting after public meeting” where these issues were discussed “ad nausea?”
Were an Ole Seagull a betting bird he would wager that the only thing “ad nausea” about the details of all the agreements that the city of Branson entered into was the repeated use of Missouri’s Sunshine Law exceptions to keep details like these from the general public and the discussion that might have followed. Or, could a better argument be made that the term “nausea,” should be used to describe some the “sweet deals” that were made in the name of progress at the expense of the taxpayers and Branson’s existing businesses. What was the percentage that some downtown businesses and property owners said their business was down since Branson Landing opened?
In any event, it certainly describes the way an Ole Seagull felt when Dody verbally attacked an elected official that is one of his bosses in such an arrogant and public manner. “Ah Seagull, do you think that if Dody can’t produce the minutes or transcripts backing up his ad nausea claim that he should issue a public apology for his actions?” Whether or not a public apology is due is not a matter of whether he is right or wrong, it’s a matter of “how” he did what he did. What he should do is obvious but what he will do remains to be seen.
