THE LEADERSHIP OF FORT SMITH—what does it mean and where is
it taking us?

Gentlemen:                                                                                    February
8, 2010

Last week I sent a memo to each of you asking some basic
questions regarding your knowledge of the history and meaning of “Quality of
Place” and ICLEI (“International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives”),
or if you had any understanding of the aforementioned.

To this day I have had only one response.  Mayor Baker informed me he would instruct
City Manager Kelly to answer my questions. 
As yet, no response from Kelly. 
Apparently Mayor Baker did not read the missive carefully:  I asked that Kelly, the Mayor and all of the
Board of Directors answer the questions posed. Please allow me some latitude to
make suppositions.

1.     
I believe City Mgr Kelly, Assistant Mgr Gosack
and Director Campbell are familiar with Quality of Place and ICLEI’s history
& goals.  Correct me if wrong, but
the city of Ft. Smith, under the leadership of City Mgr Harding entered into an
agreement with an international operation that empowered the city with any
number of edicts, i.e. control over homeowners’ property.

2.     
In all likelihood Mayor Baker is remotely aware
of the two projects by the mere fact that mayors seem to be the primary targets.  It seems reasonable to assume that top
management in the city government, along with city planners are also cognizant of
the invasive process being carried out by Quality of Place and ICLEI.

3.     
By the same token, it would be surprising if the
remaining Board of Directors had any inkling re the proposed takeover of
citizens’ rights and property.

Facts & Deductions: Since 90% of all federal & state
income taxes are paid by 10% of the population the question becomes—who will
use the enormously expensive entertainment venues the city is proposing and why
are they being proposed?  It is highly
unlikely that the 10% of the population paying 90% of income taxes will utilize
these venues—then who will?  Of course it
is the masses who have no financial obligations in government that benefit from
these enormous redistribution schemes, which are Utopist at best in nature.

It is not a proper function of government to provide
entertainment and the real winners are politicians, bureaucrats and those involved
in the construction of the ill-gotten gains. 
These proposed programs result in expansion of government, theft of
producer’s resources, vote buying, and the implementation of the Marxist
philosophy—redistribution of income and dependency on government.

Questions: Are the principals in this inquiry hunkered down
because they got their hands caught in the cookie jar, or are they positioned in
an arrogant stance, or are they colossally ignorant of what is being proposed
& implemented?  Or in the instance of
a cover-up they may want to fly the “Conspiracy Flag”?

In any case, each of you has refused so far to answer the
simple questions posed. 

Obama transparency?

Assistant Gosack, in true government arrogant brute force,
is suggesting that the city government bypass voters on the new one cent
prepared food tax, designed to subsidize the debt-ridden Civic Center and other
proposed entertainment extravaganzas.

Kindest regards,

Joe McCutchen