Posted in Conflict of Interest, Kensington Island Properties aka KIP Costanza, 34083 Yukon Inc., UBID

Audio Recording of 34083 Yukon Inc. Monday March 14, 2016

Okay, this audio isn’t the best but it’s all I have been able to lay my hands on and I appreciate the individual who passed it on to me.

Just listened to it again and notice there are gaps as some subjects discussed are not on the audio.

Be thankful.

NOTE:  proceed to  6:49 in part one to hear the Developer claim:
“Just so everybody’s aware a week ago sunday, Carol Molstad put out an email to all the tag members to have them disrupt the meeting, so this is what we’re going to get …” (cannot make out the last two words)

NOTE:  proceed to 13:38 of Part One to hear the developer describe the meeting which took place with Minister Fassbender, David Godfrey, Peter Jacques, MLA Don McRae and VP of 34083 Yukon Inc. Brian McMahon.

NOTE:  proceed to 19:36 in Part One to hear the Developer:

“But ya know it’s a, we’re in a bind right now and we’re frustrated and that frustration now, I mean, is going to spill over into this room tonight.”

Part one:

NOTE:  Proceed to 3:40 in part two and hear McMahon state “they don’t have the money”.  That’s the problem – this developer is out of bucks and will be gone once   a water deal is secured.  There’s nothing for Union Bay from this developer except problems.

NOTE: Proceed the 4:45 point in part two to hear Mr. McMahon refer a number of times to the “previous agreement”.   He admits it is not an existing agreement.  What are his followers thinking?

NOTE:  Proceed to the 10:00 in part two and hear Mr. McMahon read a document and emphasize the word “conceptual”.  That is exactly what KIP has provided – a concept.  KIP isn’t going to build a seniors housing, medical clinics, and all the other pretty pictures we’ve seen.  It’s all a concept.  Do you get it?  It is what could be built by those wishing to invest the money.  It’s an idea.

NOTE:  Proceed to the 11:00 point and hear Mr. McMahon clearly state “Yes, there was an agreement on the prescription of the coal hill solution, but it was not agreed to in 2012.  It was agreed to in 2014 and who was paying what proportion of the costs was still going on.  But it was not until 2014 that we finally had a go ahead.”    So the remedy was agreed to but they were haggling over who was going to pay what proportion and this is why KIP feels the expired agreement is still in effect?

Part two:

Part three:

This will not make you proud of your community.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s