Parts 8a & 8b — Integrity and Transparency in Government – Deadly Drift & Non-Disclosure Agreement? — Summary and Conclusions

The cases explored in Deadly Drift and Non-Disclosure Agreement? share many striking similarities:

  • Both involve powerful Agricultural interests who are catered to politically and bureaucratically.
  • Action on the complaints could result in a loss of profit and a restriction of those Agricultural interests.
  • Action on the complaints would damage the public image and undermine the favored political position of those Agricultural interests.
  • Health risks were limited to rural residents.
  • The facts of the complaints were never argued or admitted.
  • The officials entrusted with the welfare of the public at large refused responsibility to act.
  • The decision to take any action was left to the same people who had the most to lose if any action on the complaint was taken. No “conflict of interest” concerns were ever expressed.

I tried to explore all avenues of remediation, and follow all the proper protocols, so that nothing could “fall through the cracks.”

In answer to those critics who point out that there are “only two examples”:

There will be more.

The proving of a circumstantial case depends having a number of pieces of evidence that all point in the same direction. It will be left to the reader to decide for themselves how far a coincidence can be stretched.

While the county’s rural community has always been the focus of this blog, there are larger and more far reaching social issues to be examined.

What secrets lie at the heart of this template for a Progressive society?

Welcome to Cornithaca County.