City Manager, Town Attorney and other officials sign confidentiality agreements with Google.

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,561
4
0
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/14/technology/14search.html?_r=1&oref=slogin


The fact that Google is behind the data center, referred to locally as Project 02, has been reported in the local press. But many officials in The Dalles, including the city attorney and the city manager, said they could not comment on the project because they signed confidentiality agreements with Google last year.

"No one says the 'G' word," said Diane Sherwood, executive director of the Port of Klickitat, Wash., directly across the river from The Dalles, who is not bound by such agreements. "It's a little bit like He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named in Harry Potter."


I find it disturbing that elected and appointed government officials can sign confidentiality agreeements with corporations.
Seems like a conflict of interest.
 

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,981
3,318
126
Originally posted by: techs
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/14/technology/14search.html?_r=1&oref=slogin


The fact that Google is behind the data center, referred to locally as Project 02, has been reported in the local press. But many officials in The Dalles, including the city attorney and the city manager, said they could not comment on the project because they signed confidentiality agreements with Google last year.

"No one says the 'G' word," said Diane Sherwood, executive director of the Port of Klickitat, Wash., directly across the river from The Dalles, who is not bound by such agreements. "It's a little bit like He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named in Harry Potter."

still grasping for straws huh?
I find it perfectly acceptable...
To what standards are you holding people to now?
I find it disturbing that elected and appointed government officials can sign confidentiality agreeements with corporations.
Seems like a conflict of interest.

 

BlueWeasel

Lifer
Jun 2, 2000
15,940
474
126
Originally posted by: JEDIYoda
Originally posted by: techs
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/14/technology/14search.html?_r=1&oref=slogin


The fact that Google is behind the data center, referred to locally as Project 02, has been reported in the local press. But many officials in The Dalles, including the city attorney and the city manager, said they could not comment on the project because they signed confidentiality agreements with Google last year.

"No one says the 'G' word," said Diane Sherwood, executive director of the Port of Klickitat, Wash., directly across the river from The Dalles, who is not bound by such agreements. "It's a little bit like He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named in Harry Potter."

still grasping for straws huh?
I find it perfectly acceptable...
To what standards are you holding people to now?
I find it disturbing that elected and appointed government officials can sign confidentiality agreeements with corporations.
Seems like a conflict of interest.

Seems as though you still haven't caught on putting your comments AFTER the quote. It makes your ramblings and fragments somewhat easier to read (if that's even possible).
 
Jun 27, 2005
19,251
1
61
I dunno... I think you have to take it on a case by case basis and look at exactly what the CA covers.

If you're a public official in a small town and tech giant says they want to move into your area are you going to say no? Property values go up. Potentially hundreds of new jobs. Of course you want that.

If I'm Google, I know that if I build I'm going to have to get permits. These permits will contain sensitive information concerning the technology I'm using in the buildings that will be used to house my computers. If this information were to get out, my competitors would gain information they wouldn't otherwise have access to thus giving them an advantage over me.

The town wants us and we want to protect our information. Here's how we do it...



All that having been said I wouldn't want my city council to allow BP to move into town and use our river to get rid of their excess drilling mud while covered by a CA. So like I said... I would take it on a case by case basis.