TDD board meeting on Thursday 4/19/07 @ 10:00AM
Your on your own on this one as I will be in Centralia, IL. all day Thursday. This is a meeting that most likely, the THF Atty. will try to convience our people that $850,000.00 is justified (right,) so if you can, please verify time's and date (meetings have a way of changing,) and attend!
By the way, if your against any funds being reimberesed to THF for this transaction, call your Alerman and tell them not one red cent back for this project! This will come up for a second reading at the next BOA meeting, and they need to hear from you to make the right decision!
Tom Ford
NO.321
By the way, if your against any funds being reimberesed to THF for this transaction, call your Alerman and tell them not one red cent back for this project! This will come up for a second reading at the next BOA meeting, and they need to hear from you to make the right decision!
Tom Ford
NO.321
posted by Crestwood Independent at 17:54
81 Comments:
Tom's comments were:
"I believe the check (I have seen a copy) for $850,000.00 was written to Rosebrook Realty, and not the City of Crestwood, so just who is liable if THF does not get what they wanted?"
Can you post a copy of the $850,000 check to see who the check WAS made out to?
The "books" that people are so quick to dismiss show the entire deal in cronological order, and seem to raise questions that have yet to be answered to anyones satisfaction.
You seem to be very frightened at the possibility of a law suit. That can happen at any time, anywhere, and for whatever reason. But if we allow anyone to come into Crestwood, threaten us, and walk away with all the marbles, well, in my estimation we may as well shut down.
Tom Ford
Tom,
Who's name will be on the $295,000 check?
Tom,
Who's name will be on the $515,000 check?
Who can audit all of the Storm Sewers in Crestwood?
If TIF money is used in any way in the Boundaries of the City of Crestwood that affect the General Revenue in any way or make the city fulfill any responsibility as a contract for the failure of the original TIF, the citizens of the City of Crestwood should be informed of those risks of issues to see if they are willing to be at risk with this possibility. As an example of this responsibility, the Kohl’s TIF, TDD, CID, Intergovernmental Agreement, and Reimbursement Agreement.
Some type of flyer should be issued to each citizen and resident of the City of Crestwood for their approval or disapproval for the city’s responsibility of the TIF, TDD, CID, Intergovernmental Agreement, and Reimbursement Agreement usage.
Since this is so confusing for the average resident of Crestwood, a
Town Hall Meeting )like the Animal Control Meeting) would give residents the opportunity to try to understand the issues of the Kohl's Redevelopment project which involves EXTRA TAXES!
Recipe for Success in Building a Private Swimming Club in Crestwood
1. Sales Taxes from Kohl's
2. General Fund taxes from Crestwood Kohl's TDD Intergovernmental Agreement
3. Real Estate Taxes from Kohl's CID
4. Free Trash from City of Crestwood
5. Free Parking Year Round and free 10 foot driveway
6. New Parking Lot and Sewers
7. Meet our Public Officials who are members!
Please continue to shop at Kohl's to continue the 51 years of tradition of using taxes to support our Private Swim Club in Crestwood.
It is called either Crestwood Swim Club or Rosebrook Real Estate Company!
It all depends on who is filling the taxes!
Get your facts straight know it all
No free parking
parking lot was given to City of Crestwood
No free trash
Parking lot is in disrepair
What do the public officials who are members get for their membership? REALLY? A place to swim for three months out of the year. Big deal.
Get over yourself.
I understand an alderman runs for three terms; but what I don't understand is: when such large undertakings as building a swimming pool in a landlocked location in a residential area. Isn't it logical that the people who were on the boards at the time this took place would be available to answer the questions of why and how this was allowed to happen. If we elect aldermen for a short time and all they do is get into office to further their own personal agendas and then disappear into the woodwork, are they actually good citizens of our community. Don't we have people on the board right now who know what happened when this pool was being planned and voted on. Can't we ask Mr. Vincent to come to the TDD meeting on Thursday and answer our questions. Wouldn't he have all the answers to who received the money and for exactly what. Why was it so important to be an alderman when the planning was going on and so completely disinterested now. On Tuesday night when they take the second reading, please REMEMBER THE LAST NIGHT OF FORMER MAYOR FAGANS REGIME! Are we going to allow history to repeat itself when we have been warned by months and years that it is being set up to happen? Remember, if someone does something once, shame of him, if he does it to you twice, SHAME ON US!
Why would anyone want to be involved in a community after there are so many lies told, libelous statments written, slanderous accusations made and misinformation spread by a very vocal minority. I don't blame any of the alderman for being disinterested. Most of the former alderman are very successful in their personal and business lives and do not need to be bothered by the crybabies of Crestwood.
Crestwood Swim Club resides on property that is zoned commercial, just as the old location. Get you facts straight. Another example of ignorance.....If you have read the big books with all the facts,you would know this.
Yes I remember the last nite of Mayor Fagan's regime, it was the last nite we had a Mayor who was against nepotism!!
Burke Wasson did a classy job in today's Call saying how badly the board screwed up OKing nepotism. And before Tom loses it, he did mention Mr. Ford in the article but only in a factual way and not criticism. We have a lot to be proud of with our aldermen and our mayor. But talk about dropping the ball on this one.
I am not sure about whose name will be on the check (295,000.00,) but if I had to guess I would say THF realty Co. Rosebrook has been paid for a long time now.
I am sorry, I have no scanning devise, so I will not be able to post the cancelled check for $850,000.00, but a copy is in the two books, so ask to see them, and you can see it for yourself!
The property where the new pool sits is not zoned "residential," it just happens to border on residential property. The City was deeded the entire parking lot for $1.00, and now owns it, and the swim club (as of last summer) is paying the City to use the dumpster.
I have also verified that the swim club has it's own water meter, and elictric meter in place so these things are a non issue!
What does an elected official get as a member? I have no idea, nor do I wish, or need to know, so lets drop that one.
Folks, the pool is there, it's not going to close up so we may as well get used to it. The part that I am dead set against is ANY sort of re-payment to THF for ANY expenses in buying out a blighted property in danger of eminent domain apraised at $88,000.00 (by what one would consider a competent apraiser, the bank took it!)
THF bought their ticket, they knew what they were getting into when they closed the deal, so why add the "wish list" now I can't find a document that states they will be re-imbursed, so why do it?
Attorney Robert Klarr stated that the TDD could not re-imberse THF for the swim club in 2006, so what's changed in 2007? I'll tell you what, they now want to use funds from the inter-governmental agreement (1% that we get for administering the fund) to pay the $295,000.00 to THF, thus moving past the TDD! It's still taxpayer money, and as such cann'ot be used for private real estate transactions, so please, BOA, just forget it, and let the chips fall where they may!
Tom Ford
I blame the Mayor, then Miguel, Nieder, Golterman, Civil Service Board and those who support them on this blog. Not only did they ok nepotism but they passed the change in the rules that takes away the protection from the whistle blower at City Hall, by making it impossible to speak to the press without the Mayor or City Administrators ok. So much for Freedom of Speech in Crestwood!
Nepotism? Good grief, Now I know why I have always loved the Call!
I'm mortified that the family name should be connected to such skuldugery, such cigar smoke filled back room's filled with immoral politician's!
Just kidding Burke, but hey, I had no clue this was taking place my friend! But I will take the blame as usual.
Tom Ford
No one is blaming you for this Tom,it is our Mayor and the people who he picked for the Civil Service Board who have brought this about. You were treated very fairly and correctly in the article, I suggest you read it as soon as you can
Tom,
you had no clue that the Civil Service Commission was asking the City to make the changes in the nepotism laws that Roy had requested?
Too much time spent @ the Swim Club?
Come on "gentle bloggers" why aren't you up in arms over the travesty that just took place with the changes made in the Civil Service rules?
Is it because the Pool is more important to you?
Is it because the changes cant be blamed on Greer or Fagan?
Is it because you haven't gotten your talking points from your command center?
Is it because it is not about S#X?
Is it because you cant stand to admit your Mayor, really blew it on this one?
Is it because you have no problem with NEPOTISM, but want the police to report any illegal dating when they aren't on speed trap duty?
Is it because you are all watching American Idol?
It's because I was watching "Clambake" with Elvis Presley. Ok, ok I admit, I watched "Charro" and "Harum Scarum" too.
Kohl's TDD Board, Mayor Roy Robinson, City Administrator, and Alderman Miguel,
Public money is only for the public to better the public.
You cannot justify allotment of monies to a private entity unless they won the contract bid.
There is no other way.
It is a wrong allocation of funds.
Eminent Domain is the only way to justify giving public monies like sales taxes to a private entity.
Well the field reports are coming in, and as I understand it THF wanted $37,000.00 more than the $295,000.00 that the apriser said the property was worth. Our side said no! The $295,000.00 was approved by the TDD board, and will now go to the BOA on the 24th.
The problem still exists in that TAX monies will be used to fund the $295,000.00 (from the intergovernmental agreement,) and as such, it's still the wrong thing to do.
A group of Crestwood citizens have petitioned Jay Nixon for a ruling on this and conflict of interest matters, and they expect an answer by the 24th. to bring before the board prior to the vote.
The State of Missouri Ethics laws plainly state that any Alderman or TIF, CID, TDD commisioner with ANY ties to a project, or with any relitives that have any ties to said project must recuse themselves from any vote on said project!
Since the new Aldermen will not be sworn in until after the evenings business is completed we will have at least 4 sitting Alderman who will have to recuse themselves or face ethics violations at the State level!
Asd you can see this project is far from a done deal by a long shot, so please attend the 4/24/07 meeting, and call your Alderman and let them know how you feel about giving public funds to a private contractor for a private pool!
Last but not least, No, I had no idea of these "negoations" set forth in Wassons missive. I wish I had as it would have given some peace of mind to my Wife!
I believe that statute needed to be changed anyway. In this day and age, it was furtile grounds for one heck of a law suit. Your Honor, you did the right thing Sir!
Tom Ford
So the State law says you cant vote for on a project if you have any ties or relatives attached to the project. But yet you are ok with the changes that allow nepotism in Crestwood? That is talking out both sides of your mouth!
No, that's the law! Having two people work for the same palce who are honest, up-right, and are the best people for the job is just the right thimg to do!
If when you were a kid you mowed lawns with your brother, were you guilty of NEPOTISM? The trouble with the PC crowd today is there are far to many idiot things they have created, and not enough common sense!
Tom Ford
I didn't get paid for mowing lawns with tax dollars. It's wrong and you know it. You dont want tax dollars spent on the private swim club but have no problem with nepotism when it comes to the use of tax dollars. That is really two faced on your part Tom.
Pray tell what does "tax dollars" have to do with "nepotism?" If you mean that the employees will both be paid by tax dollar's, well sure!
Nepotism is an old saw that must be thrown out now, if we are to get "the best people for the job. We need not look at "family ties," nor race, creed, or religion, but the "best qualified person for that job!" To do otherwise invites sub-standard employees who will guarantee lack luster performance!
Tom Ford
that's such a blue collar mentality
It's the paycheck of related employees of the City that is funded by tax dollars Tom. Surely you cant be serious in your position? You know that it is wrong, your stance is disappointing, unethical and so out of line with the moral stands you have take in the past I cant believe you are taking it. Did someone get to you Tom to make you take this position? Look up in Websters for what nepotism means. An old saw that must be thrown out! I thought the old Charter was good and didn't need to be changed, now we have this change and you are all for it?
Shame on you Tom, shame on you, I really thought you were better than this.
that's such a blue collar mentality
Why is it wrong? I am serious, please explain it to me. I know what nepotism means, and I don't think the case apply's here, please tell me why you do.
Do yor really believe anyone can "get to me?" Please!
Tom Ford
The elected official will vote on wages for the relative (budget), will be the relatives boss (City Administrator and Dept. Heads are under the control of the elected officials per our Charter), the elected officials have to design and approve the budget from which the relative gets their living and .insurance and retirement. Any time a elected official supports a tax increase, they are supporting a benefit increase for their relative in the eyes of the voters. If you are a dept. head and you have to lay off people, are you going to feel comfrontable in laying off the elected officials relative? What if the elected official and employee are married? How will that sit with the new non dating law?
It is a bad bad change that will leave the elected officials every vote and move open to suspicion.
Do you want that Tom?
Think about elections, what impact will the relative have in influencing others when it comes time to vote or support their elected relative?
My fear is in your desire to support the Mayor as you have said you will and do you will gloss over his mistakes like this one.
I understand you point, however the State law against voting on anything related to the "relitive," or any portion of same will trump that, no?
You have to look at both laws to come up with the answer.
Fear not! If he is clearly wrong, I will say so, but as for me, the jury is still out on this one!
Tom Ford
Can the board revisit this issue?
SO you are saying that the alderman who are members of the swim club better recuse themselves from an votes related to their $160 stock ownership-which is all their financial interest is, contrary to all of the urban legends circulating in Crestwood--but it is okay to vote on matters that would affect a persons salary and health benefits? TALK ABOUT BEING A BIG FAT HYPOCRITE!
So we elect some one who can not vote on issues because of a relative who works for the City? What can the elected official vote on, to not hold a meeting on Christmas eve? What good would they be for the people who elected them to represent them at city hall? Why should they get a paycheck from the taxpayers and not be able to vote on the budget, hiring of dept heads and/or City Admin., a new police radio or fire truck, or dump truck or hours White cliff will be open or any pay raise? Any dept that the official's relative worked, they could not vote on any issue that effected that dept!
An example would be you and your son, could you vote to approve a 3% pay raise for all police, or to buy new police cars, or purchase new training courses? All are good things the police need, but they would benefit a relative of yours, so could you vote?
poster 7:52 sure the board can revisit but only if one of the aldermen who voted in the majority for this change ask to bring it back up for reconsideration, and that will need a second from any one of the alderman. So, which of the 5 do you think are going to move to reconsider?
Just a further point, this is a rule that is a part of the City Code and Roberts Rules of order which I read in the paper the Board recently voted and passed and instructed the Mayor to run their meeting s by. So it's there to be used.
8:03 PM blogger: If the City has in place an ordinance that allows a person to vote on all issues, you bet they can.
If you, or ANY relitive of yours hold stock in ANY project that comes before you as an Alderman, or ANY governing body, you must recuse yourself! Pretty simple, and a ruling by Jay Nixon, not Tom Ford, the Mayor, or the swim club president.
If this ruling is violated on Tuesdau night it will go to the State ethics commission, as well as Mr. Nixon for a final ruling.
Either way you should have nothing to worry about if your right, but what if your wrong, are you going to pay the fines levied against the ones who should have recused themselves?
Tom Ford
There are greater legal minds at work here than youTom, thanks for the legal advice.
Hmmm, let's see. The issue is the amount of money to include in the TDD to reimburse THF.
Do any of the Alderman work for THF????? Own stock in THF????? Have relatives that work for THF???
2:10PM blogger: hope there are greater legal minds than mine at work here! And your welcome, except that's not advice, that's just my thought's, as are your's when you post. I just happened to look up and read the statute's.
At any rate, the weekend will be great, so let's all enjoy God's gift to us while we can.
Tom Ford
Does one of those great legal minds belong to our Mayor?
6:46 PM blogger: I doubt that, he relies on Mr. Golterman for legal advice, as does the Board.
Nuff said.
Tom Ford
Rob Golterman is a successful attorney.
7:32PM blogger: Marvellous! Then we have nothing to fear, correct?
Tom Ford
correct.
Nothing to fear but NEPOTISM itself. With the new Nepotism is ok in Crestwood law just passed at his honors bequest, we could have a Mayor's son be the City Administrator. Or Police Chief. Or life guard at the Crestwood Swim Club. All would be ok as long was they werent dating someone who also worked for Crestwood.
But like Tom wrote, whats wrong with that as long as they are quality workers?
Legal opinion fro the Attorney General, Honorable Mr. Jay Nixon.
Call your alderman, read this to them, and ask them to do the right thing!
Tom Ford
"January 24, 2006
Honorable Bob Johnson
State Representative, District 47
Room 400, State Capitol Building
Jefferson City, MO 65101
Dear Representative Johnson:
You have submitted the following question to this office for response:
An alderman, or member of a TIF commission appointed pursuant to § 99.820.2, is the owner of real property in an area proposed for a redevelopment project under § 99.820. Does § 99.820.1(13) bar that owner from voting, either as an alderman or as a member of the TIF commission, on any matter pertaining to the redevelopment plan?
Section 99.820, RSMo Cum. Supp. 2005, [footnote 1] outlines the powers and duties of municipalities in relation to real property tax increment allocation redevelopment. Under § 99.820.2, a municipality must create a commission prior to adopting an ordinance relating to a redevelopment plan and must follow certain guidelines in appointing members to the commission.
Section 99.820.1(13), which relates to property interests of commission members or aldermen involved in a redevelopment project, addresses conflicts of interest among those officials:
(13) If any member of the governing body of the municipality, a member of a commission established pursuant to subsection 2 of this section, or an employee or consultant of the municipality, involved in the planning and preparation of a redevelopment plan, or redevelopment project for a redevelopment area or proposed redevelopment area, owns or controls an interest, direct or indirect, in any property included in any redevelopment area, or proposed redevelopment area, which property is designated to be acquired or improved pursuant to a redevelopment project, he or she shall disclose the same in writing to the clerk of the municipality, and shall also so disclose the dates, terms, and conditions of any disposition of any such interest, which disclosures shall be acknowledged by the governing body of the municipality and entered upon the minutes books of the governing body of the municipality. If an individual holds such an interest, then that individual shall refrain from any further official involvement in regard to such redevelopment plan, redevelopment project or redevelopment area, from voting on any matter pertaining to such redevelopment plan, redevelopment project or redevelopment area, or communicating with other members concerning any matter pertaining to that redevelopment plan, redevelopment project or redevelopment area. Furthermore, no such member or employee shall acquire any interest, direct or indirect, in any property in a redevelopment area or proposed redevelopment area after either (a) such individual obtains knowledge of such plan or project, or (b) first public notice of such plan, project or area pursuant to section 99.830, whichever first occurs[.]
Under Missouri law, we use the "plain or ordinary and usual sense" of words and phrases found in Missouri statutes. See § 1.090, RSMo 2000; J.S. v. Beaird, 28 S.W.3d 875, 876 (Mo. banc 2000) (citing State ex rel. Maryland Heights Fire Prot. Dist. v. Campbell, 736 S.W.2d 383, 387 (Mo. banc 1987)).
Applying the plain and ordinary meaning of the terms "interest, direct or indirect, in any property," ownership of real property within a proposed redevelopment area is a "direct" "interest" in property in that area. Thus an alderman or TIF commissioner who owns real property within a proposed redevelopment area has an "interest, direct or indirect, in any property" within that area, and that alderman or commissioner is barred by § 99.820.1(13) from voting on matters pertaining to the redevelopment plan.
CONCLUSION
An alderman or TIF commissioner who owns real property within a proposed redevelopment area has an "interest, direct or indirect, in any property" within a proposed redevelopment area, and that alderman or commissioner is thus barred by § 99.820.1(13), RSMo Cum. Supp. 2005, from voting on matters pertaining to the redevelopment plan for that area."
Sincerely,
JEREMIAH W. (JAY) NIXON
Attorney General
"Thus an alderman or TIF commissioner who owns real property within a proposed redevelopment area ..."
THF owns the property in question. Does any Alderman work for THF? Doubt it. Good try.
10:57 a.m.
... and good try to you, but your timing is wrong. A "proposed redevelopment" (as stated in the opinion) refers to a project that is under consideration, not one that is nearing completion. THF did not own the property at the time the redevelopment was being proposed to the city; Rosebrook Real Estate did.
Martha Duchild
Martha, thanks again for bringing nepotism into Crestwood.
Marth, I don't think you are a lawyer, are you?
Doesn't really matter at this point since THF owns the property.
8:04 blogger: Ah but it does matter. You see THF want's their money back now, and per the opinion I don't think the current BOA can vote to give it to them (club members or stock holders.)
But that's a matter for Jay Nixon to decide, and I am sure he will have that chance.
Tom Ford
Is Jay Nixon going to be at the meeting? Has he consulted with the city attorney?
I agree. If it is sooooo important, why has it not been addressed before now and especially before tonight's vote? I smell smoke but doubt if there is a fire.
I think you are tilting at windmills, this is not a TIF issue but a TDD issue. I do not have a dog in this fight, but I can read and there is nothing in the Nixon quotes that says everybody cant vote tonight. Now how they vote is a different matter and from what I know about the BOA I see it as follows.
Against:
Miguel
Nieder
Robie
Breeding
For:
Dewe
Kellerher
Pickel
Bland
It will be up to the Mayor to settle this one, and all the ramifications of his vote will be his and no one elses.
Ought to be interesting.
Am presuming there is insurance for the aldermen if they do not vote for the constituancy and it wants to sue them. Say, for instance, they do not recuse themselves, they AND the city attorney. There is enough information out there for a very measured vote. So it would certainly behoove them all to noodle this out for its ramifications and inflamability. Then, go back and build this issue for all its worth. Your being safe not sorry is justified.
4:45 PM blogger: In light of the information we recieved from Jefferson City this afternoon (via telephone,) I couldent agree with you more!
I feel the entire vote should be tabled tonight until the MO. A.G. can render his opinion on the voting.
As most of you know, I am against any funds being re-paid to THF for a lot of reasons. I would however be very happy if this were to go to binding arbitration, and allow the arbitrator to settle this for once and for all!
We could win or loose, but whatever happens we will finally put this behind us, without the finger pointing that will surely happen no matter what the vote is.
Tom Ford
I don't understand why at this late date "I feel the entire vote should be tabled tonight until the MO. A.G. can render his opinion on the voting."
If you really felt that strong about it the opinion of the MO A.G. would have been sought way before last night's meeting. Why would you make such a statement? to stir the mud?
8:04 April 24
You've missed the point entirely. I was not commenting on whether it matters. Re-read my response; it was a simple correction. If the A.G.'s legal opinion applied in this case, it would apply to the situation at the time the redevelopment was being proposed, when Rosebrook Real Estate owned the property.
Martha Duchild
11:24 April 23
You're thanking the wrong person. You can thank the mayor, the city attorney, and the board members who passed this section.
Martha Duchild
Martha,
so you dont support the change?
10:46 blogger: If had any idea that some BOA members were not going to recuse themselves, I would have asked fot it a long time ago.
Due to the results it seems it would have made no difference though, so let's wait to see if the AG takes it up now.
By the way, the mud dosen't need to be agitated in the least, it now has a life of it's own.
Tom Ford
After reading the past several entries, I believe it's all over but the crying!
Watch out for the Clarks and Murphys, no telling what they are plotting right now.
Wasn't the "nepotism" clause added at the insistence of the mayor? I believe that was in the paper-correct me if I'm wrong.
Or let me rephrase that - or at least quote the mayor from his letter to the editor in The Suncrest Call:
"But I equally cannot and will not support any long-term employee losing their job because a member of their family chooses to run for public office and is elected by the people.
The city's previous policy prohibited such employees from remaining employed after their family member is elected. I believe this is wrong and unconstitutional."
Any thoughts?
6:37 PM blogger: I think the clark's and the Murphy's are the least of your worries at this point!
What say we all wait for the next shoe to drop (and it may be loud,) and go from there.
I hope that what I have heard is not true, but time will tell, so sit back, open a "cold one," and we shall see!
Tom Ford
I don't think any shoe will drop. What's to drop?
by the way did anyone see how the Call (on the website at least) defined nepotism after they printed the mayor's letter?
Tom you are so full of it with your roundabout allusions---when does it stop. Face it...you are not going to win this one.
8:53 PM blogger: If it's an illusion as you say it is, well then nothing will happen, if, however it's not, well THUD!
I am a patient man, I'm for "wait and see!" Oh, and when will it stop, well I guess when the Crestwood citizens accept the TDD deal, at this point very few have!
Tom Ford
I was asked to put this on the blog by an "anonymous" person who was unable to post it, so here goes.
Anonymous said: "This one ain't over till the fat lady sings!"
Thank you for your comments, "anonymous blogger"
Tom Ford
Ms. Barrett can sing?
Her song is so loud and shrill we can hear it all the way from Texas.
6:37PM blogger: be nice now, we have all seen some of the "bathing beauty's" that are swim club members, so please do not "cast the first stone!"
I am a "one eyed old fat man," so if you must cast aspersions toss them at me!
Tom Ford
Like Ms Barrett has never cast any stones? Hah!
I believe Ms. Barrett, like you is a citizen of Crestwood, and as such has the right to make her opinions known, no?
Tom Ford
but its ok if she casts the stone but not me?
where were you when Kelleher was called a drunk on your blog? wasnt someone casting stones then? did you rush to his defense?
NO
if you can allow posters to say that someone was a drunk on your blog, why wont you allow someone to say that someone is fat?
after all, i am just "making my opinions known".
10:46 PM blogger: Opine away, this is your forum I didn't cut you off did I, no I didden't!
And by the way, I called myself the "one eyed old fat man," so?
I defended her right to believe as she does, not her size, or mine, nor anyone elses. I do believe the comment's can rise above that type though, don't you?
Tom Ford
except when you allow them to be posted about Alderman Kelleher, then its off with the gloves and anything goes as far as your concerned.
10:16 am blogger, please enjoy this in the spirit it was intended, a good laugh!
http://beverlys.net/LJ/BuggingYou.swf
Tom Ford
Nothing funny about being called a drunk by anonymous putz posters.
Can we include raciest, zenophobe, biggot, etc in that conclusion?
I think Alderman Kelleher (ret.) has taken enough heat from enough people to hold him for the rest of his life. To that end,from now on, I will be removing any post's that include his name in a less than favorable light.
The man is out of politics, so please leave him alone!
Tom Ford
Post a Comment
<< Home