Announcing a Ward Two meeting set for 6:00 PM, June 14th, 2011 at City Hall (Board of Alderman chambers.)
Ladies and Gentlemen of Ward Two, Crestwood, MO. There will be a meeting of Ward Two residents on Tuesday, June 14, 2011 starting a 6:00 PM to 6:50 PM prior to the Board of Alderman meeting at 7:00 PM (same room.)
The meeting will follow a list of questions that are pertinent to Ward Two, and Alderman Chris Pickel is invited (I called his house and emailed him today) to attend to discuss our unique issues. As you can see time will be tight so there will be no questions allowed from the audience unless you advise us prior to the meeting night via email to tford60@earthlink.net.
We have some 'housekeeping" items on the agenda already, so please do not wait too long to send me your questions and we will make every effort to include them.
The meeting moderators will be Ms. Jackie Stock, and I (Alderman Pickel may respond but will not be part of the moderators or take questions not on the agenda due to time constraints.)
If you wish to know why certain things have been done as they were, now is a great time to ask. Ms. Stock and I will be presenting an idea that I believe you may find to have quite a bit of Merit, so please make every effort to attend and then stay for the Board meeting.
Tom Ford
NO. 893
The meeting will follow a list of questions that are pertinent to Ward Two, and Alderman Chris Pickel is invited (I called his house and emailed him today) to attend to discuss our unique issues. As you can see time will be tight so there will be no questions allowed from the audience unless you advise us prior to the meeting night via email to tford60@earthlink.net.
We have some 'housekeeping" items on the agenda already, so please do not wait too long to send me your questions and we will make every effort to include them.
The meeting moderators will be Ms. Jackie Stock, and I (Alderman Pickel may respond but will not be part of the moderators or take questions not on the agenda due to time constraints.)
If you wish to know why certain things have been done as they were, now is a great time to ask. Ms. Stock and I will be presenting an idea that I believe you may find to have quite a bit of Merit, so please make every effort to attend and then stay for the Board meeting.
Tom Ford
NO. 893
posted by Crestwood Independent at 16:11
49 Comments:
This sounds like a great opportunity for anyone with a question or comment to get an answer from someone who can prove what they say about the subject with proof (either copies of boa meetings from the past) or documents in the archives. I wish I lived in ward 2 and I wish I could belong to the private swim club but my family picture would surely keep me out.
who will be the "authority" if Mr. Pickle does not come? Mr. Ford??
4:39 PM Blogger; Well if Mr. Pickel doesn't come it will be Ms. Jackie Stock and Tom Ford
Tom Ford
3:40 PM, June 08, 2011
WUT??
To 4:39 6-8 Why do you think Mr. Pickle wouldn't attend a Ward 2 meeting. Will someone have to be the 'authority'. I think this meeting is an open non-bias question/answer suggestion type thing to benefit anyone interested. If you feel you'd like to be in on this, you're more than welcome to put in your thoughts. What do you say besides WUT? What does WUT mean? Is this one of those negative new words?
11:06 AM, June 09, 2011
WUT?
I think it's quite feasible that Mr. Pickel might have another engagement, which would lead mr. Ford to be the "authority". Deliver us.
5:06 PM Blogger: First we will not need an "authority" as we won't be getting into anything that requires one.
Second you have been invited as is Alderman Pickel, we hope to see you but if not Ms Stock and I will continue on without you!
Third, we will be happy to "deliver" you before or after the meeting! However we will be busy during, so you will have to find other means of transportation.
Tom Ford
Hey WUT we used to have someone always say YAWN. Of course some of us bloggers know each other and we all agreed that it was one of our former alderman. Yawn fit his personality perfectly. This is the last negative attention you'll get from me. Too Boring!
To 5:06 Deliver us as in deliver us from evil? Maybe so. You know what you need better than we do.
I never thought I would see the words "Pickel" and "authority" in the same sentence.
oh, and Tom Ford and authority go so well together? Please.
8:13 AM Blogger: Has a nice ring to it doesn't it.
Gee I know that your so enamored with me that you must continue these comments, but alas I have bad news! I am taken and have been for over 45 years now.
It's sad but true that all we can be is "ships passing in the night."
However if you come to the meeting and wave at me (with all your fingers) I will acknowledge your presence (best I can do under the circumstances.
Tom Ford
will do.
Tom:
Do you intend to specifically ask both Mr. Deutschmann and Mr. Knarr to attend your meeting, given that their names have been submitted for the BOA's consideration?
9:04 AM Blogger: I do indeed. I believe Jacki Stock has done that already but I will make sure it's done.
Tom Ford
I would be very happy to have my aldermanic rep. be Bob Duetchmann or Steve Knarr. They are both very community minded and I think would make great aldermen to represent me and others in Ward 2.
Steve has been on other boards and has no open conflicts of interest. And Bob has been a very consciencious and community minded person for years. He has always been fair and honest.
I will say if anybody has any problems with either of these guys, they are just nitpicking. Plus if that be the case, I sure would like to hear them told at the Ward Two meeting.
The most important thing is that we make sure whatever are the conclusions or objectives after the Ward Two meeting, they needs to be in accordance with the Crestwood City Charter.
That's my view on the matter.
4:29 PM Blogger: Agreed, both men are excellent choices as was Doug Mosby.
That said, I wonder how the appointment of Mr. Knarr could be considered as he carries the same baggage that Ms. Beesley and company said was "UN-acceptable."
Mr. Knarr was the Architect on the failed Police building which ended up costing us $3,000,000.oo before it was over (we paid his firm $1.1 Million). He remains in the same line of work today and is with a firm who does Municipal work.
I am positive that his firm will want to bid on any project we may have in the future, so as you can see, the same reason Mr. Mosby was rejected (possible conflict of interest) also applies to Mr. Knarr.
Is it possible that our Board of Alderman would have such a short memory reference what they said about Mr. Mosby's so called "conflict of interest" that they would try to bring on a person with the exact same credentials?
On the other hand Bob Duetchmann has been a resident of Crestwood for over 51 years, makes the Board Meetings regularly, and has the benefit of knowing what Ward Two wants and needs. And he has the added advantage of having none of the "negatives" that seem to have haunted Mr. Mosby, and now Mr. Knarr.
As the Chinese curse goes, "May you live in interesting times." We will have an interesting time on Tuesday night!
Tom Ford
I can't fathom how you can begin by saying both men are excellent choices, and then proceed to trash Mr. Knarr with your innuendo. All you are looking to do is stir the pot, which seems to be your sole focus in life.
To 6:41 6-11. I'm confused by your notes. It's very obvious that you don't like Tom Ford, but, he is stating facts, NOT, innuendos. A innuendo is a baseless invention of thoughts or ideas. It's obvious to me that you don't know much about the history of Crestwood because if you did, you'd know all about the plans drawn up by Mr. Knarr in close working relationship with Don Greer and neither of the plans were brought in under budget but we paid and are still paying for this little 'boo boo' So am I stirring up the pot for you too. You need to look up the information offered to you before saying something offensive as you did. For shame!
I remember Knarr was in favor of Prop 1.
Would Knarr truly understand his role as an elected official of the people? Do Foote, Beasley, Duncan, and Pickel?
Well let's back up a minute. Say what you want but if I understand the rules and procedures regarding plans for a police building or any other kind of hugh undertaking, does it not need the seal of approval by the mayor and board?
Before the architect draws up the plans, he has to be picked by the governing body of the city to do the plans; is that not the case? So, they (the BOA) must have given their approval right?
Then after the approval, Greer had to have discussions with Knarr who is doing what he was paid to do by WHO? The City fathers right! They had to OK it - isn't that procedure?
Greer should have never gotten by with that grandeos police facility. But whatever Greer wanted he got! No other department head in the city would have been so in love with power and themselves as to even remotely want to spend money like Greer did. He was a legend in his own MIND!
So what I am asking then is why didn't the board say to the whole idea of a police facility....No, No a thousand times in the first place and tell "King" Greer - as he called himself - to go take a long walk off of a short bridge?
So now, because of the fact that nobody told Greer NO, Knarr has a big black mark on his chest? Someone gave Knarr the OK to be the architect, so why blame him - he was just doing his job.
BUT does that mean that Knarr will again gain a contract for a new plan in the future if he gets to be alderman? NO! He will be required to do what everybody else has done for years and recuse himself as an alderman.
Yes I know all about what they did to Mosby but I would hope by now the board and everyone knows that if we keep using that conflict of interest issue to hold over a person's head, we will never get anyone in an aldermanic seat if this comes up again. Why? Because half of the people who work for a living could posibly, in the future, do business with the city. We have dozens of capable people in Crestwood who sell one thing or another. Geez!
If we superimpose the same issue on Knarr or anyone else because of the Mosby problem, Ward 2 will have a much lesser chance to get anybody to serve.
I'm just saying.....
Has everyone looked at Mr Knarr's resume on the BOA web site? He seems to have held many jobs for rather short times. He was also elected alderman for a three year term but quit after a year.
Those, along with the things already mentioned, make me wonder how good a candidate he is.
I have not yet seen any info on Mr Deutschmann yet.
For goodness sakes, has it now stooped to the level of McCarthyism? There's some history for you. If you all were so worried about knowing Crestwood's "illustrious" history, then you would know that Mr. Knarr stepped-down to care for his ailing wife, who subsequently passed on.
This has now gotten to be an embarrassing joke. Whatever it takes to trash a man. Do you really feel good about this?
"Crestwood's "illustrious" history"
Perhaps you can tell me where I might find this publication.
I think your spring is wound way too tight.
How do you think someone who has lived here for less than thirty years would go about finding all these facts?
I based my comments on reading HIS RESUME, which is all I have seen about him. Perhaps you should withdraw his resume, and rewrite it to serve your puposes. I will be glad to read it and comment based on your facts.
6:41 PM Blogger: What you call "trashing the man" is in fact a process called "Vetting."
Both gentlemen will be (or darn sure should be) vetted before any vote is taken,
One of these two will represent Ward Two for the next few months and the citizens of Ward Two need to know everything they can about who they are so we can make our recommendation to the BOA reference who WE want.
I for one am sick and tired of people from other Wards telling us what and who we need!
The "vetting " process will be a part of the Ward Two meeting at 6:00 PM. If you want to be a part of it and your a resident of Ward Two please come and listen to both (I hope) applicants state their case.
There will be at least one former Alderman attending who also may well be able to shed some light on what we need in a Representative.
Please remember that OUR REPRESENTATIVE speaks for Ward Two, and we the citizens of Ward Two should be the only ones to select him, not Alderman from Wards one, three and four!
Tom Ford
Why excuse Mr. Knarr for any potential conflict of interest, but refuse Mr. Mosby the same?
If the BOA is prepared to make this concession, then the proper thing to do would be to reconsider their vote on Mr. Mosby's appointment and approve him as the alderman for Ward 2. As I said before, they had no legitimate reason for rejecting him.
Martha Duchild
If I were Mr. Mosby, after what you all call a terrible Q & A inquisition before the board and the public (whoever were present, since I was not there), I would tell the city to take that job and stick it (somewhere)!
I don't even know if Mosby can still hold that office any more because of procedure as it had already been voted on to the negative. But perhaps maybe he still can. Someone smarter than I will have to check it out.
But if I saw that the board members rejected me, I would call becoming an ald. rep. a bit tenuous for Mosby. Talk about pressure! He would be further judged by everyone whenever he opened his mouth on the dais. That would be like putting oneself under a microscope.
Plus, we may or may not be able to be the recommending board for our Ward unless it is stated in the Charter that Ward Two residents can get up in front of a meeting and do so. I thought that the recommendations from Ward residents needed to be presented by the mayor and board before a board meeting, not at a board meeting. If that is not the case, and people from Ward 2 can just nominate someone at a board meeting, then the mayor and board would need more time to digest any recommendations made on June 14th right?
I am just saying......
Well, interestly enough Tom Ford doesn't always clearly state the facts as someone stated in a comment. (JUST VETTING TOM)
Tom Ford, in a prior comment on this issue, wants to think he is an authority but he isn't. He equates - Mosby and Knarr's position the same under his comment. However - the fact that Mosby HAS and STILL DOES DO BUSINESS WITH THE CITY (as Mosby himself stated at the board meeting) is NOT the same as Steve Knarr who HAS IN THE PAST done business with the city THROUGH HIS ARCHTECTUAL FIRM.
FURTHER, Steve Knarr was elected BEFORE as a member of the board of aldermen and as someone stated KNARR LEFT because of his ailing wife WHO IS NOW DECEASED. NOT THE SAME THING TOM. (JUST VETTING)
THING IS, you and others want Knarr - after being on the board of aldermen before WHEN THERE WAS NO CONTROVERSY - TO MAKE THIS AN ISSUE. WHY? Because you need to blame someone for the fact that the city had to pay for those plans. Greer, the mastermind is gone AND THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN APPROVED THEM - BUT NOW make Knarr EAT those architectual plans and shove them down his throat.
KNARR WAS MADE ALDERMAN WAY AFTER THAT POLICE FACILITY WAS AN ISSUE. PLUS you know that he was an alderman WITHOUT ANY NEGATIVE FEEDBACK. YOUR REASONING IS SIMPLE - ALONG WITH YOUR FRIENDS - YOU WANT MOSBY AND IF YOU CAN'T HAVE MOSBY, YOU WILL MAKE EVERYONE ELSE SUFFER. FURTHER, AND AS ALWAYS MR. FORD, ACCORDING TO YOU, Anybody who has been in the military walks on water. Not necessarily true and not necessarily a reason to vote somebody in a position. Many Presidents were military men - they were not always suited for the job as history should tell you since you boast about being so knowledgeable about history.
That is what you always do, Mr. Ford, set yourself up as an authority on everything and even if you have to fudge on THE FACTS a little, you will do it to get your way.
PS I have nothing against Mosby if you think I do - but Steve Knarr has had the tenure of being a previous alderman and has served on several boards; Mosby has not.
NOW,
12:13 PM, June 12, 2011
Nice to hear from you again Alderman Foot
"Anybody who has been in the military walks on water. Not necessarily true and not necessarily a reason to vote somebody in a position"
Obviously a draft dodging radical from the sixties.
12;13 PM Blogger: Were you really a draft dodging hippie as John said, or are you just mad that we wont be taking warm showers together till the wee hours of the morning?
You said:
"THING IS, you and others want Knarr - after being on the board of aldermen before WHEN THERE WAS NO CONTROVERSY - TO MAKE THIS AN ISSUE. WHY?" (say what?)
I had no idea that Mr. Knarr was going to make his an issue, thanks for telling us.
You need to calm down, obviously your blood pressure is way too high for your own good!
Come to the meeting, tell ALL of us how you like to smart off without giving your name, and then we will be the judge of whats right and whats wrong!
Tom Ford
12:13 PM June 12
This is not an indictment of Mr. Knarr. It is a comparison, and the only reason to compare is to demonstrate that what was not acceptable in Mr. Mosby (doing business with the city in the past and the potential to do business with the city in the future, as well as being familiar with city employees) is now acceptable in Mr. Knarr.
Mr. Knarr did business in the past with the city, and as an architect, has the potential to do business with the city in the future. As a member of several city boards, Mr. Knarr, though not a former city employee, has made the acquaintance of current city employees through his memberships on various boards.
As I have pointed out, there is no finger-pointing at Mr. Knarr. The problem lies with the four alderman who selected a candidate who has the exact same "issues" they cited as a reason to reject Mayor Schlink's appointee.
I'll be interested to hear how they explain their way out of this bit of hypocrisy.
Martha Duchild
12;13 PM Blogger
Here's the deal
Mayor Slink defeated former mayor at every poll in WARD TWO. Handily!
It would be safe to say based on those election results that Mayor Slink has a better idea of what the voters in WARD TWO want as his replacement. A better idea than the Aldermen from WARDS 1,3 & 4. The only logical reason for these Aldermen to be against the Mayors selection is for political reasons, not for the reasons they sited. They do not want the BOA to vote against the CID before them. They want him to veto the bill. Pure politics being played at the expense of the citizens of WARD TWO who are having their voice reduced @ City hall.
I will do all with in my limited power to ensure, that if this is the outcome, to remove Alderman Pickel from his seat as Alderman in April of 2012 elections. I urge all my fellow voters from WARD TWO to join me in this oath.
To 1:27p 6-12 regarding what 12:13 6-12 said. Not to make all this serious stuff into a soap; but I'd wager 12:13 is a woman for many reason, an especially long winded one at that. I won't go into and I'd also wager it is NOT John Foote. John won't put himself out there without checking with the others.
Heavens Tom, I am just saying that Knarr was alderman in the past, and nobody said a word about his seat being a conflict of interest. Now all of a sudden, it is a big deal and I have to wonder why! Why now and not then???? Is that not a fair question? And you seem to go along with it and you make me angry.
For heaven sake, can't you just answer the question and see how that looks for those of you who wanted Mosby in that seat. You all thought it was unfair for Mosby, but not unfair to accuse Knarr of the same thing.
Why is it that Ms. Duchild can tell us all about the legal issues regarding Mosby's conflict of interest rejection, but doesn't feel that those same legal issues also apply to Steve Knarr. Do two wrongs make a right?
FURTHER, Give it up bloggers on your suppositions and name calling because I said something about the military. It's amazing how you can take things and run with them because you refuse to read all the words. Or should Tom start another subject that all military people are sqeeky clean.
I happen to feel let down BY SOME OF OUR MILITARY LEADERS OK?
And Tom, You are aware and have been told before that I fought in Korea on the DMZ for 18 months and saw my best friend killed when stepping on a gernade. I am proud I served and to have your bloggers call me names is disgusting.
I still say that all military people are just people like you and I and it still doesn't mean that all military people are OK, no questions asked!!!!
And of course, fellow bloggers who called me "ill founded names previously, you don't seem to care when Mr. Ford starts shouting to the world that Demos are no good but all, I mean all Republicans are.
Lastly Tom, You don't ask others on your blog to sign their names so why should I. And under the circumstances with some of your bloggers who seem to know it all, I will remain anonymous. Heaven help a person who would give out their name on this blog to be ridiculed - and that only being the tip of the iceberg.
I stand tall for my country but everybody in the military are not necessarily deemed to be 4 star generals. Get it? Or should I draw a picture. Sorry, but this upsets me.
7:29 PM June 12
It appears you did not understand my post.
I will state it plainly again:
The charter defines who can become an alderman (elected or appointed) through certain qualifications and prohibitions.
Mr. Mosby asked to be considered for the job. Four of the board members chose to create a more narrow definition of who can become an alderman; this was an unecessary, politically motivated step.
The additional qualifications that these four alderman added (without merit) were conflict of interest and familiarity with city personnel.
Using this "new" definition, the four alderman determined that Mr. Mosby was not qualified to be appointed alderman.
These four aldermen have decided to choose Mr. Knarr as their candidate. Bear in mind that when Mayor Schlink asked for volunteers to fill his vacated aldermanic seat, Mr. Knarr did not contact him, most likely because he wasn't interested.
In selecting Mr. Knarr as their candidate, the four alderman have chosen someone who, like Mr. Mosby, does not fit their narrow definition of eligibility.
I don't know Mr. Mosby, and I have no personal interest in seeing him appointed. What I am opposed to is the indiscriminate application of non-charter standards to Mayor Schlink's candidate for the Ward 2 seat, standards that appear to come and go at whim.
The charter qualifications are there for a reason. No one need meet any other standards, or have any previous aldermanic experience, to become an alderman.
If the four alderman had any respect for the charter, they would reconsider their "no" votes at the next BOA meeting and approve Mr. Mosby's charter-sanctioned appointment.
Mr. Mosby did not create the mess in which the BOA finds itself; aldermen Beezely, Duncan, Foote, and Pickel took care of that. Mr. Mosby would not be under any sort of microscope once appointed.
Martha Duchild
VERY well said Ms. Duchild!
I second that motion. (To reconsider.)
Question about the pre-meeting. Should Ward 2 residents bring their own pitchforks, or will they be issued during the meeting?
Martha, I agree with the comment from a blogger who was very pleased with your clear and concise answer regarding Mosby. That really was very informative and helpful.
My question to you would be that at this next board of aldermen meeting, can those who cast a NO vote for Mr. Mosby, under the City Charter, be allowed to reconsider their vote?
If they are allowed, would this be setting a new prescedent. If so, we may have another war on our hands when this ever comes up again.
11:54 PM Blogger: No need to BYOPF (bring your own pitch fork) as the meeting will come no where near that sort of thing.
Torches are however optional!
Tom Ford
I continue to be baffled at this Ward 2 issue. I hope that everything will be understood more at the meeting tomorrow night.
Whatever the outcome, everyone will not be happy.It seems that the new mayor has just started his new job and we already have political walls up. I hope that doesn't prove to be true but it sounds like it to me.
7:29 PM Blogger: Look back at your original comments and you will see you attacked me.
When attacked I respond, in fact i was once told that if someone comes at me with a BB gun, I respond with an atomic bomb!
And, for the record, please don't try the 'victim hood status" as I am all stocked up with victims now.
Tom Ford
No need for an Atomic Bomb here! I just do what you have done many times on this blog, I speak my mind. You see things your way, I see them my way. There's a big gap between our differences of opinion. Thanks for not deleting mine; it's your blog.
11:39 AM June 13
Yes, anyone who cast a "No" vote for Mr. Mosby at the last meeting may state that they wish to reconsider their vote. This can only be done at the meeting immediately following the one where the original "No" vote was cast. This has been done before, by a different Crestwood alderman on a different issue, so there is no cause for concern that any conflict would be created if an alderman chose to exercise this option.
Martha Duchild
Wow. I can't wait for these small municipalities to be merged into the county and eventually the city. What a f'ing waste of time and money.
What will be - will be; nothing f'ing about it. Further, what's happening to our Country?
4:34 PM Blogger: One question please. Why wait, plenty of room for you elsewhere in the Country.
In fact why stop there, leave this Country and be happier than you seem to be now!
Tom Ford
Head in the sand... just act as though this crap really matters to you... Did you not read what I just said?? I'm not talking about anti-Americanism or whatever the hell you just interpreted or saw on Fox News... Eventually all municipalities in the County will be merged. St. Louis shall return to the great region it once was. All the crap that is spewed out in this blog won't matter, and our tax dollars won't be wasted as these local politicians bicker and wine while Crestwood continues to FAIL! I speak the truth and if you can handle it bury your head in the sand or you can "leave the Country"...
Post a Comment
<< Home