Meet your Alderman, Ward Two Alderman,Chris Pickel (per his Bio on the City Site.)
As below, no attacks without your signature or I will remove them.
Chris Pickel – Ward 2
(314)966-4866
cpickel@ci.crestwood.mo.us
Chris Pickel is Director – External Affairs for AT&T-Missouri. In this position, he coordinates all of AT&T’s charitable contributions in the state and works with local communities on various telecommunications issues. Previously, he was Regional Marketing Manager for Cingular wireless and was responsible for all marketing, advertising and public relations programs in Missouri and Kansas. Before joining AT&T, Mr. Pickel was Manager of Public Relations at D’Arcy Masius Benton & Bowles.
He is a member of the Crestwood-Sunset Hills Chamber of Commerce and a former member of the Crestwood Planning & Zoning Commission. Other organizations he has supported through volunteer activities include: American Red Cross, The United Way, FIRST Robotics, Ronald McDonald House, March of Dimes and St. Louis University High School.
A native of St. Louis, Mr. Pickel earned a bachelor’s degree in Marketing and Communications from St. Louis University. He and his wife, Eileen, have three children
Tom Ford
NO. 900
posted by Crestwood Independent at 17:41
19 Comments:
This guy was in public relations?
What I find perplexing is Mr. Pickel's assertion that he did not speak with Steve Knarr until after Mr. Mosby's rejection.
If this is true, then when Mr. Pickel contacted Mayor Schlink suggesting he choose Mr. Knarr to fill the vacated Ward 2 seat, he made the recommendation without having bothered to check with Mr. Knarr to see if he was even interested in the job.
This, coupled with the fact that two aldermen (Foote & Pickel) decided on the same day, and within hours of each other, to call Mayor Schlink with identical recommendations, makes Mr. Pickel's assertions of not having discussed the job with Mr. Knarr prior to the rejection of Mr. Mosby appear a bit dubious at best.
Whether or not he did speak with Knarr or not, I was one of his constituents who told him I didn't think Mosby was right for this job. Plus there were other constituents who told Pickel the same thing.
You can pound this Mosby issue into the ground and you can try Pickel in a court of law if you feel you have sufficient cause; because I feel that this is what you and others want to do.
Since he apparently is a so-called "tax and spend" guy; chances are you were looking for something negative in the first place; and look at that! You didn't have to look very far to find something.
I am so tired of all these people on the board jabbing at each other it's amazing that as indignant as some of them are, they didn't put a contract out on these 4 (so called failures)! Nothing like being marked with a "scarlet letter" on their backs to gain peace and understanding on the board.
So where do we go from here? What's next on the hatchet list?
These aldermen are going to have to work with each other for a few years cause we have just started. Are we going to keep arguing about this or do we try to make it work - remember - this is suppose to be a mayor and board who make decisions for the good of the city.
The way things are going, sounds like barriers are already in place.
I saw a documentary on Abe Lincoln last night - and he said : "a house divided against itself - will fall! Let's remember those words please!
Alderman Pickel,
When it comes to issues you have to vote on, do you get the views and opinions of the voters in Ward Two?
To paraphrase the departing Mayor Robinson to the alderman:
Please support Mayor Schlink, he's going to need it.
I'm not "pounding this issue to the ground." It is important to hold our elected representatives accountable. One way of doing this is to periodically evaluate whether their deeds match their words. After repeatedly complaining of the board's lack of unity, four of the alderman who often voice this complaint had a chance to act on their words, and failed utterly. What harm would this appointment have caused the city or the board?
You were one constituent who voiced concern. You mentioned a couple others who did the same. How many other residents of Ward 2 contacted Mr. Pickel? Do the few residents who contacted Mr. Pickel outnumber those residents who voted for Mr. Schlink as aldermen and then as Mayor? His election by an overwhelming majority can clearly be interpreted as confirmation of his positions on various issues affecting the city. Do you accept the candidate chosen by the person who has had the most recent contact with a majority of his constituents (through door-to-door campaigning during the mayoral election 2 months ago), or do you accept the candidate selected by the alderman who's heard from a few people?
Not a single person has provided a legitimate reason for denying Mr. Mosby the opportunity to serve Ward 2. No one on the board, and no one on this blog.
One has to wonder about how much consideration went into Mr. Knarr's appointment when not a single one of the four aldermen who voted for him asked him any questions.
What happened need not be pounded to the ground, but it does need to be held up to scrutiny.
Martha Duchild
You make good points Martha. But where does everyone go from here? Do they allow this issue to overwhelm them to the point where they refuse to keep an open mind on all the issues to come?
After all, they are going to have many things to deal with from this point on. I did not like the manner in which Mosby's issue was handled either, and I was not even in favor of him. But that being the case, I would have waited until I could personally talk to the mayor and would not want to vote on it until he was present.
Nobody seems to want to explain that issue to me and I would really like to know the reason.
But if I were on the board of aldermen at the present time, and were in their shoes now, I would have to force myself to watch, wait and see how things go from this point on. After a certain amount of time passes, I then, for sure, could make a true and honest opinion on whether these 4 are going to cooperate with the rest of the board.
If everyone keeps carrying resentment toward them and makes their conclusions based on only one issue, this board is dead in the water before it begins.
They all need to try to cooperate.
That's all I am saying.
Resentment does not cause problems. The actual problem is trust. The BOA, city attorney etc. failed to follow the rule of law that is stated in the charter of the City of Crestwood.
The BOA is simply and only mandated by the charter to fill in to perform the actions the city clerk would normaly do when an application for elective office is submitted. The failure to follow the rule of law creates distrust.
The solution is simple. Follow the rule of law and create trust. If you do not like the law then seek to change it, not defy or break it, as BOA has done.
Good luck with seeking election for another term Pickle, Beezley, Knarr, and Duncan.
Steve Nieder
What rule of law in the charter did they break. I am just asking a question as I do not know the charter. Thanks.
Here's a thought:
When Mr. Schlink was running for mayor, he assured everyone that he would be available to serve this city, and that his employer would allow him all necessary time off. Clearly that has not been the case, at least for the vote that has everyone's knickers in a twist. My bottom line question: if Mr. Schlink wanted Mr. Mosby put in as alderman, why in the heck wasn't he there for the vote?? he was out of town, as I understand it, but maybe he should have considered that vote necessary time for the city. Or are we not allowed to question Mr. Schlink yet?
"if Mr. Schlink wanted Mr. Mosby put in as alderman, why in the heck wasn't he there for the vote?? "
He cant cast a vote, he is not an Alderman
5:26 PM June 21
Perhaps residents are not prepared to let this go, but the BOA has, with one important distinction: it is now clear to all of them that political games are still being played, and the rejection of Mr. Mosby has done severe damage to the credibility of the four members who selected Mr. Knarr over Mr. Mosby and Mr. Deutschman.
Regarding the post about Mayor Schlink's assurance that he would be there for the city: he has been there for the city. The one meeting he missed was due to a prior commitment that could not be changed. I'm sure this absence will be the exception rather than the rule. Also, bear in mind that thanks to advances in technology, there are myriad ways of "being there" for residents.
As to why he wasn't there for the vote, it's quite possible that Mayor Schlink, after speaking with Mr. Mosby, had every confidence in his ability to serve Ward 2 residents, and may have (mistakenly as it turns out) taken some of the aldermen at their word when they referred to a desire to work together to move the city forward.
The BOA will move forward, but with a bit more knowledge than they had before Mr. Mosby's appointment.
Martha Duchild
It doesn't matter that the mayor doesn't cast a vote. If it was important to him, I feel he should have been there to defend his choice.
Once again the charter, article three, section 3.3, specifies what the board is to verify before voting for the candidate the mayor selected. The BOA chose to ignore the rule of law and create new rules for the charter without the voters approval. Mayor Schlink did not need to attend the meeting because Mosby met the qualifications mandated by the charter.
I am sure the mayor did not expect the BOA and the legal counsel to ignore and violate the charter rules.
Steve Nieder
Thanks Steve. If there was a breach in the charter made, and the charter not upheld, I am not happy about the way this was handled and would really like further clarification from the city attorney.
Plus to place this mayor at fault for being absent for one meeting is not right either. That is really a stretch to accuse him of any wrong doing; however it not uncommon when it comes to bad judgement calls and the blame game by residents.
I would have preferred Deutchmann to get the re-vote as he is really a community-minded and honest man (with emphasis on honest), but I am still adamant that the board should have waited to vote a new alderman in until the mayor was there; that only being another two weeks.
Further and foremost, anybody would know that to vote in his absence is like a slap in the face which is not the way you want to start a relationship on the board of aldermen.
If these four do not want to respond on this blog which looks like they don't intend to do, then they should at least give their responses to the newspaper.
Please be careful when you listen to advice from an attorney.
The attorney we have offers opinions but when asked for precedents to support them cannot and instead offers useless chatter.
Our present attorney has made many mistakes when offering opinions both in Crestwood and Wildwood.
The mistakes are documented.
10:00 AM Blogger: Well as of Right mow i intend to ask them the same questions next Tuesday night in front of the papers and "we the people."
Now I will add one more question, that being, don't they feel a certain responsibility to answer a citizen when emailed?
Tom Ford
I agree Tom with what you say; but because of all the comments on this blog along with the character assassinations, maybe they just don't feel anyone would listen.
Maybe they just don't want to give people the satisfaction of a response because no one on the blog has given them the benefit of of the doubt. Rather, the rebucking mostly from you has been so full of anger, I, for one, would feel it would be useless to try.
When you put people down this much, it actually can become scary.
9:39 AM Blogger: Well if they do not want to respond to me or anyone else why say on your campaign flier that you will?
You can't have it both ways (respond when all is in the affirmative, no response when things are negative.) now can you?
I look upon the no response as strictly a product of arrogance on their part, nothing more and nothing less!
The second I hit the post it button I open myself up to massive criticism (just read the Blog,) and the second they took the oath of Alderman they did likewise.
They don't have to agree with me, you or anyone else, but they do owe all of us the courtesy of telling us why they voted the way they did.
If they are not willing to do that then let them resign and we can fill their seat with someone who will.
Tom Ford
Until former Mayor Robinson change this, the City of Crestwood always had an outside negotiator who negotiated for the City the agreement of understanding with Fire Fighters Union . The negotiator was replaced by the city Administrator and City Attorney by former Mayor Robinson. Recently the former Mayor and some members of the BOA acted to change the Charters rules on City employees campaigning for a City election.
Would you support the City of Crestwood removing it's staff from labor negotiations and returning to the use of professional negotiator as was used in the past?
Post a Comment
<< Home