New letter posted on-line details rift between Mayor’s office and City Council

fight

I was aware of this letter a few days ago.  I frankly don’t know what to make of it and am not going to comment.  It has just surfaced on-line May 31st 2014 and formally sent to me from a verified source on 1 June 2014.    -   CLICK HERE TO VIEW.  

 

There is a lot of bad blood on both sides still un resolved from the recent employee investigations.  I frankly don’t know where this is going, and don’t want to even report it.   It does tie into the on-going current waterfront issue so I have no choice.  Its in the public view now.   The only comment I will make is that both men involved in the current mess concerning this letter are good people.  Sometimes it is hard to separate policy from the personal.  I would recommend a bottle of bourbon and a locked room away from the public and settle it.

NOTE:  I want to make note as referenced in the comments by a reader.  To keep it in context, I think that group that posted it will admit, they don’t like the Mayor much going back to other issues.  It is on city stationary so it can’t be ignored, no matter the motivations behind posting it.  Had it been sent to me, I would have had no choice but to post it.  Its an official city document subject to public records request.

I will leave the comments open, but I am not going to let through any personal attacks.

_________________

UPDATE: I closed the comments as it was turning into personal attacks.

5 thoughts on “New letter posted on-line details rift between Mayor’s office and City Council

  1. Tom,
    By now it must be obvious to all that you have a vendetta against the Mayor and City Administrator. You are entitled to your opinions, but please don’t wallow in the mud with the character assassins on the Monte Watchdog Blog.

    ___________
    ED NOTE: I have posted dozens of articles both here and in the Vidette supporting both the Mayor and Kristy, even during the employee investigations. I supported both of them vigorously. I took a great deal of heat for doing so. Where you come up with a vendetta remark I don’t know. If you are suggesting that I blindly turn away from this issue, it isn’t going to happen. I don’t do Facebook and don’t know any of them over there. I am not in communication with any of them and restrict any postings on this site to being based on official public documents. Which are posted.

    Like it or not, a public spat between the Mayor office and a sitting City Council member is news.

    When I got up this morning there must have been a dozen messages in my inbox with links to it everywhere…accusing me of being a Mayor “hack” for not putting it up. It is virtually everywhere on social media overnight. I mean come on guys. I put up, I’m fostering a vendetta, I don’t put it up, I am a Mayor “hack”. Make up your minds.

    As for the waterfront there are only two questions that everyone is running from. 1. Who told who to type up that contract that left out the covenants and why? And who decided not to advertise the sale? Pretty basic questions and a whole lot of people want to talk about everything but. Why?

    Any opinions on this site are clearly labeled as opinion and based on both documented personal experience on this issue as well as printed articles in both the Vidette and now the Daily World. Documents have been posted on this issue as a result of public records request. Nothing is in the dark here. All comments on this site require a verified email address as well. I realize this is a hot issue, it doesn’t have to be. Personally, it is my opinion that that sale contract was thrown in front of him and he probably assumed it went with something else. I don’t know. Nobody does. But if that was the case, who threw it in front of him. We can’t continue to cover for people up there. This one cost us our waterfront. What will the next one cost us if we don’t have accountability?

    Just because this group at city hall doesn’t have the vision to develop it, what gives a couple of them up there to make the decision to give away our city waterfront? Twenty years from now a new group might. We don’t have the right to make those decisions. That was the city waterfront. This is not a nothing issue.

    Its not me anybody needs to convince one way or the other, I imagine about now we have 7 ticked off council members and two ex council members wondering what the hell they even bother showing up and voting for if what what do isn’t carried out.

    • Tom,
      Go to city hall, sit down with the Mayor and City Administrator and see the documents and records of how the sell of waterfront property transpired. Neither The City or Willis did anything wrong or underhanded. The only mistake the Mayor made was telling the Vidette that the sale of the property had been posted in their newspaper. He was told the sale had been posted, and he assumed that meant in the newspaper, when in fact all that was done was a for sale sign was posted on the property, as required.
      He made a mistake and admitted it. There was nothing illegal in what happened, as the council had earlier passed an ordinance stating that the sale of surplus property only needed to be posted on said property.
      We all make mistakes and learn from them. I’m sure in the future the Mayor will never assume anything.

      ———-
      ED NOTE: I never said the developer did anything wrong. I wish I could get a deal like that.

  2. Emery,
    All u do is make up excuses for all the mistakes that have been made by this administration. Its time for some answers.. how and why did this land deal go through without the provisions that were suppose to be outlined in the agreement.. who put this in front of the mayor to sign and said it was all good to go.. Instead of making a fool out of yourself Emery why aren’t u asking questions or is it because your good friends with the mayor and your blinded by that friendship..

  3. Now I have to weigh in again….Emery is a good guy…he isn’t a fool, I’ve met him and he is a pretty smart guy. He is just passionate on this. I like Ken too personally. Kristy too just so there isn’t any confusion. This whole issue is getting who supports who…and as Ryan correctly pointed out, it is the basic issue of that contract and advertising….. that is what is important.

    Everybody please stick to the facts. And Ryan, great insight and I have seen quite a few of your postings and you write well. If you ever want to pen something, let me know. Tom

  4. And one more thing. Just to let everyone know what it is like reporting on the goings on around here. When you start asking questions in a culture that has developed that doesn’t like questions….this is what happens.

    When I first began to ask questions on this sale, the month before the sale and prior to the establishment of this site, it got so bad for me personally that I had to walk into the Fire station here in town and ask them if they had been told or pressured to deny or slow down ambulance service to my home. At the time there was a health problem in my house. If any of you think that was an easy thing to do, you can kiss my ass.

    It was one of the hardest and most humbling things I have ever had to do in my life. All of them came out of their offices and sat me on a couch to assure me they were above the politics. I asked them not to say anything.

    I deliberately didn’t say anything to Ken as he would have gone ballistic at what was going on to me personally at the time and I didn’t want to cause any more problems. Ken is a good guy, no matter what people say.

    A month later I started this website.

Comments are closed.