Saturday, October 08, 2011

Dickson Echoes The Party Line

DICKSON'S ONLY THE MOST RECENT
In a Letter to the Editor in the Daily Pilot, HERE, published in print Sunday, October 9th, Robert Dickson, an appointee of the current city council majority to a powerful position on the Planning Commission, is the most recent such appointee to chime in to support his benefactor's misguided attempts to destroy the very fabric of our municipal government by ham-handedly forcing its outsourcing scheme on our city before doing their homework or attempting to approach the bargaining units to try to work out the perceived fiscal difficulties. Only at the most recent council meeting last Tuesday did we find out that letters have finally been sent to the six associations that represent the interests of our municipal employees, inviting them to re-open their Memorandums of Understanding - a move that is six months late.

DEFENDING THE INDEFENSIBLE
The council actions Dickson defends have
torn this city apart under the guise of probable fiscal insolvency - a fabrication by certain members of the council and their sycophants designed to frighten voters into supporting their actions. In meeting after meeting we see members of the council majority chide, vilify and otherwise treat with disdain respected members of the community who dare to speak up. In the more than a decade that I've been watching municipal activities I do not recall such displays of arrogance and abuse of power by council members. We've seen members of the council invite community input, then, with a smirk and snide comment, dismiss that input like they are swatting flies.

SENIOR STAFFERS HAVE BAILED
OUT
The actions of thi
s council have caused the departure of almost all senior city staffers, who departed with decades of exemplary, award-winning service in our city and took with them years of institutional knowledge. Perhaps the most glaring example of this problem was the abrupt departure by hand-picked interim Police Chief, Steve Staveley, last spring. He left his second tour as interim chief - he filled that void the first time while the city performed the search that resulted in Chris Shawkey being appointed Chief - when he realized what this council is doing to our city and left in his wake an unambiguous indictment of their actions in the form of a long letter to the members of the Costa Mesa Police Department. This man, who has more than four decades of law enforcement experience, was - and is - one of the most respected law enforcement leaders in the state, left no doubt about his feelings about this city council majority. In one segment of his letter, referring to this council, he said, "They lack skill, training, education, knowledge, they fail to study (or at least learn)." He later said, "They are in my opinion incompetent, unskilled and unethical."

STAVELEY WAS RIGHT...

Staveley's assessment has proven to be accurate. The council majority demanded, and received, a budget for the year for the Cost
a Mesa Police Department that provides for a police staffing level not seen for more than two decades. The council majority ignored Staveley's staffing recommendations and those of the hand-picked consultants and arbitrarily pulled a number out of the air. As council woman Leece recently pointed out, several categories of crime are now on the rise. For providing this information to the public she was chided by Eric Bever, attending one of his few meetings this year. Even worse, non-elected council member Steve Mensinger is now proposing a hiring freeze across the board, in an attempt to bully the employee associations to implement a two-tiered pension plan.

OUR "LEADERS".
..
This city is presently being governed by a city council majority composed of one carpet-bagging opportunist - Jim Righeimer - with no real ties to the community, but who gives all the appearances of a man jockeying for position to higher office; one member - Eric Bever - approaching the last year of his final term who apparently can't be bothered to attend all the meetings and community events that are expected of a council member; one member - Steve Mensinger - who was NOT elected to the office by the voters of this city, but occupies his seat thanks to three votes of his pals on the dais and treats this gift of power like a frat boy at a kegger; one member - Gary Monahan - who, despite more than a dozen years on the council, seems to have lost interest in what's going on and has virtually abdicated control of issues to others and Wendy Leece, who is presently the only member in touch with the community and who is actually earning her stipend by suffering abusive behavior by the other members on the council.

FOR EXAMPLE...

The motives of the majority are clear when they venomously criticize Leece, implying that she's "in the pocket of the unions" for her votes last year on contract modifications approved by the the
n-majority in an attempt to stabilize the city's fiscal situation and yet that majority ignores the fact that Monahan also voted for those contracts. We can only speculate about why this double-standard exists and Monahan might be getting a pass on this issue.

CORRUPTION?
Last Tuesday there was a whiff of corruption in the auditorium when the council majority - minus Bever, who was again absent - voted to select one of the vendors for the Monahan-proposed turn over of the TeWinkle Park Sports Complex to private enterprise. During the discussions Leece - who opposed the proposal - twice asked the other three council members to tell the public of any ex parte communications they may have had with any of the three vendors who made their pitches to them that evening. She said she had NO communications with any of them. The other three members were curiously mute - not a peep. This seems strange, since having communications with those folks would not have been out of line. Now we are left to speculate about just what kind of communications - and deals - may have been struck between individual council members and the vendors.

ADDING FUEL TO THE FIRE OF SUSPICION

It certainly didn't help things when - according to first-hand reports from the scene la
st Tuesday night - the representative of the vendor chosen, Big League Dreams, got into a heated argument with the President of the Mesa Del Mar Community Association in which he cursed him out. It took a Costa Mesa police officer in the chambers to stop the dust-up. There are those who were in attendance last Tuesday night, including representatives of the unsuccessful vendors, that apparently believe this deal was a fait accompli - a done-deal - months ago.

HE CHOSE THE WRONG WAGON
I guess I underst
and Rob Dickson's loyalty to his benefactors. He's a smart guy with whom I've exchanged opinions over the past half-dozen years. He's a recent Westside homeowner and a paralegal working for a local law firm. He knows how to do his homework and to frame a position, but he's misguided on this one. He's tied his political future to a party bandwagon that has the wheels falling off and that's too bad.

Labels: , , , , , ,

36 Comments:

Anonymous Max said...

Anyone else google all of the out of court settlements and cost overruns that involve Big League Dreams? There's one article that talks about a 17 million dollar overrun. If BLD could make it on their own, they would. Since they can't, they want us residents to give up an existing ball field in a public park to build a restaurant and parking for their restaurant. The city shouldn't be in the joint venture restaurant business with our taxpayer assets or taxpayer money. It doesn't sound like BLD will sign off on all liabilities so this could cost the city a great deal of money in the long run. At the very least, its a tacky junk project by a marginal company. Righeimer needs to get the boot before all of our parks start looking like a cheap Boomer's. Plus, any customers that BLD would get would only be stealing from real deal businesses that have to survive completely on their own. Another thing, what's with the whole no bid no RFP thing he did at the last council meeting? Was that crooked or what?

10/09/2011 02:10:00 AM  
Anonymous factcheck said...

I strongly disagree that public speakers are treated with disdain. Actually I even disagree that these public speakers are respected members of the community. They are publicity hounds, wasting hours of council meeting time repeating the same thing over and over. Maybe they once were respected members of the community but that has been lost. They spew forth false information and when the council sets the record straight you say they are treated with disdain? You bring up Stavely again when he is a classic example of a mental meltdown, a man whose time has past, a laughingstock to many in fact. What next, Muir a respected reporter? Mensinger is an elected official btw. Ask Genis, she can quote the law I'm sure. All these layoffs(o), all this outsourcing (0), all this corruption (0)and our unfunded pension liability still soars. We need a hiring freeze in place until we have the two tier system in place don't you think?

10/09/2011 06:19:00 AM  
Anonymous This again said...

The small municipal employee union already agreed to a 2 tier last year. It has yet to be implemented, just like the other 99 ideas that the municipal employees suggested.

The real fight is with police and fire. The municipal employees they're trying to outsource aren't the ones retiring at 50 years old.

10/09/2011 08:47:00 AM  
Anonymous Cheech said...

These boys on the City council are prime examples of why my facebook page is full of Occupy Everything posts. They disregard any citizen input while hooking up with dubious contractors and spend millions on lawyers because breaking contracts are in their blood. With direct links to the Wall Street/Koch Bros gang it's no wonder things are how they are. There will be many revelations to come about these guys because a tiger does not change his stripes and the same scavengers will defend them hoping to get the scraps from the feeding frenzy.

10/09/2011 09:41:00 AM  
Anonymous Doomsday said...

This again is correct, but as usual is is conveniently left out of the usual rhetoric. The general employees and the managers agreed to this along with paying their portion of PERS. It is Police and Fire who are dragging their feet. It would be nice if actual facts were presented. Another thing, Mensinger was not elected by the vote of the people. I do not get why this is even debated. He was appointed by his buddies on the council. This is why his seat is up in next year's election. The real publicity hounds are Righeimer and Mensinger. Wasn't is Righeimer that went on several talk shows to promote his agenda and called on a columnist at the LA Times twice to do a piece on him and Mensinger? Wasn't it those two who had a ceremony for street improvements for work that they had nothing to do with and had been in the budget long before they came on to the council, but took credit for it anyway? They could of recognized the city staff who applied for the funds and managed the project, but then they would have to say that staff did a great job and they couldn't do that could they?

10/09/2011 09:41:00 AM  
Anonymous left turn said...

Police offered a two tier last negotiations, but it was turned down. This council has shown they do not want to come to the table and talk about what is best for the city. I would bet there is not a chance in hell PD will voluntarily come to the table at this point and council knows that.

PD will be down another 20-30 officers by next negotiations. If you think you can cut your PD by a third and still get adequate service, you are wrong. I believe council's end game is going Sheriff. I have a friend who held down a burglary suspect for 40 minutes until a deputy arrived. I refuse to live in a city patrolled by OCSD!

10/09/2011 10:17:00 AM  
Anonymous Mary Ann O'Connell said...

Dear factcheck:

A humorous pen name for one who failed to cite a single fact but instead spew nothing but opinion.

10/09/2011 10:38:00 AM  
Anonymous Doomsday said...

Left turn, I apologize for saying that Police did not offer a two tier during their last negotiations. I also need to check my facts further. Do you know if Fire offered the same?

If the goal of Righeimer is to have OCSD police Costa Mesa, which I am inclined to believe, then the residents better be ready to accept that. Righeimer will just move to another city and leave his mess behind.

10/09/2011 11:12:00 AM  
Blogger Joe said...

Geoff,

Excellent summary of the past year. Dick-Son sounds like just one more regime footsoldier in the Battle for Costa Mesa.

BLD sounds like another cluster.

Why do Riggy and Menssy hate Costa Mesa so much??

10/09/2011 11:13:00 AM  
Anonymous Rob Dickson said...

PART 1 of 2

Geoff,

Feel free to impugn my motives all you want, I'll let my words stand on their own.

As you know from our many discussions, I care deeply about Costa Mesa and its future. I have lived here almost 20 years, and as you note, I just bought a house on the Westside, where I intend to raise my family. I have been very involved in civic affairs for a long time, and have a long history of public commentary on these issues. As always, my opinions are my own, and based on facts and research.

Your pot calling the kettle black idiom is highly ironic. That you dismiss my commentary as the "party line" while consistently hewing to the union party line is amazing.

I wrote this commentary because the emotion and rancor of the debate has obscured reality, too bad you can't take it at face value.

Outrageous misrepresentations like the ones you made in this blog post fly in the face of reality:
"...destroy the very fabric of our municipal government by ham-handedly forcing its outsourcing scheme on our city before doing their homework or attempting to approach the bargaining units to try to work out the perceived fiscal difficulties."

Absolutely amazing, and just plain wrong.

I suggest that you go back and watch the entire meeting video for the October 26, 2010 City council meeting. The bargaining units made it clear that they were done negotiating. They refused to go back to the bargaining table, threatening legal action to prevent any negotiation or delay. Despite being told by both Allan Roeder and Eric Bever that approving the contracts would result in massive layoffs, they did not relent.

I suggest that you go back and watch the candidate's forums, where Jim Righeimer calmly and factually stated that public safety compensation practices, including pensions, were unsustainable. He didn't say that cops and firefighters are bad people or that CMPD and CMFD were bad departments, he praised them. Turns out, he was right, as is being proven locally, and across the state and nation.

Instead of explaining why their compensation was appropriate, or engaging in a dialogue with Righeimer, the associations went to war, waging an entirely unprecedented negative campaign.

(Continued)

10/09/2011 12:10:00 PM  
Anonymous Rob Dickson said...

PART 2 0f 2

You accuse the Council of refusing to meet with the bargaining units, while conveniently ignoring the fact that a week before the election last year, the associations flatly refused to negotiate anything, threatening legal action to prevent further negotiation.

Your "perceived fiscal difficulties" comment is stunning. You are an astute observer, and have been closely following the budget for years. You have been one of the few people in the room during budget presentations, so you know darn well that the problems are not perceived. Decimating reserves, layoffs, cuts to services, etc. - as well as furloughs, pay cuts and other concessions graciously made by employees are conclusive proof that the fiscal problems are real.

Outsourcing is a reality in Costa Mesa. The Council adopted an outsourcing policy 12 years ago, and the union/associations had a six month notice provision added to their contract(s)/MOUs to address it. City functions have been outsourced previously, yet the union and people like you act as if the current council is some rogue entity out to destroy the city.

The actions of the associations at the 10/26/10 meeting made it clear that negotiations were done. After the election, with the same deficit that existed before the election, the only options left to address the largest portion of the budget - personnel costs - were layoffs or outsourcing. Instead of layoffs, the Council decided to explore outsourcing and, as required by the contracts, the 6-month notices to employees who were in positions that were being considered for outsourcing were issued.

Instead of actually representing their members and sitting down with the City to determine how to save money, the union went to war. The harsh rhetoric, misinformation and legal action have further damaged Costa Mesa, in my opinion.

Instead of fighting the City and residents (every dollar spent defending against union legal action is a dollar not available for services to residents), the union and associations should embrace the Council's cost-saving efforts and structure their MOUs and contracts to provide the highest quality of City services at the lowest cost, with optimum effectiveness and efficiency, as well as long-term security for the employees they represent.

10/09/2011 12:29:00 PM  
Blogger feral390 said...

Geoff, you are dead on about all the senior leadership departing. But what about the departures of an obscene number of rank and file front line employees? Not only in the Police Department, but throughout City Hall as well. The Building Department is almost completely staffed now by part time contract workers. Any job openings are never announced nor is there any opportunity for an "outsider" to apply. Maybe we could get an ebriefing or CM minute to tell us how many positions have been vacated either by retirement or resignation in the past year.

10/09/2011 12:40:00 PM  
Anonymous Max said...

fastcheck, name one citizen during the last election that voted for Mensinger? That's right, there weren't any were there? He was appointed by 3 people over someone that got the next highest number of votes from actual citizens in an actual election. That's not a democracy.

10/09/2011 12:41:00 PM  
Anonymous Left Turn said...

Dickson…I suggest you go back to before Riggy was even elected and declared war on public employees. The "unions" knew carpetbagger Riggy was bad news for Costa Mesa from the start. It was then followed by a onslaught of anti-public employee propaganda including the DUI checkpoint & "stink eye" incidents.

I suggest you go back to when employees voluntarily opened contracts, took furloughs, increased pension contributions and worked with significantly lower staffing levels.

I suggest you go back to the 'Feet To The Fire" debate when the "Unions" flat out offered to re-open negotiations and Riggy back pedaled.

The truth is that none of the emplyee "unions" of Costa Mesa have ever threatened strike or even a work slow down. The "unions" have cared more about this city than Riggy ever will and have offered suggestions and concessions from the start.

Riggy's agenda is very clear…Villainize the Costa Mesa Employee to drive them away. The employees that remain will then be replaced with part-time, outsourced or minimum wage applicants. In the mean time he spends a ton of money on anyone willing to line his pockets or make him look good for his future attempt at Sacramento. Riggy is the definition of corruption.

10/09/2011 02:56:00 PM  
Anonymous Col. Jessup said...

Max,

Did you mean Factcheck? Your post made me want to say these words. Don't take it personally, this is just way overdue for me.

You undoubtedly refer to Chris McEvoy in your post. I have nothing personally against the man but the words of Jim Righeimer still echo in my memory that night Steve Mensinger was elected to Council, I only wish I said them. It went something like: "….we are comparing Steve Mensinger to Chris McEvoy? There is no comparison, it does not even come close".

To this day wish I uttered those words because they are so right on point.

I am sick of hearing from the City-Council haters how McEvoy should have gotten the position now held by Mensinger because he came in third place. That is NOT how our system works. Get over it!! If you compare the resumes of these two men it is so lopsided in Steve's favor that a blind man could see it. Steve has extensive qualifications spanning city service, community work, business ventures, Pop Warner, and more. I don't have his complete resume but he obviously does not sit around his home much watching TV, drinking beer or smoking something. Steve has been doing work for our city on many levels for many years. McEvoy's contribution, from what I have seen and read are his "deep wisdoms" he bestowed on us at each council meeting on every subject. He never advertised what else he did for the community so I assume he did nothing else. Being a math teacher is not exactly the qualifications we need to run our city. Sitting on Council takes a lot more than just math and teacher skills, it takes real-world experience in a multitude of areas. It takes professional people-skills that the young 31 year old Chris has not developed yet and you do not get those skills in the classroom teaching teenagers. Costa Mesa cannot and could not afford to have on-the-job training for Chris while we suffer through the worst financial nightmare this country has seen in generations.

Finally, Chris's success in the poles was almost entirely because he was the only candidate the unions felt they could control and easily manipulate. His success was entirely because the unions spent thousands of dollars trying to defeat his opponent.

So I echo Righeimer's words, "It is not even close."

10/09/2011 03:53:00 PM  
Anonymous Other Mike said...

@Left Turn: let's also add that Dickson of course mischaraterizes the "threat" of litigation on the last contracts. There were tentative agreements on the table between the city and the associations. Somehow between the negotiation and TA, the council was backpeddling on the agreement an wanted to go back and change what had been agreed on in closed session. In a negotiation, backpeddling on a Tentative Agreement is known as "regressive bargaining" which is not considered "bargaining in good faith". Therein lies your legal challenge. It wasn't that the associations didn't get thier way. It was that the city was trying to unwind what they had agreed on in good faith.

The associations made a lot of offers and the city played the stall game even though negotiations had been opened for months. It was clear that their motive was to stave of an agreement until after the election, so that Righeimer could get his finger in the pie. It didn't happen and what we have seen since is payback. Pure and simple.

10/09/2011 04:16:00 PM  
Anonymous Doomsday said...

Geoff, once again you rattled someone's cage in the Righeimer regime. If Mr. Dickson (fitting name) actually had a opinion way back in October of 2010, about what is going on in Costa Mesa, why are we hearing from him now? Once a month it seems someone from the regime writes to the Daily Pilot. We have heard from Mr. McCarthy, Mr. Fitzy, Mr. Smith, Mr. Dickson, etc. All have an agenda, and all write from the same script. If he has been a almost 20 year resident as he claims, he sure has been quiet before now. Once you become part of Righeimer's regime, your opinion is obviously not your own, regardless of what Mr. Dickson says to the contrary. I am sure he will be back to dispute all this. Can't wait to hear the rebuttal.

10/09/2011 06:08:00 PM  
Anonymous The CLOWNS must GO! said...

@Col Jessup


I would rather have an ETHIICAL HONEST PERSON WITH INTEGRITY on the council then a person who resorts to belittling, bullying and walking away from the dais whenever he does not get his way or like listening to what is being said. That is a FACT.

KICK OUT THE CLOWN AND HIS BUDDIES!!!!

You are not fooling me. I am a Mesa Verde HOMEOWNER and waiting eagerly to get rid of these KOOKS.

Oh ya-all my neighbors feel the same way.

10/09/2011 07:13:00 PM  
Blogger Joe said...

Col. Jessup said in part:
"Finally, Chris's success in the poles was almost entirely because.."

Dear Riggclone:

The phrase is "Success at the polls." Does the Little General have to come to your home in the 909 and actually type the words for you?

And how fitting that you take the name of a movie character that basically admitted to complicity in homicide.

Just like your master is doing to our city.

10/09/2011 07:16:00 PM  
Blogger Joe said...

I'll take a younger, less experienced McEvoy representing my interests over a smirking creep like Menssy ANY day.

10/09/2011 07:19:00 PM  
Anonymous 1st grade writing said...

Jessup, please tell me did Chris win the south pole or north pole?
You are just another person pretending to know what you are talking about. One last question, which pole has elves?

10/09/2011 07:42:00 PM  
Anonymous Max said...

Col. Jessup,

Your post is disgusting. You sound like citizens are too stupid to know what's best for them. Not surprised to hear you are a fan of a government that feels that way about it's citizens. You probably want our city to be run like SunCal and Bethany Group too.

I'll take a democratically elected representative government any day over what you suggest. In fact, like most people, I will gladly take to arms to defend our government of the people, by the people, and for the people.

By the way, you would be extremely wrong if you thought I was some liberal pro-union council hater. If the council makes a decision that is bad for the city, why would I say otherwise? I may not like their decisions but I don't hate them.

10/09/2011 09:21:00 PM  
Anonymous Rob Dickson said...

Left Turn,

Even with the concessions made, which the employee associations and employees themselves should be thanked for - and were, there was still $9.5 million shortfall - it wasn't enough.

I was at the Feet to the Fire forums, and Berardino conditioned negotiation on rescinding the 6-month notices.

10/09/2011 10:59:00 PM  
Anonymous Other Mike said...

Dickson said: "Even with the concessions made, which the employee associations and employees themselves should be thanked for - and were, there was still $9.5 million shortfall - it wasn't enough."

Of course you leave out that the concessions came during a contract period and that the employees voluntarily opened those contracts early to make those concessions. Then you have the gall to say it wasn't enough?

The entire budget defecit could not be balanced off of employee conessions alone. Hopefully you recognize that. In fact, it was the employees who said time and time again, that it would have to come from concessions and revised revenue streams in combination. Such as the TOT etc.

It's always give half of the story or minimize the contribution or compromise of the employees by you and your ilk. It's wrong and you should be ashamed of yourself.

10/09/2011 11:23:00 PM  
Anonymous Rob Dickson said...

Other Mike,

Your statement below is a clear example of what I meant by the union and association tactics doing more harm than good.

"There were tentative agreements on the table between the city and the associations. Somehow between the negotiation and TA, the council was backpeddling on the agreement an wanted to go back and change what had been agreed on in closed session. In a negotiation, backpeddling on a Tentative Agreement is known as "regressive bargaining" which is not considered "bargaining in good faith"."

It seems obvious that something changed between the TA and the 10/26/10 meeting. Allan Roeder told the Council at the 10/26/10 meeting that approving the side letter agreements would result in up to 100 layoffs. When the Council asked for reconsideration or more time to negotiate, the associations said no, and the City Attorney made it clear that litigation would result if the Council delayed the vote or renegotiated to lesser terms. That wasn't backpeddling or regressive bargaining, it was trying to save jobs.

The only thing the public has to go on is what happened at the public meeting, and that is what it looked like to me.

This isn't a blame game anymore - city employee jobs are on the line. Time to drop the rhetoric and get to work on solutions to save jobs while providing city services in a manner consistent with Council Policy 100-6.

10/09/2011 11:27:00 PM  
Anonymous Other Mike said...

Anyone else find it curious that Jeff and Rick Odekirk of BLD both played babseball at USC? It seems that is a cut-off criteria for this city anymore. Connected to USC? You're in. Oh, and their dad was a developer.

I know both Righeimer and Mensinger never met a developer they didn't like. It would be interesting to see if dad's development company is one with whom Righeimer and Mensinger have done business with in the past, whether it was through SunCal or any other company they have managed or owned. No wonder they didn't want to disclose any ex-parte communications.

Maybe it's all on the up and up, but where there's smoke, there's fire. I see thick black smoke from where I sit.

10/10/2011 01:23:00 AM  
Anonymous Col. Jessup said...

Max,

Boy I just love messing with you. You are fun to work with but don't blow a gasket.

You did not address even one of the issues I bring up. Like the others, you want to bury your head in the ground and pretend everything would be better if only we had a different Council.

Clearly you and your pals must be smoking the same crap that Chris smokes.

10/10/2011 07:24:00 AM  
Anonymous Col Jessup said...

1st grade writing

What the hell are you talking about? You can't respond intelligently to me so you dive into something unintelligible and attack. So typical. Yawn.

10/10/2011 07:52:00 AM  
Anonymous sewtheir said...

weather or knot the word "poles" was spelt correctly,their is know doubt as two what he meant. Four all intensive purposes eye agree with hymn. the french benefits hour staff receives is the important topic two bee discussed, knot how won spells his words. Can ewe sea that oar knot?

10/10/2011 08:06:00 AM  
Anonymous Right Wing Wacko said...

Joe, I'd take one Mensinger over a dozen like Chris or Wendy.

Such anger and vial on this blog. This is nothing more than a council hate club.

10/10/2011 08:47:00 AM  
Anonymous Other Mike said...

Sewtheir-What fringe benefits? You mean like health benefits paid for in large by the employee? From what I have seen, it is all pretty standard fare. Once again, a stretch of the truth.

And Jessup-You are right, it's not even close. I would choose a neophyte with ethical standards and no axe to grind over someone who believes that business is done by he has the most to offer on a personal front. If you think that these business guys don't wine and dine those who are monied and will look after them and their ventures with backroom promises, you are a fool. "I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine" is how they do business deals. It's no different than what you accuse unions of doing. If ou can't see that you ae a foolish person.

10/10/2011 09:02:00 AM  
Blogger Joe said...

RW Whacko spewed:
"Such anger and vial on this blog.."

Me:

Vial of what? CRACK like you and your pals are probably smoking?

I think you mean to say, "Such anger and BILE on this blog."

Yes Virginia, there IS anger and bile when our fine city and our excellent police force is under attack by liars, thieves, and miscreants.

10/10/2011 09:21:00 AM  
Anonymous Mike M said...

Col. Jessup -

You can't handle the truth! These guys are more crooked Lombard Street. Now go join them for cocktails over at the local Trojan Club in Mesa Verde.

10/10/2011 09:56:00 AM  
Anonymous Careful of the swine said...

Mr Dickson, your DP piece was excellent. I suggest you let it stand, and not continue to cast pearls to swine.

10/10/2011 11:08:00 AM  
Blogger Rich said...

Col Jessup your post on 10/09/2011 03:53:00 PM, I decided to change the word Chris to Barak and McEvoy to Obama and Chris McEvoy to Barak Obama.
I then put in Steve Mensinger's place "ANYONE". What a great little excerpt.
The only thing Mensinger brings to the table is a second, or another vote in Righeimers favor.

10/10/2011 03:45:00 PM  
Anonymous Start here said...

Here is a good example of your hypocrisy. You claim to want civility and decency here, there and everywhere but here in your blog because the rules don't apply to you. You wrote, "Last Tuesday there was a whiff of corruption in the auditorium when the council majority..." You just accused elected officials of a serious crime with no evidence, just your opinion. If you want to stop the noise and start serious discussions, heal thyself first. Otherwise, stop taking the high road because it's insulting.

10/11/2011 12:23:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home