I will also request a copy of the separation agreement and post it along with the video.
City Administrator Resignation 1
City Administrator Resignation 2
Cody
I have heard from a Council member concerning this.
Although much of the answers I needed answered were executive session protected.
I did learn that there is a legal protection clause not mentioned in this meeting.
This clause protects our former City Administrator, from future legal action against him.
Which makes me question why those four voting for this, kept mentioning protecting the City.
Protecting from what?
I have also learned that the new Council will have option's presented to them to finance this pay-off.
Among some of the ideas I heard was terminating the Ordinance Enforcement Officer position and putting that responsibility back where it belongs.
In the hands of the new City Administrator.
Cody
Here is the separation agreement for your review.
Cody
SEPARATION AGREEMENT
This Separation Agreement ("Agreement") is entered into between the City of Cascade Locks, an Oregon municipal corporation ("City"), and Bernard Seeger, City Administrator ("Seeger").
RECITALS
B. Seeger serves at the pleasure of the City Council and may be terminated from or resign his employment. The City and Seeger may also mutually agree to terms of separation.
C. Seeger and the City have agreed that Seeger’s employment with the City shall terminate as provided in this Agreement.
4.2 During the same period, as set forth in Section 4.1 above, Seeger agrees he shall make himself reasonably available to the City as reasonably requested to answer questions and otherwise provide information relating to all matters with which he was involved while employed with the City. After that time, the City and Seeger may agree to terms regarding additional such assistance. Nothing in this section requires Seeger to travel to City of Cascade Locks or meet or be available at times that would interfere with any future employment or with efforts to obtain employment.
4.3 In addition, Seeger agrees to be reasonably available to appear on behalf of City in any litigation, arbitration, or other proceeding involving Seeger’s performance of his duties while employed by the City. The City agrees to provide Seeger access to files and the assistance of staff as needed to help him prepare for any testimony. During the same period, as set forth in Section 4.1 above, Seeger agrees he shall make himself reasonably available to the City as reasonably requested to answer questions and otherwise provide information relating to all matters with which he was involved while employed with the City. After that time, the City and Seeger may agree to terms regarding additional such assistance. Nothing in this section requires Seeger to travel to City of Cascade Locks or meet or be available at times that would interfere with any future employment or with efforts to obtain employment. During the period of transition to a new City Administrator, Seeger shall cooperate and assist in the transition to new City management, including at a mutually agreeable time or times and places, meeting with the interim Finance Director to provide background information or strategy for preparation of the Fiscal Year 2011-12 budget, and meeting with the Interim City Administrator and/or new City Administrator to inform and update the Interim and/or new City Administrator of the status of important City matters.
5. Confidentiality and Publicity
This section covers any and all liabilities or claims the factual basis of which occurred or is alleged to have occurred or commenced prior to the date of this document.
This section includes all claims for any and all additional wages, salaries, compensation of any sort, damages, attorney fees, or other costs however denominated of any nature, except as provided in this Agreement.
This section includes any and all claims and remedies available under any federal, state or other governmental statute, regulation, ordinance or presidential executive order, including, without limitation, a grievance under any applicable labor contract or employee handbook, any employment contract express or implied, common law tort claims, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, 42 USCA 1981, the Fair Labor Standards Act, the State of Oregon and the Federal Family Medical Leave Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the State of Oregon wage and discrimination statutes (including Chapters 652, 659, and 659A), and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.
To the extent permitted by statute, the City shall hold harmless from and indemnify Seeger for any and all liability, settlements, loss, costs, and expenses in connection with any action, suit, or claim resulting or allegedly resulting from Seeger’s acts, omissions, activities, or services within the scope of his employment as City Administrator of the City of Cascade Locks.
City Recorder
City of Cascade Locks
P.O. Box 308
Cascade Locks, OR 97014
Such written notice of revocation must actually be received within the required seven (7) calendar day period to be effective. Notwithstanding any other provision in this Agreement, this Agreement shall not become effective or enforceable until this seven (7) calendar day period has expired. Payment of any sums required by this Agreement will not be made at least until the expiration of the seven (7) calendar day period. This seven (7) calendar day period cannot be waived.
14. Attorney Fees
| CITY | SEEGER |
| CITY OF CASCADE LOCKS ________________________ Mayor Dated: __________________ | ________________________ Bernard Seeger Dated: __________________ |
| APPROVED AS TO FORM: _______________________ City Attorney |
48 comments:
What happened is that we watched behind the scenes maneuvering and the last f**k you Cascade Locks that that Council is going to give us.
Recall Lance, fire Sean Osbourne, do not buy anything from the Gallery.
Blackmail, pure and simple with the disgruntled mayor applying the lube. What this tells me is that the casino is not coming in and the rats are deserting the ship. Texan rats first.
Well those four who allowed this blackmail should be ashamed. It is a good thing that three of them are not going to be here next year & the 4th should be recalled. Enough already! Have you ever heard of an employee quitting and then given severance pay? Typically, companies change the locks, clean out the desk and get the person escorted out asap. There is no telling what kind of damage can be done to the City documents, computers, etc. in the time left. It would have been smarter to cover their asses rather than his. They can be sued. I hope sincerely that the new City Council will rescind that giveaway. I also hope that they will be leaders with what is best for the City in mind. Enough of the ego driven administrating.
I gotta ask the question!! $18,000.00 for "unused vacation time"???? what kind of robbery is this??? Just how much "Vacation" did Bad Bernie earn in a little over TWO YEARS??? Come on Lorang, call this what it is, payoff! It will be a cold day in hell when you or your business get much support from this town. Even your small group of supporters cant forgive you for this slap in the face. Cant wait to see how fast you leave when the casino isnt approved. But the Governor promised he would sign the final approval right??? He said right after the decision came from the BIA? How many days did you say are left in his lame duck term? Maybe he just forgot to sign it. Or maybe he is going to do a "Lorang F#*& You" and sign it on his way out the door.
$18,000 for back vacation pay is a crock. I remember when he went on vacation, more than once, to see his family. The one time he also used that trip to visit a Nestle plant in Texas. I would like to know just how much vacation time he was promised each year. This whole thing smells real bad in more ways than one.
The city paid 3 months salary for Bernard leaving now instead of paying 4 months salary when he is fired. We saved a month's salary. What is wrong with that?
What a sad, sad commentary on the four councilmembers' behaviour. How many other behind the scene shanigans did they & Bernard & Jeff & John Morgan pull? Personally I wouldn't want to leave a council position on this unethical note, but I'm guessing they're all feeling smug about how they outsmarted the other councilors and the citizens of CL. Talk about an all-time low for a political move. Disgusting.
Who says "art" isn't a good investment?
Bernard seems to have done pretty well for himself by spending city's money at the gallery.
Dear blithering idiot anonymous poster at 29 December 10:36 am:
We saved nothing. The contract said that if we fired BS without just cause that we owed him 6-months salary. If he resigned, we owe him nothing. We just agreed to pay him $18,112.05 for, wait for it... resigning. Double duh.
You said it yourself Brad.
We do not always do what is in the best interest of the city.
You ruled with arrogance and contempt.
But never in the best interest of the city.
So goodbye to you.
P.W.D.
A giveaway is a giveaway.
The documented FACTS.
Bernard signs employment contract that says if he is found to be in violation of state ethics laws he may be "fired for cause" and will not be paid any severance pay.
Bernard violates state ethics laws.
Bernard applies for job in Wood Village.
State finally publishes findings of ethics violation by Bernard.
Wood Village decides they don't want Bernard as their city administrator.
Bernard realizes he could be fired "for cause" by a council that represents the interests of the city and he that wouldn't receive a termination bonus.
Brad and Bernard conspire to create an agenda item at the end of Brad's final meeting as mayor so Brad, Lance, Kari Jo and Randy can vote to give Bernard money he is not owed.
Why did Brad think it was necessary to give Bernard nearly $20,000 he wasn't entitled to?
Why did the other 3 follow Brad's lead?
The worst part of all of this isn't the money, it's the state of affairs the city has been left in by these 5 jack asses.
Every city department is behind on their responsibilities.
Our "level of service" for the fire department is 30 minutes, regardless of whether it's a house fire or a child in a life or death crisis.
How do we spend $80,000 on a full time "chief", build a $2M garage, buy a $450,000 engine, and still make response times get worse?
Maybe these 5 can fill you in on that.
Customer(citizen) service has been replaced by aggressive arrogance, "If we don't get a fee for it, we ain't do'in it.
U elected 'em
U deserve 'em
I also consider the release of future legal and financial liability, this agreement specifically grants the City Administrator.
For instance; The fire hall loan from the electrical reserve fund.
That loan is to be satisfied by a certain date.
This date is coming due in the very near future.
Some on this Council and the previous Council banked repayment of that loan on the sale of the old fire hall property.
As it is, it has taken years to clean out the old fire hall, just to get it listed for sale.
As it is, all of the transfer of assets to the new station is not complete, from the old fire hall.
Take the trailer behind it, our Fire Chief is determined on moving to it the new fire station.
Then in the previous meeting, when the City thought that they had the old fire station portion sold.
Our City Administrator makes the statement that the City has many options that this money could be used for.
That very statement opened up a pandora's box of liability.
By the intent of that loan, this money can only be used for one thing.
Paying off that loan by the due date.
So who knows just what financial state we are in, to just up and release this City Administrator, granting him immunity from financial, civil and criminal liability?
In my mind the four who voted for this, are now fully responsible should anything raise its ugly head.
They better hope that they did not just write a check that they cannot cash!
$450,000 + interest is a large check to have just written.
Cody
You cannot grant him immunity from criminal liability.
I heard in the store that the sale is not going through. We still have to pay for half of Jeff's garage.
They cannot grant him immunity from any of it.
That agreement would only cover Council from filing for damages.
And yes you did hear right. The sale fell through.
One reason was the buyer thought the trailer came with the sale and he could allow someone to live in it.
Well the trailer was not included and that is a commercial zone not a residential zone.
The other reason was the buyer wanted to level the building and was told what he could build and that it was not his choice.
That was the nail in the coffin.
The deal fell through.
Cody
The "Nail in the Coffin" was Brad Lorang being elected mayor.
You're gonna be paying for that mistake for years.
After getting this today this appears more like a termination.
It also appears that this has been in the works for some time.
13. Understanding of Agreement
Seeger acknowledges that he has had the opportunity to consult with independent legal counsel of his choice during the negotiations prior to the execution of this Agreement and, in fact, has consulted with his own attorney and enters into this Agreement after receiving advice from his attorney. Seeger acknowledges that he has had a reasonable period of time to consider whether to accept this settlement.
7. Review Period
Seeger acknowledges that he has read this Agreement and has been advised in writing by the City to consult with an attorney before signing this Agreement. Seeger also acknowledges that he has been given a period of 21 calendar days within which to consider this Agreement if he so wishes. Seeger expressly agrees that this 21 calendar day waiting period is waived to the extent that this Agreement is signed by him and delivered to the City before the expiration of such 21 calendar day period.
So it is apparent Seeger has been in discussion with someone from this council.
I can tell by the video that Councilmember's Benson, Pruitt and Cramblett were taken by surprise.
So it appears once again, that the policy of the state was violated and some person or persons from this council, acted independently of this council.
That is a violation of public meeting law's once again.
This needs to be repealed by the new council at the first meeting.
Then this council needs to discuss the issue's as a council.
Not just a select few.
Never should it be allowed, where any of the council is excluded, from determining such an issue of great importance.
That is why these types of actions violate the law.
Cody
ORS 192.620 Policy. The Oregon form of government requires an informed public aware of the deliberations and decisions of governing bodies and the information upon which such decisions were made. It is the intent of ORS 192.610 to 192.690 that decisions of governing bodies be arrived at openly.
Cody
192.610 Definitions for ORS 192.610 to 192.690. As used in ORS 192.610 to 192.690:
(1) “Decision” means any determination, action, vote or final disposition upon a motion, proposal, resolution, order, ordinance or measure on which a vote of a governing body is required, at any meeting at which a quorum is present.
(2) “Executive session” means any meeting or part of a meeting of a governing body which is closed to certain persons for deliberation on certain matters.
(3) “Governing body” means the members of any public body which consists of two or more members, with the authority to make decisions for or recommendations to a public body on policy or administration.
(5) “Meeting” means the convening of a governing body of a public body for which a quorum is required in order to make a decision or to deliberate toward a decision on any matter. “Meeting” does not include any on-site inspection of any project or program. “Meeting” also does not include the attendance of members of a governing body at any national, regional or state association to which the public body or the members belong. [1973 c.172 §2; 1979 c.644 §1]
So in reading this agreement.
A meeting occurred.
Decision's which required a quorum where made without that quorum.
Then after all decision's were made by a select few and it was presented to our City Attorney, then the rest of the council had to vote on it.
Yet their right to be involved in these discussion's, which arrived at this agreement, were stripped from them.
Not to mention our right to business being done in public and with public notice.
This is the meaning of corruption at it's finest.
Cody
I also want to know who presented this to our City Attorney and on who's authority.
Cody
I see no where on this that invalidates his pre-existing employment contract. The agreement wherein he resigns = no money, we fire = money.
And I don't know if it has been signed yet that 21 days may be starting last Monday.
What is this?
A. Seeger has been employed by the City as its City Administrator since July 1, 2009, and presently serves as City Administrator pursuant to an employment agreement dated July 1, 2009 (“Employment Agreement”).
That first date is totally incorrect.
Cody,
What is with deleting a post? Nothing controversial was said!?
Truth hurts doesn't it!
Yes this is your blog, but you are being put on notice, you are promoting an open forum for the citizens, so why delete a post that asks you to check facts?
Keep up the open transparent and good work
-Beware-
-Beware-
First off I have not deleted any post.
This has happened on occasions before and I learned that commenter's must ensure, that the post published before closing the post.
If the heading of the comment box says that the comment was posted, then it posted.
But if it says your post did not publish either your email address was incorrect or you did not check the anonymous box.
It is the commenter's responsibility to check this.
Sometimes even when I have my correct email information filled in it does not post and I have to submit it again.
I know this is a problem but I did not write the script for blogspot.
But that is not a problem as I get the emails of even those whom make that mistake.
If you have been monitoring my previous blog, I have on occasions posted things which did not appear on the blog, yet was in my email.
I have done that as I monitor the blog in reference to the emails I get.
Had I seen this in the morning before this was brought to my attention, I would have posted your comment for you at that time.
So in the interest of transparency I will post it for you now.
This is the only explanation I can give you, as to why your post did not appear on the blog and the truth of this matter.
So now I will post your comment, then shortly after reply to it.
Cody
Cody,
You really need to start checking your facts.
Your information about the failing sale of the old garage is not accurate.
Allowing other people to post anonymously on your site that you manage comes with a price. YOU are responsible for the content. Allowing people to make blanket statements that mention some sort of fact without the content being checked makes you culpable. You should be very careful and be prepared for what ever damages are waged against you.
Your do a good job of bringing certain issues up and I hope you continue to do that. Just know that all of your content is being watched by big brother. It is hard to hide things in this electronic age.
Also remember, that your interpretations are just that. However, by allowing others to make inaccurate statements on a site you manage changes things. In this day and age it would be real easy for an attorney to liken this blog to a wire service, a news agency and as such, certain standards exist. Trust me when I say, you do not want that to happen to you. In other words, check your facts, and those of people who post on your blog. If you fail to remove inaccurate information, you are culpable.
-Beware-
Yaawwn!!!
Beware needs to learn to play nice and realize that her threats just lack any punch without a signature, or an attorney.
Just unbunch those panties little girl and learn how to be a real troll.
Kind of like yours!?
Nah,
I tone mine down for you lightweights here in the Locks. You can't handle real trolling. Ooh-whee there's some real nasty swearwords in real trolling. Blog support pages now transfer your swearwords right into a spam folder if you don't *** your *** every time. It's just not like the good old days. Now you can download programs, (kinda like I did) that hide your source computer. Nossir, just not like the old days.
"Beware"
"Just know that all of your content is being watched by big brother."
Really?
Does this mean that the First Amendment has been repealed? Seems like that would have made the news.
Might want to check your facts.
-Beware-
Welcome.
The purpose of this blog was to talk about the issues from both sides.
So lets do that.
You said;
"Cody,"
"You really need to start checking your facts."
"Your information about the failing sale of the old garage is not accurate."
After reading your comment I did try and speak with the buyer.
He had already went back to his home for the holiday.
He will be back Monday.
So until Monday and I hear otherwise from him I have to stand for now on this issue.
I will find out Monday if his position has changed and update you then.
Cody
I hope the new City Council will obtain the advice of an attorney before the Monday night meeting. (and not the one who has sat in on the City Council meetings)
Things are not right and haven't been for some time. Time to see the light and not be taken advantage of in order to protect the citizens from further fiscal ruination.
-Beware-
You said;
"Allowing other people to post anonymously on your site that you manage comes with a price. YOU are responsible for the content. Allowing people to make blanket statements that mention some sort of fact without the content being checked makes you culpable. You should be very careful and be prepared for what ever damages are waged against you."
First off you seem to be mistaking this site for a news site.
That is not what this is.
This is protected by the constitution of this state.
Let me explain legally to ease your concerns.
Oregon Constitution
ARTICLE I, BILL OF RIGHTS
Section 1. Natural rights inherent in people. We declare that all men, when they form a social compact are equal in right: that all power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their peace, safety, and happiness; and they have at all times a right to alter, reform, or abolish the government in such manner as they may think proper.–
Section 26. Assemblages of people; instruction of representatives; application to legislature. No law shall be passed restraining any of the inhabitants of the State from assembling together in a peaceable manner to consult for their common good; nor from instructing their Representatives; nor from applying to the Legislature for redress of greviances [sic].–
So in retrospect I have chosen this blog as a forum to alter and reform this government, by assembling together inhabitants of this City, for the common good, to instruct our representatives for redress of our grievances.
So where in these rights we the people have, does any of your concerns tell me I am violating the City's rights?
Furthermore, every citizen has a federally protected right to freedom of speech and expression.
So who am I to deny any person of those protected rights?
Cody
-Beware-
You said;
"Your do a good job of bringing certain issues up and I hope you continue to do that. Just know that all of your content is being watched by big brother. It is hard to hide things in this electronic age."
Thank you for thinking I bring up good issues and you can count on it continuing.
As far as big brother watching.
I invited them myself and use the links from this blog in complaints to many State and Federal agencies and attorney's.
This blog is upfront and in there face, as I demand action for my grievances from all these agencies.
To be honest with you, this is why some of these agencies are now paying attention.
Cody
-Beware-
You said;
"Also remember, that your interpretations are just that. However, by allowing others to make inaccurate statements on a site you manage changes things. In this day and age it would be real easy for an attorney to liken this blog to a wire service, a news agency and as such, certain standards exist. Trust me when I say, you do not want that to happen to you. In other words, check your facts, and those of people who post on your blog. If you fail to remove inaccurate information, you are culpable."
My interpretations are based on the law as I understand it.
There is no interpretation at all.
For example, I said that this separation agreement was not a valid executive session matter.
I based that statement on the law.
41 Op Atty Gen 437, April 14, 1981
"Routine job performance evaluation material concerning a local school district superintendent, not relating to health, family status, personal finances or similar subjects, is not exempt from disclosure under the "personal information" exemption under the Public Records Law. Information relating to manner of performance of public duties is not personal."
I have many others, including case law to base what you think is my interpretation on, in my statements.
I do my homework before I post anything.
Now if any attorney wishes to make the same mistake as you in thinking this is a news agency he or she is more than welcome to try.
As far as other commenter's who am I to say they are factually wrong.
It is the responsibility of every visitor of this blog to prove otherwise.
That includes government.
So unless someone brings up the issue and points out the facts otherwise asking for a retraction there is not a thing an attorney can do.
Which means you need to be specific in your claim that inaccurate information is being posted.
Otherwise there is not a thing I or any other commenter can do for you.
So please point out anything you believe is not factual and we can determine fact from fiction.
Cody
The front page of the Hood River News has an article by Kirby Neumann-Rea covering Seeger's separation agreement.
Seems Mr. Seeger is jumping ship because he didn't feel that he has the trust of the incoming council.
But the most unbelievable and objectionable problem with the article is that Seeger and Neumann-Rea were able to portray Seeger as the "victim" of unfounded distrust, and so he had no choice but to "pursue a new path".
No mention of the numerous reasons for that lack of trust by not only the incoming council, but by a whole lot of us citizens as well.
Thank you Mr. Neumann-Rea for one more example of your excellent journalism and your interest in what is really happening in Cascade Locks.
Gary, I am writing a letter to the Hood River News and believe you and others should also. We have to stop sitting by and letting these misconceptions and outright lies about our town be printed. Perhaps if enough of us write and explain how disappointed we were and how the block of four did not represent the city and left us with large debts and other ramifications such as a over-staffed office with under-staffed and under watched departments, we could begin to change how others view us and restore our reputation.
Kate,
You are absolutely right.
I started on my letter right after I wrote my last post on this blog. As I was proofing that post, I just got madder and madder at Mr. Neumann-Rea.
Agree, I noticed a dearth of balance or citizen's feelings in that article. It is basically an article about poor Bernard. I wish Joe Petshow did not live here - he seems to not let Kirby print much about us if it's not a happy thing or so huge they can't ignore it. and I miss Raylene, she at least was willing to take the time to find out all sides of the story, not just whoever answered their phone that morning.
It is common for cities to change management every few years. For those of us that have lived here for a long time, think back and try to name all the City Managers we have had in the last twenty years.
The professional manager knows that his length of employment may be a relatively short one. The national average for Local Government Managers is six years.
I share the opinion that the article in the Hood River News was weak on many points. That in itself should be no surprise. With the exception of a few recent reporters, The HRN tends to not spend much time or energy on Cascade Locks unless the story is too big to ignore.
Seeger's statement about his departure should have been followed by references to issues in Cascade Locks during his employment. The reader could then have a better understanding of what happened. No innuendo or rumor, but facts. Instead it appears that the reporter chose the easier path and you have seen the results. Seeger was given the opertunity to make the statement that he felt the new mayor and council didnt trust him and he was moving on. There are several more professional things he could have said. Then again many will say his lack of professionalism is what has lead to his abrupt departure.
I agree that people need to take the time and write letters. A more effective thing to do is let the HRN know that your not satisfied with poor reporting and that your not buying the paper.
We have the great opertunity. We have new council people and a new mayor. The first order of business will be to restore faith in City Government. Finding a new City Manager who will work with the mayor and council while providing needed leadership is a must. The new manager will also need to be active in the community outside of work.
This isnt going to be easy by any means. The Resort-Casino, Nestle Water, a revamped City Charter and yes the return of our High School will take extra efforts from all of us.
Everyone is busy, we know that. But its going to take more from everyone to move forward. Happy 2011. The year we bring back the Pirates.
Bob, Gary and Kate.
I agree with all of you on the Hood River News article.
I too will write a letter to the editor concerning that article.
Cody
Bob
Thank you for your comment.
You brought up some very good issues.
Now I do not know the average employment time of professional managers.
I do not know if that groups corporate and government together, or is just one of those groups, but what we have here is our City is soon to be without one.
We have a new Council, with 3 new member's which have never done this job.
There first official act, after taking their oath, will be to deal with this problem.
As a citizen, I would hope that going through this process of filling this position, that they would determine what caused this resignation and to address that problem for future Council's.
I would hope, that the Council will study the issues of our City and pinpoint a special person to look for, to fill this position.
If we need someone with a utility background, a governmental background, a tourism background, a legal background and the like that this will all be considered.
Because if the statistics you quote here are true and that is for governmental managers, then I would think that is not in the best interest of any city, or governmental agency.
As a citizen, I would think we would want to find someone, whom looks to the long-term of working in the best interest of our City and would do such a job, that person would not want to leave.
But as citizens, all we can do is hope for this council to do the right thing, as most of the negotiations will be held in executive session and we as citizens, will not have knowledge of those proceedings.
Cody
Bob
Concerning the resort casino that is out of our hands at this time.
I do know this and that is, this city cannot afford to expend another dime, on the backs of the electrical consumers to finance a business which is exempt from tax's.
Sure, we will get financial help for some of our services and it will create jobs which are needed, but until the time that it becomes a reality, I feel that the expenses of getting that business are solely the responsibility of that business.
Because in the end we will only get pocket change from the casino compared to a private business who can create jobs and be on the tax roles at some point in time.
As far as Nestle Water that is a 2sided sword as well.
At first I thought it was a great idea until I researched the issue and now even with the loss of job creation, I do not believe it is such a good idea.
The protestors have a valid side which must be considered such as this.
http://www.naturalnews.tv/v.asp?v=6B6D8E76B41489ACA5C1C0BC0CBE28B7
That is just a start but council needs determine the fact from fiction.
To do that requires transparency and to invite that group in to present their side as well.
Then when all the facts are known that decision must be in the best interest of the City as a whole.
Cody
Bob
The School you bet!!! I do not see how we can survive without one.
No respectful business in their right mind will want to establish a business here without a School for the children of their employees.
Then the property values will stagnate without a school.
What family would want to buy a home here, if their children had to be bused over 20 miles of the Gorge to go to school.
School is a heart of any City.
School pride resonates through the children and effects every adult.
School is not just during classroom hours.
Schools provide after hour activities.
Without those functions what will the children have?
What will the children do?
When children lose the structure that these services provide to their lives they are left hopeless.
I am sure the children today being bussed to Hood River dread that ride to and from.
Not to mention feeling left out of those activities going on with their other classmates they cannot share the experience with.
All because it is so far from their homes.
So what effect does that have on them?
It must be negative because they were handicapped from the start.
Oh yes Bob school and the experience of the whole package for the students is a must have.
As far as the school situation all I can say in ending this is I am tired of being treated like the bastard stepchild for Hood River.
Cody
Bob
The Charter, oh how right you are.
I am on board with that.
Of the people, by the people and for the people.
Where we the people, tell government what powers they have and how they will use them.
But above all, everything in it, is in the best interest of the City.
But we need to stop talking about it and just do it.
I am just waiting for things to die down and for Council to get settled in and I plan on going to council for a request for a citizen's committee to do just that.
Are you interested?
Happy 2011 to you as well.
I look at this year as the year of change.
Change for a brighter and better future.
We are at a crossroads right now.
We have a new Council.
We will be getting a new Administrator.
This is a new beginning.
We have the chance here to build this City to be even better.
Let's back this new Council, to tackle the tough issue's they are about to face.
Let's insure that it does not just stay the way that it has.
Let's do everything in our power to bring quality business's, with cost of living job's to our City.
Let's work towards financial stability.
Let's make this the year to do the best we can so 2012 can be met with a bang and we can celebrate in the streets.
Cody
I don't understand how a few people, some of whom have lived here for awhile, others who moved here for career or *coughing* political gain, would want to ruin such a beautiful town. I have lived here off and on since i was 7 years old, I graduated from the now defunct cascade locks high school in 2004. Every year this town slowing started to sink, and I will not blame it on the "recession" the rest of the U.S. had because this town owns everything it runs so in order to lose money its citizens would have to stop paying, which god knows no matter how broke we are we still have to pay the city for our basic services. No matter how outrageous the price may be, considering my electric rates rival southern California's companies. How can you be so fiscally irresponsible? I mean I'm in debt, but what we are giving Bernard would pay off everything I owe, and I say we because we all know who's money it's going to be paying for it, not the council's. I think it's pretty sad that i am 24 years old and could have made a more responsible decisions than those chickens did, that was just a pathetic move and i don't understand how they can even consider themselves a "respected" member of our city. I love this place and am so glad that the new council WE voted for will be in soon. although they do have huge messes to clean up, i believe there is not much else they can do, but pick up the mop and start scrubbing. Maybe someday the odor will go away.
Cody,
I was not able to attend the last council meeting but I understand you did. Can you give the facts of what happened with the CA that prompted his being told to hand in his keys? There appear to be copies of letters floating around town writen by the ex CA to those that deal with the City. From what I can gather, there were one or two letters written that were less than complimentary to the new mayor and council. If there were such letters written, wouldnt that make the seperation agreement null and void or is the City Attorney saying its cheaper for the City to pay the money now versus a court battle.
Thank you
Bobby
Call me and I will tell you what I know I can, as I cannot go public until I find out what I can disclose.
My number is (541)490-9273
Cody
I am wondering why the former CA still has access to his office and why Lance is backing him. Get rid of them both asap.
Post a Comment