| Council OKS board appointments |
|
Posted: Wednesday, January 7, 2009 12:14 am
|
 Email  Print
|
NORTHFIELD — The city council on Monday approved board and commission appointments as follows:
Environmental Quality Commission — George Kinney and Daniel Jones were reappointed. Peter Schmelzer and Stephanie Wolle were appointed. All terms are three years.
Heritage Preservation Commission — Peter Carlson, Judy Swanson and Steve Edwins reappointed for three-year terms.
Arts & Culture Commission — Richard Collman, Gail Jones Hansen, Fredric Gustafson reappointed for three-year terms.
Library Board — Bruce Collwell and Bob Bruce were reappointed, while Jan Shoger was appointed to three-year terms.
Rental Board of Appeals — Andrew Berglund and David Geist were reappointed for three-year terms.
Grace Whittier Fund Committee — Elizabeth Berry was reappointed for a three-year term.
Economic Development Authority — Councilor Jim Pokorney was reappointed and Councilor Rhonda Pownell was appointed to a term ending Dec. 31, 2012 or until they no longer serve as a councilor.
Hospital Board — John Lundblad, Brett Reese and Gina Washburn were reappointed for three-year terms.
Housing and Redevelopment Authority — Kevin Fink was reappointed for a five-year term. Councilor Kris Vohs was reappointed for a five-year term or until he no longer serves as a councilor.
Planning Commission — Tracy Davis and Alice Thomas were reappointed for three-year terms.
Mayor Mary Rossing said Monday that she plans to make additional appointments to the Planning Commission, Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, Human Rights Commission and the Building Code Board of Appeals sometime in February. |
|
|
|
Story Comment Guidelines:
Registered members who identify themselves by name are authorized to automatically post comments to stories. Readers who wish to remain anonymous submit comments to a pending queue, where they will be reviewed for approval within 24 hours of their submission. To determine the author of a comment, click on the user name.
Those who identify themselves will be given broader boundaries to express their opinion. Only those anonymous comments that contribute to the conversation in a thoughtful, respectful, civil manner will be approved. The decision to approve or reject a comment is a subjective one and is ours alone. Authors of rejected comments will receive an email response.
If you would like to report abuse click here to notify us.
|
|
| Show Comments | Hide Comments
|
|
| Login and voice your opinion!
|
|
|
|
Digg
Del.icio.us
Facebook
MySpace
StumbleUpon
Google
Yahoo!
Denison's Votes: Conflicts of Interest?
Suzy,... Jaci,... we need your help. There is some troubling data available in the records of Minnesota district courts regarding a Jon Denison of Northfield.
Having reported on Northfield City Councilor Jon Denison's various landlord and residency woes it is surprising that the NfNews doesn't consider the following public record narrative NfNews-worthy.
Is this our Jon Denison, or a carefully crafted case of internet mistaken identity.
The Northfield News reports that on Monday evening the City Council approved the reappointment of Andrew Berglund to the “Rental Board of Appeals[sic].”
Councilor Jon Denison voted to deny Berglund the reappointment.
Online district court records reveal that on October 24, 2008 Berglund, once a Denison landlord, was awarded a judgement of $1,471.25 stemming from Councilor Denison having been substantially arrear in his rent.
The same records indicate that an order to show cause hearing is currently on the calendar of Judge Thomas M. Neuville for next Thursday, January 15, 2009 at 1:30pm, apparently in the matter of Councilor Denison's refusal to comply with the court ordered award.
Councilor Denison is on the losing end of an ongoing court matter with board member Berglund.
Is Councilor Denison's vote on this appointment a violation of conflict of interest law?
Were either the Mayor or the City Attorney aware of the Denison/Berglund legal history?
Did the Mayor ever have any conversations with board member Berglund or Councilor Denison, or any other person, which referenced the judgement, the ongoing action against the Councilor, or its affect on his political career?
Online district court records appear to suggest that Councilor Denison has an allegedly densely patterned history of failing to meet his contractual, i.e., lease, obligations: ordered evictions, two inside of six months; and yet another ordered judgement to a previous landlord, this in the sum of $2,910.00, also still active.
In published reports defendant Denison seems to paint himself as a self-styled tenant's rights advocate; actual courts of law do not seem to have found that rubric compelling. The adjudicated victims of Jon Denison's serial nonperformance as a tenant are his constituents; as property owners, as Northfield residents, as an actual resident of Ward Four.
Jaci, Suzy, the Northfield News must with all its good resources either qualify or disqualify this narrative? Do the records mean what they say? Having reported snippets of a story in the past does not obviate connecting all the dots of a larger ongoing story.
Again, these questions beg to be answered:
Is Councilor Denison's vote on this appointment a violation of conflict of interest law?
Were either the Mayor or the City Attorney aware of the Denison/Berglund legal history?
And, maybe most importantly, did the Mayor ever have any conversations with board member Berglund or Councilor Denison, or any other person, which referenced the judgement, the ongoing action against the Councilor, or its affect on his political career?
Report, follow-up, repeat. Three simple yes or no questions. Will you ask the questions for us, or will we pay someone else to do it?
My understanding is that Mr. Denison checked with the city attorney and he was told he could vote on this without a problem.
His objection wasn't based on Mr. Berglund personally, but a belief that the council needed to adhere to the promise to have a tenant representative on he board, so having a second landlord violated that promise.
This comment seems to be a really thinly veiled excuse to expose Mr. Denison's private legal history. My understanding is that the former mayor has an extensive record of private legal transactions, which pietro felt no need to explore.
And since the only people who care this much about Mr. Denison are the Summas, it would be hilarious that if after all the nagging about anonymous comments, pietro is either one of the Summas or an accomplice. It seems anonymous comments are fine if they serve their purpose.
I noticed Ms Summa blogged twice about this posting over on locally grown, and everyone ignored her comment. I wonder how she knew about the posting????
If anyone actually does look at this, and you're worried about boards and commissions, here's the court case you should really be worried about.
You can find this by going to the News archives, enter "Summa Charges" in the search box and find the place in the article to click and view this complaint. Here are a few of the more interesting parts.
County of Rice, Court File No. 66-CR-08-4104
Ms Little brought a folder containing various petitions to the defendant (MR SUMMA) The defendant grabbed the folder from Ms Little...and removed several of the documents. Ms Little told the defendant that it was a public document and it could not be removed The defendant held the papers to his chest and refused to give them to Ms Little. ms Little repeatedly informed the defendant that he could not take the documents Ms Little requested that the defendant allow her to make copies of the pages he was taking; he refused.
Ms Little stated that she felt intimidated by the defendant's actions.
The petition is governed by Minn Stat 13.01. ......The government shall allow this data to be inspected and copied. These statutes do not allow original government data to be taken from government files.
Furthermore under Minn Administrative Rule 8205.1040 subp. #, "Filing of a petition is effective upon receipt by the filing officer. Petition papers must not be altered by anyone except the filing officer for verification purposes after the petition has been filed.
This is all copied right out of teh complaint. You can go to the link and read it. One of our city employees, just trying to do her job, said that Mr Summa made her feel intimidated.
Mr Summa admits that he took the documents from city hall. Clearly the statute said he could not.
Our city staff has to interact with persons on boards and commissions, but they also have a right to a workplace free from intimidation and harassment. If a person had a history of intimidating city staff, I would not want them to even be allowed in city hall.
Because of this, I believe that Mr Summa should be removed from the EDA and the Charter Commission.
Call or write to Mary Rossing, Chris Vohs, Rhonda Pownell, and your Ward Rep. and tell them that you'd like to see Mr Summa voted off the EDA as soon as possible. While we're dealing with getting our boards and commissions squared away, we might as well deal with this too.
Curious: It is my observation that you can neither read, nor report, with your questioning of my knowledge of the comment on the NFNews site. On the LG thread you reference, I clearly state that I look at the NFNews site frequently to see what 'charges' are being leveled at the Summas. Hence my seeing the comment which went up and down.
Now I have a question for you, "curious" ... at the end of ypur comment you say " while we're dealing with getting our boards and commissions squared away ..."
Who is the "we" you refer to? the citizenry of Northfield, or the Council?
Is your reference general, or specific? This is not the first time you have implied that you are in the deciding body.
Wishful thinking, wanting to be in a position of power? or actuality, misusing a position of power?
BACK TO THE STORY
Denison's Votes: Conflicts of Interest?
Suzy,... Jaci,... we need your help. There is some troubling data available in the records of Minnesota district courts regarding a Jon Denison of Northfield.
Having reported on Northfield City Councilor Jon Denison's various landlord and residency woes it is surprising that the NfNews doesn't consider the following public record narrative NfNews-worthy.
Is this our Jon Denison, or a carefully crafted case of internet mistaken identity.
The Northfield News reports that on Monday evening the City Council approved the reappointment of Andrew Berglund to the “Rental Board of Appeals[sic].”
Councilor Jon Denison voted to deny Berglund the reappointment.
Online district court records reveal that on October 24, 2008 Berglund, once a Denison landlord, was awarded a judgement of $1,471.25 stemming from Councilor Denison having been substantially arrear in his rent.
The same records indicate that an order to show cause hearing is currently on the calendar of Judge Thomas M. Neuville for next Thursday, January 15, 2009 at 1:30pm, apparently in the matter of Councilor Denison's refusal to comply with the court ordered award.
Councilor Denison is on the losing end of an ongoing court matter with board member Berglund.
Is Councilor Denison's vote on this appointment a violation of conflict of interest law?
Were either the Mayor or the City Attorney aware of the Denison/Berglund legal history?
Did the Mayor ever have any conversations with board member Berglund or Councilor Denison, or any other person, which referenced the judgement, the ongoing action against the Councilor, or its affect on his political career?
Online district court records appear to suggest that Councilor Denison has an allegedly densely patterned history of failing to meet his contractual, i.e., lease, obligations: ordered evictions, two inside of six months; and yet another ordered judgement to a previous landlord, this in the sum of $2,910.00, also still active.
In published reports defendant Denison seems to paint himself as a self-styled tenant's rights advocate; actual courts of law do not seem to have found that rubric compelling. The adjudicated victims of Jon Denison's serial nonperformance as a tenant are his constituents; as property owners, as Northfield residents, as an actual resident of Ward Four.
Jaci, Suzy, the Northfield News must with all its good resources either qualify or disqualify this narrative? Do the records mean what they say? Having reported snippets of a story in the past does not obviate connecting all the dots of a larger ongoing story.
Again, these questions beg to be answered:
Is Councilor Denison's vote on this appointment a violation of conflict of interest law?
Were either the Mayor or the City Attorney aware of the Denison/Berglund legal history?
And, maybe most importantly, did the Mayor ever have any conversations with board member Berglund or Councilor Denison, or any other person, which referenced the judgement, the ongoing action against the Councilor, or its affect on his political career?
Report, follow-up, repeat. Three simple yes or no questions. Will you ask the questions for us, or will we pay someone else to do it?
OK, Pietro and Curious:
Both of your positions are well known now, and I've had e-mail conversations with both of you, so you know mine. Let's take this conversation in a different direction:
What are your opinions of those who were newly nominated to serve?
That seems to me to be an infinitely more interesting discussion.
Thanks.
Thank you, Jaci,
I'd love to know more about the people on each board and commission. Perhaps the city could help produce a photo and a couple of paragraphs about each member and post it to the website pages for each group. It would be nice to be able to be able to learn more, and it might help recruit others to apply for positions if people could see they'd fit in well with fellow appointees.
Jaci, you know I will continue to try to make my point and convince others of its validity. I will continue to disagree with those that I disagree with. But, point taken. I respect your right to delete the occaissional comment. I also appreciate that you tend to let the conversation ride a bit and that so far you aren't putting people in some penalty box. Sorry to put you through all this. I guess that's why you get paid the big bucks.
I honestly don't know a ton about most of these folks, but I'm not a micromanager. I elected someone to pick these people. I now feel much more confident that our mayor/council will be/are using a good system for choosing these people, and that this process is much more transparent. Since I am confident in the process, I am confident that these people are being selected for good reasons, and with input from the groups they serve on, not simply because they're friends of the mayor, helped someone get elected, or will provide political payback in return for being appointed.
I think the NNews does the best it can with what it has. It's not perfect. It's a small town newspaper in a town full of demanding intelligencia, and we all know we're right. Most people I know are very supportive of the job the news has done informing the community over the last year. It's been a challenging time for Northfield, and clearly we're still dealing with some of Lee Lansing's legacy, and we will be for a while. It just doesn't all go away the day Mary took office. The truth is messy, it's not pretty, and the people who it looks unfavorably upon will always resent it being told, and will scream and yell about it.
Some people don't realize that yelling and screaming and threatening people only hurts themselves, their cause, other people's opinions of them, and just makes the other guys point seem that much more valid.
HEAD NOTE: Now missing from this thread is an Anne Bretts comment which said, roughly, 'Pietro, repeating lies doesn't make them true.'
Not so fast.
Jaci:
If Anne, with an e, can't identify a lie in my post is her statement defamatory?
Oh, right it's Anne, so it is after all just unsupported opinion coupled with dissembling obfuscation..
Jaci, you haven't responded to the latest level of our exchange after more than 24 hours.
It stands, inter alia, at this:
Jaci:
“I'm not entirely certain how his personal, civil financial problems
are germain to his work as a councilor -- unless of course it's proven that
he's making decisions as a councilor to help him get out of his financial
difficulties.”
Pietro:
“Regarding conflict of interest I believe you set the bar too high.
“"His personal, civil financial problems are germain[e] to his work as a
councilor" precisely because they inform the "purported conflict of
interest." The city code on the council and conflict of interest does not
require anyone to be harvesting shoe boxes of illicit cash.
“The city code establishes the bar as that "which interest is incompatible
with the proper discharge of his/her official duties in the pubic interest
or would tend to impair his/her independence of judgment or action in the
performance of official duties." (City code Art.II, Sec.2-127(b) )”
It isn't rocket science.
Denison rents from Berglund.
Denison stiffs Berglund on rent.
Berglund wins judgement against Denison.
Denison fails to satisfy judgement against him($1,471.25.)
Next Thursday, January 15, 2009 will be the Third District Courts next attempt to compel Councilor Denison to pay-up to Berglund.
Last Monday Councilor Denison cast a vote opposing Berglunds appointment to the Rental Code Appeals Board!
Conflict of interest, as defined in the above city code citation?
Many in town might conclude, “Yes. No doubt. By the very fact.”
Jaci, most of the last paragraph of the Bend in the River post “Sticking to the Plan,” (NfNews December 5, 2008) reads as follows:
“This isn't about Victor Summa, incidentally. This is about journalism in the new era of the Internet and blogs and online comments to news stories, and when -- or if -- speculation does more harm than good, so I'd respectfully ask the commentary focus on that.”
Jaci, you then allowed that deep, dark thread to roil on for nearly a week and 103 comments. Virtually all of it was anti-Summa invective and you intervened to moderate not once! You did serious damage to your credibility, Jaci, and there are a lot of people in the community who are watching. Far more than the couple dozen of us who comment here.
And now you're going to come swinging through the verdant forest of this burgeoning discussion like Paul Bunyan with Anne the Baby Blue Ox in tow. You self-proclaimed broads got brass!
Jaci, I was enjoying our exchange, but I've got to tell you your actions are wildly inconsistent. If you shut down this discussion after less than a dozen comments and a day and a half compared to the over one hundred comments on BitRiver you will further damage your and the NfNews' credibility.
And many in the community are going to take one giant step closer to being willing to consider the question, hypothetically and in terms of their lay opinion of course, of whether, any individual statement not-withstanding, the NfNews manages the editing of whole parts of its operation as something akin to a general instrument of defamation.
This isn't rocket science and we're not asking any one to reinvent the wheel. This is about:
Denison rents from Berglund.
Denison stiffs Berglund on rent.
Berglund wins judgement against Denison.
Denison fails to satisfy judgement against him($1,471.25.)
Next Thursday, January 15, 2009 will be the Third District Courts next attempt to compel Councilor Denison to pay-up to Berglund.
Last Monday Councilor Denison cast a vote opposing Berglunds appointment to the Rental Code Appeals Board!
Conflict of interest, as defined in the above city code citation?
Many in town might conclude, “Yes. No doubt. By the very fact.”
Jaci, why not just make it an online poll?
Oh, and Anne, you silly goose, you can't defame me, I'm anonymous. ;-)
Jaci, while I was writing, I think you deleted Pietra's last blog. Honestly, I think you should put it back up. It does no harm to me, Jon Dennison, Anne, you or the News. I truly believe that people will read all this stuff and recognize or find out what of it is truthful or not. Let the people judge. Thanks
Whoa, did I miss something, now it's back or I see it. Sorry?
Curious, Pietro, et al.:
I didn't remove Pietro's latest comment, nor AnneBretts'. She may have self-moderated. Nor would I have moderated it. It's not defamatory.
Overall, I'm glad to hear that at least some of you are comfortable with the idea of calling each other out when comments cross the line. Although I disagree about my inconsistency with regard to these posts and the ones on Bend in the River (especially since I know there was plenty of moderation happening there), I think Pietro raises a valid point about when moderation happens and doesn't. There is always the danger that you will be perceived as subjective in your selection.
On the Jon Denison story, Pietro, I believe the News has fulfilled its obligation in reporting this story. As I wrote in our e-mail exchange, I don't believe readers are as intensely interested in this as you think. To back up my contention I offer:
-what I saw at his Ward meeting when the issue of his tenancy came up (it seemed few in attendance cared, outside of Victor Summa, who expressed strong dissatisfaction);
-the News' reader advisory panel (I asked whether we should be reporting this story more aggressively and got what I thought was a mixed reaction at best)
-no reaction to my column where I explained why we hadn't reported more on it
-city hall's apathy on the matter (although I also think they were pretty apathetic about the mayor and we were very aggressive on that story, so I don't offer that one as a big reason!)
I don't think our readers are stupid. The fact that Jon Dension did as poorly as he did in the mayoral primary says, at least in part, voters read what we wrote and connected the dots on their own.
Jaci, I deleted my comment in response to your request to stick with the topic.
I agree with you that Mr. Denison's minor legal dispute with a former landlord isn't of interest to anyone but the Summas. And it seems the Summas have a conflict of interest of their own, since their obsession with the destruction of Mr. Denison's political life could lead to an opportunity for Mr. Summa to try again for that council seat, unlikely as it would be for him to win. Their constant public attacks also could make it difficult for Mr. Denison to get hired by a local employer. It seems that if they really want him to meet his obligations, they should leave him alone. The only good thing is that they are creating the paper trail needed to enforce stalking laws when they cross the line.
Ms. Bretts: So now I am a stalker, or approaching that line?
Is there no end to your calumny?
How telling that you criticize only the Summas, but leave Pietro out, although he/she has stated the case so much more succinctly than I. Oh the "joys" of being anonymous!
It is, oh so obvious! When you have no facts to stand on, you place yourself more squarely in a less desirable place.
How is it that you square your criticism of the former Mayor in your version of his alleged violations of ethics/conflicts of interest ( not yet adjudicated) but excuse Mr. Denison's which have been adjudicated and are yet subject to further adjudication this week? That is not rational, except by prejudice.
Facts do not seem to carry any weight with you......
I ask again, is there no end to your calumny?
I spoke with Maren Swanson, the city attorney, this morning about whether Councilor Jon Denison had a conflict of interest when voting last week on the appointments to the Rental Code Board of Appeals.
At the end of this post I will attach the text of an e-mail Swanson sent Friday to Interim City Administrator Joel Walinski and forwarded to me this morning.
I also spoke with Denison today and he said he talked with Swanson before voting last year on appointments to the rental board. At that time, she said it was his decision whether to abstain from voting or not. He chose to abstain.
Last week, he did not abstain from the vote so he could discuss the need for a tenant on the board.
"I felt I would have been lax in my duties if I didn't strongly object to no tenant and I knew nobody else would," he said.
Denison has long advocated having a tenants' representative on the board. Currently, the board has two landlords and no tenant.
* * * * *
Hi Joel –
I was aware that there was a legal dispute between Jon Denison and Andrew Berglund in the past, but Jon never discussed it with me and I had no idea it was still active.
If there is a personal interest which is incompatible with the proper discharge of a public official’s duties in the public interest, or that would tend to impair his independence of judgment or action in the performance of his official duties, then under the city’s ethics ordinance the public official is required to disclose the personal interest and disqualify himself from discussion and voting, except he may participate in discussion as a member of the public.
It is up to the public official to decide whether he or she has such a conflict of interest and if so, to disclose it and abstain from discussion and voting as a member of the council. It is not up to the mayor or city attorney or anyone else to make this determination or disclosure. Mr. Denison apparently determined that he did not have a personal interest in the appointment of Mr. Berglund to the rental board of appeals which required him to disclose the interest and abstain from discussion and voting. Someone else might have made a different decision, but it is up to the officer to make the decision.
Incidentally, as I recall, Mr. Denison did not object to Mr. Berglund’s appointment per se but commented that he strongly wanted at least one tenant to be appointed to the board of appeals and therefore would be voting against the appointments that were made at the last council meeting since they completed the five person board without a tenant being one of the five.
There are some kinds of conflict of interest (a personal financial interest in or benefit from a sale, lease or contract the official is authorized to participate in making on behalf of the city) the violation of which may be a gross misdemeanor and may result in the council action being nullified. If Mr. Denison had a conflict of interest on the matter of the appointment of Mr. Berglund, it does not appear that it was one of those contractual conflicts which could have such dire consequences.
Please let me know if you need anything further from me in this regard.
Sincerely,
Maren L. Swanson
Thank you, Suzy, for presenting the facts. How refreshing.
Geez, Louise! This is just ridiculous... I have heard Maren express the opinion that it is up to the official to decide to declare a conflict or not about a dozen times at council meetings.
That is precisely the point that she so skillfully leaves open in her memo: IT IS UP TO THE OFFICIAL TO DECLARE AND MR. DENISON DID NOT !
Ms. Swanson also says she was not aware that the unpaid/rental conflict was still active.
For anyone who's thinking out there... is there anyone thinking out there? ... if the burden to declare is ONLY on the official just "how the ho-tel" did Mayor Lansing's alleged "conflict" become such an issue???
I'm waiting for the stupid (sorry, IMHO) answer ....
One last time...Mr. Denison actually voted against his personal interests to support a position he felt was important. If he had voted for Mr. Berglund or even abstained, he might have been able to reach a more favorable settlement of his legal issue with him. Mr. Denison has maintained for more than a year that the rental board should have a tenant member instead of two landlords. It seems, in this case, he put ethics ahead of his personal gain in a failed attempt to get the council to agree to have a tenant on the board.
Of course, one could argue that the vote was retaliation against Mr. Berglund, but with another court date pending it would be a risky exercise.
Sure, Mrs. Summa, you're unhappy. Get used to it. Just as we had to live with Mr. Lansing, you have to live with Mr. Denison on the council or mount a recall campaign...this time with a legal petition.
Puke and Barf, Bretts....
As usual when you can't answer a question, *which you did not*, you deflect...
Not even worth making the return case. I'm going through the 2008 New Yorkers to see what to keep; a much more important task!
Puke and Barf? LOL.
Holy cow, I feel like I missed out on all the fun. This is amazing. I actually have to say that the tone of a lot of these comments is way beyond anything I ever expected to read. Clearly some people are extremely frustrated. I think the points have been made and the parties will never agree.
I think it's significant to note that Ms Summa complains and tries to label any challenging comment about her and Mr Summa as defamation or libel, and accuses the paper and Jaci of trying to smear her. She doesn't realize that the way she posts and carries herself on line does far more harm to her and Mr Summa's reputation and credibility around town then any comment anyone has made or could make.
Puke and barf, waiting for your stupid answer, telling people they can't read. It's great when people make your point for you. How do you think readers weigh your argument when you make your points like that.
If someone lies about you, I think people will tend to figure out what's true or not, and they consider the source in making their final decision. They know my bias, Anne's bias, curious'ss''s bias, etc. But when you reveal the truth about yourself to people through your own actions and statements, they don't even have to make a decision or consider the source. Then you wonder why Mr Summa has never won an election and some people don't want him on the EDA or charter commission.
You accuse Anne of calling you a stalker? Did she? Is following a council person around town and staking out his house stalking? I guess we'd never know unless that person called the police,pressed charges, and the matter went to court. Which by the way is exactly what you should do if you think someone's following you. Jon, I hope you're listening.
I agree with Jaci that people out there are not stupid, and they will decide for themselves about Jon Denison. Honestly, he probably won't get reelected.
In a way, it's too bad. Despite his faults, I think Jon has tried very hard and applied himself well. He's impressed many intelligent people, and it's nice to have someone that represents the regular guy. It helps diversify the council, and I think that's healthy for our community. I think this relates very closely to a remark made by someone on locally grown the other day about the people who care being the people that matter or something like that. Who is to judge who cares and who matters? Does someone care more or less because they call their counsel person or write a letter rather than speaking at the open mic? Do they care and matter more or less if they go to one counsel meeting or all of them? Are you a better citizen if you know a little latin?
Jaci, this thread is festering in the backwaters of old stories. Why don't you put this whole thread under the most viewed stories and let the readers be aware of it. Let them read the comments and make their own decisions.
No, no, fair and balanced, let this thread die. This is a disgusting personal attack and any responses just feed it. And after all, once you've gotten to puke and barf as a philosophical argument on ethics, what else is there to say?
That's why you let everyone see it! Let them see that there's no substance to it. That this whole thing is just one big attempt at political payback. The whole thread makes our point better than we ever could ourselves. Anyway, our opinion is moot, Jaci will decide.