Councilman Knode Refuses
Our Interview Request
Some have wondered where I have disappeared to. Well the reports of my demise have been greatly exaggerated. Unfortunately, I have been struggling with an Internet Access problem. Now that it is resolved I can get back to work. Expect my coverage of the September 25th, 2006 meeting to be posted this weekend.
For now however, I would like to share with you the response I received from Councilman Knode in regard to an interview request I made earlier in the week. It is unfortunate that Councilman Knode chooses not to participate in an interview where we might be able to clarify his positions on the issues. What follows is the letter he sent to me, as well as my response to his letter. You be the judge.
Please note: in the interest of clarity I changed the portions from Councilman Knode to the color blue, and colored references to other sources red. My own responses are in the normal black color.
>Dear Mr. Moyle,
>
>Thank you for your recent invitation to speak with you regarding an
>interview For your website. In all good conscience,I must
>respectfully decline your offer.
Dear Councilman Knode,
I appreciate you taking the time to respond to my request. It is unfortunate that you do not wish to participate. I think if you had, you would have found that my questions were designed to flesh out your positions on the various issues facing the City of Overland, nothing more.
>A review of your previous “reportings” on your website indicates to
>me a strong bias against the basic rights of your fellow citizens.
>While I will fight to the death for your right to “report” as you
>wish, such does not indicate an acceptance of your current standard
>of conduct.
Well sir I obviously disagree. My website is, in and of itself, an example of the basic rights of our citizens. I appreciate and agree with your position on the right to report, though I feel your own bias is likely clouding your judgement concerning my articles.
In every article I have written sir I have made an effort to be objective. When someone cites the law, I research it. When they are wrong, I point out why, link the readers to the law(s) in question and explain where I believe the problem is. When there are facts I source them, and report them specifically. When it comes to rumors, I rarely report them. When faced with a rumor I feel is critical enough to need to be aired I make it very clear that it is a rumor and nothing more.
A quick review of the letter you recently sent out to residents in Ward 1 is an example of what my reporting is not. For example, you state that the Mayor can appoint an interim or temporary Chief of Police and City Attorney without Council Approval:
"Then she [the Mayor] wanted to appoint a temporary or interim Police Chief and City Attorney until the Council approved permanent positions appointed by the Mayor. This is well within her rights per State Statute and City Ordinances."
I find it curious that you chose not to cite the specific Statutes and Ordinances in question. As my website clearly shows, when faced with such issues I always cite the actually law, statute, etc and link the readers to it for their own review whenever possible.
The courts have already ruled against the Mayor on this Mr. Knode. The Mayor may have the ability to fill vacancies until the next Council Meeting, however to use this power, the office would have to be vacant.
The Mayor points to Ordinance 115.020, subsection C when making her case:
SECTION 115.020C. Term Of Office. All appointive officers of the City of Overland, with the exception of the Municipal Judge(s), serve at the pleasure of the Mayor and the City Council and are intended by their appointment to be at-will employees of the City of Overland. Any appointive officer may be removed from office at will by the Mayor of the City of Overland with consent of a majority of all members elected to the Council. Any appointive officer other than the Municipal Judge(s) of the City of Overland may be removed from office by a two-thirds (2/3) vote of the Council independent of the Mayor's approval or recommendation. Notwithstanding the above, all appointive officers shall hold office until the next General Election at which a Mayor is chosen.
Specifically that "all appointive officers shall hold office until the next General Election at which a Mayor is chosen."
However the Mayor's case does not seem to take into account Missouri Revised Statutes, Chapter 77, Section 77.370, Subsection 5 which states:
5. The term of office for each of the officers is two years except the office of mayor and the marshal which are four-year terms. All officers hold office until their successors are duly elected or appointed and qualified.
The Key here being that the officer holders remains in office until their successor is duly elected or appointed and qualified.
According to Overland Ordinance 115.020, subsection B,:
SECTION 115.020
B. Other Appointive Officers. The Mayor with the consent and approval of a majority of all the members elected to the City Council shall appoint the Municipal Judge(s), City Attorney, City Prosecutor, Director of Finance, Marshal, who shall also serve as Chief of Police, Director of Finance, Street Commissioner and other appointive officers as provided by ordinance.
As you can see, to appoint an officer requires the consent of the Majority of the Council. It seems clear that to "duly appoint and qualify" would require a majority vote of those elected to the City Council.
Based on a reading of both Overland Ordinances and State Statute (realizing that State Statute trumps City Ordinance if there is a conflict) it is obvious that the Mayor was not acting within her "rights" when she attempted to replace the Police Chief and the City Attorney. As we know, the Court ruled against the Mayor on this issue.
It is of course possible that the Mayor made an honest mistake here. However, considering that the Mayor has filed an appeal, and that you yourself still refer to the City Attorney as the "Former" City Attorney publicly, it becomes more and more difficult for reasonable people to believe this was merely an honest mistake.
I would welcome your reply on this issue sir. I would honestly like to better understand your legal position on this matter.
>An open and selfish travesty is being perpetrated upon the citizen’s
>of Overland of which you are clearly aware, but have yet to honestly
>address.
>This ongoing travesty is unjust, unethical and frankly un-American.
I agree sir. An "open and selfish travesty" is definitely being perpetrated upon the Citizens of Overland. However, we seem to disagree on who the perpetrators are.
>Four individuals are denying you and all your fellow citizen’s
>their rights to FULL & FAIR REPRESENTATION; and you
>have stood by and let these repeated callous actions of a selfish
>few go un-addressed.
Sir. We disagree on this point as well. As I see it, the Mayor is equally to blame on this issue. Several on the Council have expressed concern to the Mayor about the appointment of Mr. Blonden. Their concern seems to be that they have no information on the gentleman, and have not have the opportunity to speak to him. As a result, the majority of the Council has voted against his appointment repeatedly. Perhaps if the Mayor would allow the Council to communicate with and learn more about Mr. Blonden their position would change.
Further, as can be said about the General Revenue Budget, the Mayor have made no effort to meet with others on the Council to work out a compromise. Politics, often requires compromise sir. However the Mayor refuses to discuss the issue or even consider any of the number of residents who offered their services in response to her request as an alternative. In the case of the General Revenue Budget, you as the Budget Committee Chairman and the Mayor have apparently made no effort to discuss the issues of concern for others on the Council. The Mayor offers the same appointment and the same General Revenue Budget that failed to get a majority vote before, and complains when they do not pass again. This is, in my opinion sir, arrogance at its "finest". If you and the Mayor want to move the City forward you are going to have to allow the entire Council to participate. Politics is the art of compromise.
>You have purported yourself as a fair arbiter of facts, yet you have
>failed miserably to report the most basic and fundamental facts
>available to you.
>You have stood by and passively watched as the most basic rights
>of your fellow citizens have been trampled time after time again
>without even a syllable of concern.
>Your “reporting” and lack of straight critical thought on this
>ongoing travesty is frankly unexplainable by any common measure
>forthright journalistic conduct.
With all do respect sir, I deal in facts, examples, and evidence. I leave the generalizations and suggestions of wrong doing to the playground where they belong. If you would like to reasonably discuss where you think my conduct is lacking, then feel free to cite examples to support your "argument".
>People now and in our history have struggled, fought and died to
>establish these most important of rights and freedoms. These basic
>rights that have been protected with sweat, honor and blood.
I agree sir. The election process is also one of those very important rights. We as Citizens of the United States vote for those we feel will best do the job in question within the bounds of the Laws, Statutes, Ordnances and Rules that govern their position. When an elected official chooses to ignore those restrictions and operate outside the law, they insult and ignore the efforts of those who fought so bravely for those freedoms. Veterans like myself take great offense when elected officials choose to abuse their office. We swore to uphold and defend the Constitution for all enemies both foreign and domestic sir.
>You have stood by, silent and uncaring while these basic rights of
>your fellow citizens to have FULL & FAIR REPRESENTATION have
>been purposely denied and diminished by a few within our
>community.
>This conduct of selective concerns for citizen’s rights
>is at least……..unbecoming.
With all do respect sir, when suggesting that there are those who address "selective concerns for citizen's rights" I would advise that you consider reviewing your own actions, as well as the actions of the Mayor. When considering what the law is on a particular issue one needs to review the entire law, as well as all laws, statutes, ordinances, and rules that relate to the issue. That is what I make an honest attempt to do on my site sir. I would welcome a response from you that included your specific issues with my reporting, and / or your specific legal positions on the various issues we face.
>As such, you have treated the repeated votes to deny basic rights to
>your fellow citizen’s of Overland…..AS IF IT WERE NOT EVEN
>HAPPENING.
Again, I have addressed this issue repeatedly sir. You have yet to discuss the specific issues you have with my analysis.
>It is my hope you will find a way to join myself and the other
>concerned citizens in the honorable fight to restore the rights of
>all of Overland’s citizens to FULL & FAIR REPRESENTATION within
>our own local government.
That is my hope for you and others sir. Until you Councilman Knode, as well as, Councilman Owensby, Councilman Sellers, and Mayor Purzner realize that to properly govern you need to work within the legal limitations of your positions and work to develop mutually agreeable compromises when you do not have the votes to pass various bills, the problems in Overland will continue.
I watched you as the Budget Committee Chairman sir. When it came to the discussions about the Capital Improvements Budget you were fair, you listened to the positions of all sides and you worked to develop compromises. The result was that the Capital Improvements Budget passed unanimously. I reported on this sir, pointing out how well I thought you handled the meetings concerning the Capital Improvements Budget.
However, you have yet to allow any discussion on the General Revenue Budget, where there are serious differences of opinion on various issues. It is that failure to try to work towards compromise, as you did with the Capital Improvements Budget, that is most responsible for the failure to pass the General Revenue Budget. I also reported on this, pointing out that I was disappointed that the "spirit of compromise" you appeared to promote as Chairman, ceased the moment the General Revenue Budget came up.
This is a perfect example of the lack of communication, and the lack of effort to find compromises on numerous issues (like the appointment to vacant seat in Ward 3) that are holding Overland back and preventing this City from Moving forward.
>Sincerely
>Richard Knode
I welcome your reply sir, should you choose to do so. If you want the Residents to seriously consider your positions and arguments you are going to have to state them seriously and professionally. That would include citing the specific concerns, in specific terms, and referencing specific laws and the like. I deal in specifics sir, those who chose to toss around unfounded accusations are the ones causing the problems for Overland.
Thank you for your time and Consideration,
John Moyle
CC: http://www.theoverlandexaminer.org/
It appears that this is as close as we shall get to an interview with Councilman Knode. I cannot control the paranoia or biased attitudes of those elected officials we are interested in talking to and learning from. All I can do is make the honest attempt to reach out to them.
posted by Overland Sailor @ 12:57 PM 
25 comments
Post Permalink
links to this post
25 Comments:
Why is this guy always talking about being in a fight or fighting to the death? Ol' Blood and Guts Kmode.
In three-quarters of his sentences, I honestly do not know what he is talking about. Its always also great to read Kmode wrapping himself in flag in order to be disrespectful to an actual serviceman.
Good try.
I would love to know which BASIC right is being denied to the Citizens of Overland, is he speaking of the empty seat in Ward 3. That's the Mayor fault for failing to nominate a person who would be acceptable to the majority of the Board.
Is he speaking about the basic right of Freedom of Speech, if that is the case why did he walk out of meeting when the residents were doing just that.
The concept of Majority Rule has long been accepted. It is not Minority Rule. You Mr Kmode seem to be in the minority, you don't get your way on a number of items. Learn how to compromise you showed once you understood the concept.
Quit wrapping yourself in the flag and citing reference to the brave men suffering now, you are insulting them. You are a coward who will not even listen to the questions put to you. You can decline to answer them if you see fit.
He's a self-righteous ass.
Folks, lets be kind here. As we all know passions run deep when it comes to some of the issues we are facing. Many on both sides have said things about "the other side" that they later felt went too far, and regretted.
It is entirely possible that this email is an example of that for Councilman Knode. After reading it again, as well as my responses to individual areas, Councilman Knode could possibly reconsider his position. Stranger things have happened.
That said, whether he does or not, I hope we can focus on the actual issues raised in his email and stay away from the name calling. I know it can be difficult not to scream out in frustration, and I'm not saying people cannot / should not do that here. I am only asking that we leave the personal insults, pet names, and the like out of it.
There are more then enough items in that email to take issue with on a non-personal level.
Thanks for your understanding.
Mr. Knode's main point seems to be "full and fair representation" of citizens, by which he refers to the open council seat of Ward 3.
Mr. Knode sidesteps the fact that the Mayor has NOT worked toward "full and fair representation" from the outset of her term. This mayor acted on her beliefs alone, by her one-sided attempts to remove two appointed officials without council approval.
If Mr. Knode sincerely wanted "full and fair representation", then he would advise our mayor to do so. Ward 3 needs a moderate thinker, not an empty-headed ventriloquist's dummy.
Mr. Knode needs to realize we have a mayor who doesn't want "full and fair representation." Minority rule is what mayor purzner seeks.
John, you did a great job on the non-interview with Mr. Knode.
It might seem like a waste of time, but why don't the councilmen request to interview the people who have shown interest in the ward three seat? At least start some type of movement in a positive direction.
It was stated at the meeting before last that the Mayor was contacting the Municipal League
about sending in a mediator to help with this mess. Does anyone know if this is happening?
The mayor has often turned to the Municipal League for advice and information. Perhaps she will make good her promise to ask them to mediate. We are at such an impasse now that we could use their help. I fail to see, however, how they could support the unprofessional conduct and illegal actions of this mayor and her supporting councilmen. I hope that Mr. Knode, Mr. Sellers and Mr.Owensby will help to share the responsibility for the catastrophic
damage to our city done by the ORT.
I'm afraid however that our illustrious mayor will be left holding the bag by Mr. Brown and his loyal councilmen.
If there is anymore rational dialogue with Mr. Knode, would you please inquire as to the purpose of he and Mrs. Knode constantly making video tapes of those around them? I wish you all could have seen the ridiculous six legged creature that was lurking between the booths at the fair. At the center, like a cyclops, was the infamous Knode minicam. Mr Owensby managed to infuriate a COGG member, then they voiced a few threats to sue etc and scurried away like some sort of frightened insect. The 3 ORTmen failed to give a reason for their intent to sue the individuals they approached en masse. Ir reminded me of the old battle formation of the Roman soldiers called "the turtle" For what purpose, Mr. Knode? I mean, other than to provide entertainment for the crowd at the fair.
I sincerly hope that Mr. and Mrs. Knode have plenty of time to sit at home and enjoy their extensive videotape collection after the next election. We will work for them to have that privilege.
What a pity! When all this began I heard it expressed that there may be hope for Mr. Knode to compromise or listen to reason because he was the one who displayed more than a Neanderthal mentality. That may have been a false hope.We were wrong.It's the same attitude expressed with a bit larger vocabulary.
sam, at this point I think there is only one person on the council who hasn't acted up and that is Mr. Schneider.
When Dody was Mayor he had the cards stacked in his favor, it was usually a four/four vote and he as mayor broke the tie, so the other side had it their way for eight years. I want to see people who will vote how they feel, not how a group wants them to vote.
Look at the TV ads for the November elections, so far the ones I've seen are tearing the other person down,just nothing but negative.
Thank you Overland Sailor for trying so hard to be fair to all. Frankly I'm surprised you even got a response from Knode.
But you're beating a dead horse when it comes to asking for specifics, facts & figures, from those 4.
But I do appreciate you trying.
Mayor Dody may have had it "his way" in the sense that he had the votes on the council he needed to move forward. I had some issues with Mayor Dody, but one thing I can definitely say in his favor was that he always did his best to work within the Law. Mayor Purzner seems to have an antagonistic relationship with it.
Since Mayor Purzner does not have the votes to move forward unchallenged, she needs to work with the entire council. She needs to work out agreeable compromises with both sides. However, as far as I can tell, she has made no effort to do so. It's a shame really, because the best programs and actions usually come from political compromise with each side tempering the other.
When the Mayor says we are not moving forward because some on the Council will not pass her appointment, her general revenue budget, etc, she seems to fail to understand that this is normal in politics. When faced with strong opposition political leaders have to compromise. They need to present more moderate candidates for appointments, they need to work out differences in budgets and policies, and they need to make honest efforts to communicate with the opposition. That is how politics has always worked. The Mayor seems bent on holding all city offices and programs in limbo, waited until she gets that coveted forth vote. I think she underestimates the intelligence of the residents. It is far more likely in my opinion that here obstructionist tactics will result in her opponents having a 5-6 vote majority after the April election if she continues down the path she is following now.
Absolutely right. If she had the best interest in the City Residents she would give in or shall we say compromise, Ann is suppose to be the leader, so it is up to her to start the ball rolling. I look at it this way, if she is afraid of compromise then she should step down.
Are they all stubborn? Maybe to a point. Will they give in? Probably not. We elected a "leader" and she should lead, maybe the direction is not the way she wants to go, but at least things would get moving.
Show me something, anything of leadership so I can avoid signing the recall .
Are you serious about blaming the Mayor for the open seat? What color is the sky in your world?
http://www.annpurzner.com/Welcome/Contact_Us/library/647.mp3
Seriously now, stop being such a docile tool for those who deny us our say in government.
Shame on you.
Sue Q
damn,
See message above.
This is pretty daming stuff considering how you blame everything on the mayor.
http://www.annpurzner.com/
Welcome/Contact_Us/
library/647.mp3
I am always amazed at how some choose to read things into what others write. What I said is when a Leader, in this case the Mayor, is faced with strong opposition, in this case not having a supporting majority on the Council, communication and compromise is in order.
That is what leaders do. This is how politics has been done since the dawn of civilization. They work to bring the sides together and work out the best deal they can between the sides.
The Mayor, as best as I can tell has failed to make this effort. However, I could be mistaken. Please feel free to point out to me where and when the Mayor scheduled any meetings / discussions on her appointment choice, or the General Revenue Budget with ALL of the Council members?
It seems to me, that even though the Mayor does not have the votes to approve the budget as it stands (a budget I also have major concerns about) or her choice of an appointment to Ward 3 (a person no one knows anything about), she still chooses to resubmit both, knowing they will fail, without any effort at all to discuss the issues or negotiate a compromise. At best this is arrogance in my opinion.
Does she deserve 100% of the blame? No. But she deserves the majority of it. As a Leader she needs to step up and bring both sides to the table. She chooses not to do that thus far.
Ann is the best mayor ever, she has brought so much deserved attention to our fair city. She is a wonderful lady with no common sense, no memory, a habitual liar, a purportrator of mail and voter fraud, she falsify her own records and credentials, is in bed with special interest who own a printing shop on Page and ran for Congress and a former public works director who in conjunction with the print shop owner blighted houses and bought them and sectioned 8 them off, she is selling off our parks, working on fraudulent grans and working with people who have been indicted on among things child pornography. Yea this Mayor is the best mayor ever.
never was in favor of buying the Seminary in the first place. There was talk about buying before the Meyer's group leased the place.
Right now Overland is making ends meet. The proposed budget ask for cuts in Department Heads salary, not replacing four police officers, and a dispatcher. I would be more then happy to get out from under the payment for the Seminary property and would be delighted to have that money go into the budget for at least two of the officers. Keep the salaries what they are right now and keep the people we have in those spots. Question, how long have we been down several officers ?
If selling the Ashby property means giving us the ability to hire more people where we need them then so be it. I don't care who comes in and develops the area there, if they make a profit on it doesn't bother me at all. It is costing the residents money that could be better spent somewhere else in the City.
I'm in favor of free trash. It wasn't free, we were paying for free trash out of the monies generated from the utility taxes.
One last thing, I thought that this site was above the name calling, today is one of the first times I've seen the unwanted post.
anon, you bring up a point that Owensby and Knode have raised about utility taxes being committed to waste hauling.
I cannot see utility taxes being enough to cover waste hauling. A portion of that amount was returned to seniors filing forms with city hall. What were the numbers?
Obviously, on whatever the utility tax revenue has been spent, would have to suffer if the funds are then redirected at waste hauling.
Walking away from the 2500 Ashby site would only free up about $200,000 annually.
Some of us old timers are still around who voted for the utility tax to go towards " TWO "free trash pick up a week. We may have stayed longer then the politicians expected. I do remember
being told when we were a fourth class city, if the residents vote for the utility tax it will be used for the trash. No the exact word used on the ballot.
Things have changed, I know that. I also know Overland has lost lots of business. Many things have hurt us. And I do believe the money is not there to provide the service, but the utility tax is still being collected. I never have looked into the senior's getting the utility tax money back. I've heard different things about not being worth the effort.
I know I'm going to hear a lot from this next statement. I don't know why we seniors should get the utility tax money back. It was a way to get votes to win an election. I can always use money, don't get me wrong, but I don't feel seniors should get special compensation just because we got older, I know young families that struggle to make ends meet just like the majority of Overland residents. Now if anyone wants to reward me for getting old, might I suggest they give us the Ritenour District school taxes back, just joking.
I don't see anything wrong with freeing up an extra two hundred thousand a year. Plus where will we get the money to bring the building's up to code? Shouldn't we add that amount of money in, in all fairness to the residents, I feel we should be allowed to vote on rather to keep 2500 Ashby or sell it, since we were never given the choice to vote on buying it. I wonder why it looked good to the board when they bought it, if the Archdiocese of St. Louis and the Joyce Meyers Ministries didn't see a money maker there, then I think we might be better off freeing
two hundred thousand dollars and more a year for our needs.
It appears that Knode, Purzner, Owensby and Sellers all give the same pat answer to everything, with no substance or back up.
It is either "we can't do anything until the budget is passed" or "Overland residents are not getting full and fair representation". I guess they have been programmed to only respond with those two answers to any questions presented to them. They can't think outside of their script.
How might a mediator reconcile the differences on the council?
What follows is from an excerpt of Councilman Knode's message to this website.
>A review of your >previous “reportings” on
>your website indicates to me a strong bias >against the basic rights of your fellow >citizens.
>While I will fight to the death for your right >to “report” as you wish, such does not >indicate an acceptance of your current >standard of conduct.
"Basic rights" in this context likely refers to Ward 3 deserving a second councilman.
All humans have Basic Rights to make informed decisions.
Submitting unknown, hand-picked applicants to the majority of the council for their approval is far from showing respect for the Basic Rights of Ward 3.
For Purzner, Knode, Owensby and Sellers to select ONLY one citizen only for approval, denies ALL of Overland our Basic Rights to make informed decisions.
Mr. Knode. That Ward 3 has been represented by only one councilman is YOUR concern. Yet, the inactions of Sellers, Knode, Purzner and Owensby have caused it to remain empty, by their conscious, deliberate decisions.
Had Knode, Owensby, Purzner and Sellers committed to fair government, chances are Ward 3 might have two representatives today.
More later.
Are all of Purzners supporters in a constant state of denial and deliberate falsification of the facts? Please To discuss Joyce Meyers and The Archdiocesses as a money maker potential is crazy don't you realize the music notes? They are not-for-profit organizations who actually evade taxes.
It is my understanding that had the City of Overland not purchased this property, the Joyce Meyers Ministry would have. It was not that they decided they did not want it, it was that the City decided it wanted it instead.
The Seminary property, besides a number of beautiful buildings with amazing craftsmanship throughout, is also a unique property. It is something no other city around us has. There are a lot of possibilities for this property. Most of them not only add interesting and in some cases unique services for the residents of Overland, but they have the potential to be a revenue generator for the City.
"The Friends of Wild Acres" organization is devoted to developing a plan for this property by weighing all of the options. If the Mayor truly wants suggestions for what to do with the Seminary property she might want to consider contacting them.
As for this site being "above the name calling": I, as the author of the content here, choose not participate in name calling and the like. However, I choose not to employ an Iron fist when it comes to the comments others post. Within limits, if no foul language is used, the comments are left alone. This includes comments from the Mayor's supporters, regardless of their absence of facts.
Recently anon said above:
"Are you serious about blaming the Mayor for the open seat? What color is the sky in your world?
http://www.annpurzner.com/Welcome/Contact_Us/library/647.mp3
Seriously now, stop being such a docile tool for those who deny us our say in government."
My sky is at best blue with the odd clouds on occasion, anon.
Ward 3 would have two councilmen, had it not been for mayor purzner's failure to name a respectable choice. She's denying Ward 3 their second councilperson, by her deliberate and stubborn ways.
As it stands, mayor purzner has blatantly tried to appoint only persons who suit her.
Were the mayor wise enough to submit ALL the names of candidates, chances are one would have been approved.
The majority cannot be blamed for the fact that purzner is refusing to respect the majority of the council's perspective.
How might one get in touch with the friends of Wild Acres? I have never heard of this group. I am willing to seek and find out information for the reasons these folks see something there I don't. I think the friends of Wild Acres should come to the voters and let us know what potential they see for this property. The residents of Overland should have the right to vote on what to do with the Ashby site.
2500 ASHBY IS A WASTE OF MONEY (now here is the point I am trying to make)when the City is so low on money that we are short four police officers, a dispatcher and who knows about the other departments. I understand we have been down police officers since before this last election, I would guess this is because the lack of money available. So why not free up two hundred thousand a year and hire the workers the City needs? W
Anonymous, the Archdiocese of St. Louis and Joyce Meyers Ministries not making money, have you ever heard of the Vatican and the different business's they are in.
I am not downing any religion, but why do you think there is such a big fight about St. Stanislaus Kostka Parish?
Look into the holdings of the Meyers Ministry. By the way, I am not music notes, like her I never supported the Mayor. I must say I'm proud you think I am MN, this lady has such a knowledge of Overland going back to when the streets were dirt roads.
I use to post on Overland Chat under the user name of "stonecold" as soon as the people there started the negative posting I left. The only reason I came to this site was the posters
kept the name calling and slurs out of their messages. I don't see one post here that I support anything other then to better the City of Overland.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home