Disclaimer: everything contained in this blog is MY OPINION. Every attempt is made to present the truth through actual facts or to identify statements which are in doubt; otherwise there will be no deliberate presentation of gossip, rumor, or innuendo which can't be proven as factual.
This time when the city commission put their foot in it over City Park, there were not just two or three people who complained to me about it; there were dozens. And 100% of them told me they would never have voted for the bond if they'd known the fate of City Park. They not only stopped me on the street, and spoke to me in cafes, but came to my house, worried and upset, wanting something done.
Very probably that's why the bond backers were so sneaky about the involvement of the park before the vote.
What kind of people have we elected who would deliberately hide the proposed destruction of the park? And don't try to tell me it won't be ruined because any fool can see that it will be.
Ever wonder why our city authorities seem to prefer scandal, secrecy, and manipulation rather than simply abiding by the law and the city charter and telling the truth?
Here's a bunch of questions and rumored answers concerning City Park.
Question: Who would go to the senior citizens and electioneer about the school bond and call it 'information?'
Rumor: Could it be the same people who think the city charter is "just a piece of paper?"
Q: Who would ignore the law regarding public parks and permanent constructions in them?
R: Likely the same people who push and push and push to get something they want?
Q: Who would be so low as to start a false rumor concerning the school bond involving one of our teachers who is also a commissioner, and imperil her job?
R: Maybe someone in a tax-collecting entity which ought to ban politics and stick to business?
Q: Who might promise the people at senior citizens not to vote for destroying City Park, and then go and do just that?
R: Would our top cat do that?
Q: Who neglected to inform the voters of the complete plan for the new school, omitting the involvement of City Park?
R: Perhaps the people who'd already made up their minds to annex the park, and who knew there would be more opposition to the bond if the voters were aware of that?
Q: Who didn't investigate alternatives to annexing City Park?
R: Probably the people who didn't bother to canvass the property owners bordering the present school to see if they'd sell at a reasonable price?
Q: Who could have informed employees that they'd better look for another job because of politics?
R: Hm: would that be various individuals who have a track record of attempted intimidation?
Q. Who had the idea that housing for the elderly could be built at the flood-free, utilities- and traffic -ready Rattlesnakes Acres, but refused to consider it for the new school?
R. Could that be the same person who poo-poo-ed the danger of rattlesnakes, tarantulas, and blue rats amongst older people, but who reared back in horror at the suggestion of a school there because "the kids might get bitten!" ?
Q: Who, after I mentioned the Army Corps of Engineers in a Letter to the Editor, immediately claimed that the ACE had been consulted about moving Buffalo Creek?
R: Might it be someone who tends to manipulate facts to suit current situations?
Q: Who put biased school bond 'information' a the tax-collecting entity?
R: Have we been down this road before with election posters?
Q: Who believes these rumors?
R: Yours truly?
Q: Who are going to be laughing their asses off when Buffalo Creek goes wild during the next big rain?
R: Maybe me and anyone who ever went to EHS 1940-1970?
11. Who just really doesn't care if he upsets the townspeople and snottily brags that he can do anything he wants to?
Anita Huguelet McMurtrie
