More on Ideas and Comments
There has been a lot of good discussion going on regarding the "Project", and I want to respond to some of the issues and questions raised. I will try to have a full posting on these matters later this evening.
Meanwhile, I just want to make note of a few things that caught my attention, and a minor change in the look of the blog.
First, I have changed the settings for the "comments" that should make it more 'user friendly'.
Secondly, I'd like to remark that CM Dan Coffey has been the first Council member to comment here publicly. For that, I extend my thanks for participating as a City official. Your "Fourth Option" plan is interesting. And, in my opinion, worthy of consideration. My whys and why- nots will be in the later posting.
As most folks know, this blog was created to bring people, information, and opinions to an open format for discussion. For those who are participating in this manner, I thank you. Particularly to those who have had to "take it on the chin" (Shirley, et,al.), you have remained dignified and forthright in the purpose to stick to the issues even when others attack and refuse to practice common decency when it comes to debating the issues.
Personally, I can only apologize for the rudeness and personal attacks that continue to pop up occasionally, I have done my best to deter it, and will continue enforcing the policies here.
As to the issue at hand:
The proposed "Project" obviously has some opposition in regards to ownership and investment. However, I see very little opposition to the "Project" actually happening. In fact, I believe most folks see the value of the development, but have very little confidence left in the compentency of the City administrations, past, current and future.
This is a very long term plan that will require the cooperation and blessings of future administrations that could very well re-structure the whole thing. Mayor Garner has already altered past-Mayor Overton's plans dramatically in terms of project. I'm curious to know if it was altered financially. What was in the original plan?
The next posting will take a closer look at the beginnings of this Project as it was undertaken by the Redevelopment Commission.
posted by East Ender at
2:29 PM
61 Comments:
Whoops!
Forgot, I am re-setting the time stamp as well. Meant to do it before posting, but new comments should get back to correct time.
By
East Ender, at 4:29 PM, June 23, 2005
Need help---- Would someone please explain the buildings proposed in the City's share of the Scribner Project?
I know that the YMCA is doing their own fund raising and will build their building.
Now-- the discussion from the proposed
$13 million city bond refers to the
Natatorium-- swimming pool. Are we
floating a $13 million bond to build a swimming pool? Then--I hear discussions about WHO will operate the pool. Mr. Seabrook was right at the council meeting when he said it was too early to vote on a $13 million swimming pool if they had
not agreed on who would operate it.
For the $13 million dollars, I had
envisioned several buildings down there to attract people.
By
Anonymous, at 7:52 PM, June 23, 2005
I thought the 13 million was for property and clean-up, not buildings. Anyone?
By
Anonymous, at 8:06 PM, June 23, 2005
#1 -
Construction Costs - $8,008,551
Non-Construction Costs - $2,877,465
Bond Issurance Costs - $599,550
Interest - $1,295,441
Project Contingencies - $479,993
Total Project Costs - $13,361,000
#2 -
Construction Costs - $8,008,551
Non-Construction Costs - $2,877,465
Bond Issurance Costs - $624,367
Interest - $1,392,886
Project Contingencies - $482,731
Total Project Costs - $13,386,000
#3 -
Construction Costs - $8,008,551
Non-Construction Costs - $2,877,465
Debt Service Reserve - $1,380,000
Bond Issurance Costs - $651,768
Interest - $1,544,481
Project Contingencies - $498,735
Total Project Costs - $14,961,000
For those inquiry minds who want to know
:)
By
Anonymous, at 8:00 AM, June 24, 2005
Shirley, what is a personal attack?
What happened here is that people, including the moderator, selectively chose to define a personal attack as something they were in disagreement with. It seems to be straightening out now, but be aware that this is not because of better manners, but because people were ejected from the blog for having different views.
Nope - that's not free sppeech at all.
Anyway, Shirley, here's the point: It is perfectly legitimate to ask an elected officials what his or her agenda is, and to subject their actions to scrutiny. No one seemed to mind when the target was the mayor, but when anyone doubts Mr. Schmidt, out come the knives.
By
Anonymous, at 8:20 AM, June 24, 2005
Can anyone tell me why Smith and Baylor are so against the "Coffey Plan" and why they are being so hard on Schmidt?
Surely they aren't worried that the "little people" have a do-able alternative plan that they can't discredit.
By
Anonymous, at 8:59 AM, June 24, 2005
mr. smith: In response to your comments. this Blog was started for the people of New Albany to talk,state there opioions. And there ideas. (east ender- Laura) made a decision to allow anonymous comments. And seems to infurate other blogs. It seems to be that Laura feels everyone has a right to be heard. Talk about "Scrutiny" Attacks- character assination-laura has been hit with almost every brick in New Albany. And believe me she is still standing Tall. Speak Out Loud NA is the peoples blog. The many voices of New Albany Citizens. This is what Freedom Of Speech is!
By
Anonymous, at 9:02 AM, June 24, 2005
Proud Anonymous--- I agree with you.
The purpose of this blog site is for
Freedom of Speech and not for bashing people.
By
Anonymous, at 9:18 AM, June 24, 2005
Okay, cool, the "little people" now have a plan, and this of course is fine. Everyone needs a plan.
The question is, is the plan necessary when there already are ways to achieve the goal - if, in fact, the "little people" can agree on the goal.
Or is the plan there all of a sudden for political reasons? Isn't it legitimate to ask whether a politician has an agenda, when most everyone here thinks that other bloggers have an agenda?
Are agendas the exclusive domain of bloggers, or can politicans have them, too? You think the mayor does. Why not Coffey, Schmidt, Price?
There's the rub, because a few days ago, the sum total of opinion here was that there should be no Scribner Place in any form.
Suddenly, people now say, well, it's a fine idea so long as we (taxpayers, residents, whomsoever) don't have to pay for it and the YMCA does.
Dan Coffey's been for it and against it so many times that you need a scorecard to keep track. Just last week, he said he doesn't think it will succeed because a market isn't there for it.
Just because he, or you, is not a potential customer doesn't mean there's no market? Folks, you create markets and create demand. The best product to sell is the one that the buyer didn't know he needed until you explained it to him.
Steve Price says that he's against it in any form, and the money should be spent elsewhere. And so on.
More than a year passed with little comment from our public officials, then suddenly the whole thing became important, and they start telling us that we must be afraid of debt, and that we don't have the ability to do more than one thing at a time.
I'd like to see Laura start a thread with this question: Assuming one plan or another can be agreed, and financing is achieved to the satisfaction of most of us, then are you for or against the notion of Scribner Place as a starting point for revitalizing downtown?
If so, then there may be less between these "sides" than it seems.
If not, then what alternative would you offer?
By
Anonymous, at 10:06 AM, June 24, 2005
Baylor's capable of speaking for himself, but he can't do so here.
In fact, he speaks for himself almost every day on his blog, and yet most of you openly say you either won't or can't read it.
So, how then is he supposed to defend his position with regard to the councilmen if you don't try to understand what he's saying?
At what point do you have a responsibility to make the effort to understand the other side?
Otherwise, all your doing is agreeing with yourselves.
A final note: He never said you couldn't comment at his site, just that you ahave to be identified. It's a shame that so many of you think that you can't have an opinion without hiding.
Has anyone yet given a reason for the persecutio that will come your way if people know who you are?
Why are you afraid? Let's figure that one out, and work to end the fear.
By
Anonymous, at 10:10 AM, June 24, 2005
Larence Welk,
I think the biggest obstacle with Scribner is the financing. People are supportive until the talk of "property tax backup" came into the picture.
I would assume that if the YMCA gets the funding directly and the City (taxpayers) are left out of the debt then everyone should be happy. Win-Win situation.
By
Anonymous, at 10:17 AM, June 24, 2005
I still don't get why bashing the mayor or Blevins or Messer or Crump or Seabrook or even Baylor is free speech but bashing any other CM or any other blogger is a rude attack.
There have often been times when simple questions have been characterized as attacks. There seems to be a sentiment that any one who questions what someone has said is attacking them. I don't get it.
Can someone please explain any of the above?
This blog in no way represents the voice of the people in its entirety. Some people post comments here, some people post comments at NA Confidential. Most don't comment at all.
To suggest that calling yourself a homeowner or taxpayer or citizen means that your view represents that of the entire city is just plain silly, especially in light of the fact that other homeowners, taxpayers, and citizens comment within a few minutes of you to disagree.
By
Anonymous, at 10:36 AM, June 24, 2005
But it's not a win-win situation.
What message are we sending when we say that the citizens of NA aren't willing to support an effort to revitalize downtown? The fact is, you don't support it if you aren't willing for public funds to be used for it.
What about when we suggest that Caesars would be better off working with someone else rather than the very body that represents us?
What company or business owner in their right mind would look at that as a positive for the potential of NA? What about people who see the inherent possiblities of downtown and are considering buying a house and moving here? Wouldn't we be telling them "Don't bother"?
To convince others to take the plunge of investing in our city, we have to show that the citizens are ready and willing to support positive development.
Coffey is saying that the exact opposite is true.
By
Anonymous, at 10:48 AM, June 24, 2005
Mike,
How is it not a win-win situation? You get your YMCA and the taxpayers aren't left paying the bill.
I have not heard of anyone moving into an area because there is a YMCA or a swimming pool, let alone travel 100 miles to reach one.
Where are these business that are going to choose downtown New Albany because we have a YMCA and a pool?
By
Anonymous, at 11:29 AM, June 24, 2005
Since Mr. Baylor has been banned from this blog, I suggest a jog over to his http://cityofnewalbany.blogspot.com and hear his side of the Coffey situation. This is history in the making citizens, get all of the information you can digest and then make up your on mind.
By
Anonymous, at 11:42 AM, June 24, 2005
That's where some of the thinking is flawed from my point of view.
This isn't just about whether or not we get a Y. It's about whether or not the citizens of NA have enough gumption to pick themselves up and commit themselves to revitalizing their city.
People may not make decisions based on the Y alone (but some might). I think they would, however, respond to New Albany residents realizing their own potential and committing themselves to downtown redevelopment.
If we don't support a small expenditure that we know is going to generate a much larger private investment, what in the world would we actually say yes to in the way of downtown revitalization?
By saying that they don't want public money spent on the Y and the potential it represents, people are sending a clear message that we don't care about our downtown or think it's worth the trouble.
If citizens and council members are saying that, why would potential outside investors think any differently?
We should be promoting ourselves and our abilities, not bemoaning our shortcomings to anyone that will listen.
You can't continually shout that "It's our city" without being willing to take on some of the responsibility for it's well being and future.
By
Anonymous, at 11:53 AM, June 24, 2005
When anonymous said "You get your YMCA and the taxpayers aren't left paying the bill," the essence of the problem is revealed, I think.
"Your."
Not "ours."
And, for what seems like the millionth time, someone advances the falsehood that taxpayers are going to pay for something that "they" don't want.
Not "we."
For the other millionth time, anonymous suggests that all there is to Scribner Place is a YMCA.
It is a good deal for the whole city -- not just part of it, not just this citizen or the other -- to support Scribner Place.
It's perfectly okay for you individually not to care about the Y. But we're not talking about the Y, we're talking about investment to spur investment, raise the tax base by renovating downtown, and make it easier on everyone -- also to give people something to be proud about.
By
Anonymous, at 12:08 PM, June 24, 2005
anonymous said "I think the biggest obstacle with Scribner is the financing. People are supportive until the talk of "property tax backup" came into the picture."
When you look at 4th Street Live in Louisville and see it is successful, what do you think?
Do you know what the city of Louisville putinto the project to get back jobs and tax streams downtown, where none were there before?
The city has to be part of the development equation.
By
Anonymous, at 12:11 PM, June 24, 2005
Mike I know not how long you have resided in this area, but you must be forgetting what your taxes since 1989 have been spent on in just the downtown area alone. For starters a parking garage ring a bell? Most folks in this area are tired of not getting the most for their money.
By
Anonymous, at 12:15 PM, June 24, 2005
Anonymous said "Where are these business that are going to choose downtown New Albany because we have a YMCA and a pool?"
Please, this is a bad argument.
They won't do it because of the buildings, they'll do it because of the people who come downtown to use the buildings, because those people are documented to have certain thinking and buying characteristics that a smart business person can appeal to for a sale.
Any investment goes beyond bricks and mortar. You invest in something in large measure because the evidence suggests you can believe in it, but no one would ever say that raw numbers alone are the sole means of dterminingan investment.
In today's economic climate, you have to think outside the traditional box. To do so isn't always simple, which is why it is wrong for people like the councilment to suggest that it is.
By
Anonymous, at 12:18 PM, June 24, 2005
Village People, no one's ever said that every cent in the past was spent well. The point is, what does anyone need to be convinced that you can't say, look, previous people made mistakes, so in response we'll just do nothing ever again.
By
Anonymous, at 12:20 PM, June 24, 2005
Until the current corruption of this administration and council gets cleaned up, the "little people" should say nay to any of this. Who will the Redevelopment Csaz Coffey get funding from by knocking door to door in the NA industrial park? If the big business gets involved, they will push for the Y to be located in "New Town" corridors of Charlestown Rd or Grant Line Road so the rich will not have to come downtown.
By
Anonymous, at 1:30 PM, June 24, 2005
Village People,
What you would need to show then is why Scribner Place is a bad investment. So far nobody has done that.
For that matter, can you show it for the parking garage? Even though you and others have pointed to it as an example of waste, nobody has actually shown that it is. Posting just the construction and operating costs doesn't tell anybody if it was a good investment or not.
If you can't do that, what are you basing your argument on?
By
Anonymous, at 1:30 PM, June 24, 2005
Mike good investments are made as you know when you can afford to make them. Would the Scribner Place be good for NA? Yes. At this time, probably not. The YMCA is going to build in Floyd County as their leader has previously stated, but to move on as a city and sink further down is not good for this community right now.
I don't mean to sound mean, but your last statement came off like President Bush this morning on the news bashing Democrats about not having a solution for the mess of Social Security. I want a win win for this community and not to sink us deeper in the hole.
By
Anonymous, at 1:43 PM, June 24, 2005
Village People,
I don't quite get what you mean by saying the Y would be good for the city but would cause us to sink further down.
If we wait until all the city's problems are solved before we decide to invest in Scribner Place or any progress, we never will. It's like waiting for a good time to have a child. There's not one. But, it would be good if you get someone else to pay most of the expenses of raising the child while not giving up your parental rights.
For what it's worth, I do consider any suggestion of similarity between me and the moron in the White House as mean but I accept your apology.
Bush is risking the whole of a long standing, proven, universally beneficial system in order to potentially benefit a very small portion of U.S. citizens to the tune of about 2% at best on just a portion of their money. That hardly equates to Scribner Place that invests a small amount in order to reap benefits for the entire city. It's not as if we'd be giving up all of our EDIT money for it.
Given our current city situation, it seems reasonable that we can't afford not to invest in downtown revitalization. We need to create a larger tax base without further encouraging urban sprawl.
By
Anonymous, at 2:06 PM, June 24, 2005
We agree on the President Bush situation. I think the YMCA would be best suited near Community Park where it would be more centrally located and easily bicycled from most places in the city limits, rather than downtown. Urban sprawl? That should have been stopped before it got started on Charlestown Rd. Look at the sewer maoney spent just to make a sewer super highway out for the Meijers venue, etc. That could have all been placed downtown, but no one wants to admit that mistake. You can thank Mayor Overton and crew for that mess. So Mike I think you and I agree on a lot more than we both care to admit. Just don't mess with Harvest Homecoming.
By
Anonymous, at 2:29 PM, June 24, 2005
Your suggestion of Community Park for the YMCA is a great idea. Why didn't the City take suggestions from the people when they chose the location?
By
Anonymous, at 4:08 PM, June 24, 2005
lawrence welk: Baylor who? We support the Dan Coffey plan.
By
Anonymous, at 4:37 PM, June 24, 2005
I can't believe I'm reading this.
It's because the idea of Scribner Place is to help revitalize an area that is unproductive, rhather than to build something else along the beltway that doesn't require pump priming.
Some people here just don't get it - but that's okay, as I guess being a taxpayer entitles you not to be a part of the solution.
By
Anonymous, at 4:38 PM, June 24, 2005
deadman talkin smack
By
Anonymous, at 4:38 PM, June 24, 2005
ed norton: Don't you recieve the Tribune? There like alot of the other Blogs-papers they only say what this Adminstration tells them to write. ed norton you need to work in New Albany Sewers!
By
Anonymous, at 4:41 PM, June 24, 2005
ms. information: Your number are wrong! again! Talk about Fuzzy Math. Were do you all get these numbers and points of few? Npw let's talk about property taxes used for Scribner Place. That's the real issue. I have never heard about a Project in New Albany completed under Budget? Why does anyone think this Venture will!
By
Anonymous, at 4:49 PM, June 24, 2005
to my dear elmer: Unload your gun for awhile and let's talk. well elmer, all I ever hear Bev Crump say is "I DIDN'T KNOW THAT? WHERE IS IT IN MY PACKET? Why didn't some one tell me? Jack Messer: Great cop louse Councilman. He has really dumb things come outta his mouth. But truly is a nice guy. Seabrook: Sad thing about Seabrook what is says in Private is not what he says in Council Meetings. (I think that's why they say he is fickled!) Now Elmer: On the subject of Baylor and Freedom of Speech. We have came up Elmer with a New Label for Baylor: (Code Blue)"DNR" - Many Of us do support Scribner Place. But elmer we sure don't Agree on Property Taxes for backing up funding. Like it is said Dan Coffey Plan is a Win-win for all sides. Or let the YMCA and Redevlopment get there own loan. Just leave New Albany Taxpayers outta this.
By
Anonymous, at 5:15 PM, June 24, 2005
lawerence welk That's the point: Baylor needs to speak for himself on his own blog! We support Dan Coffey's Plan. We need facts not fiction! Who in this Adminstration will sign a document stated there plan is better and why it Benefits the Taxpayers? None of them! We have more options now!
By
Anonymous, at 5:21 PM, June 24, 2005
Why does people on this Blog continue to compare New Albany to Louisville? Dream on !
By
Anonymous, at 5:25 PM, June 24, 2005
For the life of me I can't understand why people seem to think it's fun to lie to everybody else.
trixie and mis-informed:
At the very least you should realize that, if you really are against Scribner Place, your comments only serve the other side. At this point, all anyone has to do is point to your ridiculous comments and say "That's the opposition"
Anyone with any sense of self-worth would be embarrassed to be associated with such mindless utterances.
By
Anonymous, at 5:27 PM, June 24, 2005
Comment to Mike: How many memberships need to be sold to pay for Bond Payments? Do you not wonder why business are not in downtown? And going out Charlestown Road? Even the County is Smart. There going to move to Grantline Road! They look at the future. Not a Field of Dreams.
By
Anonymous, at 5:36 PM, June 24, 2005
ralph's theory. They do the work and let us pay the bill. New Albany Residents are not getting there "Bang for The Buck!" I truly wonder how many pools we can build in New Albany for $13 million Dollars. Put a pool in my yard! And I'll let you put a YMCA SIGN OVER MY DOOR. AND PAY THE INS. REPAIRS AND mAINTANCE?
By
Anonymous, at 5:44 PM, June 24, 2005
New Albany's not spending $13 million dollars.
Luckily, that means we'll have enough left over for the kook removal program. First West Nile, and now this!
By
Anonymous, at 5:53 PM, June 24, 2005
This may be the truest statement I've seen on the topic:
"New Albany Residents are not getting there..."
Thanks, Flip.
By
Anonymous, at 5:57 PM, June 24, 2005
your ms. informed numbers,
If I have fuzzy math - then where are you getting your numbers?
Would it surprise you to know these are the administrations numbers?
We are not necessarily the opposition, we are the fact finders. The ones who bring the truth to the public - the real truth not the administration truth. Perhaps the truth hurts?
By
Anonymous, at 8:47 PM, June 24, 2005
MS INFORMATION: Then if you information and numbers are correct. Why are we doing a cost study. And spending $36,000.00? This sounds more like marci! She needs to focus on getting the correct minutes. We support the Coffey Plan! This who Adminstration is based on Fuzzy Math.
By
Anonymous, at 9:32 PM, June 24, 2005
The study isn't a cost study for Phase One. It's a feasibility study for Phase Two.
Are you honestly having that much trouble understanding what's going on or are you just making stuff up?
By
Anonymous, at 9:39 PM, June 24, 2005
I am compelled to speak my mind regarding the recent comments. First and foremost, I believe most folks feel the YMCA/Scribner Place project is not a terrible idea, it's just not a terribly great idea.
At issue is the enormous cost of the project and the long term committment it will require in terms of funding.
Other issues of concern are centered around the confidence factor.
Do you really think that, with all things considered, there is much confidence left in how this city has, is, or will be run?
As more and more information sputters out, it becomes more and more obvious that the details of this project are disconcerting.
Property tax back up for the bonds, swimming complex run by Parks Dept., Redevelopment Commission is the actual co-recipient of grant, no fesibility study for attracting new business has been done, and the project has been seriously scaled back for Phase I.
How are we to believe that Phase II will actually ever happen?
This is a huge leap of faith we are being asked to condone.
Everyone wants to see downtown revitalized, but there are other ideas out there.
Personally, I am of the belief that we need to put a population downtown first. Growth will spring from that.
Scribner Place is a nice amenity, but I think we have the cart before the horse.
By
East Ender, at 4:23 AM, June 25, 2005
We await the Shriley Baird plan for downtown revitalization, or in fact, the plan from anyone here who can formulate an alternative rather than naysay the current ones.
By
Anonymous, at 10:48 AM, June 25, 2005
Meanwhile, the County Commissioners are ready to commit EDIT money to Scribner Place.
Many of you said the county wouldn't participate. Your thoughts now?
By
Anonymous, at 10:49 AM, June 25, 2005
Tim's been bragging about a plan for nearly two years now. Apparently, he doesn't think it's good enough to share with anyone, though, because people have offered repeatedly to help him get the word out.
I, too, am still waiting for any of the people who keep saying there're better ways to share their ideas.
Laura just said there are other ideas out there. If they are better based on the complaints here, one would pretty much have to assume that they guarantee over $25 million in private investment, appeal to a larger demographic than Scribner Place, have the support of the county commissioners, can be totally planned, approved, completed and paid for during one administration and won't cost the city a dime.
Sounds good. What are they?
By
Anonymous, at 11:29 AM, June 25, 2005
PropertytaxKOJAKsewercatastrophewastemayor’sSUVbigmesswecan’tfolkscutthefatadultDVDjimmyyouworkforuslittlefolksburdenEDITthankgodforlauraCOFFEYPLANpropertytaxlittlepeoplenewfangledparkingcriminalconspiracygaragepointyheadsaaaaaaaaAAAARGGHHH.
By
Anonymous, at 11:52 AM, June 25, 2005
So I guess that means you still won't show it to us?
By
Anonymous, at 2:44 PM, June 25, 2005
COMMISSIONERS--- PROMISES BROKEN ? ?
See the Courier Journal article of
October 2, 2002 BEFORE the election.
"Commissioner Chuck Frieberger said he opposes the use of Economic Development income tax money for the
Scribner project." He said the county tax could be repealed when the jail bonds are paid off in 2007.
He realizes there is support in New Albany, but, not so much in his district of Lafayette and Greenville
townships."
By
Anonymous, at 3:05 PM, June 25, 2005
Mayor's Plan - Plan 1
Construction Costs: 8,008,551
"non-construction costs": 2,877,465
Project Contingencies: 479,993
Bond issuance costs: 599,500
capilaized Interest: 1,295,441
Total: 13,261,000
Bond Issue: 12,100,000
Total Bond Payofff "net debt service" 17,667,945
Plan 2
Construction Costs: 8,008,551
"non-construction costs": 2,877,465
Project Contingencies: 482,731
Bond issuance costs: 624,367
capilaized Interest: 1,392,886
Total: 13,386,000
Bond Issue: 13,025,000
Total Bond Payofff "net debt service" 19,019,395
Plan 3
Construction Costs: 8,008,551
"non-construction costs": 2,877,465
Project Contingencies: 498,735
Bond issuance costs: 651,768
capilaized Interest: 1,544,481
Total: 14,961,000
Bond Issue: 13,800,000
Total Bond Payofff "net debt service" 19,175,595
Coffey Plan - Plan 4
Construction Costs: 0
"non-construction costs": 0
Project Contingencies: 0
Bond issuance costs: 0
capilaized Interest: 0
Total: 0
Bond Issue: 0
Total Bond Payofff "net debt service" 0
Now which one looks the best?
I pick coffey
By
Anonymous, at 7:14 PM, June 25, 2005
Right on--- Tim--- I agree with you.
The Coffey plan is the best for the City. The city is broke--- budget was cut to shreds and we need to patch the
potholes to save our cars. Streets need to be striped to tell what side of the street you are traveling on.
Right on --- Tim-- good idea
By
Anonymous, at 10:37 PM, June 25, 2005
If you need stripes to tell what side of the road you're on, may I humbly suggest that you just may have more problems than the budget of any city could cure.
By
Anonymous, at 11:18 PM, June 25, 2005
Tim...what side are you on? I can never really tell from one post to the next, much less from one blog to another.
By
Anonymous, at 12:41 AM, June 26, 2005
Let's don't even go there! We are fed up with the attacks on Valla Ann. And believe me there is not enough room on this blog or any blog for the comments to be printed in support for Valla Ann! And many of US was emailed The Comments on N/A Confidential "Blasting Tim Deatrick". Comments written by New Albany Resident. I Personally E-mailed those comments to everyone whom has ever heard Valla Ann Speak, and fighting for "The Little People!" I also support the Dan Coffey Plan. As well as Support Valla Ann! And plan to continue to Speak out for Truth and Injustice in New Albany.
By
Anonymous, at 7:55 AM, June 26, 2005
I also recieved E-MAIL: New Albany Resident posted Comments. Talk about the power of E-mails. GREAT JOB! who ever wrote it.
By
Anonymous, at 8:04 AM, June 26, 2005
If legal beegle keeps supporting things, he's gonna need a supporter.
By
Anonymous, at 10:52 AM, June 26, 2005
Tim attacks Baylor - it stays.
Someone points out an inconsistency in Tim's attack - it goes.
Comments come and go, with no apparent reason.
Does the moderator here have any sense at all?
By
Anonymous, at 7:32 AM, June 27, 2005
Legal Bagel said he will "continue to Speak out for Truth and Injustice in New Albany."
We need more injustice. Bravo.
By
Anonymous, at 7:58 PM, June 27, 2005
Ms. Oates, why do you continue to let Tim Deatrick attack Roger Baylor, when you banned Roger and bluegill for the same. I propose you ban Mr. Deatrick from this blog as well. I think I am not the only one to feel this way.
By
Anonymous, at 12:18 PM, June 29, 2005
Michigan Economic Development Corporation - MEDC Release: MichBio's The Coalition will focus on supporting increased funding for the FDA to ensure
[url=http://www.planetnana.co.il/forumnews01/cheap-phentermine-cod.html]cheap phentermine cod[/url]
[url=http://www.forumnews02.kokoom.com/index.html]For this price we give you fast and descrete shipping[/url]
By
Anonymous, at 6:59 AM, January 06, 2007
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
r << Home