I was hoping he would win this one. I think that selling the course was wrong.

Phillips and Vutnosky probably would have been fairly successful in at least delaying the sale (if not stopping it outright) if that ******* didn't stick his face into it.

Congrats, Joe. Your interference on the behalf of the people helped cost us a ball field. No one else to blame for this but yourself, dick.

Yes, Joe, I said US. We actually used the place. A lot. I doubt you could have found it with a map.

I'm not trying to apolgize for J.P. I just think the whole golf course deal stinks. I'll never understand why it was considered an emergency to sell it.

John,

Ditto what Art said.

I think all of us enjoy having a healthy discussion about issues here. Given the name of the board, most of what is posted has to do with serial-plaintiff & bully Joe Pilchesky, but I think just about anything else is fair game. We've even had the likes the David "Green Volvo" Evans post here, so you know we are open to different ideas (and Mr Janet Evans is full of "different" ideas).

Free Speech does't require a multi-paragrah disclaimer Mr. Pilchesky.

I't not over yet. Stacy Brown did not report the truth. JP does in fact have standing. Check out the ruling, JP has it posted.

and more tax dollars!

I stand firmly behind the report. And it's fine that you want to hatch your wagon to that clown. Not my problem as we've continued to prove beyond all doubt that we have never needed approval from him or his small band of followers. Be well.

Stacy,

Are you for real? I stated very clearly that I'm not a JP apologist. So, I'm not "hitching" (not sure what hatching is) my wagon to anybody. Your words are in print, you reported he lost on standing, and that's not true. Man up and correct yourself.

Also it shouldn't matter that it was sold several (3 years?) years ago, it's still a park, just like Nay Aug.

If not the court, then where else to settle disputes? High noon on Maint St?.......................... I don't think so.

What's right is right, and wrong is wrong.

Well for my part this is my take on this event

1. I wasn't real thrilled with the following comment

:::Stacy Brown did not report the truth.::

Thus implying that Stacy lied. I have seen no evidence to support that Mr. Brown would or has ever lied, nor can I think of any way that he could get away with it since all these things can be independently varified. At worse a "mistake" could be made but nothing more sinister than a mistake.

2. Since Stacy has replied that he stands firmly behind his report I am inclined to believe him...why?? If I have to either believe Clarence or Stacy...there is simply no contest there...Stacy wins without a doubt.

3. Clarence still believes he won by settling his suit with the DA (I guess that means they won also as they also settled but in Clarence's twisted world they lost...go figure!) Thus his "perception" of the truth and reality are slightly strange if you ask me.

Therefore I shall except Stacy Brown's account until it has been proven otherwise by someone with a little more credibilty than Clarence.

-- Edited by IHavehadenoughofhaters at 11:02, 2008-01-19

100% sure John ... I spoke with him on the telephone and confirmed the fact that he is the poster.

He provided a phone number and extention at the TT that he could be reached at ... it's him.

One more thing, I'm not trying to upset the apple cart here, but if you're going to point out deceit, let's get it right. Look, I just don't like this practice of selling our parks.

Have to agree with Lus and Stacy. I never heard anyone suggest we sell parks. During the Connor's administration there was some talk of handing Nay Aug over to the county, but Doherty has never suggested selling parks.

While I didn't want to see the gold course go, it catered to a very small number of paying customers and was 15 miles outside of the city. Our city parks are free and in our neighborhoods. If unloading the golf course in some way benefited the city parks it was a good deal. I guess the jury is still out on that.

I guess technically the SS complex was a park, but the muni wasn't - it was a golf course. Hey, I never said I agreed with the sale, but I don't see where Stacy has this wrong. Calling the SSC a park is a stretch. It was two baseball fields and a basketball court. Did it even have a playground?

Doesn't matter, it wasn't done cloak and dagger style and no other "park" sales have been proposed. Facts, not my opinion.

I'll gladly defer to your knowledge of the court case if you'll accept my claim that no other parks have EVER been on the auction block. I follow these things quite closely. I really don't want to read an entire ruling if I have to. If you say you're right I'll take your word (and Lus's). If I suspect your wrong in the future I'll get off of my butt and read the damn thing.

That said, show anything anywhere that says we're selling parks other than the SSC and the muni. To the best of my knowledge that isn't happening and has never been discussed. I hope I'm right, I hope your wrong. We shouldn't be selling our CITY parks.

Peace.