Jump to content
Thank you Ms. Jeffcoats, for not only reporting the good works of Forest Park Parks and Recreation but joining us in the celebration and fellowship. I wholeheartedly agree it was a fun event. The candidates that attended showed great decorum and some even let their hair down and had fun before the grueling task of full fledged campaigning begins. It wasn't used by the incumbents to further their cause they just celebrated and appreciated the accomplishment at hand. The contenders did no mudslinging, all in all the way it should be. Let the people rejoice!
This was John Parker's parting gift to the City of Forest Park and the new leaders.
Questions: Why would any candidates be highlighted before they even qualify for office? Is this really fair and equal exposure for any other potential candidates? And why mention three people that may or may not qualify to run for the position of Mayor and only one for either of the two council seats up for election? Does this mean that the News Daily is endorsing this candidate over any other? This article smacks of favoritism.
Mr. Mack and Mr. Parker are correct when they stated Mr. Parker did not have the AUTHORITY to approve the settlement. Nevertheless, the settlement was approved and not by the governing body. Parker admitted sending an email saying "Go Ahead" and the insurance company went ahead, whether he had the AUTHORITY or not his actions initiated the settlement bottom line!
It was a public forum where Ms. Williams announced her award which Forest Park had not had with the previous administration. Previously it was said that the award was pay-off for supporting Mayor Lockhart, obviously not true since they did not know anything about it. It is not unclear who approved it, Mr. Parker said he sent the email and it said "Go ahead". What is unclear is, did he agree to $10K or $35K. As he admitted he did not have the authority to do either. Please people stop being sheep, the bad things that are going around are political tactics being used because others want in office. In order to do that they must discredit the current Council. I have said this before and I will say it again, if you do not like something they are doing talk to them and make up your own mind. Do not give the right to someone else to decide what you believe. Corrupt people use others to do their dirty work, don't let it happen to you. I find the current council to be overwhelmingly more transparent that the last, once again just my opinion.
It appears to me the “He’s going fishing" statement was uncalled for. It plainly states Councilman Smith rushed in in his work clothes. Fact of the matter, he showed dedication to the city by pushing himself to get there as quickly as his situation would allow. Also, why is it now called "Secret Session" in the press when with the previous group it was called "Executive Session"? Election time brings out either the best or worst in people.
It was an open and shut council move, much ado about nothing.
People need to be held accountable for their actions. You can not just go around printing/distributing things about people because you have the "I heard", "I think" mentality. "I heard" is rumor, "I think" is opinion and both of these should be expressed carefully, if at all. The fact is we all have lives both personal and professional and accusations like these are damaging. Unless these things were done in your presence you do not know it for a fact. In writing you are opening yourself up for liable, in speaking slander. Think before you write or speak about someone else. If you have no sins throw the first stone, otherwise let judgment come from where it is supposed to. If you have a problem with someone take it up with them not your neighbors, co-workers, so on. That way these things can be kept civil not viral.
Last login: Wednesday, September 11, 2013