Please follow the links below to more information from opponents of Blue Back Square. There is a flyer produced by Save the Center and a link to the editorial by Jasyn Sadler who is one of the residents of Burr Street with the courage to take on this soon to be debacle.
- Save The Center Flyer currently being passed door to door by Save the Center.
- Jasyn Sadler's Letter from Courant, Sunday June 19, 2005.
- Blue Back Square Timeline: This is a smattering of various happenings during the last few years that are of interest.
- Robert E. Tuthill Letter, as passed around via email. I'm not sure if this was printed...I will update this when I find out.
Thank you to Save the Center for the submission of the flyer, thank you to Judy Aron for submitting the timeline, thank you to Robert Tuthill for an excellent letter and Thank you to Jasyn Sadler for for an excellent letter and for standing up for the rights of his family and neighborhood by taking this to court. Thank you, West Hartford RAC Note: West Hartford RAC did not produce the information in the flyer, the letter or the timeline. These materials were submitted by various individuals or groups in opposition to the development of Blue Back Square. I am posting these materials here so more West Hartford residents can read the information submitted by the opposition.
18 comments:
We lost the vote re BBS, but as is true in much of the country on many issues including going to war, it's not for not having the information to make choices out there - People just need to know how to find it (like at this blog site) and believe the mass media message is not always the most accurate one.
This episode, I believe, is a micro-episode that will occur over and over again before we catch on. Perhaps it's purpose will be to in-your-face 'told ya so' the people who glean info off the headlines of the Courant and glossy adverrtisements. If they believe these are their quick and easy guideposts to democratic participation, they will soon learn this is not a sufficient means of sustaining democracy. If so, well it's one small community place to sacrifice to get a critical message to a lot of people and learn by our mistakes. We are a mobile society and can move away from the mess. It is sad for West Hartford Center though and we will miss it here. Will be looking for signs of intelligent, hearty, and compassionate leadership in the meantime to take this foolish group on.
Thanks again for your efforts.
Also what is WH RAC? Enlighten me.
Cheryl
I was very turned off by tactics employed by the anti-blueback groups during the run-up to the recent referendum. I have no problem with people opposing the development, but I do have a problem with anti-blueback groups attacking the motives and character of those that favor the development. Blueback proponents attack the Taubman group, a corporation with the admitted goal of stopping the development due to potential competition. I have not seen any personal attacks on individuals opposed the blueback. The same can not be said for opponents of the development. On Saturday I received in my mail box a newsletter which questioned the ethics and professional competency of the town manager. I have been living in West Hartford for almost 9 years and I have not met anyone, including those in government, who questioned the ethics or competency of the town manager. In Sunday's Hartford Courant there was an anti-Blueback piece that compared the town's actions with respect to the development to John Rowland's illegal dealings. The piece failed to mention exactly what actions violated which laws, but I guess that’s irrelevant when your main goal is to assault the character of your opponents. Remember, people who serve on the town council are volunteers. They should not be subjected to such mean spirited attacks regardless of their position on a particular issue.
WTF are you, Barry Feldman? You hide behind an annonymous title, and talk about the flyer.
Just because you haven't heard about the charges previously doesn't mean they're false. Did you think they fell out of the sky? Quick quiz: with all of the power of the town, all of the media support, how did more than 5 percent of the people still vote against it? Hmm? Magic?
How about when the residents of the neighborhood are invited to see the Blue Back plan unveiling and the first thing, the first freaking thing that the developer says is "This is what the project is. This is how it will be built. We're open to suggestions, but we're going to build this."
And he says that at the site that is now the Whole Foods store. But they're independant of BBS. RIIIIIIIIIGHT.
Look, for me it's the politics. It's one thing to build this development. It's another when the town lies about it.
When BBS doesn't list the parking garages for the project on it's maps of the project, they're lying. Why? Why don't they list the garages?
When 40 and then 30 percent of the town votes against the project in spite of all the town and developer pressure, how does the Town Council vote 9-0 for it? Hmm? Care to explain that? So 30-40 percent of the town's opinion is worthless?
How about Al Turco and others who are former Town Council members who now work with the project as advisors? Do you know that if these people were STATE Legislators, that's illegal? You cannot work for a group whose interests you have made a descision on while a state legislator. Yet the supposeldy-corrupt state government outlaws it, while West Hartford says it's ok.
How come the largest land-owner of properties in West Hartford Center has been working to fight BBS? Hmm? Does that make them evil like Westfarms? Guess what- Westfarms pays more taxes than anyone in town. More than me, you, Barry Feldman or Scott Slifka. As far as I'm concerned, they've got a hell of a lot more right to speak their minds on the project than most people- including the Town Council.
They built Westfarms from nothing. They paid for the building, the roads, everything, and without a PENNY from the town.
And now a new developer comes in, with more cash than Westfarms had at the start, AND GETS HANDED land and cash from the town? And they shouldn't be pissed off?
I'd love to get into a buisiness deal with you. It'd be the easiest money I'd ever make.
ps- Many pages of the agreement are blank. And it isn't signed. BLANK. CHECK.
And please spare me the "don't say not-nice things about them, they're on the Town Council!"
The fact that they volunteer to help the job does not change the fact that this deal is corrupt. The fact that they don't get paid doesn't change the fact that this deal is corrupt.
As far as I'm concerned, this Democratically controlled Town Council sounds just like the Bush Administration- and I hate the Bush Administration. It's the same "you can't say anything bad or you hate America" type stuff. You know where they don't say bad things about the ruling class because they're volunteering for such service? Cuba. China. Iran. That's a great group to try and ally with.
Enjoy the higher taxes.
hey Anonymous - you honestly think Barry Feldman is ethical? and honest? I'll wager your photo is beside the dictionary entry for gullible ...
you have not only been living in West Hartford for 9 years - you've been living in Oz as well.
You want to know what Saint Barry has done that is so wrong? How about the hide and seek games he has been playing to make budget numbers look good.. have you taken the time to examine why we have a 2 million dollar deficit in our Town leisure budget? or the fiscal irresponsibility surrounding our skating rink? Or the vilification of our Town Registrar when there have been unauthorized uses of our town credit card (on more than one occasion).. or maybe the illegal tactics he used regarding the development in Elmwood (you can talk to Patti Lowry about that)... wake up and smell the West Hartford Latte anonymous .. or maybe you'd prefer to keep your head buried in the sandtraps at Rockledge golf course.
Judy Aron
oh... and as for our illustrious Town Council members giving their time to volunteer.. I wish they would all resign and save themselves the grief .. You think they are exempt from criticism because they volunteer?
oh puh-leeze...
They are deserving of personal attacks especially where their ethics are concerned.. but I guess it doesn't bother you that we had council members working for law firms that represent the developer - or that they had conflict of interests and voted on BBS anyway when they should have recused themselves.. I am sorry to tell you but they lied to us all regarding the fact that they knew about this deal in its entirety before the last election.
Those Town Council people should be ashamed of themselves.
JA
I wanted to thank you, Judy, for all the great work you, Joe, Mark, and Jason have done. As for burying their heads at Rockledge, I've heard that might not be an option for long.
As the Supreme Court ruled today, hey, tax revenue is ALL that matters.
It's enough to make our founders roll over in their graves a few times - if their burial plots aren't bulldozed to make a mall that is..
This is a very sad day for us .. private property no longer matters..
but now we all need to understand that rulings can be overturned and judges can be impeached and incumbents can be voted out..
Zach and Judy,
Your responses to my post prove my underlying point: people usually resort to ad hominen attacks when they are not capable of making a reasonable argument. Together you two made about six or seven personal attacks on me simply because I disagree with you. Why is that?
Seventy percent of those who voted think BBS is good for West Hartford and that's after all the slander that has been thrown at the developer, town manager and town council. Why can't you simply accept the rule of the majority?
Below I respond to some of your points . . .
---When 40 and then 30 percent of the town votes against the project in spite of all the town and developer pressure, how does the Town Council vote 9-0 for it? Hmm? Care to explain that? So 30-40 percent of the town's opinion is worthless?
The town council voted 9-0 twice because they believe BBS is good for the town. Do you believe that each vote of a legislative body should exactly reflect the views of the population? Perhaps you should run for the council?
---How about Al Turco and others who are former Town Council members who now work with the project as advisors? Do you know that if these people were STATE Legislators, that's illegal? You cannot work for a group whose interests you have made a descision on while a state legislator. Yet the supposeldy-corrupt state government outlaws it, while West Hartford says it's ok.
Please state exactly which laws present and former council members have violated.
---How come the largest land-owner of properties in West Hartford Center has been working to fight BBS? Hmm? Does that make them evil like Westfarms? Guess what- Westfarms pays more taxes than anyone in town. More than me, you, Barry Feldman or Scott Slifka. As far as I'm concerned, they've got a hell of a lot more right to speak their minds on the project than most people- including the Town Council.
Everybody has the right to take a position on a particular issue. Of course, the fact that Westfarms pays taxes does not give them the right to vote. I have no idea as to why you think Westfarms has more of a right to speak on BBS than the TC.
---I'd love to get into a buisiness deal with you. It'd be the easiest money I'd ever make.
"Deals" do not have to be a zero sum proposition. Both sides can "win."
---The fact that they volunteer to help the job does not change the fact that this deal is corrupt. The fact that they don't get paid doesn't change the fact that this deal is corrupt.
Again, please provide the particular statutes that are being violated. If you are unable to do this, then you should stop accusing people of corruption.
---oh... and as for our illustrious Town Council members giving their time to volunteer.. I wish they would all resign and save themselves the grief .. You think they are exempt from criticism because they volunteer?
oh puh-leeze...
I never said that the TC can't be criticized. What I did say is that general accusations of fraud and corruption without reference to specific statutes has no value.
In sum, unless you guys can't come up with specific violations of statutes you should accept the will of the OVERWHELMING majority residents of WH and stop with you ad hominen attacks.
See you at the ground breaking!!!!!
"Do you believe that each vote of a legislative body should exactly reflect the views of the population? Perhaps you should run for the council?"
YES! YES! THE TOWN COUNCIL! IS SUPPOSED! TO REFLECT THE EXACT VIEWS! OF THE POPULATION! THATS THE WHOLE POINT!!!!!!! IF THEY WEREN'T, WE'D HAVE JUST A STRONG MAYOR FORM OF GOVERNMENT!
"Please state exactly which laws present and former council members have violated."
They made votes that had an impact on Blue Back Square and now work for the project. Former Mayor Bouvier recused himself during the exploration process, the rest of the council members should have done the same when BBS came calling.
"I never said that the TC can't be criticized."
Really? You didn't? Then what is this?
"Remember, people who serve on the town council are volunteers. They should not be subjected to such mean spirited attacks regardless of their position on a particular issue."
Oh, I guess you DID say it. Gee, shucks, I guess that sinks that argument of yours.
"Of course, the fact that Westfarms pays taxes does not give them the right to vote."
If you can PAY TAXES to the town of West Hartford, then you can vote in the Town of West Hartford.
So you think they can talk, they just can't vote. Westfarms has been dragged through the mud during the entire process just for using the 1st Amendment. Its insane. It's facist.
I know they'll break ground. But what if the lawsuit works? What about the fact that the Register of Historic Places agreed to review the Town Hall/Library/Board of Ed buildings, even after Mayor Slifka stormed out of a meeting of WHISP and the State Historic Register when they wouldn't let him bully them? What if they say the movie theater can't put up a marquee because it would alter the buildings?
I guess that would eliminate the movie theater. Have you ever seen a movie theater without a marquee?
Dear Anonymous:
OK - you want to know what law was broken? Our town charter for one .. Ever hear of the bidding process that is supposed to take place on a project like this? or where the charter states that "No ordinance or other measure which shall have been adopted (remember the oct 12 vote?) in accordance with the provisions of this section shall be repealed or AMENDED by the council within two years after adoption except by vote of the electors." (Chapt. XI Initiative & referendum, section 3)
The TC would not have brought that to a referendum .. we had to get signatures to do that. The Town Council brought up the emergency session without adequate notice so that no one could see what they were doing. 32 pages of amendments were made in one fell swoop, and they hoped that no one would notice, comment or show up.
I do accept the rule of the majority which is why I was upset at the arrogance of the TC to just go and change a document that we all agreed on in the first place. But I am sure that if the town had had the truth from the start instead of the brainwashing garbage that was thrown at them by the half million dollar slick advertising of BBS they would have voted no. It was clever of the TC to use Westfarms as the red herring and the proof of this will be the next batches of changes coming down the pike.
The town was lied to from the start.
The traffic numbers are bogus and so are the garage revenue numbers. You all don't even have a plan or cost for the Town Hall renovations.
I suppose it is legal for Jon Harris to have worked for a law firm that had ties to JDA and Healthtrax.. I suppose it is legal for Slifka to have worked for a law firm that had ties to CDA .. I suppose it is legal for Coursey to be executive director of a pro-development organization.. and I suppose it is fine for Thornberry to push her hubby's agendas on the Council while he has his face plastered all over a no bid developer's propaganda.. but it sure as hell ain't ETHICAL!!!!!
Ever heard of ETHICS? Do us all a favor and look it up in Websters.
How about the TC lying to the public during the 2003 election and saying they didn't know about the BBS plan back then. That was a bunch of Bull and you know it. They knew about the plan. It was presented to them by that time.
This deal was and is corrupt - because the Town residents were never told straight up from day 1 what was going on. Barry and his buddies picked a developer when he should have put the concept out for bid. They should have engaged the whole Town (and that includes Westfarms) on this scheme early on instead of working on it behind closed doors for 2 years and them presenting it to the public for "tweaks", and cramming it downtheir throat.
This Town was Delphied.. and our Civic organizations were bought and you freaking know it.
You tell me right here and now that Noah Webster House didn't get $50,000 and a promise for full participation if they'ed co-operate.. You tell me if the American Legion wouldn't have signed on without being given a new home with free parking.. You tell me that the Chamber of Commerce wouldn't have given support if they didn't have membership mandatory in all of the leases in BBS. You tell me that Patrissi isn't getting all or part of the landscaping in this project and you frigging tell me that Rachel Grody would not be willing to option that property without an equity position in the deal plus the promise of not having to pay for the cleanup of that land as well as a bunch of other perks. I'd like to know how many other people will be getting free condos or other equity positions in this deal. It certainly won't be any of the West Hartford step-children in Elmwood.
As for the media - you did a good job buying them off with all of the air and ad space you bought. Plus the Courant knows how much advertising space will be bought with the retail coming in.. They know what side their bread is buttered. We all know how themedia is so interested in the "public good".. Give me a break!
The whole deal was cut to benefit the political elite in this town and screw everyone else, including folks like the Sadlers.
How much did BBS have to pay to buy out the Raymond Road Condo folks? including that poor lady who cried during the public hearings because her condo was all she had and she didn't want to move, and she was being gagged not to discuss the whole thing? The suits surrounded her so fast at that meeting she didn't know what happened.
So yeah - you won this battle - and you can have your ground-breaking and your Crate and Barrel.
When the bulldozers start tearing up the Town Hall green and the Education building is torn down and defaced, people will realize what they have done. Mr DeWaal and Mr. Heapes, and the other weasels will collect their returns and be moving on to their next kill.
You people act like you are so noble to do this for the public good.. 5,000 of us know it is for personal gain. Whether it is to climb the political ladder and be bought and placed into office like Harris was or whether it is for a piece of the pie, you never gave a thought to all the residents .. just your own self serving needs.
See yourself at the ground-breaking .. kiss this town goodbye for it will be changing and not for the better.
Judy Aron
Zach, two points
1. It is one thing to criticize the TC, it is quite another thing to make unfounded accusations of fraud and corruption and personally attack. “Mean spirited attacks” do not amount to criticism. I believe they are inherently different and ad hominen attacks have no place in public discourse. This has been my point all along and it concerns me that you are still unwilling or unable to understand this distinction.
2. All property owners pay taxes, including corporations. Residents vote even if they do not own property. Corporations cannot vote, even if they own property and pay taxes. With that in mind, perhaps you should retract your prior statement, “If you can PAY TAXES to the town of West Hartford, then you can vote in the Town of West Hartford.” Westfarms pays taxes, but it cannot vote because a corporation cannot be a resident. Consequently, Westfarms does not have standing as a resident so it needs residents to bring law suits on its behalf. The fact you do not appear to understand all of this also concerns me.
Judy, one point
1. I think it is you who need to better understand the concept of ethics. There are specific rules of ethics for certain professions and also for people who serve on TCs. People who violate such codes are subject to disciple. If you really believe someone’s action “sure as hell ain’t Ethical” then, as I stated in prior posts, you should be able to point to violations of actual codes of ethics. For example, if you believe that certain former and present attorney members of the TC violated ethics, then you can review the ethical codes that members of the Connecticut bar must adhere to and point out specific violations. The fact that you have not done this means 1) you have reviewed the applicable ethic codes were unable to find any violations, or 2) you really don’t understand what people mean when they speak of ethics. I’m guessing the latter.
Regards
Yes, while Westfarms cannot cast a vote, they should have a right to participate in the proccess. They've done a lot to help the town and the tax base. You never countered the fact that they should be angry when another corporation gets a town handout when they were never given the same, so I'll assume you agree that they have a right to be angry at the unequal playing field.
I'll let Judy speak for herself, but remember: Mayor Slifka was recently nominated to be the head of the WH Ethics Commission. So I don't expect him to take any action against himself.
Is it ethical to vote on a project and then work to help that project in the private sector? It isn't.
That's obvious...you shouldn't need an ethics code to prove that.
The Town Charter states the following:
"No ordinance or other measure which shall have been adopted in accordance with the provisions of this section shall be repealed or AMENDED by the council within two years after adoption except by vote of the electors." (Chapt. XI Initiative & referendum, section 3).
So it appears to me that without the Save the Center folks, the TC would have violated the Town Charter. They had to get signatures for a referendum that, by law, is supposed to happen anyway. That's corrupt. Knowingly and willingly breaking the Town Charter is corrupt.
You think that any account on the TC is ad-hominem. It was a guarantee that you would think this. One of the things the Save the Center people complained about was that the cost of the project would be higher than the TC claimed it would be.
And you said "don't accuse them of lying!"
Well, it appears we were right. Aaaaaaagain.
"So while the higher energy prices aren't expected to crush the economy, everything from locally produce food to the construction costs for West Hartford's Blue Back Square development become more expensive."
http://www.courant.com/business/hc-oil0625.artjun25,0,1465874.story
Well, asking for specific examples is reasonable enough. The problem is, I can't even find the Town's Ethics Code online.
But I did find the one the state uses for State Officials. I think it's a good enough standard, don't you?
"Code of Ethics for Public Officials"
Sec. 1-84 (Formerly Sec. 1-66). Prohibited activites.
"b) No public official or state employee shall accept other employment which will either impair his independence of judgment as to his official duties or employment or require him, or induce him, to disclose confidential information acquired by him in the course of and by reason of his official duties."
"(l) No public official or state employee, or any person acting on behalf of a public official or state employee, shall willfully and knowingly interfere with, influence, direct or solicit existing or new lobbying contracts, agreements or business relationships for or on behalf of any person."
Sec. 1-84a. Disclosure or use of confidential information by former official or employee.
"No former executive or legislative branch or quasi-public agency public official or state employee shall disclose or use confidential information acquired in the course of and by reason of his official duties, for financial gain for himself or another person."
Sec. 1-84b. Certain activities restricted after leaving public office or employment.
"(a) No former executive branch or quasi-public agency public official or state employee shall represent anyone other than the state, concerning any particular matter (1) in which he participated personally and substantially while in state service and (2) in which the state has a substantial interest."
"(b) No former executive branch or quasi-public agency public official or state employee shall, for one year after leaving state service, represent anyone, other than the state, for compensation before the department, agency, board, commission, council or office in which he served at the time of his termination of service, concerning any matter in which the state has a substantial interest. The provisions of this subsection shall not apply to an attorney who is a former employee of the Division of Criminal Justice, with respect to any representation in a matter under the jurisdiction of a court."
http://www.ethics.state.ct.us/Statutues_and_Regulations/po_code_2004.htm
If you can find a copy of the town's ethics code posted online, let me know.
Ok "anonymous" (I notice you still don't have the maturity to say who you are), it is clear to me that you don't think that there was any unethical behavior on the part of our Town Council or the Town Management, from day 1.
I guess you believe everyone did what they were supposed to and that is exactly what your problem is.. you don't seem to understand what unethical behavior is. You need a specific law to be broken instead of actually following what is right and decent.
Too bad .. I pity you for not seeing anything wrong with Jon Harris's being employed by KME who represented Healthtrax and JDA (is there something about disclosure thatyou don't understand?), or that the incumbents running for office lied to the public when asked about plans for BBS saying they didn't know anything about it. (I was there at Duffy School when that happened.. I asked the question several times.. they were previously presented with the plan and they lied saying they did not know about it). Or that this deal was not done according to Town Charter (i.e. no bidding process)...but wait .. there's more..LOL ..need I go on .. I think not...
Just because you don't comprehend or refuse to see unethical behavior and Town Charter violations doesn't mean there weren't any. And the only way that you can refute my claim is by whining about ad hominem attacks which is pure nonsense and a childish way to deflect the real issue. So tell me here and now if you believe that not one Town Council member or Town Administrator acted unethically or illegally.
Your response really doesn't matter anyway though.. you all did a fine job of using the Delphi technique to get the sheeple to follow along with the BBS scheme, which could have been crafted so much better. Just remember those same people will crucify you when you don't deliver what was promised, their taxes go sky high, the traffic will be a mess, there will be more crime and pollution, and the charm of West Hartford will be gone forever, including the demolishing of the Ed building.... that is if any of the BBS cheerleaders have the guts to stick around and clean up the mess they are creating now. Oh yeah.. no problemo they'll just empty the taxpayers pockets more.
I don't have much faith in the CT courts either - having known people who have faced them, we all know that statute is not usually followed and judges make up their own rules, especially when they have influential friends.
But what the hell.. you will always have Taubman as a scape goat. I only wish they'ed sell the West Hartford portion of the mall to a tax exempt organization.. I know that's what I'd do.
Funny though how Claire Feldman was just as happy to take their money to help fund the Conard grad party.
Here's ad hominem for ya...You are such a bunch of freaking hypocrites. Have a nice day.
Judy and Zach,
OK, I'm getting bored with all of this. I respect your opinion regarding BBS and acknowledge your right to actively campaign against the development. My main point all along is that I think the anti-BBS position was tainted by all the personal attacks made against people who supported BBS and your posts have only reaffirmed my opinion. I think pro-BBS support increased this past referendum because 1) Westfarms and the plaintiffs tried to hide the fact that Westfarms was financing the suits and 2) people were turned off by the personal attacks made by your group on town leaders. I think your group would have done better had it stuck to problems with the development itself instead of focusing on the people who supported it.
If you really believe that the TC and others acted unethically, then you have several options. You can file complaints with the town ethics commission; the state ethics commission, since many of the people you accused are active in state government; or the state bar association, since many of the people are lawyers. By not filing complaints you accusations seem nothing more than sour grapes. You can also actively oppose re-election of the TC. Its always easier to sit on the sidelines and attack.
I'm sure you don't know me. I was not active in the debate. I just stumbled upon this website when I was searching for the BBS site (ie, I did not know that it was bluebacksquare.com). I honestly do not think that it is being "immature" by not giving my name. The truth is I'm sure my skin is not as thick as the TC and TM and I would prefer not to be subject to your wrath.
You have yet to acuuratley discount one claim that either Judy or I have made.
Don't worry, it's not just you, who happened to stumble onto the site. The Town Council hasn't countered them either.
In every interview, Mayor Slifka calls the lawsuits laughable/a joke/not lawful. But he never said why. If it's such a joke to him, wouldn't he, as a lawyer, be able to say why?
And don't forget...every second spent with AD-HOMINEM ATTACKS ON WESTFARMS, is a second not spent by the BBS people talking about how great they think BBS is. Why is that?
dear "anonymous"
thanks - I'll take you up on the offer and file complaints to the bar.. like that will do any good.
as for the town ethics commission - that's a joke right? the perpetrators were/are on the town board of ethics. LOL
The state ethics commission only deals with state officials..and Sullivan's actions although unethical (supporting a no-bid deal) are not covered by state statute.
I don't know if I'll oppose re-election of the esteemed TC - they should be made to stay and clean up their mess, when taxes go double digit and traffic becomes unmanageable I want them to be there taking the heat.
Sour Grapes? I think not. This town will get exactly what it's apathetic little hearts deserve. As for the others who were so easily brainwashed into voting for this awful deal, they too will get the Crate and Barrel they so dearly wanted.
As for personal attacks in the Spotlight and elsewhere.. they were not personal attacks they were exposing the truth about our "esteemed" leaders. Oh but I guess you don't think people ought to know the truth. We did stick to the issues .. the issues were the deal makers and the no-bid back door done deal, that was crafted way back in 2001. The issue was not Taubman and competition, or mall money (as if BBS, LLC and deWaal money is any better)- they are both out of state millionaires fighting over our town so that argument was entirely bogus. Unfortunately the little guy is the one that loses.
If it's any consolation to you - I am bored with you as well..
I personally don't care who you are - it's too bad though that you don't feel confident enough in your opinion to attach it to your name.
Post a Comment