I’m just tired of every time someone holds the critics critically it suddenly becomes about how they’re being picked on instead of someone exercising the same rights the critics are exercising. It’s not “us vs. them.” It’s just “us.”

I’m very apologetic that you think someone is corrupt in government, perhaps you should research this as another worthy piece of writing.

If we thought someone was corrupt we would have already pursued legal proceedings to bring justice to an injustice, but when it comes to government spending PROVING corruption is quite difficult.

The majority of citizens don’t believe there is mass corruption at city hall and they’re tired of hearing the sky is falling every time people question those who seem to think there’s a sinister plot behind every city decision. A good and active group of citizens watching the government is vital for the accountability of our government but someone that only thinks the fix is in on everything does nothing but feed the people they’re critical of when they say that it’s just something made by up by radicals.

The majority of people do believe there is a better way than what we’ve had up to this point. That doesn’t mean the people in place are corrupt. Perhaps there are just better people to get the job done.

As has been proven already with the audit and the mismanagement of city funds which should have been paid into the pension fund, I believe the direct quote above is a ill fated attempt at making people who are truly concerned with how government operates, sound a bit contrite and to belittle them for their work behind the scenes.
A witch hunt went out with the Salem, MA burning at the stake days.

People who are concerned with how government operates and spends the tax revenue it receives are quite patriotic and should be commended by everyone as they LOOK out for the BEST interest of how tax dollars are funneled through the system. The insinuation that they are anything but shows some real character flaws. I don’t hear any of these groups begging government to keep funneling them money so they can continue to operate, NO these groups do so on there OWN dollars and use the resources of which they do have quite wisely in there investigative areas of how government can become more efficient.

As for Dan Chiles and his involvement in the square renovation, to think that he alone could instigate the means by which some of these federal groups are now researching the money being allocated to our square, makes me laugh so hard that my ribs hurt. Anytime money is being allocated from the federal trough to reconstruct anything there is a federal watchdog group ready to pounce on the item to see if it is a political payback or something that is drastically needed to improve existing infrastructure. In the case of the square I believe several flags went flying especially since our elected city leaders and those not elected but drawing a salary(supposedly to represent our best interest) tied the redevelopment of the Heers Tower into the square redevelopment. This smacks of a political payback and should be investigated and should have even been questioned before the deal was sign, sealed, and delivered.

Just my take, however the person who asked for the e-mail exchange is within their right to do so IF Mr. Chiles tried to use his position as a means to prevent or prohibit this redevelopment or if he used ‘like’ to try to promote this redevelopment