Thursday, May 10, 2012

IS THERE A PROBLEM?

Two comments both of course from “anonymous”; the first one to Plaintalker II and the second one to this blog gives cause for concern. It is most likely that the author is the same person’
Anonymous May muhammad is dave wynn's flunky and the mayor's personal protector. The budget should be checked for how many jobs he is actually being paid for. I know of at least 3. His true intentions were revealed when he tried to chase away QCBL 4-6 year olds from practing Tball on a school field where rec. was using only one of the 2 fields. Does that mean his fight is not with Ms Glencamp Daniel but with the kiddies. How sad is that. I'm sure the mayor gave him brownie points for that too. (Plaintalker II)
Anonymous said...May 9, 2012 7:14 PM mr. muhammad is a paid employee for Hannah Atkins. He wasn't down there out of the goodness of his heart. Someone needs to check (Berry) how many positions he is actually getting paid for. I'll give a hint, baseball, Hannah Atkins and the boxing gym on 5th Street that gets money from the City but that's another dark story.
It's absolutely a head shaker that everyone around knows how wrong recreation is and NOBODY can or will do anything about. The recreation supporters continue to be duped and follow blindly like they have no principles or ethics. It's just so sad for our children to witness this. But I still make sure they see it so they can do something better when they become adults.
I believe that somewhere in the City Code it states that nobody can hold more than one paying city position concurrently. If this is true; the charge that one individual is holding at least 2 paying City jobs is disturbing.
I have no way of confirming the facts although since both the baseball league and Hannah Atkins are Recreational Division enterprises it should be possible to OPRA that information.
Also the charge that the boxing gym on 5th St which is a private enterprise is receiving city funds. That would be an outside contract that would have to be approved by Council vote in the same manner as all other vendors.
Is Recreation acting independent of the City Government? Is city money being used to pay a specific employee? Are these matters that Council should have answers before finalizing the Budget?
And most important, is a section head in violation of the city code?
Delete

4 comments:

  1. You're right, this may be something the council needs to look into further. This administration and her flunkies have never balked at breaking the rules. If this is so, then we need to see how deep this goes and it does bring up additional ethics questions, if this mayor was aware of this and did not put an end to it.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Do your research you will find that none of this is true. Your anonymous commentator is none other than the person that holds a recreation title, but works in another department. NOW do your research on that council member's I bet they will not. WHY? because she is their friend. How illegal is that. holding a current title but not doing that job. Once this can of worms open you will see the snakes coming out.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I also forgot to mention council member's (new dems) allowed that to save her job during the last layoffs. Come out snakes peak your head. See one thing I was always told when you are pointing the finger one place that other finger is pointing back at you.

    ReplyDelete
  4. One of the problems with posting anonymous comments is that they may be falacious as well as malicious in intent regarding charges of improprieties.

    Likewise rebuttal comments also anonymous have by themselves the same degree of validity; zero.

    It is hope that some identifiable peson with knowledge will respond.

    ReplyDelete