How can anyone trust Mayor Hutchinson?
amazing

Waterloo, IL

#21 Jun 10, 2009
wow you all are just so ignorant its scary..and jsut to make a point..the validity of the agreement was never in question and it is actually a valid, legal agreement. what was disputed was the cities authority to sign such an agreement. Any other city would kill to have an agreement that was so tilted in favor of the city..

that's the funny thing about your lies they just don't hold water which is why no one bites
Frenchie

Saint Louis, MO

#22 Jun 11, 2009
To "amazing". You and your hardcore Niemietz and Hutchinson followers are amazing. You call us "ignorant" and then in the same sentence have the nerve to say "it is actually a valid, legal agreement". I find it "amazing" that you believe you are smarter than a federal judge!
dude

Saint Louis, MO

#23 Jun 11, 2009
It is. The case, the only case ever ruled this way, was that non-home rule cities don't have the ability to enter into development agreements. Which they always do, and they always have.

It's a case of a lower court making a dumb ruling that will have to get overturned at some point, and it will.

And where do you get Federal Judge? It hasn't even gone to an appellate judge yet.
terry

Columbia, IL

#24 Jun 11, 2009
it was tried in east st louis at the federal court house dude.
amazing

Waterloo, IL

#25 Jun 11, 2009
but you see you don't even understand what was ruled on...the agreement was fine..it was a loophole having to do with home rule that the U5 seized on and pushed. Do you really believe all those lawyers drafted an invalid agreement..give them some credit. Stop listening to only one side and do some research and maybe you will change your mind..like I did
Frenchie

Saint Louis, MO

#26 Jun 11, 2009
To Amazing - Well the U5 must have been a pretty brillant bunch to have found such a loophole. Too bad one of them is gone. But your comments demonstrate your lack of understanding - the federal judge who ruled the agreement was invalid is a highly respected federal judge and it is extremely unlikely his decision will be overturned. I believe Tom Adams is a good guy he was just doing what he was told by a Mayor that wanted this development at any and all costs - and so the Council did its usual rubber stamping act and the City ended up with a one-sided and invalid agreement.
Think Local

Millstadt, IL

#27 Jun 11, 2009
recall the mayor wrote:
you will see the proof in the higher taxes we all will have to pay to develop this area.. infrastructure as well as increase school taxes oh and lets not forget the increase in the city budget for the tif funded development. more police more city employees all who will have to be paid with the increase of taxes. sales tax in ill is more than missouri and if we only have to drive 3 miles more then we will, while we are over there might as well fill up the gas tank since it is 15 cents cheaper a gallon for the same fuel. makes a lot of sense to me but i guess i'm one of a very few that likes to keep some money in my pocket. would love to move but the housing market in monroe county is stifled by the taxes which keep going up just to keep the undesirables out. lived here for 40+ yrs and have never seen a decrease in taxes.
As a local business owner, I feel the need to respond personally to this post. First of all, I'd like to direct your attention to a movement in Monroe County called: Think Monroe County First. http://www.thinkmonroecountyfirst.com . I also feel the need to correct your statement about sales tax. Sales tax in Monroe County is only 6.5%. Tax on the other side of the river is over 7%(at least and I'm thinking its closer to 8%- definitely over 8% in the city of St. Louis). And, you aren't driving 3 miles to pay $.15 less for gas. You are actually driving about 12 to 15 miles round trip. If you choose to spend your money across the river, that's your choice. However, the sales tax you pay stays across the river. The businesses in our county are owned and run by people who live in this community, who own homes in this community, pay taxes in this community, raise their children and send them to school here, employee people who live and raise their children here, they pay taxes through their business, property taxes, they also donate their time and money to community organizations because they are asked to do so and because they want to do so. Don't think for a minute that the Khoury League is going to go across the river to South County and ask their businesses for sponsorships. Or, that anyone is going to care if the Rotary, Optimists, Lions, Kiwanis or anyone else needs help raising funds for their programs. I find it so frustrating that people complain about petty things but are willing to take their money and spend it not only in a different county but an entirely different state. I do encourage you to do some research and check out the website. It benefits everyone in our community when you choose to spend locally whenever possible.
John

Waterloo, IL

#28 Jun 11, 2009
Think Local - I agree with everything you said 100%. The problem with Columbia Crossing is that you will raise sales tax an additional 1% to 7.5% and none of that will go into our community. It will just go into Grewe's pocket. Worse yet, the pressure from this huge strip mall will kill other retail outlets on Main Street, the Marketplace, and in Waterloo that do contribute their fair share of taxes. Finally the TIF district that is created will rebate all the property taxes to Grewe instead of going into our community. The citizens get extra crime, traffic, closure of local business; and Grewe gets all the tax dollars. And all these tax rebates keep going to Grewe for the next 25 years! At least that was the agreement before the lawsuit killed it.
John

Waterloo, IL

#29 Jun 11, 2009
Public tax dollars should be used for the public good, not to put into a developer's pockets. Especially one like Grewe.
Cutter

Waterloo, IL

#30 Jun 11, 2009
Getting back to the topic, I would like to point out that Mayor Kevin Hutchinson has a long and extensive track record of deceit and manipulation. Some examples:

- Prior to the Columbia Crossing referendum, Kevin claims he really wants to know how citizens feel about the project. Sounds good! But then he rejects the referendum question 850 citizens signed a petition for, and replaces it with one of his own – one that starts with “In order to ensure the future economic success of Columbia...". Whether out of stupidity or arrogance, Conrad and Ebersohl and Niemietz give their rubber stamp approval to this completely manipulative referendum question.

- Kevin, counting on voter apathy and confident his manipulative question will succeed, publicly states whatever the outcome, he will follow the voters’ wishes. Another lie. The referendum fails and Kevin continues to advocate for his primary constituent - Terry Grewe, even after Grewe sues the City! Obviously Kevin never intended to oppose Columbia Crossing no matter how the citizens voted.

- To garner support for Columbia Crossing, Kevin promises a 35%“cut-through” for the school district, even though such a “cut-through” is prohibited by IL state law.

- Information about an Attorney General’s investigation of the City is covered up and not provided to the City Council. Kevin claims innocence and that he was not involved in any cover up, and states that in fact he passed the information on to City Admin Anthony Traxler. But Mr. Traxler says he never received anything from Kevin. Ooops – someone’s telling a lie! Next time better get your stories straight.

- In order for Kevin to get his board appointee approved, a compromise is reached and Kevin promises to appoint Wyona Farmer to the next position on the Library Board. Another promise Kevin never intended to keep. To this day Ms. Farmer still has not been appointed.

- Kevin violates the city’s own ordinances and has Rita Diehl investigated over her opposition to Columbia Crossing, at taxpayer expense, and in insult to every citizen’s civil liberty.

This is just a sampling from what’s known publicly – but if this isn’t enough for you to figure it out ….
xxcolumbian

Saint Louis, MO

#31 Jun 11, 2009
your facts are wrong..sorry John.
amazing

Waterloo, IL

#32 Jun 12, 2009
- the question was taken directly from the cities 20 year Master Plan and I believe everyone voted to put it on the ballot
- It was a 50/50 split on the referendum
- the cut-thru is valid if done correctly..which was planned and also why EVERY group that reviewed it was in favor except for one group of 5
- The AG thing is a joke..read the letter from AG resolving the city of any wrongdoing..you guys never seem to mention that
- I don't blame Kevin for not appointing WF to the library board after what her and her hubby had done and said about him and the city. Those appointments are a mayors prerogative.
- the way I understand it Kevin had the attorney investigate whether it was a crime to impersonate a city official..NOT her directly. HUGE DIFFERENCE

Just like before the election you guys pick and chose the sentences and facts you want to complain about and never look at the big picture. Probably why all of you got trounced at the polls
Levi

Saint Louis, MO

#33 Jun 12, 2009
A cut through is not valid according to Illinois State law, hence the reason why Bill Phelps stopped endorsing it. Ask him and he will tell you this to be true.
Cutter

Waterloo, IL

#36 Jun 18, 2009
Kevin Hutchinson – you are truly “amazing”. Only “amazing” you could distort the facts the way you have above. Poor Columbia to have a Mayor like you. To your points:

- the referendum question was not taken “directly” from the Master Plan, and frankly I don’t care if it was taken from the Holy Bible, that is no excuse to manipulate the voters the way you tried to do.
- even with your manipulative question designed to fool voters, the referendum still failed, in addition 3 anti-Columbia Crossing candidates beat 3 pro-Columbia Crossing candidates – Kevin you lied to all citizens as you know you never had any intention to follow the voters’ wishes.
- Kevin you and others told so many people that the school would get a 35% cut-thru that you can’t allow your lies to be exposed now, but more people are realizing this – see Levi’s post regarding Bill Phelps above.
- the AG ruled the way they did because you covered up the investigation and withheld providing information to them
- no more needs to be said on this one – anyone who even remotely knows Wyona and Alan Farmer know them to be extremely intelligent, wonderful, dedicated people that would be a credit on any committee they served – this was just hatefulness on the part of you/Niemietz/Ebersohl.
- sorry but I don’t think the city would have needed to have TWO ATTORNEYs make multiple phone calls – this was absolutely about Rita Diehl “directly”– otherwise someone on staff could’ve just looked up the state statute.

You and Niemietz and Eberhole have certainly proven the old adage “some people can rationalize anything!”

Since: Jun 09

Saint Charles, MO

#37 Jun 19, 2009
Jonas wrote:
This all pales though in comparison to the way Kevin tried to take advantage and manipulate money from Diane Smith - that makes him a flat out crook.
Can you explain what this situation is?

Also the Meyers have filed for a minor subdivision plat. Which to my understanding is what Diane Smith was told she would have had to do.
The Hard Fact

Britton, MI

#38 Jun 20, 2009
Look, it may not be right but Life and what's right are two different things. Any City, Columbia Included, you must find the right people in the right positions to get things done.
Business is Business and the greener the incentive, the faster the grass grows !!
Jonas

Waterloo, IL

#39 Jun 24, 2009
Nice post Cutter! I think the saddest thing isn't Kevin's obvious history of deceit, it's that Columbia's so-called leading citizens, folks who know Kevin well like Dave Wittenaur, Ron Langhans, Bill Phelps, Mike Conrad, and of course Niemietz and Ebersohl, have been such strong advocates for him. Obviously they don't place a high priority on personal integrity.
Jonas

Waterloo, IL

#40 Jun 24, 2009
Levi - to answer your question. Diane Smith was trying to sell her land along Ghent Road. She was selling lots for $100,000 and she had buyers for this amount. But she ran into trouble with the City over subdivision and platting complications. So Kevin visits with Diane and says "If you'll take $60,000 I'll make your troubles go away." Columbia has its own version of Gov Rod with Kevin - abusing his power to rip off a fellow citizen for $40,000. It's so very wrong.
dude

Millstadt, IL

#41 Jun 24, 2009
prove it.
Garth

Waterloo, IL

#42 Jun 24, 2009
Du DUde disprove it.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Columbia Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Tiny's skinny blonde bartender. 13 hr Rollo 16
Tax Hike 15 hr Richard Rollo 4
Topics is a weird place! Fri Mikey 39
Security lights Fri Sho nuff 10
Red night gown Aug 18 The real Mike Wilson 2
Racism? (Feb '14) Aug 17 Resident 91
Hongry Aug 12 Richard Rollo 31

Columbia Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Columbia Mortgages