Authority gain is McKeesport's loss, official saysSeems to me that if this money were to be divided with others someone would have had to keep a record of all the contracts, the money involved and any change orders. Afterall, crooks usually don't trust other crooks.
Who would have been the most obvious person to do the record keeping? Maybe it was more than one person. Who would have had access to the records? Would they have had to give money to any particular political party so this money could be passed on to other politicians as a political donation? If so, what political party would have been most likely to receive the payments? Maybe that Libertarian Party, or the one that runs Gus Hall for president every year.
If I were a Civics teacher my first day of class would be teaching the children what scoundrels our elected officials and government workers are. I would use West Mifflin, McKeesport and Clairton as examples to prove my point.
February 23, 2012 5:00 AM
City solicitor Jason Elash, however, recently echoed Mayor Mike Cherepko's assertion that the city had to accept the prepayment of the loan.
"There was no provision in there to prohibit [the authority] from prepaying the loan," Mr. Elash said.
But Mr. Malinchak said that, according to a legal rule known as the "perfect tender in time rule," when loan documents are silent on the issue of prepayment, the borrower may not be permitted to make prepayments of the loan. The rule applies to borrowers who promise to repay loans in installments at specified times or at a specified date. It means that borrowers have no right to compel a creditor to accept prepayment because they are bound by the payment dates in the loan, he said.