Comments
141 - 160 of 205 Comments Last updated Nov 5, 2013
Troublemaker

Pittsburgh, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#142
Feb 19, 2013
 
Nanner nanner boo boo wrote:
<quoted text>

Unhappy because the legal system worked against "us" ? No, just unhappy that a few people were able to bastardize and bully the "legal system" to their favor, taking a neighbor-neghbor issue and making it a city wide issue.
Those people are the prime example of what is wrong with society today.
You can bet your arse that if the council had voted the ban out the lawyer lady and her pals would have been appealing it to higher courts and screaming about the vote being "fixed"....much as some of them are (anonymously) already crying "foul" saying that the mayor hasn't signed the ordinance yet.
Talk about a bunch of crybabies.
How long have you lived in McKeesport?

City Hall and Council are nothing but "a few people who bastardize and bully the "legal system" to their favor." They've been doing it for decades.

And yes, if the council had voted the ban out the lawyer lady and her pals would have been appealing it to higher courts and screaming about the vote being "fixed". Thank God for that. It's the only redress the residents have against the horse$h!t that goes on here.

Do you think people aren't trying to find some legal recourse to fight the outrageous sewer bills? Or do you work for the MACM?

The legal system is there for everybody, not just for those who City Hall and their buddies think it is. Which side are you on?
MACM and City Exposed

Mckeesport, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#143
Feb 19, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Troublemaker wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you think people aren't trying to find some legal recourse to fight the outrageous sewer bills? Or do you work for the MACM?
The legal system is there for everybody, not just for those who City Hall and their buddies think it is. Which side are you on?
I am on my side and the side of all abused sewage rate payers and all communities unfairly impacted by the exorbitant sewage rate increases.

You are so correct. That is exactly what Mayor Cherepko and his controlled MACM board and City Council did with enacting the unfair and illegal HOST FEE. They used the legal system and force of ordinance for City benefit ONLY.

Only Mayor Cherepko and City benefited from the $1 Million host fee. All the other MACM network communities must pay for it. Mayor Cherepko avers that the source of the $1 million is not from the sewage fee rates, but cannot explain the source of the $ 1 million?

Do you realize that the $1 million host fee is like a 45% increase in City property taxes that other communities and the City are forced to pay for via increased sewage rates? What clever and covert approach to increase City revenue and to go on record of not increase property taxes!

The other communities see right through this scam and may seek a legal remedy like they should. No one can ever predict how the court will rule (O. J. Simpson). But, it seems like a no brainer that Mayor Cherepko, the fired MACM superintendent, and the beleaguered Chairman of the MACM will be subpoenaed to testify in an anticipated legal action by the adversely impacted communities.
Could this be a class action case?

Senator Brewster may be provided a public opportunity to explain why he frequently referred to the MACM as a cash cow for the City? Millions over the years have flowed to the City from the MACM to circumvent unmanageable deficits. These millions came from all the communities who pay increased sewage fees.

Strange, only the city benefits but other communities are forced to pay increased fees to subsidize city taxes for years. Time will tell if this ends in courts or the other communities continue to subsidize the City. We the citizens of the City thank these communities for their generosity without on representation on the MACM board.

Rumor has it that the MACM “brain trust” is working on other schemes and configurations to provide a much needed annual cash flow to the City. It seems like MACM and the City are anticipating in coming in second best in court, if legally pursed by the outlying communities?
Helter Skelter

Pittsburgh, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#144
Feb 19, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Troublemaker wrote:
<quoted text>

The legal system is there for everybody, not just for those who City Hall and their buddies think it is.
Agree 100%

However, lawyer lady is just as guilty of manipulating the (corrupt) system for her own gains.

Funny how you say that SHE has the "right" to fight for her opinion but anyone that feels different from her is "the corrupt system".

Paranoia at its finest.

Continuing the corruption will not change things.

Nor will Topix. LOL
Helter Skelter

Pittsburgh, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#145
Feb 19, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Troublemaker wrote:
<quoted text>
How long have you lived in McKeesport?
City Hall and Council are nothing but "a few people who bastardize and bully the "legal system" to their favor." They've been doing it for decades.
Long enough to know that McKeesport's council doesnt work any different than any other council in any other city across the US.

Its all about "who you know" EVERYWHERE. DUH.

No matter WHO is "in power", there will be someone who says they are corrupt, etc etc etc.

The way to change that or at least keep up with that is to be vocal PUBLICLY and GET INVOLVED not by anonymously slandering people with half truths or even outright lies on a crap board like Topix.

As far as that $2 million.......were you at the last meeting so you could hear the mayor explain in simple terms how that money was used to pay down our (then) HUGE monthly debt?

It doesnt take a rocket scientist (or a lady lawyer) to figure out that we have to pay for what we have already spent money on...THEN see what is left over....pay off our debt first, then but those shiny new shoes.

Our monthly debt was somthing like $187k. Simple bank interest, assuming 2%, is $40k a month. Any other sort of "investment" would have had risks.

SIMPLE MATH for anyone who puts down their "I hate anyone in power" signs long enough to think about it rationally.

I dont believe that it in any way causes a back-door tax....but ok, lets say that you are right and it does......SOMEONE HAS TO PAY FOR THINGS IN THE CITY ANYWAYS!!!! DUH! We the taxpayer have to pay for stuff!

Unless the mayor and/or council are pocketing the fees, WHO CARES!!!! We would pay it anyways.....call it "tax" or call it "fee" or whatever.....the net result is the same. Things the city needs get paid for and we do not go bankrupt.

SO many entitlement fools these days thinking the roads are paved, snow is plowed, safety is kept, renzie is kept open etc etc for free.....

The problem is very simple...we live in a city where at least half the people who live here DO NOT PAY TAXES. WE pay their taxes.

The majority of the people in this city requiring

The money has to come from somewhere.

If its such a huge amount of money (the sewage bill), try crapping in a bag and throwing it out that way for a month...flush once a day, and use the showers at the Y.

THAT will "show them".....LOL
Help Me Understand

Mckeesport, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#146
Feb 19, 2013
 
Helter Skelter wrote:
<quoted text>

As far as that $2 million.......were you at the last meeting so you could hear the mayor explain in simple terms how that money was used to pay down our (then) HUGE monthly debt?
No I was not at the last meeting. Please explain the $2 million and how it was used to pay down on huge montly debt on what? Where did the $2 million come from? I know the host fee was ONLY $1 million.
Helter Skelter

Pittsburgh, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#147
Feb 20, 2013
 
Help Me Understand wrote:
<quoted text>
No I was not at the last meeting. Please explain the $2 million and how it was used to pay down on huge montly debt on what? Where did the $2 million come from? I know the host fee was ONLY $1 million.
Sorry, typo on my part...$1m

It was used to pay down the debts we already had incurred and were paying on. Mayor siad they paid off some debt and reduced our monthly payout.

The specifics will be in the minutes, when they are published.
Troublemaker

Pittsburgh, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#148
Feb 20, 2013
 
Helter Skelter wrote:
<quoted text>
Long enough to know that McKeesport's council doesnt work any different than any other council in any other city across the US.
Its all about "who you know" EVERYWHERE. DUH.
No matter WHO is "in power", there will be someone who says they are corrupt, etc etc etc.
The way to change that or at least keep up with that is to be vocal PUBLICLY and GET INVOLVED not by anonymously slandering people with half truths or even outright lies on a crap board like Topix.
As far as that $2 million.......were you at the last meeting so you could hear the mayor explain in simple terms how that money was used to pay down our (then) HUGE monthly debt?
It doesnt take a rocket scientist (or a lady lawyer) to figure out that we have to pay for what we have already spent money on...THEN see what is left over....pay off our debt first, then but those shiny new shoes.
Our monthly debt was somthing like $187k. Simple bank interest, assuming 2%, is $40k a month. Any other sort of "investment" would have had risks.
SIMPLE MATH for anyone who puts down their "I hate anyone in power" signs long enough to think about it rationally.
I dont believe that it in any way causes a back-door tax....but ok, lets say that you are right and it does......SOMEONE HAS TO PAY FOR THINGS IN THE CITY ANYWAYS!!!! DUH! We the taxpayer have to pay for stuff!
Unless the mayor and/or council are pocketing the fees, WHO CARES!!!! We would pay it anyways.....call it "tax" or call it "fee" or whatever.....the net result is the same. Things the city needs get paid for and we do not go bankrupt.
SO many entitlement fools these days thinking the roads are paved, snow is plowed, safety is kept, renzie is kept open etc etc for free.....
The problem is very simple...we live in a city where at least half the people who live here DO NOT PAY TAXES. WE pay their taxes.
The majority of the people in this city requiring
The money has to come from somewhere.
If its such a huge amount of money (the sewage bill), try crapping in a bag and throwing it out that way for a month...flush once a day, and use the showers at the Y.
THAT will "show them".....LOL
Take the caps lock off and settle down. Maybe you've lived in town a little too long.

I've lived all over the country in major cities and small towns where I've been either politically active or kept abreast of local politics.

Every other council in any other city across the US is NOT like McKeesport, Allegheny County, or Pennsylvania.

It is NOT all about "who you know" EVERYWHERE.

Because you have not had the experience otherwise, you will say things like "No matter WHO is "in power", there will be someone who says they are corrupt." McKeesport had NOTHING like the corruption in Youngstown and that place got cleaned up and out pretty damn good.

Who is slandering who? Aren't you one of Jimmy's supporters who says he wasn't slandering the lawyer on facebook but it's slander here? Again with the both ways.

There's more truth being told on topix than what the mayor said about the debt at the last meeting.

You should care whether it's called a fee or a tax or if it's going into somebody's pocket. They're playing a shell game with ALL the money in town.
IF YOU KNEW ANYTHING

Pittsburgh, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#149
Feb 20, 2013
 
Troublemaker wrote:
<quoted text>
Take the caps lock off and settle down.
Wow. REALLY? You sure do live up to your name. Nothing but a trouble maker....PROBABLY A LAWYER.
Troublemaker wrote:
I've lived all over the country in major cities and small towns where I've been either politically active or kept abreast of local politics.
Every other council in any other city across the US is NOT like McKeesport, Allegheny County, or Pennsylvania.
It is NOT all about "who you know" EVERYWHERE.
Because you have not had the experience otherwise, you will say things like "No matter WHO is "in power", there will be someone who says they are corrupt." McKeesport had NOTHING like the corruption in Youngstown and that place got cleaned up and out pretty damn good.
WOW! Such a traveler! In order to get a real picture of the goings on in ANY city or town, you would need to be involved for a good amount of time. One would question why you lived in so many places for such short a time as to be able to sample every city and town across the states....on the run maybe?

And you must be retired, able to spend hours at council meetings across the US and to get "deeply involved". LOL

Please, get over yourself.

You are an anonymous "expert" on Topix, no where else.

And not even a good expert on Topix, because if you were, you would just browse any of the hundreds of other Topix forums for different cities and you see the same exact "the machine" postings as you see here.....people cock-sure that THEIR town is corrupt....simply because they disagree (more likely do not UNDERSTAND) the goings on in their city.

Topix is FULL of forums like this where people get diarrhea of the mouth anonymously and accuse good people of all sorts of things.

Do SOME important things get "exposed" once in a while ? Sure. Sling crap long enough and you are sure to hit something once in a while.

But you do way more damage than good here, Troublemaker. You accuse but have no PROOF. Just thoughts from your troubled mind.

All one needs to do is read the newspaper and see what goes on in various cities and states and in fact our NATION. It is ALL ABOUT "who you know" . Networking. Getting involved, meeting people. It has always been that way and will be forever more.

Thats how things get done.

Sometimes people take advantage of that networking. Yes.

Did I say I agreed that was the way it should be?

No.

But one would be naive to believe that our little, almost dead city is any worse off in politics than any other city in the US.
Troublemaker wrote:
There's more truth being told on topix than what the mayor said about the debt at the last meeting.
You should care whether it's called a fee or a tax or if it's going into somebody's pocket. They're playing a shell game with ALL the money in town.
If you know for certain that there is one or more people in our government stealing from us, then you have the OBLIGATION to bring that to light.

And I am not talking about posting wide-spraying opinions or suppositions about what you THINK is going on. GO PUBLIC and BRING THE REAL TRUTH OUT. Pretending like you are making a difference by "exposing" people anonymously on Topix is just ridiculous.

Oh, sorry....you also think that you will somehow mysteriously vanish due to "the machine" if you try to fight for what is right.

Wow....TALK ABOUT PARANOID.

If you really cared at all you would find a way to go public with the info and truly expose the problem in a CONSTRUCTIVE way.

Topix crap doesn't count.

Thing is, you are no different than any of the anonymous fools here who are posting fairy tales and dreams and conspiracy theories, only because you lack the understanding and full picture that you would have if you TRULY DID know as much about local government as you claim to.

It says a lot about someone who makes accusations about someone else, using that person's name but not their own.

It says a lot.
Troublemaker

Pittsburgh, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#150
Feb 20, 2013
 
IF YOU KNEW ANYTHING wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow. REALLY? You sure do live up to your name. Nothing but a trouble maker....PROBABLY A LAWYER.
<quoted text>
WOW! Such a traveler! In order to get a real picture of the goings on in ANY city or town, you would need to be involved for a good amount of time. One would question why you lived in so many places for such short a time as to be able to sample every city and town across the states....on the run maybe?
And you must be retired, able to spend hours at council meetings across the US and to get "deeply involved". LOL
Please, get over yourself.
You are an anonymous "expert" on Topix, no where else.
And not even a good expert on Topix, because if you were, you would just browse any of the hundreds of other Topix forums for different cities and you see the same exact "the machine" postings as you see here.....people cock-sure that THEIR town is corrupt....simply because they disagree (more likely do not UNDERSTAND) the goings on in their city.
Topix is FULL of forums like this where people get diarrhea of the mouth anonymously and accuse good people of all sorts of things.
Do SOME important things get "exposed" once in a while ? Sure. Sling crap long enough and you are sure to hit something once in a while.
But you do way more damage than good here, Troublemaker. You accuse but have no PROOF. Just thoughts from your troubled mind.
All one needs to do is read the newspaper and see what goes on in various cities and states and in fact our NATION. It is ALL ABOUT "who you know" . Networking. Getting involved, meeting people. It has always been that way and will be forever more.
Thats how things get done.
Sometimes people take advantage of that networking. Yes.
Did I say I agreed that was the way it should be?
No.
But one would be naive to believe that our little, almost dead city is any worse off in politics than any other city in the US.
<quoted text>
If you know for certain that there is one or more people in our government stealing from us, then you have the OBLIGATION to bring that to light.
And I am not talking about posting wide-spraying opinions or suppositions about what you THINK is going on. GO PUBLIC and BRING THE REAL TRUTH OUT. Pretending like you are making a difference by "exposing" people anonymously on Topix is just ridiculous.
Oh, sorry....you also think that you will somehow mysteriously vanish due to "the machine" if you try to fight for what is right.
Wow....TALK ABOUT PARANOID.
If you really cared at all you would find a way to go public with the info and truly expose the problem in a CONSTRUCTIVE way.
Topix crap doesn't count.
Thing is, you are no different than any of the anonymous fools here who are posting fairy tales and dreams and conspiracy theories, only because you lack the understanding and full picture that you would have if you TRULY DID know as much about local government as you claim to.
It says a lot about someone who makes accusations about someone else, using that person's name but not their own.
It says a lot.
WOW. Talk about diarrhea mouth. You're posting on here so that's makes you part of YOUR problem and rant.

Thanks for the lawyer compliment, but I'm not one nor even a paralegal. Not retired either. I've learned too much about municipal law, property rights, free speech, and due process under the 5th and 14th Amendments since moving to McKeesport.

You need to find out about White Oak and their manager. The Snooze quoted him saying he serves at council's pleasure. Whether they're kicking him to the curb for nefarious or legitimate reasons, he at least behaved appropriately. That's how it's done ELSEWHERE.
IF YOU KNEW ANYTHING

Pittsburgh, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#151
Feb 21, 2013
 
Troublemaker wrote:
<quoted text>
WOW. Talk about diarrhea mouth. You're posting on here so that's makes you part of YOUR problem and rant.
Thanks for the lawyer compliment, but I'm not one nor even a paralegal. Not retired either. I've learned too much about municipal law, property rights, free speech, and due process under the 5th and 14th Amendments since moving to McKeesport.
You need to find out about White Oak and their manager. The Snooze quoted him saying he serves at council's pleasure. Whether they're kicking him to the curb for nefarious or legitimate reasons, he at least behaved appropriately. That's how it's done ELSEWHERE.
LOL Witty reply (not)...should get you tons of phantom "helpful" votes here....LOL

The lawyer comment was by no means a compliment. But apparently you think it was, so that helps us figure out how you operate.

For someone who considers herself so worldly, you sure do not understand much.

"He serves at council's pleasure".......It's not supposed to be about the mayor succumbing to every one of council's whims without discussion or push back.....THAT is what leads to problems and mismanagement. There are SUPPOSED to be checks and balances and differing opinions so as to look at ALL sides. Otherwsie we could be at the mercy of a tyranical council until re-election time.

"YES MEN" are not what McKeesport needs.

The Mayor isn't one..he speaks his mind and does what he thinks is the right thing to do within the powers that he has..... nor are a couple of our council members....they think openly and at least TRY to look at all sides.
U R A Bitter Pill

Belle Vernon, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#152
Feb 21, 2013
 
IF YOU KNEW ANYTHING wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL Witty reply (not)...should get you tons of phantom "helpful" votes here....LOL
The lawyer comment was by no means a compliment. But apparently you think it was, so that helps us figure out how you operate.
For someone who considers herself so worldly, you sure do not understand much.
"He serves at council's pleasure".......It's not supposed to be about the mayor succumbing to every one of council's whims without discussion or push back.....THAT is what leads to problems and mismanagement. There are SUPPOSED to be checks and balances and differing opinions so as to look at ALL sides. Otherwsie we could be at the mercy of a tyranical council until re-election time.
"YES MEN" are not what McKeesport needs.
The Mayor isn't one..he speaks his mind and does what he thinks is the right thing to do within the powers that he has..... nor are a couple of our council members....they think openly and at least TRY to look at all sides.
I agree that "YES MEN" are not what the city needs.
Ironic, don't you think, that the mayor has stated he will not endorse the 3 who supported the ban in the upcoming election?
There goes your argument for checks, balances and differing opinions.

As for the mayor succumbing to push back.......read the home rule charter.
Only council has the authority to enact ordinances.
The mayor can only sign or veto an ordinance passed by council. He did neither.
Had he vetoed it, a second vote would have had to be addressed at the next council meeting.
Because he did nothing, it was enacted by default after 10 days time.
Wouldn't want to alienate the support of voters on either side of this polarizing issue, would he?
And you ridicule the resident lawyers motives? Tsk Tsk Tsk.
Troublemaker

Pittsburgh, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#153
Feb 21, 2013
 
IF YOU KNEW ANYTHING wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL Witty reply (not)...should get you tons of phantom "helpful" votes here....LOL
The lawyer comment was by no means a compliment. But apparently you think it was, so that helps us figure out how you operate.
For someone who considers herself so worldly, you sure do not understand much.
"He serves at council's pleasure".......It's not supposed to be about the mayor succumbing to every one of council's whims without discussion or push back.....THAT is what leads to problems and mismanagement. There are SUPPOSED to be checks and balances and differing opinions so as to look at ALL sides. Otherwsie we could be at the mercy of a tyranical council until re-election time.
"YES MEN" are not what McKeesport needs.
The Mayor isn't one..he speaks his mind and does what he thinks is the right thing to do within the powers that he has..... nor are a couple of our council members....they think openly and at least TRY to look at all sides.
It's not important to me whether or how my comments are rated.

And I was being facetious about the lawyer comment. However, given your views about attorneys, I hope you don't find yourself in a position where you need one. Or maybe if you've been burned by one, you'll find one you can trust.

I'm not sure I'm following you about "Serving at council's pleasure". That was Jack Petro's reaction to White Oak removing him from his position as borough manager. If you go back and read my previous post, I was referring to the system working without the circus atmosphere found in McKeesport.

But if I understand "problems and mismanagement, checks and balances and differing opinions," etc., I agree with you. And I agree with you about YES MEN.

I didn't vote for the YES MEN on council. Did you?

But I don't think the mayor speaks his mind. He's a puppet, and the Puppet Master is putting words in his mouth. LOL
Need Enlightened

Mckeesport, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#154
Feb 21, 2013
 
Troublemaker wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't vote for the YES MEN on council. Did you?
But I don't think the mayor speaks his mind. He's a puppet, and the Puppet Master is putting words in his mouth. LOL
And would you respectfully provide a hint about who the Pupper Master might be?
Insider

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#155
Feb 21, 2013
 
The Puppet Master is none other than the leader of the decadent and morally bankrupt group that operates out of St Stephen's church... and Papa PittBull himself... Jim Miller
Pill box

Pittsburgh, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#156
Feb 21, 2013
 
U R A Bitter Pill wrote:
<quoted text>I agree that "YES MEN" are not what the city needs.
Ironic, don't you think, that the mayor has stated he will not endorse the 3 who supported the ban in the upcoming election?
There goes your argument for checks, balances and differing opinions.
He isn't making that statement based on just this one ordinance. In my opinion, he is making that statement based on how difficult the 3 are on EVERY topic that comes up....clinging to old complaints and bringing up the past when what this city needs is to move forward.

In any event, so what that the mayor said that? In fact, that IS The check and balance.....he can choose to not support them, and they can choose not to support HIM. It goes both ways, which is what you left out.
U R A Bitter Pill wrote:
As for the mayor succumbing to push back.......read the home rule charter.
Only council has the authority to enact ordinances.
The mayor can only sign or veto an ordinance passed by council. He did neither.
Had he vetoed it, a second vote would have had to be addressed at the next council meeting.
Because he did nothing, it was enacted by default after 10 days time.
So what? The net result is the same.

Vetoing the bill would have been saying that he doesnt agree with any of the ordinance in most folks eyes whereas he was looking for a middle-ground (which is not what the 3 or lawyer lady was interested in, am I wrong?).

His basically abstaining from the process nets the same result as signing it, but he doesnt have to put his signature on a flawed ordinance. Cant say as I blame him. No different that when certain council members abstain from voting.
U R A Bitter Pill wrote:
Wouldn't want to alienate the support of voters on either side of this polarizing issue, would he?
And you ridicule the resident lawyers motives? Tsk Tsk Tsk.
Let's see...as mayor he doesn't want to piss off EITHER side and find solutions to problems....sounds like what a mayor is SUPPOSED to do....finding middle ground. And you ridicule him. You wouldnt be happy unless he signed the ban....because its on your agenda.....if he had veto'd it you would be claiming here on Topix that it was fixed no matter what his motives were, even if only to bring it back in a month with changes to make it better represent ALL residents, not just the few with loudest mouths at council hearings. Am I wrong? Did I misread you?

In other words, they are "machine" and "Corrupt" as long as YOUR agenda isnt followed to the T.

LOL Talk about being a "bitter pill"
Greatest show on earth

Pittsburgh, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#157
Feb 21, 2013
 
Troublemaker wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not sure I'm following you about "Serving at council's pleasure". That was Jack Petro's reaction to White Oak removing him from his position as borough manager. If you go back and read my previous post, I was referring to the system working without the circus atmosphere found in McKeesport.
I guess I misunderstood your comment there, my apologies....The way I read it, you were advocating that kind of behavior (going along with council's whims) and suggesting that the mayor has the duty to go along with council's "pleasure".
Troublemaker wrote:
<quoted text>
But if I understand "problems and mismanagement, checks and balances and differing opinions," etc., I agree with you. And I agree with you about YES MEN.
I didn't vote for the YES MEN on council. Did you?
I guess it depends upon who you think the "yes men" are.

Seems like many here feel that if "their" agenda isnt agreed to or followed by a councilman, that councilman is a "yes man" for "the machine". But the ones that agree with their agenda are "upstanding and independent thinkers". LOL
Troublemaker wrote:
<quoted text>
But I don't think the mayor speaks his mind. He's a puppet, and the Puppet Master is putting words in his mouth. LOL
Again, it sounds like you say that from a reasoning that you dont like what he has done or says.....because you do not agree.

We all have the right to disagree with any elected official...and elect them out at voting time.....any other ridicule (especially anonymous accusations and mean-spirited criticism is feeding a fire that doesnt need fed.

It takes two to tango they say, and the circus like environment at some meetings is because TWO sides elect to go that route.
Two Funnie

Mckeesport, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#158
Feb 21, 2013
 
Too funny for fun.
Lady and the ATV Tramps

Mckeesport, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#159
Feb 25, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

The Lady Lawyer should look at this twist if Mikey sways four council votes to over turn the ATV Ban ordinance.

The City of Dallas, Texas, has passed an ordinance stating that if a driver is pulled over by law enforcement and is not able to provide proof of insurance, the car is towed. To retrieve the car after being impounded, they must show proof of insurance to have the car released. This has made it easy for the City of Dallas to remove uninsured cars.

Shortly after the "No Insurance" ordinance was passed, the Dallas impound lots began to fill up and were full after nine days. Over 80% of the impounded cars were driven by illegals. Not only must they provide proof of insurance to have their car released, they have to pay for the cost of the tow, a $350 fine, and $20 for every day their car is kept in the lot.

Accident rates have gone down 47%, and Dallas' solution gets uninsured drivers off the road without making them show proof of nationality. Wonder how the ACLU and the Justice Department will get around this one. Just brings tears to my eyes.

GO DALLAS!
Wolf in sheeps clothes

Pittsburgh, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#160
Feb 26, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Lady and the ATV Tramps wrote:
The Lady Lawyer should look at this twist if Mikey sways four council votes to over turn the ATV Ban ordinance.
The City of Dallas, Texas, has passed an ordinance stating that if a driver is pulled over by law enforcement and is not able to provide proof of insurance, the car is towed. To retrieve the car after being impounded, they must show proof of insurance to have the car released. This has made it easy for the City of Dallas to remove uninsured cars.
Shortly after the "No Insurance" ordinance was passed, the Dallas impound lots began to fill up and were full after nine days. Over 80% of the impounded cars were driven by illegals. Not only must they provide proof of insurance to have their car released, they have to pay for the cost of the tow, a $350 fine, and $20 for every day their car is kept in the lot.
Accident rates have gone down 47%, and Dallas' solution gets uninsured drivers off the road without making them show proof of nationality. Wonder how the ACLU and the Justice Department will get around this one. Just brings tears to my eyes.
GO DALLAS!
A) not sure WHAT that has to do with this discussion

B) PA already HAS that law. North Versailles and East McKeesport regularly tow uninsured automobiles. As it SHOULD be.

C) If you are trying to equate uninsured cars/trucks on the roads and the mayhem they cause in people's lives with uninsured ATVs in the woods (or even on the roads for that matter) you are comparing apples to collard greens.

How many traffic accidents or injuries are caused by ATVs/dirt bikes and how many are caused by cars/trucks on the public roads? LOL

While ATVs and dirt bikes can be insured for liability and such, and ATVs need to be registered (dirt bikes do not), that still does not allow for their use on public roads EXCEPT for certain situations, like crossing road to get to private land, etc. So if there is frequent illegal riding of ATVs/dirt bikes on public roads, those vehicles could be impounded under current law, no local ordinance required. The cops just have to enforce the current laws. But of course, with every possible "bust" comes a measure of leeway, afforded to EVERYONE, including speeders and stop sign rollers/parkers in McKeesport.

So be careful what you ask for.
My Uninsured Story

Mckeesport, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#161
Feb 26, 2013
 
Wolf in sheeps clothes wrote:
<quoted text>
PA already HAS that law. North Versailles and East McKeesport regularly tow uninsured automobiles. As it SHOULD be.
East McKeesport several years ago let an uninsured driver go when he rear ended our car. They refused to follow up and cite him for this infraction. They were reluctant to provide a "finalized" police report and only relented when I promised to visit my state rep immediately

In fact we lost the case for unexplainable reasons at the local MDJ court. Someone knew someone. We hired an attorney and evently settled with our own insurance company via the uninsured provision. So much for E. McKeesport towing uninsured vehicles.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

12 Users are viewing the McKeesport Forum right now

Search the McKeesport Forum:
Title Updated Last By Comments
who is running this city? 1 hr White Lightning 132
PA Who do you support for U.S. Senate in Pennsylva... (Oct '10) 1 hr Big Daddy 3,812
Worst Politician in Mckeesport History (Aug '09) 13 hr Jamie 478
Salvation Army giving slower this year (Dec '13) 15 hr CaCat 24
Does International Village Need A Paper Trail (Jul '12) Wed south park innocent lad 20
PA Who do you support for Governor in Pennsylvania... (Oct '10) Wed More Settled Science 51,184
mckeesport police mark steel (Sep '11) Jul 22 naw him and the rest 13
•••
•••
•••
•••

McKeesport Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

McKeesport People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

McKeesport News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in McKeesport
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••