Comments on: UPDATED: City Manager Threatens Legal Action After Threatening Phone Call

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 15 Jul 2015 03:44:10 +0000

They need to take Brennan Reilly with them! The 3 B’s are out of control!

By: Brokelyn

Brokelyn — Tue, 14 Jul 2015 04:52:48 +0000

Sorry, the above comment is mine.

By: Disgusted

Disgusted — Tue, 14 Jul 2015 04:09:20 +0000

Was there a ruckus at the city council meeting tonight?

By: Disgusted

Disgusted — Tue, 14 Jul 2015 04:08:32 +0000

Did everybody play nice at the city council meeting Monday?

By: Disgusted

Disgusted — Tue, 14 Jul 2015 04:07:46 +0000

What happened at the city council meeting tonight? Did everybody play nice?

By: Mellissa Martin

Mellissa Martin — Mon, 13 Jul 2015 19:22:40 +0000

No kidding. Do the right thing.

By: Matt Cash

Matt Cash — Mon, 13 Jul 2015 18:16:21 +0000

Please help me understand this. Four out of five of the city council have told Ross they want him to leave. However they do not want to live up to the 13 year old contract where he has always been guaranteed 12 months pay for being terminated. This seems like an open and shut case where he leaves and they fulfill their obligation. They should vote to do that tonight and end this. There is nothing they can do that will keep the other staff here.

By: Joni

Joni — Mon, 13 Jul 2015 17:43:02 +0000

Steven, well said and very true. We have an excellent city staff and each does his/her job extremely well. It is very disheartening that we’ve already lost one valued staff member. I pray we don’t run off others! Boards and Council should support, not dictate/control, the work our employees do so well.

By: Brokelyn

Brokelyn — Mon, 13 Jul 2015 04:13:11 +0000

Is there anyone here who personally knows Belligerant Brennan? He lives in the community, right? I’d love to get a character reference or three because right now he ranks right down there with tree roaches and vomit. Can someone tell us why he isn’t the conniving, truth-impaired, and Belligerant individual that he has portrayed at Council meetings and in other unofficial reports?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 13 Jul 2015 04:01:44 +0000

Voter turn out:
I have been keenly observing and commenting on everything around here. Turnout was higher this year than two years ago and yet only around 15% of registered voters showed up. That’s progress I guess, but it is still pathetic. What makes it worse is that the elections were a referendum of sorts on the super block controversy–if there was ever a time for citizens to have their voices heard this was it!

I did vote. If you scan the comments from these boards from before the elections, I stated who I was voting for. I stated why I was voting for the people I voted for. I also warned, strenuously against a number of the people who were subsequently voted into power. It’s all here, on these boards.

By: Matt Cash

Matt Cash — Mon, 13 Jul 2015 02:36:43 +0000

Give it up Ted. Dutch is incapable of understanding that it is the city manager’s job to carry out the will of the city council. If this new council decided it was best to build something offensive (to Dutch) where the public works maintenance facility rests Ross would run with that idea in exactly the same fashion. That is his job.

I guess Dutch feels that Ross should have told the last council NO to carrying out their wishes on the master plan, even though they were unanimous in their direction. Then Dutch would have been happy and Ross would have been fired by that council instead of the new group.

By: Ted Ferguson

Ted Ferguson — Sun, 12 Jul 2015 23:56:56 +0000

Let me make this as simple as I can possibly can:

One or more members of this city council are trying to oust city manager Michael Ross, while providing absolutely no reason for doing so, and are actively resisting an open meeting to discuss it. If Michael Ross is guilty of some malfeasance/misfeasance/whatever, then their job would be done for them. They could simply cite his heinous crime(s), drop kick him out the front door at city hall, and then spend the next council meeting humble bragging about their great work, and slapping each other on the back. Instead, Michael Ross has had to hire an attorney, and threaten to sue the city (the “transparent slate” that are doing this “to protect Michael”) for an open meeting, so that everyone can hear the supposed reason for this. I can’t make it any simpler than that. If anyone here still doesn’t get it, I’d really like to know what you do for a living that you can afford to live in West U., and yet have absolutely zero common sense. This is a debacle, a waste of city time and money, will have far reaching impact on our beautiful city, and is being done for no demonstrable reason or return for effort being spent.

By: david d

david d — Sun, 12 Jul 2015 23:25:43 +0000

The last council can him? Are you kidding me? Did you attend a single meeting of the super block debacle? They were all in it together. A reasonable plan with the most arrogant and unprofessional execution of a major infrastructure project I have ever wittnessed. I am willing to bet you have no idea what a disaster the whole superblock debacle was. elections have consequences, and for those paying attention Michael and the previous city council royally screwed up. That is what we are dealing with here. Now I stated a view both pro and con Michael, but that substance seems to mean very little to you. Why don’t you tell us what exactly this council is doing outside of their legal scope?

By: Ted Ferguson

Ted Ferguson — Sun, 12 Jul 2015 23:08:20 +0000

Michael’s vision? If he went rogue during the last council’s tenure, it was THEIR job to can him. They didn’t, and that should tell you that the city manager didn’t implement his own “vision”, and I’m STILL waiting to hear an explanation for his departure – which Michael Ross, himself, is fighting to make public. As for “fighting for his job”, he’ll quickly find another job, have success there, too, and this city will be left a shambles. An overwhelming majority of staff is eligible for retirement, and contrary to popular belief, there are other cities that are hiring, closer to affordable housing, and with less traffic. Anyone hired here will be in and out the door, while residents eat the cost, and it will take several years for this city to recover. And in my opinion, this all happened over a personal vendetta that will probably end up getting this city dragged into a state AG investigation. Thanks.

By: david d

david d — Sun, 12 Jul 2015 22:31:01 +0000

I always use my real name ted. I can argue for Michael staying because he is a great city manager regarding the management of staff and running our city services so well. I can just as easily argue we need to go in differant direction and move on without Michael due to his butchering of the super block and a very differant vision of what west u should look like in the future. He likes the Sugarland view of the city with shiny new buildings and comformity whereas I and many residents like the funky version of West u we currently have. If you paid attention during the election Michael’s vision was very much part of the vote. Glad you are finally getting involved…..Attend the council meetings and speak up. Michael made his own bed here and now he is fighting for his job. Support him if you care but don’t hate the current Council because they feel it is time to move on without Michael. It is a differant opinion than you have and does not make this council evil.

By: Ted Ferguson

Ted Ferguson — Sun, 12 Jul 2015 22:06:12 +0000

It took two hours to say “I want you gone”? If the conversation was about the details of Ross’ departure, and the rest of city council knew ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about it, as they allege, then I have other questions. LOTS of questions.

By: Dave Agerton

Dave Agerton — Sun, 12 Jul 2015 22:03:14 +0000

The conflict has disrupted our City. The discord and disdain have darkened it. What if Brennan and Bob recused themselves from Council for 60 days? The conflict could dissipate, comity could return, people could recover and staff could get on with working for us. And such a demonstration of humility and leadership by key players could win widespread respect. Even better if, in time, everyone involved works together for the greater good. We need a peacemaker.

By: Ted Ferguson

Ted Ferguson — Sun, 12 Jul 2015 21:54:57 +0000

Feel free to come forward, using your real name, with any accusation(s) you have against Michael Ross. I’m still waiting to hear the reason for this council showing him the door.

By: lyle

lyle — Sun, 12 Jul 2015 19:55:09 +0000

Wow! Has anyone considered the notion that everyone here is in the wrong? I’ve had questions about Michael Ross since the beginning when I was told that it was agreed up front that there were certain projects, including the recreation center, that were to be taken on to keep him “interested.” The new crop of guys, including Kelly don’t strike me well either. Kelly was all for Michael and his vision when it included the recreation center and Kelly’s vision. I suspect the only reason for this falling out is a divergence in vision on how to develop in WU to make as much profit in the downtown area for these guys and their friends. Given that the value in WU is its neighborhood feel in the middle of a large urban city, I’m concerned about all of these guy’s agendas, including some of the agendas of their supporters here.

By: david d

david d — Sun, 12 Jul 2015 19:36:38 +0000

Mike the Saint, Brennan the devil,George the innocent bystander….

priceless!