I read in the Advance News that when Mr. Woods situation (creek diversion)was explained at council, and the horrible treatment he seemed to be receiving, the council voted 5 to 4 for staff to have another look at this. I would like to know how 4 councilors coulsd not see the apparent injustice in Mr. Woods situation and not want to look into it further. Can anyone enlighten us on why this man seems to be getting the dirty end of the stick?
methinks | 04.19.06 - 12:01 pm | #

Re kudos to the Advance on the Alberts "Slate" story. I think that Albert's showed his true colours when he wriggled his way weakly out of that stunt, by running to his favourite newspaper the following morning with a lame explanation. It's obvious that he thought he could lose his supporting councilllors and put together his list. The unfortunate part is that this slight of hand did work out for him.
methinks | 04.19.06 - 12:11 pm | #