The Public Face Vs. The Private Face…

      

As many politicians do, Mr. Curran also has the same affliction of misleading the public by adopting a public face of one person and in private outside of the public eye another.

Recently a report came to the Insider detailing the private face Mr. Curran does not want you know about. The report is as follows. When purchasing another  home in the same complex the home was offered on an “AS IS’ basis. He had an inspection performed. The report was approved and the purchased was completed. A couple of months later a problem was discovered in the upstairs a/c. Upon finding that the original inspection failed to report on the problem  he chose to demand compensation from the seller despite the purchase contract that clearly stated an “AS IS” basis.

When this contract clause was pointed out to him he refused to honor it and instead  obtained a lawyer who proceeded to send to the seller a series of demand letters with the threat of a lawsuit should the seller refuse to pay  damages of $15k to him.

The seller, a recent widow (about 3 months earlier) with two of her children still residing with her, bereaved over her recent loss and the unexpected need to sell her home in order to deal with the subsequent unexpected expenses was quite distraught.  

The under the pressure of the persistent deluge of demand letters and  the threat  of a lawsuit the widow who was also dealing with a heart condition, gave in and paid Mr. Curran $15k  rather than go to court and deal with the anguish of going to court.

Does this sound like the person that talks about how much he cares for others?

We think not. What say you?

A final twist is that the lawyer Mr. Curran chose demanded his fee of $8K. Therefore, the net to Curran was a mere $7k.  How would you feel regarding Mr. Curran had you been the seller under these conditions?

                        

 

 

 

 

  

"Deflection" (Commissioner Lisa Mallozzi's DRW Article)

by Skip Klauber, resident & p/t journalist 

I don't care for the tactics being utilized by Commissioners Jamie Curran, Lisa Mallozzi and Jeff Green. While I can't give a legal analysis, as far as I can tell from observing events and reviewing documents, there is no present issue about the "Optimists owing money". The aforementioned individuals, and their fellow travellers, need to stop trying to undermine the Optimists. Be men, and women, rather than selfish, self-centered, power hungry cowards.

There certainly seems to be an issue of financial and other mismanagement by the City. There are also, apparently, issues of mis-governance related to covering up the City's financial and other mismanagement. But based on everything I've seen, and I forwarded public record requests for everything relevant, I don't believe the Optimists owe the City a single penny. But the Optimists' financial obligations are not what the aforementioned Commissioners, and any possible accommodations for them by the Mayor, are all about.

There are few things more annoying to purveyors of bad governance than dissent. All the potential thinking and answering questions can be so very bothersome. In 2009 our Commission found a way to get around most of that dissent "stuff". The Commission promulgated a rule that terminated the decades-old privilege held by City residents to pose questions to Commission members.

The Commission liked the new gag rule so much it has not only been reaffirmed, it has even been extended to all of the City's so-called advisory boards. In fact, it appears the Commission members are even barred from asking questions of one another! (To his credit, Mayor Greg Ross joined Commissioner John Sims in unsuccessfully seeking to widen public input at Commission meetings). 

Getting rid of a need to answer residents' questions has been a real boon to most Commission members. Other than having to listen to three, or at most six total minutes of a resident's comments, most Commission members have a pretty low-stress position. A Commission member doesn't even have to listen to residents' comments- it's not like an elected official might have to answer questions, or anything potentially challenging. If nothing else, the past few years have shown that truly anyone, of any ability, can be on our City's Commission.

Eliminating nearly all effective dissent is nice, but your average tin-horn Caesar with a soft spot for authoritarian process requires more. They need affirmation. A sure vehicle for such affirmation is reading what others say or write about the utter brilliance of your positions, analysis, or performance. And having the populace as a whole reading of your accomplishments goes hand in hand with the affirmation process. Thus, there are "house organs", "party newspapers", and the like. After a while, some pols of high ego/low intelligence even forget they are just reading political propaganda.

Because city commission in a town of under 50,000 residents is on the smaller potatoes side, local yokel tin-horn Caesars need to settle for less media when it comes to the affirmation/ propaganda process. This leads to my thoughts regarding Commissioner Lisa Mallozzi's recent article in the DRW publication.

The article may be more in the nature of self-affirmation, but it fulfills the sine qua non of our local Commission majoritarians: "No Questions Will Be Answered!"  This is reflected in what I believe to be the "write what you want, and don't worry" philosophy underlying the author's approach.

I don't know who penned the DRW article attributed to Mallozzi. I guess I'd like to think its not someone who defeated the well-qualified David Nall in the 2010 election. But whoever composed the article has a very hostile relationship with the truth.

What is the precise status of the facts in Ms. Mallozzi's article?

(1) The article claims it will let residents know "a few facts". This is true. Ms. Mallozzi's article has a few actual facts;

(2) The 2004 Resolution? Sorry, what Ms. Mallozzi writes is less than accurate. By 2004 the Optimists and City were several decades into a relationship. I believe Ms. Mallozzi's entire discussion on this point shows either a complete lack of knowledge (i.e., "ignorance") regarding the Optimists-City relationship, or is intended to be misleading;

(3) The April 12, 2012 get-together? I'm afraid what Ms. Mallozzi writes scores comfortably below the Mendoza Line for truthfulness. That's not to say everything is inaccurate or misleading, but there is enough here straying far from the truth to give me material for another article, or two.

For the doubters, some examples:

(A) Why did the City (note, CITY, not the Optimists!) "invite" only four Commissioners? Do you think it odd the sole Commission member not invited, Commissioner John Sims, was also the only Commissioner not a member of the Optimists organization?

            (by the way, did Commissioner Mallozzi mention she is a member of the Optimists?)

(B) While the 2012 meeting was indeed held in the Commission's meeting room, it was moved to that room at the time of the 2012 meeting. The 2012 meeting was noticed for the City Manager's office. At 9:00 A.M. On a weekday.

(C) As noted, the notice said the meeting was in the City Manager's office. Does that sound like easy access for the public? If you think so, go try and walk into the City Manager's office tomorrow morning;

(D) About that "notice". In Cooper City, City policy is that open public meetings subject to the Sunshine Laws are noticed to the public in (at least) two places, a cork board in City Hall, and online. The City's online site has this big calendar that has about every meeting possibly of interest to a resident, in quite a bit of detail. Yet, the April 12, 2012 meeting was not on the website. Only on that City Hall bulletin board;

(E) The notice failed to reference two of the items to be discussed on April 12, 2012. The items left off the notice were the most complex matters, as well as those of greatest importance to the public;

(F) Ah, the minutes. Yes, the minutes. Maybe Commissioner Mallozzi should read these minutes at the next Commission meeting. A discussion of five subjects over 1 hr. 45 minutes summarized into: 17 words (note, in fairness to all, one word is hyphenated). That may sound a little, sketchy, but

(G) Those minutes again! Commissioner Mallozzi failed to include in her article that two of her colleagues, Commissioners Curran and Green, insisted at a January 28, 2014 Commission meeting the 2012 "minutes" are inaccurate. Yep, inaccurate.  (And you believe Commissioners Curran and Green, don't you?);

This could go on for quite while, so let's summarize. The article by Commissioner Mallozzi is disrespectful to residents, devoid of integrity, and a stain on Cooper City's reputation. Surely, Commissioner Mallozzi must realize that sooner or later the truth always comes out.

Don’t Be Fooled, Again

(Recieved this in an email and thought others might find it of interest. Ed.)

As many have come to recognize the ‘politricks’ of Mayor Debbie Eisinger do not have any bounds. As a practitioner of the Judy Stern school of nasty and often vile personal attacks Mayor Eisinger and her acolytes Lori, Amy, Diane, and Commissioner Liza Mallozzi have once again resorted to her favorite tactic of attempting to cloak themselves in the garment of religious persecution in order to gain a political advantage.

This election time the mayor and her appointed favorite candidate Gary Laufenberg, don’t be fooled again, he is of stout Germanic origin with a maternal Italian heritage of which he boasts strongly, are raising a flag against their opponent claiming a anti-Semitic bigotry.

Nothing could be further from the truth. The charge stands empty of both of any evidence or any commentary. In Fact, it appears that the truth while unknown to these accusers is just the opposite. Commissioner John Sims, a strong advocate of religious freedoms, he and only he was a strong supporter of the Jewish Chabad of Nova that had to sue Cooper City to win the right to be in Cooper City. The Mayor and her allies on the commission dragged out the suit for over 18 months refusing to settle it for $10,000 dollars. The federal judge finally settled it and awarded the Chabad $800,000.

When word that Commissioner John Sims had been a strong supporter of the Chabad reached others within the community an organization with a proud heritage, the Jewish War Veterans Post 177, determined that John’s military service record and his efforts on behalf of the Chabad of Nova warranted an invitation to join their group. Commissioner Sims gratefully, and I might add, with humility and pride accepted as a patron member.

As might be expected few outside of his group of friends and the members of Post 177 knew of his membership. Well, when the abominable minions of political detractors found that John’s resume contained a line indicating that membership they attacked with a viciousness of bigotry not seen in this area since the days of the KKK, claiming Sims could not be a member as he was not Jewish. (check with the website)

Not only did two of the Cooper City Commissioners, Mallozzi and one unnamed, and a pseudo civic activist named Diane Sori begin a campaign of harassment by calling national headquarters’ of the Jewish War Veterans demanding reprimanding action be taken against this post. This haranguing culminating in threats of demanding the revocation of the post’s charter, notwithstanding the age of these proud veterans.

I can hardly find the words to express my personal disgust and admittedly anger that persons of this community, two of whom purport to be of the Jewish faith would take to committing such a despicable if not vile and demeaning action to members of such a proud organization. Can we as a community of free loving, tolerant and compassionate people allow this to go unmentioned? I think not.

If there exists a group, both men and women, to whom we all owe a deep and profound debt, I can not think of another more deserving of our respect and gratitude. The fact that individuals chose to disparage, demean and castigate a veteran(s) cannot be deemed a simple political tactic. It must be seen for what it is, bigotry of the most despicable vile nature.

Please, stand with me against this type of crass behavior. It is without exception the most reprehensible act I have seen in many a year. It’s now your turn to standup for what we the citizens of Cooper City know to be an essential part of our being.

Condemn these acts by your action and vote on Tuesday Nov. 2, 2010.

Walt Jolliff

See the Jewish War Veterans' letter click on the link below

https://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0B856dApO1AB2NjVhYWQyZjktYzdiYi00ZDgwLTkzOTUtNzA3YTJmZTg4ZTdi&hl=en

Wanted: Dissent in Cooper City

Dissent Is An American Necessity

Once again the principle of free speech and the right of citizens to question the actions of their government are being tested. I.E., Recent Cooper City commission meeting and newly proposed resolution scheduled for voting at May 27th meeting. The general feeling seems to be that dissent is dangerous, that critical commentary erodes our unity and diminishes our resolve, that debates over the loss of constitutional rights is somehow a negative to the betterment of the nation. Perhaps such feelings are natural.
The attacks of 9/11, mystery illnesses, anthrax scares, and sniper attacks, as well as the outrageous larceny of some corporate leaders, indifference of political leaders and the stresses of high costs gas and other necessities can create levels of distress that can be unbearable. The tendency is to close down, circle the wagons, and lash out at all who may question. But real security doesn’t come from stifling debate or muting voices of dissent. In fact, dissent may be what we need most.
Dissent is the antidote for what social-psychologists call “group-think,” the tendency to rush to judgment. (Clearly demonstrated by the recent “witch hunts” disguised as city commissions meetings). Group-think can become a kind of herd mentality. Dissent is a guard against this mentality, a check on the unbridled stampede toward the cliff.
For this reason, as President Eisenhower once reminded us, we should never confuse honest dissent with disloyal subversion. A democratic society depends on dissent because, at its best, dissent is an act of courage, a real test of patriotism. The ancient Greeks understood this. They used the term, “parrhesia” to refer to speech based on moral principle, voiced by a speaker with the courage to speak the truth in the face of powerful opposition. Such dissent, they believed, represented one of the highest ideals toward which a citizen could aspire.
The American Founders also understood the importance of dissent, which is why they crafted the First Amendment. As the nation evolved, dissent became an important feature in all government institutions and processes, from Congress to the Supreme Court. Even in the executive branch -- the one most feared by the Founders because of its resemblance to monarchy and its tendency toward imperialism – even here our best presidents have welcomed and honored dissent.
Today we see government officials, powerful public figures, even our friends and neighbors asking us to be silent. Once again we are told that protest is bad, that dissent is divisive and un-American. That for the betterment and solidarity of the community we must become silent. But it is not. We must not be misled from a central truth: Free and passionate debate is essential to self-governance.
To dissent, to break from the herd, to question and offer in many cases an alternative position, is to celebrate American democracy with a ferocity that no one should attempt to suppress.Unless we let them.

A turn for the worst?

One of our sources who has been most aware of the internal happenings at Cooper City has forwarded to us this commentary on the last Cooper City Commission meeting. We respectfully submit to you the citizens and readers of this blog for your review and as always your comments. [Editor.]


Cooper City’s recent commission meeting may well go down in history as the straw that broke the camel’s back. The mayor, Debbie Eisinger, and her personal friend of 18 years, newly hired city attorney and puppet lawyer David Wolpin, may well have denied former Commissioner Elliot Kleiman and former commission candidate Diane Sori their right to speak before the city commission on any subject because she didn’t like what either may want to say. This ‘citizens concerns’ portion is a time honored staple of the Cooper City commission meetings and has been grossly abused by the friends/supporters of the mayor for the past year or more. That’s right folks, the mayor cut off each one off before (mind reader that she is) they were able to get to the heart of what they were going to say, pounding the gavel and pronouncing ‘personal attack, personal attack!’
Former Commission Kleiman was rudely interrupted by the mayor because he choose to reference the phase “N*** b****”, a phase which has been uttered by the supporters of the Mayor at least a couple of dozen times in the past two or three commission meetings, which now is being reinterpreted as a ‘bad’ word. My, we were unaware that the mayor has adopted such a ‘puritanical’ view. As a former commissioner, Elliot Kleiman surly deserved more respect than he received but more importantly, we would have liked to hear his comments in full. To make matters even worse, Chief Hale was commanded to escort Mr. Kleiman to his seat but Commissioner Kleiman, being a gentleman and showing the proper respect, walked away on his own accord.
In Mrs. Sori’s case, there appears to be no rational reason for the interruption. Rumor has it that she had something of significance to tell the commission and the people of Cooper City about Mayor Eisinger’s campaign politics. (The campaign financial final reports are now available.) The mayor must have suspected this and in fear of what Mrs. Sori might say cut her off in mid-sentence and remanded told her to sit down or Chief Hale would be commanded to escort her out. (Can one imagine what damage this mayor would have caused to the BSO staff and citizen by putting a well-liked police chief in the middle of her dirty work.) Thankfully, Mrs. Sori, a lady and out of respect for the city commission, chose to walk away so as not to place Chief Hale in an awkward position. The manner and the obvious abruptness of the mayor’s interruption does cause one to wonder what she was going to say that might be that damaging to Mayor Eisinger. We are reasonable sure that the citizens of Cooper City now want to really hear it.
Now folks, the seriousness of the matter here is that the mayor and city attorney may well have violated Elliot Kleiman’s and Diane Sori’s first amendment right to free speech and totally suppressed the long standing privilege and expected right of the citizens of Cooper City to voice their concern to their elected officials on whatever issues they may choose to. (reference the city agenda).
Most would believe this is a very serious a matter and are being advised that both Mrs. Sori and Mr. Kleiman are not taking this very kindly and are pursuing all options. We hope that they will pursue this matter to the fullest extent of the law not only for themselves but for all the good people of Cooper City who deserve better from their elected and appointed officials and who would be expecting to be treated respectfully should they chose to address the city commission.
[end of the submitted report]

[Editor]
The authors of this blog also share the view that the boundaries of appropriate conduct of the chairperson/mayor are capricious and arbitrary in light of the past year. The failure of the mayor to compote herself in a manner of the impartial conductor of the commission meetings as it relates to the total disregard for behavior of those whose commentary is of benefit to the mayor political agenda can only be described as abominable.
It is also note notable that the rest of the city commission did not speak up or even comment about the manner of the dictatorial posture of the mayor position, rather some commented on the political correctness of the meeting as though that allows for any previous egregious mistakes.
That is a little scary.

The Iron of fist of Cooper City?

“The first sign of a dictator and the loss of freedom is the attempt of those in power to suppress the freedom of speech.” Anonymous.

It appears that at this time the "ruling trio" of Cooper City has a plan to reduce if not eliminate the expression of free speech and the abridgement of the right to redress the government.
Of course, this can be done now that the witch hunt allowed by the Mayor has fallen apart.
As the Mayor has no need to be responsive to the electorate as she will be seeking higher office in the county.
Stay tuned there is more.. much more to come.

Muddy politics revealed?

Suggest that all viewers visit Bob Normans column, Muddy-Politics, on the New Times Broward or http://www.coopercityinfo.blogspot.com/ for a really good perspective of the politics of Cooper City and the Mayor's view of how to get things done.

Takeh Shanda (Indeed a Shame)

Open Letter to Elliot Kleiman

Dear Sir,

We all are very please that you are no longer attending the Commission meeting while under the influence of alcohol. We therefore assume that your comments and subsequent emails are done with a clear and sober mind. This allows us to listen closely to what you have said and make a decision as to the truth of your commentary.

Alas, such is not the case. Some of your comments are obviously not accurate yet you persist in stating the same fallacious comments over and over. Let the real facts help you overcome your difficulty in telling the truth even with a clear head.

Your statements of the fact of how a blog works or is controlled is totally inaccurate. There are several variations of posting, comments and the permissions allowed for different types of blogs. Ask Joseph Marhee. He seems to have the process down quite well on the several blogs he spews his filth and to which this author has posted a number posting and comments without his permission.

Did Lori Green tell you that she and the Mayor were told just 3 days before the incident at the BSO office that the BSO in Cooper City did not consider the moustache on the Mayors’ picture was a hate crime? ( This is surly accurate as the picture in question had hung in the hallway of the Cooper City Police Station as recently as three weeks ago.) Such pictures have been made of many Americans politicians (most recently G.W. Bush) including those of the Jewish faith without any out cries of anti-Semitism.

Did the Mayor indicate to you that her attempts to get the ADL to become involved were rebuffed as the moustache was evaluated as merely political satire, (clearly protected by US Law)?

Did the Mayor tell you that she demanded that the BSO of Cooper City not, repeat, not investigate the damage to Lori Green’s daughters’ car but to be handled by the Ft Lauderdale office of BSO? I guess there was a reason that she insisted that her name be listed as one of the involved persons in the incident in order for her to claim that she was a victim.

Did you ask if there also was any direct connections between the blogs ( all five that were listed) and the damage to Lori Green’s car? There was none as if there were the BSO would have at least question some of the parties with other than a phone call.

Did the Mayor read to you the comments from the police report that Lori Green made when she acknowledged that the damage could have been a random act of local juveniles? You did ask why the police report fails to indicate that the tapes of all visitors to Embassy Lakes at all three gates were not reviewed to determine if any suspicious vehicles may have entered during the period in question? You live there don’t you know that?

Lori Green didn’t tell you that the blog she referenced in the police report was in fact blanked out several weeks before the 01-12-08? She probably got confused and meant to say the Coopercityblog.wordpress.com. It is not uncommon that if your husband is a lawyer you are more inclined to stretch
the truth around as you don’t have to be really concerned about the cost of a legal defense for falsifying a police report.

Did you ask any one if they had actual seen the blog or the words “N*** B****” ? I have it on very good authority ( the authors of several other blogs) that none of the blogs made any anti-Semitic remarks and that a blog which advocated the election of the Mayor had that questionable picture and the added comment posted for at least 5 weeks. (Coopercityblog.wordpress.com).

We at the Coopercityinsider.blogspot.com are very upset as we had made many disparaging and disapproving comments and we were not mentioned at all. (Darn).

Lastly, we are very appalled that you, Elliot Kleiman, a former commissioner who was video taped drinking on several occasions just before city commission meetings which you vehemently denied and probably have seen the film of another commissioner video taped as being publicly drunk making obscene gestures to the police and paramedics who had come to his aid believing that he might be in need of medical attention, took no action what so ever, would have the Chutzpah to email the current commissioners and demand a vote of censure and a demand for a resignation.

Takeh Shanda

More to come as the days roll by.

Your comments are invited.

A note worthy Comment

The comments made below first appeared on the Sun-Sentinel online edition. The authors of this blog were impressed with the directness, honesty and simplicity of the writer and thought it should be shared with as many as possible.

To "Remove Sims from Office":

I look at myself in the mirror just fine. I have a clear conscience. I have done nothing wrong, despite the mayor's supporters who tried to spread rumors that I had put the swastika on Lori Green's car - and she was sitting right beside the mayor's campaign manager last night.
I, unlike the mayor, do not have an agenda. I am merely stating the facts.
Where was the outrage when Commissioner Roper was arrested for drunk driving and then proceeded to raise an obscene gesture to the news crew? Why didn't we hear Commissioner Kleiman or the mayor demanding his resignation? Where was the outrage when underage drinking occurred at the mayor's house (on more than one occasion), finally resulting in a young girl's death? Anytime that subject is raised at the meetings, I hear all of you gasping in horror. The real horror here is that no one was ever held accountable for that criminal act. Where was the outrage over the dining and drinking on our tax dollars?
From what I can see there are 2 sets of standards in Cooper City. The mayor and her supporters have NO STANDARDS. They are free to do whatever they please. Anyone who dares to oppose the mayor and their antics, get bullied.
And, as I said last night, at least I have the courage to sign my name to my blog entries because I believe in my principles. You cannot say the same, now can you?
Keep spreading your hatred. That Peace Festival is really going to make great strides in healing our city. But, hey, it sure will look good on the mayor's resume when she makes her run for a higher office!
By the way, I sure hope our tax dollars weren't spent making all those copies that were passed out around the city in order to castigate Mr. Sims. I certainly would enjoy reading a psychological profile on the various players in this ridiculous scenario - two bitter and angry commissioners voted out of office - the mayor, reelected with the majority of voters AGAINST HER (my, how that must have crushed her huge ego) - and all the rest of you supporters out there who turn a blind eye to all of the mayor's faults.
Shame on all of you!
Sherry Ibbs

You make the Call

It appears as though the lawsuit by the Chabad could have been prevented.
That’s right this whole messy thing might have been prevented.
When the issues first arose Cooper City had a chance to reflect on the possibility that one of its codes was in error. Zemel, attorney for the Chabad, wrote to Cooper City Mayor Debby Eisinger and strongly urging that the city retain an independent counsel to ensure its codes comply with the federal Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act.

However, our intrepid Mayor had another view and we quote Mayor Eisinger, who stated at that time to the Sun-Sentinel, “I feel that the city's codes are not discriminatory in any way.” Well Debby, a federal judge saw it very differently. The judge ruled that the city ordinances did in fact violate the law.
It is as we see it an egregious error that the Mayor, in this case chose to act as an attorney for the city, chose not to consult with competent legal counsel, did not attempt in any apparent way to look out for the best interest of Cooper City. Was this simply an error in judgment or was it the arrogant, ‘I am right at all times‘, attitude that we have come to know as the Debby Eisinger’s leadership style?
What makes this absolutely mind-boggling is that this series of events occurred in July 2006. After that as we have been advised no further effort was made to resolve this issue.

As one might reasonable expect a lawsuit was filed. At this point outside legal consul was contracted to handle this suit. What then transpired for the next 14-16- months is vague and difficult to find out. What is known is that the is that the attorney for the Chabad wanted to sit down with Cooper City to some how resolve this issue. (It also appears that the law required mediation in order to attempt to resolve this matter and Cooper City did not respond).
The recent closed door meeting in December of 2007, some 18 months later, of the city attorney with contracted outside consul and the city commission was also disappointing. Sources in the room have indicated that an attempt was made to silence the inquiry of the two commissioners by the mayor. However that was not to be and questions were asked and direct statements were made that indicated there were specific directions to resolve this problem were demanded. (Due to the nature of the confidentiality of those discussions and in order to protect our sources we are not at liberty to comment on them.)

Within a month or so items were placed on the commission agenda by the mayor that were intended to change the ordinances. Fortunately Commissioners Mallozi, Sims, and Kleiman were alerted to this deceptive maneuver and rejected making any changes at this time.

What appears to be on the horizon for the tax payers in Cooper City is a cost of $120-280
per household to settle this. We can only assume that the leadership demonstrated by the Mayor on a very important and critical issue to come before the commission, which could have been resolved before it reached the lawsuit state, and could have been resolved by meetings of the parties, was obviously a $2,000,000.00 failure.

Thanks, Mayor Eisinger. Oops, someone just handed me a recent news item that says Cooper City is being sued about excessive garbage/recycling fees. It starts out by describing how the city clerk has refused to meet with and discuss the issue with the business who are affected.
Holy Cow, here we go again. We wonder what this one will cost.
Let me ask you, Can we really afford to rehire Mayor Eisinger for another term?
You will make the call next Tuesday when you vote for a new Mayor.