UPDATED: City Manager Threatens Legal Action After Threatening Phone Call

July 12, 2015 By:Anne Marie Kilday

Local News

UPDATED: Councilmember Brennan Reilly’s response has been added to the article. 

West University Place City Manager Michael Ross threatened Friday to take legal action, including a possible criminal complaint, to force the West U City Council to comply with the Texas Open Meetings Act.

After a “harsh” telephone conversation from newly elected City Councilman Brennan Reilly, in which Ross said that Reilly threatened to “manufacture some ‘cause’” for firing him, Ross repeated his earlier demand that all council discussions about his future employment be conducted in a public, open meeting.

In a letter to City Attorney Alan Petrov, Ross warned that he would take legal action to force the council to meet in an open session Monday evening.

In an email to on Sunday, Reilly responded and said their two-hour telephone conversation on Friday was neither harsh nor threatening.

“Regarding my conversation with Michael Ross, I never stated that anyone would manufacture “cause” for his termination, never threatened him with anything, and was not harsh,” Reilly wrote. ” Michael requested that we talk via multiple emails and texts over several days.  We spoke for almost two hours, and our conversation was cordial and professional about the possibility of compromise with his separation.  We would not have spoken for that long if his characterization were correct,” Reilly concluded.

Reilly said Sunday that he was on vacation, “with limited email access.”

The agenda for the council’s meeting on Monday includes a closed executive session, during which the council is scheduled to discuss Ross’ future with the city. The council will first meet with Petrov to discuss the Open Meetings Act.

“Obviously, based upon Mr. Reilly’s harsh tone and threats of earlier today, coupled with the fact he has requested the opportunity to speak with council regarding my contract in a closed, executive session, I am deeply concerned that I be treated fairly and lawfully in all respects,” Ross stated in the letter.

“I expect all discussions regarding my relationship with the City to be conducted in open session as required under Section 551.074 of the Texas Open Meetings Act,” Ross said.

“It seems that I may need to seek a judicial order in advance of the meeting of July 13 to ensure the City’s compliance with its obligations not to discuss my employment relationship with the City in any closed session,” Ross continued. “Before I do so, I am asking you to advise me whether the City intends to comply with my request and state law in this regard.  Accordingly, please let me know before Noon on July 13, 2015, whether the City intends to conduct any of the July 13, 2015 City Council meeting regarding my employment in anything other than a fully open and public session.”

The veteran City Manager, who has been employed by West U for nearly 14 years, also said he might file a criminal complaint with the Harris County District Attorney’s office.

“I may be forced to ask an attorney to obtain a temporary restraining order compelling such compliance and/or I may report any violation to the Harris County District Attorney’s Office, although I am hoping that neither are necessary,” Ross wrote in his letter.

Ross suggested that the some of the council members might have already engaged in a violation of the Texas Open Meetings Act, by meeting in groups of less than a quorum, to avoid complying with the law.

“Based on conversations with individuals I remain concerned about apparent violations of the Texas Open Meetings Act where a ’walking quorum’  of council members are intentionally meeting outside of a properly posted meeting regarding my employment,” Ross’ letter stated.

In an earlier letter to the city council, Ross’ attorney William Helfand advised the council that Ross wants any and all discussions of his future with the city to be held in open sessions.

Ross’ continued employment with the city has been an issue since a slate of four candidates, including former Mayors Bob Kelly and Burt Ballanfant, along with Reilly and Mardi Turner, won election to the council in early May. The slate of candidates had campaigned on a pledge of bringing more “transparency” to city government.

Three days after taking office, however, Reilly and Ballanfant approached Ross privately and told him they wanted him to resign. During that meeting, the two council members said that the newly elected council had agreed that he should resign. At that time, they indicated that they would comply with Ross’ employment contract with the city of West U.

“These gentlemen suggested that, in their words, I “write the script” for my separation, including any new agreement that might be appropriate,” Ross said in his letter.

That contract includes a provision that Ross will be paid a full year’s salary if he is terminated.

That provision of Ross’ employment contract was in place when Kelly and Ballanfant were serving as mayors of West U. Both Kelly and Ballanfant voted to ratify Ross’ earlier employment contracts.

“Over the last 13 years as City Manager, no one has ever expressed any concern with my contract until now,” Ross said.

Under Ross’ contract, he would be entitled to payment of about $300,000 if he is ousted by the council.

Kelly said that Reilly was not speaking at the request of any other member of the council during the telephone conversation with Ross.

“I don’t know anything about it,” Kelly said. “We haven’t had a meeting. All I know is we are scheduled for an executive session on Monday.”

Kelly suggested that Richard Rothfelder, the special attorney hired by the council to negotiate the terms of Ross’ separation from the city, might know about the conversation. Rothfelder could not be reached for comment.

Turner said late Friday that she wasn’t aware of Reilly’s conversation with Ross.

“This is not my show,” Turner said. “I suggested, long ago, we look at other ways of solving whatever problems the other council members have with Michael Ross.”

Ballanfant did not respond to emails and telephone calls seeking comment about Reilly’s conversation with Ross, or Ross’ subsequent letter.

Former City Councilman Dick Yehle wrote a letter to Mayor Susan Sample and the members of the council late Friday. In his letter, Yehle said, “It is now time for some of you to set aside what appears to be a personal vendetta and end this foolishness.”

Yehle also tried to set the record straight about the city manager’s employment contract.

“While I remain critical of the new West U City Council’s lack of justification for the $300,000+ expenditure they are proposing in order to replace the City Manager, some of them have tried to deflect blame on the cost of the severance package by asserting that the previous Council “doubled the value of the severance package”.  That is untrue and despite efforts to correct statements to that effect, a misunderstanding has been allowed to persist in the public arena and perhaps at the Council table,” Yehle wrote in an email to Instant News.

“The fact is that for years dating back to prior administrations where both Ballanfant and Kelly were involved, the terms of employment for West U’s City Manager have been contained in a contract.  To protect the City Manager from capricious acts of new City Councils, the contract has always had a provision providing a full year’s pay if the City Manager was dismissed without cause in the first six months of a new term,” Yehle wrote. “No change was made affecting that clause, a clause repeatedly endorsed by Council members Ballanfant and Kelly during their prior terms.  Thus rumors that the prior City Council ’doubled the severance pay‘ are simply untrue.”

Yehle also suggested that the council try to work with Ross, to insure that the city continue its excellent reputation for city services.

“You should work to formally define any unique expectations and challenge Michael to meet them.  I think he will cheerfully and successfully follow your instructions.,” Yehle wrote. “ Life in West U can then return to normal without the turmoil which is disheartening to Michael, disruptive to the City, and impairs your ability to function without resorting to the non-productive procedural maneuvers still being used to camouflage your actions.”

According to  the Texas Municipal Leauge’s guide to the Open Meetings Act: “Penalties for violating the Act range from having the action voided to the imposition of fines and incarceration. Any action taken in violation is voidable and may be reversed in a civil lawsuit. There are four criminal provisions under the Act, including: (1) knowingly conspiring to circumvent the Act by meeting in numbers less than a quorum for the purpose of secret deliberations; (2) calling or participating in a closed meeting; (3) participating in an executive session without a certified agenda or tape recording; and (4) disclosure of a certified agenda or tape recording to a member of the public. Upon conviction, fines may be up to $2,000, and incarceration may be up to six months. ”


54 Responses to “UPDATED: City Manager Threatens Legal Action After Threatening Phone Call”

  1. Disgusted Says:

    Was there a ruckus at the city council meeting tonight?

  2. Disgusted Says:

    Did everybody play nice at the city council meeting Monday?

  3. Disgusted Says:

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

  4. Mellissa Martin Says:

    No kidding. Do the right thing.

  5. Matt Cash Says:

    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.

  6. Brokelyn Says:

    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?

  7. Ted Ferguson Says:

    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.

  8. Ted Ferguson Says:

    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.

  9. Dave Agerton Says:

    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.

  10. lyle Says:

    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.

  11. david d Says:

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


    • Ted Ferguson Says:

      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.

      • david d Says:

        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.

        • Ted Ferguson Says:

          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.

          • david d Says:

            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?

          • Matt Cash Says:

            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.

  12. Johnny B Says:

    Where is Brennan vacationing? He must be really bored stiff if he chose to have a “cordial and professional” 2-hour phone conversation with the guy he wants to fire.

  13. Tangley Resident Says:

    I love Brennan’s legal talk: “Reilly responded and said their two-hour telephone conversation on Friday was neither harsh nor threatening”.

    Why would you talk for two hours unless it is “harsh or threatening”? Brennan, you called the guy you have been trying to fire from vacation and talked to him for two hours. Were you talking about your new recipe for chicken soup? Tel us about the conversation.

  14. Legal Beagle Says:

    If the city council member, who is also an attorney, threatened the city manager to try to get him to modify his contract, that may be torturous interference of the lawful enforcement of a contract.

    The question we may have as taxpayers is do we want to pay the councilmember’s legal bills? If he did all this, he was not acting in a lawful capacity as a city councilmember.

  15. Jim Shields Says:

    Unfortunately, or fortunately as the case may be, I cannot attend the council meeting tomorrow night. Brass Band rehearsals take precedence for me.

    But I hope all of you and your friends can pack the place. The underhanded tactics of the slate cannot stand the light of day. They are being hoisted with their own petard of transparency.

  16. Plumb resident Says:

    Lucille Gallman for Mayor of West U!

  17. Johnny B Says:

    Lucille, the reason you should quit commenting is because you are uninformed. Today is different. I think everyone wants to recognize you and your nostalgia.

    But this is a nasty time in West U. And you should move out of the way. You have no clue. It is complicated.

  18. Tangley Resident Says:

    Brennan has commented on the blog many times. Where is he? Is he above it now that he is on the city council?

  19. Tangley Resident Says:

    Lucille as much as I hearing about your work history, it has nothing to to with this article.

    If the report of Brennan’s conversation with the embattled city manager is substantially correct one of the following has occurred:

    1) BRENNAN (AND OTHERS) COMMITTED A CRIMINAL ACT: If Brennan has acted on the authority of a majority of the city council, they all committed a criminal act because there has been no public vote to authorize Brennan to act on their authority. So if they granted him this authority is an illegal meeting all of the participants would be guilty of a criminal act.

    2) BRENNAN ACTED ON HIS OWN: If so, Brennan went way beyond the authority of his office, has acted like a boorish bully, and should be scorned and ostracized by us all.

    They other choice is that Michael Ross made it all up? I look forward to hearing from Brennan..

    • Lucille Gallman Says:

      Tangley Resident: You are right. It makes no sense to draw on work experience in a corporate atmosphere and try to apply it to a city work environment. Every time I see your “name” I do a double take. I grew up at 3759 Tangley. My folks built the house in 1940 and it is still there. I know Tangley is a long street, but I was curious about where on Tangley you live. I was only three when we moved from The Heights. All the houses were painted white and there were no trees.

  20. Legal Beagle Says:

    A few observation about this sideshow-

    I think that a conversation must have taken place between the ambitious new city councilmember and Mike Ross.

    Councilmember Riley is an attorney and he is reported to have made the call to Ross, so I think it is likely Riley recorded the conversation to protect his position. That would be both legal and prudent considering the significance of the conversation.

    Next – Does Riley dispute the conversation as recalled by Ross? If, so does he release an audio to support his position?

    • Jim Shields Says:


      See my comment above. When the call was made I don’t think Reilly was thinking legally or prudently. He was trying to extort Ross.

      But I could be wrong. Only a recording will tell.

  21. WUES Mom Says:

    The fact that Brennan even called the city manager without the participation of the mayor and other council members reeks. If Brennan did this, he needs to explain himself at a public meeting before we rush to judgement. But it sure sounds bad.

  22. Johnny B Says:

    Wake up people! The article is about a city council member “possibly” threatened a city employee. There has to be some kind of investigation. I the city councilmember did threaten a city employee, they must be removed from office.

    Can’t we all agree on that?

  23. phil snyder Says:


    In the corporate world you are right, at least in the US. Employment is at will and contracts are not the norm. Good business sense and business ethics however usually prevail. You seek to maintain continuity, you carefully assure skill pool competency and do not arbitrarily shoot a senior guy without cause. Economics can cause staffing change and often in good companies there are ‘packages’. But the issue here is the apparently arbitrary nature of the proposed dismissal. Absent sufficient ‘for cause’ it cuts against what is felt to be right. And lets not forget, the City Mgr works for the Council. His actions last year, if you didn’t like them, were attributed directly or indirectly to the wishes of the Mayor and Council. So lets keep accountabilities in mind.

    • Lucille Gallman Says:

      I never thought of the City Manager as being the captain of the ship. His job would be to do what was necessary to make the goals for the city as proposed by the City Council (Mayor plus Council) a reality. If a City Manager wasn’t aggressive then he probably wouldn’t have his contract renewed. The influence of people who saw a profit to be made in changing West U into an exclusive, expensive place with a country club feel would make any city manager’s job a challenge. The ability of the Internet to fuel a small fire is something new. I lived in West U a long time and city councils and city managers came and went. I’m sure there were always conflicts, but I was never aware of them.

  24. Jim Shields Says:

    I smell alcohol. Brennan is clearly not the sharpest knife in the drawer but he is a lawyer. I am not a lawyer but I suspect that in Law 101 you are taught not to say or write something that can be held against you. Threatening an employee with a bogus charge would fall into that category.

    Of course it could be argued that this will come down to a “he said – he said” matter, but Brennan has to know that Mike Ross has a history of recording phone calls.

    Which is why I smell alcohol. That threat of Reilly’s had to be fueled by a prodigious consumption of adult beverages or else he is stupider than I thought.

    Look for the next chapter in this drama. I predict it will be a recording of Reilly in all of his boozy glory.

    • Jim Shields Says:

      From Webster


      the act or practice of extorting especially money or other property; especially : the offense committed by an official engaging in such practice

    • JusttheFacts Says:

      Ross recorded exactly two phone calls with Commissioner Radack about six years ago at the suggestion of Mayor Kelly at the time. Radack was playing very loose with the truth and he got caught in the recordings. Ross’s city council at the time completely condoned and supported his actions and there has been no further mention of the issue until this council comes along wanting to dream up a cause.

  25. Lucille Gallman Says:

    After watching this drama, I’m surprised anyone gets involved in anyway with the politics of a city. I guess having a contract is the difference. The municipal world is certainly better than the corporate world. I worked for huge and not so huge corporations and saw, as is often printed in the Instant News, a “veteran” laid off. (Frankly, 14 years doesn’t seem all that long.) They certainly didn’t get to debate their employment and discharge on a stage in front of other employees and especially the press. I don’t know Mr. Ross but I am sure he is a fine person, but I can’t think of any change in management in business or government, etc. where the new doesn’t select their own staff. However, I haven’t read the contract. Has anyone?

    • Mellissa Martin Says:

      So you do not think that CEO’s in the corporate world have severance agreements in a similar way to City Managers? You do not think school superintendents have severance agreements? Where have you been? Check with your Katy School Superintendent and see what he gets if he is terminated and get back with us.

      • Lucille Gallman Says:

        My work experience was really more at the mid-management level. I can’t remember a CEO being fired which I guess would have to come from The Board of Directors. A CEO was usually the last-man-standing. (They were all men back then.) The people who reported to a CEO seemed to disappear though frequently.

    • Steven Segal Says:

      Lucille, you seem to forget that the City Manager heads a group of professionals who devote their working days to successful operations for the residents. Council members are elected for a two year term and are not (should not) be involved in day to day operations, which are carried out by City staff. The Council sets policy and the City Manager and staff carry out that policy. This Council (the “slate” – not Mayor Sample) seem to be so upset with decisions of the prior Council that they are taking it out on Michael Ross for working to implement that policy. Rather than working with the City Manager and setting a new policy, they seek to unravel our government and run (likely ruin) our City. Our highly regarded Communications Manger just left her post. If the slate continues their outrageous conduct, you are likely to see departures by additional key members of our City staff. This is very unfortunate knowing that this Council; is only temporary — and many of our staff are long time, devoted employees. Asking Council to discuss the reasons for firing Michael Ross (especially when he requests an open discussion) in an open meeting before the residents who elected them, is not like a corporate discussion in front of employees. The residents are the ultimate “bosses” of the Council, and for the slate to refuse to tell us the reasons for their drastic and unusual action is indefensible.

      • Lucille Gallman Says:

        Mr. Segal: You are right. I really shouldn’t comment because not only do I not have any connection with West U now, but I don’t know anything about the governing of a city. By the way, if the position listed on the West U website for employment is the Communications Manager it must be a big job. The salary range is listed as $81,098 – $121,647. Why don’t you apply for it, if you are interested. I think you would be a good choice.

      • Joni Says:

        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.

    • Stephen D. Says:

      Never happened in West U Lucille. Tell me about a time a new city council has dumped a city manager in West U? Answer is never.

      • Lucille Gallman Says:

        Stephen: Even though I lived in West U for many years, I was never even aware of how the city was run and by whom and frankly, I didn’t care. I think it is nice that residents are interested in what is going on now. I do remember the city manager before Michael Ross. He was Sherman Yehl. He was accessible and seemed interested in resident’s problems. I had a big Pecan Tree hanging over my house and tried to get them to let me cut it down without replacing it or paying what for me was a lot of money into the Tree Trust. I had a second Pecan Tree that the infrastructure work damaged. I paid to remove that and a third Pecan Tree that was in the way of a sidewalk but I didn’t have to pay anything to the Tree Trust for two and three. I live in Katy now and my main goal is to get some fireworks restrictions enforced for Fort Bend County. Be glad you live in West U. You don’t have fireworks or feral hogs digging up your yard, or signs everywhere warning about snakes and alligators.

  26. Voter Turn Out Says:

    Brokelyn, where have you been? West U had more voter turn out than the last 3 elections. Remember, West U Instant News is a blog, the owner is good friends with the City Manager. One inflated side of the story.

    • Mellissa Martin Says:

      Is something non-factual in the article? You probably have no problem with the other paper’s arrangement where the son (Ben Ballanfant) writes for mom (Kathleen Ballanfant) in the Village News about dad (councilman Burt Ballanfant). How much one sided influence do you think Kelly and Ballanfant have in that publication? I can’t remember the last time I read a fact in that publication.

      • Lucille Gallman Says:

        Mellissa: I enjoy the Village News even out here in Katy. If you google “Village-Southwest News” you will be able to read it totally online and free. I’ve always read the local paper beginning with the Southwestern Times. It was the best place to look for a local job and repair people. There is the Katy Times where I live now, but I like being able to read about everyday life in West U and Bellaire.

    • Anonymous Says:

      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.

  27. Brokelyn Says:

    Can someone please post a copy to YouTube of the Council meeting where Creepy Kelly and Company repeatedly berated our mayor? There may still be citizens of WU who believe that Council is sane — this needs to go viral.

  28. Brokelyn Says:

    Fh, you are so full of it.

    The “citizens” of WU didn’t vote for this Council. Around 85% of residents of our city chose to ignore the elections. Lazy bums. Council was voted into power based on lies — and that has all become very obvious to everyone…except you.

    I’ve been a citizen of WU for many years during which time Michael Ross’ behavior was rarely supercilious and arrogant towards us. I did not agree with all of his decisions, but the cumulative total of what he did not do perfectly right is FAR outweighed by his successful efforts to carry out the will and spirit of this city.

    If he has been getting kickbacks then charge him with a crime. Otherwise you’re just making stuff up. If this is indeed the issue Creepy Kelly and Belligerent Brennan have with him, then let’s get this into court and not behind closed doors. If Ross has been lying and cheating then the facts will get every citizen of WU to support his ouster, but that is certainly NOT the way this is being carried out.

    Sunshine is the best disinfectant. Only Ross is shining light on the bacteria growing on the underside of Council. Why doesn’t Council do the same to Ross? Is it because they don’t have a leg to stand on?

  29. phil snyder Says:

    Unfortunate developments.

    To make the cost picture more complete, the likely cost of a search firm as proposed can be ~25% of the new managers salary. So the true cost for this change is closer to $350,000.

  30. Fh Says:

    (Comment deleted)

    • Will Bertron Says:

      Really FH? REALLY???? We need to oust certain of the the recently elected councilmen and get back to doing the business of the City. We are wasting time and money on personal vendettas. Grow up children…

tumblr visitor stats