Comment history

Allegations, health insurance benefit questions preceded Loughry's firing

bestforbasehor or should I say Dennis it is obvious that you are only telling half the truth here. If I read correctly in one accusation you claim that the Council only intended to provide Loughry with what he was receiving in Hays and then in the next breath you say you didn't support the health insurance that he was receiving in Hays. Your own attorney said the Council intended to provide him what he was receiving in Hays clear back in June or July of 2009 which was well before he even started. It also appears that the document from Reavey was given to the Council in April of 2010, I would hope if there was any real merit to these accusations then the Council at the time would have taken immediate action (Mertz, Dysart, Washington, Moyer, Breuer) and if they didn’t then there was no actual issue and it is like Hill and Loughry say it was always the intent of the Council to provide this. But evidently a year and a half later some of the Council are “misremembering” what actually happened. Oh and Dennis you now claiming to make a comment to the Mayor at the time that “you” wanted this brought back in front of the Council seems like something the entire Council would need to be a part of, or were you acting on your own again just like when “you” filed a bogus ethics complaint against the City Attorney, and when “you” claimed that there was criminal activity on Loughry’s part. One last thing I would say, accusations are not convictions and until someone is actually charged and convicted, which has not happened, then this “criminal activity” only exists in one man’s mind, Mertz. Dennis you have likely exposed the City and yourself to a massive lawsuit by trying to make yourself look important. You may have also caused harm to this man’s entire career based on what are so far false accusations. Way to go

September 28, 2011 at 9:09 a.m. ( | suggest removal )