It's the deal that has been on the City's agenda twice recently. There has been discussion at council but never with any public mention of the people involved.
It's the Airport-Kalitta contract, termination, buyout-- it has been described in lots of different ways.
Soon the revised deal and the name(s) of the people involved in the new hangar lease at the Morristown Airport will be public.
Since Councilmember Chesney started giving clues on his Facebook website a few weeks ago, I gave a clue yesterday morning.
Here's another clue: RJ
As an aside, Chesney's Facebook page is very nice. You can click here to see his City Hall site,
Tuesday, November 19, 2013
Monday, November 18, 2013
November 18, 2013 Chesney's Guessing Game
At the last city council meeting, there was discussion, sort of, about a person or persons (never named) who were interested in taking over the airport hangar lease between the City and Kalitta Air.
It seems City leaders approved a contract with Kalitta years ago without reading it or asking questions of the City attorney.
Evidently, council decided they had to pass the contract to find out what was in it!
Fast forward to today. Kalitta decided to pack up and move on and sent the City a huge bill for getting out of/buying out the contract.
Presumably, tough negotiations followed and the City decided several weeks ago to settle the matter and buy the hangar from Kalitta for $975,000.
At the last council meeting before a vote was to be taken on approval to take the $975,000 out of fund balance to pay Kalitta, it was revealed that a third party was interested in taking over the lease. The vote was postponed to see if a new lease can be worked out.
That's all well and good.
But no one at the City would mention the name of the persons with whom the Airport Commission was negotiating. Never mind that this was a city contract and public business. The public will be told what's going on----sometime-----usually right before or after it's a done deal.
On Councilman Gary Chesney's City Hall Facebook page someone asked about the secrecy. Gary said "some" people already know and then he decided to turn it into a guessing game with a clue for his reader: "...it is a local person who has an office near the airport and has a vested interest in air travel."
Well, let me throw out another clue: LM
Soon, very soon, we'll know.
And maybe Gary will give another clue about this and other public business.
It seems City leaders approved a contract with Kalitta years ago without reading it or asking questions of the City attorney.
Evidently, council decided they had to pass the contract to find out what was in it!
Fast forward to today. Kalitta decided to pack up and move on and sent the City a huge bill for getting out of/buying out the contract.
Presumably, tough negotiations followed and the City decided several weeks ago to settle the matter and buy the hangar from Kalitta for $975,000.
At the last council meeting before a vote was to be taken on approval to take the $975,000 out of fund balance to pay Kalitta, it was revealed that a third party was interested in taking over the lease. The vote was postponed to see if a new lease can be worked out.
That's all well and good.
But no one at the City would mention the name of the persons with whom the Airport Commission was negotiating. Never mind that this was a city contract and public business. The public will be told what's going on----sometime-----usually right before or after it's a done deal.
On Councilman Gary Chesney's City Hall Facebook page someone asked about the secrecy. Gary said "some" people already know and then he decided to turn it into a guessing game with a clue for his reader: "...it is a local person who has an office near the airport and has a vested interest in air travel."
Well, let me throw out another clue: LM
Soon, very soon, we'll know.
And maybe Gary will give another clue about this and other public business.
Monday, November 11, 2013
November 11, 2013 VETERANS DAY
History of Veterans Day
Excerpts from U.S. Dept. of Veterans Affairs website
Soldiers of the 353rd Infantry near a church at Stenay, Meuse in France, wait for the end of hostilities. This photo was taken at 10:58 a.m., on November 11, 1918, two minutes before the armistice ending World War I went into effect
In November 1919, President Wilson proclaimed November 11 as the first commemoration of Armistice Day with the following words: "To us in America, the reflections of Armistice Day will be filled with solemn pride in the heroism of those who died in the country’s service and with gratitude for the victory, both because of the thing from which it has freed us and because of the opportunity it has given America to show her sympathy with peace and justice in the councils of the nations…"
On May 13, 1938, a Congressional Act was passed making the 11th of November in each year a legal holiday—a day to be dedicated to the cause of world peace and to be thereafter celebrated and known as "Armistice Day."
In 1954, after World War II had required the greatest mobilization of soldiers, sailors, Marines and airmen in the Nation’s history and after American forces had fought aggression in Korea, the 83rd Congress amended the Act of 1938 by striking out the word "Armistice" and inserting in its place the word "Veterans." With the approval of this legislation (Public Law 380) on June 1, 1954, November 11th became a day to honor American veterans of all wars.
For more on the history of Veterans Day, click here.
Sunday, November 10, 2013
November 10, 2013 Captain Justice Wins Over General Rettig
This is too good!
The Government's attorney doesn't want to be referred to as the government's attorney because such a reference might "inflame" the jury! The prosecutor files a motion asking the Judge to order that she be referred to by only four "acceptable" (to her) names.
The reply by the attorney for the Defendant has made news in Tennessee and beyond. Click on each image and see if you can keep a straight face as Captain Justice responds.
Wondering how it all came out?
Well, the Judge tossed General Rettig's motion in the trash--figuratively speaking, of course.
The Government's attorney doesn't want to be referred to as the government's attorney because such a reference might "inflame" the jury! The prosecutor files a motion asking the Judge to order that she be referred to by only four "acceptable" (to her) names.
The reply by the attorney for the Defendant has made news in Tennessee and beyond. Click on each image and see if you can keep a straight face as Captain Justice responds.
Wondering how it all came out?
Well, the Judge tossed General Rettig's motion in the trash--figuratively speaking, of course.
Labels:
Captain Justice,
Drew Justice,
Humor,
legal,
Tammy Rettig
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)