Forum
Register Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 4 of 10      Prev   1   2   3   4   5   6   7   Next   »
PrairieFire

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 217
Reply with quote  #76 
Kevin;

I didn't mention anything about residential schools I did mention another project being run by a director of Crouse developments. It might be time to stop seeing things that aren't there and open your eyes to the issues in front of you.
0
Murray Lambert

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 289
Reply with quote  #77 
While I agree with Kevin so far as the 'healing garden' comment being inappropriate and in poor taste, his characterization of it as bigotry is overreaching in itself serving only to distract from and inflame the real issue at hand.  
0
OMG

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 767
Reply with quote  #78 
Healing Garden ...is being considered for council funding. I would like to add that the City consider funding Craig Skarupa and family for their 30 years of stress. Instead we have a mayor who votes against a motion. Crouse should have jumped at the chance to do the right thing. But nooooooooooooooooooo! He had to look after his own interests while the Skarupas require support and healing. Crouse and that almighty dollar!

Wonder how much of the contaminants reached the schoolyard?
0
Kevin

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 274
Reply with quote  #79 
Quote:
Originally Posted by EnoughAllready
What are your thoughts on this conflict of interest issue Kevin?


I won't use the term conflict of interest, but I can see a case for pecuniary interest.

I find Skarupa's case to be really weak though. Where are the soil samples that show the soil is contaminated? Where are the certified statements from the hydrovac company?

It is a great sorry that generates sympathy, however if Skarupa had not made it public, his property value would not have dropped.

There is no evidence that this garage has caused or is responsible for any cancers.

There are at least two and probably more former gas stations that the soil is contaminated and there is no cancer outcry.

I feel bad for Mr. Skarupa, but I don't buy into the story.

__________________
 
1
Kevin

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 274
Reply with quote  #80 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Murray Lambert
While I agree with Kevin so far as the 'healing garden' comment being inappropriate and in poor taste, his characterization of it as bigotry is overreaching in itself serving only to distract from and inflame the real issue at hand.  


The real issue at hand has nothing to do with the Healing Garden, no does Gwen Crouse deserve to be attacked.

The definition of bigotry is intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself.

Do you care to go through this forum and say there is no bigotry here.

__________________
 
1
Kevin

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 274
Reply with quote  #81 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OMG
Wonder how much of the contaminants reached the schoolyard?


What contaminates? We have no idea what was in those tanks, nor is there any evidence that any of the ground is contaminated.

__________________
 
1
OMG

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 767
Reply with quote  #82 
Kevin, you find Craig Skarupa's story weak. What has that got to do with Crouse voting when he has a vested financial interest in the outcome?
0
theskeptic

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,484
Reply with quote  #83 
However, nothing that Kevin stated in any way negates the fact that Crouse violated the laws in relation to pecuniary interests. Further, in accordance with the act it is incumbent upon Crouse to tender his resignation immediately.
0
Head Honcho

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 1,170
Reply with quote  #84 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin


The real issue at hand has nothing to do with the Healing Garden, no does Gwen Crouse deserve to be attacked.

The definition of bigotry is intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself.

Do you care to go through this forum and say there is no bigotry here.


Bigotry comes in many forms and it should be noted that the bigotry practiced here also includes bigotry by members of the Poliwings group against this forum.

Funny how that never occurs to them. ;-)

People who live in glass houses most certainly applies to them.
1
SweetLou

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 116
Reply with quote  #85 
Why would anyone address council about a potential hazard that doesn't exist?  
I'm quite certain the documentation from the hydrovac company that pumped out the vessel was in the pkg supplied to council.  

Would you pay for soil sample on a property you don't own?  Does the C of SA have zero accountability when it was their negligence that allowed an industrial shop to be built in a residential area? 

Get over your negativity toward all things SAP Kevin and put that broad brush you use to stroke this site and everyone who takes part back under the stairs.  
0
Kevin

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 274
Reply with quote  #86 
Quote:
Originally Posted by PrairieFire
Kevin;

I didn't mention anything about residential schools I did mention another project being run by a director of Crouse developments. It might be time to stop seeing things that aren't there and open your eyes to the issues in front of you.


Yes you referenced the Healing Garden directly,.This is a project you either know is directly related to Residential Schools or are making references to things you know nothing about.

Gwen Crouse has nothing to do with 80 Salisbury avenue, nor does Crouse Developments. However Nolan being a director may have a demonstatable pecuniary interest, if it can be demonstrated that the issue of the garage will affect the property value of his property.

The only reason property values may have come down right now is because Skarupa made it public.

You are so intolerant of Mayor Crouse now you decide to attack his wife for sitting on a committee.

Tell me again I am seeing things that aren't there.

__________________
 
0
Kevin

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 274
Reply with quote  #87 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Head Honcho


Bigotry comes in many forms and it should be noted that the bigotry practiced here also includes bigotry by members of the Poliwings group against this forum.

Funny how that never occurs to them. ;-)

People who live in glass houses most certainly applies to them.


This forum started the attacks against people who enjoy attending Poliwings get togethers. There is no group, hell you get notified as well Don (does that make you part of this group you imagine?).

There are a lot of concepts, concerns and situations that are brought up by contributors in this forum that are real concerns. Unfortunately you allow the membership to remain anonymous and continually attack people instead of issues. Then you hide this forum from the world because something you posted on your main page got quoted by Mayor Crouse in a letter to the Gazette..

If things are so above board here why do you have to hide? Why are you so scared to let people with opposing opinions participate.

When Nolan Crouse made an address at the Chamber Gala and made comments about 2 councillors he couldn't work with, then stated it was a poor attempt at a joke you took him to town including reprinting my blog on your front page.

Now when you get taken to task and someone posts your comments publicly you ban him from posting here.

Do you really want to start talking about glass houses?


__________________
 
0
EnoughAllready

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 388
Reply with quote  #88 
Kevin, I don't even know what to say! You seem to be trying your very, very best to excuse Crouse of any wrong doing. It's truly unbelievable!
0
OMG

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 767
Reply with quote  #89 
Craig Skarupa had an assessment before he made this sorry situation public and was told his house was worth less. He had every right to make this public. Staying underground not to hurt someone's feelings get you nowhere. Craig did nothing wrong. Kevin, what I get from your statements is that Craig is the bad guy here. Unbelievable.
0
Kevin

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 274
Reply with quote  #90 
Quote:
Originally Posted by EnoughAllready
Kevin, I don't even know what to say! You seem to be trying your very, very best to excuse Crouse of any wrong doing. It's truly unbelievable!


Not at all. I already said I believe it can be demonstrated. I also showed here where the defence is.

There is no evidence of contamination. Skarupa has done no tests on "his" land to prove contaminants seeped onto his property.

The motion was in camera so I have no idea what they voted on, I don't know that the motion was something that pecuniary interest may apply to.

But if you are so sure,.. I don't see all of you ponying up the $500 and taking this to court. It is a forgone conclusion council won't.

__________________
 
0
EnoughAllready

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 388
Reply with quote  #91 
@ Kevin, You are missing something really important here!!!!

You said,
"However Nolan being a director may have a demonstatable pecuniary interest, if it can be demonstrated that the issue of the garage will affect the property value of his property."

It does not matter if property values go down in that area!!!! That's not the deal breaker here!!!!

There must be a reason Crouse would have been the lone single vote (6-1) on this issue. The idea that he thought the value of his property may drop and voted based on this thought is the issue!!!!

0
Kevin

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 274
Reply with quote  #92 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OMG
Craig Skarupa had an assessment before he made this sorry situation public and was told his house was worth less. He had every right to make this public. Staying underground not to hurt someone's feelings get you nowhere. Craig did nothing wrong. Kevin, what I get from your statements is that Craig is the bad guy here. Unbelievable.


Not at all, I already stated I feel bad for Mr. Skarupa but he has no evidence any of this caused cancer to anyone.

You are aware that Monday night wasn't the first time Mr. Skarupa addressed council? He made this public along time ago.

__________________
 
0
EnoughAllready

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 388
Reply with quote  #93 
Craig stated on the video in council, that he had a hundred documents so let assume he has some pretty damaging stuff he hasn't brought forward. Maybe he does have sample, etc.

Like i said, there has to be a reason why Crouse would be the lone vote against whatever the motion was. When that is revealed, everything will make sense.
0
OMG

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 767
Reply with quote  #94 
Like I stated Craig had an assessment before it went public!!!

Kevin, the point is that Crouse voted to protect his interests period. Nothing else matters. Once Crouse voted, he crossed the line.
0
Kevin

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 274
Reply with quote  #95 
Quote:
Originally Posted by EnoughAllready
@ Kevin, You are missing something really important here!!!!

You said,
"However Nolan being a director may have a demonstatable pecuniary interest, if it can be demonstrated that the issue of the garage will affect the property value of his property."

It does not matter if property values go down in that area!!!! That's not the deal breaker here!!!!

There must be a reason Crouse would have been the lone single vote (6-1) on this issue. The idea that he thought the value of his property may drop and voted based on this thought is the issue!!!!



I have no idea why Nolan voted against the motion as I have no idea what the motion was. If you do, please elaborate.

If you are so sure, get the rest of the "so sure" people here to contribute and pay the $500 fee and let a judge decide.

Heck if you can find 24 people who will contribute, I will throw in $20 to make the $500.

__________________
 
0
kellex98

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 170
Reply with quote  #96 
Kevin, Crouse Developments has 2 employees/directors - himself and Gwen as listed in the corporation's public documents.  So yes, Gwen did have a stake in all of this as well.  As for Crouse saying anything along the lines of him not knowing anything about this, that is not true.  Mr. Skarupa has evidence via email that he talked to Crouse about this years ago.  Crouse Developments is not a huge corporation, I am sure the 2 employees know what properties they own in St. Albert!
0
Kevin

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 274
Reply with quote  #97 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kellex98
Kevin, Crouse Developments has 2 employees/directors - himself and Gwen as listed in the corporation's public documents.  So yes, Gwen did have a stake in all of this as well.  As for Crouse saying anything along the lines of him not knowing anything about this, that is not true.  Mr. Skarupa has evidence via email that he talked to Crouse about this years ago.  Crouse Developments is not a huge corporation, I am sure the 2 employees know what properties they own in St. Albert!


Please tell me how Gwen Crouse has any fault in this? Yes she is a director, but she is not on council, she has nothing to recuse herself for, she has done nothing except volunteer her time on a project that went south because of the city. But now PF is badmouthing her and taking cheap shots on what is really a good project.

I have never said Crouse didn't know he owned the property.

__________________
 
0
OMG

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 767
Reply with quote  #98 
Again the only issue here is that CROUSE VOTED.
0
Kevin

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 274
Reply with quote  #99 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OMG
Again the only issue here is that CROUSE VOTED.


Voted on what? It was an in camera motion, if you are so sure, put up the $500.

__________________
 
1
kellex98

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 170
Reply with quote  #100 
Kevin, you said "Gwen Crouse has nothing to do with 80 Salisbury avenue, nor does Crouse Developments." I disagree with you because they/Crouse Developments own the property close by that is possibly affected by the structure and/or possible contaminants.  They would be concerned about their investment (as anyone in the area would be).  So I feel that they would have had discussions about the 80 Salisbury property as husband/wife/company owners.  They (via Crouse the Mayor) were just in the position to do something about their investment (ie: keep information hidden from the public).

I stand corrected, it was not you that mentioned Crouse stating he did not know he owned the property.  That was posted further down by another poster.
0
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.