I like her concise responses. She says the same thing in two words that I say with twenty. Nice interview.

I like her concise responses. She says the same thing in two words that I say with twenty. Nice interview.

HMMMMM lets see "small changes may be able to be made just by putting a freeze on payroll". Freeze payroll and expect MORE from some of the already overworked and underpaid police officers that haven't got even a cost of living raise in years. However wants to work WITH the police officers that have already lost two of its finest due to "Budget Cuts". Is Greenwood Ever going to change?

HMMMMM lets see "small changes may be able to be made just by putting a freeze on payroll". Freeze payroll and expect MORE from some of the already overworked and underpaid police officers that haven't got even a cost of living raise in years. However wants to work WITH the police officers that have already lost two of its finest due to "Budget Cuts". Is Greenwood Ever going to change?

It is very obvious that Sharon Hutinett is prepared to takle the tough issues that face Greenwood. She has a well thought out set of priorities and the past experience to put her ideas in motion. Unlike the last three years, Ward I would have an Alderperson who would work to solve problems for constituents.

I have to wonder why Al Reynolds has decided to make a run for the Board after a very long absence from the board. It was Reynolds who led the BOA in 1991 to override Mayor Ferguson’s veto of an agreement with the Greenwood quarry that gave the heavy trucks access to Greenwood roads. Those trucks damaged our roads, poluted our neighborhoods, and paid not a dime in taxes to the city for the damage that the trucks had done. I have to wonder why, at this time, when the city has won a jury award from the state of Missouri, he has decided to run for a board position. Would Reynolds represent the city or the rock quarry that he used as a cement truck driver while he last served on the BOA. He had a conflict of interest that put him squarely on the side of the rock quarry owners.

It is very obvious that Sharon Hutinett is prepared to takle the tough issues that face Greenwood. She has a well thought out set of priorities and the past experience to put her ideas in motion. Unlike the last three years, Ward I would have an Alderperson who would work to solve problems for constituents.

I have to wonder why Al Reynolds has decided to make a run for the Board after a very long absence from the board. It was Reynolds who led the BOA in 1991 to override Mayor Ferguson’s veto of an agreement with the Greenwood quarry that gave the heavy trucks access to Greenwood roads. Those trucks damaged our roads, poluted our neighborhoods, and paid not a dime in taxes to the city for the damage that the trucks had done. I have to wonder why, at this time, when the city has won a jury award from the state of Missouri, he has decided to run for a board position. Would Reynolds represent the city or the rock quarry that he used as a cement truck driver while he last served on the BOA. He had a conflict of interest that put him squarely on the side of the rock quarry owners.

In reply to Gene DeVaux on February 19, 2010, get your facts straight. The reason I didn’t rerun for office in 1994 is because I made a major career change. The hours I worked were erratic and demanding. I felt I couldn’t do justice to the position of alderman or the city. At this time I had not worked for the concrete plant for 8 years and the quarry was under new ownership, so there was no conflict of interest. When I served as alderman we were faced with the possibility of replacing 3 bridges in Greenwood at the same time. These were brought to our attention by the Lee’s Summit School Bus Service. Our city engineer examined these bridges and deemed them unsafe for both bus and truck traffic. In an effort to move forward, we decided to replace the bridge on 2nd St, which meant closing the truck route for an extended period of time. The state engineer examined the bridges and he declared the bridge on Ranson Rd safe for all traffic. The bridge on 13th St was declared safe for residential traffic only. It was replaced by a later administration. the bridge on 2nd St was declared unsafe for all traffic. Marin Marietta approached the city with the offer to replace the bridge and assume all costs. The quarry requested that the city grant them permanent use of the truck route. This was approved by the mayor and the aldermen. After the bridge was replaced and Martin Marietta had paid the city for the bridge, the aldermen with a veto proof vote approved the ordinance providing Martin Marietta the use of the truck route. The mayor vetoed it anyway, causing the alderman, with the support of the citizens, to override the veto. The businesses on the truck route were the number one employers of the citizens of Greenwood. Gene is right about the quarry never paying taxes to the city because we had no taxing authority over them. I do know of 2 $50,000 donations to the City of Greenwood by the quarry. Why is Gene challenging the vote of the aldermen without having the facts? Who is he supporting in this election? Do they really want that support? Gene, you need to go down to the abandoned railroad track, watch for the train, and blow a little smoke in the air. Maybe the Katy Trail will come by. Now that you know the facts and there was no conflict of interest, I’m asking for your vote as alderman of ward 1. Al Reynolds

In reply to Gene DeVaux on February 19, 2010, get your facts straight. The reason I didn’t rerun for office in 1994 is because I made a major career change. The hours I worked were erratic and demanding. I felt I couldn’t do justice to the position of alderman or the city. At this time I had not worked for the concrete plant for 8 years and the quarry was under new ownership, so there was no conflict of interest. When I served as alderman we were faced with the possibility of replacing 3 bridges in Greenwood at the same time. These were brought to our attention by the Lee’s Summit School Bus Service. Our city engineer examined these bridges and deemed them unsafe for both bus and truck traffic. In an effort to move forward, we decided to replace the bridge on 2nd St, which meant closing the truck route for an extended period of time. The state engineer examined the bridges and he declared the bridge on Ranson Rd safe for all traffic. The bridge on 13th St was declared safe for residential traffic only. It was replaced by a later administration. the bridge on 2nd St was declared unsafe for all traffic. Marin Marietta approached the city with the offer to replace the bridge and assume all costs. The quarry requested that the city grant them permanent use of the truck route. This was approved by the mayor and the aldermen. After the bridge was replaced and Martin Marietta had paid the city for the bridge, the aldermen with a veto proof vote approved the ordinance providing Martin Marietta the use of the truck route. The mayor vetoed it anyway, causing the alderman, with the support of the citizens, to override the veto. The businesses on the truck route were the number one employers of the citizens of Greenwood. Gene is right about the quarry never paying taxes to the city because we had no taxing authority over them. I do know of 2 $50,000 donations to the City of Greenwood by the quarry. Why is Gene challenging the vote of the aldermen without having the facts? Who is he supporting in this election? Do they really want that support? Gene, you need to go down to the abandoned railroad track, watch for the train, and blow a little smoke in the air. Maybe the Katy Trail will come by. Now that you know the facts and there was no conflict of interest, I’m asking for your vote as alderman of ward 1. Al Reynolds

In response to Al Reynolds:
First of all, I wrote nothing about why you did not run for re-election. I had no idea why you did not run in 1994.
I can appreciate the need to do repair to bridges when they need work. I also remember that shortly after my wife and I moved here, the bridge on Ranson Rd. at the railroad track was washed out during a heavy rainstorm. That was a costly repair that the city was not prepared for.
As for the bridge on 2nd, Ave., who got the most benefit from that? It was my understanding that Mayor Ferguson had vetoed the ordinance that would allow the quarry to have permanent access to street just for replacing a bridge that would benefit the quarry. In your comments, you wrote that the Mayor and BOA voted for the ordinance. So, would you clarify that for me?
As for conflict of interest, you may have been gone from the concrete company, but that does not mean that you didn’t feel an obligation to help them. I think it is a huge mistake to give away the rights to city property without being compensated for the damages that was sure to, and it fact, did occur to that street. The quarry hired a contractor to come into town to do repairs to the road. That work was done on weekends and without city permits or city engineering approvals. The work was substandard and the road and drainage along that street are problems for greenwood. The state jury awarded the city an award for real damages and legal expenses to do the repairs.
The quarry sued the city in state court and made it clear that they want to use Allendale Lake Rd. that is wider and, to their minds, more suitable to their needs. Allendale is wider and, right now, is in much better condition than 2nd. Ave. Whipple’s ruling that is being appealed would allow the quarry trucks to use any street in Greenwood. The Judge made gave no thought to the health and safety of Greenwood residents, nor did he consider the costs of maintaining our roads. In Judge Whipple’s statements during the trial, the city should make the improvements at city expense. He also thought that the city should have provided sidewalks on 2nd Ave for pedestrian traffic without consideration of how they would be paid for, and all of that should be done for to benefit the quarry.
You wrote that the quarry donated $50,000 on two different occasions. I know of one $5000 donation that was found in the desk of the court clerk. It was not specified for any particular use. That small amount of money would do nothing to repair over a million and a half worth of damages.
Al wrote: “The businesses on the truck route were the number one employers of the citizens of Greenwood.” And who would that be? The Greenwood quarry, Buckley powder were probably the biggest employers of Greenwood residents. If they needed a route to their jobs at the quarry, should the city give away its right to that route for eternity? And, how did the BOA think the city could afford to maintain the road that would be destroyed by heavy gravel trucks? Before they stopped using that route, they no longer used just big gravel trucks; they started using semi-trailers.
As for who I am supporting, I do not vote in Ward I, but if I did, I would vote for someone who would bring youth, experience and dedication to making Greenwood the type of town to raise children.

In response to Al Reynolds:
First of all, I wrote nothing about why you did not run for re-election. I had no idea why you did not run in 1994.
I can appreciate the need to do repair to bridges when they need work. I also remember that shortly after my wife and I moved here, the bridge on Ranson Rd. at the railroad track was washed out during a heavy rainstorm. That was a costly repair that the city was not prepared for.
As for the bridge on 2nd, Ave., who got the most benefit from that? It was my understanding that Mayor Ferguson had vetoed the ordinance that would allow the quarry to have permanent access to street just for replacing a bridge that would benefit the quarry. In your comments, you wrote that the Mayor and BOA voted for the ordinance. So, would you clarify that for me?
As for conflict of interest, you may have been gone from the concrete company, but that does not mean that you didn’t feel an obligation to help them. I think it is a huge mistake to give away the rights to city property without being compensated for the damages that was sure to, and it fact, did occur to that street. The quarry hired a contractor to come into town to do repairs to the road. That work was done on weekends and without city permits or city engineering approvals. The work was substandard and the road and drainage along that street are problems for greenwood. The state jury awarded the city an award for real damages and legal expenses to do the repairs.
The quarry sued the city in state court and made it clear that they want to use Allendale Lake Rd. that is wider and, to their minds, more suitable to their needs. Allendale is wider and, right now, is in much better condition than 2nd. Ave. Whipple’s ruling that is being appealed would allow the quarry trucks to use any street in Greenwood. The Judge made gave no thought to the health and safety of Greenwood residents, nor did he consider the costs of maintaining our roads. In Judge Whipple’s statements during the trial, the city should make the improvements at city expense. He also thought that the city should have provided sidewalks on 2nd Ave for pedestrian traffic without consideration of how they would be paid for, and all of that should be done for to benefit the quarry.
You wrote that the quarry donated $50,000 on two different occasions. I know of one $5000 donation that was found in the desk of the court clerk. It was not specified for any particular use. That small amount of money would do nothing to repair over a million and a half worth of damages.
Al wrote: “The businesses on the truck route were the number one employers of the citizens of Greenwood.” And who would that be? The Greenwood quarry, Buckley powder were probably the biggest employers of Greenwood residents. If they needed a route to their jobs at the quarry, should the city give away its right to that route for eternity? And, how did the BOA think the city could afford to maintain the road that would be destroyed by heavy gravel trucks? Before they stopped using that route, they no longer used just big gravel trucks; they started using semi-trailers.
As for who I am supporting, I do not vote in Ward I, but if I did, I would vote for someone who would bring youth, experience and dedication to making Greenwood the type of town to raise children.

To correct my previous comment, Al Reynolds did make it clear concernig the veto override in his comment. In my response, I mistakenly wrote that: “The quarry sued the city in (state) court. That was an error, I meant federal court where they claimed that the city violated the Interstate Commerce Clause. That case is in the federal appeals court in St. Louis. Since the quarry attorneys could not demonstrate that they had suffered material damages by losing the Greenwood route to 150 Highway, it is likely that the appeals court will overturn Whipple’s ruling.

To correct my previous comment, Al Reynolds did make it clear concernig the veto override in his comment. In my response, I mistakenly wrote that: “The quarry sued the city in (state) court. That was an error, I meant federal court where they claimed that the city violated the Interstate Commerce Clause. That case is in the federal appeals court in St. Louis. Since the quarry attorneys could not demonstrate that they had suffered material damages by losing the Greenwood route to 150 Highway, it is likely that the appeals court will overturn Whipple’s ruling.

In response to Gene DeVaux, who appears to never let the “facts” get in the way of his words and, one who also appears to never let an opportunity pass to throw trash at another person, regardless of the true “facts”, the reality is had it not been for the ward 1 alderwomen over the last number of years Greenwood would be in a far worst shape that it currently finds itself. Since Gene DeVaux appears to be void of the ability to deal with “facts” I’ll only remind you Sara Ring was the “only” board member with sense enough, intellect enough, forethought enough, to know, and to vote against the quarry lawsuit – because she alone knew – the financial hardship it would bring to the city of Greenwood. The ward 1 alderwomen fought for the citizens and business owners of their ward. Simply because you, Gene DeVaux, apparently have a personal ax to grind against these two women, who will not lower themselves to get into the gutter with you, please, in the future, get your facts straight. I could give you specifics, but, I believe you already know the specifics and good they have done for Greenwood. If you doubt it, Gene DeVaux, I challenge you to go door-to-door, business-to-business and spew your vitriol. I believe you would soon learn the true meaning of “facts”.
But, then again, it’s so very easy to sit behind your computer, isn’t it, Gene DeVaux.
Someone submitted a post not long ago with a question to you, Gene DeVaux, that went something like, “why do you bother to come back”? You did not respond! Could it be concluded the answer might be found in that old axiom, a legend in his own mind? Just curious.

In response to Gene DeVaux, who appears to never let the “facts” get in the way of his words and, one who also appears to never let an opportunity pass to throw trash at another person, regardless of the true “facts”, the reality is had it not been for the ward 1 alderwomen over the last number of years Greenwood would be in a far worst shape that it currently finds itself. Since Gene DeVaux appears to be void of the ability to deal with “facts” I’ll only remind you Sara Ring was the “only” board member with sense enough, intellect enough, forethought enough, to know, and to vote against the quarry lawsuit – because she alone knew – the financial hardship it would bring to the city of Greenwood. The ward 1 alderwomen fought for the citizens and business owners of their ward. Simply because you, Gene DeVaux, apparently have a personal ax to grind against these two women, who will not lower themselves to get into the gutter with you, please, in the future, get your facts straight. I could give you specifics, but, I believe you already know the specifics and good they have done for Greenwood. If you doubt it, Gene DeVaux, I challenge you to go door-to-door, business-to-business and spew your vitriol. I believe you would soon learn the true meaning of “facts”.
But, then again, it’s so very easy to sit behind your computer, isn’t it, Gene DeVaux.
Someone submitted a post not long ago with a question to you, Gene DeVaux, that went something like, “why do you bother to come back”? You did not respond! Could it be concluded the answer might be found in that old axiom, a legend in his own mind? Just curious.

Herein lies half the problem with Greenwood. We have people who want to talk about what Al Reynolds did SIXTEEN years ago instead of what he’s going to do in 2010. I don’t know about you but I’m a different person than I was in 1994. I was a US Marine hired killing machine in 1994. I’m not that guy any longer.

Al Reynolds is clearly passionate about his community. But this article is about Sharon Hutinett. Al’s will be published shortly.

Herein lies half the problem with Greenwood. We have people who want to talk about what Al Reynolds did SIXTEEN years ago instead of what he’s going to do in 2010. I don’t know about you but I’m a different person than I was in 1994. I was a US Marine hired killing machine in 1994. I’m not that guy any longer.

Al Reynolds is clearly passionate about his community. But this article is about Sharon Hutinett. Al’s will be published shortly.