Weeks' doting narrative and Tab's memo

You may remember the publication of the various police reports and court orders in the matter of Alderman Weeks’ divorce that surfaced after his re-election in 2004. To recap Weeks escaped charges of alleged spousal abuse, many incidents of violation of a protection order, and an alleged charge of residential burglary in and around the time of his campaigning for office.

But in true good ol’ boy fashion that seems to plague our local government no criminal charges were levied and Alderman Weeks however the divorce court found him in contempt for violation of the protection order and kept that order in effect. This order forbids Weeks from being anywhere near his ex-wife and specifically names the campus of Hendrix College as one of the place he is not to be.

Many times in his official capacity Weeks has continued to violate this order as he has on this occasion. But instead of the profile reporter asking him why he was violating a court order we get a doting narrative into a “stay-at-home dad” who would do anything for a developer. The reporter goes on portraying Weeks as the loving father and mentions the alderman’s now 6 year old daughter, would this be the same daughter that, according to police reports, saw her father push past her mother while calling the mom a “F’ing C” as he allegedly stole items from their home in Dec. 2004?

Clearly this “interview” was just another campaign tool used by the Mayor and his crew to get the people to vote for the tax rededication. Recently we came across another tool used by the Mayor, intimidation.

In an email memo to Police Chief Randal Aragon and Fire Chief Bart Castleberry Mayor Townsell explains how he failed to deliver his end of an apparent understanding the three had together. Townsell says,

Randall & Bart,

I am sorry that I have put you in a bad position. You have followed through from our conversations and I didn't deliver all I said I was going to do. Obviously, I wanted the bad news now rather than later if I was going to fail to deliver.

Townsell goes on to explain how the city’s general fund reserves have dropped to under $1.5 million or less that 8% in the reserve, which led him and the finance committee to cut the departmental budgets. A loss in personnel and new equipment at both departments was the result of these cuts.

Townsell blames the apparent budgetary problems on the cost of the special census and a raid of the general fund for “economic development”. The bottom line being the City Council created the problem, if there really is one. Keep in mind the city has shown an increase in revenue due to a 10.5% and a 14% sales tax increase that would tend to negate the Mayor’s assertions.

But Townsell insists there is a problem and says that he can guarantee that major capital projects will never be funded if the rededication fails,

I CAN guarantee however that the major capital projects will not, can not be funded in the foreseeable future if the rededication fails. That guarantee will not fail in either good or bad budget years. The projects will not get done in any year.

In essence the citizens are being asked to pay for the city’s overspending on special interest projects designed to MAYBE bring in additional revenue or lose out on projects for our police and fire departments.

Here’s our suggestion, vote “NO” on the rededication and tell Mayor Townsell and the special interest loving Alderman to find a way to fund these projects or come election day we will find other representation.