November 21, 2012
Revisited: Worst Day In
County Politics By A
Landslide
____________________________

One older female Democrat who
knew my parents and both sets of
grandparents could not wait till she
crossed the parking lot to relay just
how disappointed she was that I
believe the majority commissioners
screwed the county over last year by
stalling, delaying conversation and
planning of the temporary womens'
jail.

"How can you say that? How did
they know that then that there
would be over a million dollars
sending those prisoners out of
Fayette?" she asked me, referring to
2012 and things she has read said
here.

Before she could find her copy of
the Crabtree study in the trunk of
her car and whatever else she
seemed to be scrounging to locate, I
ended up walking her across the
parking lot to wi-fi. She was so
shook up; somehow, she lost focus
and locked her car keys and cell
phone inside her purse in her trunk.

Like me or not these days, she had
little choice but to tag along -- other
than stand in the parking lot peeing
her pants waiting for a better offer.
We went inside, got a hot coffee and
tea and she accepted a ride back to
her place to find a hidden housekey
to retrieve an extra set of car keys.




"And this should change my
mind?" she asked of whatever it was
that I wanted her to read,
annoyingly close to mocking my
voice, as I got a laptop online to get
onto the county's official website.

I wanted her to read some of the

minutes of the commissioners'
meeting from November 21, 2012. I
scrolled down for her, to page 27.

She
had to know that she was
reading about the very saddest,
pathetically worst public display of
government mismanagement ever in
Fayette politics. The poker face look
on her face reading didn't give away
her gut feeling, though. Die-hard
political supporter of the county
commission majority that she is, she
soon was nit picking at written
words of formal county minutes.

This tough cookie was someone who
really needed to see the actual video
of the
November 21, 2012
commissioners' meeting, starting at
around 1:58 into it, to recognize and
accept the truth. She needed to hear
and see that the video of the
meeting on the right side split screen
pretty closely captured the moments
as written about in the county
meeting minutes displayed on the
left split screen side.

I, meanwhile, was most empathetic.
The meeting minutes, naturally,
don't come with added shock
preparing comments such as
"He/they didn't look up that much
and stared downward most of the
time that Zimmerlink asked about
the county's interest in the
building."


Almost a year later, it is still very
hard for me to believe that two
commissioners authorized a $500
payment for a property appraisal
without telling the third
commissioner or the public and
would authorize a county worker a
task on a Saturday, when the
courthouse is closed, to attend and
actively bid on an auctioned
property at the auction.

"Oh, so that's why they were at Bud
Murphy's!" the older Democrat
across the table exclaimed. No, no,
Bud's was a whole different outing,
city and purpose.




An auction to sell an Iowa
Street property of
unknown interest to two
county commissioners was
held on a 2012 November
Saturday, almost one year
ago. It was a weekend
auction, followed by a
Monday when the court
house was closed but email
among the men contined.

While a RTK request is to be sent to
obtain copies of these particular
emails and memo signed to allow a
county worker to attend a Saturday
auction and bid on a property that
some county officials thought the
county needed for some purpose, I
expect to receive heavily censored
emails. I do not expect to get the
memo.




The elderly Democrat friend of the
family, now seated comfortably in a
wi-fi cafe across my table watching
video of the 2012 November
commissioners' meeting, still wasn't
giving up all hope so quickly,
however. She asked to back up the
video to repeat a few things. The
memo struck her as being
significant.

"Right there!" she exclaimed. "The
solicitor was in on the emails, so it
all had to be legal," she said,
referring to references in the video
to the solicitor being copied on
those emails, starting 10 days before
the auction.



"Not to change the subject, but I'll
go out on a limb here and bet that
you agree that the Sunshine Act was
not violated at the monthly jail ad
hoc committee meetings because
Ambrosini said a reporter was
there," I commented in between
video segment replays and
repeatedly backing up a few
particular comments and awkward
pauses of silence on the parts of the
county commission majority and
solicitors as Zimmerlink practically
begged to be informed of what had
happened.  She ignored the
Sunshine question completely. She
kept watching the meeting video
and listening, comparing it to the
meeting minutes.



Nah, she wasn't buying the theory
that the men might have been
shopping in November of 2012 for a
building to be used for the
incarceration of county residents in
some way.

"The solicitor knew about the plan
to let the county staff attend the
auction on a Saturday behind the
scene to bid on a building. The
solicitor knew that they authorized
payment for an appraisal," she said.
That meant it was all OK, she said.

How was she so sure, I asked her,
that the solicitors were aware of
anything else after giving opinion
early what formal, legal steps
needed to be taken prior to bidding?

"We may know if you send a Right
To Know request to get the emails
and the letter that Commissioner
Zapotosky said that he 'signed off
on' to allow the staff to attend and
bid," I told her.



Telling her that it was unclear from
the minutes and video what the
solicitors knew prior to the auction
or since, I agreed with her that a
RTK will be sent to attempt to
obtain those emails. A RTK request
also would include getting a copy of
the memo that one commissioner
said at the county meeting that his
fellow commissioner's secretary
typed and he signed before the
auction to authorize county staff to
bid on property for unknown
county use.


"The county won't give you those,"
she said almost in a whisper, leaning
over the table, much to my surprise.
Then she asked something else.

"Was Mark O'Keefe's email to you
real?" she asked, very dramatically
looking me straight in the eye. I
recognized the look. She was
cracking from all the pressure of
supporting a farce. She was ready
for reality and truth.

Yes, O'Keefe's email was authentic.
I shared his original email right
from my email account with her.
That email, from the Uniontown
paper editorial page editor, of
course, confirmed that the time and
date on a letter to the editor he
received from a citizen did not jive
with Ambrosini's claim in a
subsequently published letter to the
editor that the citizen and minority
commissioner wrote the letter in her
office a few days after it had already
been received at the paper.