Jim O'Bryan wrote: This is one of the problems with not all the facts.
Just sounded like good advice when you were telling it to others.
Moderator: Jim O'Bryan
Jim O'Bryan wrote: This is one of the problems with not all the facts.
Corey Rossen wrote:Jim O'Bryan wrote: This is one of the problems with not all the facts.
Just sounded like good advice when you were telling it to others.
Still seems like a stretch header no matter how you try to justify it. So when the City blocks off (fill in the blank example here) Avenue, they hate the people who live on that street, even if work is being done on it?Jim O'Bryan wrote:Corey Rossen wrote:Jim O'Bryan wrote: This is one of the problems with not all the facts.
Just sounded like good advice when you were telling it to others.
Corey
It was, but this story hasn't changed? You seem confused sometimes by nuance.
Those were not RTA signs, they were City of Lakewood signs, put their by Lakewood City workers under Lakewood City Hall orders.
Additional information was added as to why. It doesn't change the message, or the header.
While it was pointed out many times that Lakewood can control its destiny with RTA.
.
Lori Allen _ wrote:Some persons that post here on the Deck seem like they are never happy with what they read and are always going after the messenger. Why then do they just keep coming back for more! Good day for fishing!