I've noticed either Todd or one of his minions are posting quite a bit going after the Hargroves for some of the projects they have done in Red Oak. I've done some digging and found out some interesting information. Y'all can debate this here all you want. I'm going to continue to dig and ask questions and see what comes up.
There have been allegations that Casey Hargrove's father was involved in some less that upfront projects and indirectly involved the council person on this blog. I checked the records and "Houston, we have a problem".
The funny little catch to that is that all of the projects Casey's father has done in Red Oak were presided over and approved by King Todd I. I just cannot find Casey's name as councilperson while these projects were completed. Please educate me if I'm reading the records incorrectly or not getting it right. I would definitely like to know and will post a retraction if I'm mistaken in reading records. I'm confused by the major disconnect. Sounds like yet more disinformation is being posted "right here in River City" on the blog. One CAN make a classic political connection however; demonize the person personally if you cannot disassemble them politically. A classic Clintonian tactical ploy.....
So far, every project that Ben Little has done in Red Oak during Ken Pfeifer's tenure has received direct City assistance, either in the form of the City extending costly sewer lines to the southwest corner of 35/Ovilla, or on all the frontage on Ovilla around his strip center which was purchased from the City for below market value. I also found that Mr. Little and his father got a first right of refusal on the property (something I have never seen a city do), all of this while Little Toddie was Mayor. That may all be "legal" but it doesn't pass the smell test for this amateur wag.
Circumstantial and anecdotal evidence does not get it done in a court of law. I'm no lawyer but something walks, sounds and acts like a duck, it must BE a duck. Please "unconfuse me".
It personally bothers me to write this because reputations, and personalities are involved , but if posters really want to go there, the facts are not kind to the Littles. I'd like to see some rebuttal in defense of the way these projects were handled. I don't think it will happen. Please prove me wrong....I will post a retraction if I'm OBG on it.
To "Todd's and Dawn's troops"...be certain the wine you make is not crushed from sour grapes. Contrary to popular opinion, people that live in Red Oak are NOT stupid, uneducated, and politically passive. People ARE tired of the way things have been done, have spoken in several recent elections and will speak again at the Tuesday Special Meeting either yea or nay. The people's voice and will must be heard. Business should never be concluded in backroom or lunchtime deals made by the "good ole boys in charge" of managing city services. That's a Huey P. Long mentality and frankly we're way past "The Kingfish" era in Red Oak politics.....or are we? That's a question hopefully Mr. Pfieifer is prepared to answer on Tuesday night. His continued relationship with the City of Red Oak hinges upon his answer. As per Indiana Jones and the Crusader watching "the bad guy" turn to dust...."he chose wrongly."
We'll see you on Tuesday....yea or nay? It's your call....business as usual or significant change/clean up in how business is done in our city?