Comments by cueball66
Page 1 of 2 | Next
Posted on October 27 at 10:58 p.m.
when i read this clearly uninformed opinion I had to say ARE YOU KIDDING ME IS THIS A JOKE? please dont' let fear rule over your decisions. that would be likesaying Im not voting for mcCain because he tried to commit sucide in Vietnam and I'm really worried about him suffering from Post tramatic stress syndrome once he gets in the white house.
Posted on October 27 at 10:48 p.m.
he has my vote he cares about the kids and has worked very well with famlies!
Posted on May 30 at 12:13 a.m.
Kids with modified mufflers is what I think is the basic target group, because they are being loud intentally and not all motorcycles are loud just the crotch rockets. when i lived in St. Cloud the cars wre so loud, both muffler and music wise that it would shake the dishes in the cabinets and pictures on the wall. sometimes u could not hear the tv or sleep at night because of the noise. not that I'm agaisnt these things, its that it becomes a problem when they (the noise) is forced on me against my will.
Posted on May 30 at 12:01 a.m.
why cant we hust use the empty rooms in the court house? it is a low cost anserw to an an existing problem.
Posted on May 29 at 11:51 p.m.
cant be any worse than fergus's orthopedics
Posted on May 28 at 11:44 p.m.
im not holding my breath. this is too proative for this community! if this goes through it will be the biggest thing for fergus since project 500, and i whole heartly support it
Posted on May 28 at 11:36 p.m.
I hope this is not going to be a trend of the city to take away alternative engery sources. first it was the wind now wood next it will be solar. it tends to show that the only thing the city is proactive on is making laws on technology that might help people, and keeping the boys club going.
Posted on April 25 at 11:04 p.m.
I am just glad that there will be some architectural design and not just another boring bridge
Posted on March 6 at 11:25 a.m.
What is wrong with people? How much of an idoit was this person. to me maybe we should shoot him with his gun so he knows how it feels
Page 1 of 2 | Next
Posted on November 9 at 4:29 p.m.
at the very least the council needs to reconsider sec 3 of the definations section of the ordinance. by passing the ordinance the city is saying that alcohol is addictive drug therefore putting the city in the bad position of being a entity that sells and licenses business's that provide the outlet for the addictive drug. does that mean the city also becomes liable by passing this ordiance? also i don't understand the part of leaving the descretion up to the police does this leave the police liable for a poor decision. I think this ordinace needs to have some serious reconsideration
On Proposed ordinance threatens parties