Some people believe purchasing property from the mayor of St. Helens is ok, I do not believe the city should purchase property from the mayor while he is in office.

Do I believe there is hanky panky going on between the council and the mayor? The answer is "no".

Do I think they should be considering this property? The answer is "no". 

Doing the talks in executive session is wrong and raises suspicion. I do not agree with many actions by the city council, nor do I agree that the council should always agree in public meetings with the mayor as a healthy way to portray themselves or a way to handle the people's business. But then I have heard that if a council person voice's an opinion against the mayors wishes openly in public he will table the issue, so I guess other than that things are peachy in River City or maybe not.

There was an incident which had been rumored all through town……..it happened many years ago…..

The mayor was a fireman at the time…. Mayor Peterson and another fireman decided it would be a fun day to go down to the docks in St Helens and deflate the inflatable fire rescue boat Ha, Ha, very funny! And they surely did. When the incident came to light to this is what happened…..

The people who wanted the mayor and pal disciplined appropriately--- lost that battle and left town entirely. The incident was handled internally at the fire department and Mayor Peterson was given a promotion and no charges were filed against him and his pal.

Now if this incident had been done by a teenager, or an adult who had too much to drink or done just for laughs like the mayor and pal had done the teenager would have been put in Juvenal Hall.  If  her/her was close to 18 they might have been tried as an adult.  Am adult would have been fined and would have been a guest of the local jail and who the heck knows what all charges would be filed and would have most likely had to do restitution along with fines. Making front page headlines.

So whether this rumored incident has anything to do with the purchasing of property from the mayor or not it sheds some light on the mayor.

The city council thinks purchasing this property will add to the value of the surrounding property that the city owns now where the city shops are. Thinking ahead is great but what business would want to build there? Other than a trucking or garage type?

The city mentioned that perhaps they would move the city shop but failed to mention to where.

I agree with the individual who mentioned the fact that there is no money for needed police officers in the budget but there is money to purchase this property and dilapidated storage buildings.

Heck--- we can't get businesses to locate in St. Helens and a huge part of the reason is because the city charges such high permit rates, if they really wanted to get new business they would make the permits a reasonable rate. Plus we have an entire down town area that has empty stores with no prospects, we have an entire downtown which has been tried to be reinvented for the last 25 years with no success.

When I was a kid down town was so busy you could not find a parking spot. Up town Houlton was the same. You could buy anything you needed right here in town. We had a Sears, Montgomery Wards, Penny's, shoe stores ,shoe repair, several clothing stores men's, women's, restaurants, car dealers, you name it we had it. Now you have to go to Portland to buy most things, unless you shop at Wal-mart or go to Scappoose to shop at Fred Meyer's. Thankfully we still Have a decent clothing store in Harrington's which has been around for decades and deserves our support.

If the city believes buying the property from the mayor is a good investment, maybe they know something the rest of us don't.