Linda Wells is the fever that boils Dunn's power struggles

Greg Dunn is not the only one up for reelection July 18. Linda Wells has oposition as well from Sam Chapman and Jack Smith. Either one is a better choice.
You would only have to attend one Commission meeting to observe the way Wells plays Dunn. She merely has to suggest a power struggle and Dunn is all over it.
She argues over pencils and paper clips while she sanctions half million dollar legal bills over her unnecassary power struggles to feed she and Dunn's ego.
Beyond Wells' seemingly passive demeanor is a vicious woman who feeds on the battle for power no matter what it cost the taxpayer.

Harvey's blog | login to post comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Submitted by justaskin on Mon, 05/15/2006 - 12:16pm.

Harvey,

Can you give me a single example of where you were present and saw Linda Wells, (or Dunn, or Pfiefer) being vicious? I find this kind of comment to be distasteful beyond compare. If you have an example, back it up, if you don't then why make such a post?

Submitted by Harvey on Mon, 05/15/2006 - 1:34pm.

There are too many examples to mention. Try every time anyone came before the Commission that she didn't like and even some you would think she would. The way she talks to Mark Pulium in front of the press, and Herb Frady, and not to mention anyone from the Sheriff's Office, even sometimes Jack Krakeel. And it's not just the way she (or you) talk to them but the way she/you talk about them behind their backs.

You fail to realize that the staff at Stonewall is around you hearing what you say about the lower paid employees. The ones you think are less educated so you speak as if they are beneath you/her. The way you/she laugh at something so silly as the way someone looks or dressed for work. You/she is vicious. If you/she doesn't realize it then that is part of the problem.

Joey Jamokes's picture
Submitted by Joey Jamokes on Mon, 05/15/2006 - 4:02pm.

Linda Wells not nasty ??? That’s hilarious !!! Even John Thompson recorded “the nasty glare” from Linda at Herb Frady. Linda has been vintage rude and angry since she set up shop in Fayette. Sorry, Linda, but he is a Commissioner too. Linda/JustAsking/Greg think that they are ordained by the heavens and routinely bully, sandbag and attack people that come to the podium. They have become just like Sprayberry– it’s time to take out the trash.

Justaskin— why don’t you answer the questions: What did the county attorney get paid in each of the last two years? What did the county attorney get paid for all of the lawsuits he filed (all of which he lost)? You may be “Justaskin” but ain’t it funny you ain’t answering ? Here’s the good news— with the new $10 million dollar price tag for the park, there should be room in there for several hundred thousand for the lawyers.


Submitted by justaskin on Mon, 05/15/2006 - 4:37pm.

Joey,

Have you ever had a conversation with any commissioner? Do you know anything about any of them beyond what you read in the paper? I have had occasion to ask these people for help in resolving issues in my neighborhood. Your description is simply not true.

As usual in your enthusiasm for blogging you miss the point. Were you there when the "glare" was delivered? Thompson was there, so I hear, but did he tell you that the glare was in response to a rude remark by Frady? Check the minutes of the meeting and see what was said. Wells did not even address him. If they routinely bully, sandbag and attack, you must have chapter and verse from the meeting minutes to support your statement. Oh wait, probably not. You bring this up as if it were a daily occurance when you know that such situations are very very rare for this board over the past 8 years.

Do not know about the last two years, but according to the county website the outside attorney was paid $506k for everything done for the county in the budget year ending. You know that the amount on the suits was about $50k for the county and $50k for the sheriff.

Lastly, Joey, the price tag on the park is not $10 million. That was a consultants estimate not the price tag, so cut out the nonsense.

Submitted by 00 on Mon, 05/15/2006 - 12:18pm.

Hurry up and answer Janet. We're just asskin.

Submitted by snark on Mon, 05/15/2006 - 12:38pm.

I feared the Sock Nazis would come for you.

Submitted by Honestly on Sat, 05/13/2006 - 11:48am.

I definitely agree with the description of Linda Wells as vicious. You obviously know her well, but why do you leave Peter Pfiefer out of all of this? He is the third vote that makes all of this happen. The park, Taj Mahal, the law suits, none of that would have happened without his third vote. If your gonna name them name them all.

Submitted by justaskin on Mon, 05/15/2006 - 12:19pm.

I will ask you the same simple question. Give me a single example where Linda Wells(or Dunn or Pfeifer) has been vicious to anyone at anytime?

Why would you suggest that Harvey knows Ms. Wells at all? It would appear to me that he/she does not know, and likely has never met her or any of the other members of the commission or this comment would never have been made.

Submitted by Harvey on Mon, 05/15/2006 - 1:53pm.

It only took one phone call for more examples. Your/her comments about the fit of the female groundsworkers uniforms and the workers caliber. Your comments about the caliber of workers in the water department and data processing. Your thoughts about the jail staff at the Fayette County Jail. She shouldn't speak these things outloud and then ask for them to be repeated. Want more??

cogitoergofay's picture
Submitted by cogitoergofay on Sat, 05/13/2006 - 7:35am.

So many people, including Citizen reporter John Thompson, have been fooled. Many people will watch a Commission meeting and be convinced that the strident opposition to small spending must mean that they are cautious on large scale spending as well. Not true. Therein lies the logical fallacy. They may abuse the Sheriff over $20,000 but will freqently spend huge sums of money on large projects. The Taj Mahal and the bloated legal bills are just two multimillion dollar examples. Look at the North Fayette Park. If it was a wise expenditure at $2.5 million, fine -- go ahead and do it. But when the price quadruples, it should be obvious that no one is minding the candy story.


Submitted by robert m on Sat, 05/13/2006 - 7:49am.

I couldn't have said it better myself. This county commission has wasted millions of taxpayer dollars in the short 4 years they have been together. The park in north Fayette now demands that $10 million total, or write off the $2.5 million initial outlay.

We may never know the total cost of the attorneys fees regarding the fighting the sheriff and the cities. It's in the hundreds of thousands of dollars, no doubt about that. And they have, to date, lost every one of the lawsuits.

Recent rumor is that they will pursue the sheriff to force the removal of the heliport. Why? Doesn't it seem logical that the copter be as near as possible when it is called into action? Does this commission want the pursuit delayed for several minutes just to satisfy their own lust for power?

Time for the three amigos to go away. Time for a change.

Submitted by justaskin on Mon, 05/15/2006 - 12:34pm.

Where is this supposed was of "millions of dollars" been wasted?
The $2.5 million dollar number was for the entire project in two phases only one of which is progress. Only $500k was spent in 2005 on the park so there would be no "writing off" of an investment. The $10 million dollar figure is an estimate, not the cost.

And why do you continue to use the term, "hundreds of thousands of dollars" spent on the lawsuits when you know that is not true? Does it make you feel good just to repeat an untruth?

This group has been together for almost 6 years.

Submitted by Harvey on Mon, 05/15/2006 - 2:05pm.

Denying the truth about the cost of the law suits only kills your own credibility. The cat is out of the bag on the cost and our own staff thinks it's incredibily wasteful.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.