So that WAS you in the front row last night. You and your laptop.

But about the meeting and the appearance of Mr. Smothers. At least this time there was someone in the chair. At the last city council meeting, Mr. Lowery’s name plate was (intentionally or not) covered by the C.E.R.T. sign.

I think you may have misused “brangle”. To quote June Heath, the copy editor that chose to use the word:
“… I then thought of “brangle,” which is defined in our Webster’s unabridged dictionary (2nd ed.) as “to dispute contentiously; to squabble.” The word “squabble” would also have been acceptable, but not quite angry enough, with a connotation of fighting over something petty (”to quarrel noisily over a small matter; wrangle”). The issues in the story aren’t petty.”
http://www.stltoday.com/blogzone/the-editors-desk/the-editors-desk/2009/02/copy-editor-explains-using-brangle-in-headline/

Substituting either of the discarded alternatives - wrangle or squabble - causes the sentence to fall apart, does it not? I believe a more accurate use would be, “The Post-Dispatch published a story in yesterday’s edition recapping much of the recent brangling at City Hall.”

I brangle, he brangles, they brangled, we are brangling. Well, we could be brangling if this is taken too seriously.

But I could be mistaken.

See you in two weeks.

Of course the Council should take action on Lowery. I would be for a very open and public hearing so that the citizens of O’Fallon could hear why Bob Lowery should be fired. Anyone who hears the evidence will wonder what took them so long to fire this guy.

Make a decision either way, dragging this out is silly and only causes further speculation that it is only a political power play. If you have cause fire him, if you don’t bring him back and move on for the next two months. Let the next council and mayor hire someone to their choosing and hopefully it will be someone that can move the city forward .

Perhaps “brangling at City Hall” would have been better. I probably won’t use the word in conversation ever, but at least I, too, learned a new word. Thanks to copyeditor June Heath!

What amazes me is all of the vitriolic comments concerning this issue.
If the Council feels that there might be a reason(s) for dismissing the City Administrator, then it is in the interest of the citizens for them to do their due dilligence in investigating this and come to a logical conclusion. Unfounded (and not stated) allegations of a “Council person” lead me to wonder what is really going on.

Putting someone on administrative leave while an indepth process is proceeding is not only protecting the city but Mr. Lowery at the same time. From what I read and hear, this is not cut and dried as would be if there were a felony committed this is performance based.

There are issues here that are both personal and personnel in nature. They do not need to be debated in the media in fairness to all concerned.Give the process a chance and then live with the outcome.

I have my own opinion as to what I hope the outcome will be, but it is not up to me, it is up to the individuals whom we elected to office. I trust and hope that their decision will be what is best for the city.

Hi Jim.

You are, of course, completely correct. Except that you aren’t.

Mr. Lowery, Jr. can be “unappointed” at will (unappointed? deappointed? have an appointedectomy?). All the council needs to do is make up their minds one way or the other, and actually DO something.

You know what? What if they offered Mr. Lowery the same deal that was offered to former Chief of Police Schulte? Offer him cash to leave “voluntarily” or he’s out with nothing.

Brangling is not in Webster’s dictionary. If Robert lowery Jr. needs ajob maybe daddy cab get him one in Florissant.

God save us all if Lowery returns. If Lowery come back he will feel very empowered. The terror will just be starting. The city did not seem mind firing others and then paying settlements. At least Lowery would be some other poor municipalities problem.

Lowery is not there but still pulling the strings. See Morrow wants her aide, Carl Maus, picked to be the city’s Economic Developer. She knows Maus is out of job when she leaves. So to keep him and Adolphus Busch happy she wants him in a City Job that will keep employed after April. She is telling Lowery to tell Smothers to hire Maus this week. The burning of the City as she exits is in full swing. Maus has no credentials to be in Economic Development much less in charge.

Smothers knows he is on the way out also and will do whatever he can to protect his job in the short term. The new mayor, which will be Hennessy, will then go in and clear house. If he doesnt, he will constantly be undercut by members of staff. Lowery knows that his demise is inevitable also. He is trying to set himself up for additional money during his ‘transition’. I am sure the City will move forward under Hennessy, but believe me, I am no fan of his (the others will be much worse). I would love to see a video of Bob being escorted out of City Hall. I also think that the current administration should be investigated for wrongdoing and actually prosecuted.