PLANET VALENTI News and Commentary

(FORTRESS OF SOLITUDE, THURSDAY, AUG. 29, 2013) — Congratulations again to Terry Kinnas,

TERRY KINNAS: Vindicated!

Pittsfield’s most effective public servant. Once more (actually, thrice more), the office of state Attorney Gen. Martha Coakley has ruled in favor of Kinnas in three open meeting complaints related to the Reid Middle School Council Community Outreach Committee. The AG ruled that the Reid group, chaired by Julia Sabourin (aka Julia Berkowitz), violated the law three times in its deliberations, including two meetings illegally held to plan what became the most embarrassing evening for any city deliberative body in years.

THE PLANET speaks, of course, of the infamous Scopes Monkey Trial, in which Mayor Dan Bianchi and the rest of Kinnas’ school committee colleagues put Kinnas on trial for having the audacity to file the Reid complaints with the AG in the first place.

The AG’s ruling makes clear: Terry Kinnas was in the right. The Reid-ites, the Pittsfield School Committee, Dan Bianchi, and the PSD administration were in the wrong. Shame on them, and more glory to Kinnas. Do you wonder why, folks, the Pittsfield public schools have turned into a joke? You shouldn’t anymore.

“I feel vindicated,” Kinnas told THE PLANET. “I received unwarranted political and legal harassment via the Pittsfield School Committee [of which Kinnas is a member] and the mayor. That would be Bianchi, of course. Kinnas also pointed out the “arrogance” of the Reid subcommittee, which ignored the Kinnas’ complaints. As the AG ruled, “failing to respond to Mr. Kinnas’ two Dec. 11, 2012 complaints … also violated the Open Meeting Law.” Jonathan Sclarsic, assistant AG, sent letters to Sabourin informing her of the decisions.

Let’s take a look at the three rulings:

KINNAS: Justice will not be denied.

Violation #1: The AG found that the Reid subcommittee broke the Open Meeting law on Nov. 14, 2012, for conducting a meeting “that was inaccessible to the public.” The AG determined that in response to Kinnas’ complaint, the subcommittee took remedial action and that no further remedial action was necessary beyond a slap on the wrist. The Reid Critters didn’t get off as well on Violations 2 and 3.

Violations 2 and 3: The AG found that the Reid-ites violated the Open Meeting law twice for “failing to provide 48 hours notice for its November 21, 2012 and December 3, 2012 meetings.” Moreover, the AG also determined that the Reid-ites broke the law by failing to respond to Kinnas’ Feb. 7, 2013 allegations. The law requires that “a public body shall, within 14 business days of receipt of an Open Meeting Law complaint, review the complainant’s allegations; take remedial action, if appropriate; and send to the Attorney General a copy of the complaint and a description of any remedial action taken” [PLANET’s underline]. The  Reid-ites did none of this.

Kinnas, therefore, is more than justified in his criticism of the subcommittee’s “arrogance.” Public officials must sign an affidavit of compliance and file it with the city clerk’s office that they have read the state’s Open Meeting Law, that they understand it, and that they will obey it. This is not discretionary, except that many Pittsfield officials seem to think the laws do not apply in the city. Well, as everyone on Bear Creek can tell them, those laws DO apply. Think for a moment if it wasn’t for Kinnas, nothing would have happened. The Reid-ites would have continued to meet illegally, and no one on the PSC or in the administration — including all the troughers who lap up six-figure salaries out of taxpayers’ pockets — would have done a thing about it.


For these violations, the AG:

1.) Ordered the Reid-ites’ “immediate and future compliance” with the law.

2.) Put the subcommittee on notice “that similar future violations may be considered evidence of an intentional violation of the law.” This is AG-speak for saying, “The next time, it’s going to hit the members of the subcommittee in the pocketbook.”

3. Ordered “the subcommittee members to review and certify in writing to our office within thirty (30) days that the members have complied.” In other words, the AG gave the Reid-ites a homework assignment and a deadline. They have to eat crow, and rightly so. They must put it in writing, and we shall eagerly look forward to obtaining a copy of the letter, which we shall share. We hope Sabourin can avoid further embarrassment by at least spelling her mea culpa correctly. She is, after all, connected with the PSD.

It shall furthermore be the case, in light of the AG’s finding, that all personnel on all city boards, councils, and commissions had better start following the law. Simply put: They have to do the public’s business in public.

MAYOR BIANCHI: Did he orchestrate the “Scopes Monkey Trial?” and why was he out of town that night?

Also invited to the crow feast is Bianchi, Alf Barbalunga, Dan Elias, Jim Conant, Kathy Amuso, and Kathy Yon. These accomplices aided and abetted the unjust persecution of Kinnas in the now infamous “Scopes Monkey Trial.” This occurred in January of this year, as THE PLANET recalls, on a night in which Bianchi conveniently found it “necessary” to be out of town. The mayor has yet to explain his role in arranging the Trial or why he wasn’t in the room that night. Was it a miraculous coincidence or was it an example of Bianchi’s political cowardice? We’ll leave it to you to decide for yourself.

During the Trial, the school committee chastised Kinnas for pursuing these violations of the law. Now that Kinnas has basically stuck it to them, at minimum Barbalunga, Bianchi and the rest owe Kinnas a public apology at the next school committee meeting.

The violations send the message that Bianchi and the others, caught red-handed, think they are above the law. It also makes us wince to think about the message these yahoos send to Boston. No wonder the politicians think the state ends at Worcester, despite the neat little photo ops of Mayor Bianchi shining the shoes of newly minted U.S. Sen. Ed Markey.

We also throw school committee lawyer Mr. Dupere in with the hooligans. Dupere presided as legal counsel to the committee during the Monkey Trial. In essence, he gave a stamp of approval to nothing less than a violation of Terry Kinnas’ civil rights. We aren’t lawyers here at THE PLANET, but we know plenty of law, and it would seem to us to be an actionable situation.

Oh, by the way, for his stellar work on behalf of the school committee, that body gave Dupere, who’s a private lawyer serving the PSC as a hired gun, a $10,000 raise! When that came up early in this term, all but one member of the PSC voted to boost Dupere from $35,000 to $45,000 a year for his part-time gig.

Guess who was the only school committeeman who voted against this? If you guessed Terry Kinnas, you got it right!

Incidentally, THE PLANET shares this “veddy interesting” side note from the AG’s action. It has to do with the online postings.

As we said, the AG sent the complaints via post directly to Julia Sabourin c/o of Reid Middle School. Kinnas, as the complainant, received a copy by mail as well. If you want to see the actual letters online from the AG’s website, you follow these steps (there’s a reason we are sharing this information, so bear with us uno momento):

a.) Go to

b.) Click on “Government Resources” on the top menu bar.

c.) Click on the hot link for “Open Meeting Law.”

d.) Under the heading :Open Meeting Law Resources,” click on the first hot link, which reads, “Browse OML Determinations.” This lists the recent findings from the AG on the Open Meeting Law.

Do all this, and you will see a list of determinations that go back to Jan. 3, 2013. It is a ponderous list, some 127 items in all. Here’s the anomaly: Every one of the links on this long list is a hot one except two. Can you guess which two? If you guessed the two dated 8/26/13, OML 2013-125 and 126, “Reid Middle School Council Community Outreach Subcommittee,” you are correct once more.

What are the odds, ladies and gentlemen, that this should be a coincidence? Gosh, you think someone out there doesn’t want the good people of Pittsfield to know about the reckless attitude toward the law exhibited by the mayor and the school committee.

No problem, though: THE PLANET is here, once again, to break a story that the GOB-controlled local mainstream and alternate media wouldn’t find in a million years — not because the Boring Broadsheet, WBEC, WUHN, WBRK, and all the rest of them aren’t capable of finding.

It’s because they’re too friggin’ afraid to look.


“One can see what will trouble / This sleep of mine, whatever sleep it is. / Were he not gone, / The woodchuck could say whether it’s like his / Long sleep, as I describe it coming on, / Or just some human sleep.”Robert Frost, closing stanza, “After Apple-Picking.”




  1. Ron Kitterman
    August 28, 2013 at 11:01 pm #

    Why would the Mayor offer an apology, he was conspicuously absent from the meeting ? He makes Silent Cal, look like a blabber mouth with his actions. “ The committee voted 5-1, with Kinnas opposed and Mayor Daniel Bianchi absent, to approve the following motion in response to the dispute: “

    • danvalenti
      August 29, 2013 at 4:52 pm #

      It was and remains and likely shall be Bianchi’s low point as mayor.

  2. Scott
    August 29, 2013 at 4:13 am #

    This mayor has proven himself unworthy to lead. It’s a shame he’s going unopposed. Spend, spend, spend Bianchi we got ill just get another job. New police station, new water system and a new school.

  3. Sally
    August 29, 2013 at 5:18 am #

    Whatever good Mr. Kinnas tried to do was overshadowed by his ranting diatribes and anger management issues. He is his own worst enemy.

    • Russell Moody
      August 29, 2013 at 5:45 am #

      Ms. Sally,
      I concur…

    • Jim Gleason
      August 29, 2013 at 12:08 pm #

      Terry Kinnas did no ranting, in fact he was very much under control at all times during all of this ridiculousness.He asked questions, which is taboo under GOB control(and I don’t count Mayor Bianchi as a GOB). Weneeded 6 more Terry Kinnas’ on that committee and maybe they could’ve gotten something accomplished instead of worrying about pleasing their masters.Keep up the good work Terry and I’m sorry you’re not running again. You got and would have my vote.

      • Ten
        August 29, 2013 at 8:25 pm #

        So From what you say Mr. Kinnas did no ranting at any meeting. From what I have heard from parents that were present at the meeting was that Kinnas did not only rant but went as far as to slam his fist on the table on which the meeting was held around and become “red in the face” resorting to yelling and belligerence to “get his point across”. It appears from what I know of the meeting from people who were present was that some members of the subcommittee felt so intimidated that they required someone to escort them from the building to feel safe to leave. Not only did Mr. Kinnas resort to an agressive tactic to present his displeasure regarding the violation of open meeting laws he was also observed to be in violation of standard meeting practice demanding to be admitted to sit at the table around which the committee was sitting. This would indicate that he has a measure of power regarding the actions of the committee as to their deliberation which clearly a non member of the committee, even one who is an elected public official, clearly does not possess. He refused to sit in the seats reserved for the public presenting a face I find to be displeasing at best.

        I find such comments from members of the committee to reveal conduct that is simply unacceptable and downright troubling in regards to politics especially coming from an elected official. I am simply disappointed in the man who many of you see as a savior of local politics and instead have come to see a man who I once had great hope for in the school committee as more of a hindrance to progress in the local school system.

        In addition he proceeded to take his complaints regarding the open meeting violations to the AG rather than local authorities which may have simply resulted in the fixing of the error which was perpetrated. Instead he proceeded to make a move that showed a lack of confidence in the local systems generating such controversy and the potential of massive fines to be paid out by the government of Pittsfield,

        Those of you that have up to this point supported Mr. Kinnas’s actions relying on the biased information supported by himself and those who support him, without ever looking into the true nature of the events which had unfolded in the meeting in question and the words of those who were present are in the right to have such opinions and I likewise would take similar action regarding a public official given the same information. However with this information I cannot find it morally sound to continue blindly supporting someone in the face of such fact. Those of you who rethink your support of this man should like me find themselves at least reconsidering their support of the man.

        • danvalenti
          August 29, 2013 at 9:08 pm #

          Blah blah blah, yadda yadda, yukkety yuck. By that, I mean you and your type consistently refuse to acknowledge that the AG decided that Mr. Kinnas was in the right and the Reid-ites were in the wrong. Just admit it, my good friend. It will make it easier to take.

          • Ten
            August 29, 2013 at 9:52 pm #

            So… simply because the AG says it’s right makes it right? The U.S. Government said slavery was right for more than 100 years. was that right then or were they wrong. Furthermore you totally fail to address my content

        • Jim Gleason
          August 30, 2013 at 8:54 am #

          Dear Ten, I that your IQ? It surely seems to be that way. “According to parents who were at the meetings” blah blah. Did you see this for yourself? I did, and you can be assured that at no time did Mr. Kinnas lose him composure or rnat and rave. You wont believe me , of course, because I am telling it as it happened, not a made up fantasy version of the happenings. Ta Ta.

          • danvalenti
            August 30, 2013 at 6:23 pm #

            Your eyewitness account is the same as any truthful person who attended that night or watched by TV, X-Ray Specs, or NSA monitoring. Terry was professional throughout. “Parents who were at the meeting?” Notice TEN doesn’t include names.

    • danvalenti
      August 29, 2013 at 4:51 pm #

      “Diatribes and anger management issues?” You are trying to deflect attention from the fact that the AG agreed with Terry, for the fourth time in four Open Meeting Law complaints. You are throwing mud, and when you do that, you lose ground, as you have here.

      • TKO
        August 29, 2013 at 6:57 pm #

        If the AG had found intentional violations of the law there could have been $1000 fines assessed for each violation. That fine would be payed out of my tax dollars. These were not found to be intentional….thank you. I wonder how this is in any way financially responsible? The open meeting violations could have been handled at the school committee level. Complaints to the AG clearly were an option, but change to a faulty meeting posting process could have been handled in a far more financially responsible manner.

        • danvalenti
          August 29, 2013 at 7:58 pm #

          Again, you are deflecting. Look at what the AG said. (S)he’s giving these yokels a break. The letter warns of fines if there’s any more criminal activity. We agree, all things being equal, that these complaints could have been handled at the local level. However, all things are not equal. The locals, including the PSC, would not have done a thing, as is evidenced by the Money Trial, in which they actually did the opposite, which was to punish an official who was trying to bring attention to violations, intentional or otherwise. We also point out that ignorance of the law cannot be an excuse in the case of the Reid subcommittee.

          • Ten
            August 29, 2013 at 8:48 pm #

            Sir by my understanding in the case of the Money Trial officials were not punished for their actions to bring attention to violations. Rather they were reprimanded for their actions in disrupting a meeting. If you have data to disprove me and prove otherwise I would greatly appreciate it.

  4. Mike Ward
    August 29, 2013 at 8:06 am #

    Terry’s school committee legacy is, not surprisingly, a continuation of his role as government watchdog. It’s an important role, but it was never necessary for Terry to actually be a member of the school committee. I’d rather see someone in that seat who is interested in improving the product.

    • Jim Gleason
      August 29, 2013 at 12:14 pm #

      Mike, would you say the same about Barry Clairmont on the City Council? Terry got a lot accomplished, including bringing the light the shady dealings that go on in the PPS and getting rid of the most inept and crooked Superintendent since Dr Lafrenzie.He also stood up for students and families who weren’t connected and who had no voice before.As I said before, keep up the good work Terry, and I’m sorry you’re not running again.

      • Ed Shepardson
        August 29, 2013 at 2:23 pm #

        At this point, it might be that the entire electorate has anger management issues.

        • danvalenti
          August 29, 2013 at 4:43 pm #

          Good one, ED. So true, so true.

      • danvalenti
        August 29, 2013 at 4:46 pm #

        We agree with you, JIM, about Terry’s service.

      • Mike Ward
        August 29, 2013 at 6:18 pm #

        Good observation, Jimmy. Barry and Terry both have that auditor quality about them. I get the impression that what they do with their findings is what differentiates them. Barry is more of a reformer and Terry is more of a snitch.

        I do give Terry credit for uncovering Housegate, even though he was unable to stop the deal.

    • Dave
      August 29, 2013 at 3:12 pm #

      “it was never NECESSARY(my caps) for Terry to ACTUALLY(my caps) be a member of the school committee” If that one statement doesn’t sum up what is ACTUALLY wrong with the way this city has run for far too long I can’t come up with a better one. Also, “interested in improving the product”?!?!?!?!?!?! The throwing more money approach hasn’t worked. “The vocational department has been grossly underfunded for far too long” is a statement I have heard for quite a few budget seasons. The budget grows each year, the surpluses get spent elsewhere, whose fault is this? Obviously not the people interested in improving the product.

      • danvalenti
        August 29, 2013 at 4:45 pm #

        You and so many others see right through the phonies, and so does Terry. That’s why they try to deflect the situation, bringing up false accusations of “anger issues” and other such bull. Notice how the apologists have trouble admitting this, as evident on some of these comments.

      • Ten
        August 29, 2013 at 8:38 pm #

        A question I feel needs to be presented in this situation is “Why is the vocational system grossly underfunded?” I cannot simply find myself willing to complain about the problem without more information. I feel that it is more important to find out why the school department is spending more money elsewhere? Personally I find a totally possible answer to be that the requirements placed upon the local school department by the state regarding the MCAS test and scores in other areas of study as well as other programs to support such advancement might be responsible in this under-funding.

    • danvalenti
      August 29, 2013 at 4:49 pm #

      Honestly — You don’t think Terry “is interested in improving the product?” Seriously?? He’s the only one on that committee who has shown such interest. And as has been pointed out, your statement about it not being “necessary” for Terry to “actually” be on the committee can’t be taken seriously. I thought that was the idea: To encourage citizens to become involved in government … or is that not how it’s done in Pittsfield?

      • Mike Ward
        August 29, 2013 at 5:57 pm #

        Dan, please describe a constructive idea that Terry brought forward, advocated, sold, and saw implemented. An idea that somehow improved the way the schools operate or saved us money. That’s not how he works. He’s a watchdog. He looks for procedural missteps and reports those missteps to the proper authorities. I think my critique was a fair and apt counterpoint to your characterization of his term. That’s allowed here, right?

        • raider50
          August 29, 2013 at 6:29 pm #


        • danvalenti
          August 29, 2013 at 8:01 pm #

          I can describe a Tome’s worth, but I shall let Terry handle that. He has proposed many ideas for efficiency, cost savings, and productivity in government. Do your homework, man! And yes, your critique is not only allowed but welcome and encouraged.

        • Jim Gleason
          August 30, 2013 at 9:01 am #

          Mike, every time Terry brought forward a valid way to save money or improve efficiency his small minded mates on the committe shot ot down because it came from him, and solely because it came from him.At least you have the guts to put your name on your misguided thoughts, unlike the cowards who bash anonymously.

          • danvalenti
            August 30, 2013 at 6:21 pm #

            Right-o on both counts. Kinnas has brought forth innumerable ideas for the betterment of the city and the schools, but the GOB dares not employ any of them. They have their cushy deals to protect!

  5. CarlosDanger
    August 29, 2013 at 8:30 am #

    Whereas Mr. Kinnas seems to try to do the right thing, he lacks the tact and proper communication skills to gather buy-in for his proposals and ideas. That being said, what the school committee and the mayor did to him was just downright wrong.

    • dusty
      August 29, 2013 at 12:29 pm #

      What the mayor and school committee did was demoralizing to the taxpayers. But that is their style and they probably lost the battle but won the war. I am sure they have discouraged other candidates with integrity from running. And was that not their goal in the first place?

      At least now the people who do pay attention know who the slime balls are and what they really stand for. They are above shame so I doubt Terry will let any hand shakes from any of them.

      • danvalenti
        August 29, 2013 at 4:45 pm #

        Any hand shakes Terry gets from that crew should be followed by a large dose of Janitor in a Drum.

      • Ten
        August 29, 2013 at 8:31 pm #

        How can one say that these people have no integrity? I mean to say is it not possible that these people who you would have be believed spineless and without integrity to simply be running on different ethical systemics and moral ideals than yourselves. Could it not be possible that they show integrity in equal measure toward the objectives that they believe to be most important? Or is it that many among you cannot find it possible that one could have other objectives than Mr. Kinnas? Before you ever judge a man’s integrity you need to know his objectives.

        • danvalenti
          August 29, 2013 at 9:06 pm #

          That’s a fair question. It has a simple answer. The answer about “integrity” in this case is the law. We are a nation of laws. Mr. Kinnas has fought to uphold the law. The Pittsfield School Committee, the PSD Administration, the the Reid subcommittee acted to violate the law.

          • Ten
            August 29, 2013 at 9:58 pm #

            No. They acted out of ignorance of the law there is a strong difference between acting in defiance and ignorance. The other members of the PSD and School Committee were for giving them a chance to rectify their error. I believe integrity is acting for what you believe is right it has nothing to do with law. To say law is the basis of integrity means men like Gandhi who acted directly in defiance of colonial law, or MLK and the Civil Rights fighters who acted in opposition of the law to do what was right had no integrity. INSTEAD you give integrity to men like the Taliban who make unfair laws and enforce them with an iron fist. If having integrity means always acting to persue punishment to the fullest extent of the law then count me out. I’d rather be able to act fair then have your kind of “Integrity”.

    • danvalenti
      August 29, 2013 at 4:47 pm #

      Thank you, CARLOS.

  6. Tom Verizer
    August 29, 2013 at 9:05 am #

    Terry Kinnas has always conducted himself in a modest and professional manner. He has been a fearless watchdog on behalf of his citywide constituents. He has never never never engaged in “ranting diatribes” as Sally claims. He doesn’t has anger mgnt issue, he has “dishonest govt” issues. Go Terry!

    • danvalenti
      August 29, 2013 at 4:47 pm #

      I have seen Terry in countless public meetings over the years, and NEVER ONCE have I seen him act in anything but a professional and courteous manner. He even did so during the Monkey Trial, exhibiting more class than the rest of the room combined.

  7. TKO
    August 29, 2013 at 4:26 pm #

    On this blog, the open meeting law violations and the sanction against Mr. Kinnas are presented as if they are the same issue. The open meeting law violations were against a middle school school council that was made up of volunteer parents and teachers who disbanded at the conclusion of their business….good luck with following up with a group that no longer exists. Also, “Mr. Keeper of the law” was sanctioned for being aggressive and speaking out of order to these parent and teacher volunteers. Those present at his “performance” felt threatened and asked to be escorted from the building because of Mr. Kinnas. There is a place for being vigilant, there is no place to be a vigilante. It was never up to Mr. Kinnas to enforce the law, and that is why he was sanctioned.

    • danvalenti
      August 29, 2013 at 4:42 pm #

      Sorry to deflate your revisionist history, but they ARE the same. Kinnas caught the Reid subcommittee breaking the law. Having never apparently never read the Open Meeting Law, which they are required to do and sign their name to it at the start of the shool year, the Reid-ites apparently were tongue-tied and didn’t know what to make of Kinnas when, as a school department official AND a state official, he wanted to attend your … oops, we mean, “their” … meeting. The Monkey Trial was the result of this particular official having the audacity of insisting that the law be followed and that a “public” meeting would be posted, with signs, and not be held in secret. Mr. Kinnas did not enforce the law. He let the state AG do that. Why don’t you admit it?

      • TKO
        August 29, 2013 at 6:22 pm #


        As usual, you have given me a chuckle for the evening…..
        I beg to differ….it was not any more my school council meeting than it was any constitutents meeting….Just saying….and you confirmed the fact that Mr. Kinnas should have known that raising his voice, speaking without being recognized by the chair and pounding on the table constitutes conduct unbecoming of a school committee member and a state official. Why don’t you admit it?

        • danvalenti
          August 29, 2013 at 8:05 pm #

          Glad to have provided a chuckle, but be careful of your laughter, because it’s the choking kind, methinks. Terry did not scream. Terry did not pound on the table. That’s why I cannot admit it, because it’s not true. Let me ask you, though, why you can’t admit he was right, and the AG, the top law enforcement officer in the state, agreed with him. The Reid subcommittee was caught in criminal activity. They were ignorant of the law? So what? They were required to read and know the Open Meeting Law before they started playing at government.

          • TKO
            August 29, 2013 at 8:49 pm #

            How can you say he was not doing these things at the meeting? You were not there. What possible motive do the volunteer parents have for making this up? Mr.Kinnas is the only attendee at that meeting that says he was not aggressive…if I recall the School Committee meeting correctly, even he said because of the back pain he was experiencing at the time, his body language could have been mis-interpreted. This is in no way intended to be a quote from him…

            Also it was discussed that the subcommittee had no way to know that the meeting posting was held before being distributed. Clearly that needed to change. The system of meeting notification needed to change. Criminal? Really???

          • danvalenti
            August 29, 2013 at 9:03 pm #

            Criminal. Yes. That’s what it’s called when you break the law. It’s amazing how the GOB and its stooges are now trying to smear Kinnas, after he’s got you dead to rights not one, not two, not three, but four times. “Really?” Yes, my good friend: Really.

      • Ten
        August 29, 2013 at 8:58 pm #

        I find there to be a fine distinction between the actions that you discuss. In this I mean to say that Kinnas’s reprisal and the open meeting violations are connected in that they are in relation to the same meeting but disparate in that Kinnas’s reprisal is related to complaints from members of the committee regarding his behavior while the open meeting violations are the result of actions taken by the committee before Mr. Kinnas was involved. This leaves all of us with two options. Either one chooses to believe that the events are unrelated in nature to a high degrees. Or instead we decide that they are directly related. This means that Kinnas did indeed threaten the council with action about open meeting violations, such that I would consider to be aggressive action resulting in reprisal, instead of acting to resolve the issue without problems.

        • danvalenti
          August 29, 2013 at 9:02 pm #

          Yes, he “threatened” the subcommittee with action. He followed through on that action when the subcommittee turned hostile. And, voila!, the AG agreed with Kinnas and decided AGAINST the Reid subcommittee. Admit it! He got them dead to rights. Don’t try to diffuse the issue.

          • Ten
            August 29, 2013 at 10:02 pm #

            Is not a threat agressive? Is aggression the basis of our governmental system? Do Americans not believe in second chances? Is it not the job of elected officials to support the beliefs of the people they represent? (HINT: the answers are yes; no; yes; and yes) In this I believe Kinnas failed to give the council a chance to rectify their wrongs without harsh punishment. So yes with the AG’s decision he is legally right but he is totally morally wrong in not giving them a chance to reform without punishment and in opening with aggression.

    • Jim Gleason
      August 29, 2013 at 4:45 pm #

      Tito, you should be sanctioned for writing asinine statements. Mr. Kinnas was right, they were wrong, simple.I’m sure mr. Kinnas threatened no one and that was all used for effect, “Oh, I felt so threatened by him”. He’s not Andre the Giant for crying out loud. Get off that bandwagon, the wheels don’t turn any more.

    • raider50
      August 29, 2013 at 6:31 pm #

      Quit bringing facts into the discussion

      • Ten
        August 29, 2013 at 10:04 pm #

        Hahaha Very funny I appreciate commments like this.

    • Rick
      August 29, 2013 at 9:35 pm #

      How can you speak out of order at an illegal meeting?

  8. tito
    August 29, 2013 at 5:38 pm #

    Jim, you need a vision check, and see if the Jets can find a new coach while your at it,,,,,,,,,,

  9. GMHeller
    August 30, 2013 at 3:17 am #

    Mr. Valenti,
    No mention, of course, to which political party all these arrogant clowns belong.

    • danvalenti
      August 30, 2013 at 6:29 pm #

      No mention needed in these here parts, since there’s only One Party, as we both (and all) know.

  10. tito
    August 30, 2013 at 5:01 am #

    ,,,,,keep an eye on this bird Planet.