Let's review. In the month since the Joplin City Council fired him by a 5-4 vote he has done the following things:
-He promised to expose corruption on the City Council.
-He called the five council members who fired him liars and damned them all to hell. (He's the one who said they would get their judgment in the next life.)
-He came close to tears (that seems to be a requirement for the people the media have described as heroes of the Joplin Tornado) and shamelessly brought his children into his speech (another thing that those same heroes of the Joplin Tornado seem to like to do).
-He was hired as the new city manager of League City, Texas.
Since Mark Rohr's firing, I have watched the coverage, both online and in print and it has been, for the most part, unabashedly pro-Rohr. In its editorial pages, the Joplin Globe has done everything but tell voters that the two council members who were with the majority and fired Rohr should be voted out of office (and I am sure that editorial is coming).
In their now-independent blogs, former Globe bloggers Anson Burlingame and Geoff Caldwell have referred to the five council members as "The Feral Five," and "The Bloc of Five" with Burlingame insisting that the pages of the Loraine investigation that we have not seen have people describing Rohr as a bully. How he knows this, I have no idea, but that accusation is probably in those pages. Though it does not appear their blogs receive a great deal of traffic, both men are staples on the Globe's editorial page and Burlingame, in particular, has made it clear he intends to influence the outcome of the April elections.
The Globe has painted the five council members as the ones who are responsible for not releasing the entire report, even though the last time I looked there are nine council members, all of whom know what was included in the report...and Mark Rohr knows what is in the report, as well.
The Joplin Tri-State Business Journal also included several pages in its most recent edition that appeared slanted solidly on Rohr's side.
And those media have made Rohr's characterization of the five who fired him as being a part of a good old boy network that is intent on stopping progress from coming to Joplin, sound like a fact, instead of what is, a talking point planted by Rohr to influence coverage from people who were already inclined to be on his side.
Some questions we should consider:
-Where is the corruption that Mark Rohr promised to reveal? It was a great sound bite, but he has not produced any evidence that there is widespread corruption on the Joplin City Council. An allegedly stolen sticky note is not corruption, its elementary school name calling. Unless, of course, Rohr's corruption allegations are centered around his (successful) attempts to woo Globe Editor Carol Stark into fighting his battles with Councilman Bill Scearce.
-Why are the five council members being described as part of a good-old-boy network, when the most secretive group involved in the April city election, the Joplin Progress Committee, has received contributions from many of the major power players in the city- and none of their contributions are going to anyone who voted to fire Mark Rohr. Apparently, they don't make good old boys the way they used to.
-Why is the media acting like Wallace-Bajjali has disproven the accusations in the Loraine report? The last time I looked, all they did was provide their own version of the facts and did not disprove anything.
-Why is the media ignoring the bankruptcies, fraud accusations, and securities violations, as well as numerous lawsuits involving Wallace-Bajjali. As far as I can recall, it has never been brought up in any of the local media except for a paragraph in the Globe, which quoted Mark Rohr as saying none of it amounted to anything.
Some final thoughts
If the Joplin Globe is successful in its legal efforts to force the city to release the complete report, this is what I expect will occur:
-The report is not going to be what the Globe, Anson Burlingame, or any of the other Rohr supporters would expect. The council members who voted to fire Mark Rohr were not taken by surprise by the reaction. Rohr's influence over the Joplin Globe is well known. Two council members, Trisha Raney and Jack Golden, voted to fire Rohr, knowing full well that it could cost them their council seats. That is not the way good old boys usually operate.
-Bullying may have been a factor in Rohr's dismissal, but it was not the deciding factor. I would say there were things that occurred that the five council members saw as Rohr abusing his office. We probably will wonder why the other four did not join them in their vote. The allegations could have prevented Rohr from landing the League City position and could have landed the city in a lawsuit. When Rohr left Piqua, Ohio, he successfully sued someone who accused him of wrongdoing. I reported the following in the June 3, 2007, Turner Report:
The Family Abuse Shelter of Miami County, Ohio, is $3,000 richer, thanks to a settlement of a libel suit brought by Joplin City Manager Mark Rohr against a Piqua, Ohio, businessman who Rohr says defamed him while Rohr was Piqua's city manager.
According to an article in the March 29 Dayton Daily News, Rohr had initially won his lawsuit against Gustin, but the jury voted not to award him any money. A retrial was ordered, but will not be held thanks to the settlement.
Rohr sued Charles "Mo" Gustin after Gustin claimed police cruisers had been to Rohr's house three or four times to check out domestic abuse complaints;
Rohr said his lawyer, Grant Kerber of Troy, suggested the donation. Rohr liked the idea.
"My sole objective was to send a message that you can't go around saying untrue things about someone without repercussions." Rohr said.
Rohr said he thinks he made his point.
13 comments:
No thoughts on the way they voted to pay the bill?
It is quite normal to think of your children at times of stress or sadness or upheaval. There is nothing wrong with that.
So no one can say things about Rohr that aren't true but he can say all of the untrue things he wants to say? Hmmmm..... Who is the good old boy here?
When David Wallace addressed the City Council, he invited everyone to drop by for coffee. He also said that the allegations against Wallace Bajjali and their defenses could be obtained by e-mailing Wallace Bajjali (though no address for coffee or e-mail address was given). I looked up the Wallace Bajjali website and sent an e-mail request a day or two after the City Council meeting and still have not received a response. I have no idea where to drop by for coffee. Also, Wallace Bajjali continually referenced market studies that substantiated that all of their projects were needed without any detriment to existing similar business, but these market studies apparently are unavailable to the general public. Mark Rohr and Wallace Bajalli are in cahoots together. I am just amazed (and not pleasantly)that people cannot see through this whole fiasco. Getting rid of Rohr was a great first step. Wallace Bajjali and their get rich quick at the expense of Joplin deals need to go away as well.
I agree with Anonymous. ALL of you. There is a lot of explaining to do, and no one is explaining. It makes you wonder how far corruption runs, and whom are involved. I read also on Rohr and his previous jobs. This man some deem as a Miracle Worker for rebuilding Joplin after the May tornado, people, people, that is his job and if it wasn't for the incredible people working under him, all of this would not have been accomplished. The miracle workers are the people from our own city, surrounding cities, our own state, the states of others, and all the wonderful volunteers. I have been told that Rohr was a tyrant and no one liked working with him or for him. I believe the council had many complaints, from who ?, I don't know that. Drama sucks, especially because it hurts everyone in this city. Whatever is in that report, is meaningful. I believe even though that man charged more than the original price of the report, the council felt that it was well worth it. There I said it !! It may have been worth getting rid of him. The Wallace-Bajjali deal, well, Im not going there. At least now that they know we are on to them, maybe they will be on the up and up. Time will tell...
Is it just a coincidence that Sugarland, TX (Wallace Bajjali home office)is less than 40 miles from League City, TX (Mark Rohr's job)?
The Globe refuses to comment on why the editor refused to testify to the investigator or his admonition to them that they could be sued for further slander of Scearce. They also refuse to print the police incident report from Dec. 2012 involving Rohr, that any other citizen without a supervisory capacity over the P.D.(as Rohr had) would have been arrested for committing. The police chief refused to testify and explain this as well. It will cost the city $3 million dollars to terminate Wallace Bajali's services thanks to Rohr. I am glad the majority of the council demand integrity from the city manager, voters should ask why the other four do not.
I wonder if the real problem was not a sticky note but sticky fingers. Remember any good investigator just needs to follow the money. My experience has shown that the only reason people go into politics is greed, why else put up with all the nonsense.
Anon @10:15 AM:
This is not the sort of thing that "someone else", such as those "IT qualified", could do more than provide obvious help.
The problem is akin to a messy office and desk with folders put hither and yon with no significant organization. Probably because most documents were just shared between two or three people in an ad hoc manner.
It's not a good sign that they have this problem, although it's probably the rule rather than the exception, and it's not at all unreasonable for a CFO of an outfit with I'm sure not that many people to tackle this, or to ask what are some of the good ways people have found to organize their computer documents.
Rohr is right about corruption on the city council. Council member Woolston has admitted to being involved in 18 property sales in the 20th Street corridor for which he did not take a real estate commission. His client sold many of the properties to the Joplin Redevelopmet Corp. for a substantial profit. Woolston's client cannot be blamed for making money but Woolston had increased the property value so much that when the JRC sold the land to Wallace-Bajali bought it, they were paid a greater commission when it was acquired. Woolston says he took no commission but don't try to tell this taxpayer there is no "quid pro quo" involved. How.many realtors sell eighteen properties and take no commission? Contrary to what the Globe reported, that the investigated report "raised questions" as to Woolston's involvement, the report stated that Woolston had committed ethics violations. Why would Woolston risk his reputation buying and selling properties the city had an interest in acquiring if not for compensa
There is a big difference in how effective a strong leader is and an ineffective an abusive leader is.I think the 5 were able to see the problem and correct it.
Also most employers would want to fire an employee if they found out that they used their time to write a book.
We can only hope that the 9 pages are released.
DID THE NINE PAGES EVER GET RELEASED?
Mr. Rohr has exhibited this same pattern since his first assignment in Newton Falls, Ohio where he sought criminal indictment against the mayor who hired him. In his next job in Washington Court House, Ohio, he turned on the Chairman of Council (who hired him) during a referendum on the purchase of the local Water Utility. Mr. Rohr had been kept on the sidelines and wanted to "lead" the city's efforts after the fact, with disastrous consequences to the local taxpayers who paid too much for the utility. He abandoned both his position there and his wife to relocate to Boca Raton, Florida. You won't find any references to the first two people who hired Mr. Rohr. He's too smart to let people know that his tendencies have exhibited form the outset.
Post a Comment