Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Mayor won't reinstate
I'd be upset if I lived in Portland right now. How much money is he willing to lose?
I think he succeeded at that a long time ago.Maybe he's trying to make a legacy as the worst mayor in the history of the city.
Most of it centers around the fact that he's gay, and that he had an affair with a 17 year old intern at his previous post.Pardon my n00b-ness, but I don't know anything about the mayor as I moved here from the Midwest recently. Who wants to provide the highlights for me?
In a statement, the PPA said:
"By appealing the arbitrator's decision, you (Adams) are breaking your word that arbitration would be 'final and binding.' From the very beginning, the Portland Police Association trusted the integrity of the arbitration process. If the arbitrator had upheld Officer Frashour's termination, the Portland Police Association would have honored it."
I'm wondering if this does get litigated further based on Adams rejection of the arbitration ruling, could he be held personally liable for the costs?
Pardon my n00b-ness, but I don't know anything about the mayor as I moved here from the Midwest recently. Who wants to provide the highlights for me?
So does that mean if we have had binding arbitration in the past with the city and did not like the outcome we can just not abide by it like the Mayor wants to do? Or is it only for officials to be above the law? The fact is he didn't like the way it went and he is not going to listen to it? Well if it was us they would enforce it on us if they had to by gunpoint so what gives them the right to not listen to it?
The concept of binding arbitration seems to elude the mayor. Maybe he's trying to make a legacy as the worst mayor in the history of the city.
[FONT=arial, verdana, sans-serif]It'd be really nice if we can just ignore orders from government (since they can only steal and never give), but as you say they'll just enforce the "law" at gunpoint as [/FONT]Ron Frashour did to Aaron Campbell.
With this particular event, the state killed a man then proceeded to waste yet more taxpayer money over a power grab between the cop union and the department. Since the "law" has already proven itself to be a joke (i.e. the cop is not in prison because said law pretty much allows the state to inflict violence as it pleases), I really couldn't care less what the government does as long as the killer cop doesn't get to 'protect and serve" ever again.
Mob mentality. The ends justify the means? As long as this guy doesn't get to be a cop, you don't care if the law is broken?