Northwest Indiana Discussion

I don't care how many people care about this. I CARE ABOUT IT. If you don't like the topic, you are welcome to move on.
Here's part of the story that has me so interested. Mcmayor is NOT quoted in it, and he's the one who decided to pay Krusa the quarter million dollars in public moneY:

Krusa defends wearing multiple hats as consultant

* Story
* Discussion

Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

BY SUSAN BROWN
sbrown@nwitimes.com
219.836.3780 | Sunday, March 02, 2008 | 4 comment(s)

HAMMOND | Water Works Department head Edward Krusa, a longtime Hammond economic consultant whose latest city contract expired Thursday, acknowledged last week he also served as a paid consultant to Jupiter Aluminum during that company's tax abatement quest.

Jupiter's latest tax abatement was approved by the City Council in 2005, at which time Krusa was under city contract as a financial consultant.

But Krusa insists he has avoided any conflicts of interest by staying away from representing the city "in analysis of the Jupiter application for abatement or anything related to it" while he was being paid by both parties.

Until Thursday, Krusa had been under contract to the city since 2004, advising the city administration on a plethora of issues, from municipal finance to redevelopment issues to city insurance to representing the mayor's office at City Council meetings. For his contractual services, Krusa was paid a total of $247,030 from 2004 through 2006. As of last week, Krusa had submitted no claims for work performed in 2007.

WRONG. Mike
Here's the story you cite as proof for your erroneous claim:

Krusa defends wearing multiple hats as consultant

* Story
* Discussion

Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

BY SUSAN BROWN
sbrown@nwitimes.com
219.836.3780 | Sunday, March 02, 2008 | 4 comment(s)

HAMMOND | Water Works Department head Edward Krusa, a longtime Hammond economic consultant whose latest city contract expired Thursday, acknowledged last week he also served as a paid consultant to Jupiter Aluminum during that company's tax abatement quest.

Jupiter's latest tax abatement was approved by the City Council in 2005, at which time Krusa was under city contract as a financial consultant.

But Krusa insists he has avoided any conflicts of interest by staying away from representing the city "in analysis of the Jupiter application for abatement or anything related to it" while he was being paid by both parties.

Until Thursday, Krusa had been under contract to the city since 2004, advising the city administration on a plethora of issues, from municipal finance to redevelopment issues to city insurance to representing the mayor's office at City Council meetings. For his contractual services, Krusa was paid a total of $247,030 from 2004 through 2006. As of last week, Krusa had submitted no claims for work performed in 2007.

oh big deal I was off a couple of years who gives a crap


Notice your poll results Freetime, no one cares


You failed yet again in your quest to undermine the mayor

HA HA HA HA


And yet again you come out looking like the village idiot

mike3775 wrote:
freetime wrote:
State law also says Krusa should have filed conflict of interest disclosures with the County Clerk when he was paid by Jupiter Aluminum, but that didn't happen. The city attorney, hired by mcmayor, has chosen not to pursue it.



GIVE IT UP ALREADY

That occured in 2003 according to the articles from the Times boards, thats 5 f*****g years ago

No one cared then, no one cares now

If anyone gave a s***, would there not have been a huge federal investigation by now?

why don't you email everything to the AG and see what he says




WRONG. Mike
Here's the story you cite as proof for your erroneous claim:

Krusa defends wearing multiple hats as consultant

* Story
* Discussion

Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

BY SUSAN BROWN
sbrown@nwitimes.com
219.836.3780 | Sunday, March 02, 2008 | 4 comment(s)

HAMMOND | Water Works Department head Edward Krusa, a longtime Hammond economic consultant whose latest city contract expired Thursday, acknowledged last week he also served as a paid consultant to Jupiter Aluminum during that company's tax abatement quest.

Jupiter's latest tax abatement was approved by the City Council in 2005, at which time Krusa was under city contract as a financial consultant.

But Krusa insists he has avoided any conflicts of interest by staying away from representing the city "in analysis of the Jupiter application for abatement or anything related to it" while he was being paid by both parties.

Until Thursday, Krusa had been under contract to the city since 2004, advising the city administration on a plethora of issues, from municipal finance to redevelopment issues to city insurance to representing the mayor's office at City Council meetings. For his contractual services, Krusa was paid a total of $247,030 from 2004 through 2006. As of last week, Krusa had submitted no claims for work performed in 2007.

Funny I see 18-2 NO in the poll, that shows that only you and the socko seem to care


45D12-0806-SC-00596

Too bad. As amended it's about the only post of yours that made any sense in this topic.

as one of the 'daves' who approved that measure i can tell you...well i dont remember exactly but i heard little sabio on the radio say we spent 1 million on the water line and 1 million on the stage...so it must be true!

YOU ARE A COMPLETE IDIOT!!! NO MUSIC STAGE REQUIRES A WATER HOOK UP. FURTHER MORE, YOU DON'T LISTEN, AND YOU SURE AS HELL ONLY HEAR WHAT YOU WANT TO HEAR. WHAT WAS SAID BY THE MAYOR WAS, "A WATER LINE HAD BEEN MOVED FOR THIS YEARS FEST AND THERE IS SOME TALK OF A PERMANET BAND SHELL IN WOLF LAKE PARK, AND THAT WOULD COST OVER A MILLION DOLLARS." NOW WHAT DON'T YOU AND LITTLE SAVIO UNDERSTAND ABOUT THAT ??

NOW WHAT DON'T YOU AND LITTLE SAVIO UNDERSTAND ABOUT THAT ??

She doesn't understand why she has no reason to blame McMayor or Krusa for rumors floated on WJOB by equally uninformed whiners and complainers.

Still beating a dead horse?

If the feds havenot thought it a big enough deal to investigate, why do you keep harping on it?

You sent all the info to the Times already so why don't you wait for the high and mighty Keisling monster to report on the status?

Still beating a dead horse?

Aren't there laws about that sorta thing?

Not one here evidentally