Northwest Indiana Discussion

Matt,

One day, when Jr and some of his clan are taking a vacation @ club fed, if you so choose, we'll have a beer. I seldom invibe anymore, but the Preacher, Marsha and some of the living, who Jr has fucked over will all be celebrating, I am going to join them celebrating by having a brew.

I talked with a friend while roasting marshmallows around the campfire, under the hohman ave bridge, today, they shared some info... we will see if it pans out. You can only steal so much money before someone knocks on your door.

If Jr leaves office, it may be worse for him. No one is going to cover his theft as it would pass down to them. If Jr stays he makes a hard target. It is a loose, loose for JR.

With other duties, I have had little time to do anything other than working on other specific projects.

I am aware of at least three players in this story line, no actually four. I will not name them. I know the people. I know their character, their caliber or lack there of it in some case/s.

Therefore, I have an opinion on how this case got to federal court (I was thinking of taking Jr to court myself, but chose to seek relief from outside agencies, repetitively focusing on problems with Jr and the people he does business with). Trust me on that.

I place some value on the parties character/lack there of. Therefore, knowing this base, I have no problem with the case brought to federal court or the circumstances behind it.

I know someone who has made an audio tape of experiences with Kimmie and another players. Damaging to them, to say the least, and falls into their character described.

Then lets add the severity of lying in Federal Court. It is not something you want to do.

The woman was unemployed, not working, filed for bankruptcy. I have a dear friend of my in Chicago going thru a horrendous issue similar to what this woman is going thru. I understand the transiency caused by being unemployed for a period of time..... with no place to live, lacking stability moving from place to place, hell I'm living under the Hohman Ave Bridge!!

I say, let this play out. Let's see where it goes.



And by the way, Tom, I have worked very hard at making this case known on a broader scale. If this case is discovered, along with its detail in the Hispanic community.... bye bye political career!

McDermott is scum, scum of the earth.

Also Matt,

as I am not the sharpest knife in the drawer , I just love Spunk bitchin at how the blue type doesn't lead to a link... dumb mf, any document that goes to a federal court, when received is processed, the filed is scanned with an assigned case number, printed on each page, number the pages in sequence with total number of pages via the scanning equipment..... just don't tell him that, let him keep clicking on the blue type.

Some of the behavior as described in the filing which happened in court, draws some question. What judge would allow the behavior described by the plaintiff in court, who wasn't compromised by the participants behaving such. A total disrespect for the court....

Hammond City court needs to go.

As to documenting the behaviors as described in the courtroom, easily validated by pulling the court docket for the day and talking to witness.

And where does that leave Hammond after he leaves?

McDermott is scum ...but Janiec is what scum excretes.

I don't see any Democrat heir apparent that isn't connected to McDermott. If he chooses to leave, he still controls the democrat party in Hammond. He controls the successor.

The Republicans are in as big of disarray as ever in Hammond. Janiec? Pastore the racist? Saliga going to dust off his cap and try and claim he didn't sell his soul to McDermott?

As to homesteads, wasn't a recent known politician who had five homesteads on rental properties?

Lake County is still trying to clean that issue up.

After the Philpott trial, I was sitting having a drink with someone who worked in the assessor's office, a friend. the story told to me about tom's people adding and subtracting homesteads at will. Right Tom

You right....if, and it is a big if, it will be when, not if this hits the media, McDermott will have racial blood on his hands. He was notified in writing. Dabertin, per plaintiff received a phone call. She wrote it got worse. Tom's political career will suffer. He had an opportunity to correct this and he just let it get worse, in fact after Tom's and Dabertin's hands touched it it certainly appears things got much worse for this woman, don't you think? She states so in her federal complaint!

The allegations were out there for a while. He ain't the good looking young man, with a boyish smile, with his googlable history, the sheriff debacle, the threat to Markovich's kid, now this.... he will be luck to still have his law license.

Saliga can't he would have to quit his city inspector job.

Someone might surface by default. Lets see how this plays out friend, I don't think it will be good for jr.

Remember, who ever follows Jr is going to have to deal with large amounts of deficits, missing funds, $250,000 a year in Snake Fest alone... no one is going to take the hit for jr.

551 Gostlin is the worst looking building on Gostlin in between Calumet Ave and Hohman. The roof is shot. On the east side of the roof there are missing shingles and the gutter is falling off the building. On the west side, the sheathing has rotted and parts of the roof are caving in. The gutters have completely detached because the rafter tails have rotted away. One window on the west side is covered with plywood and another window on the north side of the building is missing completely, allowing rain to pour in the structure. Blighted buildings like this are an eyesore and discourage other property owners from investing in their properties. There isn't a judge in the country who would rule in favor of the plaintiff after seeing pictures of how she has allowed this building to rot away like this.

How is it that the city of Hammond is hot to demo this property, but not the property on Huehn that JCMT has posted about many times? The city owns the huehn house so I am sure the owner would be cooperative in demoing it to remove the blight. When is the next court date for the dozens of citations that could be found at the huehn house? When was the last court date? The huehn house has been in an increasingly deteriorating state for more than two years. The roof on it is it's only boast. I wonder if Made Rite did the roof?

sparks wrote:

mattlap wrote:

JCMT,

Do you realize that she uses at least 3 different addresses in her differing legal filings?

She claims to be living at 551 Gostlin, yet lists 4324 S Hermitage in the Lake County Sheriffs report plus uses an Illinois Drivers License Number.

Her or her husband sign the petition in 3 different places and uses 2 different addresses, under Sonia Avalos, Sonia Moreno and Salvador Moreno. 551 Gostlin and 4734 Johnson. From the assessor site it looks like 4734 Johnson no longer belongs to her but belongs to another slumlord that owns at least 7 properties in Hammond with some addresses in really crappy neighborhoods.

The $4000 settlement pertains to HER fines in the US Bankruptcy Court. The City of Hammond offered to settle for her paying $4000 and her bankruptcy attorney suggested taking it to the judge for less.

Added! She also has a homestead exemption on the 551 Gostlin address even though it appears she is living out of state. Someone ought to let the Assessors office know about that!

551 Gostlin is the worst looking building on Gostlin in between Calumet Ave and Hohman. The roof is shot. On the east side of the roof there are missing shingles and the gutter is falling off the building. On the west side, the sheathing has rotted and parts of the roof are caving in. The gutters have completely detached because the rafter tails have rotted away. One window on the west side is covered with plywood and another window on the north side of the building is missing completely, allowing rain to pour in the structure. Blighted buildings like this are an eyesore and discourage other property owners from investing in their properties. There isn't a judge in the country who would rule in favor of the plaintiff after seeing pictures of how she has allowed this building to rot away like this.

WORST LOOKING PROPERTY NEEDED REPAIRS... WOMAN HIRED A CONTRACTOR TO PUT ON A ROOF AND HE WAS DENIED A PERMIT.... APPARENTLY IT WASN'T THE RITE CONTRACT WAS IT?




SPUNKIE DOES THE PLANTIFF'S HOUSE LOOK WORSE THAN THE HAMMOND REDEVELOPEMENT REHABBED HUD PROPERTY WHICH HAS NEVER BEEN FIT FOR OCCUPANCY EVEN AFTER IT WAS REHABBED? MAYBE A COLLEGE BOUND FAMILY MIGHT MOVE INTO THIS PROPERTY.

DIDN'T I READ THE PLANTIFF WAS UNEMPLOYED? DIDN'T I READ THAT PLAINTIFF DIDN'T HAVE THE MONEY AT THE TIME..... HOW MANY PEOPLE IN HAMMOND ARE SUFFERING FROM THE SAME DELIMA?



Inconsistencies in Kimmie statement, said the roof was good, then changed the story? Why, because this woman stood up for her constitutional rights and challenged the harassment she suffered? IS THIS WHY KIMMIE CHANGED HER STORY THE PLAINTIFF NEED A FULL ROOF? OR WAS IT BECAUSE THE RITE CONTRACTOR WASN'T CHOSEN? IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE WAS NOT ENOUGH MONEY TO SPREAD THE WEALTH AROUND WITH A PARTIAL REPAIR, SO SOMEONE, WHOM EVER IT WAS MANDATED THAT THE WHOLE ROOF BE REPAIRD? At least this is what it sounds like... doesn't it? THIS IS A VALID QUESTION!!!!



[color=#800000]So the pro bono attorney fights for this woman's rights and gets an agreement to leave the decision regarding replacement up to a [u]recognized licensed HAMMOND contractor. SOUNDS FAIR. The question is, was this a contractor who would keep Kimmie off this woman's back? Or is it a contractor who reportedly quotes a $5,000 roof and reportedly states if you have me put on your roof, I'll make sure Kimmie doesn't harass you any more...... sorta something to that affect, LOOK UP THE EXACT QUOTE FOR YOURSELF.[/u]



So it appears the pro bono attorney gets Kimmie kicked off the case all together. I wonder why? IS THERE SOME CONFLICT? SOME UNPROFESSIONAL CONDUCT?



Then on April 13th, 2013 a licensed HAMMOND APPROVED CONTRACTOR, NOT THE RITE CONTRACT, BUT A THIRD PARTY CONTRACTOR, WHOM THE CITY AGREED TO GO ALONG WITH THE JUDGEMENT OF A THIRD PARTY CONTRACTOR, fills out the the above affidavit.... they, excuse me HAMMOND refused to give a LICENSED HAMMOND CONTRACTOR A PERMIT TO DO THE JOB?

NOW YOU HAVE TO ASK THE QUESTION WHY WAS A THIRD PARTY, LICENSED HAMMOND CONTRACTOR/ROOFER REFUSED A PERMIT TO REHAB THIS ROOF?

WHY?

WAS IT BECAUSE HE WAS NOT THE RITE CONTRACTOR WHO WAS GOING TO MAKE SURE KIMMIE WOULD STAY OFF THE PLAINTIFF'S BACK? THE RITE CONTRACTOR OF CHOICE PER THE PLAINTIFF SAID IF YOU GIVE ME THE MONEY TO DO THE ROOF, I'LL MAKE SURE KIMMIE DOESN'T BOTHER YOU ANY MORE...IF SOMEONE ELSE DOES THE JOB, SHE MIGHT FIND SOMETHING ELSE WRONG.... OR SOMETHING TO THAT AFFECT... READ THE FEDERAL COURT FILING TO GET THE ACTUAL WORDING.......

NOW WHAT DOES THIS SOUND LIKE? DOES IT SOUND LIKE SOMEONE OF SOME INFLUENCE IN THIS CASE HAD THEIR HAND OUT AND WANTED PAYMENT TO GET THE PLAINTIFF'S ROOF ON? WHOM COULD THAT BE? NO, NOT IN HAMMOND, NEVER HAPPEN, NEVER!

WHY ON THE FACE OF THIS EARTH WOULD A CITY OFFICIAL DENY ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT BY A LICENSED HAMMOND CONTRACTOR TO PUT A ROOF ON THIS WOMAN'S PROPERTY UNLESS......? YOU FILL IN THE BLANKS.


SPICKLE, COME ON WTF, PER THE DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED TO FEDERAL COURT, HAMMOND TOLD A LICENSED QUALIFIED CONTRACTOR HE WAS NOT GOING TO GET THE PERMIT. WAS IT BECAUSE THE PLAINTIFF WAS HISPANIC? WAS IT BECAUSE SHE WAS FIGHTING FOR HER CONSTITUTION RIGHTS? WAS IT BECAUSE OF SOMEONE HAD THEIR HAND OUT AND THEY WERE NOT GOING TO GET THEIRS? MAYBE A COMBINATION OF ALL?




AND THEN WE HAVE THE HISPANIC PERSON WHO WROTE THAT THE CITY BROUGHT FINES UP TO $15,000 BECAUSE OF GRASS NOT BEING CUT.... NOW THAT CERTAINLY APPEARS LIKE SOMEONE HAD THEIR HAND OUT AND REFUSED TO PAY TO PLAY.... .. REALLY $15,000 BECAUSE OF GRASS, NOW I DON'T REMEMBER WAS THAT HOUSE CONDEMNED?

HELL EVEN ONE OF TOM'S BEST FRIENDS GREW SOME GRASS AND DIDN'T GET FINED $15,000. SOME BELIEVE IT ONLY TOOK $6,000 TO CORRECT THE PROBLEM.

THIS SMELLS UGLY.... VERY UGLY....

SO FINALLY THIS WOMAN, WHO REPORTEDLY WAS UNEMPLOYED, DIDN'T HAVE THE MONEY, COMES UP WITH THE MONEY TO REPAIR THE ROOF, ENGAGES A LICENSED HAMMOND CONTRACTOR TO PUT ON A ROOF AND THE COMPANY IS DENIED THE PERMIT.

I DON'T UNDERSTAND SPARKS... SHE HIRED A LICENSED CONTRACTOR AND THE CITY SAID NO.....

WHAT DOES THAT SOUND LIKE PAL... REALLY... WHAT DOES IT SOUND LIKE?[/color]672

Tommy,

This is where your reasoning and vitriol for McDermott jumps the shark. Instead of making criticism (rightfully so) of the city employee using his position to boost his construction business, you chase ghosts and try and manipulate the situation.

Why can't it continue to be an issue that that part of the 1st and 2nd districts are some of the worst housing stock in the city?

Fines racked up to $15,000 for more than not cutting the grass. The person that claimed the $15,000 is her husband Salvador Moreno. In the paperwork it claims that the city was charging fines of $250 a day. She strung this out for almost 18 months. Do the math ........

Her own lawyer pushed her to get quotes from roofing companies and she took almost 5 months to do that and then didn't act on any of those quotes. She finally got another quote in March, 2013 and acted on that 18 months later. I have no idea why the permit was denied. Was it because she had not paid the fines on the building and there was a lein on it? Was it because of pending demolition litigation?

In addition you are trying to turn this into a racial thing when there are 9 signatures on a petition of which 2 are hers and one is her husbands. That part of the 1st district has to be in the neighborhood of 75% hispanic. A couple thousand homes with 7 complainants and you try and turn it into a claim of widespread abuse of the hispanic community. Look at the housing in that part of town and much of it looks like crap and I would guess that it approaches 50% rental.

Wait a minute here Mat.

Per the federal complaint:

1. It appears the individual was unemployed.

2. at first only a part of the roof needed replacement, then the whole roof needed replacement. Was that after someone saying there wasn't enough money in a partial repair to make sure the parties in code enforcement would get their share?

3. Per Plaintiff, someone working with Kimmie made the statement of inducement to smooth the process. $5000 worth of roofing and smoothing, so, Kimmie won't harass you any more....paraphrased of course per the plaintiff's filing. Do you think this inducement happened only one time? Do you think other individuals in code enforcement may have used the same tactics? Then how do you also explain the described behaviors by code enforcement in court?

4. Plaintiff reports she got two roofing bids, one from an out of the area roofer, it was denied. then from a hammond contractor and the contractor writes an affidavit he was denied a permit.

5. It appears because of the plaintiff reaching out to dabertin, a letter written to the mayor, things got hostile, increased pressure.

6. was it when a contractor other than a rite contractor providing the work, someone in code enforcement or the legal end of code enforcement or both decided to proceed with condemnation proceedings? Could the condemnation proceedings been initiated because cash wasn't going to flow to certain parties? Is that a plausible concept? Could you admit up to this point, this case smells bad, real bad?????

7. even after the probono atty negotiated a deal for the woman to not use the "rite" contractor the wrong licensed contractor couldn't get a permit. Now was this because the wrong contractor used and the money wouldn't flowed up the food chain???????

8. Now Matt, I have a whole host of pictures in Hammond regarding problems with code not doing their job. why on earth was this hispanic woman dealt with in this manner.

9. Then Matt, how do you explain someone changing the demolition court date hearing and not notifying the plaintiff's atty?

It is not as narrow of an issue as you think.

It even appears the code enforcement department leadership made it personal. Do you think it was because the 1st and 2nd districts are some of the worst housing stock in the city?

There is a reason why 1st and 2nd district have most of the worst housing stock because of economics. Matt, it was reported and I don't know, other than what you shared on this board, and I am not picking on you, but for a period of time you were unemployed. When you were unemployed, reported due to illness, could you have come up with $5,000, $7000 to do repairs to your house?

And I know little about you other than you wrote in past post. Did you loose your house? Did you work at saving your property, stringing it out as long as you could? Anyone would do the same.

Matt, not one contractor, but two of the wrong contractors were denied a permit on this property. I wonder if the rite contractor would have gotten issued?

As to pending fines, Didn't a certain Hammond City Court forgive THOUSANDS OF $$$$ OF FINES ASSOCIATED WITH WOODMAR MALL's developer? ?????

I think what this requires is putting data in its chronological order. I'll re post for everyone's pleasure. I am sure Tom will want me to do that...


703

Matt,

You know as well as I, McDermott's people work at intimidating anyone who opposes their mantra.

Just look at Spark's behaviors. Past dealing with the Preacher, Marsha/Freetime.

Few residents of this community want to come forward, but that might be changing. Tom is taking extra ordinary steps to screen phone calls on his show.

Tommy,

Lets go thru your points .....

1 ... She claims she is an unemployed teacher, yet her and her husband owned 2 buildings in Hammond, 1 in East Chicago, and a 6 unit in Chicago that she has intermittently used as a home address.

2 ... Her claim was only part of the roof needed replacement. When she got the first quotes, both roofers said the whole roof needed to be replaced. There is one from Calumet city quoting $9000 and another from Charles Gluth which is unable to be read but looks like it is 5 figures.

3 .....Her claim is the guy that has the roofing business made that claim and not code enforcement. I fully believe that he should be investigated and likely fired for his using of city resources to further his business.

4 .... I only see the claim from the Hammond contractor saying his permit was denied. Was there a lien? Pending court action?

5 ... Most of her writing is rambling and chaotic. She of course claims persecution when the google map pictures from 2011 clearly show that her building needed a roof.

6 .... the other contractor trying to get the permit was almost 18 months later after accrued fines kept adding up.

7 ..... The probono atty didn't do anything to negotiate not to use the contractor. He suggested she find an outside contractor and said that he felt the Hammond attorney would have no problem with that. She shows 2 quotes from soon after both saying she needed a new roof.

8 .... You do have a host of pictures that show needed code enforcement. But it also seems that every time Hammond does do code enforcement you claim persecution. Like the crazy old landlord that you posted videos for back a couple of years ago. Hammond has torn down houses and needs to tear down a ton more.

9 ..... Her claim is that the date was changed when the city claims it was not and always that date the day before. Who's right? I don't know ........I don't see anywhere that she shows paperwork showing the "correct" date she claims. I read through most of the paperwork, but show me if I missed it.

Well the worst stock is in the 2nd and 3rd districts of Hammond. The very North end of the 1st against the 2nd has terrible housing stock as well. Economics is the reason, but it goes much deeper than someone living in Chicago that owns 2 buildings in Hammond saying she is unemployed. Education and workplace skills are and have been Hammond's problems and nobody (R or D) is doing anything to fix that. McDermott's economic development plans have been a huge failure but I have yet to see ANY real plans from the opposition.

In 2 runs for Mayor, Janiec's economic development plans have never been laid out. He was too busy shilling for Team Slumlord with Wes Miller in the beginning, and destroying any opposition in the Republican Party in the process.

I went to a large economic development presentation at Purdue Cal in 2011 dealing with infrastructure and the needs of NW Indiana. Matt Saliga showed up at my urging, but didn't get it and was too concerned with managing by statistics. George Janiec showed up late, listened to half the presentation on the need for infrastructure and then made a public comment about high taxation and left.

I will deal with MY personal situation in the next post since it seems to concern you and sparks (on the other board).

Ok .... since you and sparks both want to misrepresent my situation and twist it however you want.

I did lose my house. Technically it was not a foreclosure, but deed in lieu. Yes I probably would have lost it to foreclosure if I had not.

I bought a house in 2004 in Robertsdale, where I had already lived for 3 1/2 years as a renter. I found Robertsdale to be quiet, inexpensive and close to Chicago. I was traveling between 150 and 175 nights a year over a 14 state territory for my job and didn't see the reason to spend a large amount on a house that I was rarely in.

As for my health situation, I had a surgery for diverticulitis in 2004 that was uneventful. However I ended up with a ventral hernia (not uncommon) that was bothering me and decided to have fixed in 2006. It was supposed to be a 4 week recovery. I wound up with a MRSA staph infection acquired at St Margarets in Hammond and spent 14 days in the hospital and 8 weeks home on IV antibiotics. I had to use the Family Leave Act from work as I could not travel.

In the spring of 2007, the wound opened up with drainage and infection. It was first treated with IV Antibiotics and then surgery. I was off work for 3 months and was let go by my employer because I was unable to travel my territory due to the fact I was ineligible for another family leave act. I recovered and was told that the infection was taken care of. I received a job offer and was scheduled to travel to Denmark for training in August of 2007 when the infection returned. The job offer was pulled before I could even start it. Another surgery and another round of IV Antibiotics. Again told that I was "cured"

I started working in late 2007 for a start up business in Chicago (my business plan that I could not finance) and had a minority equity stake in. The business struggled due to the financial crisis and recession but held it's own, and my health held out until September 2008 when the infection returned. I had what I thought was the flu but within 5 hours I ran a 104 degree fever and my incision area became red and split open over 4". I spent 2 weeks in the hospital and another 16 weeks on 2 rounds of IV Antibiotics. In December I was notified that they had to hire someone else at the business, and my position was no longer available.

Over the next 2 years I had 3 more recurrences with a total of 8 surgeries and 9 rounds of IV Antibiotics. I spent the next 2 years unemployed due to my health situation until late 2010.

During that time I used my saving to survive (you aren't eligible for unemployment when you are unable to work for health reasons) and even had to tap my 401K to pay for medications. My IV Antibiotics carried a co-pay of $75 a dose, 3 times a day, at one point.

I missed my first house payment in January, 2010 at the advice of Bank of America. They told me they were unable to help me until I had missed 2 payments. I was put into a HAMP Modification program with Bank of America. For the next 18 months they delayed approval of the permanent modification, repeatedly asking for paperwork that they had received time and time again. Until finally denying me a modification without explanation. They then told me my options for deed in lieu of foreclosure.

My house was purchased for $104K in 2004 and was sold by the bank for $39,000 to someone that then rented it out to 4 traveling workers that were working on the BP expansion. My understanding is the house is now empty again while the owner tries to rent it.

This is the best description of what happened to me and many others ..... http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-12-16/why-obamas-home-affordable-modification-program-failed-spoiler-alert-thank-bank-amer

I received a settlement (negotiated by the Federal Government) for $1800 for my loss at their hands.

So that's the story .....and if you have any more questions ask me directly instead of misrepresenting my situation.

I think the only pictures that would matter would be any that were taken when this whole drama started. This sounds like ineptitude on the owners part as well as code enforcement. CE seems like they need to get "tuned up".