Just the Facts: Public Records & CH2M Hill

By  | 

    “Just the facts” is a phrase attributed to Sergeant Joe Friday of the 50’s and 60’s television crime drama “Dragnet.”  Joe Friday seemed annoyed by people’s attempts to embellish their story and would often refocus their telling of the story and limit it to the truth, and not anyone’s interpretation of the truth.  In almost all controversy there is one side’s perception, the other side’s perception, and, somewhere in between, what actually happened. feels that it is our job to give you, to the best of our ability, the unbiased facts of the matter, and to let the facts speak for themselves.  We are finding this to be a daunting task which may never be perfectly accomplished, and we always welcome input from anyone which may further explain or correct anything we set forth in print, as long as it is true and verifiable.  So, bear with us as we try to present “Just the Facts” in the article below entitled “Public Records and CH2M HILL.”

CH2M HILL, the company hired by the City of Central to provide almost all public services in Central, became a major focal point of the recent city elections.  Since then, we have heard on the street and read on the internet and in print, comments, suppositions and accusations ranging from thought-provoking to extremist.  It seems that the talk all centers around the issue of whether CH2M HILL is denying access to public records. is edited and published by Central citizens who are neither lawyers nor experienced journalists, and we have struggled with how to responsibly report on this issue without giving even the appearance of bias.  Most of the discussions we have heard and read have come back to one issue: a lack of facts.  We at also believe that the citizens of Central are capable of reading the facts and deciding for themselves whether there is a problem, without interpreting the evidence for you.  So we will endeavor here to give you “Just the facts.” 

Presented in chronological order will be: 

The text of the four page advertisement which

CH2M HILL ran in the Advocate

The March 31st public records request made by the Central City News

The April 6th response by CH2M HILL

The April 6th response by the City of Central

The April 15th letter from CH2M HILL to the City of Central explaining CH2M HILL’s position. 

    These documents journal the initial exchange between the City of Central, CH2M HILL and the Central City News.  On April 26th, the Central City News filed a lawsuit requesting the courts to force CH2M HILL to allow the Central City News access to records of the private corporation, CH2M HILL.  While the courts will ultimately decide this issue, this exchange has established several baseline stances of the parties involved. 

    The City of Central has made all contracts, permits, licenses, inspections, notices, work orders, surveys, ordinances and violation notices available for public viewing or copying.

    CH2M HILL maintains that the City of Central’s public records, which are in the custody of CH2M HILL, are available through the City of Central via a public records request.

    CH2M HILL also asserts that they are a private company and that its private records are not subject to a public records request.

    The Central City News maintains that CH2M HILL should be required to produce records beyond those such as permits, inspections, etc. that the City of Central has already made available.

Advocate Insert

The following text is a transcription of the entire four-page insert CH2M HILL ran in the Advocate on March 26, 2010. 

We are Central

    In March 2008, the City of Central formed an innovative public-private partnership with CH2M HILL to provide a full range of day-to-day operations services – an approach that helped the city begin to deliver new services to businesses and residents quickly and efficiently.  CH2M HILL is responsible for public works, planning and zoning, code enforcement, building permits and inspections, and general administrative functions.  As your friends and neighbors, we have a special stake in getting this job done well.  After all, we live here, too.

    Our commitment to service begins with a single phone number, answered 24 hours per day, 7 days per week.  Call us to report a pothole, to discuss an item on the city’s calendar, or simply to make a suggestion about how Central can better serve you.  Call us at the Central Municipal Services Center at 225.262.5000, any time, night or day.   CH2M Hill.


    Headquartered in Denver, employee-owned CH2M HILL is a global leader in engineering, procurement, construction, management and operations for government, civil, industrial and energy clients.  With $6.3 billion in revenue and more than 23,500 employees, CH2M HILL is an industry-leading program management, construction management and design firm, as ranked by Engineering News-Record (2009).  Long-recognized as a most-admired company and leading employer, CH2M HILL also is listed among the world’s most ethical companies and the FORTUNE 500.  Our innovative work with local government has earned us awards from both the National Council for Public-Private Partnerships the United States Conference of Mayors.  In 2000, we earned the nation’s highest award for business, the Malcolm Baldridge National Quality Award.  For more information, visit

Engaging in the community

    CH2M HILL is a sponsor of the annual Cookin’ for Our Kids event, which raises funds for technology and educational improvements for Central’s schools.  In 2008, our cooking team, Central Krewe, took first place in the couchon-de-lait category and third in the brisket category.

Managing development in our community

    The City of Central staff is responsible for planning and zoning, residential and commercial inspections, code enforcement and occupational licensing.  Since March 2008, they have: Processed 3,147 requests ranging from sign permits to rezoning – Conducted 5,296 residential and commercial inspections – Investigated 386 code violations – Removed 1,401 illegal signs from rights of way – Processed 938 occupational licenses.

Prioritizing roadway improvements

    In October 2008, a survey was conducted to assess the condition of all the roadways maintained by the City of Central.  The resulting report has been implemented by the Capital Improvements Committee as a guide in determining the potential priority areas within the proposed street rehabilitation project.

Putting the work in public works

    Since March 2008, City of Central public works crews have completed nearly 2,000 work orders, including: Repairing 391 potholes – Completing 688 drainage repairs – Striping 20 miles (106,612 linear feet) of roads – Repairing or replacing 201 signs – Completing 92 debris and litter clean-up jobs – Mowing 148 miles or 776,370 linear feet of rights of way.  In January and February we’ve completed 49% more work orders than in the same time period in 2009.  We’re on to increase the number of inspected work requests by 53% or more than 500 jobs.

Cleaning up after Gustav

    In the wake of Hurricane Gustav, uprooted trees, downed power lines and more than 100 tons of scattered debris covered the city and made many of the city’s 52 miles of roadways impassable.  Putting the city’s emergency preparedness plan into action, Central crews cleared all of the blocked roadways within 24 hours.  Staff also handed out more than 1,000 FEMA-supplied tarps to help citizens cover damaged rooftops.

New Residential Construction

Permit Comparison

  City of Central East Baton Rouge
Subsidized No Yes
Living Area Sq Ft 2,090 2,090
Accessory Sq Ft 669 669
Valuation $226,238.00 $184,414.00
Building $1,131.15 $468.83
Plan Review $395.90 $60
Electrical $100.00 $132.10
Plumbing $100.00 $181.50
Mechanical $100.00 $65.00
Traffic Impact $0 $760.00
Total Permit Fee $1,827.05 $1,667.43


Setting the record straight on fees

    From time to time, we get questions about Central’s structure for permitting and inspection fees – perhaps because they’re set up a little differently than those in neighboring communities.  Central uses what’s called a self-supporting model, where only those who use the service pay for the service.  For the average Central citizen, this means you’re not paying for services you’re not using.  All building permit and plan review fees are set up to cover all of the costs associated with administering the department (including labor), and set fees for electrical, plumbing and mechanical inspections mean no surprises.  Total fees are highly competitive within East Baton Rouge Parish, and the City of Central is guaranteed 10% of every fee to invest in the community. 

City of Central

Municipal Services Center

22801 Greenwell Springs Road, Suites 2 & 3

Central, LA  70739



The March 31st Public

Information Request

by the Central City News

to each the City of Central and CH2M HILL 

Ladies and Gentlemen: 

    Under Louisiana’s public records law, we hereby request a copy of the following documents:  A copy of all letters, e-mails, documents, invoices, statements, proposals, memos, faxes, audio recordings, video recordings, and any and all other material that may relate to the publication entitled “We are Central,” which was published in the Advocate on Friday, March 26, 2010. 

    We ask for a full accounting of how this publication came about, its origins, who influenced its content, the timing of its publication, the number of copies printed, and the cost of printing and insertion in the Advocate. 

    Before making copies, please inform us of the 1) documents or other things proposed to be copied, 2) the number of pages in each, and 3) the proposed cost of copying. 

    Please inform us via fax at 225-261-5022 or via email at  We will inform you of the documents or other materials we would like to have copied.  We propose to pick them up at your office and would ask that they be provided within the maximum period provided by law. 

April 6th Response

by the City of Central

Dear Mr. Jenkins:

    Your public records request to the City of Central has been referred to me for review and response.  First, you requested “a copy of all letters, e-mails, documents, invoices, statements, proposals, memos, faxes, audio recordings, video recordings, and any and all other material that may relate to the publication entitled “We are Central,” which was published in the Advocate on Friday, March 26, 2010. (Emphasis added.)

    There are no public records which relate to the publication entitled “We are Central”.  It is my understanding that the publication, similar to recent publications in the Central City News, was prepared by and paid for by CH2M HILL.  There are numerous public records which relate to the content of the publication “We are Central” including but not limited to the following:

1. Contract between City of Central and CH2M HILL OMI;

2. Records of the City of Central Planning and Zoning Commission from March 2008 to present;

3. Occupational licenses issued by the City of Central from March 2008 to present;

4. Building permits issued by the City of Central from March 2008 to present;

5. Inspections of residential and commercial construction sites permitted by the City of Central from March 2008 to present;

6. Code violation notices from March 2008 to present;

7. Department of Public Works work orders from March 2008 to present;

8. October 2008 Road Survey conducted by CH2M HILL; and

9. Ordinance No. 2008-21 Re: Permit Fees

    The foregoing records are available for inspection at the City of Central, Municipal Services located at 22801 Greenwell Springs Road, Suites 2 & 3, Central, LA  70739.  If you would like to obtain copies of the above listed records, please identify the records which you would like copies of for calculation of the copying cost.  Advance payment of the copying cost of 25 cents per page will be required for copies of the above listed documents.

    Secondly, you requested “a full accounting of how this publication came about, its origins, who influenced its content, the timing of its publication, the number of copies printed, and the cost of printing and insertion in the Advocate.”  The foregoing request is not a request for public records as defined in La. R.S.44:1, et seq.

    Please contact me if you have any questions regarding this response or if I can further assist you with this matter.

    Very truly yours,

Sheri M. Morris, City Attorney  


Dear Mr. Jenkins,


We are in receipt of your March 31, 2010 Public Information Request.  The City of Central has responded to your public information request in a letter dated April 6, 2010 (copy attached).  We trust this letter is responsive to your March 31, 2010 Public Information Request.


Sincerely Yours,

David A Garrison

Senior Corporate Counsel 

April 15th Correspondence from CH2M HILL

to the City of Central

Dear Ms. Morris:

    We are in receipt of the April 12 and 13, 2010 Public Information Request from Central City News by Mr. Woody Jenkins.  Previously, you responded to a March 31, 2010 Public Information Request by the Central City News by Mr. Woody Jenkins.

    Mr. Jenkins’ request to CH2M HILL for records was not made to a “public body” as required by the Louisiana Public Records Statute, La. R.S. 44:1, et seq.  Moreover in Mr. Jenkins’ correspondence of April 8, 2010, he concedes that CH2M HILL is a private company.

    Accordingly, the records requested by Mr. Jenkins do not fall under the request for public records as defined in Louisiana Public Records Statute.

    Please contact me if you have any questions.

    Sincerely yours, David A Garrison, Senior Corporate Counsel.


  1. AreYouKiddingMe?

    May 5, 2010 at 11:09 am

    I, for one, will not stand for private companies buying ad space in our newspapers!

    /sarcasm off

  2. Mike Mannino

    May 5, 2010 at 12:54 pm

    Nice except you leave out some crucial details. I will not attempt to go through your long posting to respond step by step though I could. I will focus on some key issues.

    First, Ch2mhill, by its own corporate policy on business ethics, forbides participation by itself or its employees in campaigns for public office. Obviously, this was participation in a campaign by act of donations from the Company AND its employees. The statement by one of the candidates that he was not aware of the donation and subsequently returned it, is an out and out lie since he attended a FUNDRAISER at a citizens house where donations were collected. If anyone does not see a ethical conflict with all of this, then I probably cant convince you of the obvious. So I wonder how they could be in the fortune 500 for most ethical companies if this is how they operate. Remember, ethical and legal are 2 different things.

    Second,at teh heart of the suit is to identify who in the City, actually approved the use of the name of Central in these ads. Supposed to be the Mayor. I suspect it was not or it would have been revealed already and we wouldnt be where we are today.

    Third, the flyer that was sent out is factually incorrect. One of the young ladies that worked on this called me during the campaign pleading with me to retract my posting questioning it because she said she had done a lot of research and thought it was correct. I proceeded to explain that leaving the traffic impact fee off for Central was misleading because the developers are assessed this in Central, then add to the price of the house so you end up with a higher tax liabilty that you pay for the entire time you own the house. She could not dispute my explanation.

    I have been wondering why all of what is going on in Central seems familiar. Then I remembered. How many of you have read George Orwells Animal Farm ? I went back and read it and I can tell you some of the things in that book are going on here. Naiivity of the Citizens who always think the powers are right, twisting of words to suit the objectives of the powers, All people are equal but some are more equal, Manipulation of the other animals for their own gain, and on and on. Go read it, very interesting parallel’s…………

  3. dave

    May 5, 2010 at 1:55 pm


    My post is not intended to do anything other than give the reader the foundation for the discussion. I did not “leave out some crucial details”, because that would imply that I intended to take sides and argue for or against either party. In fact, the article posted above is just about devoid of any possibility of bias because it is simply a reprinting of other people’s writings and it is presented as such. I honestly do not mind you, or anyone, commenting on this site, whether I agree or disagree with your opinion. I ask first that everyone avoid mean-spirited derogatory comments and only offer as “facts” that which they can reasonably support. I ask second that you all take the time to review well over a thousand posts on and let me know if there is any bias evident. If there is, I want to be called and held accountable. In a city that has become very divided over elections and specific issues, I will do just about whatever it takes to remain informational and unbiased.

    Mike, I believe that your comment starts out by calling our post into question, but then the remainder of the post addresses the continuing legal and ethical discussion which I have not even attempted to discuss. As a citizen of Central you know that I must have an opinion, whether it be pro or anti CH2M HILL. So, if I even ATTEMPT to discuss the issue in print or on line I immediately become identified as having taken sides and I lose the right to present “Just the facts” without people being suspicious.

    So, I’ll go out on a limb and tell you what I believe. I actually believe the truth lies somewhere in between, as it usually does when parties polarize and argue so vehemently. Typically, the parties get so caught up in trying to prove ALL of their points and disprove ALL of the opposing party’s points, that they fail to see the truth lies somewhere between the two extremes. If I am to go on record in print as having taken sides, I will simply be the guy who believes that EVERYONE needs to find a healthier way to come to the table and openly and honestly discuss the issues. EVERYONE will have to be willing to admit that their approach or their argument is not 100% virtuous and right before any productive discussion can be had. For Central, I believe the answer is neither dictatorship nor revolution, it is open-minded, reasonable and honest discussion.

    So, having written more than I intended, I ask that you have respectful disagreements, and I respectfully ask that you leave out of the argument. If you feel we have shown bias, e-mail me at or call me at 262-3730. I am not above apologies or corrections if I fail to walk the middle road of information without bias.

    Thanks for listening,

  4. AreYouKiddingMe?

    May 5, 2010 at 2:21 pm

    I bet they’re putting flouride in our drinking water, too!

    Actually, you probably should attempt to go through the “long post” point by point, as I see no indication that CHM2 Hill’s insert supported any candidate one way or the other. It was a statement of who CHM2 Hill is, and what they’ve done in the community of Central. Meanwhile, your comments about campaign donations are disconnected from what this article is focusing on: the requests for public (and apparently private) records pertaining to the purchasing of a newspaper ad that didn’t mention any candidates at all, or even a political position.
    Second, I was unaware that any ad bought in a newspaper needed authorization from a city official in order to use the name of that city. However, I could be wrong, as cities are incorporated entities and perhaps have commercial rights to their names, as with IPs. Given that “Central” is also a commonly used adjective, the legitimacy of this argument seems a bit cloudy.
    Third, I’d rather not get into the whole “naivety” issue, but since it was brought up: I don’t think anyone with a working brain takes a company’s status as a “most ethical company, as referenced by ethiCo, a subsidiary of StatusMart” without a grain of salt. Furthermore, if businesses try to play nice with the governments they work in, its not a conspiracy, its just good policy.

    And finally, while we’re on the topic of conspiracies, did it occur to anyone else that a company that doesn’t have anything to hide, out of wrongdoing, might still want private information kept private? Especially after their regional office had a bomb threat called into it?

  5. Mike Mannino

    May 5, 2010 at 3:01 pm

    First let me say I am not implying in any way that you are taking sides. I will defend this paper to anyone that claims there is any bias here. I am just replying to the article with my own perspective. Some comments are subjective and stated as so, others are facts and not disputed.

    To AreYouKiddinMe ?,

    1- Do you really believe that a flyer that tried to answer a question concerning a major campaign issue and defended the incumbents position was not designed to support him ? How about R U KIDDIN ME ? You cant possibly believe that.

    2- Actually they do need permission. Its standard contract language so that a company cannot use a clients name as a selling point to another client without the knowledge of the original client. In this case, its supposed to be approved by the Mayor.

    3- Are you saying Ch2mhill may not have been ethical in this campaign ? We may actually agree on someting.

    Dave, I deal with differences of opinion on issues every day. You are right, on some of these there is a middle. But facts are facts and their are no middles and we should not compromise our efforts to demand honesty, integrity, and ethics in government even if it happens to be legal to not do so.

    As far as having a discussion about this with the elected officials, that would require their participation. Not one, except Mr.Washington, has made any attempt to resolve this………….

  6. TimL

    May 5, 2010 at 3:03 pm

    It has been disheartening to watch our great city be torn apart. The issue of permit fees was (and remains) insignificant to most of us. To continue the battles that derived from that topic just seems petty, yet the resulting damage is apparent and significant. To all parties involved, I ask that you please just leave it alone!

  7. Donna Dufour

    May 5, 2010 at 3:45 pm

    TimL, are you kidding me? “just leave it alone”. That’s like saying “Just make it go away”. If it were only that simple. I’m sure the council (except Ralph) and CH2MILL would love for it to be left alone and go away. There is only one way to make that happen. I don’t know all the ins and outs of this issue, don’t pretend to. When I talk to both sides (and yes I have talked to one councilman other than Ralph)I see their points and it just makes me more confused. But the professional people like the lawyers and judge will end up deciding who is right on this one. Until then like my momma said “where there is smoke there is fire”. Just an old saying, but I have seen it to turn out to be true more times than not.

  8. Mike Mannino

    May 5, 2010 at 5:58 pm

    I respectfully decline your request. The reason why this country is in the shape its in today is because good people just sit back for fear of being critized for doing the right thing. In the interest of my children and grandchildren, I will not do that. I’m too old for this to benefit me. I could sit back, relax, retire and just be blind to the obvious, but its not in me……… I suggest you get involved also before its too late.

  9. Kyle

    May 5, 2010 at 7:59 pm

    Mike and Donna: GET A LIFE! Do either of you have real jobs or are you just hateful and that close-minded? Dave attempted to explain that he just printed the FACTS. I read both of his articles today in his paper Central Speaks (the Ch2M and the Sports Bar articles), and I APPRECIATE getting just the FACTS as he wrote them. Great job, Dave. Another local publication won’t print all the facts, just bits and pieces instead that are obviously biased. Mike, you seem to personally want to attack everyone on this site that doesn’t agree with you. This is one of the reasons why I really quit coming to this site, but I had to speak up once I saw your comments to Dave. Now you’re attacking the moderator of this with Ms. Dufour right by your side as usual.

    Like the person above said, let’s just move on! I for one and grateful for the new paper and for you Dave for presenting JUST THE FACTS without an editorial. I know A LOT of others who feel the same!

  10. Mike Stephens

    May 5, 2010 at 8:14 pm

    Hey Donna we agree again. It is very copplicated. And Mike I am with you on not sitting back and do encourage everyone to get involved especially if they are is search of the truth.We have enough folks that are SCARED of the truth and rely only on what they hear or read and each time it is repeated the rumor grows a little more. Hope this dont offend anyone but if the shoe fits wear!

    Perhaps what Timi was trying to say and I would definately agree that since a suit has been filed and it is in the court system leave it alone and wait for the judges ruling. Wanna bet that some of the folks I mentioned above will swear the judge was bought?

    In the mean time have either of you contacted the mayors office to see if there are any committes or study groups that may not have been filled yet and offer to help?

  11. Donna Dufour

    May 5, 2010 at 9:05 pm

    Kyle, you would like us to go away, not happening. I don’t see where my post is attacking Dave, unless he is hiding behind the name TimL. Which I know he wouldn’t. I have no problem at all with Dave or anyone associated with this site. Take your head and stick it in the sand if you want, that’s your choice.

    Mike, not ready for that yet. Who knows what might happen after the new councilman are sworn in. Did you volunteer or get asked? I’m not going pretend I know enough to be any good to a committee, but Mike M. whether people like it or not would be an asset to any committee or study group.

  12. Mike Mannino

    May 5, 2010 at 9:07 pm

    Always can depend on you to take the sensible approach and I appreciate that. At least you and I can agree to disagree when the occasion arises, and still walk away friends. I agree at this point that its out of our hands, the courts will ultimately decide this. In any case, at best this was handled poorly, at the worst, its more sinister. No matter the outcome now, this is a black mark for the city.

    To Kyle,
    People like you amaze me. You remind me of my kids when I corrected them for doing something wrong. They got mad at me like it was my fault. Do you place any blame on the administration for their role in this. Or is it all the fault of those of us who want truth, ethics, and openness in government ? As far as attacking Dave, I did no such thing and cleared that up on a previous post. And where do I attack anyone personally for stating their opinion ? Unfortuantely, the way this has been handled has been the dividing issue. Its no longer about the suit or the records or the CCN. Its about right and wrong, which you will see I am consistent about no matter how you interpret. With me there is Black and White with a very narrow gray band. To a small portion of you the gray completely blots out the black and white. Its very flattering that I can drive you away from a site with my outspoken ways. Some how I dont think that is the problem, some people just cant handle the truth. I have not seen you answer one of my posts with factual responses. Calling me names and asking if I have a job is not a response, its an attack which is what you falsely accuse me of. I will debate anyone on this subject and many other topics going on right now in this City , State, and Country, in government and can walk away with out any hard feelings about your opinions. Its not personal like some of you make it. Just because I am passionate about good government, spend late hours reading all I can on various topics, and have my own opinion, why is that a bad thing ? Sorry but you will find that I will use the amount of force necessary to overcome the force exerted against me. So, I’m not going away as long as there are issues like this to voice my opinion about. You can make me go away by putting forth a factual argument that disproves what I claim. Otherwise, I advise you to stay away from this and other sites that allow free exchange of opinions or you may continue to be frustrated.

  13. Morgan

    May 5, 2010 at 10:18 pm

    Fact: CH2M Hill are not required by law to release private information concerning their organization.
    (My)Opinion: They would be irresponsible if they released private information within the context of a vocally hostile/violent external group that is apparently based within the community. It would be an invitation to further acts of quasi-terrorism.

    While I never encourage the attitude of standing against truth, I have to say this whole argument smacks of foot-shooting. Central needs Industry to make itself economically viable. Scaring off what could be a great addition to the economical development to our city seems like a very bad idea. Unless you want property taxes to become absurd, of course. What factual arguments can you make that indicate CH2M Hill are the OCP we so need to fear, and not simply a capital group eager to do much needed construction business within the city?

  14. Mike Mannino

    May 6, 2010 at 12:31 am

    You are correct but this is not private information. I’m surprised the CCN has not taken another route and demanded these records from the City also.

    I am lost as to your other points though ? I do not fear Ch2, except if they are being directed to hide facts from the Citizens. What Construction business does Ch2 do ? They are a public works organization for Central. They are capable of construction projects and handle EBR sewer contract which has doubled from original estimates by the way since they took over under Kip Holden.

  15. Mike Mannino

    May 6, 2010 at 2:50 pm

    Call me a conspiracy nut or just suspicious but a comment in your last posting tipped me off to something that you know that not many people are aware of and gives me an idea of who you are connected to.

    Ch2 is an extremely large company and I have not been able to figure why they are so protective of a contract that to them, is peanuts and probably rounds off on thier balance sheet. You mention construction within the city. What do you know about any discussions or plans for Ch2 to do such a thing in Central or is that just another strange coincidence that just popped out ?

    I have been researching Ch2 around the country and have found some interesting parrallels in small, young cities, resulting in legal action. One in California involves 70,000 in campaign contributions after which Ch2 was given an open checkbook on a water project. EBR has a contract with them for the sewer upgrades that was mentioned in an editorial a couple of weeks ago by a project engineer. Costs have doubled from the original estimate since they took over shortly after the current Mayor took office. Both of these comments are facts once again that I can back up so please dont dismiss them as rumors.

    So, Morgan, whoever you are and whomever you are connected to, all this activity in Central is only going to put people on alert to start keeping a closer eye on things. If nothing else comes out of this suit, you can bet many more people will be watching whats happening in our Government.
    Dave, in the interest of your terms and conditions for posting here, I will state that none of this means anything is going on here in Central. But it certainly tells us we should be careful and make sure we are aware of whats going on.

  16. Emile

    May 6, 2010 at 3:39 pm

    I have a few questions I hope that someone can answer. Does ch2 need the mayor permission every time they send out a mass communication? I know that they sent one out via CCN. Is the communication between the Mayor or lack of and Ch2 considered part of the public record?
    Just the facts Please..
    thanks in advance.

  17. dave

    May 6, 2010 at 3:49 pm

    I know Morgan. No connections, guaranteed.

  18. Mike Mannino

    May 6, 2010 at 6:47 pm

    Thank you Dave, I trust your word. I apologize Morgan.

  19. TimL (Tim Lazaroe)

    May 7, 2010 at 8:04 am

    Mike M.,

    You suggested that I, “get involved also before its too late”…….. I am as involved in this community as I could possibly be (without abandoning my family), yet I cannot understand the motivation for all of this ruckus. I am not being mean-spirited or taking sides: I just do not see the problem.

    Apparently you know things about the situation that the rest of us are not privy to. I look forward to hearing the rest of the story. I would be glad to meet with you to hear what you have to say about it. You are welcome to stop by my office any time, or I would be glad to meet you for lunch or something.

    Tim Lazaroe
    RV Cams, Inc
    8889 Sullivan Rd
    Suite C

  20. Mike Mannino

    May 7, 2010 at 8:32 am

    Great Tim. Thanks and I’ll take you up on that. I pass by everyday and will stop by to meet you.

  21. Fed Up With CH2M Hill

    June 11, 2010 at 10:56 pm

    Believe me, for CH2M to be listed as an ethical company is an outright farce. See what they did to the Huntsinger family when Tom Huntsinger, a CH2M executive employee of 25 years, told CH2M to pull out of job because the company had a conflict of interest and corruption was on the horizon. CH2M literally killed the messenger. They continue to hide under the umbrella of being a private company and not giving up information, but it’s our public taxpayer dollars that keep it going. Instead of making things right, like in the Huntsinger case, they use their immense financial and legal resources to squeeze out anyone that shows them that CH2M made a mistake. My advice: stay away from these folks and keep a handle on your pocketbook when they are nearby!

  22. Guadalupe Connon

    May 26, 2011 at 2:22 pm

    Thanks for this awesome post. This is very resourceful for someone looking for a transcription article. I will be checking your site again soon.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *