Comments by DexterDawg
Page 1 of 4 | Next
Posted on August 25 at 9:13 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I wish the Trib would have went into further detail on this matter so that the public knew what was in the proposal. Under this proposal there are several buildings that would not fit the standard, but I think the majority of residents would disagree. Remax, Ben's Floral/Lakeside, and Cafourek Insurance to name a few are all structures that would not meet the proposed "design standards" because they have some steel siding. I would challenge you to find anyone that would agree that those buildings are not attractive and should not be allowed to have been built in their location.
There may be room for some standards in place, but these are just too much. Unless the plan all along has been to find more ways to limit growth in Albert Lea.
Posted on May 31 at 10:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Thanks for fixing the online article, I'll be interested to see which version was printed. I just think we can sometimes be all to forgiving on teenage drinking.
Posted on May 30 at 1:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)
First I'll say these seem like good kids, and I hope they learned their lesson, but I just want to correct an early paragraph in the article.
"Falk and teammate Grant Stadheim made a mistake many their age have made when they were both caught drinking....."
The mistake was not getting "caught" drinking, it was drinking in the first place.
I hope this was merely an oversight by the writer.
Posted on May 4 at 11:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I just happened to see this article today online, I don't personally know anyone involved, but the stove info should have been provided to the Tribune by ALPD or ALFD.
Posted on May 4 at 10:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Mine4me, Gas leak was from a renter doing something he shouldn't. Name calling and speculation are not helpful. At least that's what I tell my 6 year old daughter....
Posted on May 4 at 10:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The stove is an electric stove kids, find something else to speculate about. The renter, apparently unbeknown to the owner replaced the gas stove with an electric, didn't cap off the gas line and someone apparently turned the gas valve on the night before. All night long the house filled with gas, one of the renters lit a smoke the next morning and the rest is history.
Now that we know that, could someone please tell me how the rental ordinance would solve this?
Posted on April 14 at 12:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)
It's funny that the city now decided that it should use these tools that it has to generate new business in down times. Think how many companies kept on driving after being turned down for these incentives in the past.
Posted on April 7 at 6:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Yey! Tim Walz got 11 million kids insured. Why can't I cancel my kids policy?
Posted on February 27 at 2 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Lizzy,
I don't think it's ok for an environment to get that bad, that usually ends up in a companies demise so an intelligent business owner wouldn't want that either. The beauty of our free country is you can choose if you want to work there or not. Hell once upon a time people had ambition and found ways to start their own businesses when they didn't like what was out there. You do not have a constitutional right to a pension or other benefits. Those are things that some employers attempt to offer their employees as incentives to work for them. Good for those who can afford to offer them.
It's very easy to play armchair quarterback and make assumptions about what this company or that company can or should do, but until you sit at the helm you have no idea what challenges they may be facing.
As far as your "simple" debate, how can it even be debat? Why on earth would someone even want to start a new business in our country if they are just going to have to hand it over to the employees? I don't see any logic behind what you said at all.
Leftys,
Publicly traded is not a public job. It means you can purchase an ownership stake in the company and like I said earlier. If you don't like a particular company feel free to do that so that you can voice your concern. Also it is not yours or my business what a company deems a CEO or any other employee of that company to be worth. It's not your business, and if is, go to the shareholder or board meetings.
Page 1 of 4 | Next
Posted on October 25 at 8:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)
How much does it cost to bring back 2008-2009 programming, and why is this not to bring the elementary back to New Richaland?
Last year this was to avoid the consolidation.
On NRHEG to vote on levy