Did VanTil ever pay for his gas?

freetime · **Posted:** Sun Dec 20, 2009 9:04 am

hammonite wrote:

Free,

It sounds like you have again nailed McDermott, this is a city vehicle which he is clearly using for outside city business.

My concern is the risk mcdermott is placing the city of hammond @ for using this municipal vehicle for other than city use.

1/3 of the gas he paying for, that's cheap what about 1/3 of the insurance, the maintenance and payment. Give me a vehicle and I will pay 1/3 of the gas. :roll:

Read the policy again. The city is supposed to be indemnified from liability if there's an accident while the vehicle is being used for personal business.
Now getting them to admit it would be another matter entirely.
Last year a poster with whom I was not familiar said McDermott had an accident with his city vehicle. He said the Water Department had the vehicle fixed on the QT.
Never heard anything officially about it.
I know the mcteam went absolutely rabid over it.

Politician's R Liars · **Posted:** Sun Dec 20, 2009 9:44 am

freetime wrote:

On the subject of misusing taxpayer gas and vehicles, is Hammond Mayor and LC Dem Chairman Tom McDermott violating city policy with his daily use of a take home vehicle?

Some months ago, McDermott told the Post-Tribune he uses his take home vehicle for personal business.
Now, since he became the Dem chairman, he attends many political functions to which he drives the vehicle the Water Department provides for him.
McDermott told the Post he would write a check for 1/3 of the gas he puts into his take home vehicle to cover the personal use.
Whether or not he has done that I don't know. But it would appear he is breaking the city law even if he pays.
Read it for yourself:

37.003 CITY SEALS ON CITY-OWNED VEHICLES.

(A) All vehicles owned or operated by the city shall be used exclusively for official purposes only.

(B) All vehicles owned or operated by the city, excluding Police and Fire Department vehicles used for official purposes only, and the Mayorâ€™s automobile, shall bear a replica of the city seal on the front, side doors of the vehicles. The seals shall not be less than 10 inches in diameter, with the words â€œCity of Hammond, Indianaâ€ printed in 4-inch letters immediately above or below the city seal replica.

(C) Any person operating a vehicle in violation of this section shall be subject to a fine of up to $2,500 or dismissal as an employee or officer of the city. In addition, that person shall not be indemnified by the city for any damage caused by the operation of that vehicle.

The only part of this policy the mayor is exempt from, and I don't know why he should be, is the requirement to have a city seal on the vehicle.

I'm sure he and his legal mouthpieces would argue since the Water Department provides the vehicle, he can do whatever he wants in it. I say that's nonsense. The law says "or operated by the city." HE'S the city.
So when is he going to be held accountable to the taxpayers?
$2500 a day! Van Til didn't pump that much gas.

OK, well McDermott is a piece of sh!t, just like the rest of them, no argument here.. But why do you keep suggesting VanTil is any better? Your city ordinance does not say anything about gasoline by the way.

Politician's R Liars · **Posted:** Sun Dec 20, 2009 9:48 am

freetime wrote:

I don't know what the policy was at the time regarding Van Til's kid taking the truck to school.

Van Til keeps getting reelected because he is a very skilled politican who has spent many years honing his craft. [/size]

So do you support this scum bag, because it almost sounds like you do? I like your line about the "policy" and his kid taking the truck, you sound just like a politician!

Politician's R Liars · **Posted:** Sun Dec 20, 2009 9:56 am

freetime wrote:

Read the policy again. The city is supposed to be indemnified from liability if there's an accident while the vehicle is being used for personal business.
Now getting them to admit it would be another matter entirely.
Last year a poster with whom I was not familiar said McDermott had an accident with his city vehicle. He said the Water Department had the vehicle fixed on the QT.
Never heard anything officially about it.
I know the mcteam went absolutely rabid over it.

First it's not a "policy" it's an ordinance, I would think you should know that of all people. Also there is NO WAY that an ordinance or "policy" would exempt the city from being liable for damage or loss if there was an accident. The vehicle is insured and owned by the city, they would have to pay the claim.

freetime · **Posted:** Sun Dec 20, 2009 10:41 am

I know it's an ordinance. You see I copied and pasted the exact chapter and verse. The chapter in the ordinance book is called "City Policy." So That's what I used as shorthand.
But what the hell is the difference? He's breaking it frequently.No one in Hammond will try to stop him.
I don't know what would happen in court regarding the liability issue. As I said, they would probably say he was on a city errand anyway.
Hammond is absolutely lawless these days. Our government operates as if it is above the law, unlike the chump taxpayers.
That's why I don't get too excited by Van Til's antics.
I don't like what Van Til did, and I don't like what McDermott does.
But McDemott is costing my family more money, and is busy looting the city I love.
He also portrays himself as a reformer, which he is NOT. I think Van Til is less of a hypocrite. [quote][/quote]

Politician's R Liars · **Posted:** Sun Dec 20, 2009 11:51 am

freetime wrote:

I don't know what would happen in court regarding the liability issue.
I think Van Til is less of a hypocrite.

Quote:

#1 what would happen in court is the city would pay!
#2 "less of a hypocrite" that's like saying Hussein Obama is less of a Muslim than the rest of those crazy f*****g terroists.

freetime · **Posted:** Sun Dec 20, 2009 4:40 pm

Wrong. Obama is a Christian. But it shouldn't matter anyway.
I seem to remember that we have religious freedom in this country.

As for the city cars, you can see what the ordinance says. I don't like the law beiing broken by city officials who should know better (McDermott is allegedly a lawyer) under any circumstances. .

Politician's R Liars · **Posted:** Sun Dec 20, 2009 11:29 pm

freetime wrote:

Wrong. Obama is a Christian. But it shouldn't matter anyway.
I seem to remember that we have religious freedom in this country.

As for the city cars, you can see what the ordinance says. I don't like the law beiing broken by city officials who should know better (McDermott is allegedly a lawyer) under any circumstances. .

I see, so you are one of those idiots that supports Hussein Osamabama... Well let me change the subject here by saying...........YOU MAKE ME SICK! But then again you are right up the "Obama Money" alley aren't you "Freemoney".
Now I see why you are such an idiot that you can't read and understand basic English. This is a town ordinance that isn't worth the paper it's written on. Only someone as STUPID as you would suggest that the city of Hammond would not be liable in damages on a car they own and insure just because an "employee" is "breaking the rules". You dumb azz! At this point I believe our conversation is over, I will not attempt to talk to someone who supports Obama! Good luck to you and your free ride!

Northwest Indiana Discussion

Did VanTil ever pay for his gas?

Who is online