Thugs aren't loosing their houses to condemnation. People who can't afford to maintain & own them are.

Thugs don't buy properties, the return on investment is greater in illegal drug sales.
Plus Scarface didn't own a mansion till he was way up the ladder, these people never make it that far.

Plus locally, there's a 7 year high surplus of houses for sale, the bottom dropped out on the real estate boom.

I believe I read in a recent budget article that the city may lose some police officers to attrition (retirement) and that for budget reasons they won't be replaced. I apologize if my recollections are incorrect.

That being said, if my recollection is true, the city needs to make every effort to replace any retiring police officers. How are we to attract any downtown visitors or any visitors to any part of the city if no one can feel safe?

Trim the administration pork and hire more police officers.

Can anyone tell me where to purchase a keychain pepper spray device?

That's amazing...

I see that the adjusted per share price for WMT (Wal-Mart) was $00.05 ( a nickle) on 9/28/72. Today's close was $47.78.

I understand that LancasterDoc makes this kind of profit on his regular daily business, but I had no idea that his side business (owning some Lancaster City rentals) was so profitable.

Maybe he owns them for what they lose yearly... hmmm will have to rethink this

I was at one of the Budget Committee meetings where the City Administration budget was discussed.

There is very little pork in the administration budget.

Certain City administrators are managing two entire departments. A number of administration positions remain vacant. Patrick Hopkins squeezes every penny until it squeals in anguish, then he squeezes some more.

Contrast Rick Gray's policies to those of his predecessor. Under Charlie Smithgall, a number of police were hired using grant money. UNFORTUNATELY, when the grant money runs out, City taxpayers must pay their salaries. And remember, Smithgall hired a lot of police officers.

This is only one of the many things that Smithgall did to deceive the public into believing Lancaster City was in far better financial shape than it really was.

The City budget was under $24 million, with a $2 million surplus, when Smithgall took office; when he left, the budget was over $40 million, with an over $7 million deficit. This doesn't include the long-term debt from some of Smithgall's grandiose projects. Even his four tax increases in eight years weren't nearly enough to cover his increased spending.

No matter who the next mayor after Smithgall would have been, no matter what political party, City taxpayers would have been stuck with a tax increase. Now Lancaster City either must reverse some of Smithgall's policies, or raise taxes to pay for them.

Which should it be?