>> ROBERT RED DOT THE ONLY
FUGITIVE WANTED RIGHT NOW TO
SEE THE OTHER PEOPLE THAT WE’VE
FUGITIVE WANTED RIGHT NOW TO
SEE THE OTHER PEOPLE THAT WE’VE
ALSO FEATURE JUST GO TO OUR
SEE THE OTHER PEOPLE THAT WE’VE
ALSO FEATURE JUST GO TO OUR
WEBSITE KSAT
ALSO FEATURE JUST GO TO OUR
WEBSITE KSAT
DOT COM.
WEBSITE KSAT
DOT COM.
>> A PUBLIC REPRIMAND FOR LEON
DOT COM.
>> A PUBLIC REPRIMAND FOR LEON
VALLEY MAYOR CHRIS RILEY WHO
>> A PUBLIC REPRIMAND FOR LEON
VALLEY MAYOR CHRIS RILEY WHO
AFFIX REVIEW BOARD FOUND
VALLEY MAYOR CHRIS RILEY WHO
AFFIX REVIEW BOARD FOUND
VIOLATED THE CITY CHARTER WHEN
AFFIX REVIEW BOARD FOUND
VIOLATED THE CITY CHARTER WHEN
SHE DISCLOSED PRIVILEGED
VIOLATED THE CITY CHARTER WHEN
SHE DISCLOSED PRIVILEGED
INFORMATION SHE OBTAINED
SHE DISCLOSED PRIVILEGED
INFORMATION SHE OBTAINED
BECAUSE OF HER STATUS AS MAYOR
INFORMATION SHE OBTAINED
BECAUSE OF HER STATUS AS MAYOR
LAST NIGHT’S HEARING
BECAUSE OF HER STATUS AS MAYOR
LAST NIGHT’S HEARING
HEARD FROM. MAYOR RILEY SEVERAL
LAST NIGHT’S HEARING
HEARD FROM. MAYOR RILEY SEVERAL
WITNESSES AND COUNCILWOMAN
HEARD FROM. MAYOR RILEY SEVERAL
WITNESSES AND COUNCILWOMAN
DONNA CHARLES
WITNESSES AND COUNCILWOMAN
DONNA CHARLES
WHO FILED 2 ETHICS COMPLAINTS
DONNA CHARLES
WHO FILED 2 ETHICS COMPLAINTS
AGAINST BRADLEY BACK IN
WHO FILED 2 ETHICS COMPLAINTS
AGAINST BRADLEY BACK IN
SEPTEMBER OF THE 2 COMPLAINTS,
AGAINST BRADLEY BACK IN
SEPTEMBER OF THE 2 COMPLAINTS,
THE ETHICS PANEL FOUND RILEY
SEPTEMBER OF THE 2 COMPLAINTS,
THE ETHICS PANEL FOUND RILEY
DID DISCLOSE ATTORNEY INVOICES
THE ETHICS PANEL FOUND RILEY
DID DISCLOSE ATTORNEY INVOICES
REGARDING HEARING WHICH WERE
DID DISCLOSE ATTORNEY INVOICES
REGARDING HEARING WHICH WERE
CONSIDERED CONFIDENTIAL.
REGARDING HEARING WHICH WERE
CONSIDERED CONFIDENTIAL.
IN RESPONSE. MAYOR RILEY SAYS
CONSIDERED CONFIDENTIAL.
IN RESPONSE. MAYOR RILEY SAYS
IN PART QUOTE
IN RESPONSE. MAYOR RILEY SAYS
IN PART QUOTE
I DISPUTE THAT THERE WAS ANY
IN PART QUOTE
I DISPUTE THAT THERE WAS ANY
PRIVILEGED INFORMATION IN THE
I DISPUTE THAT THERE WAS ANY
PRIVILEGED INFORMATION IN THE
FEMALES, PRIVILEGED INFORMATION
PRIVILEGED INFORMATION IN THE
FEMALES, PRIVILEGED INFORMATION
MEANS LEGAL ADVICE OR
FEMALES, PRIVILEGED INFORMATION
MEANS LEGAL ADVICE OR
CLIENT CONFIDENCES. NO SUCH
MEANS LEGAL ADVICE OR
CLIENT CONFIDENCES. NO SUCH
INFORMATION IN THE FEE BILLS IN
CLIENT CONFIDENCES. NO SUCH
INFORMATION IN THE FEE BILLS IN
QUESTION WAS IDENTIFIED AT THAT
INFORMATION IN THE FEE BILLS IN
QUESTION WAS IDENTIFIED AT THAT
HEARING AND QUOTE RILEY IS
QUESTION WAS IDENTIFIED AT THAT
HEARING AND QUOTE RILEY IS
RUNNING UNOPPOSED FOR
HEARING AND QUOTE RILEY IS
RUNNING UNOPPOSED FOR
REELECTION IN MAY.
RUNNING UNOPPOSED FOR
REELECTION IN MAY.
BUT IT’S UNCLEAR RIGHT NOW HOW
REELECTION IN MAY.
BUT IT’S UNCLEAR RIGHT NOW HOW
THE BOARD’S FINDINGS WILL
BUT IT’S UNCLEAR RIGHT NOW HOW
THE BOARD’S FINDINGS WILL
IMPACT HER ABILITY TO RUN FOR
THE BOARD’S FINDINGS WILL
IMPACT HER ABILITY TO RUN FOR
OFFICE.
IMPACT HER ABILITY TO RUN FOR
OFFICE.
>> 2 THINGS CAN HAPPEN AT THIS
OFFICE.
>> 2 THINGS CAN HAPPEN AT THIS
TIME, THE CITY SECRETARY CAN
>> 2 THINGS CAN HAPPEN AT THIS
TIME, THE CITY SECRETARY CAN
FILE AN ADMINISTRATIVE
TIME, THE CITY SECRETARY CAN
FILE AN ADMINISTRATIVE
DECLARATION OF INELIGIBILITY
FILE AN ADMINISTRATIVE
DECLARATION OF INELIGIBILITY
THE
DECLARATION OF INELIGIBILITY
THE
CITY COUNCIL IS THE BODY THAT’S
THE
CITY COUNCIL IS THE BODY THAT’S
ACTUALLY THE JUDGE OF THE
CITY COUNCIL IS THE BODY THAT’S
ACTUALLY THE JUDGE OF THE
QUALIFICATIONS AND SO THE CITY
ACTUALLY THE JUDGE OF THE
QUALIFICATIONS AND SO THE CITY
COUNCIL COULD ALSO DETERMINE
QUALIFICATIONS AND SO THE CITY
COUNCIL COULD ALSO DETERMINE
WHETHER OR NOT
COUNCIL COULD ALSO DETERMINE
WHETHER OR NOT
THE MAYOR AT THIS POINT STILL
WHETHER OR NOT
THE MAYOR AT THIS POINT STILL
MEETS THE QUALIFICATIONS TO BE
