The determination to appoint Shingleton as stated by Hammond and Peterson was based upon last year's election results. None of the other candidates ran in last year's election, which means the decision was made on unequal ground. The decision should have been made based upon the most qualified individual out of the group of candidates who presented to the council on the 23rd. I am not saying that I am the most qualified; however selecting Shingleton creates suspicion of back-door politicking.
Shingleton participated in a lawsuit against the city two years ago that supported the mayor's position. The mayor contributed toward Shingleton's campaign last year, which shows some kind of financial connection. In my opinion, the mayor had a greater reason to abstain in the vote for Shingleton.

Sour grapes, Bob. If you were so "qaulified" to be on the city council, why didn't you run last go around? Most cities look first to the candidate with the highest number of votes who was not elected when a vacancy occurs. This only makes sense. Shingleton took the time, and incurred the expense, of running a campaign for office. He was vetted by the voters and received a lot of vote. You, Bob, did not. If you think you are such a great candidate, then why not run for office like everyone else on the city council has!

I challenge you and every resident of Syracuse to review the 22 applications that were submitted for consideration for the vacancy. I sat through the speeches and I agree with Mr. Knight and Mr. Clark that Mr. Whitely is the most qualified.

If all cities select people to fill vacancies by picking the person with the next most votes at the last election why would cities even ask for applications? In my opinion, the councilmen that voted for Mr. Shingleton because he ran in the last election owe the other 21 candidates a personal apology for asking them to take time out of their lives to participate in a farse.

I wish I could retract my vote from last November. I voted for Mr. Hammond, Mr. Petersen, and Mr. Singleton. Mr. Hammond, Mr. Petersen and Mayor Panucci have lost my respect. What a joke.

The people of Syracuse were fed up with the former councilmen and Lurlin Knight and their unwillingness to listen to the people. Larry Shingleton is as qualified as anyone who applied, the only difference being is that he ran, walked, and took his time to represent the city of Syracuse in the November election and lost by less than 2%. You could have run Robert but you chose not to put yourself on the line. Mr. Shingleton should be the one to fill this vacancy. Positive reform will begin to go forward which will be a good thing for Syracuse.

Mr Shingleton's appointment was clearly due to granting of a political favor from Mr. Hammond and Mr. Petersen. They ran together as a political party and Mr. Shingleton was the only one of the three not elected. Hammond and Petersen felt bad that he was not elected with them and saw this as an opportunity to get their whole party on the council. The last election was over two years ago, a lot can change in two years. I know Mr. Whitely and he considered running then, but conditions in his life did not allow him to run. Only one of those who applied ran in the election. If finishing 4th in the election was a requirement for the position, then why wasn't that listed in the request for applicants from the city? The council could have saved themselves a lot of time. The council was charged with picking the most qualified candidate and they chose to put political favors over the best interests of the city. It was especially appalling that Mayor Panucci didn't have the courage to cast a vote, but chose the cowards way out by abstaining. Certain councilmembers clearly failed the citizens by this action.

I have personally known Larry Shingleton for many years. He is honest, trustworthy, and very knowledgeable in business and finance. I am thankful Councilman Hammond, Councilman Peterson and Mayor Panucci voted in his favor. He will work hard and represent Syracuse well. We have had eight years of councilmen not listening and following the will of the people. We will see a positive difference and direction for Syracuse. Congratulations Mr. Shingleton from a grateful resident.

I know both Larry Shingleton and Councilman Hammond and know them both to be good men with great integrity. They are both very honest and hard-working individuals that will serve Syracuse well in the months ahead. I do not believe that there was anything wrong with what took place. The city of Syracuse is in good hands.

If you believe Councilman Hammond and Petersen did the will of the people at the council meeting you were obviously not there. There was applause when Whitely was nominated, he was obviously the choice of the people. When Hammond and Petersen voted against him, there was booing and comments afterward to the council that they had failed in their duty to represent the people, they obviously were not doing the will of the full house in the council chambers. Those who spoke and applauded where not there to support Whitely, they were there to support other candidates, but felt he was the best choice. Hammond and Petersen may be good and honest men, but chose to give a political favor rather than do the will of the people. This appointment was clearly a "thank you" for help getting them elected and to complete their ticket on the council. If this vote was any indication of how the next two years will go, get ready for more of not listening to the citizens and following their own agenda. DTEC is against the will of the citizens and it's taken many months for any besides Knight and Clark to oppose it.

I was at the meeting and did hear each canidate stand and give their views. Perhaps Councilman Clark and Councilman Knight did not hear what was being said either. I truly believe that Councilman Hammond and Councilman Peterson did what they felt was right and did what they felt was the best for the citizens of Syracuse. There were many in that meeting which expressed gratitude for Mr. Shingletons appointment. Larry Shingleton was the next vote getter in the recent election. It wasn't councilman Clark who was against DTEC - it was Councilman Hammond, Peterson and Knight. Councilman Clark was for DTEC. Yes, get ready because the next two years will be a positive change for Syracuse. You must have a very short memory concerning all the money that has been spent from your pocket concerning decisions that only Wally Peterson chose to vote against. The citizens of Syracuse deserve to have honest men exercise prudence with their tax dollars and hopefully this will be the case now. Don't be so naive - Councilman Clark and Councilman Knight needed Robert Whitely on the council to keep their majority vote. The people of Syracuse needs a positive change.

As someone who has been working against DTEC from the beginning and spoken personally with each councilperson about it, I can tell you are sadly misinformed. Councilman Clark has been against DTEC for sometime. It is Councilman Petersen and Mayor Panucci who have been in favor of DTEC. Councilman Hammond has been for or against depending on when you talk with him.

You keep bringing up the last election. It should have no bearing on the appointment. If that were part of the criteria, then why weren't the other 21 people who applied informed of that. The council shouldn't have even asked for applications. They should have just called Shingleton and asked if he wanted the job.

I remember what Wally Peterson did and respect him for it. I talked to him many times during those months and am glad the citizens saw fit to undo the change to keep the Mayor's position as it was.

Robert Whitely would have been an independent voice on the council. He supported keeping the mayor's duties. We now have the whole political party from the last election on the council. They had a chance to put this behind us and didn't.

I am sorry but you are misinformed. I have heard Councilman Clark speak for DTEC numerous times. Concerning Councilman Hammond, if you read the minutes, he repeatedly said that the landowners needed to be involved from the beginning. He also stated the city of Syracuse needed to plan but this was not the time for DTEC. He never strayed from that view. If you think Robert Whitely would have been an independent voice on the council think again.

For those of you that were not at the council meeting, it was interesting to hear Councilmen Knight and Councilmen Clark state that they were voting for the most qualified candidate. Then Councilmen Peterson stated that he voted for Mr. Shingleton because 3 years ago he felt bad when he wasn't selected for a vacancy. Councilmen Petersen, I can assure you that there will be other times in your life when you will feel bad. That is not a valid reason to choose your direction. Use your head next time.

Interesting how this string has gone from one of the inappropriate selection to one on the discussion of DTEC. I hope spoken with Councilman Clark at least 6 times regarding DTEC. He is not and was not in support of DTEC. He asked for appointment to the committee to make sure that the needs of Syracuse were met. This is in the minutes. Read them. In the last two work sessions of the council, he has recommended that we pull back and plan for our city. With Councilmen Knight, he recommended that a combined work session be held with the planning commission so that planning for the city could begin. Councilmen Hammond and Peterson did not join in on this discussion until the Mayor did. And this didn't occur until last week. I can't wait to read the minutes from their work session last week when all of the council finally agreed it was time to pull back.

I agree with a previous comment. I wish that I could take back my votes for Councilmen Hammond and Peterson. What a stupid, stupid reason for selecting a person to fill a vacancy.

DTEC was brought up as a point to show how councilmen Hammond and Petersen are not listening to the voice of the people, just as they didn't they appointed their fellow "party" member to the council.

Robert Whitely would have been an independent voice on the council. He isn't aligned with either "faction" which seem to continue to exist on the council. (It's too bad these "factions" can't be put behind us. The voters decided the issue and that should have settled it.) He was supported by Councilmen Clark and Knight because they made a commitment to select the most qualified candidate. Mr. Whitely was clearly the most qualified candidate with his experience on the Planning Commission and other service to the city. Running a losing campaign shouldn't be a reason or requirement for appointment, when the others who applied didn't even run.

If someone still feels the next person in the election should be the one chosen, then the election to review should be the one the seat was filled. In this case, it should be the election from 3 years ago when Phil Orton was elected. Not sure who finished fourth, but it wasn't Larry Shingleton.