MCS Is Being Sued as "PUBLIC NUISANCE"
- Thread starter Qtrmileracer
- Start date
- Status
I don’t know if it’s so much a case of illiteracy on the part of those that would support Kevin, Tammy and Gordy in there efforts with Tri-City Speedway. I’ve been there MANY times over the years and see a BIG improvement over the Wente years. No doubt, it’s a much better place now than it was then! They’ve done well at TCS! (Granted I have not seen the place since I learned of the lawsuit) … BUT that’s not the issue. Has nothing to do with it at all!!!
I have a personal problem, as well as many others that understand what’s going on, with the OWNERSHIP of Tri City Speedway. The facility is owned by a holding company called G&G Motorsports. The PRINCIPAL owner in G&G Motoersports is GORDON Gundaker!!!! The SAME person that is involved with a law suit against Montgomery Count Speedway calling it a “public nuisance.” Too many people in our racing community seem to dismiss this as “no big deal.” … To me it is a big deal!
There have been times during the discussions on here I felt a little bad for Kevin over this mess… He obviously can’t control his father’s actions. … BUT here we go with his statements from today. Statements which are at best “misinformation” that will pretty much end any of my considerations. Whether he lied on here intentionally, OR he was told a lie and passed then just passed it on… The manure that was spread was that of the smelliest kind.
Hey... Use you fingers on the keyboard, rather than whatever you were typin' with!!!
What are you tryin’ to say? 
racin90
Well-Known Member
Im flattered with your kindness..and i feel tha love..lol. No hard feelings here..i do hope this all pans out soon so Mel can do with whatever he wishes and get this evil monkey off his back.
Got-cha... 94 jumped in between there too. I get it,
Call me slow, and easily confused, well and cheap oh and easy too.Since this is still on the first page, I would like to put in my two cents worth. Kevin's original post referenced a conversation between his dad and Mel's lawyer! I read and re-read it several times and every time, it says that the conversation was with "Mel's lawyer and my dad", it did not specifically mention Mel. So technically, Mel could say that he did not call Gordon because he didn't, his lawyer did.
Funny how when one word is omitted from a "quote," it can take on a whole new meaning. Wonder how that happened?
Jack
Funny how when one word is omitted from a "quote," it can take on a whole new meaning. Wonder how that happened?
Jack
smokingjoe
Owner RAMS 65 & 652
Last edited by Revin : Today at 12:06 AM.
Did you not see that at the bottom of the post or do you just think everyone is that stupid.
Plus as we all know if 1 story doesnt work try another!!!!
Did you not see that at the bottom of the post or do you just think everyone is that stupid.
Plus as we all know if 1 story doesnt work try another!!!!
modfan
Member
And this still makes a difference because???
If it's true it just illustrates the plan of the partners is working!!! Everyone needs to step up and support MCS
modfan
Member
Since this is still on the first page, I would like to put in my two cents worth. Kevin's original post referenced a conversation between his dad and Mel's lawyer! I read and re-read it several times and every time, it says that the conversation was with "Mel's lawyer and my dad", it did not specifically mention Mel. So technically, Mel could say that he did not call Gordon because he didn't, his lawyer did.
Funny how when one word is omitted from a "quote," it can take on a whole new meaning. Wonder how that happened?
Jack
Look at the post directly under it it has the unedited post quoted there
racefantoo
New Member
I'm sure the conversation between the lawyer and Gordon and the context of the statement was much different than what Kevin's assement of it was.
Probably more on the order of:
If you want it so damn bad why don't you do what an honorable person would do and just buy it.
Probably more on the order of:
If you want it so damn bad why don't you do what an honorable person would do and just buy it.
If the conversation would have happened, I would have to agree with your thought,racefantoo. However, we would all understand why the individual would HAVE to decline, since the word HONORABLE it not a descriptive word for this individual.
ROCKINRHINO24
New Member
HE OWNS A RACE TRACK BUT NOT A COMPUTER? COME ON YOU GOTTA BE KIDDING ME. UNLESS MEL OR GORDON POST IT I PERSONALY WOULDN'T BELIVE IT. BESIDES THIS IS A BUSSINESS DEAL NOT REALLY ANYBODY'S BIZZ BUT THEIRS. I HOPE MCS STAYS OPEN FOR MANY YEARS TO COME BUT IF IT DON'T IT'S NOT THE END OF RACING.
GLENNON
Glennon,
You are asbsolutely correct, it wouldn't be the end of racing for some people, however, there are quite a few drivers that have made MCS our HOME TRACK and would like to keep it that way!
And as far as being a business deal, are you kidding me?
IT'S A LAWSUIT!
So let's all just call it like it is!
DAVID VS. GOLIATH
modfan
Member
You know you are totally right about it not being anyone's business except people effected by the lawsuit. Since, I race there every week it will effect me so then it becomes my business. Can I do anything about it probably not, but I can and will continue to support Mel and MCS.
racin90
Well-Known Member
That is why..ive said what..ive said. Unless..i hear a statement from Gordon..and Mel...personally..i dont beleive any posts...due to alot of info gets from..hey post this..to said person..actually posting it..sometimes. I respect Kevin...and i respect Mel. And..i respect Kevin's dad. But..i already see some info that is missaid...misposted...ect. I didnt see you guys make a stink when Godfrey got blowed out by Beelmans...which was the same deal. I do hope Mel doesnt loose his track..either. We dont need anymore track shutting down..at all! Band together race fans..just dont go after people who are not the culprits.
Godfrey didn't have a lawsuit pending forcing them to close,
Godfrey closing was a Business deal.
Those owner's didn't want to have a track anymore!
Second, I have talked to Mel, I have read the entire lawsuit (I got it from the Public Records), I have a copy of the radio show that one individual was on, and I talked personally with a wanna be political candidate.
Let me just say for certain individuals being in a partnership, I know for a fact that they have two different stories. The ex-candidate clearly stated numerous times that the other individual never asked to be removed from the lawsuit. He also kept referring to the property being sold to a hotel chain. Never once did he say Hospital as his first choice of words. And when he was asked about hard facts that are clearly stated in the lawsuit and or the minutes from the planning & zoning meeting, he didn't know anything. He just kept saying that he is not an attorney so he don't know what it all means. Everyone of those partners had notification sent to them so they had the opportunity to fight the track going in previous to the start of construction there. Yet, they were all NO-SHOWS!
In July, 2006 when an informational picket took place outside a Chesterfield Hotel the ex-candidate was interviewed by FOX 2 News. His only 2 complaint's were people parking on their ground, (Which another individual said on the radio show that he had granted permission to do so free of charge, even though Mel offered to rent the space.) And the other was the County Road. On 10/02/00, Mel met with the County Commision in regards to that road being used. And after reading the State Statues, THE COMMISION determined that the road had never been vacated because of Non-use by the public. So Mel agreed to maintain the road for public use.
Also, just for a little more information, I find it strange that the judge who ruled against Mel for the dismissal of this lawsuit on 10/04/06 is the same judge who in 12/03 dismissed the original lawsuit.
- Status
