support@semo.net
1573 686-9114​​​​

We have started a fund to help us cover this expense...click here for more information! UPDATE: All current information has now been reported by the DAR. The DAR took 30 days to report about our case reopened, 17 days to report on the dismissal of the ethics charges, and yet only 3 days to report the city was awarded $5k in legal fees. I was not contacted by the DAR regarding either article in Friday's (2/22) paper. Back in January, one of the judge’s requirement for reinstating our case was that PB Internet would pay the City's expenses incurred from the two extra hearings. We had argued that the charges were over and above that necessary to the proceedings, but

I've had several people ask for more details regarding what's being argued and discussed with our case against the city. As I posted last month, the Judge ruled to rescind the ruling made in November giving us the opportunity to file our pleadings. In that ruling the Judge also stated that Poplar Bluff Internet would be required to pay any legal fees caused by our reasonable neglect. A week later, the city filed multiple invoices totally $5100 in legal expenses from Carl Lumley and no expenses recorded by Wally Duncan. Both sides have weighed in on what should and shouldn't be covered, including the fact that my lawyer only charged $1500 to research, prepare documents and attend the hearing in question.

I've known for several years that the DAR was on the City's side regarding my case against the City. It's been easy to see how the reporting and headlines seemingly favor the City. Last summer, the city filed three motions and the judge denied them all. We walked out of the court very thrilled with our progress. The next day the headline read: Judge Denies Two Motions Becker and City Case You had to flip to the fourth paragraph before you got to the point that it was the City who got their motions denied. Back when we first filed against the City, it took 5 days for our story to be newsworthy. But two days later, how did we

I'm thrilled to announce that we just received word from the Missouri Ethics Commission that the two complaints filed against me have been dismissed. This is definitely a big weight off my family's shoulders. Let me disclaim this next section as the Point of View of Brian Becker...just so we are clear: Both complaints were filed by Doug Bagby and investigated by the City's Police Department issuing search warrants and subpoenas to multiple companies in Poplar Bluff, compiling their evidence for the complaint. The complaints alleged that I was responsible for printing the flyers. Approximately 20 of us distributed the flyers around Poplar Bluff the weekend before the election. Bagby wrongfully alleged that my billboards didn't carry the proper disclaimer

"Poplar Bluff Internet vs City of Poplar Bluff" regarding Open Access and the resulting disputed bills: We are thrilled to announce that the Judge ruled today that we can file our response to motions that we attempted to have filed back in November. The judge has awarded us 10 days to post our motion and then I would assume that we'd have a hearing a few weeks following. The judge also ruled that we must pay the City's expenses incurred because of the hearing back in November when no lawyer appeared for Poplar Bluff Internet.