Would you hire someone who mishandled a basic lease agreement to run your entire city?

Stephen Manoj Thompson wants your vote, but his own words under oath show why that could be a huge mistake for the City of Cottleville.

A Lease-to-Purchase Debacle

In a five-year lease agreement for his property that included a $235,000 purchase option and $11,000 credited toward the purchase, Thompson’s mishandling was a masterclass in contradiction and carelessness.

He admitted signing a contract he didn’t understand:

Q: “Then why did you sign it?”

A: “I didn’t read this properly. I didn’t understand. We had a talk and I just trusted him.”

Despite having a full month to review the agreement before signing, he never asked a lawyer or even clarified basic terms:

Q: “So would you also agree that you had plenty of time to review that contract before signing it?”

A: “Yes… but I wasn’t seriously reading this.”

This is someone who admits he wasn’t serious—about a legally binding agreement involving five years, $235,000, and someone’s home.

 Even worse, Thompson signed a contract he says he didn’t even write, yet accepted money and terms based on it:

Q: “Who wrote this document?”

A: “Tim wrote this document.”

Q: “So you didn’t write it?”

A: “Yeah. He provided it to me.”

Instead of confirming the terms before signing, Thompson simply took someone else’s version, signed it, and then spent his time trying to deny the meaning of what he agreed to.

Business Acumen? Missing in Action.

In sworn testimony, Thompson repeatedly contradicted himself over the nature of an $11,000 payment:

• At one point, he called it a “personal loan”:

Q: “Purpose of the payment?”

A: “Personal loan.”

• Then, he testified it was a lease deposit:

“The $11,000 is an advance… a deposit for the lease.”

• But when pressed under oath, he finally admitted he used that money to help himself qualify for a mortgage:

Q: “So you used the money from the Manninos to show the bank you had the money to close on your new home?”

A: “Yes, I did.”

He flip-flopped multiple times — even while under oath — revealing either dishonesty or total confusion. Either way, it’s not the mindset of someone who should be negotiating contracts on behalf of a city.

Fiscal Responsibility? Not From Day One.

Thompson also admitted that he was losing money every month on the rental property—and knowingly.

Q: “Were you making a profit on the rent?”

A: “No, not from day one.”

He charged $1,000/month rent while his mortgage started at $1,253 and rose to $1,600. Instead of renting to a market-rate tenant offering $1,800/month, he took a loss—and then blamed others when the deal soured.

He also claimed that the purchase price was just a “placeholder,” even though the signed contract clearly specified $235,000 and terms for crediting rent toward a purchase:

Q: “Does it say anywhere in the contract that it’s a placeholder?”

A: “It doesn’t.”

The Bigger Problem

Being mayor isn’t about charity or being well-meaning. It’s about legal clarity, financial responsibility, and the ability to make and enforce binding agreements.

If Stephen Thompson can’t keep his own mortgage deal straight, can’t remember what he agreed to, and signs documents without reading them — how can he be trusted to manage multi-million-dollar city budgets or negotiate with developers, unions, or state agencies?

His own words under oath sum it up:

“I didn’t have any idea what I was doing.” – Stephen Thompson

 Final Thought:

Stephen Thompson’s behavior wasn’t just careless. It was reckless, inconsistent, and evasive. He signed legal documents he didn’t understand, misused funds entrusted to him, and then tried to rewrite history in court.

We can’t afford to put someone like this in charge of your tax dollars, your infrastructure, or your future.

City Hall is no place for guesswork.

Stephen Thompson for mayor? Think again.