Poison Pill for Oak Grove
Original post made by Jack, Danbury Park, on Jan 25, 2010
Now the OG attorney wants the city council to remove the poison pills. According to the article, the removal could mean that if voters say NO to OG, it could come back again in another form because part of it was grandfather-in as a pre-measure PP! And if the council didn't, the city they might get sued again by the developer. Why, because the city approved language in the development agreement and PUD like, "obligates the city to take any and all actions as may be necessary and appropriate to ensure that the vested rights provided provided by the development agreement can be enjoyed by the Lins." Who would agree to this type of blank check/open statement?!!! Your progrowth council majority - that's who. Sounds like they are more concerned with the developer than the citizens, again.
The House of Representatives performs history’s first repeat hara-kiri
By Tom Cushing | 3 comments | 771 views
Net Neutrality a win or loss for open Internet and First Amendment?
By Gina Channell-Allen | 1 comment | 52 views