Well that's no good. PW's site scaled it down too much. You can see a better version of the screenshot by going here: Web Link

Hi, Stacey -

Wow! Great research! Everyone should have a look:-)

Okay, time for honest discussion here. Stacey, you are obviously a paid consultant for Oak Grove! You say you were just playing around and put all of this together. What a LIE! How much do they pay you to fill up this site with your garbage.

Your "link" goes directly to the Developer's own site... www.OakGrove....! Stop trying to look like a normal citizen-- you are a phooney.

Believe what you will. I've been accused of a lot so far. Apparently I'm also a "pen name" for someone on city staff or a council member. Is it because people are finding it hard to believe that a regular citizen like themselves would be against the referendum and initiative? Some volunteers go out and collected signatures for the petitions. How is what I write here different from that?

Yes, the graphic is from the developer's website. It is the public location where I knew I could find an image of the proposed development. How does that make me a paid consultant suddenly?

Why don't you look at the screenshot and make your own objective decisions about it instead of focusing upon your assumptions about me?

By the way, whether I were a paid consultant or not doesn't seem to change the facts that are present by looking at the site with the Google Earth software, namely these:

1) the trails for the park are on higher ridgelines than the homes so hikers won't be "looking down" on them

2) the homes are on lots not much higher than the highest lots in Kottinger Ranch and not on primary ridgelines so the visual impact is questionable

Karen,
Don't you think it's contradictory for you to applaud "those signature collectors [who worked] so hard during their own holiday time" as "[showing] real commitment to their values" ( Web Link ) yet insult someone who uses their own time to gather facts and present them in a visual manner as not having any values? You say, "How much do they pay you to fill up this site with your garbage" ( Web Link ). I say, how many facts can you refute without it eating away at you? Since when did facts presented in a graphical or visual manner become "garbage?"

Thanks Stacey, I am glad someone is doing their homework!

I find the comments that are being posted here such as the one quoted below as being potentially libelous and slanderous.

"Okay, time for honest discussion here. Stacey, you are obviously a paid consultant for Oak Grove! You say you were just playing around and put all of this together. What a LIE! How much do they pay you to fill up this site with your garbage.

Your "link" goes directly to the Developer's own site... www.OakGrove....! Stop trying to look like a normal citizen-- you are a phooney."

Slander. Definition: A false and malicious statement or report about someone.

So, it seems to me the poster should be very careful that her accusations are true before making them, especially in print and in a public forum such as this.

Libel. Definition:
a. A false publication, as in writing, print, signs, or pictures, that damages a person's reputation.
b. The act of presenting such material to the public.

Yep let's talk about definitions:

Definition of LIE: "A lie is an untruthful statement made to someone else with the intention to deceive."

Example of a LIE: "I needed to get an idea of visualizing this area for myself so I opened up handy ol' Google Earth and overlayed the "Oak Grove at Buildout" graphic available from this site: Web Link"

AUTHOR: Stacey--Note the word "I" in this sentence, that is where the sentence begins, and where the Lie begins.

The words "slander" and "libel" are only applicable IF the state is NOT true.

Karen,

Could you prove what I wrote was a lie? No? Then stop flinging your slander and libel.

This post is directed to Karen. Actually my post was meant to be helpful to you so that you will not write yourself into a possible lawsuit by libeling people, the instance at hand being your statements regarding Stacey. However, it appears to me you are not picking up on the message, so let me re-state:

You wrote: "Okay, time for honest discussion here. Stacey, you are obviously a paid consultant for Oak Grove! You say you were just playing around and put all of this together. What a LIE! How much do they pay you to fill up this site with your garbage."

In this statement you are not expressing an opinion, but instead are making an absolute statement which is an accusation and thereby denigrating your subject, Stacey. If you investigate whether your accusation is true or not, you will find it untrue, that is, she is not a paid consultant and did not lie.

You wrote: "Stop trying to look like a normal citizen-- you are a phooney."

This statement, if you investigate its truth, is false and further is malicious.

Therefore, it was and still is my opinion that you are both slandering and libeling Stacey. Does this not bother you?

Are you one of the Save The Hills people?

These postings have lost their purpose and the post is being closed. Thanks for your comments. Jeb Bing