Lawsuit filed

8 Comments

1. 

   George Entenman

    /  June 8, 2011

   What’s the basis of the lawsuit? Is it actually illegal for council members to have their minds made up before hearing all citizens speak?

2. 

   CitizenWill

    /  June 8, 2011

   George, the SUP is granted during a quasi-judicial process. The rules are fairly specified as out-lined by UNC’s David Owens (who guided the Town through the Carolina North process) here: http://sogpubs.unc.edu/electronicversions/pdfs/ss22.pdf

   The question the Chamber asked (in their usual “yes/no” no nuance fashion) was:

   5.) Will you vote to set a final and firm lease expiration date or a deadline for the IFC Homeless Shelter to vacate the old municipal building downtown and move to its new location on Homestead Road?

   At the time I answered YES as did most every other candidate (Laurin and Jon DeHart were undecided) [http://www.carolinachamber.org/elections/raymond.html].

   I read the question as to mean “transitional housing” only though in subsequent meetings the Chamber’s Aaron Nelson took it further – extending it to emergency housing also.

   I can understand why the lawsuit was filed. When Mayor Foy proposed siting the trash transfer station on Millhouse after a backroom discussion with some of the concerned parties, the idea of filing a similar lawsuit was floated.

   If the end result of this lawsuit is that candidates become even more circumspect than they already are (with some notable exceptions!) then I believe the community will lose necessary clarity and transparency during the election.

3. 

   Terri Buckner

    /  June 9, 2011

   Matt and Lauren both voted differently from what they said on the survey. As I understand it, the council has to consider 3 questions: 1) does the request meet all local/state ordinances, 2) is the use compatible with the existing neighborhood, and 3) does the use endanger public health/safety. Since the evidence for those issues isn’t presented until the SUP hearing, this lawsuit would appear to be claiming that the council members are disregarding these 3 questions. In other words, the preponderance of the opposition evidence presented during the hearing indicated that the application did not meet these standards and some of the council members ignored that lack of evidence. In other words, those neighbors who are participating in this lawsuit are saying the sitting council members are corrupt/unethical. Should make for an interesting election season.

4. 

   Walker

    /  June 9, 2011

   Nancy – you may want to update the post to reflect the actual vote

5. 

   Nancy Oates

    /  June 9, 2011

   In the Chamber of Commerce survey, candidates Jon DeHart and Laurin Easthom indicated they were undecided about how they would vote. Matt Czajkowski indicated in the survey that he would vote for the shelter to move to Homestead Road and close the Rosemary Street facility by a set date, but as he listened to the concerns of many constituents, he came up with the idea of approving the SUP without the 17 beds, leaving room to negotiate or come up with alternative solutions on that point while still allowing the IFC to build the same structure it had planned. On May 9, Czajkowski and Easthom voted against approving the SUP with the 17 emergency beds.

6. 

   Steve

    /  June 9, 2011

   I wish people who haven’t had a consistent or coherent thought outside of their own blind self-interest would stop trying to put words in other people’s mouth.

   Terri, why do you hate Parkside so much? Perhaps, I can show you around someday. We are one of the MOST diverse neighborhoods in the Town. As for calling people unethical, I don’t think Council was unethical (and I live in Parkside – thus your theory is completely blown out of the water right there). I think the SUP Process is to blame.

   I don’t think a reasonable person, which I think our Council are reasonable people, could understand it. So, please quit trying to play PR and Spin things. We know you support the IFC in whatever they do. Cool. But don’t start calling Council unethical, which is what you implied.

   As a Parkside Resident, I emphatically believe the Council, like everyone else, was caught in this process. If the IFC gets rid of the Emergency Beds, we don’t have any issues at all. Do we?

   It would appear to me that the IFC is saying to the Town – “We’ll take your money and your land. Now leave us alone.” But I would never put words in their mouths.

7. 

   Mark Marcoplos

    /  June 9, 2011

   Without risking my brain sliding over to one side of my head by examining the legal argument, it seems to go against common sense that we wouldn’t want candidates to honestly answer how they feel about issues.

8. 

   Terri Buckner

    /  June 9, 2011

   Get real, Steve. I have no idea who all is involved in the lawsuit, but I certainly don’t believe everyone in Parkside signed on. If you are one of the complainants, perhaps you can explain how a lawsuit that says that certain council members already had their mind made up before the SUP process (when each of those polled swore that they didn’t) isn’t a direct accusation that they lied? To me, lying in a quasi-judicial hearing is an ethical violation. Maybe there’s another technical name for it.

   Personally, I think they listened to both sides in the hearing, weighed the evidence and found in favor of IFC. How does that leave them caught in a process?

   I don’t recall hearing a single member of the opposition standing up to say, “if they remove the emergency beds, we will support this move.” In fact, when the issue first arose, over on OrangePolitics, the 3 primary voices of opposition specifically said they wouldn’t accept the move to Homestead even if the emergency beds were removed. So maybe you don’t have an issue except with the emergency beds, but that was not the public message. I think most of us agree that we need to find another alternative for those emergency beds though. I know I do; I just don’t think the IFC should have removed them from the plan until a concrete alternative is in place. How much would you trust/respect them if they simply caved in and said, Oh well, those other homeless people don’t matter as long as we get our facility?