The Editorial Staff at the Sun Telegram shows their disdain for the common citizen in their most recent article regarding Grand Terrace.
The skipping over the facts of the events and court decisions in the cases brought to Court is misleading reporting of what is the motivation of the citizens, or of the facts behind the actions taken by various citizens, who have found an effective legal advisor.
Focus on just the first bits of print:
Anti-growth advocates difficult to appease
Our view: Sue-happy critics seem
ready to pounce on anything.
Article Launched: 01/11/2007 12:00:00 AM
PST
Why is it that certain people don't care if a project has gone through all the hoops and all the public vetting, met all the city requirements and done all the mitigation, but still want to find a way to stop it in its tracks?
A judge has refused to issue a temporary restraining order against construction of a fast-food restaurant in Grand Terrace that the city Planning Commission approved more than 18 months ago. And we agree with City Manager Tom Schwab that there's no reason to contest the development.
The Sun Telegram refuses to accept that the City and or the Developer have had ample opportunity prior to cases being filed to negotiate or address the concerns of the citizens and they have refused to do so. There have been developments that have not been challenged by the citizens and others that have and the developers have negotiated and adjusted their plans. These have been done without court intervention being taken. The question is why is it when the City Redevelopment Agency has a Plan or Relationship with the Development there is a problem. That is the common denominator of the actions taken.
The citizens are not happy to have to take action against the city and to suggest that the effort is a pounce action is ignoring the fact that the citizens have tried for months and some cases years to resolve their concerns, Pounce is not quite the correct representation. It suggests that the City is unaware of what to expect.
Why is it the Sun Telegram Editorial Staff thinks that requesting that a Judge be the judge in resolving the concerns that not all mitigations have been done, and all requirements met? Is it the opinion of the Editorial Staff that the Courts should be available only to the City to Enforce Codes when the City Wants to Use the Court, but Citizens should not have access to equal protection under the law? Not all the required HOOPS have been passed through Citizens; even a MINORITY has the OPTION to put one final HOOP up. That HOOP is the Court. Does the Sun Telegram Editorial Staff want to suggest that this Right of the Citizens be removed as a means to resolve differences of opinion? Rule of the Majority or Rule of the Dollar, what is the Standard the Sun Telegram supports? Or does the Sun’s Editorial Staff support rights for some, and no rights for others?
The Judge did refuse to issue a temporary restringing order, but he also advised that should the construction go on, and at a future date he determines there is just cause of the action to proceed with construction will be at the risk and loss of the Developer and possibly the City. The judge’s decision was more that there is not any thing being done that is not reversible. Should the Judge order the property restored or modified it will be at the cost of the Developer or the City. His advice was suggesting that the DEVELOPER may want to hold off and wait for a final decision and not risk the cost to modify the building or site.
Clearly this is not the opinion of Mr. Schwab. Mr. Schwab is more than happy to have Miguel’s owners stick their financial neck out and have them proceed with construction while the court proceedings continue to hang over the project.
Will Mr. Schwab and the Editorial Staff of the Sun Telegram offset the financial risk taken by Miguel’s should the Judge require a modification that results in additional costs that resulted by their advise to go ahead prior to the Judges decision and possible mitigation requirements? Will it come from Mr. Schwab’s Pocket or the City’s?
This addresses only the first bits of the “Opinion” of the Sun Telegram’s Editorial Staff.
I am not going to run advertisements in the Sun Telegram. This may cost me some business, but I will not support their pocket or their “Opinion” with my money.
P.S. to Gramps: I hope the new voice on the City Council is as courageous as the citizens who have exercised their rights and the procedures provided to them to mitigate their concerns. This will be a welcome change to the Council. It is ok to vote No and not be in “Unity”, just going along so there is a Unanimous Decision is not conducive to the betterment of a community. Thanks for posting Emails at least the Citizens Have a Place to record their opinions and concerns.
