County sued for $3 Million+

I am guessing that I should not invite my buddy Robert to the next meeting of my beloved Historic Point Washington Association.

I still say they got lucky...

Bobby,
Lucky? Jolly Bay probably doesn't feel very Lucky. They would maybe agree with you they were Lucky if they would have been told the TRUTH from the county just ONE time in all the meetings they had with the county before the August 1 Technical Review Meeting. From 2004 till the day they were put on the TRC agenda for the August 1 meeting, the county told the taxpayers(applicants) there were no issues with the Jolly Bay project.
Jolly Bay met with county engineers and planners many times and were told in those meeting there was no height problem with the Jolly Bay site. George Newman, Greg Graham, Melissa Ward, Tim Brown and twice in two meetings With LaSeur. LaSeur told the applicant no problem with planning or zoning! so Jolly Bay kept spending time and money with her recommendations. La Seur commented in those meeting that this was a great plan and she hadn't seen one come through planning as nice as this in a while. They staff report that was prepared for the August 1 2007 TRC states no compatibility study required, no height restrictions for this site, no neighborhood meeting needed, no mention of some book they would later find that says 8 stories is rural and 12 stories is urban.

Jolly Bay probably feels pretty UNLUCKY that they had to deal with a planning dept. that completely flip flopped on their own set of rules. How can us taxpayers use our government effectively when you have a planning department operating like this?

In the years this project was going thru planning where was Pat Blackshire? LaSeur never said a word to her? Pat Blackshire never put out a memo for someone to tell the taxpayers (applicants) she had a problem.

You should probably feel UNLUCKY if you have to do business with Walton Co. Planning Dept.

And if it got approval, how viable would that project and the applicants(taxpayers) be today?

Bobby,
Lucky? Jolly Bay probably doesn't feel very Lucky. They would maybe agree with you they were Lucky if they would have been told the TRUTH from the county just ONE time in all the meetings they had with the county before the August 1 Technical Review Meeting. From 2004 till the day they were put on the TRC agenda for the August 1 meeting, the county told the taxpayers(applicants) there were no issues with the Jolly Bay project.
Jolly Bay met with county engineers and planners many times and were told in those meeting there was no height problem with the Jolly Bay site. George Newman, Greg Graham, Melissa Ward, Tim Brown and twice in two meetings With Lies LaSeur. Lies LaSeur told the applicant no problem with planning or zoning! so Jolly Bay kept spending time and money with her recommendations. Lies La Seur commented in those meeting that this was a great plan and she hadn't seen one come through planning as nice as this in a while. They staff report that was prepared for the August 1 2007 TRC states no compatibility study required, no height restrictions for this site, no neighborhood meeting needed, no mention of some book they would later find that says 8 stories is rural and 12 stories is urban.

Jolly Bay probably feels pretty UNLUCKY that they had to deal with a planning dept. that completely flip flopped on their own set of rules. How can us taxpayers use our government effectively when you have a planning department operating like this?

In the years this project was going thru planning where was Pat Blackshire? Lies LaSeur never said a word to her? Pat Blackshire never put out a memo for someone to tell the taxpayers (applicants) she had a problem.

You should probably feel UNLUCKY if you have to do business with Walton Co. Planning Dept.

I have done a lot of business with Walton Co. Planning and have found it to be a moving target. My answers from the county have changed day to day. Its been that way for 25 years or more. I was and still happy Pat is in charge. I do not know all the details of your current situation but am being a little playful when I say they "got lucky". Many times in life when I don't get what I want or I get "jerked around" I discover later I may have gotten lucky. I mean no harm. Merely a comment in regards to the current Real Estate Market.

Bobby,
Lucky? Jolly Bay probably doesn't feel very Lucky. They would maybe agree with you they were Lucky if they would have been told the TRUTH from the county just ONE time in all the meetings they had with the county before the August 1 Technical Review Meeting. From 2004 till the day they were put on the TRC agenda for the August 1 meeting, the county told the taxpayers(applicants) there were no issues with the Jolly Bay project.
Jolly Bay met with county engineers and planners many times and were told in those meeting there was no height problem with the Jolly Bay site. George Newman, Greg Graham, Melissa Ward, Tim Brown and twice in two meetings With Lies LaSeur. Lies LaSeur told the applicant no problem with planning or zoning! so Jolly Bay kept spending time and money with her recommendations. Lies La Seur commented in those meeting that this was a great plan and she hadn't seen one come through planning as nice as this in a while. They staff report that was prepared for the August 1 2007 TRC states no compatibility study required, no height restrictions for this site, no neighborhood meeting needed, no mention of some book they would later find that says 8 stories is rural and 12 stories is urban.

Jolly Bay probably feels pretty UNLUCKY that they had to deal with a planning dept. that completely flip flopped on their own set of rules. How can us taxpayers use our government effectively when you have a planning department operating like this?

In the years this project was going thru planning where was Pat Blackshire? Lies LaSeur never said a word to her? Pat Blackshire never put out a memo for someone to tell the taxpayers (applicants) she had a problem.

You should probably feel UNLUCKY if you have to do business with Walton Co. Planning Dept.

Just a heads up that you're not completely anonymous. If LaSeur wanted to sue for liable/slander she can get a court order to reveal your IP address, e-mail address, and any other pertinent information to find out who you are.

Lois and Lies and pretty far apart on the keyboard...

Just a heads up that you're not completely anonymous. If LaSeur wanted to sue for liable/slander she can get a court order to reveal your IP address, e-mail address, and any other pertinent information to find out who you are.

Maybe if Dragnet is one of the Plaintiffs in this case, LaSeur will opt to make a cross-claim for Libel. Maybe not.

Funny you all point this out. If the plaintiffs were watching this thread, wouldn't they have alot to pull from for thier own libel suit against your bantering on this thread?

Funny you all point this out. If the plaintiffs were watching this thread, wouldn't they have alot to pull from for thier own libel suit against your bantering on this thread?

How so? We are all stating opinion. Dragnet decided to go ahead and make a statement that someone was a liar.

So what is your definition of opinion? and your definition of statement? Are you always right?

Funny you all point this out. If the plaintiffs were watching this thread, wouldn't they have alot to pull from for thier own libel suit against your bantering on this thread?

That's definately within the control of the Plaintiffs. It always is.

Just a heads up that you're not completely anonymous. If LaSeur wanted to sue for liable/slander she can get a court order to reveal your IP address, e-mail address, and any other pertinent information to find out who you are.

Even if it is legal, common decency dictates that you do not call someone a liar without being prepared to prove it. Being anonymous is no excuse for being uncivil.
I would tend to agree with Dragnet on the issue, but I am turned off by his statement.

Even if it is legal, common decency dictates that you do not call someone a liar without being prepared to prove it. Being anonymous is no excuse for being uncivil.
I would tend to agree with Dragnet on the issue, but I am turned off by his statement.

Don't you mean "her" statement.

We did not plan on being silent. We did our job. We elected some free market thinkers, at least that is what they told us when they ran for office. Now that they are in it appears that they are forgetting those that believe in 'live and let live' and run for cover every time something a little bit controversial gets brought up.

If you truly believe this, why have you attended County Commissioner meetings at all? Your words speak differently than your actions.

Bobby,
Lucky? Jolly Bay probably doesn't feel very Lucky. They would maybe agree with you they were Lucky if they would have been told the TRUTH from the county just ONE time in all the meetings they had with the county before the August 1 Technical Review Meeting. From 2004 till the day they were put on the TRC agenda for the August 1 meeting, the county told the taxpayers(applicants) there were no issues with the Jolly Bay project.
Jolly Bay met with county engineers and planners many times and were told in those meeting there was no height problem with the Jolly Bay site. George Newman, Greg Graham, Melissa Ward, Tim Brown and twice in two meetings With LaSeur. LaSeur told the applicant no problem with planning or zoning!

So you really have no personal interest in this? I call BS.

You insinuate that Planning Dept never had anything negative to say about this proposed project. However, testimony was given by LaSeur that she told the applicants that the original proposed height would likely be a hindrance for approval. The applicants reduced the height of the planned structure, after their meetings. That was testimony given by the applicant's representatives. The developers reduced the building height because the height WAS in fact a potential issue brought forth by Planning.

Don't you mean "her" statement.

How in the world did I miss that? I am getting old.

If you truly believe this, why have you attended County Commissioner meetings at all? Your words speak differently than your actions.

Sometimes that is the only place I have been able to find individuals I need to speak too. Even I admit some commissioners are not the best at returning phone calls.

In that case, are you saying that you trust government and politicians?
I don't know anyone who does that, completely.

In that case, are you saying that you trust government and politicians?
I don't know anyone who does that, completely.

Whoa, good thing you said "copletely". Our local Commissioners are pretty decent and I think they have the overall good of the citizens at heart. I understand and agree with what you are saying, particularly at the national level but I don't think that necessarily relates to local politicians.

Whoa, good thing you said "copletely". Our local Commissioners are pretty decent and I think they have the overall good of the citizens at heart. I understand and agree with what you are saying, particularly at the national level but I don't think that necessarily relates to local politicians.

In my experience a politician with 100% public trust is most likely the corrupt one. Questioning authority isn't always a bad thing. If our founding fathers hadn't questioned authority there would be a member of royalty on your cash.

In my experience a politician with 100% public trust is most likely the corrupt one. Questioning authority isn't always a bad thing. If our founding fathers hadn't questioned authority there would be a member of royalty on your cash.

Question, yes. To indicate corruptness without any proof, no. Just because our nation was created by a revolution does not mean we should have another one every time someone's whims are not met.

The disgruntled developer has the same story as thousands of others. Remember "the buck stops here"? The buck doesn't stop at the planning department. The planning department is a blender.

Question, yes. To indicate corruptness without any proof, no. Just because our nation was created by a revolution does not mean we should have another one every time someone's whims are not met.

I never said (in this thread) that we should have a revolution. I just said it's never bad to question authority. Questioning authority isn't the same as a revolution or anarchy, it's actually a good thing to do from time to time.

So you really have no personal interest in this? I call BS.

You insinuate that Planning Dept never had anything negative to say about this proposed project. However, testimony was given by LaSeur that she told the applicants that the original proposed height would likely be a hindrance for approval. The applicants reduced the height of the planned structure, after their meetings. That was testimony given by the applicant's representatives. The developers reduced the building height because the height WAS in fact a potential issue brought forth by Planning.

WRONG!!!!!! Staff report given to the Technical Review Board Aug. 2007 after two years of meeting with the planning department states in writing, no compatibility study needed, no height restriction for this project, no neighborhood meeting required, I'm sure the applicants would have been required to do these things before they were allowed to move forward to TRC if planning had put it in their report. I'm sure it takes a lot of time and money to prepare a project to the county's liking before they will let it move forward to TRC. Look up Rural VILLAGE, the rules are all there. If planning had a problem don't you think it would they would have made SOME mention of it.

I never said (in this thread) that we should have a revolution. I just said it's never bad to question authority. Questioning authority isn't the same as a revolution or anarchy, it's actually a good thing to do from time to time.

I see nothing wrong with what you say and agree with this above. Sometimes, to me, it is how you say something more than what you say. Also, it depends in what light you question authority. In the military, you do not question authority when given an order though many times you would like to do so. On the football field it is not wise to question the authority of the coach if you are a player. Just my drift.