Monday, October 6, 2008

Calling Shenanigans

Ray notes a big conflict of interest in the Westbrook City Council's vote on Stroudwater Place, the big retail development proposed for Westbrook.


Bruce said...

leave it to you to try to turn this into a bash union opportunity.
I guess it is all right for the police who patrol a shopping center to be union, but heaven forbid that the people who toil to build it do.

Looks like they are actually amending their comprehensive plan too to enable this. I have no feelings for or against, but Contract zoning is that, a contract from a developer to get what he wants by making deals with the town that he agrees to. Without the deals it was reffered to as "spot zoning"

Towns are encouraged to have Comprehensive plans for orderly growth and to develop their zoning ordinances with. Then along comes contract zoning as a way for developers to have a little quid pro quo to get what they want while having the town get something too,besides just new business.
I gotta ask , Ray, Do you believe in Comprehensive plans and zoning?

I do think it is funny that they are viewing this as a "gateway" to Westbrook.What a wonderful gateway,
a mall

Bruce said...

You are leaving something out of your conspiracy theory. Are you saying the majority of the councillors are pro union. Otherwise why would they be in favor of the PLA?
Councillors are elected, they should not have to recuse themselves from voicing opinions and voting on issues in their neighborhood, no matter which side they are on. Conflicts of interest exist when things are kept under wraps. That is not the case here , He is 1 of 7 of the elected.
Usually the only people that get wound up about zoning changes are the people who live in the area affected and they have a hard time getting support from people who are not affected.
The developer does not have to do contract zoning. They can go the lengthy route and get the Comprehensive plan amended and the zoning changed to make what they want an allowed use. No concessions then
All they have to do is a little social activisim to get the majority of the town behind them. Give them some help Ray like you did with question 1 supporters. Start a peoples movement for a mall.

By the way some states have actually outlawed contract zoning.
Our planning board wanted nothing to do with it. It is basically a deveoper bribing a community to abandon their vision for their town

Ray Richardson said...

Do your homework, get up to speed on the actual issue, not a theory, know the players involved, find out the behind the scenes issues playing out, learn who said they support the project 100% repeatedly in public yet are voting against the project .... once you have learned all of these facts .... then post here.

Bruce said...

OOps I forgot I was suposed to say attaboy Ray, right on expose that corruption (shenanigans) Ditto Ditto. So Sorry

Ray obviously you did not read what I wrote (as usual)
If getting all the facts were a prerequisite by the way. You would never have anything to say. I don't need to do any homework to respond to your innuendos about shenanigans etc that you post

I think having a traffic study as proposed last night would be a no brainer. Unless there was one done already.
This is planning 101 and the pb should have addressed that issue. maybe they did. Without taking my life in my hands and coming to the town that has drive buy shootings at school busses, I go by what i read in the paper and this mornings herald did not mention that the pb had already done a traffic study

As usual you did not answer my questions. Are you in favor of zoning in general?
Also ? why would the council memebrs want the union clause? are they pro union

Tonight should be fun Big Mac is getting the Town Hall forum he has pushed for. What's wrong wwith this moderator? Must be something.

If the liberal press were as powerful as you say, we would not have had Dubya around for a second term.

Bruce said...

What is the "actual" issue according to you.
I did not hear it in your verbal diatribe. Come on put it out there. What exactly is your beef with this process? Get some of your "facts' out there.
Did you go to the meeting last night? Did you speak out lke the concerned citizen you are?

Bruce said...

Ray one thing you should be concerned about is that the Westbrook website only has Planning board minutes posted to the July 29 meeting.

Ray Richardson said...

Traffic studies are not mandated under state law. Jon McKane of Damrascotta (spelling) helped get that passed.

It was dumb for people to keep repeating and even dumber that not one elected official pointed out that these projects now require full impact studies mandated by state law.

I was there, but I did not speak. There was no need. The issue was going to be tabled and postponed to another day.

I personally find it very disrespectful to ask citizens to come to a meeting, have them speak, pour out their emotions and ask pointed questions, knowing the whole time you are not going to address the issue, but after everyone speaks .... vote to table it.

I knew this on Friday that it would be tabled.

To back that statement up, I called city hall to find out if a contract zone can be implemented by citizen petition or if such an effort would be advisory only.

Why does a guy from Franklin County have such an interest in Westbrook?

In my case, they pay me to have an interest in communities other than my own. What's your interest?

Ray Richardson said...

The first sentence should read:

"Traffic studies are now mandated by law." I mishit the key and typed not.

Traffic studies are now mandated by state law as part of an impact study for projects of this scope.