Dr. Carl Boswell sent me the following e-mail. I called Carl to advise him I would post his email, although he and I disagree on many of the issues he addresses as it concerns Council Member Barry Gillaspie. Rather than comment further, here is Carl Boswell's e-mail. He & I look forward to your comments.
Art
_____________________________________________________________________
Hi Art,
I hope you will accept the following statement for publication in the LOVE
Blog.
First, to let you know where I'm coming from, I'm a knee-jerk liberal, a
cactus hugger, a slow growth supporter, a charter member of the Oro Valley
Neighborhood Coalition, and I served on both General Plan efforts. My
introduction to fighting city hall was the failed effort to save Honey Bee
Canyon. Given that, I'd like to address the unwarranted criticism being
heaped on Barry Gillaspie.
Adding additional capacity to the new Hilton may seem like the proper
response to changing the zoning, but it misses the point. There are a lot
of righteous battles that deserve attention, but this one does not. Even at
60 ft tall, the hotel will still be substantially lower than the Hospital
across the street. The views of the mountains have already been obliterated
by the hospital and Splendido, not to mention the additional developments on
the ridge above El Conquistador. It is not clear to me which views
currently available will be destroyed by this structure? More
significantly, the amount of cold hard cash that moves through Ventana
Medical, the Northwest Medical Center and now Sanofi Aventis is staggering,
and these businesses all need access to high end accommodations and meeting
venues. The addition of the hotel is essentially a gold mine, providing an
income for the Town completely from outside the Town. At the same time it
presents an enticement for more high-tech industry to settle in Oro Valley.
If there was one thing the Town could have done to advance the stated goal
of attracting high-tech industry to Oro Valley, the new Hilton is it.
Concerning the incentive awarded to Sanofi to move into the larger
facility, I agree that it is a pittance when compared with their gross
income. But again, the point of the agreement is missed by such a narrow
negative view. The tax-break was essentially a show of support, which will
not go unnoticed when other clean, high-paying biotech firms consider Oro
Valley in which to set up shop. It would be foolish to not realize that a
LACK of support would also not go unnoticed.
This agreement should in no way be compared to what Vestar got for
bringing in Wal-Mart. That made me so mad I can still hardly talk about it.
If there was anything that made Oro Valley representatives look like
bumpkins, it was that deal. Remember that there are still some council
members that will be coming up for election in the next cycle who supported
this and their names are not Barry Gillaspie.
As for the crematorium, there have been a lot of histrionics about this
commercial operation, and it is baffling that it is being held up as
evidence that council members are inept. There is no legal method for
refusing to allow this business, which will be discreet and certifiably
non-polluting. A lot of folks are uncomfortable with the physical aspects
of human death, but they need to get over it and use some rationale.
If you want to scream about injustices, answer this question: Who
allowed the fire district to charge by the assessed value of a property,
rather than its size?" The answer is the State. Can't you just picture the
lobbying by fire districts to convince legislators that an illogical but
more profitable scheme was the best approach?
Finally, regarding much of the negativity toward Barry, it is worth
considering that diatribes sheltered by anonymity should immediately raise
suspicions of motive. Many of the particularly vitriolic statements seem to
come from just plain grouchy people. The adamant nature of the arguments
bring to mind the phrase "That's my story and I'm sticking to it", implying
an unwillingness to consider alternative ideas. Moreover, there is a clear
lack of understanding (or selective reading) of the General Plan. The
issues are complex, and legal constraints significant. If I could make one
suggestion it would be to take a relaxing deep breath, then actually talk to
Barry about the issues that bother you. You will be impressed with his
knowledge and grasp of the issues, and with his sympathy for those of us who
what Oro Valley to be some place special.
Carl A. Boswell
39 comments:
Just a short couple of comments
Yes there was a legal way to refuse to allow the crematorium business and that has been exercised in another C-1 zoned property somewhere in the VICINITY of Tangerine and La Canada (as I understand it). This issue is a national one Mr. Boswell, some communities have honored the objections of nearby residents and some have not. My own personal objections are primarily just that - personal; however, I truly will not like driving into my part of Rancho Vistoso and seeing the emissions coming out of an incinerator stack whether they be of particulate matter or the generation of vapor/heat effects.
Also, the Town and the owner reasonably should have known that the subject was potentially controversial and should have made every effort, prior to the 'done deal' to bring all parties together; they didn't even try.
As to Mr. Gillaspie, yes I find him very astute and have personally complimented him for that; I did add, however, that I hoped that [if he was to continue as a councilperson, that he would ACT AND VOTE with the same principles and knowledge that he espoused].
The hotel? The manner in which that issue was handled was an abomination!
Glad to see a new poster.
I would have more respect for Barry Gillaspie if he would decide what side of the fence he sits on.
Back home people would say pick a team and stick with it.
When I listen to the council meetings at home via the computer, I get so mad at him I could scream!!!!
He starts with asking a lot of questions, obviously well thought out.
I listen and silently cheer him on, thinking his questioning is going to result in voting a certain way. Then he he turns around and votes the other way.
A lot of us voted for him and had high expectations. I know I did. I voted for him. I do recall hearing that he was involved with or supported preserving Honey Bee Canyon. What happened to that Barry Gillaspie?
Not saying I never agree with him.
But he seems to want to vote with the majority.
If he would stand up to the mayor , along with a few others, I would support him.
I don't think he is a strong enough voice to represent us in the current council mix.
I will say he is intelligent and seems to have expert knowledge on zoning issues.
We voted for Salette Latas and Bill Garner.
Now if we need to pick or vote again for another candidate, I think we will vote for him.
First wee need to make sure Bill and Salette get elected.
Maybe some of us will work for Barry as he does seem more flexible then Terry and Helen.
Sticking to my "just the facts" promise, to clear up the confusion regarding the property at Tangerine and La Canada...it's the northwest corner. As part of a rezoning application from R1-144 to to TP and C1, the Council restricted the allowable uses to exclude funeral homes. The rezoning was heard on 2/21/07 and the use restrictions are part of the minutes. There was no such rezoning process, by which a similar condition could have been made, on the Vistoso Memorial Chapel site as the existing zoning was already C-1.
Dr. Boswell,
Your lack of information about cremations' toxic emissions is stunning. Continuing to build a crematory next to a subdivision of 450 families who ardently fought it, alienates their potential clients. Do that make good business sense? As Zev wrote so eloquently, this issue is national. States like Minnesota legislate where crematories can be built. Other builders, ie Tampa,Fl relocated so as not to offend potential customers. The Harpolds did not consider their neighbors' feelings. No one protested cremation or their right to open a business. The focus was clearly the location and lack of appropriate notification by Oro Valley. Just as OV engaged Vestar and allowed Walmart, it could have easily reversed its decision. If the crematory was built next to your home, one wonders how you would like it.
The 60 foot hotel sets precedent, troubling many. That is why it is significant.
Barry Gillaspie's vote for it was a defining moment for me. As you, Zev,Ms Coyote highlighted, he articulates issues beautifully.His background in planning helps make significant contributions. Bright, socialable, charming, popular and respectful, he engages the constituents easily. But when he votes he betrays that confidence. This leaves the voter feeling violated and angry because he raised their hopes. I want a councilperson who can be depended on to represent constituents.
Native Spirit
CYCLONE 1
Your explanation for the okaying of a restriction for the property at Tangerine and La Canada is seemingly an embellished EXCUSE and nothing more! C1 zoning is C1 zoning, period - how it came to be is moot. So, lets not parse the reasons, CYCLONE 1, this Town (especially when it comes to skewing zoning regulations) seems
to always find a decption in order to get their way! Are you following suit? If you can cite,
by QUOTING a legal affirmation that what you say is, in fact, a truism, then please publish the clause AS IT IS WRITTEN; if you can't then I can only conclude that you have given us a flimsy, canned interpretation.
My comment here is NOT an attack on your person, it is simply that all we hear are erroneous semantic applications, muffled zoning interpretations, a zoning administrator that can't seem to get things straight, a zoning administrator that doesn't follow procedures as they are DICTATED by local zoning rules and regs and those directed by the Constitution of the State of Arizona relative to municipality applications. All the P&Z administration seems to do is 'rubber stamp' those projects
'worked out by self-interested parties'.
As to the crematorium,I can quote
the Oro Valley zoning document
which governs the 'appearance' of the emissions stacks/mechanical equipment on any building, not just the crematorium; I also have a host of correspondance relative to the visibility of the emissions stack of Harpolds' ediface. Mayor Loomis CONFIRMED to me last June, in writing,that the provisions of the zoning code would be [strictly applied]. THEY WERE NOT and seemingly the Harpolds made an attempt to pull the wool over everyones' eyes by an attempt at camouflage which is unacceptable and not in accordance with the zoning regulations (a solution is supposedly in order at this time). After a complaint that I wrote to certain Town offcials, Mayor Loomis included,'requesting' that NO Certificate of Occupancy be issued until FULL compliance was met, lo and behold that request was affirmed to a couple of 'activists' that also have worked on this issue, but not to me. So much for the integrity of the workings of our Town.
As Carl Boswell suggests, let's all take a deep breath here. Carl has taken considerable time and space to explain some complex issues. So, let's try this again:
The Crematorium: Again, there was no legal way for the Town to deny the construction of the crematorium on RV Blvd. Period. There was no rezoning required, no general plan amendment required. All the meetings in the world would not have changed the property owner's vested rights to build the facility. Yes, there are architectural standards to meet and, once they're met, that facility has every right to operate under state and federal laws.
The La Canada/Tangerine issue was different and involved a rezoning wherein certain uses could be excluded. To confuse the two only obfuscates the issue which is: OV residents don't want crematoria in the community. OK--then ask the Council to change the zoning laws to disallow them. That's all it takes, assuming you can get 4 votes.
Likewise, you are welcome to ask your state legislature to amend the ASRS to allow municipal oversight of crematoria, or some other way of regulating them. That is also your right. As is pointed out here, other states have different laws. Complaining on a blog doesn't get these things accomplished--you have to work at the legislative level (Council, state, congress) to make these changes.
I cannot begin to tell you how complex zoning and planning law is. I'll reluctantly admit on this blog that I have had the responsibility for re-writing an entire zoning code for a city in another state that had just passed a new general plan. It certainly took two years off of my life! Sometimes we need to remember that the U.S. Constitution is only a few pages long and seems to have survived pretty well. In the mean time, we write zoning codes that run to thousands of pages and we're still not satisfied that they have covered every conceivable situation. Jeez--if I had only followed the rest of my family to law school, I could make a fortune as a land use attorney!
As for Mr. Gillaspie, he admirably tries to see all sides of an issue. Unfortunately for him, he cannot vote for all sides of an issue! Picking the a third member for the Council election is like trying to decide whom you like best: Larry, Curly or Moe. And then you're surprised when they poke each other in the eyes!
For those of you who are literary minded, I recommend that you read John Hersey's "A Bell for Adano," about an army captain who has to manage an entire Italian town after WWII. You'll gain a new appreciation for the profession after you've read the Pulitzer-prize winning novel. I'd be interested in your responses.
Nobody said the Council could stop the crematorium--what has been learned is that "Crematorium" appears NOWHERE in the OV Zoning Code. Only the P & Z Director said, "Yes" to the smoke, fumes and pollution, when she said it was "analogous" to a funeral home. Prior to the zoning change in 2005, the C-1 that Harpold had already bought did NOT allow funeral homes and he applied for a CUP.
"Certiable" that it doesn't Pollute! HOW? PDEQ does visual inspections--they don't test for Mercury and other heavy metals.
Love to hear your answers on how you prove we are not polluted by this contemptible development, which was "slipped" through. Fumes were witnessed two days ago when it was tested, but there was no body in it yet!
The point here, Ferlin, is that there are thousands of uses that don't appear in the zoning code. The words "atomic bombs" don't appear in the Constitution, but that doesn't mean that the U.S. is prohibited from making them.
And no one says that anyone is "not polluted." Go outside any day and walk down your street--you're polluted by vehicle emissions, noise, the smell from your neighbor's yard, etc., etc. That doesn't mean that pollution from a crematory is healthy or desirable--it's just one of the many polluting items we live with on a daily basis. Again, if you do not think that these facilities belong in certain neighborhoods, please ask your state legislator to propose legislation to change the ASRS. All this complaining is getting everyone nowhere except closer to needing the services of a funeral home.
Just don't let the Harrpolds
I think if we refuse to use the "services" provided by the crematorium and take our business elsewhere away from our homes.... It will not only send a message to the Harpolds, but may in-fact run them out of business.
I see no reason why we cannot try to educate the residents of OV regarding the issues Rancho Vistoso residents have with the burning of bodies next to there homes. OV is made of good people with a neighborly spirit that would contemplate using a different crematorium when the time comes.
There are many crematoriums and funeral homes available, so we DO have some say in this!
For all of us that are "close to the end" you have the right to put this in your will or instruct your loved ones to the funeral home of your choosing.
OK everyone--let's lighten this up. Here are the lyrics to the Chad Mitchell Trio's popular song "A Dyin'Business'" Everyone please join in on the chorus!
Spoken:
Funeral Directors of America, I am very deeply honored standing here;
Receiving this token of your esteem, "The Funeral Director of the Year."
Now I've been asked by all the delegates--and members of the board,
To tell you of the funeral that won me this award.
It was handled with taste and dignity, that much I can say for it;
And I'm sure it will take the family twenty years to pay for it!
Chorus:
It was a helluva fun'ral, It was a helluva fun'ral
The finest fun'ral ever booked:
I had some high school juniors who passed around petunial
And lilies everywhere you looked.
It was a helluva fun'ral, I say one helluva fun'ral
Oh, how I wish that you were there;
I had ten drum majorettes doubling on the castanets
It really was a lively affair
It really was a lively affair.
It was a helluva fun'ral, It was a helluva fun'ral
The national guard showed up for me;
And during the oration, they went into formation
And formed the letters R. I. P.
It was a helluva fun'ral, I say one helluva fun'ral
I gave it all my loving care;
The band was on its toes playing "Mexicali Rose",
It really was a lively affair.
It really was a lively affair.
A tisket a tasket, Tell us about the casket
Spoken:
Well, I'll tell you 'bout the casket, my good friends
It would-a made your poor eyes pop
It was sterling silver all around and a real formica top.
(Formica top, it had a formica top).
Well, I'll tell you 'bout the widow, my good friends,
The widow was in navy blue
With a gown designed by Balenciaga, I supplied that too.
(He sold the widow widow's weeds too).
I held the first funereal raffle, though I don't much like to boast
And I gave away a Chevrolet to the person who cried the most.
(He gave away a brand new Chevrolet). I won it myself!
There were eighteen jugglers by the grave to demonstrate their art
And when they were done, I fired a gun to let the hoot-e-nanny start.
(He fired a gun and the hoot-e-nanny begun).
I was serving beer and pretzels, 'til the hot pastrami came;
And I sold some souvenier hankies with the dear departed's name.
(He was sellin' hankies with the dear departed's name).
As a fitting finale we had the Rockettes from New Your's Music Hall;
As you can see, my very good friends
All in all, all in all:
Sung:
It was a helluva fun'ral, I say one helluva fun'ral
No other burial could compare;
It was all done up deluxe 'n' I made forty thousand bucks,
It really was a lively affair. It really was a swingin' affair
Boobie-Baby, I think you have gone "over-the-edge"!
Why do we have zoning laws at all?;everything is analagous these days :)
Boobie-Baby... What is wrong with you? Are you drinking?
For Pete's sake.. what does this have to do with any issue on this blog?
You cannot type up the lyrics to a song to diffuse the moral, emotional and ethical objections to a crematorium in our backyard.
Some of us are Holocaust Survivors, WWII POW, Vietnam POW, and other survivors. We don't want to smell or see anything that remotely resembles any tragedy experienced in our past!
This is a DEEP and emotionally charged subject, one in which you should NOT try to make light of!
Shame on you! You chastized me for bringing up Wolff.. and you are making fun of death and burning bodies?
Folks, we're all gonna die some day. There are hospitals, cemeteries, funeral homes, crematoria, etc., everywhere. Get used to it; try smiling once in awhile; trying singing (even if it's a satirical song). Enjoy your lives. I'm not over the edge nor am I drinking--I'm just trying to keep things in perspective. There are bigger issues in the world than whether so-and-so voted yes before he voted no and what "analogous" really means. Jeeez.....
Sorry, Boobie-baby, zoning limits are zoning limits; zoning inclusions are zoning inclusions. Whether a C-1 zoning was a prior designation in one case and was a 'changed-to' designation in another, without specific cause, if they are both zoned the same, do they not have the same rights and/or limitations (equal protection?). Please show me the legal backup that you may have for your assertion of difference and that arbitrary or discretionary determination is allowable in the manner that was executed in this case.
Zev--I'm not gonna argue a case that's already been decided, whether we agree with the decision or not. If you want interpretations, please see a judge. And keep smiling.
Boobie-baby, I was not the one who brought up the 'legality' of the case. I simply got a bit tired of hearing the same old, same old JUSTIFICATIONS for the Council's exclusionary tactics and some of the commentary here that tries to justify the justifications.
The end run is that we are the
citizens of a community, not a bunch of (pardon the expression)
kiss-ass robots that have to succomb to insensative governance!
The crematorium was and is (how many times does this have to be said) a touchy issue and from the beginning WAS HANDLED IN A MOST
SURRIPTICIOUS, QUESTIONABLE, AND MINDLESS WAY; And THAT, dear Boobie, is MY take on the matter.
Laws, from biblical times on, were supposed to be designed for the implementation of a fair and just societal order, not to 'enrich' a dictatorial few who consider that they are the power elite.
Now, we all realize that there
will be an ending to our lives as we know them; but, that is not the point in this forum, Boobie, so your attempts to glorify death and crematoriums seems a bit 'out of whack'. To poke fun with this subject, at what might be the expense of others (this goes for you, too, Bev), is neither appropriate nor dignified. Or do either of you care?
I care. I can't speak for others. Let's move on.
By the way BB, DO YOU GET IT or are you beginning to show a side of you that simply refuses to understand other points of view?
I have been enjoying your interaction and hope that in the future we can all return to not making mockery of the subjects at hand.
Oops, you slipped one in on me while I was typing my last message.
Hopefully, we can.
Dr. Boswell,
An efficient way to research your info on toxic emissions is to search www.speakupov.com and click on "the issues". A career man in a medical field, you might want to catch up on the documentation.
What has yet to be tested are lawsuits to TOV, RV and the Harpolds for the potential nuerodevelopmental disorders that mercury emissions can cause in young and old. You allowed "analogous" and you will be held accountable for this decision. Wonder if the entrepreneur considered this or whether his highly paid legal team apprised him of his potential financial liabilities. The best is yet to come!
Native Spirit
Boobie-baby you started out so promising but are now very boring. Please go away or get some sleep and come back with meaningful opinions.
BB is self-contradictory - she states that her experience in writing zoning laws, that [they are thousands and thousands of pages long but do not and cannot cover every conceivable instance].
Well, well, perhaps this validates the assertion of a 'murky cloud' hovering over and around the unwanted crematorium approval process. Is (was) it, as BB avers, an example of that which was not one of the 'conceivable instances'? I think it became so and therefor SHOULD HAVE BEEN PRESENTED TO THE PEOPLE, and THAT BB, was denied! Let's be consistant, BB, not protectionist.
Re. zoning districts--While the OVZC list of permitted uses is pretty comprehensive, other uses that are not otherwise prohibited are allowed.
That's the way most zoning codes are written because it's virtually impossible to dream up every conceivable use that might arise. Mr. Harpold had the right to build the funeral home--no one seems to disagree with that on this blog. I fully understand everyone's concern with the ancillary or analogous use determinations.
One suggestion in this blog that's worth considering for any undesirable business: If you don't want to support that business when it's open, that's your right. You vote with your feet, in that case--whether it's Wal-Mart, Vistoso Memorial Chapel, or any other business that you don't believe deserves your support.
If you all felt the song was out of line--well, satire does that to people, so if you were offended, please accept my apologies.
In the mean time, how many of you have asked Rep. Wright, Rep. Hershberger or Sen. Pesquiera to submit bills that would tighten control of the placement of crematoria? Now's the time for those bills to be dropped in the hopper for consideration during the next session. Let's start working on something positive that can be done for the future, don't you think?
One last comment and then I'm outta here - Boobie-baby, YOU'RE ENTITLED TO YOUR OWN OPINION BUT YOU'RE NOT ENTITLED TO YOUR OWN FACTS!
What has happend to you? You seem only to be able to relate to a kind of self-righteous dogma and I find that elitist. Relating to you in a manner befitting a forum such as this one is becoming more and more difficult. YOU seem to be the one who is not having much of a 'good time' as is evidenced by your progressively cynical approach to others' dimensions. Openess seems not to be your style.
Cynicism seems to be the by-word of this blog. I have said repeatedly that everyone is entitled to his or her own opinion. That's my story, and I'm sticking with it, Zev.
And why hasn't anyone taken me up on the challenge of trying to change state law on the issues that seem to matter the most to the bloggers here?
Boobie Baby
You asked why somebody has not taken you up on your challenge?
Only so much time, so many challenges!
Most are concerned about making some changes on our town council right now.
Nothing wrong with being cynical, it is a necessity when dealing with government.
A lot of politicans, local and otherwise count on people just accepting what they say.
We are cynical because we have to be.
If you don't mind, what made you pick your blog name?
WE DON'T NEED ANY MORE LAWS - SIMPLY A LITTLE MORE CONSIDERATION!
THE END
WE DON'T NEED ANY MORE LAWS - SIMPLY A LITTLE MORE CONSIDERATION!
THE END
Not more laws, Zev--we agree on that one. But situations change, and the laws need to catch up with the realities on the ground. Changing the members of the Council does not--in and of itself--change what the state and counties regulate as spelled out in the Arizona Revised Statutes. I am quite sincere here in recommending that route--perhaps the newly elected Council members will take their case to the legislators.
Ms. Coyote--I took that blog name because it wasn't already taken by someone else....
Carl
Your comments were excellent. we've been to war together over the years. Sometime on the same side and some times not.
To others: Having served on a Town Council I can say from experience that there is a difference between established zoning and what it allows and conditions put on a re-zoning. A re-zoning is a Council members grab bag. You can put more restrictions on a property because the applicant wants the zoning for a specific reason and is willing to give away some of his "zoning rights" to get the zoning he needs for the business he is going to open. It easy, because it is a negotiation.
More later
Who's Carl?
Guess what BB--
Every State Legislator, every State Office was contacted from the Governor, Attorney General on down during the campaign against Harpold's body-burner....and guess what? They sent the letters to the Town of Oro Valley!
Isn't it thrilling how we have "The Best Government Money Can Buy"?
Ferlin,
Contacting the legislators and governor to object to a local issue over which they have no control will get you nowhere, money or not. You need to take a reasoned, step-by-step approach--contact a legislator, suggest wording for changes to the ASRS and AZ Dept. of Environmental Quality rules, ask the legislator to sponsor the bill, find others in similar situations in other Arizona towns and cities, deal with associations of mortuary owners (who will, no doubt, oppose the legislation)etc., etc. So much of what occurs at the local level in AZ is controlled by ASRS that you must use those laws as your starting point. Besides, as Pepper Dog points out, no intervention by anyone was going to stop the Harpold's business because they already had zoning rights (as opposed to other cases in other states that have been cited in these blogs where crematoria required re-zonings, general plan amendments, conditional use permits, etc.--all kinds of permissions that would entail public hearings and votes of yes or no).
Zev's personal objections that started this blog are understandable. At the entrance to Sun City in Las Vegas, there is the office of the Neptune Society,a national organization that arranges cremation--not a welcoming site, but a smart business decision given the demographics.
BB--
You admitted Harpold had no zoning rights for a crematorium. That is what folks objected to--not the funeral home itself, which was "added" to the original zoning uses in December of 2005 after he bought the site.
Funny, isn't it, the engineering firm labeled their building plans "funeral home" never mentioning the body burner.
As for State help, the neighborhoods next to the crematorium did not even have decent notice of the developer's plans, let alone the time to advance any legislation.
We can only assume that the TOV Council was unaware of the dangerous pollution caused by crematoria when they voted for it: "The TOV Council Memorial Crematorium"
The whole deal was truly obfuscated!!
Ferlin--We're probably talking about a 2-year process to change laws and DEQ rules, so even with notification of plans, it probably would not have impacted this particular development.
Nevertheless, it still would not hurt to ask your legislator to begin the process of changing state rules, and to ask your Council members to amend the zoning code to specifically prohibit crematoria within X feet of a residential neighborhood (or outlaw them outright). It will save a lot of wear and tear on others in the community as OV grows.
I'd give the same advice for notification issues: In another state where I worked, I had to travel to the state capitol to lobby the legislature to change the rezoning notification laws (e.g., number of feet from the boundary, etc., etc.). If you want more people notified of pending issues coming before deliberative bodies, ask the Town Council to amend the code for a wider mailed notification process or bigger signs, or whatever you'd like. They'll figure the cost and then vote yea or nay.
Zev and Ferlin,
I think you are wasting your proverbial "breath" as I am of the belief that Boobie-Baby may in-fact be a Harpold and you may be conversing with the enemy!
We Agree! BB is either Harpold, or step-father/partner . The other state referred to would be Illinois where Harpold lived.
BB chooses to ignore the fact about the crematorium not being a "permitted use" and was an "analogous" use interpreted as such by ONE P & Z Director. No notification would have changed her decision, which does not impact her at all.
I restate: "We have the best government money can buy."
Going to government agencies for any oversight is useless...too bad BB doesn't know how useless! That isn't all he doesn't know.
Oh, for goodness sake. I am not a member of the Harpold family and have only encountered them twice in my lifetime (and maybe once more when I pass on). Without printing my entire CV here, just know that I have academic credentials in urban and regional planning and have taught college courses in urban studies.
The advice I provide here would be just as applicable to the Harpold property if a billiard hall or bowling alley had been proposed. I'm sure there would be ancillary uses that would have required some interpretation that also would be open to legitimate questions.
Please don't insult me by claiming what I don't know. I will not participate in ad hominem attacks on anyone in this forum, and I expect the same behavior from you. If you disagree with me, that's your right, but to brand me as a member of an "enemy" family is going too far. And, no, I have never lived in Illinois. If you want to read the boring section of the California Government Code that I lobbied for to amend notification processes of zoning changes, see section 65091, especially if you can't fall asleep at night.
Post a Comment