ABSTRACT: In a Letter to the Editor, The Carmel Pine Cone (11/20/2009), attorney Skip Lloyd explains “how it can be that the pending lawsuit over the EIR regarding the Flanders sale, if lost by the city, could void the public vote on the issue as presented to the voters.” Highlights of the letter and a link to the entire letter are presented.
HIGHLIGHTS of ‘Flanders election a mistake:’
“... the pending lawsuit over the EIR regarding the Flanders sale, if lost by the city, could void the public vote on the issue as presented to the voters.”
“... it should be recalled that the citizens would not even have had their required vote in the Flanders matter if the city council had not been sued and forced to hold the election regarding Flanders which the law required.”
“The reasoning behind the CRA’s statement was that, if the city lost the lawsuit, the council would have wasted the cost of the election and have put the community through an election wherein, in the end, one’s vote was meaningless.”
“... if one’s vote turns out to be wasted, it is the city council’s fault, not that of those who brought the lawsuit in order to make the city council comply with CEQA’s purpose to adequately explore the environmental impacts of a sale of Flanders, so that the city and the public were fully informed before voting on the issue.”
(Source: Letters to the Editor, Flanders election a mistake, Francis (“Skip”) Lloyd, Carmel, The Carmel Pine Cone, 28A)
1 comment:
Skip Lloyd is right on here. Voters I have spoken with were definitely not well informed on the facts of the issue. They recited city talking points and Carmel Pine Cone talking points, but they did not know enough to know these talking points were one-sided, propaganda from the mayor and city council.
I do not like the words wasted vote, but I do like the words void the public vote. The mayor did all she could to put the blame on the Flanders Foundation, when it should have been put with the city council.
Post a Comment