Undesirable neighbor

The railroad/city story continues to get worse.

An article in the Times recently told us that the railroad maintains that  the city never “filled out a form” or scheduled a meeting with the railroad to discuss the land sale.

It’s hard to understand how the city can object to the form–after all they make us sign up just to speak to city council.

According to the article the city never told the railroad what they wanted the land for.  The city attorney was quoted as saying “The end use does not matter–terms of the sale were the same”.

Baloney

Anyone with half of a brain knows that if you are going to sell land and thus create a next door neighbor you will find it important to know what the land will be used for.

Proof

One of the west side city representatives evidently said that the city has recordings and emails that prove the city did reach out to the railroad.

The city is saying is that they need time to compile the records.

If the city representative has identified the recordings and emails it seems to us that those records could be released immediately.

We deserve better

Brutus

3 Responses to Undesirable neighbor

  1. Not Fooled says:

    We learned today that the city has spoken to only three or four of the people whose properties the city wants for the new arena site. That’s a lot different than the picture they painted when they announced the planned site. They planned all along to steamroll the property owners and to use eminent domain is necessary, but they tried to make the public think that they had spoken to the property owners and that there was no resistance.

    Like

  2. Disgusted says:

    So the city claims to have recordings of phone calls with the railroad company. Regardless whether it is legal in the state of Texas, I wonder if those recordings were made without the knowledge of the railroad. If so, anyone who does business with the city should be very careful in its dealings with the city. The city has engaged in some questionable treatment of vendors and business partners over the past 10 years.

    Like

  3. Reality Checker says:

    The city never seriously considered locating the arena on the railroad property just like it never wanted to put the new ballpark at the Cohen site. In the case of the ballpark, they lied, saying that the league required that the ballpark be located downtown.

    Council members and their financial sponsors have their own agenda, which is to enhance the value of downtown properties owned by a few individuals. Those properties are closer to the site that was selected.

    The railroad request that the city fill out of a form simply gave the city an excuse (a lame excuse) not to pursue the railroad yard site.

    Like

Leave a Reply -- you do not have to enter your email address

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: