Heights Homeowner

I can't add on to mine in a way that makes sense to fix the objections a homebuyer would have. The ordinance prohibits it. So it will remain historic and I'll quit improving it, live with it the way it is and NOT make it better. It had an ugly remodel in the 80's. I have been working to make it look more period. That stops. I need dormers for my attic master. I need more closets. I need more storage. I need a half bath and a larger kitchen. All were in the plans and now won't happen because the most important things that need to be done won't be permitted. BTW, this is being circulated today. It would be funny if it were not so tragic.

They've been very agreeable lately. They weren't before the spotlight was on them. They were a major pain. Now that the Mayor fired Sharie Beale, maybe they will be better. I wouldn't be surprised of all of their willingness to work with people right now won't be short lived once they get a few months down the road...although this issue won't be going anywhere any time soon so they will be under lots of scrutiny for a long time. Get your remodel requests in now if you want a reasonable process.

Get Ready Folks! I got an email saying that the Planning Director is going to present her info to Council next week on Wednesday. Now the fun begins.

One of the things I've learned is that no matter who you are and what kind of retail/commercial you are bringing to an area, SOMEONE is going to complain about it. Sit down at the Planning Commission a few times and you realize that a small number of people are willing to go down to City Hall to try to prevent anything they don't like the idea of, no matter how benign. The Heights seems to have more than it share of these types but they're a very tiny minority so business owners just need to ignore them. They used to control the Heights Association and they chased off business after business but they are on the outs and will stay that way. Business owners just have to shrug off the nutcases that would complain about Grandma opening a quilting business.

Yes, the accusations of a strawman argument are frequent. He thinks this is a big word and describes those who differ from him or make logical points. And you are rigth about the traffic issue. It isn't about the traffic at all. Or the bridges failing. Or the crime. They hate Walmart. So do I. But I will simply demonstrate it by not shopping there. I won't make up a bunch of excuses or fake concerns to see if I can help influence the developer or the city to change their plans. It won't happen. Walmart is well versed in this type of stuff. And we live in the inner city - operative word "city." Within an urban community, there is traffic. These folks all want to live in a world with no progress, no development, no traffic - essentially they want to live in a rural community where life is slow, progress is infrequent and there is never more than a one car wait at the towns one stop light. They can yammer on all they want about traffic or failing bridges but Walmart is going in. Don't shop there and stop worrying about the boogy man. There has to be better causes to spend time on and to work to defeat like hunger, the homeless and illiteracy to name a few.

One of my favorite lawyers always says to me "you can't make a logical arguement with people who are illogical, particularly when it is illogical."

The anti-ordinance folks never said that HAHC would regulate paint. That is one of your red herrings. And numerous homeowners had already experienced 3 day delays in permitting HVAC due to the hysterical preservation office. Telling lies about the messenger and distorting the message won't make it so. You clearly have no idea what happened with HEB, which is typical with your posts. Since I had conversations with the lawyers representing the developer, I think I have a better handle on what happened with HEB than your rumor mill who KNOWS NOTHNG about the negotiations. They had been in talks for a long time and only when they were told they had to make a decision and subsequently turned it down did Aimbinder look for someone else. I get my info from the actual source, not Internet blogs. The 1950 reference was about your groups desire to live in the 1950’s. And by the way, it is 2011. I realize progress of any time offends you but you can’t stop it or the march of time. And the claims of too much traffic are ALWAYS the cry of those who oppose progress and development. The Planning Commish is used to it. They hear it every other Thursday. So, people are putting their homes on the market because of Walmart? And you know this how? Or is this just another one of your areas of expertise. I have rarely in my life seen someone who posts on a message board every day espousing their vast knowledge of absolutely everything. It isn’t that you have an opposing viewpoint that is the problem. You constantly post on the HAIF as if you are an expert on every subject. Real estate, the lending industry, construction, urban planning, the law, medical malpractice, economics, and what ever else is under discussion. You posted threats on another thread and drew attention to yourself as a result. I am simply pointing out to those who read this that you are a phony who is always spouting half truths, conjecture, rumor and gossip and downright lies.

As we have seen on the HPO thread, s3mh claims he knows everything about everything. He doesn't understand sarcasm or irony or any other subtlety. While he claims to know everything about the law, he didn't understand the simple truth in law that what is on the paper, in black and white, is the only thing that matters. If he understood law, he would know that the "plain language" is always what it means. If it says words like "any" or "all" or "every", then that it what it means. Any means ANY. When people pointed out the broad language, his tiny clan just cried...but they said....waaaaaaaa! No, no one said anything like what they claimed because they wanted the city to have ultimate authority over everything. Thankfully, due to the property owners complaining, we got some exclusions although the language of the ordinance is still very broad and of course, they can come back and remove those exclusions anytime they want to, which is another thing they didn't tell people. They said publicly 3 years ago, when the Heights districts were created, that they would take baby steps. They didn't have to take baby steps when Parker got elected. But they will come back and make the ordinance more restrictive. Guaranteed. The HPO folks have taken up with the anti Walmart folks thinking their kinship is a longing for days gone by. They could get closer to it if they moved to rural, small town USA. Life is easy. Development and progress is virtually non-existent (exept for Walmart, of course). Instead, they live in the inner city of the 4th largest city in the country and complain bitterly about urban revitalization and redevelopment of any kind. They dominated the HHA for years (but are now on the outs). They had nothing better to do than oppose any reasonable rtail/commercial development that came into the neighborhood for years and years and it drove people out of the homeowners association because it was ruled by this mentality. Not anymore, thankfully! It is not surprising that they co-op'd the Walmart issue too because they are against all development. They want everything frozen in time so they can live in the fantasy of the 1950's. It is very unfortunate Walmarts new frontier is inner city urban areas but it was bound to happen. The best thing to do is to work with these type of developers to get the kinds of businesses we would like to see in the community instead of fighting development in general. Developers are business people and they want to be successful and make money (I know it isn't popular to say that) but that is reality. If the folks that spend so much time fighting developers actually tried to work with them, they would be much more successful. To prempt Walmart, they could have organized and made an effort to encourage all of the grocery retailers to come to the area. The grocery retailers (Randalls, HEB and Fiests) have all been looking at the Heights for 7 or 8 years, maybe longer. Hundreds of letters/emails to HEB might have made the difference in their decision. But the s3mh type folk's methodology is to have city regulate everything, oppose everything and then scream and cry (and lie) when they don't get their way. Like I said, I hate Walmart, never shop there and never will. But the truth is that unless an another anchor retailer is willing to go in to that space, Walmart will happen. Parker is for it. Parker wants the tax revenue. Parker, despite the fact that she isn't a fan of Walmart, didn't oppose the 380 because she wanted the money it will bring to the city. She couldn't prevent it but she also doesn't care. Just like the Red Light Camera issue (she can sue over it but if doesn't change the truth) but in the end, she wants the money from Walmart and will work to get it. She is working with Aimbinder's lobbyist on other initiatives. She isn't on the anti-Walmart side. She is on the side of the money.

Good grief! Now you are an expert on doctors, lawyers and tort reform as well as urban planning. Is there anything you don't claim to be an expert on? This thread is about Walmart but that doesn't seem to stop you from weighing in on the historic district issue here. You distort and downright lie about what the opponents of the ordinance had to say about it, like the political sign issue. No one ever said politcal signs would be regulated. The Coalition of Crazy made that claim up! In fact, no one ever said that paint color or HVAC or light fixtures or fences would be regulated. The only thing the opponents pointed out was that the first draft of the ordinance had language that was so vague and all encompassing that it would allow the city to regulate any exterior feature of a property (again, no mention of signs). Clearly, you can not discern nuance. Or you can and needed a red herring to deflect from the fact that your merry band of hysterical preservationists had an unpopular position. You had to lie about density and the fact that the ordinance didn't prevent density or things like townhouses and condos, or even a high rise. No high rise residential structure could have been built in the existing historic districts as there was no tract large enough. But it didn't prevent you from using these sorts of ridiculous claims to frighten your neighbors. The truth is that there is no space large enough for grocery stores and other retail development (let alone a highrise) within the boundaries of the historic districts and most of it is protected by prevailing lot size and set back restrictions which are the ONLY thing that prevents density - something the Planning Director and the Mayor have both said publicly. The HPO does not prevent density. And the HPO will not prevent retail development in the areas that surround historic districts that have tracts large enough for retail development. You could never have created historic districts in those areas. They are largely commercial/industrial and have nothing to do with historic preservation. There is retail development on the outskirts of every residential area - its called urban planning. Retail close to where people live. I hate Walmart, and hate the idea that it is coming near our neighborhood. I never shop at Walmart and never will. But the reality is retail development surrounding the Heights is going to happen. The land is very valuable and quite frankly, we need the retail resources. I would love to have seen HEB go in but after years of negotiating with the developer, they opted out. Once that happened, the developer sought other potential anchors for the development because they had to have a large retail anchor to be successful. The one that came to the table was Walmart. Unfortunate, but that is business. That is urban development and planning. There will be more of it. Look around the fringe of our community. Where there are large tracts of land owned by a single entity, you will have redevelopment with both retail/commercial and dense residential developments. The world has changed since the 1950's. No matter how hard you wish for it, it won't go back. You continually play fast and loose with the facts and post all over this forum as if you are an expert on every subject. Again, it is better to remain silent and appear ignorant than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. You don't have to persist on convincing us you don't understand this concept.

Great idea! And now, thanks to all of our efforts, there is an appeal at City Council (and thanks to Wanda Adams who insisted on the appeal process). If the builders show up with photos of original homes and plans to build something virtually identical, I suspect Council would over-rule the hysterical preservation commission. The David and Sharie Show will undoubtedly be up there arguing against you but they have no credibility with Council anymore. And it will make any of them look ridiculous to argue against homes that are identical in style to the original architecture in the Heights. The number one thing they will fight over is size but my take on Council is that they understand that homes have to be built that are of a size that homebuyers want and lenders will finance. They will be reasonable where the hysterical group is not. It would be good to submit some plans and see what they will approve (or not) and then see what the Council does with it. The appeal process could also help with the stuff that needs to be torn down. They will fight like heck to prevent any tear-downs but if it isn't economically feasible to do anything with it, supposedly they will approve it. The issue will be the length of time you have to deal with the process but you already were waiting for 90 days for demo and another 90 for incompatible so hopefully the appeals process wouldn't take that long. (hopefully).

There really are quite a number of them still standing. Corner of 13th and Harvard, 1500 block of Tulane has two, one on 20th occupied by TBW, 1300 block of Cortlandt, 900 block of Cortlandt (on the National Register), 1800 block of Harvard.

Me too! Red is dead-on although I like to think of it as retribution justice. I am equally anxious for it to escalate. Their wild claims of "Mission Accomplished" will be embarrassing for the City and the Mayor. They had a chance to do it right and be fair and they opted for winning at all costs with any illegitimate process they could dream up. Even though their dirty political maneuvering appears to have gotten the upper hand on the surface, it is just what is on the surface. We just have to be patient, and bide our time. Just a few weeks and the real fun begins because when politicians compromise their ethics for a personal agenda, it rarely turns out well for them. And those who hitch their wagon to their colleagues in deals like this always end up collateral damage. Parker has said that Ed wasn't a leader and he needed hand-holding. She's got his number, knows he hasn't got a clue and is letting him be the fall guy in this deal. Lovell didn't have any consequences so she got to do most of the heavy lifting but Ed, well he'll have consequences no matter whether she redistricts him out of the Heights or not. In fact, it will be better for us to get him out of our district. He won't have his few minion hysterical preservationists to vote for him and instead will have a bunch of ticked off folks working on his opponents campaign telling his constituents how he was a rubber stamp for Annise Parker during his first term. Too bad for Ed. Everyone says he's a nice guy but being a nice guy won't save him from 1000+ pissed off Heights homeowners who have the motivation and deep enough pockets to impact a small council election. And because of their underhanded tactics, this will be going on long into the election season. We will remember who voted to take away property rights with this fraudulent process and we will vote and (donate) accordingly. They have no idea how committed people are, but they will soon. But back to architecture - it would be great if someone put together a photo montage of all of the two story original historic homes with second story balconies in the Heights and submit it to Pace and Parker since they stood up at a public meeting and claimed they weren't built here. I suggest presenting it at Council so that they understand that these folks don't have a clue about the original architecture. Their comments about faux Victorians being inappropriate in the Heights along with the comments about Glenbrook Valley and the double front porches were so wrong, it was almost funny. Almost. What was funny was the woman who asked them to stop talking about the Heights and talk about their district - First Montrose Commons. The video shows Parker's facial expressions - hilarious! She was shocked that the residents of FMC could care less about the Heights! Annise needs a better poker face.

Interesting since there is lots of new construction to go around. One can actually like both. They are not mutually exclusive. Like Bill Maher loves to say, I can hold two opposing thoughts at once...but then again, that might be a function of left brain logical thinking. And just how old are you? Nananana boo booo, it's your fault, not mine. Sheesh, stop embarrassing yourself. On another topic, did anyone notice the new sign that was put up on the 610 feeder around Oxford that says "Height Historic District"??? Vanna White, I'd like to please buy an "S" for the Heights historic district sign. Wonder how much more money Annise will waste on her pet project because of her screw ups. She can't read an ordinance and follow it that she wrote and now apparently her underlings can't spell "Heights" either. I sure hope the new Mayor will replace those people in January of 2012. Not sure which should go first, the Planning Departments and the Preservation office or their technology - both appear to be quite historic - but of course, we all know anything old and of limited value must be preserved so a trolley can drive by them and imagine days gone by. In this case, the tour director can announce that this is what a historic preservation department looked like in 2011 when Houston had a Mayor so driven to sheer madness by fear of townhomes in her neighborhood that she lost all of her common sense - and the respect of those who voted for her with it.

Let's just go back and revisit your comments... You said bungalows in good condition are hotcakes (and then later added your definition of a good condition). Yet, you say that people can now put their money into significant renovations since the homes are protected. But, by your own definition, a good condition is one that has been updated so why would anyone need to do a significant renovation to a home in good condition. And if they are the norm, and not rare, then the only real market is the renovated bungalow. No one has ever questioned that a fully renovated, double original size or better bungalow wouldn't sell at market value. The truth is, you are talking out of both sides of your face. You know absolutely nothing about the real estate market in general and you sure don't know anything about it in the Heights. You like to think you do but your statements always contradict themselves and then you make some outrageous claims that it is okay for those with bungalows in need of renovation to lose market value due to the ordinance because it will improve the overall neighborhood. Anyone reading this with an education beyond 5th grade reads your postings can see that your arguments are continually flawed, just like the reconsideration process but since it was dreamed up by folks just like you, it is easy to understand why it is such a train wreck. Clearly you know as little about logic argument and real estate as you do about preservation. The one thing you do seem to have a good grip on is HISTORIC REGULATION, versus historic preservation. Fortunately, the folks who will ultimately make the decisions have the ability to form logical arguments and understand them and won't be bullied by Parket and Lovell. Those days are numbered just like your victory dancing days are - they too will be short lived and bittersweet for you. Any by all means, make another posting telling us how much you know about real estate and lending and all the other things you believe you are an expert at. We enjoy the entertainment. One Term Mayor Anyone But Annise Anyone But Ed

Not second hand info. Seller's agent told me the offer amounts so that indeed would be first hand info. Offers are submitted to the seller's agent first so it doesn't get anymore first hand than that. Its not about paying a premium to not be beholden to an ordinance. It's worth at least $275 as a tear down but not worth that as a renovation. As far as being high priced, an exact same size empty lot two block away got $280k this fall, so not really too high except if it is only a candidate for remodel. The break-even for an addition/remodel is tough for most investors so they have to get a property at fire sale price in order to make it worth their while. From what I understand, with a demo permit, it's worth $275k. Without it, its worth $225k. It has nothing to do with the market crash.

And you forgot a short-lived hollow victory. hehehehehehehehe!

So, we won't be able to get loans to finance improvements and renovations. We will lose money with the ordinance. Well, everyone should want that, right? Why didn't you put these little ditties in the barrage of flyers you papered your neighbors with? In fact, why didn't you inform them of this little problem when you asked for their signature on the petition to create the district? Why did you tell them their property values would go up in an historic district in every piece of lying propaganda you put out? Why? Because only the truly crazy would want their property values to go down because of an ordinance to preserve 100 year old termite mounds that can't get financing for renovations and expansion. Grandma gets to preserve her home so the Mayor's trolley tour of the Heights can roll by while the tour guide points out that Grandma's house looks just like it did in 2011 and that if you squint real hard, you can imagine how it looked 100 years earlier before she took in the front porch, added a funny lean-to on the side, covered it in vinyl siding, put the aluminum screen door on it and removed the original window screens. OTM ABA ABE

Dear Ms. Parker, It appears you had a George W. Bush moment last night. I just got back from viewing video of the FMC meeting of last night. All I can say is "OOOOOPPPPS! Your comments about Houston architecture is terribly and embarrassingly misinformed. Talking about how atomic ranch is only found in Glenbrook Valley or that Greek Revival is not a style found in the original architecture of the Heights made you look really ridiculous. Ms. Parker, the entire loop is surrounded by ranch home JUST LIKE Glenbrook Valley. They are in subdivisions from Timbergrove and Oak Forest to Meyerland and Bellaire. And two story Greek Revival style homes with second story balconies on the front of the home were built in the Heights. Not many were built but they are in the Heights and some are even on the historic register. There is no reason to prevent new construction in that style except that your bungalow bigots don't like them. Perhaps you need to fire your historic preservation officer and your communications director who continually keep you misinformed. And add, Jonathan Smulian to the list. No more Smulian design guidelines. Please hire a real architect with real knowlege of the home styles of these historic neighborhoods without the bias of someone who has an agenda. The bungalow is just one of many styles in the Heights but Smulian can apparently only identify 1 other. The architectural style of Glenbrook Valley is everywhere in Houston. You can review the styles in these neighborhoods by going to the HAR website. There are examples in the Heights of two story Greek Revivals on the market right now! There are hundreds of 1950-60 ranch homes for sale in many subdivisions. There is plenty of opportunity to educate yourself before you speak in public. Please, as a fellow Democrat, I am asking that you do not speak about things you know nothing about as it make you appear to be following in the footsteps of Dubya. And take a moment to review those who are giving you all this bad information. They are not serving you well and will likely be your downfall.

Your original claims were about homes that were not dilapadated, not homes that have not been updated. You simply twist the facts and your own previous comments when it suits you. However, these folks get it. And I suppose from your way of thinking, the elderly in our neighborhood should just be glad that the historic ordinance has deprived them of $50k because they doubled their investment. We are just going to start calling you the Bernie Madoff of the Heights. These folks should be pleased they didn't lose more of their investment because someone unscrupulous cheated them. Madoff didn't seem to care about taking money from little old ladies either.

Amen, Brothas and Sistas! But don't be disheartened. They won't get away with these tactics forever. Unfortunately, the wheels of justice turn slowly but it will soon be out of the hands of the City and into the hands of regulatory officials who won't be bullied by MAP or bought by her promises of counci member district improvements. She won't be able to go to them and ask what they want for their support as her flunies have done with our current city council. And the more they try to lean on council, the more respect she loses. OTM ABA ABE

Sheesh, what a drama queen! And please cover yourself. Your hypocrisy is showing. Again, your group proves this has NOTHING to do with preservation. It is all about controlling development. You don't like your bungalow being overshadowed with higher priced, 21st century construction which has far wider appeal than your 2/1 bungalow with no insulation or closets, modern conveniences, large enough rooms for 2011 period furnishings, etc. Its a buyers market for those properties that don't have 2011 homebuyer features and its a sellers market for homes that meet the needs of today's families. Period. The Heights is an historic neighborhood, with or without a riduculous ordinance that stops the organic revitalization of the community. If the Coalition of Crazy was serious about presevation, they would engage in acts of preservation instead of lobbying to give control of development to City Officials. But they aren't true preservationists. Your group engages is fear tactics falsely telling our neighbors that the ordiance will prevent density and yet, lo and behold, it won't. And Gafrick and Parker have both admitted publicly that it won't although Annise didn't have a problem lying about it on her little undue influence postcard she mailed out. BTW, had a conversation with realtor with a listing for an old but well maintained, unremarkable bungalow that they have multiple solid offers of $275k IF the property is not included in the HD but multiple low ball offers at $225k if it is. So, without even a a quarter of a year atof passage of the "protected" restriction, the property value has dropped $50k. Its a hotcake alright, but at what price? What your obvious lack of expertise in the real estate industry demonstrates is that you don't understand that everything is a hotcake far below market value. Needless to say the seller isn't thrilled about being in an historic district which costs them $50k. Since you and your friends are fond of paying full price or over market, can you please send them an offer above $275k. You can revel in the fact you paid more than market value for a very desirable hot cake bungalow in a Protected Historic District. You will be the envy of all of your friends Keep repeating "we won, they lost, we won, they lost, we won, they lost." We are busy, very busy. P.S. The friends I mentioned last week are still waiting for their over market value offer for their well maintained but teeny tiny hot cake bungalow. They check the mail every day but so far, none of your buddies have sent in their contracts. Maybe they are lost in the mail like the ballots the City didn't record.

Looks like the area builders are going to compensate for the historic restriction ordinance by building all around. I was out driving today, winding my way through the hood and saw all the development West of the West District. For fun, I decided to drive South of 11th, then drove up North of 20th. All I can say is WOW! It won't hurt the builders at all to have to build outside these districts. It is definitely time to buy something outside the district before the prices go up more. The areas adjacent are going to be very attractive b/c all the run-down, commercial stuff will eventually be gone and there won't be any HAHC nonsense to deal with. My 1915 unremarkable bungalow with its 1980's renovation can stay frozen in time so people can look back and say "gee, this is what an old home that couldn't be improved past 2010 looked like." I'll be doing the community a favor by increasing the available rental opportunities. There are already 4 rental properties on my block, one a slum lord 4 plex, so one more rental can't hurt, right? If you want to live in a city regulation free zone, buy West of Ashland, North-East of 20th and Yale, much of Sunset Heights and all of the Woodland Heights outside the soon to be Historic District or Stude 2. It all looks very promising and thanks to Parker and her ill-conceived ordinance, those areas will never be able to acheive historic district status. The balloting process they dreamed up will never acheive a return of a majority, even at 51%, let alone 67%. It is a complete JOKE and everyone knows it. They tried so hard to design a process that prevented the existing districts majority opposing it to undo them, that she screwed every other area. Rocket scientists they aren't! Sell in historic districts, buy in the HAHC free zone historic neighborhoods! One Term Mayor Anyone But Annise Anyone But Ed

The folks with the Coalition of Crazies yellow "Yes to the City" yard signs comes to mind...

Just remembered you didn't comment on your best gal pal, Sharie getting tossed from the HAHC. Wonder why? Maybe you ARE the David and Sharie show?!?!?! Would explain why you think you know about real estate, even though clearly they know nothing about real estate. Would also explain why you threatened people who oppose the ordinance and why you think you have the stroke to get our renovations rejected. But the David and Sharie Show has been canceled. There will be no syndication, no re-runs. Its over. The David and Sharie show got the boot from Parker and got slapped up side the head by city attorney David Feldman on their way out as the door was hitting them in the ass. Fired from Keller Williams and fired from the HAHC, both for ethical violations. So, if you are the now defunct David and Sharie Show, in the words of Donald Trump - You're Fired! Sharie was the laughing stock of the HAHC anyway. Some of the most surprising commission members have been blabbing about how ridiculous Sharie's comments were and how they dreaded David's appearance arguing against homeowners over the stupidest, most trivial things. We heard they had a party to celebrate her departure and MAP popped the cork on the champagne because she was rid of the wacko Beales' before anyone filed formal ethics complaints and a true investigation began into their unsavory conduct. :P

And your efforts went on for how long before you could manage you lie and cheat your way to getting the designation? YEARS AND YEARS!! We also loved when Sharie baybay said, out loud, at a public hear, that she pestered her neighbors 7 or 8 times to get them to sign. And what the heck is a survey vote?? Either its a survey or its a vote. And my neighbors did think a card was coming that would be their vote. They didn't understand what the survey was by the city. They certainly didn't think the city would call their vote a survey. Why would they? It wasn't what the ordinance said they would receive. So, I guess if you are calling them idiots because they didn't know what it was the city sent them because it wasn't a card, it was a survey (which frankly most people just throw out when they receive them in the mail) and it didn't have a yes or no vote...then I suppose in your little mind, they would be idiots. But I give my neighbors much more credit to know the difference between a card, with which one would vote on and an opinion survey and I give them credit in reading the ordinance to know what to expect. But then again, they aren't omnipotent like you, oh wise one. Your little group is the ones who don't seem to know the difference between a card, with a vote and an opinion survey. And you don't seem to have much reading comprehension either or you would know that the LAW wasn't followed. But of course, we know you know the difference very well and you read the ordinance because your Coalition of Crazy helped draft it. You just couldn't follow the ordinance because it would show you don't have the support you claim you do. So once again, you had to cheat. And while we are talking about neighbors, your groups whole premise is that your neighbors are idiots so you have to decide what is right for their property because they obviously can't. On the other hand, we know our neighbors are perfectly capable, intelligent folks who don't need you to decide anything for them or their property. Enjoy your little victory party because it soon will be over and you will have to show actual, real, verifiable support for your position. And you can't or you wouldn't have been afraid to send a real ballot with a yes and no option. It is far, far from a done deal. Out of curiosity, which of the council members are you calling whiny? The ones who think you should follow the laws of the state and of the city? Funny how they think the law should be followed, eh? It's always something. No point debating politics with you. You have no idea what you are talking about related to announcing and filing and raising funds. I make it a habit of not discussing politics with folks who are to ignorant to warrant the discussion. One Term Mayor Anyone But Annise Anyone But Ed