Heights Homeowner

We must have been on the same wave length this morning. :-)))) I just posted the same, with lots of detail but didn't point out that Parker had less than 6%. Here is the link again to these stats: http://www.harrisvotes.com/HISTORY/110309/Cumulative/cumulative.pdf

The percentage of the total population over age 18 who voted in the 2008 election, a very high turn-out year, was only 58%. Presidential elections have the highest turnout compared to non-Presidential election year turnout. If you look at voting stats for Harris County, for someone in our area like, say Shelia Jackson Lee, the turn-out of voters in 2010 was slightly less than 37%. Lee won with 70% of the vote with 3 others running against her. Stats in the John Whitmire race were around 38%, only had 1 candidate to run against him and in a Republican year with supposedly high turnout due to voter unrest, and as a Democrat, he won with 60% of the vote. Both local area politicians, both popular, one Congressional, one State. Neither race had total turn out of even 40% of voters. The odd year voter turnout stats for local elections are even worse. Let's looks at 2009, a non-congressional, odd year election - local stats for races like MAP and Council, in round numbers. Percentage of registered voters voting in the mayoral race - 19%. This is the overall indication of the number of voters, presuming most vote for the mayor and it averaged across the city. Then, starting with the district races, Stardig - 23%, Johnson - 14%, Clutterbuck - 23%, Adams - 19%, Sullivan - 18%, Hoang - 15%, Pennington - 25%, Gonzalez - 16%, Rodriguez - 13%. Notice, the higher voting percentages in the "power-money" districts, of A, C, and G - all over 20%, (Memorial, River Oaks, Southhampton, Tanglewood, etc.) Then take a look at the stats for the At-Large, elected city wide. At-Large 1 - Costello's race - 19%, At-Large 2 - Lovell's race - 19%, At-Large 3 - Noriega - 19%, At-Large 4 - Bradford - 19%, At-Large 5 - Jones - 19%. All city wide elections - 19%, 178,777 ballots cast of the 935,073 registered voters. In summary, City-Wide turnout in 2009 - 19%. Local race for Council turn out between a low of 13% to a high of 25%. Lowest turnouts for high minority population districts. Middle of the road turn-out, middle class districts. Highest in the upper middle to wealthy districts. Pretty typical stuff. So yes, 20-25% voter turnout for our little vote given all the underhanded tricks employed by Parker and Company is a landslide for anything local. Even if we consider voter turnout compared to even year, non-Presidential elections, we would have prevailed because it was only one side. They were too chicken to show the "support" vote so it was a one-sided vote and we still had better turn-out than the mayor got for her own election. If both sides had voted, and comparing our stats to the 2010 elections for a Representative Lee and Sen. Whitmire, if we had the same turn out they did, a 20-25% vote to repeal the distict, they couldn't have won. At best, they would have had 17 to 18%. Here is link for the results from the Harris County Clerk's website - didn't make up these numbers. They are the real deal and the fact is we got out the vote better for just one side, than the politicians who are going to vote on this did for their own elections - LOL! http://www.harrisvotes.com/HISTORY/110309/Cumulative/cumulative.pdf s2mh can keep repeating "we won, they lost" but given the numbers for a local election, there does seem to be an explanation for the low turnout. I guess all those who didn't vote for in the 2009 election, MAP's election - and they actually had a real vote, so voters must have been living under a rock to not know they had to vote. We got to vote with a ballot, called a survey, which looked identical to the petition they already signed, conducted in the two weeks before Christmas, followed up with a postcard from the sitting mayor that said don't vote. Indeed, no reasonable explanation for that kind of turnout!

No way to rationalize the 20% huh? You keep telling yourself that. It is a big help to us for you to think that way. Just because you have no other explantion, doesn't mean there isn't one. We realize that people with questionable ethics don't understand that process has everything to do with it and there are folks who actually care about the methods employed in this sham of a vote who understand it too. So keep repeating to yourself, "they only got 20%, no way to rationalize, we won, they lost, they only got 20%, no way to rationalize, we won, they lost, they only got 20%, no way to rationalize, we won, they lost, they only got 20%, no way to rationalize we won, they lost." You'll believe it eventually and we will thoroughly enjoy proving the rationalization you think is non-existent. And we are looking forward to pulling the trigger on the future plans. Please visit your therapist because you are going to need your xanax and your anti-aniety med. Shoot, you might even need a script from the doc for anti-psychotic drugs by the time we are done. One Term Mayor Anyone But Annise Anyone But Ed

Okay everybody, let's just pretend to agree that s3mh is the area expert on the real estate and lending industry. He knows what sells, and why. He knows how much to pay and what these bungalows are worth. Blah, blah, blah... Never mind that I never mentioned the condition of my friends bungalow but since he is knows all, omnipotent, really, he must also know that too. I never said it was neglected but why deal with facts now, right? We just hate those sticky little factoids anyway. Here's the reality, unless a property has been renovated and expanded, it isn't a hotcake anymore. They are sitting on the market with no buyer in sight. Properties that were once desirable for renovation and expansion just don't have the same appeal and buying pool. That leaves a whole lot of property that isn't the value it once was, prior to June. That's okay with our little friend s3, but generally not okay with those property owners. I'm not sure who he thinks his audience is on this forum though. Clearly his speculation about the condition of these homes, how smart their realtor is, and how long ago they were purchased, and for how much is something that he he needs promote to validate his overpriced purchase. A couple of months ago, one property in the east district, waited for their 90-day waiver obtained before the moratorium, demolished the dilapadated structure on it and got $30,000 more than he had asked for it as a renovation candidate which he tried to sell for more than a year with no takers. Sold it for $280,000. Not really an indication that the market for property that needs to be torn down or renovated can't get the $275,000 it used to, as ole s3mh claims. Just that if you can tear it down because it isn't a worthy candidate for renovation, you can still get what it is worth. If you can't, you're screwed, thanks to the ordinance. Back to s3mh, DUDE, your vast knowledge of the lending industry is very interesting. Only FHA can is doing renovation loans now? Is that what you are saying? And you know this how? Are you a mortgage broker? A realtor? Or just a property owner with a single experience for your expertise? Or maybe your hysterical preservation buddies, David and Sharie Beale have told you these very interesting facts. You might want to check your sources though. Folks checked at Keller Williams, the firm that fired them, and they said that the Beales haven't sold enough real estate to say they have. One or two transactions over several years doesn't exactly make them experts in the real esate biz. And apparently Sharie dear wasn't much of an expert on historic preservation either since she was asked to resign from the HAHC commission. Or was that for ethics violations, I forget? No matter. She had to go and your friend MAP decided not to just let her term run out. She was an albatrose around Parker's neck and once the ordinance passed, and Parker didn't need her little minions to support her anymore, she gave the boot to Beale. She should have known she was getting the axe when the City Attorney lectured the entire commission about ethics and it addressed the exact same complaints about the Beales and their questionable practices. I laughed myself silly after Feldman lectured them and David Beale had to decline his speaking opportunity or his little wifey would have to recuse herself from voting. It was priceless - but I digress. My friends are waiting for the excellent offer that one of your friends is going to make for their well maintained, previously well priced (pre-ordinance change) hotcake bungalow that hasn't gotten a contract in 7 months. Please email the offer for their highly desirable property. After all, some family might want a 2/1 bungalow, right? They might even be willing to settle for a full price offer so spread the word that they are willing to forego an offer at 10-20% over list. They are very reasonable folks. One Term Mayor Anyone But Annise Anyone But Ed

Update since the last posting. Email from my friends. It seems we've created quite a domestic dispute. One is more than happy to settle for the 10 to 15% over list offer. However, their spouse is a CPA, number-cruncher type and thinks, based on your exuberance for bungalows like theirs that 20 to perhaps even 25% would be more like it. You know those pencil pushing, bean counter, accounting types. It's always about the dollars and sense, uhhh, I mean cents. I have encouraged them to hold the line at 10 to 15%. They don't want to seem overly greedy but truthfully, if you offer 20% over the list, I secretly think they will get over the appearance of being money-grubbing bungalow owners, selling out to the highest bidder and cash the check anyway. I'll bet you could even convince them to retract their ballot to repeal the district, but keep it quiet. You wouldn't want to have another accusation of buying support for the ordinance. Leave that to Parker. She's good at it. A pro, actually. You couldn't possibly compete with her although we haven't forgotten your threats that those who opposed the ordinance changes for our neighborhood won't be able to get their projects approved. That comment must mean you are either on the HAHC or have exceptional influence in the historic preservation office so you have likely learned MAP's SOP first hand so making promises to gain support for your draconian ordinance likely comes easily for you. My friends are eagerly awaiting their more than full price offer for their little hotcake.

Without going into detail, it isn't a denial of a reasonable coa that folks are waiting for before taking action. Every thing has its time and it isn't time, but its coming unless some sanity surfaces. People are being harmed by the ordinance, that's true but it all has to fall in place. Patience is a virtue in this situation. One Term Mayor Anyone But Annise Anyone But Ed

Just got off the phone with a dear friend who has had their BUNGALOW on the market since the moratorium. Several buyers have bailed or not been willing to make an offer because of the ordinance. Their bungalow is really cute. Definitely a candidate for some kind soul to come along and spend more money than it will be worth once renovated. They read your comments. They would like one of your friends to buy their bungalow for 10-15% over the list price. They would even settle for a buyer like you who offered 20% over the list price. Please make an offer. Since you obviously know that the "market is huge for bungalows" and your and your friends are so desparate for bungalows you are willing to pay any price, they need you to write an offer tomorrow. Please put them out of their misery of rejection by potential buyers who aren't clued in to the extreme value of their property. These buyers crazy realtors don't seem to be able to convince their clients that not only should they not pay less than the list price, they should pay significantly more than the seller is asking because after all, everyone can get a townhome or a new construction period looking home with all the modern ameneties but very few have the honor of buying such a desirable property, particularly at a price far more then the seller's dreamed they can get for it. My friends hotcake property is so cold you could use it as a freezer pack for your beer cooler. You and your friends can email your offer to: info@ResponsibleHistoricPreservation.org. I'm sure those three realtors would be more than happy to submit the offer on your behalf for any bungalow you want to buy, especially since they will make more 10-15% more in commission from you and your friends too. What a deal!

Yes, of course there are some families that can and do raise kids in these small homes. I am one of them. My child was 11 when we bought into the neighborhood, but we were the exception. The fact is that a 2/1 is not what the average family of today is seeking. I too have seen many bungalows. I can't tell you how many open houses I've been to where the couple has recently had a child and are now seeking larger housing. And it isn't limited to the 2/1. Even those who have had modest additions are put on the market when baby two arrives. It is rare that you walk through one of these homes that you see evidence of 2 or 3 or 4 kids past the age of 5 or 6 living in a nearly original footprint home. There is an obvious lack of older children or families larger than 2 kids. I grew up in a family of six. I know what a bedroom filled with bunkbeds and lots of kids looks like. These are starter homes, at best. Even my own family eventually upgraded from a 3/1 1/2 to a 5/4 1/2 as we grew up. Six kids in a three bedroom house was very crowded even in the 70's when people's expectations and volume of material goods was vastly different than today. When I start seeing bedrooms of families with multiple older children (plural) at an open house on a Sunday afternoon, then I'll buy the position that families want these homes. When I talk to the family on my block who live in bungalow with a child (less than 2), they say they are out of room and will probably buy new to get more space, then I will believe the expectation of families today is changing and people are willng to settle for less space to raise their family. The families with multiple small children ALL live in the new construction on my block. Bungalows are perfect for the new family. They just don't meet the needs of MOST families with multiple children who are school age. Its a generalization, not an absolute but we struggled with storage space for my childs entire middle and high school years and most people don't love these bungalows enough to put up with it for even one child, as I did, let alone more than one.

He is fishing, not that it will do him any good. He is scared because he knows we have a plan that involves 4 different types of challenges and that all of his claims of victory are premature and vulnerable. He is hoping he can goad us into revealing something but he has no idea who he is dealing with. We are not like his little clan. We are smart and committed and won't go quietly into the night. He will embarrass himself with a big "Mission Accomplished" banner. There aready is one of those on Harvard. These folks have nothing on old Dubya Bush. But, here we are in 2011, still in the Middle East, still fighting, still haven't gotten Bin Laden. Premature Mission Accomplished claims seems to be the only answer for people who do the wrong thing for the wrong reasons. But, smart people know what the right thing is and more smart people who can be bullied and bought with political favors will do the right thing, not matter who claims Mission Accomplished.

Won't go into much detail on the rest of your post. Those with any knowledge and expertise know you are flat out wrong. No one said renovated houses weren't selling. No one said that no one will renovate and add on to one that needs work. But the buying pool is very small. But again, no point in arguing logic with someone whose emotions color logic and make them illogical. Anyone who uses emotions when it comes to their largest investment is likely to do what you did and pay more than they had too. By all means, please call your investment broker and ask him to buy stocks for you at a price above the share price. We'll probably have to support you in your dodage due to your lack of investment skills because your investsments won't support you in retirement but that is what charity and the government does. They take care of those who can't take care of themselves, including those who couldn't manage their financial futures due to mental illness. Yes, yes, you're right. City Council has decided and we lost. No one cares about the details and lack of demonstrable support. Attoneys have told us we don't have a case and would be throwing our money away. We can't raise the money even if they would take our case. There are no other options to challenge what has happened. Parker and Ed will win re-election easily with no challenges. You are all knowing, all seeing - omnipotent really. Thankfully we have you telling us the real truth and we will go away with our tail tucked between our legs. We give up and you win. Go Celebrate! One Term Mayor Anyone But Annise Anyone But Ed

Like most of these hysterical preservationists, you cannot argue logic and facts with them. They have their fingers stuck in their ears and are screaming "lalalalalalalalala" so they can't hear what the real situation is. They don't beleive that the buying pool for a 2/1 bungalow is very small because even single people and young couples want more space and 21st century ameneties. They don't believe that it is a rare homebuyer who is willing to spend the money, let alone the time and carrying costs, to renovate them to make them comperable to what they could purchase for the same money for a new structure. They don't understand that families are no longer willing to raise their families in teeny tiny homes with virutally no storage or rooms large enough to accomodate their belongings and furnishings. I haven't owned a recent/new construction in 19 years or even lived in one since 1983. You have to really love old homes to live in them and put up with all of their bumps and warts. To own one is a labor of love and those bumps and warts often trump what ever charm and character they have, especially when they can get that charm and character in a newer home without the bumps and warts. The space heater in my living-dining area reads 61 degrees this morning. The central heat is on and so is the space heater. You can practically hang meat in those rooms and they are essentially unuseable when the weather gets cold so I hang out in THE NEW PART of my home, which is insulated and has insulated windows. s3mh and his pals live in a world believing that problems like this don't affect the desirablity of a bungalow and can't understand why everyone isn't willing to deal with those issues with their homes. They see the rare individual who buys a bungalow and renovates as the norm, when they represent the exception. So, confusing them with the fact that renovator/builders also have learned that they have an economic issue on these projects is pointless. One renovator I spoke with said he will never buy another bungalow in an historic district because once he factors in the added carrying costs and expenses of dealing with the HAHC, he ends up losing money on every project he's done. He tried to work with them and didn't use the 90-day waiver option until he got sick of arguing about what he had to do to make them structurally sound and large enough with a sensible floor plan. With no waiver, he won't touch a project in a district now. The hysterical preservations just can process those types of real life examples in their historic brains. They point to the exception and ignore the rule. They use examples like a home in my area where a buyer bought a 1 1/2 story bungalow with 3000 sq ft and spent a whopping $850k for a to the studs renovation and say "see, people love these bungalows and are willing to do the work." They don't understand that this labor of love of old homes is rare and even rarer still for people who have $850k to spend. They don't believe the truth, which is that homebuyer will likely never see much of a return on their investment, if any, because the project was so costly and has to compete with new construction which costs less. 3000 sq ft isn't worth $850k and while it might be some day in the murky future, the fact that it isn't worth that much upon completion will affect their investment forever. They don't understand economics and the industry and instead, they sceam that builders and realtors who point out the realities to them are greedy liars. Time will tell but most rational, reasonable people think builders and realtors actually know their trade and their positions come from experience, not an emotional, irrational longing for times gone by. You can't make a logical argument about something illogical with those who have an emotional way of thinking which prevents their logical thought process. It's impossible! One Term Mayor Anyone But Annise Anyone But Ed

Oh now we get it! You are afraid. Afraid that the homes next to you are not worthy of renovation and you will get new homes built next to you. So, it is all about you! You want to control your neighbors because you want to control what gets built next to you. It has NOTHING TO DO WITH PRESERVATION!! This is an ordinance to control development, period. Finally one of you admit it. Its all about your irrational fears. BTW folks, s3mh continues to use a ridiculous term that has no basis in reality. Block busting is NOT something that is an agenda of any builders and had to do with racisim in its day. No builder in 2011 looks at a peice of property in the Heights and says "gee, if I can buy this property and build new, maybe I'll get the whole block." Doesn't happen. Isn't on their radar. Isn't possible. s3mh continues to use this term to instill fear but it no one with any sense or education on this issue thinks that it is an appropriate use of that term. And builders don't "set up shop" either. But they will build and renovate all around the perimiter of the districts and those areas, which frankly need the kinds of improvements they were responsible for 10-15 years ago in the current districts. Nearby areas will see greater improvement and the dilapadated structures in the districts will remain forever. Time to buy south of 11th-west of Yale, north of 20th-east of Yale, west of Yale-north of 16th and in Sunset Heights. Those will be the up and coming neighborhoods and thanks to MAP, they will NEVER become historic districts. And the Heights East, West and South may go back to being a community of run-down rentals with a few renovated bunglaows interspersed with new homes which may lose value because they are never going to have the bad stuff go away. One Term Mayor Anyone But Annise Anyone But Ed

Someone is going to have to file lawsuits. Generally, there are some cases that allowed municipalities to preserve historic structures BUT the devil is in the details. However, with the way they conducted the Transition, they are in deep doo-doo. The Courts and other regulatory bodies will not be bullied by MAP with threats of withholding needed improvements in Council Districts or be swayed by dangling promises of favorable redistricting as SOME on Council are. For instance, anyone think that it is odd that Parker appointed Ed as Mayor Pro Tem? He doesn't have any experience. He is new on Council, just completing his first year. There were plenty of more qualified members but if Ed caves on the the HPO, the rest will follow so she had to step up the pressure on him. He has already demonstrated and stated that he represents the Mayor, not his constituents. When he met with Resposible Historic Preservation, in response to questions about him representing his constituents, he responded that it is a strong mayoral form of government. Essentially, MAP has his vote on whatever she wants and he represents her, not us. Judges and the other folks that will be looking at this and making decisions could care less. In fact, Houston has a terrible reputation in this state so we will have lots of sympathy if Council does this wrong. We can still try to convince Council but our best chance of getting a fair deal has always been the plans for after the final Council decisions. Those solutions take longer however and people are being harmed in the interim. They screwed up the transition provisions and it will hurt them.

Yank, we are pro-preservation as well. We just are not pro-ordinance. Big difference! We know about the tract issue. It isn't a secret. We are for preservation and historic districts in an open and transparent process that includes clear understanding and overwhelming support. We haven't had anything that resembles that. The vote turn-out was exactly what was expected because of the way it was conducted. If we take the random sampling of numbers of opposition, 75 to 80 percent of our neighbors are NOT in favor of this ordinance. The reason there was not a YES or NO vote is because they all knew their numbers would be terrible so they devised a plan to not demonstrate the support so there could be no argument that the NO's outweighed the YES's. That's wrong and it isn't going to acheive preservation. All it is going to do is result in the 4 phase plan to get justice for the majority who have had their rights usurped by a few. When you do it wrong, it never holds up. One of more of the 4 phases will force the City do it right and may unravel the whole thing. Then MAP and the City itself will have a big black eye for doing it so wrong, so undemocratically. It's a shame it has to happen that way but there is NO WAY WE ARE BACKING DOWN. Our group is determined to see the right thing done. I'll say it again, we want clear understanding and overwhelming support and we will pursue it as long as necessary. People outside of Houston are looking at this process and waiting. Others are ready to come to our aid with the resources we need. As soon as the votes are cast to make these districts remain under the new ordinance without support of the community, it's a whole new ballgame. The Bart Truxillo's can claim they had support but that was for the OLD ordinance (which the Chronicle didn't bother to point out). The support of the new ordinance has never been measured and one way or the other, it will be. And when that happens, and the other things gear up, there won't be quite so much "we won, we won, we won." I suspect the threats and retribution will continue however. If Parker were smart (I think overall she is but she gets bad advice and has let her emotions color her decisions) she would go back to the drawing board on the process before the Council votes on any of this. She will never get another historic district under the provisions for new districts (not what we wanted). She may lose many districts because she conducted the transition so poorly (again, not what we wanted). She may lose all districts if any of the other efforts after the votes prevail (definitely not what we wanted). Everything she fought for over 10 years time is now at risk. She would do better to take this effort from Lovell, who has thoroughly screwed it up, get together with all parties (separately) and try to work out a reasonable, fair process for historic designation district. She has options but, whether it is arrogance or ego or bad advice, she won't. She will continue down this path to what will certainly be a hicky on her time as Mayor, make her look bad (like her comment that she prefers back room deals) and if we are successful, all the districts will go away and have to come back again. Not what we want but it will be the outcome unless some comprimise is reached. Everything they have done, and continue to do undermines them and they just don't get it. Too bad! If it wasn't so serious, it would be comical...like the Keystone Cops of Preservation, right? BTW, I read that the ONE TERM MAYOR, ANYONE BUT ANNISE and ANYONE BUT ED movement has started. If someone knows how to get in touch with those folks, can you post it here? A lot of the people on this forum seem to be anti-Parker.

Since you are so fond of using the term "block busting" inappropriately, perhaps you deserve the term "revitalization racist" or "bungalow bigot" since you, as those who were victims of real "block busting" because they were afraid of minorities moving into the neighborhood, seem to be afraid that undesirables will move into the neighborhood. Many neighborhoods had deed restrictions preventing blacks from buying into the neighborhood, your group wants to prevent those who want new, 21st century homes, you want city deed restrictions to keep them out only instead of doing it at the community level, you want the city to do your dirty work. Its the same kind of person with a mentality they should regulate who comes into their neighborhood and it is shameful.

You can try to paint the people who oppose the ordinance as anti-preservation all you want, it doesn't make it true. It is the only answer any of your ilk have had to the problems pointed out to the community. You did NOTHING about any alternatives and offered no critique of the ordiance - which would have had no prohibitions on anything being regulated if the opposition didn't object to the vague and all encompassing language. You just make up a bunch of crap about builders and realtors and use a term (block-busting) that was never ever about what was built to scare your neighbors. (Block-busting was a term used in regards to racial integration) You promoted a false fear about townhouses, condos and high-rises because you couldn't talk about what the ordinance said because that really would scare people. You have no shame about any of the under-handed dirty tricks used by the proponents and the city. All the Coalition of Whatever cares about it saving every dilapadated, termite infested, blighted victim of urban flight 40 or 50 years ago so you can prevent the improvement of the neighborhood through reasonable modifications to homes still worthy of it or sensible redevelopment of those structures that are not. Don't talk to us about being selfish. Selfish is a tiny group of people thinking they can take away the rights of others through dirty tricks and a mayor who has had to use political strong-arming to get their way. Selfish is people who think they know better what is right for their neighbors than their neighbor knows. Selfish is thinking that historic preservation can be acheived by force. It can't. There isn't a street or block in our neighborhood that looks like 1920. That horse has left the barn and the need for revitalization occured when the Heights was abandoned for larger, more family friendly homes which resulted in a community that comprised too many rental properties and neglected homes and a neighborhood with a reputation for high crime rates. Please be sure to give up your 20th-21st century vehicle and buy a horse and buggy, your air conditioning, and most importantly, your computer so you live in the 1920's which will spare all the rest of us this garbage you espouse on this board. No one here thinks you have anything relevant to add and you continue to prove you have nothing going for you by your constant references to how this is all about builders and realtors. I will repeat, IT IS BETTER TO REMAIN SILENT AND APPEAR IGNORANT THAN TO OPEN YOUR MOUTH AND REMOVE ALL DOUBT! The most hilarious comment by you today is that you brag that paid list for your property in the middle of a housing slump and your friends paid 10-15% over list to buy theirs. Guess you and your friends needed a BETTER REALTOR - hahahahahahahahahahaha! I always thought people paid LESS for property in a buyer's market but then again, it is more than evident that you and your friends are not rocket scientists. Like most people, when I buy a home, I negotiate to get the property for LESS than list. When I negotiate a car, I negotiate to pay less than sticker. When I buy something on Ebay, I never bid the maximum. I am smart enough to know that for things that are purchased through negotiations have an inflated price to accomodate the negotiation process. So, both you and your buddies paid more than market value. I am not sure it is something to brag about because of it proves what I say about remaining silent when you will embarrass yourself if you don't. You really must work on this skill.

All this wild speculation is hilarious. I do live in the Heights and in a bungalow and have a blue sign in my yard. My home has been renovated and expanded, and not with a ridiculous, ugly, poor design concept "camelback." And I protest my value every year and voted against Prop 1, as if that has anything to do with anything. No one has stepped up to run because they had to wait UNTIL JANUARY but your clear lack of knowledge about the politcal process hasn't stopped you from making any other uninformed, absurd statements so feel free to make a few more. My dad always says it is better to remain silent and appear ignorant than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. Your dad should have taught you the same practice. Know all about Penn Central and a whole lot more cases. I'm not going to explain anything here for obvious reasons. It will be much more fun to watch you explode into a pile of dust when the time comes for the last laugh. But you are giong to have to do better than just the Penn Central case if you think that is all there is to it. So, time will tell. The rest of the folks here just need know there are a number of remedies in the works. S3mh, you should simply keep repeating to yourself - they lost, we won, they lost, we won, they lost, we won. I've heard you can actually change brain chemistry if you tell yourself something long enough and often enough. You might actually convince yourself. While you all are telling yourself you won, they lost, we will be continuing our efforts. And enjoying your arrogant boasting for a good giggle. I had a very good one today as we found another "ooops" and it's a doozie! But you are right about one thing, the law of a municipality can be changed by that municipality. We are so glad you understand that part, at least. As much as I've enjoyed this little banter with you, I must return to more productive activities related to the ordinance and the rigged process we were dealt. The rest of the readers/posters can be comforted in the old adage that good things come to those who wait. More to come kiddies, more to come so enjoy the ride!

These folks only care about the structure, not the people living in them. You should have read the blogs following the fire and death of a beloved neighbor. All they could talk about is her "inappropriate" home. It was sick, sick, sick!

Parker wouldn't allow a straight vote or any expression of support because she knew there wasn't enough support to fill a bucket. That was the ONLY reason it wasn't put up for a real vote. Parker should have followed the laws of this state and her own ordinance and the fact that she didn't makes the whole thing vulnerable. But no one cares what you think or how much you strut around the Internet claiming this false victory. In the end, when the fat lady sings, you will have to shut up and listen to the sound of real democracy.

Your clan couldn't have gotten even 5% support in 30 days and thanks to the Mayor's actions in ignoring the ordinance provisions, you got a free pass. That won't hold up however. She had to follow the law and she didn't. Good luck with that. As far as shoot fish in a barrel, it took you YEARS AND YEAR to cheat and lie and harrass your neighbors to get to 51% for a completely different ordinance that didn't have any consequences. The ordinance opposition wasn't willing to stoop to your tactics. They sent 1/4 of the number of flyers your group sent and still managed to get 35 + percent in 30 days. No way you could have acheived those kinds of numbers and everyone knows it so your claims give us all a good chuckle. As far as no opposition for Parker, you keep right on thinking that way. We love that you think those interested in her job don't smell blood in the water. Opposition to Parker is not just here and not just about this issue. Every article in the newspaper has people blogging and posting about how much they regret voting for her. She didn't win by much and her image is suffering because of her arrogance and the bad advice she gets. So, keep up the arrogance about that too. We need a good laugh every day. The realtors have said over and over that they aren't affected by whether a property is not in a historic district although those nice restrictions you want affect the sellers of old homes that need work. No one cares but you so keep on thinking they do. They've expressed concern that the areas surrounding the districts will continue to see improvements while the properties in the district will see much slower growth, which is of course, what you want because you don't have two sticks to rub together so you fear rising property values - essentially what is at issue here for your group, not preservation. So your claims just prove your total lack of understanding of anything related to this ordinance. Again, a good laugh though. Yes yes, we know you think you won, we lost, blah, blah, blah. It will continue to amuse everyone while we move on to the next efforts to get real due process from people who can't be bullied or bought by promises of political favors by Parker or scared off by your little band of hysterical preservationists. We LOVE LOVE LOVE it. Remember, he who laughs last, laughs best.

I forgot to mention that I am sure Council will appreciate the threats you made here. Apparently you think you can prevent people who opposed the ordinance from renovating or adding on to their homes. Council should love that! They also will love that you imply that you are keeping a list of those who opposed to make their lives miserable. I'll be sure to send this to Responsible Historic Presevation so they can let the City Council know about your vendetta mentality.

s3mh - Move on? Didn't you realize the second we saw the flawed, designed to fail transition process, this was Phase 1? No one ever expected that the process which was designed to acheive the results you and your merry band of preservation kooks wanted would be successful. No one! So, we started working on Phase 2. And we acheived far more oppostion that you could support, so your claim that there wasn't overwhelming opposition is laughable. 800 signatures in 30 days was a HUGE success. It was never believable that we could get 51% in 15 days but you never counted on ~35% in 30 days, did you? You had to lie and deceive people just to get 51% to agree to a meaningless restriction. So, take care when you boast about a lack of opposition. You have no idea how much oppostion there really is. As far as it being over, for your involvement, it is. You will no longer be able to rig the process. You will no longer be able to scare people into thinking that this terrible ordinance is their only option. You have no idea who funded the opposition, although we know who funded yours. You have no idea what resources we bring to bear. You have no idea what strength in numbers can accomplish. Our remedies for the Mayor taking our property rights in a rigged process designed to fail are far from over. She has screwed up so much of this that it is vulnerable on many fronts. And she is now vulnerable politically on many issues and so is the ordinance because of her arrogance. She wanted to put all her eggs in one basket when she could have had a win and it would have been over. Now she will have to defend this on so many fronts that she is bound to fail on one of them, and to her detriment. As one Council Member said recently, when you do something the wrong way, it usually doesn't hold up. A large number of Council are disgusted with this whole thing and while the Mayor might have a few of them over a barrel with political strong-arming, she is only good for those promises while she is in office and she has the money to deliver on them, and she doesn't have any money to deliver on them now. No one cares what your little tiny band of hysterical preservationst think or do. Its you who should be worried about what our community will not forgive. And we benefit from your thinking that the opposition was just a few realtors. Keep on thinking that way. We thrive on your understimation of us. You might have won a battle but the war, well that is a different story entirely so we don't care what you remember. You don't have support, never have and in the end, right and the truth will prevail. So keep on boasting and bragging and claiming victory for something that is far from settled. George Dubya was very eager to claim "Mission Accomplished" to his embarrassment and utter failure - so too will be the fate of trying to inflict this on a community that doesn't want it. Mission NOT Accomplished!

SC, you are absolutely dead on about this ordinance and what it means as well as about the city. It was clear on Tuesday night that their intention is to chip away at our property rights. Marlene Gafrick, the Planning Director said that their plan was to "incrementally make the ordinance more restrictive" and that has been the plan all along. Sharie Beale said so in a HAHC meeting two years ago. She also said in an email to keep it quiet because they were still collecting signatures. This is local government over stepping and not caring how they do it. Heights residents have a lot to be worried about.

There is a group of people who are organizing to protest the changes. I will post the information about how to get in touch with this group in a few days. We need help getting the word out to the community, knocking on doors, getting signatures, etc. There is a lot of misinformation coming from a very vocal few people. We intend to get the word out and get out the FACTS, as opposed to hyperbole and scare tactic propoganda and will have the documentation we need. If you want to help, stay tuned and get involved! There is a group of people who are organizing to protest the changes. I will post the information about how to get in touch with this group in a few days. We need help getting the word out to the community, knocking on doors, getting signatures, etc. There is a lot of misinformation coming from a very vocal few people. We intend to get the word out and get out the FACTS, as opposed to hyperbole and scare tactic propoganda and will have the documentation we need. If you want to help, stay tuned and get involved!

Chester, there will be a lot more to come on this subject. This is NOT what property owners agreed to. In fact, there is public information out there that they were pushing changes before the designation was approved. There will be opportunity for the public to speak up about it and I will post it here. They will not be able to sneak these changes in as they did with the last ones.