Half Moon Bay to fight judgment of nearly $37 million

SFGate.com-San Francisco Chronicle ^ | 12-19-2007 | AP

[Navy Patriot]

(12-19) 05:46 PST Half Moon Bay, Calif. (AP) --

Officials in Half Moon Bay will fight a court ruling that would have the city pay a judgment of nearly $37 million.

The City Council voted unanimously Tuesday night to hire a San Francisco law firm to appeal a ruling by a federal judge ordering the city to pay $36.8 million to Palo Alto-based developer Charles Keenan.

The judgment is nearly four times the city's annual budget. City council members said in a joint statement the order threatens the "very existence of our city government."

The ruling against Half Moon Bay involves a dispute over the purchase of coastal property in 1993 by Keenan.

Keenan had intended on building a subdivsion, but was blocked when it was determined the property was a protected wetlands area.

He sued, successfully arguing that drainage work by the city had created the wetlands.

[Squantos]

Yep ...... a given........yet a shame.

Stay safe !

[KC Burke]

Subsiquent to my post to you, I had an e-mail exchange with one of my best friends who has lived there for about twenty years. His acessement of the political climate has been similar to yours, but he does add that the current city council is a vast improvement over what they have had in the past.

His feeling is that they are paying for the “sins of the fathers” and that the envirnmental excess and anti-property rights procedures are now so ingrained and formally fixed that it will take decades to correct from the problems.

[Navy Patriot]

Your friend is correct, I tried to abbreviate the length of my post, and did not point out that several councils and mayors have come and gone in the 40 year period that I roughly chronicled.

Regarding: environmental excess and anti-property rights procedures are now so ingrained and formally fixed that it will take decades to correct

Again, accurate, and the reason these sneaky back door environazi bushwhackers are so dangerous and vile. The damage to the citizens (screw the environment) is so great, costly, and permanent that the only cure is to repeal, in it's entirety the act and the EPA.

[Navy Patriot]

Also, it is interesting to note, that the current mayor and city council, while they may be an improvement, refused to negotiate with the property owner after he had won the judgment. Not an indication that they are willing to examine the strong possibility that the previous administrations were incompetent, unethical or even criminal in their actions.

Reasonable officeholders or environazi accessories after the fact?