Letter to the Editor: ABR’s Arrogance and Collusion Unconscionable

» noleta res on 08.09.12 @ 11:32 PM

The vehemence with which Ms Evans and others attack the ABR members who abstained from voting is rather puzzling and to my mind totally out of proportion with what they did.
Those members were uncomfortable casting a vote because of their personal beliefs, so they abstained. Doing so lacked courage, in my opinion; they should have been able to vote upon the merits or flaws of the project. They weren’t, however and received reprimands. That seems sufficient to me.

It doesn’t make sense to accuse them of horrible crimes and want to banish them forever from public service. They are volunteers, after all, trying to keep our city’s character reflected well in the buildings of our community. People who criticize them with such anger may have other agendas fueling their objections.

Ms Evans? Are you an architect with sufficient training to qualify for the ABR? Would you volunteer your time to be in the hot seat? If so, here’s your chance.

» AN50 on 08.10.12 @ 11:00 AM

Noleta, I do have the qualifications and have been asked to serve on such boards. But as you well know I am very opinionated and generally an intellectual narcissist who insists it’s my way or the highway. Such an attitude has no place on a board that is to professionally and objectively assess projects based on compliance with government rules and statutes. I have declined many times those offers because of my lack of and unwillingness to be “objective”. I want what I think is the right way, community be damned. This may be attractive to like mined council members or other staffers but I guaranty you, you would find it quite objectionable.

What I find utterly incomprehensible is that elected representatives just go around those of us who have practiced our own conscientious screening and found rabid un-objective staffers anyway. Shame on them. They should be reprimanded severely for injecting personal desires into their jobs, then their appointees should all be fired. Nothing will send a message louder and stronger that this kind of rank, small minded, gross politicking is not tolerated here.

» Art on 08.10.12 @ 12:59 PM

If these ABR members had voted up or down based upon architectural design issues,some of the comments recently written in support of their actions might have been OK.

But they didn’t vote based on technical architectural standards. They refused to vote in order to penalize the business based on religious/political ideas. That has no place in our government at any level. And the fact that they didn’t see that point renders them at best questionably qualified for their ABR positions.

There seem to be many people in town that think homosexual marriages are good and correct while there are many other people that think the traditional definition of marriage is correct. Both are opinions and beliefs. The expression of both ideas is protected by the First Amendment. To deny a business owner the right to his business based solely upon his religious/political beliefs is diametrically opposed to what the First Amendment is all about.

Too many people seem to believe in free speech only as long as your expression of any idea agrees with their position on that idea. If they don’t agree, then they attempt to restrain your ability to express your views. This is happening more and more throughout our country in so many areas.

Sad times for our “land of the free.”

» steve on 08.10.12 @ 07:25 PM

With all ABR board members there is State mandatory “ethics/brown act” work shops that they have to go through, with mandatory update refresher “ethics/brown act” work shops that they also have to go through every few years.  All these ABR board members are with out excuses.