Jump to content
Paulding.com
Sign in to follow this  
Coppertop's Pop

The BOC voted to file a Declaratory Judgement Lawsuit against the Airport Authority

Recommended Posts

http://www.youtube.com/attribution_link?a=jppZfbrxDwY&u=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DDmJngarnRrk&feature=em-upload_owner

 

The BOC voted to file a Declaratory Judgement Lawsuit against the Airport Authority to determine if the AA had the authority to file the 139 Application WITHOUT the BOC approval! Go get 'em, boys – well done!! And you can't help but notice the woman who served Commissioners Crowe, Collett and Pownall with papers as soon as they came back in from Closed Session. Apparently, they were served with something... perhaps an invitation to the county party for voting to sue the AA?! Stay tuned for more info on the elusive woman and her mysterious papers..

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so the question is- what was the BOC served with? A lawsuit alleging contract interference or breach of contract perhaps?

 

My understanding is that it was complaint that was served on Mr. Collett, Mr. Pownell and Mr. Crowe concerning a town hall type meeting that Mr. Collett had last month.

It is my understanding that complaint alleges that Mr. Collett did not give the proper amount of notice, 24 hrs, about this meeting.

Of course social media had postings and re-postings about the meeting, for weeks before the meeting, I think even on here.

I personally think that having these type of meetings can only help serve our county and ourselves.

I guess since we have these town hall type meetings at least 3-4 times a year and they have been being held for years, Mr. Collett should have known the rules.

What's that you say?

My mistake, I guess we haven't been having these town hall type meetings on any regular basis, or at all, for in several years.

I guess that will teach those elected officials to try and listen to the people who live in this county!

 

Anyway, that is my understanding of the situation, of course I could be wrong.

Edited by stradial
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Watch the video, the BOC was not served just three commissioners. I find a few things odd, and wish this all would be over with the division it has caused in the community.

 

David Austin even commented prior to executive session two or three lawyers in the audience being paid $400-500 per hour.

 

Umm, who is dragging out a couple of legal issues going on two years?? Get it over with David, go to court and not drag it out.

 

Another thing. Due to the fact the PCAA and IBA insists their meetings be at the BOC meeting room due to security concerns, yet in the video you witness a woman quickly approaching and handing over papers to three of the commissioners at the bench. Where was any security?

Edited by rockster
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A judge will surely find the Airport Authority filed the 139 Application WITHOUT the BOC approval and the public vote from the BOC was officially opposed to commercialization. I think David Austin goofed up legally, and his supporters don't have the deep pockets that Delta, the City of Atlanta and the commercialization opponents have. This might drag on for another 20 years and then I'll be outta here and won't have to worry about it. I love it. I should have been a politician.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

My understanding is that it was complaint that was served on Mr. Collett, Mr. Pownell and Mr. Crowe concerning a town hall type meeting that Mr. Collett had last month.

It is my understanding that complaint alleges that Mr. Collett did not give the proper amount of notice, 24 hrs, about this meeting.

Of course social media had postings and re-postings about the meeting, for weeks before the meeting, I think even on here.

I personally think that having these type of meetings can only help serve our county and ourselves.

I guess since we have these town hall type meetings at least 3-4 times a year and they have been being held for years, Mr. Collett should have known the rules.

What's that you say?

My mistake, I guess we haven't been having these town hall type meetings on any regular basis, or at all, for in several years.

I guess that will teach those elected officials to try and listen to the people who live in this county!

 

Anyway, that is my understanding of the situation, of course I could be wrong.

I think Town Hall meetings are a wonderful things and I would imagine since they were served, a trip to the court house may reveal the exact details.....Failing to give prior notice seems to be more of an Ethics violation and I am surprised that is handled in that matter, seems odd and why would the other commissioners be involved?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Town Hall meetings are a wonderful things and I would imagine since they were served, a trip to the court house may reveal the exact details.....Failing to give prior notice seems to be more of an Ethics violation and I am surprised that is handled in that matter, seems odd and why would the other commissioners be involved?

 

I have no clue as to the answers to your questions.

But I think it was about an ethics violation.

I think it is obvious as to why it was handled in that way and why the 3 commissioners who were handed the papers, were handed them in that setting.

ETA, the only other commissioner at this time is Mr. Austin and if he needed to be served, I presume he was...off camera and not in public.

I just wish that all the JR High crap would stop, on all sides.

Edited by stradial
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please define "all"

 

ETA, these links may be helpful to you with future questions

 

http://www.merriam-webster.com/

 

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us

 

 

 

Full Definition of ALL

1
a : the whole amount, quantity, or extent of <needed all the courage they had> <sat up all night>
b : as much as possible <spoke in all seriousness>
2
: every member or individual component of <all men will go> <all five children were present>
3
: the whole number or sum of <all the angles of a triangle are equal to two right angles>
4
: every <all manner of hardship>
5
: any whatever <beyond all doubt>
6
: nothing but : only:
a : completely taken up with, given to, or absorbed by <became all attention>
b : having or seeming to have (some physical feature) in conspicuous excess or prominence <alllegs>
c : paying full attention with <all ears>
7
dial : used up : entirely consumed —used especially of food and drink
8
: being more than one person or thing <who all is coming>
all the
: as much of … as : as much of a … as <all the home I ever had>
Edited by stradial

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ETA, these links may be helpful to you with future questions

 

http://www.merriam-webster.com/

 

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us

 

 

 

Full Definition of ALL

 

1

a : the whole amount, quantity, or extent of <needed all the courage they had> <sat up all night>

 

b : as much as possible <spoke in all seriousness>

 

 

2

: every member or individual component of <all men will go> <all five children were present>

 

 

3

: the whole number or sum of <all the angles of a triangle are equal to two right angles>

 

 

4

: every <all manner of hardship>

 

 

5

: any whatever <beyond all doubt>

 

 

6

: nothing but : only:

 

a : completely taken up with, given to, or absorbed by <became all attention>

 

b : having or seeming to have (some physical feature) in conspicuous excess or prominence <alllegs>

 

c : paying full attention with <all ears>

 

 

7

dial : used up : entirely consumed —used especially of food and drink

 

 

8

: being more than one person or thing <who all is coming>

all the

 

 

: as much of … as : as much of a … as <all the home I ever had>

 

Glad to see you would like the plaintiffs to drop their lawsuits against the county. Especially since some of them don't know who's paying for their lawyers.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad to see you would like the plaintiffs to drop their lawsuits against the county. Especially since some of them don't know who's paying for their lawyers.

 

People have the right to sue.

Who pays the plaintiffs' lawyers isn't any of my business.

The fact that my county is delaying the suit and costing me money, is my business.

Go to court, get it over with and let's move on.

 

It amazes me that when we are discussing the safety of the US and it's citizens against a deadly threat, everyone starts worrying about "collateral damage".

What about the "collateral damage" to this county's taxpayers?

The lawsuit isn't going away, get into court, get it adjudicated.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad to see you would like the plaintiffs to drop their lawsuits against the county. Especially since some of them don't know who's paying for their lawyers.

IMO I doubt the plaintiff's are going to back down. I've said it before, why are certain folks in the county keep delaying a day in court. Take it to court, and be done with it. Folks will have to respect the decision.

 

As far is who is paying for their lawyers, who knows. But I damn sure believe I saw the writing on the wall a couple of months ago who is behind it. BTW, I assume you know the PCAA is getting help from an outside source for certain legal fees

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's put it this way. Who would have to pay the most money if the airport goes commercial? Delta and Atlanta Hartsfield. Why? Because of airspace. Plain and simple. All those planes you see in the sky? Yup.

 

But it's our right to claim our airspace, you know, if we want.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You said you wished "all the JR high crap would stop"

 

I asked you to define "all" to which you gave me links to the definition and posted a definition you found which stated "the whole amount, quantity or extent."

 

When I basically agree with you and say I'm glad to see you want the plaintiffs to drop their lawsuits you are quick to basically say no their lawsuits are ok...it's the other JR high crap you want stopped. In other words you don't want "all" of them stopped. You only want those you disagree with stopped.

 

Personally, I don't think this is JR. High crap. This is clearly post graduate level "crap"

Edited by efhutton
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You said you wished "all the JR high crap would stop"

 

I asked you to define "all" to which you gave me links to the definition and posted a definition you found which stated "the whole amount, quantity or extent."

 

When I basically agree with you and say I'm glad to see you want the plaintiffs to drop their lawsuits you are quick to basically say no their lawsuits are ok...it's the other JR high crap you want stopped. In other words you don't want "all" of them stopped. You only want those you disagree with stopped.

 

Personally, I don't think this is JR. High crap. This is clearly post graduate level "crap"

 

I'm surprised someone as psychic as you would stay in Paulding after winning the big lottery.

You have no clue what I am for and what I am against.

Even when I write it down for you, you still don't get it.

 

Please put me on ignore as I choose not to deal with people that can't read and comprehend what they read.

In case you missed it, just to make sure you get it, you're a moron.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I'm surprised someone as psychic as you would stay in Paulding after winning the big lottery.

You have no clue what I am for and what I am against.

Even when I write it down for you, you still don't get it.

 

Please put me on ignore as I choose not to deal with people that can't read and comprehend what they read.

In case you missed it, just to make sure you get it, you're a moron.

 

I'm really not sure as to your reasoning for calling him a "moron". He is being polite to you and appears to be just trying to understand what you are saying.

 

I mean in the second sentence above you say "you have no clue what I am for and what I am against" and then in the very next sentence you say "even when I write it down for you, you still don't get it." Which is it? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I'm really not sure as to your reasoning for calling him a "moron". He is being polite to you and appears to be just trying to understand what you are saying.

 

I mean in the second sentence above you say "you have no clue what I am for and what I am against" and then in the very next sentence you say "even when I write it down for you, you still don't get it." Which is it? :)

 

First off, he asks me to define all.

He is playing games and I am sick of people playing games.

I said what I meant.

Then he (I guess it is a he since you say it is) says that the only JR High crap I want stopped is what I disagree with.

"You only want those you disagree with stopped."

I personally do not think the lawsuit is JR High crap.

You might could say it was wrong or misguided or that you (you in general, not personally) disagree with it, but it's not JR High crap.

 

I no longer have the patience to deal with people that are either refuse to listen with an open mind about what I say or are too stupid to understand it.

Perhaps I was wrong to call him a moron, but don't play games with me, just come out and ask me what you want to ask me, I will be honest and tell you.

 

My post, with my answers to BB's question.

 

People have the right to sue.

That is just the facts, people have that right.

Who pays the plaintiffs' lawyers isn't any of my business.

That is another fact. It may be interesting to know, but come on, we all know.

(ohhhh, just for the record, if it Delta, then the county of Paulding has not done it's citizens a favor by picking a fight with a company that probably employs as many people as there are in this county, not a smart business move, there may have been a better way to handle that)

The fact that my county is delaying the suit and costing me money, is my business.

Go to court, get it over with and let's move on.

I'm not sure what else to add to this, the lawsuit isn't going to be dropped, so quit delaying it and get it over with.

It amazes me that when we are discussing the safety of the US and it's citizens against a deadly threat, everyone starts worrying about "collateral damage".

What about the "collateral damage" to this county's taxpayers?

The lawsuit isn't going away, get into court, get it adjudicated

Here I am just repeating myself, so I have said it twice.

 

 

I am a go by the gut person and with perhaps the exception of the ex , my gut has a good track record.

I have met and spent a little time with Mr. Swafford, Mr. Carmichael, Mr. Collett and Mr. Crowe.

I have spent more one on one time with either Mr. Swafford or Mr. Carmichael than the time I have spent with Mr. Collett and Mr. Crowe put together. I have always said that I knew Mr. Pownell from when our kids were in band together and we developed a friendship at that time.

My take on these people is that they all are decent people at heart and they all want what they think is best for Paulding county.

They just disagree with what that may be.

Mr. Swafford - Very nice man, I found him to be very honest with the questions I asked him, I think he trying to fill to many shoes and some of those shoes absolutely do not fit him. I think he would admit that, at least he did to me. That does not make him a bad person.

Mr. Carmichael - Very nice man, a man of passion, a man of principles. A very sincere man and a man who believes that what he is trying to do for this county is the right thing for the county.

Mr. Collett (remember, I have never really sat down and talked with him) - A nice man, seems to understand that businesses need sewage to move here. A man who believes that what he is trying to do for this county is the right thing for the county.

Mr. Crowe (remember, I have never really sat down and talked with him) - A nice man. A man who believes that what he is trying to do for this county is the right thing for the county.

Mr. Pownell - I won't go into all the reasons why, but I can say that I know him to be a good man, a man that helps others (without expectation of reward or being recognized for it). A man who believes that what he is trying to do for this county is the right thing for the county.

 

Now being a nice guy, who believes that what he is trying to do for this county is the right thing for the county, doesn't mean that you will make a good or effective county commissioner.

But it does mean that you can be for or against for something without being a crook and/or a bad person.

 

The county has mishandled this airport thing from the get go, I don't think anyone would disagree with that.

Was that done to be underhanded, maybe, maybe not, I don't know.

But that is in the past, we are where we are now.

We are pretty much stuck in limbo until all these lawsuits get settled and if the people funding the lawsuits are who people think are funding the lawsuits, then Paulding county will run out of money for lawyers, before the other side will.

So lets get the lawsuits resolved and move on with whatever we need to do to make our airport a good and profitable airport.

 

I am not for rehashing how the mule got in the ditch, my question now is, how do we get the mule out of the ditch.

 

Edited to add some left out words that really needed to be added to make the sentence make sense

Edited by stradial
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty simple to resolve, after two years you would think that David would insist that the pending cases be heard in the Superior Court of Paulding County.

Time to let the Courts rule, And begin the healing process!!!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The two law suits that Austin is "stalling" are the untra vires case that says the IBA over reached it's power by financing the airport. The second one has to do with the 2 day secret retreat in Douglasville where they "discussed" the commercialization of the airport.

 

Now everyone that supports the commercialization of airport thinks not posting a notice on the door 24 hours in advance of the meeting is a ethics violation that should be punished to the full extent of the law. Tar and feather him and run them out of the county!! And let's not forget the theatrics of delivering the complaint. Yes, that's quite immature. Since at least one of the post commissioners knew this was going to happen, I have a hard time with Mr. Austin's fake "surprise".

Like stradial said, this was the FIRST time I can remember a town hall meeting taking place in any Post, lesson learned, take the punishment if it warrants and move on. This will not stop our commissioners from having town hall meetings to keep the public informed of the goings on in the county and an opportunity to voice their opinions on what the think needs to be addressed.

 

I'm of the opinion that the courts should decide if the IBA did over reach it's authority and every single person that was present at those "secret" meetings should face the same punishment as they expect Commissioner Collett to face. It's basically the same violation, except Commissioner Collett did not attempt to keep his meeting secret. There weren't even any minutes from that two day retreat for 6 months. They magically showed up in December of 2013.

 

Why is counsel for the PCAA stalling? You screw up, you let the proper authorities decide if there was a violation and you move on. Why aren't those lawsuits going forward? What are they afraid of?

Edited by tundra
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I sincerely hope that the law suit filed will bring to a head all law suits that pertain to the open meeting laws that are presently pending by the Paulding six plaintiffs and has been held up since December 2014

 

I hope that all the law suits will now receive a speedy hearing and I sure hope that the plaintiffs in the most recent case will do the necessary discovery and hear that case ASAP

 

Since the County is having to foot the entire bill on Declaratory Judgement Lawsuit against the Airport Authority vs the Board of Commissioners maybe David will give the okay to hear this case promptly.

 

MY MY what a tangled web we weave when at first we try to deceive!!!!!!! You would think that David would learn from prior mistakes. Can't blame these on Delta or the City of Atlanta. These are home grown, Lets hear the cases that the citizens have filed, ALL OF THEM!!!!!!!! Before Christmas!!!!!

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was also just reminded of the Reservoir announcement...........the big meeting at the Government Complex. Was there an agenda posted 24 hours in advance, did anyone see one? Were there minutes taken? You know what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

 

Why wasn't the special called meeting recorded? The ordinance reads "meetings", not scheduled meetings, not meetings the chairman chooses, it says "meetings".

 

Should we start filing ethics complaints for every little thing these commissioners have done over the past 7 years? Really? If that's what it takes, then let's go for it.

 

Talk about frivolous!!!

Edited by tundra
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the lawsuit over the town hall meeting, the airport supporters are now on the slippery slope, going from desperate to ASININE.

 

as·i·nine
ˈasəˌnīn/
  1. extremely stupid or foolish.
    "Lydia ignored his asinine remark"

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no reason to ignore you. You are the one getting flustered. Feel.free to place me on ignore as you think I'm a "moron"

 

Deleted post.

I was apparently incorrect in my post.

Edited by stradial

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish to apologize to efhutton for calling him a moron.

That was out of line and wrong.

Thanks for your apology. I appreciate it. It says a lot about you as a person to do so. I have no hard feelings at all. This is a chat board, you don't know me and I don't know you, sometimes emotions can get the best of us. I know they have for me on an occasion or two.

 

Thanks again. God Bless and be sure to give thanks for living in the best country in the world...The United States of America.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where can this new Declaratory Judgement Lawsuit be found?

 

I haven't found the .pdf file as of yet, the Board voted in a special session to file this Declaratory Judgement Lawsuit, The video link is below. . I suspect the attorneys will have a .pdf for review soon.

 

 

 

http://www.savepauldingco.com/blog/resources/test-2/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...