![Quote](images/misc/quote_icon.png)
Originally Posted by
Urbanized
What I believe is inconsistent is that you previously indicated (without qualification) that you wouldn't have a problem if a project landed on City-owned land, but WOULD have a problem with a land swap. You since refined you position to say that you would only support it if the location were identified in a the ballot/public lobby process, which I read as a backpedal. Then, when it was pointed out that similar transactions have happened previously, you made scale the issue.
Honestly I think your complaint has more to do with thus particular project and the personalities and organizations associated with it.
Bookmarks