Councilman Attorney Baron’s Special City Council Executive Session
Tuesday August 31, 2010
“Discussion concerning possible amendments to Interlocal Easement Agreement between League City and MB Harbour, LTD” (Council Member Baron)
Also Discussions with City Attorney regarding pending and threatened or contemplated litigation. (Council Member Baron)
OK - So now Attorney Baron wants modify the easement agreement rather than rescinding.
What possible amendments could you have with an easement agreement on property the city can not prove it owns? The only amendment I can see is a termination date of yesterday rather than 96 years in the future.
Mr. Baron how about sharing your ideas with the citizens.
Please tell us what you are thinking.
As far as council's decision to release the title opinion, I have heard Helfand is NOT going to approve the release.
Here's my prediction: MB Harbor will not sue the city over the 99 year lease. It had little value. Suit will likely be over the developer's agreement that was approved by council in February 2006 under the supervision of City Attorney Polanco.
Scott Freudenburg - Glen Cove HOA Presidents Speaks:
http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/local&id=7632459
6 comments:
What? They already voted 4-3 to rescind. Can it really be brought back up?
Neil is just being silly now. Fundamentally, this is really pretty simple - you can't sell (or lease) what you don't own and the city very clearly did not own the property subject to this lease agreement. (See Dunlap title opinion.)
It was bad enough when the previous city government stumbled into this invalid agreement, but to come back and now take deliberate action effectively reasserting the city's right to engage in agreements regarding this property (such as by voting to add amendments to the agreement) in the face of proof that the city has no such right rises to new levels of foolishness.
Frankly, I don't care much one way or the other that Neil is doing this. Ultimately it will be up to the court to dictate a legal solution to the city and this latest move will just add more grievances to the case.
Jeff Hagen
Additional reporting in the Galveston Daily News this past Sunday and Wednesday.
Jeff
Don't forget August 28 GDN
http://galvestondailynews.com/story/172438
2nd Request -
Mr. Baron how about sharing your ideas with the citizens.
Please tell us what you are thinking.
“I welcome anyone in League City to call me on my personal cell phone at 281-910-0108 or contact me at my city email address at discuss our city” - Neil Baron quote from city website)
neil.baron@leaguecity.com
Any "amendment" to contract agreement would require the other party (Scotto) to sign off to, or the whole thing becomes null and void.
But it's not Neil's diversionary folly that deserves attention. It's Helfand. The city has an obligation to it's people, as represented by elected council. If council tells Helfand what to do, he'd better do it, right or wrong. In this case, the tail wags the dog. Helfand should be summarily fired.
Post a Comment