http://bbjtoday.com/blog/fairhaven-highlands-study-draws-public-criticism/4516/ ?source=rss Bellingham\'s source for business news Sun, 07 Mar 2010 01:43:23 +0000 http://bbjtoday.com/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 http://bbjtoday.com/blog/fairhaven-highlands-study-draws-public-criticism/4516/#comment-198 mchiavar Fri, 30 Oct 2009 10:42:50 +0000 http://bbjtoday.com/?p=4516#comment-198 Mr. Tull says that opponents were dissappointed that they weren't supported by the 'environmental information' as much as they wished to be. Perhaps he is referring to the DEIS' new division of two Class I wetlands into 4 separate wetlands. This division by the developers' paid experts conveniently finds that when these wetlands are divided in this new way, Wahlah!, like magic, now there is a lower classification of wetland right where the plans call for roads that would not be allowed if these wetlands had not been divided. This is a transparent piece of trickery that will not stand up in court. I have seen the evidence first hand in the company of one of our states most respected wetlands experts. I believe that Mr. tull is involved in this chicanery up to his eyeballs, but I can't prove it. I can prove that the phony division of the wetlands is just that, phony. Mr. Tull says that opponents were dissappointed that they weren't supported by the 'environmental information' as much as they wished to be. Perhaps he is referring to the DEIS' new division of two Class I wetlands into 4 separate wetlands. This division by the developers' paid experts conveniently finds that when these wetlands are divided in this new way, Wahlah!, like magic, now there is a lower classification of wetland right where the plans call for roads that would not be allowed if these wetlands had not been divided. This is a transparent piece of trickery that will not stand up in court. I have seen the evidence first hand in the company of one of our states most respected wetlands experts. I believe that Mr. tull is involved in this chicanery up to his eyeballs, but I can't prove it. I can prove that the phony division of the wetlands is just that, phony.

]]> http://bbjtoday.com/blog/fairhaven-highlands-study-draws-public-criticism/4516/#comment-92 mchiavar Fri, 30 Oct 2009 03:42:50 +0000 http://bbjtoday.com/?p=4516#comment-92 Mr. Tull says that opponents were dissappointed that they weren't supported by the 'environmental information' as much as they wished to be. Perhaps he is referring to the DEIS' new division of two Class I wetlands into 4 separate wetlands. This division by the developers' paid experts conveniently finds that when these wetlands are divided in this new way, Wahlah!, like magic, now there is a lower classification of wetland right where the plans call for roads that would not be allowed if these wetlands had not been divided. This is a transparent piece of trickery that will not stand up in court. I have seen the evidence first hand in the company of one of our states most respected wetlands experts. I believe that Mr. tull is involved in this chicanery up to his eyeballs, but I can't prove it. I can prove that the phony division of the wetlands is just that, phony. Mr. Tull says that opponents were dissappointed that they weren't supported by the 'environmental information' as much as they wished to be. Perhaps he is referring to the DEIS' new division of two Class I wetlands into 4 separate wetlands. This division by the developers' paid experts conveniently finds that when these wetlands are divided in this new way, Wahlah!, like magic, now there is a lower classification of wetland right where the plans call for roads that would not be allowed if these wetlands had not been divided. This is a transparent piece of trickery that will not stand up in court. I have seen the evidence first hand in the company of one of our states most respected wetlands experts. I believe that Mr. tull is involved in this chicanery up to his eyeballs, but I can't prove it. I can prove that the phony division of the wetlands is just that, phony.

]]> http://bbjtoday.com/blog/fairhaven-highlands-study-draws-public-criticism/4516/#comment-90 frankjamesmd Thu, 29 Oct 2009 18:04:06 +0000 http://bbjtoday.com/?p=4516#comment-90 Thank you BBJ for coving this hearing. The EIS content fall far short of what is required under the law for such a process. The additional taxes that each of us will pay to subsidize this massive project were not mentioned. A study done by Ebin Fodor revealed that we will pay an additional $9-12+ million in taxes to pay for the required infrastructure for this project. Why should the general public be paying for the legitimate costs that Horizon Band and David Edelstein should be paying? Thank you BBJ for coving this hearing. The EIS content fall far short of what is required under the law for such a process. The additional taxes that each of us will pay to subsidize this massive project were not mentioned. A study done by Ebin Fodor revealed that we will pay an additional $9-12+ million in taxes to pay for the required infrastructure for this project. Why should the general public be paying for the legitimate costs that Horizon Band and David Edelstein should be paying?

]]>