Cumberland BC: The Cumberlander Articles Section
Local · 23rd June 2011
June Haner
Sometimes it takes an outsider to point out that the emperor has no clothes. How is it that the noble stated aim in taking a “gadfly” landowner to court – to ensure that civic minded citizens would not be discouraged from entering public life for fear of being maligned or slandered – has devolved into an ugly and personal vendetta that threatens to drive the town of Union Bay over a financial cliff? Indeed, many Union Bay citizens are asking the same questions as did Carol Snaden. Why did this case ever enter our over burdened court system with no input from the 640 household whose residents are paying all the burgeoning legal costs of the plaintiffs? The residents have no idea what other measures were attempted to settle the dispute because all discussions and decisions were made “in camera” and behind closed doors. When people did start to ask questions about the wisdom of court action, monthly public meetings were cancelled pending completion of the legal process.
The landowner who has been taken to court had accused the 8 plaintiffs of lying and acting in “conflict of interest” over various issues and she ridiculed them in her blog. I fail to see a qualitative difference between the insults the accused landowner has used from those being employed by one of the plaintiffs, trustee Alan deJersey. On this site he has recently labelled her a “liar” and a “coward.”
Using the same forum, and immediately following the April 29 election of two new trustees, he referred to the two women as “lying bullies”, “manipulative” and “hypocritical.” Frankly, I have never seen a more glaring example of “the pot calling the kettle black.”
It is no wonder that some who look at the Union Bay fiasco from the outside see the whole shabby affair as junior high school name calling, or worse as a protracted sandbox fight between preschoolers.
Mr. deJersey has stated that he and his fellow plaintiffs are continuing their battle “to protect the integrity of the community”. Peppering one's own residents and co-workers with insults seems to be an odd way of protecting integrity. In truth, there are some important issues involved here but unfortunately it will now take the courts to unbury and expose those issues.
The landowner who has been taken to court had accused the 8 plaintiffs of lying and acting in “conflict of interest” over various issues and she ridiculed them in her blog. I fail to see a qualitative difference between the insults the accused landowner has used from those being employed by one of the plaintiffs, trustee Alan deJersey. On this site he has recently labelled her a “liar” and a “coward.”
Using the same forum, and immediately following the April 29 election of two new trustees, he referred to the two women as “lying bullies”, “manipulative” and “hypocritical.” Frankly, I have never seen a more glaring example of “the pot calling the kettle black.”
It is no wonder that some who look at the Union Bay fiasco from the outside see the whole shabby affair as junior high school name calling, or worse as a protracted sandbox fight between preschoolers.
Mr. deJersey has stated that he and his fellow plaintiffs are continuing their battle “to protect the integrity of the community”. Peppering one's own residents and co-workers with insults seems to be an odd way of protecting integrity. In truth, there are some important issues involved here but unfortunately it will now take the courts to unbury and expose those issues.