Adams criticizes court ruling on Glendora redevelopment
Join the discussion below, or Read more at San Bernardino County Sun.
#1 Sep 12, 2010
Anthony Adams, he of "no new taxes " fame is now offering us legal opinion. Is this the same A.A. that cannot pass the "bar" exam? What of the Atlas Pac, A.A.?You know, the ruse of the check of the supposed illegal signatures on the recall A.A. petitions. Now you may say you have never been recalled as well as being able to say that you were not voted out of the "Central Committee." You remember the arrangement that was made to allow you to withdraw as chairman instead of being voted out. Sound familiar?
#2 Sep 13, 2010
Anthony was lining up his politicial favors and friends when he backed Glendor in their "City of Bell" attack on the good people of California, in favor of Glendora politicial allies and money doners.
In the end Anthony Adams lost and so did Glendora, once for bad press in the newspapers but they spent $800,000 dollars to make a WRONG a RIGT in Califonria's Supreme Court system, they lost their alos.
#3 Sep 14, 2010
Anthony Adams has been shown once again why his a crack pot, who was backed by special interest money all along!
So long Anthony!!!
#4 Sep 17, 2010
Look who is in the drivers seat on this issue, and it's not Anthony Adams nor the City of Glendora, California.
But id you ever had a chance to watch or attend one of these City Council meetings, you would be suprised to learn Glendora is doing or has done nothing wrong?
If that not more baloney!
#5 Sep 18, 2010
Petitioning for Review in the Supreme Court
Q: When will the petition for review be decided?
A: Once it receives a petition for review, the court has at least 60 days in which to make its decision. It assigns the case to legal staff to draft a conference memorandum, which summarizes the case facts, outlines the issues, and makes a recommendation to the court whether the case presents sufficiently important issues for review.
A decision to review is made at the court’s weekly conference—at which over 250 petitions are usually considered—if at least four justices vote to accept a particular case for review.
#7 Sep 24, 2010
Parties and Attorneys
LOS ANGELES, COUNTY OF v. GLENDORA REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Case Number S184829 Date Description Notes
07/26/2010 Petition for review filed Defendant and Appellant: Glendora Redevelopment Project
Defendant and Appellant: City Council of the City of Glendora.
Defendant and Appellant: City of Glendora
Attorney: Dean Alan Bochner
07/27/2010 Record requested
07/28/2010 Received Court of Appeal record one file folder/briefs
09/22/2010 Time extended to grant or deny review The time for granting or denying review in the above-entitled matter is hereby extended to and including October 22, 2010, or the date upon which review is either granted or denied.
#8 Oct 14, 2010
Anthony Adams LOST "big time" and so did the entire Glendora, California City Council, City Managers (2).
#9 Dec 29, 2011
Gov Jerry Brown deserves lots of credit for leading on this. He brought the issue to everyone's attention, forced it through the legislature, and now the state is less socialist.
The RDAs are independent little governments - funded with eminent domain abuse and slices of new tax money - accountable to almost nobody. As the other guy says, these are effective developer bailouts.
The state budget battle was in voter minds, where RDA interests were known mostly to those in the inner-circles. What takes the cake is RDA siphoning off tax money to spend on lobbying! Jerry Brown has untangled the mess; he will be judged on how long this lasts.
It's interesting flashreport.org is down. I'm interested in what those Republican-Communists have to say about this. They've been battling to silence the supporters of Communist Redevelopment Agencies among them, which seems to be most of those guys.
#10 Dec 21, 2012
This is what happens to BAD cities who try and steal from the tax payers of California.
The state Department of Finance has demanded in recent weeks that 19 Orange County cities and the county itself turn over a combined $263 million in unused funds previously earmarked for low- and moderate-income housing.
This is what happens when your sheep DIPPED WITH THE ADAMS bull.
Add your comments below
|Court considers constitutionality of Ohio execu...||Feb '17||CodeTalker||4|
|Sixth Circuit Court: Police Can Shoot Dogs For ...||Feb '17||wolfman||4|
|Court upholds judge's order blocking Ohio execu...||Jan '17||Innocence Project||4|
|Appeals court weighs Ohio law shielding lethal ...||Dec '16||Hang Em High||4|
|Dearborn Anti-Islam Protesters' Free Speech Rig... (Nov '15)||Oct '16||Hoochie hibbabba||4|
|Appeals court: Ohio elections chief wrongly pur... (Sep '16)||Sep '16||BabyDoll||7|
|Michigan straight-party voting ban won't take e... (Sep '16)||Sep '16||WeTheSheeple||5|
Find what you want!
Search Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals Forum Now
Copyright © 2017 Topix LLC