Strider banned from SPAR building

[Karl_Pilkington]

really?  wow...where can I get a pair of those amazingly insightful assumption identifying goggles that you have?

whether or not I assume his business is legal or not, the point I made was that contacting code enforcement does not constitute tortious interference, there was no backtracking as you say.  But you are the lawyer, if you think what is going on is actionable why don't you offer your legal services to Strider pro bono, afterall aren't you supposed to do pro bono work anyway?  This way you could fulfill your pro bono requirement and stick it to SPAR, kill two birds with one stone.

[fsu813]

Thanks for responding Strider,

One of my questions was answered:

Q-why don't people that don't agree with SPAR form another organization?

A-They don't care enough.

As a comment to your answer, what the heck are they complaining about then? If people are not willing to do something about it, then stop complaining. If there so so many people who disagree with SPAR then forming such and organization wouldn't be difficult. The members of SPAR have earned their spot as the voice of the community through time, money, effort, coordination, etc. Anyone else is welcome to pursue it, noone has.

The question that was not answered is:

Q - Does SPAR support ANY venture or program that lowers property values & desirability?

I beleive the answer is no, so why they would not support rehab/boarding houses is obvious.
Perhaps someone has a different answer.

Also, i can't see how a thrift store on Main Street is a bad thing, again i contend that it has nothing to do with the type of store and everything to do with who owns it and why it is there. I can't say for certain, but it's an educated guess. Perhaps i'm wrong, wouldn't be the first time.

[RiversideLoki]

RAP can now adopt a new slogan "Hey, at least we're not those SPAR guys!"

[fsujax]

It is so funny to read all of this. I live in Springfield and never have any idea that any of this goes on. I guess I am just so focused on my house, yard and block that everything else is a blur. Just thought it was funny and wanted to share from a resident viewpoint. My atttitude who cares who is in charge, just get something done!

[strider]

As a comment to your answer, what the heck are they complaining about then? If people are not willing to do something about it, then stop complaining. If there so so many people who disagree with SPAR then forming such and organization wouldn't be difficult. The members of SPAR have earned their spot as the voice of the community through time, money, effort, coordination, etc. Anyone else is welcome to pursue it, noone has.

The answer to the question was most, not all do not care enough or can make it a high enough prioity. As to why some of us are complaining?  Someone has to or nothing will change.  The members of SPAR Council executive board have not earned the right as the voice of the community, they stole it.  They know it, many of us know it and the rest do not want to believe it. We are pursuing eliminating SPAR Council as being THE voice by pointing out the wrong doings.  We are simply doing our best to make our voice heard as SPAR COuncil will not. They don't like that much, and so they attack us.

The question that was not answered is:

Q - Does SPAR support ANY venture or program that lowers property values & desirability?

I beleive the answer is no, so why they would not support rehab/boarding houses is obvious.
Perhaps someone has a different answer.

It wasn't answered because it is the wrong question.  The question should be: Is there any evidence that the current legal rehab and boarding houses along with any and all legal rental properties is indeed pulling down the values and desirability of the houses in Historic Springfield?

The answer to this question is also no. Would like proof?  Just read the forums, ask reasonable questions and do not take the word of SPAR Council as being gospel.

Also, i can't see how a thrift store on Main Street is a bad thing, again i contend that it has nothing to do with the type of store and everything to do with who owns it and why it is there. I can't say for certain, but it's an educated guess. Perhaps i'm wrong, wouldn't be the first time.

Go read the thread about the thrift store and you will see my version is correct and it is a thrift store period as well as who owns it.  

[Karl_Pilkington]

glad your the lawyer!  can see why we have such a litigious society, reading all that into my words "assuming" this and "implying" that.....  Good stuff thanks!

must not be to busy at 'the firm', can see why you're stirring the pot.

[ChriswUfGator]

really?  wow...where can I get a pair of those amazingly insightful assumption identifying goggles that you have?

whether or not I assume his business is legal or not, the point I made was that contacting code enforcement does not constitute tortious interference, there was no backtracking as you say.  But you are the lawyer, if you think what is going on is actionable why don't you offer your legal services to Strider pro bono, afterall aren't you supposed to do pro bono work anyway?  This way you could fulfill your pro bono requirement and stick it to SPAR, kill two birds with one stone.

No backtracking, eh? So let's go down the history of what you said, shall we...

1st:

uhm..calling code enforcement to report violations of the law is not and will never be tortious interference

2nd:

Your statement rests on the assumption that Strider's rooming houses are illegal. They're not.

yeah, no it doesn't....

And finally:

whether or not I assume his business is legal or not, the point I made was that contacting code enforcement does not constitute tortious interference, there was no backtracking as you say...

So, let's take it step by step. My original comment was that, when someone creates and distributes a list of businesses, the sole purpose of which is for distrubution to a group of people who are then supposed to call and file complaints with zoning or code enforcement en masse, without regard to whether the business is actually doing anything wrong, that amounts to nothing more than harassment or an effort to put them out of business and is most certainly tortious interference.

You then responded to me, trying to backpedal and say you never said Strider's businesses were illegal. Except, as is right above in black and white, you actually did say exactly that.

So I pointed this out, and said your logic only applies if the business being targeted was indeed illegal, e.g. properly subject to action by the departments with which the complaints were filed. You actually backpedaled even further, arguing that there could be potential code violations at legally-operating businesses. But that isn't what's happening here.

SPAR is distributing a list of businesses that people are supposed to call and file complaints about, even when the businesses are actually operating lawfully. This is nothing more than harassment, and will subject SPAR to liability for tortious interference, in the event Strider & Co. have to retain counsel, pay wrongfully assessed fines, or incur any other losses as a result of SPAR's spamming COJ with bogus complaints. If there happen to be one or two random code violations present, that is irrelevant as SPAR wouldn't know that, and those certainly weren't the basis of their complaints. The basis of the flood of complaints is SPAR's distribution of a list of businesses they don't like, while instructing people to spam COJ with complaints about them.

There is normally a recognized indemnity for people who report crimes to the police, or call code enforcement, etc. However, in this case, it's an orchestrated campaign involving a list of businesses distributed to dozens of people, and inclusion on the list appears to be based on nothing more than whether SPAR likes you, and not on any actual legal grounds for making a complaint. Given the circumstances, if his businesses are indeed on their literal $h!t-list, they are subjecting themselves to liability.

Meanwhile, you backpedaled plenty in this thread, first implying SPAR's actions are OK because Strider's businesses are illegal, then switching to arguing it's OK because there may be code violations present even at a legal business, and then finally packpedaling and claiming you said none of the above. Except it's all there in black and white, rather than arguing with me and trying to re-write history, just re-read your own comments.

[ChriswUfGator]

glad your the lawyer!  can see why we have such a litigious society, reading all that into my words "assuming" this and "implying" that.....  Good stuff thanks!

must not be to busy at 'the firm', can see why you're stirring the pot.

In referring to Strider's businesses, you said that distributing a list of businesses you don't like and telling a bunch of people to file complaints about those businesses isn't tortious interference, because it's OK to complain about someone breaking the law, did you not? And given that Strider's boarding houses were the subject of the conversation, you really don't see how your comments say his businesses are illegal?

I then said that assumes Strider's businesses are illegal, and you said "no it doesn't". Except it does, even according to your own words. Look, you said what you said, man, it's all above in black and white. Why you keep arguing this point is beyond me, you weren't even subtle about it.

[Karl_Pilkington]

you said that distributing a list of businesses you don't like and telling a bunch of people to file complaints about those businesses isn't tortious interference, because it's OK to complain about someone breaking the law

yeah I said all that, its right there in black and white except that without those special lawyer goggles none of us can see it, but thanks for pointing it out.

lawyers....jeesh.

[Karl_Pilkington]

code enforcement doesn't issue citations just because, there has to be some sort of violation, your post implies that SPAR has some magical power that they can cast a spell over code enforcement to do their bidding.  If there are no violations there are no violations and the business isn't going to get cited for anything, what am I missing?  and that is contradictory how? 

[Karl_Pilkington]

You don't need 'lawyer goggles' to see that your point is asinine.

Just less beer, and a smokeless environment, and nobody piping in "HELL yeah!" at the next table.

sounds to me like an ad hominem attack, have you given up or something?

[Karl_Pilkington]

au contraire senior dare, I most certainly can maintain both its my perogative as a homo sapien.

[ChriswUfGator]

you said that distributing a list of businesses you don't like and telling a bunch of people to file complaints about those businesses isn't tortious interference, because it's OK to complain about someone breaking the law

yeah I said all that, its right there in black and white except that without those special lawyer goggles none of us can see it, but thanks for pointing it out.

Maybe someone else can chime in to convince you (if that's even possible), but it really doesn't take any special goggles. You said what you said, and you weren't real subtle about it...

And I still think the whole idea of distributing a list of places you don't like and giving it to a bunch of people with instructions to try and shut them down by spamming COJ with complaints, is !@#$%&* APPALLING! I can't believe you don't have a problem with that kind of negative and conniving activity. Not to mention that it is inhibiting economic growth, and represents the direct opposite of everything SPAR allegedly stands for.

It's clear from Despain's reaction to his question that Joe's places are on the list, even though he actually operates completely legally. They just don't happen to like him. So apparently, their vetting process for determining which businesses are illegal or not is really nothing more than whether or not they like you.

And how does this group get off with an orchestrated campaign to do harm to others in the first place? This is supposed to be a historical preservation group, and instead they're engaged in little more than politics, backroom dealings, and smear campaigns. I've never seen a similar organization that represents so little of the population of the area in which it operates, nor one which has managed to create so many enemies. Actions like this don't bother you on some ethical level?

[Karl_Pilkington]

exactly why you should take this case PRO BONO, what are you waiting for!  its time for ACTION, dammit.

let me tell you, if they effed with me like that it would be ON LIKE DONKEY KONG!

[Karl_Pilkington]

Dude you awesomeness knows no bounds!

now you're catching on!