[Mleeja]

Originally Posted by Bogie Shooter

Do ya think...........................

[tommy steam]

Originally Posted by manaboutown

As usual it is all about the money, i.e. out of whose pocket will it come?

Hopefully the cretins who vandalized the property by cutting down the trees will be identified, tried and convicted. Perhaps restitution can be had through a civil lawsuit so that those who did the deed pay the price.

Call me cynical, but the tree cutting could not have been accomplished by any one person without some witness observation or knowledge precedent or subsequent by others.

BTW, who would benefit from the cutting through view enhancement or other outcome?

Put a big fat reward for anyone with information , no questions asked . Maybe one of the workers who was in on it might come forward.

[DonH57]

Originally Posted by naneiben

I found this article mystifying. The "investigation" seems to be moving at a snail's pace. And what's with the two of the four homes "believed to be for sale." Either they are or they are not. Just the noise inherent in cutting these mature trees would certainly lead to neighbors asking questions. Something sounds fishy, and I hope folks living in that CDD don't end up paying.

So no one heard or seen anything while all this was done? Sounds like it was done by the same entity that formed the crop circles.

[Mleeja]

Couple of more post and we will hit 20 pages! The trees will grow back before we are done here. Kind of makes you miss talking about the Morse Ave. bridge...

[Barefoot]

Originally Posted by tommy steam

Put a big fat reward for anyone with information , no questions asked . Maybe one of the workers who was in on it might come forward.

An interesting suggestion.

[Bonanza]

Originally Posted by Warren Kiefer

You totally missed the point !! No one is accusing Janet Tutt of doing anything wrong. Her possible conflict of interest regarding all issues involving the Residents and the Developer is easily apparentHer possible conflict of interest re. Her employment can easily be controlled by the Developer, yet we residents directly pay her for her services. A person that pays the salary usually has control of the hiring and firing of an individual. The board that has control of Janet Tutt, is an elected body, BUT THE ONLY LANDOWNER THAT CASTS SUCH VOTES IS THE DEVELOPER HIMSELF. I cannot imagine anyone who knows the inner workings of the VCCDD not seeing the possible conflict of interest.

I was not aware that we, the residents, pay Janet Tutt's salary, and frankly, I find this very upsetting. In the real world, the fiduciary of an "employee" belongs to the person who is paying the salary. Period! So if this isn't a conflict of interest, what is it? Are we, all 110,000+ residents, drinking the Kool-Aid?

[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by Bonanza

I was not aware that we, the residents, pay Janet Tutt's salary, and frankly, I find this very upsetting. In the real world, the fiduciary of an "employee" belongs to the person who is paying the salary. Period! So if this isn't a conflict of interest, what is it? Are we, all 110,000+ residents, drinking the Kool-Aid?

I suggest going to a meeting where how a CDD is run is explained and not taking an explanation from someone who posts on this forum.

How can it be a conflict of interest if the person who manages the business of a CDD doesn't KNOW who cut down the trees? She wasn't there. I wasn't there. You weren't there. We are all pretty sure who dunnit...but proof is another matter.

. The CDD common grounds and preserves are enjoyed by all of us. Some more than others. Lovely views if you live on them.

I don't understand the combative stance against the developers.

[virgind]

By paying for the trees to be replaced is the district saying we did it.If I had to pay that and was not the guilty party I would want to find out did and have them pay. Kind of suspicious .

[bargee]

We now have people calling for an end to these postings.I would think that is exactly what the people involved in this illegal act were hoping for.Drag something out long enough and everyone will tire of hearing about it.

[Cedwards38]

Originally Posted by tommy steam

Put a big fat reward for anyone with information , no questions asked . Maybe one of the workers who was in on it might come forward.

Yeah, we could start a bidding war between the VCDD offering a reward and the jerks who initiated this who would try to buy their silence! Honestly, I bet that has already happened.

[Mleeja]

Originally Posted by bargee

We now have people calling for an end to these postings.I would think that is exactly what the people involved in this illegal act were hoping for.Drag something out long enough and everyone will tire of hearing about it.

The only problem is no one is offering anything new. What is being posted on page 19 is the same thing posted on page 2. Post something new or original, or at least take the time to read what others have posted.....

[marianne237]

would have been cheaper in the long run to just have the moss removed ... than you could have seen the view (IMHO)

[Bogie Shooter]

Originally Posted by Mleeja

Couple of more post and we will hit 20 pages! The trees will grow back before we are done here. Kind of makes you miss talking about the Morse Ave. bridge...

Its Morse Blvd.

[Bogie Shooter]

Originally Posted by graciegirl

I suggest going to a meeting where how a CDD is run is explained and not taking an explanation from someone who posts on this forum.

How can it be a conflict of interest if the person who manages the business of a CDD doesn't KNOW who cut down the trees? She wasn't there. I wasn't there. You weren't there. We are all pretty sure who dunnit...but proof is another matter.

. The CDD common grounds and preserves are enjoyed by all of us. Some more than others. Lovely views if you live on them.

I don't understand the combative stance against the developers.

You mean, this is the first you noticed from this poster?

[Bogie Shooter]

Originally Posted by virgind

By paying for the trees to be replaced is the district saying we did it.If I had to pay that and was not the guilty party I would want to find out did and have them pay. Kind of suspicious .

What makes you think the district is not trying to find out who did it?