So... does tomorrow's agreement scam us?
Upon further review, there sure is a lot of verbiage in the "rescission agreement" when all it SHOULD say, if anything, is that the MOU is null and void, and we're dropping the appeal of the Growth Management Hearing Board.
Instead, there's a whole bunch of back-handed, Stuart-sponsored scammery going on.
The question is this: why?
What does this phrase mean?
“Whereas, in a letter of February 5, 2008 to the Department of Interior, the County notified the Department that the aforementioned Tribal Ordinances are consistent with and based upon the Tribe’s obligations in the 2004 MOU, that such Ordinances establish an irrevocable limited waiver of sovereign immunity by the Tribe in favor of the County for enforcement of the Ordinances, and that the County’s future decisions and actions on matters relating to the proposed trust lands will rely on the Tribe’s promises contained in those Ordinances. . . .”
This seems to me to be quite the scam. And a law school graduate like Steve Stuart should know that.
The question for me is this: why?
WHY does the county have to "rely on the Tribe's promises contained in those Ordinances?"
Seems to me that the MOU is dead as a doornail. Why doesn't the county just hose off the fire and call in the dogs? Seems to me that this isn't what it appears
Why is all this other language necessary?
Why is Stuart pulling this scam on us? I mean, I KNOW that he's owned by casino interests and all that. But does he think we're idiots?
No comments:
Post a Comment