Telling The Truth

From the very beginning, I have been hoping that the opponents of Measure V would challenge the charge I’ve been making that high-density condominium projects downtown will have a very negative impact on home prices.

Up until Glenn Lambdin’s lawsuit, no one did. Even when someone wrote a letter to the Editor attacking my first column, she did not dispute my core argument regarding the negative market impact of high-density development. She tacitly conceded I was correct. Glenn Lambdin, however, took me on.

What is most gratifying for me is to see just how powerful the opponents are that I’m facing. What I’m referring to are the “false and misleading” accounts of the recent trial printed in the Pasadena Star News and the Sierra Madre Weekly. You must have a lot of power and money to get newspaper reporters to lie for you, even if they are lies of omission.

Here is what happened at the trial of Glenn Lambdin’s lawsuit. I know. I was there.

First, it must be pointed out that Glenn Lambdin sued to have NINE sentences stricken from our arguments. When the Judge began the trial, she informed both parties that she would hear arguments on only two. There was nothing to dispute in the other seven. They were neither false nor misleading. Three of those seven sentences, I might add, are charges about the impact of high-density condominium projects on neighboring home values.

When Mr. Lambdin’s attorney attempted to open an argument on those seven sentences, the Judge cut him short. She told him he was wasting the Court’s time, and she pointed out that the Measure V opponents used a style of language similar to ours. His argument was absurd.

We lost the argument for only ONE sentence, which was in our rebuttal, not in our main Arguments for Measure V - “The cost of elections on development projects can be passed onto developers and not be borne by the taxpayers.” Why did we lose? Because the City of Sierra Madre does not currently have an ordinance enabling it to pass on election costs to developers, so the sentence was stricken due to the use of the present tense verb “can.” Had we used the future tense verb “will,” the sentence would have been allowed. (By law, the Judge cannot change the wording, only strike the sentence or allow it.)

Two things need to be pointed out here. First, other communities with similar provisions as Measure V have enacted ordinances that pass on election costs onto developers. Second, Measure V provides for votes on development projects only at regularly scheduled city elections, every two years. No special elections are allowed.

I personally believe the primary purpose of Glenn Lambdin’s lawsuit was to discredit the charge I‘ve been making that high-density condominium projects downtown will severely undermine home values in Sierra Madre. No one can directly refute my position since there are no reputable experts or reliable data to support their argument.

So the only weapons they have to fight with are lies and deceit. Glenn Lambdin, the Pasadena Star News and the Sierra Madre Weekly have just given you a perfect example of that.