What is the point of a conditional use hearing on a project in litigation?

If you insist that the hearing for HG/SNB must proceed, then stop at ownership agenda item, aren't you wasting tax dollars of stenographer, legal, etc.?

How do you as a candidate feel about stopping borough discussions on issues of this nature - when in litigation?

I'm sure this hearing isn't going to be cheap with all of the expected "expert testimony" on this one. With the litigation on public display, one would hope SOMEONE on council would step up and put this darn thing on hold. IF NOT, IS COUNCIL (AND TAXPAYERS) GOING TO BE ON THE HOOK FOR PUSHING THIS THING THROUGH IF HGC LOSES???

I would assume Mr Wagner may say the following:

The point to proceed is we have a lot of free time and this is a volunteer position. If our minister and planning commission representative who is so nice to us - pray for us to move forward as he is the applicant, then we must. That is our duty as leaders of the community...

It is not a waste of tax payers money as the applicant would even kick in the costs if we proceed most likely.. or help with campaign next year perhaps...?

As a candidate, it is our duty to give free housing to the many elderly. We all know that the wonderful baking people and waiting list people get first priority and there is no other place in town, with a safe popular corner such as this, which could open it's doors to the housing demands so swiftly. I do not think we should stop it as all the voters live in these buildings. We would lose that control if we didn't proceed as directed by their landlord!

Here's one for the candidates.....how do you feel about the practice of the current council of changing current zoning law to suit any developer/applicant plan that's submitted, thereby allowing those developers to do what ever they want to do. And then, how good or bad do you think the current zoning laws are in protecting the community and it's neighborhoods from ruin.