Monday, August 18, 2008
Saturday, August 16, 2008
"IN THE KNOW": Why Would The City Withhold a Police Report?: an incident involving Damon Bentley that occurred between January and May 2008 at Utopia Restaurant
"IN THE KNOW": Why Would The City Withhold a Police Report?: an incident involving Damon Bentley that occurred between January and May 2008 at Utopia Restaurant
 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS GREG ABBOTT | |
 |
June 4, 2008 Mr. Joseph Harney Assistant City Attorney City of Corpus Christi P. O. Box 9277 Corpus Christi, Texas 78469-9277 OR2008-07577 Re: Request for a report regarding an incident involving Damon Bentley that occurred between January and May 2008 at Utopia Restaurant, located at 5638 Saratoga Dear Mr. Harney: The Office of the Attorney General has received your request for a ruling and assigned your request ID# 317847. After reviewing your arguments and the submitted information, we have determined that your request does not present a novel or complex issue. Thus, we are addressing your claims in a memorandum opinion. You claim that the submitted information may be withheld from the requestor pursuant to section 552.108(a)(2) of the Government Code. We have considered your arguments and the submitted information and have determined that in accordance with section 552.108(a)(2) you may withhold the submitted information. However, you must release the basic information pursuant to section 552.108(c) of the Government Code. For more information on the cited exception, as well as information on the rights and obligations of governmental bodies and requestors, please refer to open government information contained on the Office of the Attorney General website at www.oag.state.tx.us. You may also contact our Open Government Hotline at 1-877-OPENTEX. Enc: Submitted documents cc: Mr. John Jackson 8100 SPID, #302 Corpus Christi, Texas 78412 (w/o enclosures)
POST OFFICE BOX 12548, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711-2548 TEL: (512) 463-2100 WEB: WWW.OAG.STATE.TX.US |
Thursday, August 07, 2008
If we cant drive our vehicles on the beach we are effectually restricted from that portion regardless of assurances, handshakes or blueprints
When the powers that be were anticipating a "Privatized Beach".......
Posted on August 7, 2008 at 06:51:41 AM by Jaime Kenedeno
When the "powers that be" were anticipating a "Privatized Beach" the Beach in front of the seawall was at least 50 yds wide (probably 75 yds) anyhow it was wider than it has ever been in the last 20 years.
One other anticipatory preparation was the traffic sign which directed traffic towards the jetty only (no right turn or left turn only????). In a nutshell the maintenance on that portion of the right of way (at that time) was designed to create a spacious widened version of beach real estate adjacent to and extended from the seawall flamboyantly in anticipation of a demanding elite influx of human flesh. The maintenance has been once again downgraded so the beach front will recede and disallow vehicle passage as exemplified and used as argument to once again blockade our access to our beach. If we cant drive our vehicles on the beach we are effectually restricted from that portion regardless of assurances, handshakes or blueprints. Mc Cutchon just cut his own throat. He must be seeing dollar signs or has vested interests.
Councilman Michael McCutchon wants to pass the issue to voters, but needs at least four of his fellow council members to agree.
Posted on August 7, 2008 at 06:51:41 AM by Jaime Kenedeno
When the "powers that be" were anticipating a "Privatized Beach" the Beach in front of the seawall was at least 50 yds wide (probably 75 yds) anyhow it was wider than it has ever been in the last 20 years.
One other anticipatory preparation was the traffic sign which directed traffic towards the jetty only (no right turn or left turn only????). In a nutshell the maintenance on that portion of the right of way (at that time) was designed to create a spacious widened version of beach real estate adjacent to and extended from the seawall flamboyantly in anticipation of a demanding elite influx of human flesh. The maintenance has been once again downgraded so the beach front will recede and disallow vehicle passage as exemplified and used as argument to once again blockade our access to our beach. If we cant drive our vehicles on the beach we are effectually restricted from that portion regardless of assurances, handshakes or blueprints. Mc Cutchon just cut his own throat. He must be seeing dollar signs or has vested interests.
Councilman Michael McCutchon wants to pass the issue to voters, but needs at least four of his fellow council members to agree.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)