Comments
22
Joined
Jun 6, 2009
Badges
Livin-n-Walnut
Recent Posts
New law raises concerns about open enrollment at local school d...
Ott is a clueless idiot. She thinks she's not losing students to Walnut Valley now that they have reached the transfer cap. She's really delusional. More kids from Rowland Unified are using adddresses from people who live in the WVUSD and getting in that way. I mean a lot. They're doing it with their fake rental/lease agreements. Parents are pretty clever when their backs are against the wall when it comes to having to send their kids to Nogales. Groups of parents even pitch in for apartments in WVUSD and split the rent and then sublease to offset their loses.Still cheaper than private school. Where there's a will there's a way. At one time Rowland and Hacienda La Puente had a high number decent schools. Not so much anymore and that's why parents are high tailing it to different districts because of failures like Ott and Hsu. She couldn't get a parcel tax passed because a large chunk of Walnut residents in her district voted no. She is a failure like many of her schools in the Rowland District. Transfer away because Ott can't stop you. DOC lives on! (Nov 3, 2009 | post #25)
HIGH SCHOOLS: Rowland is getting its kicks
Also your own school doesn't give em proper respect. The last few seasons the principal has been whinning that Rowland needs ..and I quote "relief" from the San Antonio/Miramonte league and wants to move down to the Valle Vista. They actually got their request and will probably move down next season. The final decision will come on 10/22 in LB. So if Rowland fans are looking for respect maybe it should look at its own school's administration first. None the less I have a feeling Rowland will win over Walnut on friday unless Walnut decides to step it up. Not show up play the way they have the last two Fridays either. (Oct 13, 2009 | post #2)
Walnut citizens holding firm against NFL stadium
Oh brother, this comment just reeks of BS. Right your in laws live in Walnut and lament its snobbery. Also you're gonna have to suffer the indignty of moving here when they croak. Well then why don't they just leave if they don't like it here? The money they'd make from their house would assure them the ability to purchase a home anywhere in SoCal. Why would anyone want to live somewhere they don't like? Because your statement is just a bunch of bull..that's why. Again I challenge all you derelicts to come to Walnut October 10th @ Suzzane Park from 10-6 and see and meet its residents first hand. No doubt the Pro and Anti stadium people will have booths there again handing out free shirts like last year. Get a new one to replace the chicken wing stained one you no doubt are sporting right now. Why not Spamming Mike C. Come out to Walnut. Suction your massive rump off your computer chair, anchor down your flailing man booobs, catch the bus or borrow your parent's car and view the so called " snobbery " first hand. You'll even get a free shirt...maybe two so your mom can sew them together so you can wear it proudly. I know none of you will as it would prove your convoluted views of Walnut and its citizens wrong. You'll just continue to be the sad bunch of misinformed troglodytes you are. (Sep 27, 2009 | post #113)
First off its apparent many of you have never taken a constitutional law class or any sort of government class. Even if the vast majority of people want the stadium, this citizens group has a right to be heard about there concerns no mater how small, selfish or insigniificant you think they are. That's the reason there are Constitutions/cour ts and such. To prevent the rights of few not to be trampled or bulldozed by the many. If majority ruled there would be no need for a US Constitution and Al Gore would have been President. So they are exercising their rights to be heard. You don't like it.... well tough. Until the final court or an agreement is reached...you have no choice but to deal with it. Its not going away. You're unintelligent banter and nonsensical spin isn't going to change that. Contrary to what you guys believe they are not asking for huge cash settlements or a stake in the stadium. If it doesn't get settled in private it will go to court. Period...so deal with it. And Lim can do what he pleases this is America and he voted against the settlement and isn't bound by its terms. I guess some of you are to stupid to figure that out.. (Sep 25, 2009 | post #28)
Walnut to get $9 million, other concessions to drop NFL stadium...
If you read the settlement linked in the article you will clearly see under the "Reimbursemen t of Walnut Fees" it clearly states Industry will pay Walnut all their attorney fees and consulting fees at $725,000. So the taxpayers lose nothing. I know a lot of you guys won't understand that to many of Walnut residents it had nothing to do with money. I think the settlement alieved a lot of fears they had wit the stadium. Now Industry diverting traffic through to Diamond Bar and Rowland Heights. The Stadium can't be used with loud ampilfied noise past 10:00 PM and will be monitored for sound on Industry's tab. These were not guarantees before and now they are in a binding legal settlement. No going back on them. I'm happy with the settlement and the $350,00 -$500,000/year is an extra treat as I see it. But all could go away depending on what happens to the citizens lawsuit. If their lawsuit makes it to court and win an new EIR report any settlements would be null and void...It could happen..they are determined.. (Sep 23, 2009 | post #54)
Talks between NFL stadium developer and Walnut citizens broken ...
Nope that's where you are wrong. They don't want any piece of the pie..they just don't want the stadium built period. Like I said in one of my earlier comments days ago that the Citizens Group would not settle. I can't believe any of the pro stadium people even believed they would. It will go to Sacramento to the Cal Senate and from there it will a long projected court battle. That's why environmental groups wanted them to settle so they would be able to stay out of the fight. Looks like that isn't gonna happen now. Also get ready for a flood of lawsuits when they pass the environmental exemption, by other developers wanting to build for the sake of jobs. Roski's law will be their precedence. (Sep 23, 2009 | post #7)
Official says an agreement "in principal" has been reached for ...
Well if you're tired of hearing people complain about traffic my guess is you don't own a car and drive, or have a chaffuer, or work within walking/biking distance from home. Maybe you are part of the small percentage that uses public transportation. I don't know since anyone/everyone who drives complains about traffic. "how hard is that" Extending the gold line would probably solve some complaints about traffic, but the litany of problems that will spring from that extention like , property rights, train noise, eminent domain..etc...isn' t as easy fix like you think or hope. Besides souithern Californians love their cars and getting them to take PT has been a excericise in futilty for government officials since the 50's. I doubt a football stadium would change that now. (Sep 21, 2009 | post #85)
Official says an agreement "in principal" has been reached for ...
Blocking streets in Walnut and DB isn't a feasible idea as Grand Ave is a major thoroughfare for both cities. Walnut isn't a gated community and even with traffic and noise concerns I never professed it to be. Walnut is a bedroom community and large traffic jams is something residents will not be use to. However Walnut could use tactics to scare traffic in other directions. Sobriety checkpoints within Walnut's city limits..Not only are they annoying and time consuming , but most drivers, drunk or sober, try to avoid them at all costs. Also the old cameras installed at interesections trick would also work. Especially along Grand/Temple/Valle y BL/Ave....Not would it only prevent people from blocking intersections, making illegal turns, and what not, but also make Walnut a hefty profit in fines. I read somewhere that the one at Amar and Grand is one of the most profitable in LA county. Speed traps also but I doubt traffic would get up above 20 MPH on clogged streets. Then again since neither DB or Walnut have police departments of their own and the LA County Sheriffs will be busy with gameday mayhem, it might not work. But as a resident and taxpayer I do disagree with blocking streets. I get upset I need a permit to park on my own street. I'm still skeptical about this supposed settlement of all parties especially the "in principal"... . (Sep 21, 2009 | post #79)
Bill to fast-track Industry NFL stadium pulled
Well Spammer Mike, I can't say it's a race issue. I'm not Asian so feeling like I'm being pushed into having the stadium built in my neighborhood because of race really doesn't resonate with me. In fact, race shouldn't be an issue as many of the stadium supports want to make it...I honestly believe Roski, Mr Perez, and all the stadium advocates really thought DB and Walnut residents were going to welcome their stadium with open arms. If you watch stadium protest or have ever been to one, you'll see there are white, Hispanics as well as Asian both for and against the stadium.. As far as the signs on the front lawns..your assumption that houses who sport pro stadium signs are subject to vandalism are just plain false..While there were a few isolated incidents of signs being torn down and red circles with lines painted through them and red paint being spilt on driveways..many homes in Walnut sport the pro stadium signs with no affect to them or their property...That's COI/Majestic propoganda feed on by people like you... Maybe if you can peel yourself away from you computer for several hours...you should come to the Walnut Family Festival on October 10th at Suzanne Park where there will be both pro stadium and ant stadium booths like last year and you'll see that all these reports of widespread violence to supports/non supporters spammed by COI, Majestic and yes spammer Mike, by you are really false... Seriously I challenge anyone who's for and against the stadium to come out to the Family Festival and meet the people of Walnut for and against this project and maybe all your false ideas/impressions of Walnut and their residents will be dispelled... I'm probably asking too much so I guess keep spamming and believe what you want to read and believe...i live it...so I no longer feel the need to defend it..let the courts take care of that.... (Sep 14, 2009 | post #74)
Bill to fast-track Industry NFL stadium pulled
I don't think Walnut will settle unless its a huge payout..just don't see it happening. The senate has more sense than the assembly in not passing a prescedant setting case law. No matter how carefully they try and word it. Had it passed, immediately it will be used as case law for oil company's to start off shore oil drilling because it will create jobs. It will allow the building of massive private resorts around the state's national parks because it will create jobs. You get the idea. I feel Walnut will take its chance in the courts. Whether Walnut settles or not, if the senate doesn't pass the environmental exemptions law..there's still the case involving the citizen's groups. They will not settle, I guarantee that. The only way the stadium can start being built right away, is the senate to pass the exemtion...Walnut settlement or not. Will that happen? I don't know but it gives the environmental groups time to amass their army to lobby against it and subsequently fight the law in court if it passes. I predict a mountain of lawsuits either way. Winners..lawyers.. losers everyone else involved. (Sep 13, 2009 | post #52)
Industry NFL stadium plan clears a Sacramento hurdle
If this passes the CA Senate today, next will be a litany of lawsuits to the courts challenging the new law...No doubt. You stadium backers thought Walnut residents were tyrants with their so called "Mayberry " attitudes...wait till COI/Majestic has to deal with the evironmentalists and their gang of lawyers...They know how to find the right judges to stay the law until it makes its way through the courts..maybe to the Califoria Supreme Court and beyond...Walnut's lawsuit will be small potatoes compared to that....Also this doesn't exempt Walnut from filing additional lawsuits to recoup costs that the stadium will impose on the city of Walnut..They just have to go a different route from the EIR angle..and I'm sure they will. (Sep 11, 2009 | post #8)
Board of Supervisors vote to oppose relaxing of environmental l...
Spammer Mike this is your wishful thinking..Most traffic will be entering and exiting the stadium on Grand Ave from the 60, 57 and 10 Fwys. All Fwys either go through Diamond Bar from the 60 or Walnut from the 10 or 57 off Temple from Pomona. Through or along.. RESIDENTIAL neighborhoods. I can tell you living right off Grand that there is now way it can handle that amount of cars even on a Sunday. Also you forget to mention that the stadium isn't just being used on Sunday's but also during concerts, boat/rv/monster truck shows or whatever else they plan to exploit it for more profits... So spammer Mike you are WRONG when you spam and spin all traffic needs is proper managment. Streets need to be widened, off ramps need to be built and alternate routes need to be made for traffic to be manageable. Proper management of cars..you really are clueless...or stupid. Since you spend every waking hour spamming these blogs, I assume you don't drive. But if you did and were able to heave your 500 lb carcus in your mom's car, try driving up and down Grand during high traffic and my guess your idea of traffic management will be shot to hell, much like you ever getting a date. Keep it up Spamming Mike...there's more to memorizing and believing false reports. (Sep 10, 2009 | post #35)
Roski seeks relaxing of environmental laws for NFL stadium project
Wow the hatred of Walnut citizens seem to have hit a new high..especially from Spammer Mike C. COI/Majestic may own/lease the property but that doesn't give them the right to build anything they want without regards to their neighbors. Same thing applies to all of us including Mike C who has to get permission from his parents to do any major work on his basement dwelling. Many of you were certain the citizen's lawsuit would be thrown outin July..and it wasn't. Let Walnut have their day in court, and if they lose, well then Roski/COI and all of its lemmings will be proven correct. Maybe the lawsuits will be thrown out eventually, maybe the stadium will be forced to comply with a new EIR or maybe Walnut will sell out and get their swim stadium and road extensions in the end. It wouldn't suprise me as City of Industry has built a swim stadium before to compensate an irate neighbor. I want to see the process play out without help from crocked politicians and misinformed socially retarded maladjusted blog spammers. (Sep 9, 2009 | post #108)
California Senate approves Bob Huff bill on public school choice
Wow its about time. Too bad the article didn't make clear it was in fact the Ca Assembly that allowed this law to sunset in July in the first place. I feel DOC is a great thing to allow parents and their kids the choice of attending schools outside of their failing districts. Also maybe those districts will start getting their acts together and make QUALITY education a top priority instead of whinning that WVUSD is stealing their kids..I can't understand why Democrats would oppose the bill in the first place since many of the kids that transfer are from Democratic areas.Being a Democrat, I scratch my head in amazement. Anyway the Gov says he'll sign it, so its as good as done. (Sep 9, 2009 | post #1)
Board of Supervisors vote to oppose relaxing of environmental l...
Wow "throws out any or current existing lawsuits"..th at's a pretty bold precedence if they do pass it in any future lawsuits. Ironically it will end up in court itself.. I wonder just how much pull the BOS have with California legislatures on this issue..Guess we'll see in the next few days...Definitely dangerous ground since a football stadium isn't a life and death matter to vacate environmental laws for. I say let the current lawsuits play out and the side with the best arguments will prevail. Also I'm glad to see MikeC taking the "Majestic " moniker to heart even though he's being facetious..at least you're owning up to it. (Sep 9, 2009 | post #5)
Q & A with Livin-n-Walnut
Hometown:
Walnut, Ca
Looking for more people on Topix? Browse the Family Album and see who's saying what!|
Reach local customers. Engage a specific demographic. Maximize business-to-business opportunities. Topix can deliver your message.
|
Copyright ©2009 Topix LLC
