[Foxworthy5]

What can one do when a municipality fails to enforce an agreement that was reached and enacted by a previous administration? Can a city "back track" on it's word without a very good reason?

[ERISAjunkie]

What do you mean "agreement?" Oral promises by officials are just that- they're not binding. The written agreement would be subject to its terms and the kind of agreement your're speaking about.

[Foxworthy5]

I'm not an attorney so "agreement" my not be the proper term. Let's put it this way. A plat with certain conditions was voted on, approved, and fully documented by a previous city council. The municipality since that approval had acted in word and deed that they approved. Nothing has changed to circumvent this approved plat. It was well known that the current city administration has not liked the arrangement by the previous council. After a criminal act precipitated this situation the current administration has totally failed to enforce the agreement (or what ever you want to call it). They have basically stepped on these citizens like a bunch of ants. How can you have continuity in government when this is allowed to happen? Would most citizens call this "good government"? I think not.

[flintysooner]

Originally Posted by Foxworthy5

What can one do when a municipality fails to enforce an agreement that was reached and enacted by a previous administration? Can a city "back track" on it's word without a very good reason?

Depends on the actual facts of course but making agreements with municipalities can be very risky.

For instance an agreement that provides for payment of funds has to be approved every year. So there is great risk beyond a year for the party expecting to be paid.

The news services have lots of stories about property owners battling with planning commissions and city councils over zoning changes.

It is rather difficult and expensive to fight and very often futile; so, probably better to try and find a more expedient compromise.

[Foxworthy5]

I'm afraid your correct. Unfortunately there is no compromise with this city. We have this very well documented yet there seems to be no way to have it enforced except to sue. The city knows that a small group of folks would not have the money to purse such. There's something wrong with our justice system when the rich get justice and the rest of us don't. What this really boils down to is the principals of good government.

[flintysooner]

Originally Posted by Foxworthy5

What this really boils down to is the principals of good government.

Actually it is just the political process which mirrors human life.

[Foxworthy5]

Good point. So what I believe that we can safely say is that in most cases the further we are up on the economic ladder the more justice we get. Conversely, I assume that means the lower income segments of our society need not apply. Is this really what our society and sense of justice has become.... desensitized to the wrongs of our society which effect the less fortunate of us?
We run around the world assailing the virtues of democracy and justice. Based on what I'm learning, in this case, we better turn inward and reexamine ourselves and the system for it certainly seems to have it's lost it's way. Am I the only one who feels that justice shouldn't be based on one's economic status? I guess I'll have to throw out all that I learned in school 45 years ago.

[Foxworthy5]

Judging from the posts (or lack thereof) it is obvious that interest in this subject is lacking and that municipal governments can trounce all over their citizens any time. As long as they are not affecting me then it's some one else's problem. The problem with this mentality is if sometime your faced with a similar situation who's going to support you? So much for "GOOD" government. What my neighbors and I are facing should be of concern to everyone since most of us live in a municipal environment.

[Rickd203]

The people in this country have lost the will to stand together to demand and fight for justice. The government is allowed to violate agreements, laws and even the constitution itself with nothing more than a few whimpers of protest. Those few that are willing to stand and fight are easily killed of locked away forever. The government can label anyone a terrorist and deny them their right to trial. Welcome to Amerika!

[Foxworthy5]

Your quite correct. 20 years ago we accused the Soviet Union of following it's citizens and closely monitoring them. Sometimes they came up missing. Now we don't have much room to talk. Americans are too comfortable in their own skin and their excesses. If government runs over one of it's citizen(s) and if it doesn't affect them, they fail to submit their displeasure at the ballot box. Many simply fail to vote. And voting is no good unless you have good candidates to vote for.
It seems to take an attorney to do anything. Attorney's cost money. We have class oriented society in which justice is handed out based on one's economic status.
The case that my neighbors and me have against our municipality appears to be airtight. We did briefly have attorney, evolved but he proved to expensive for a long term sueit which this could have turned out to be. He wrote a letter to the city attorney. We have engineer memo's, construction drawings, minutes of city council and planning commission meeting. Not only do we have multiple examples of proof that the former city administration abided by the agreement in word and deed. There's other dirty little tricks this administration and contractor working together have pulled. I don't have the time or energy to get into the details, I know one thing, I don't want anyone telling me about "GOOD" government.