Letters

Annexation akin to communism

To the editor:

Communism in Europe is now practically gone, but a new communist type government has re-emerged and reared its ugly head in the leadership of Mobile, Alabama.

The Mayor of Mobile, Sam Jones, has appointed himself Lord Mayor. He makes the rules, decides which voters can vote, where they can vote. The mayor conjures up a map of all the West Mobile area, all the commercial stores and businesses that are projected to produce ten million dollars in revenue the first year in West Mobile.

Do the math. The area to be annexed has approximately 4,000 property owners. Only approximately 2,000 owners are legally registered voters. Half of the registered reside in an area of approximately two square miles, 14 streets bounded by Old Shell Road and Cody Road. The residents in this area voted in all the previous elections as a super majority of pro votes. These voters are for annexation.

Therefore (you did the math) the mayor wants these voters only, to vote for annexation. We drew a line in the sand (on the West Mobile area) that only those votes will be allowed to be counted. This area that contains all the goodies, all the rich ripe plums, all of the West Mobile area to be annexed, also contains the super-majority of voters for annexation. This area is labeled Zone A.

Wait a minute! You can’t stop voters from voting. So the mayor conjured up another wild scheme- let them vote somewhere else.

Therefore, he conjured a terrific sleazy scheme. We circled three areas where the anti-voters could vote. Again drawing lines and circles in the sand, he circled on the map Zones B, C, and D. He said the rest of the voters could vote there. (See, I didn’t deprive them from voting.)

This is how the communists do things. The only difference is this is America. We do not imprison people for voting the wrong way.

From reading this letter, doesn’t this election have a dirty, reeking smell to it?

Starting with the Revolutionary War to the present day thousands of American men and women have given their lives to protect the freedoms written in the Constitution of The United States of America. One of those freedoms is listed in The Bill of Rights, the right to vote.

That vote has been denied to the legal registered voters of West Mobile, the area to be annexed by the city.

A large majority of legal resident registered voters cannot vote in Zone A where it counts. The mayor will allow these voters to vote in the zones B, C, and D. These zones carry no weight; they are meaningless.

Who gave the mayor the legal right to turn the West Mobile area into four areas, A, B, C, and D?

Where are the wimpy lawyers of West Mobile? Where is the Commissioner, Mr. Nodine? Do something. You have the power.

Contact the Probate Judge to stop this farce.

The winners in this rigged election are…there are no winners. The losers in this election are…?

All the voters in the area of 14 streets bounded by Old Shell and Cody Roads have sewers. Most of the rest of the proposed annexed areas have no sewers. If the city of Mobile wins annexation in this election, the city of Mobile will replace all the septic tanks in the area with sewers. This is projected to cost as much as $10,000 per lot. I checked with the Department of Water and Sewers of the city of Mobile.

The resident property owners that will have to pay for sewers are mostly very poor people. Many live on meager Social Security Income, many are disabled. Many of the homes are old and need to be repaired. The only savings that many of these property owners have is the small equity that has been accumulated in their property. That equity is about to be wiped out.

To Judge Lon Davis- there is only one West Mobile. Not four separate West Mobiles.

For an honest election, Your Honor should inform the mayor of Mobile that all the votes of all the area should be counted together as West Mobile votes. If this action is undertaken by your department, it will eliminate the problems that will arise after the election. Please don’t be taken in by this cheap magician’s trick of placing honest votes, isolating them into three cages, Zones B, C, and D, that cannot be counted as a level playing field.

Many of the voters voted against annexation in previous elections. The mayor of Mobile will not let these votes be used. He made new rules. This is a violation of The Constitution of the United States.

This election is the most one-sided, crooked, shady, sneaky undertaking that I have seen in my entire 82 years of life. Something has to be done about it. Something will be done about it.

The mayor must be asked point blank. Are the property owners going to be charged for sewers and deconstruction and removal of septic tanks?

He must answer. He cannot evade the question, such as that’s not my department.

J. Foster

Wilmer, Al 36587

Don’t forget Habitat

Dear Sharman:

I read your column in the Aug 29-Sep 11 edition with interest. I noted the DASH project in Hillsdale, but somehow Habitat for Humanity in Mobile County got left out. We are also actively building in that neighborhood. We have 4 new houses under construction and 1 being rehabbed.

We invite you to come and see what we are doing in several neighborhoods around the County – Magnolia Crest in Irvington, Fort Lake Trace in Grand Bay, Cedar Point off DIP south of I-10, some property we are beginning to build on in Citronelle, actually 2 locations for 8 families, and new places to come.

We would love to see some Habitat information in your column as you have space. We are doing great stuff and I would be honored to chat with you about it. Feel free to give me a call. 251-476-7171 Thank you for your time and attention to this matter.

Myra Evans

Resource Development Manager

Habitat for Humanity in Mobile County

Myths of tort reform

To the editor:

A myth, according to our old friend Noah Webster, is “a fiction or half-truth.” Alabama’s 2,000 personal injury trial lawyers have fabricated a fabulous labyrinth of myths about the fight to level civil court playing fields here and elsewhere.

But before Alabama Voters Against Lawsuit Abuse begins to explore and explode these myths, this promise: If anyone can show where AVALA makes any statement that is demonstrably untrue, it will not be repeated.

For many months, I have challenged my old friend Jere Beasley to make the same promise. I challenge him again. But let us not hold our breaths, since this would in effect render the poor man practically mute and certainly unfit to practice his brand of law.

The first myth is that Alabama is no longer part of “tort hell.” It is, because hellhole jurisdiction locations and their subsequent damage to our state’s ability to attract business are solely determined by defense lawyers who work in them. The Montgomery Advertiser pointed this out a few weeks ago.

Corporate counsels report to their CEO’s first-hand knowledge of jurisdictions where justice is hard to find. CEO’s take this into account when looking for states in which to expand. We do not learn of the bad cases they face because most of them settle.

While Alabama is no longer the worst state in the nation for lawsuit abuse, we held that dubious distinction for years. Forbes’s magazine named Alabama the original “tort hell.” We kept that reputation until three tort reform laws were passed in 1999 and a conservative supreme court was elected in 2000.

But every major survey of the worst places in the nation for civil justice continues to include Alabama. Some rank Alabama in the bottom five, none rank us higher than the worst 10. That is why our state has to create exorbitant incentive packages to overcome our reputation and attract industry. Some say we are selling the farm to buy the cattle.

It is a hard, cold fact that Alabama ranks first in direct money payouts such as settlements. We are among the worst in jury consistency. Practically the same set of circumstances can have wildly different outcomes in different Alabama jurisdictions.

Yes, Virginia, we are still a part of tort hell.

The second myth is the image of the corporate counsel as The Fiend Incarnate, willing to trade things like automotive safety for higher profits. Picture a cigar-smoking shyster telling the company president he can increase profits by cutting safety costs and paying a few wrongful death lawsuits.

Personal injury trial lawyers have done a devilishly clever job of selling this image. It is not true. Corporate America knows it is going to get sued and many times unfairly sued. It also knows that in hellhole jurisdictions it is going to lose lawsuits that are not fair and get hit with skyrocket punitive damages that bear little relation to any harm done.

Wal-Mart and Home Depot are sued thousands of times a year, mostly bogus slip-and-fall claims. The automotive industry routinely faces frivolous lawsuits.

These industries have to project a cost for unfair lawsuit losses just like newspapers or other businesses have to figure in bad debts. I heard a corporate counsel for Chrysler speak. He said of all the lies told by the trial lawyers, the one that makes him angriest is that car manufacturers cut safety in favor of profits.

“We drive these cars,” he said. “We take our families in these cars, our sons and daughters drive these cars. This is the worst and meanest lie the trial lawyers tell.”

Cars could be made safe as NASCAR racers, but who could afford them except for personal injury trial lawyers. Ask consumers if they want a car that is crash proof at 100 mph, or one they can afford, and see what they say.

I have learned that the Beasley law firm, which is car manufactures biggest critic, sponsors a racecar. Someone should ask him how much it costs to make a car proof against a 100 mph wreck.

The most ludicrous myth is that AVALA is out to close courthouse doors and destroy the jury system. That is so crazy a charge that I did not think anyone took it seriously until a personal injury trial lawyer friend of mine got in touch to ask me if it were true.

I hate to use logic on the personal injury trial lawyers, who also claim that businesses sue each other more than trial lawyers sue them. If both things are true, why is business trying to close the courthouse doors it uses so often? Duh.

In almost 12 years in this job, I have never heard the slightest whisper that anyone is out to do away with the jury system, and I am not naïve. In Montgomery, naiveté has a half-life of about a nanosecond.

And I am positively sure that national organizations like the American Tort Reform Association have no longing or plan to destroy the jury system. And how do I know that? Because I would have learned something about it from former ATRA vice president, Lissa Astilla. I married her seven years ago.

Skip Tucker

Montgomery

Archives