Restaurant, food and dining news
Lopez et al v. Castle Lake Homes Corp - Case 15-1-1129
The Final Approval Hearing is still pending but the proposed order granting preliminary approval of the stipulated class action suit against Castle Lake Homes Corp, Masal Partners Ltd and Amak Partners LP is now published on the Cobb County Superior Court site.
The Pleadings and exhibits run 52 pages and were filed 8/22/17.
Members of the class are current and former tenants who paid Castle Lake for water and sewer charges and those who paid any fines to Castle Lake.
A 'Settlement Fund' of $125,000 will be provided by the Defendants to the Plaintiff's lawyers to be held in escrow pending approval of claims.
Plaintiff lawyer's costs and assorted fees are the responsibility of the Defendants.
The recently published documents are to large to publish here but the filing and other court documents are available at the Superior Court Site
Here is a sample of the latest documents.
If you were (or are now) a tenants of CLMHP during the covered dates you should contact the Carroll Law Firm at their below address. If you are in contact with others who may be covered, please forward the information about the coming settlement to them so that they can put in their claims.
The very nice engine on display in the Civil War and Railroad Museum in Kennesaw has only 2 original pieces of the locomotive from the Great Locomotive Chase. Those are 2 large heavy pieces of the under carriage, the rest of the engine is the result of very many restorations over the years.
It is a very nice and impressive engine, but it bears very little likeness to the actual engine from the chase.
Here is a photo FYI:
This 1864 photograph made in Atlanta by George Barnard shows an engine thought by many to be the General. (From: The Photographic History of the Civil War: in Ten Volumes, vo. 8, 1911, p. 278. Online at Internet Archive. (http://railga.com/ondispl/kennesawloco.html)
David Blinkhorn, Candidate Kennesaw City Council Post 5
1) Should the city enact 'term limits' for all elective offices? If so how would configure them?
I am a firm believer in our political process. All citizens are given the opportunity to elect who they want as their representative. Representatives should be held accountable to the communities they represent. If the voters decide the representative is doing a good job, then the representative should remain in office. If not, then the voters have the opportunity to elect someone else. Enacting term limits does not enhance the process nor encourage accountability.
2) Should City taxpayer funds continue to support the Museum and The Gardens, keeping in mind that neither has ever, nor will ever, generate any worthwhile funds by themselves? If you favor continued support, at what level?
Museums, public gardens, parks, and city events are important parts of our community that may or may not generate significant income for Kennesaw. When promoting Kennesaw to the tourism industry and businesses, it is important to present a vibrant community offering a multitude of cultural and civic opportunities.
I am all for looking at these things from a fiscally responsible position as well as assessing the value they add to our community. Too often these issues center on the idea of cut or don’t cut. Until we have exhausted all the ideas of increasing revenues and partnerships in these areas of cultural importance, I am for continuing the financial support.
3) Should those in elected City positions be subject to suspension (with or without pay) for any criminal acts involving 'moral turpitude' which resulted in their arrest during their term of office.
First and foremost everyone is innocent until proven guilty. I do believe we should have a process in place to deal with this issue as it opens the city up to financial risk and liability. Regardless of the criminal activity involved, elected officials should be able to do the job they were elected to do AND defend themselves of charges against them at their own expense. If the situation becomes too much of a distraction or interferes with city business, then I am for suspension with pay until such time as the criminal case is resolved.
4) Should the outdated method of running for Council 'posts' be eliminated in favor of those candidates receiving the highest vote totals being elected? (i.e.: if 7 people qualify to run for 3 posts, the 3 with the highest number of votes are elected.)
Residents should feel comfortable knowing that when they vote and elect their representatives they will be fairly represented. If that is at-large positions, top vote winners, or post representatives, I think it is up to the communities to decide. I do not favor having everyone run against each other and take the top vote winners. The potential for one or more area or group of our community being under represented would be too great. I favor a variation of what we have now with Posts but instead of at large you should have to live in the Post you represent.
5) Should inquiries be made to determine if the City would benefit financially by merging the KPD with the Cobb Police? If there were a worthwhile savings, would you favor such a merger?
Kennesaw is proud and blessed to have such a skilled and professional police force. To suggest Kennesaw might be better off by merging with Cobb Police would be overstating the possible financial gains against the safety and well-being of the residents of Kennesaw. I am all for doing due diligence in exploring any and all options for the betterment of Kennesaw, but the conclusions and results of that due diligence cannot be exclusively financially driven.
6) Kennesaw has up to now considered itself to be a major player in Georgia's support of Southern independence during the War Between the States. Now there is a backlash against anything 'Confederate'. Will you support efforts to ban anything Confederate from City property. Such things may include, flags, historical markers/plaques, cemetery markers, re-inactors use of City property.
This is such a highly controversial topic, and it is my hope and desire that Kennesaw will peacefully resolve this issue and, yes, be a model of how a community should act in times of such a charged atmosphere. However, the question being asked here is not the question the Kennesaw City Council is currently being asked to address.
Kennesaw City Council is being asked to remove the Confederate Flag from the Memorial Park downtown. Legally the city is not able to do that, so they passed a resolution to ask the Georgia legislature to take up the issue and remove the restrictions so individual cities can make these decisions on what should or should not be displayed at the local level by local representation.
I fully support the Council’s decision to seek a resolution from the Georgia legislature to change the laws so that local communities can decide what symbols are appropriate to be displayed by the city. It was the right decision to follow the law and process to resolve this issue peacefully and not subject the city to undue lawsuits and expenditures.
To answer the question posed more directly, I am for removing the Confederate flag from Memorial Park in downtown Kennesaw. Flying such a controversial and divisive symbol on city property does not send a clear message that we are a community of inclusion, diversity, and unity.
While I am for removing the Confederate flag from Memorial Park downtown, I am adamantly against arbitrarily removing any and all Confederate memorials, statues, plaques, or even forbidding re-enactors on city property.
These are two separate issues. The flag is not a reflection of Kennesaw city values of presenting a welcoming environment for visitors and business. Statues and plaques and re-enactors are not meant to denigrate, threaten, or intimidate but rather educate and provide a record of our history good or bad. The Confederate flag today is overwhelmingly seen as a symbol of hatred and violence and should not be flown in Kennesaw Memorial Park.