Spitting Bloody Phlegm

The mayor of Saint Laurent became entangled ..... evidence!

Hello,

Given the mood of indignation and increasingly face the confusing and chaotic management of the mayor of St. Lawrence, it seems useful to recall elected officials Mr Blond and the person texts that have been somewhat abused in their simple reality in the discourse of the attorney appointed 5 February 2011 at the expense of the municipality by the mayor, really desperate in this case.

At any lord, my honor, as the lawyer who flew in from Paris indicated that deliberation 11 April 2007 set a GPE (Participation Fee Connection to Sewer) , all without even quote the text of that deliberation, we, citizens, committed to the strict truth of the facts, give the public content, very concise, of these discussions, which, incidentally, mentions in his text no legal basis, therefore, legally valid, in that decision.

What transforms this ex deliberation on file bis RPE can only fail c ike its predecessor.

Here is the text of the municipal decision so that all people can judge based on records, as written in the archives of the Prefecture in Limoges.

" City Council, after deliberation:

DECIDES fixed rates connection fee as follows:

Sanitation connected to a sewage OR a decanter digester: 550.00 Euros per connection.

This measure applies from 1 July 2007 (completion date after authorization to construct) "

Our comments to the lawyer the municipality and the mayor

1. Where in the deliberation of 11 April 2007, is there mention of the legal bases on which these discussions may be based in law? No text is cited as legally allowing this debate!
   
   
2. Where in this text, the mayor and his lawyers have seen that this debate took on support Article L. 1331-2 of the Code of Public Health allowing, under the conditions described in this text, talking 4 years after the text of a GPE?
   
   
3. How the mayor and his lawyer can they talk about in this debate a GPE (relative to a sewer funds) while the text mentions so confused as public sanitation (connected to a station plants) that sanitation autonomous individual?
   
   
4. Deliberation speaking of a connection fee (without further precision) whose rates are fixed by the text, the mayor and his lawyer can they explain when how and on what legal texts this connection fee (without further precision in its name) was created ex nihilo ? Can they demonstrate to the people it was applied in the past on ALL the municipality?
   
   
5. The mayor and his lawyer can they tell how they can ASSERT as legally valid and involving GPE, a text without any legal basis, setting a new " rates "In 2007 with a vague connection fee, all without deliberation FOUNDER cite this fee, which should have been introduced before April 11, 2007 and should therefore be included (being recalled) in the text of 11 April 2007 under penalty of being null and void?
   
   
6. The mayor and his lawyer can they explain how an elected sense can think taxing a private sewerage systems such as connection to a sewer funds, the first being a matter entirely private, and the second frame by laws which none is cited to support the decision?
   
   
   
   
7. the final blow to the dead GPE -born: Article L 1331-2 of the Code of Public Health states in its paragraph 3 that the City Council must expressly DISCUSS, THEREFORE VISA under this section, to lays down procedures to REFUNDS the work specified in Article L 1331-2.
8. The mayor and his lawyer they perceive in the deliberation of 11 April 2007 the phrase " pursuant to Article 1331-2 of the Public Health Code " which alone would be able, While with other insurmountable difficulties, claim that deliberation Fixes the amount of possible GPE without PRIOR CREATION?

To show how the mayor and his lawyer are in an unreal world, look at how the resolution is drafted establishing the famous ERP, passed July 6, 2009, apparently to load financially Vignerie residents.

As it should be done in any proceedings in a municipal rule of law, this deliberation mentioned reference texts, by mentioning clearly on which the decision is based.

However, the deliberation of 11 April 2007 mentions no national text authorizing the decision e lle is outside the law and without any legal value.

How a lawyer and a mayor they can present as a legally valid decision which is not based on any specific text in reference to enable every citizen and Prefecture responsible to verify the legality of this decision compared to the legal text quoted?

Text voted April 11, 2007, honest and sensible person who is not blinded by motives other than the one truth of the writings, appropriate:

1 - that deliberation is ILLEGAL for not founded in law,

2 - that this decision is null and void because not even mentioning the original decision creating this tax raccordemen t very vague, therefore no valid legal parentage,

3 - it may in any event of a fee called GPE.

In summary, if the mayor of St. Lawrence will direct enforcement orders recipe on this basis without any legal value, it heading straight into the wall and may be again , curtly rebuffed by the prefecture, then the state, and possibly by the Administrative Justice who knows her very well that any deliberation should be based on existing law.

example, claims the mayor relayed by his lawyer whose client is elected king and paying with public money, are unfounded.

NO GPE has never been ESTABLISHED by the laws in force in Saint Laurent, and in any event, April 11, 2007.

Our board-free-to Alain Blond and running the disaster with his stubbornness in this case bounded ERP, suddenly became GPE by a miracle that no basis of valid:

stop here fresh, literally and figuratively,
do more publicly ridicule,
cease multiply mistakes and confusions that you are then obliged to admit your own authority against rapidly declining,
simply and frankly admit that the people of Vignerie have to pay anything in this dossier public sewer.

In this case, the mayor has a choice between reason which forced him to abandon his financial desires against the citizens and the irrationality that can only lead to inevitable disaster if hounds in position, more and more absurd and rejected by the people.

Let him know that his lawyer, any lawyer he is, can not catch these mistakes in 2011 astounding committed in the past (by Mr. Blond), which had forgotten , writing discussion, there was a rule of law which it must comply, as any citizen, he was elected.

NOTE

As the mayor has brought in a Parisian lawyer in St. Lawrence and the expense of the county, we also look carefully content of the resolution authorizing it to incur these expenses on behalf of the town.

From our side, we simply submitted for review and advice FREE deliberation of 11 April 2007 at a reputed law firm, also in Paris.

As Mr. Blonde, but without seeking anything other than assessments based solely on the law.

And we make, so citizen and direct observations amused that we have returned s ur this odd GPE born February 5, 2011, that the former lawyer of the town hall n had not seen and announced in 2007 if we are to believe the errors and confusion in which the mayor of St. Lawrence has managed, in his words, this issue since its inception.

Our citizens will thus be reassured them vocats Parisian specialists in public law , but not the town of St. Lawrence as a client, gave their opinion in total freedom of thought and analysis.

Our detailed questions are fruits citizens what they told us.

Mr. Blond will answer these questions, but first we will seek the opinion of the Minister of Health and the Prefecture in Limoges, strong professional advice of independent lawyers unconnected with the common customer .....

A facetious remark of lawyer friends of this blog: they are betting that GFOS does not exist in other towns in the valley while the ERP is introduced, along Mr. Blond initiatives at Saint Laurent.

It follows that all the residents and elected from the community of common interest were to follow this matter closely ..... to learn about sound and their own legal Commons .

The elected officials of the Gorre know yesterday that the President of the community of common errors made and / or confusion. An education that will generate new attitudes here and there ......

Soon a new meeting on "errors and confusions in series of the mayor of St. Laurent sur Gorre »?....... The probability is strong now, at least to bury the GPE.

Writing the blog of the citizens of the valley and surrounding Gorre

(written and published online February 6, 2011)

Iconography Day

Leading article, a photo of a glance, subject to work in the clogged drains without opening a new trench with heavy costs for either the individual concerned if the problem is rooted in its evacuation PVC or the company that manages public service sanitation.

Late paper, a simple diagram that shows the remediation of a house or building. This diagram was borrowed from a municipality whose mayor also establishes clear legal proceedings on the subject: the common Aixe Vienna.