Saturday, June 7, 2008

"Trailer for sale or rent..."


So yeah, when I picked up my Amherst Bulletin on Thursday and spotted the real estate ad for an “open house” at the Awad/Hubley Amherst condo today (Saturday from 1:00 to 3:00 PM) I planned to investigate with camera in hand.

But yesterday two heavy-hitters (one in the legal profession and another in the media) informed me that I was about to be hit with a SLAPP suit for “intimidation” or “stalking” or making one feel “tortured”.

And since both Select Person Awad and Town Meeting member Hubley (also a former Select Person) are—at least technically—still Amherst public officials, they would rely on the town attorney to file the suit at taxpayer expense.

Of course, BOTH my heavy-hitter sources said I would win hands down since Awad/Hubley are public officials and both are dead wrong about this residency issue but it would take time, money and an initial headline or two that would not be overly sympathetic (since the brick-and-mortar media fears blogs they would love to headline a story “blogger gone berserk.”

But I cycled by anyway, as their condo is on a bike route I do at least twice weekly.

5 comments:

dominique said...

You can get a virtual tour at this link:

http://www.realtor.com/realestate/amherst-ma-01002-1098720685/

Max Hartshorne said...

this is a broken link.

LarryK4 said...

But a virtual tour would not tell is if they slept there last night (which we all know full well they did not).

Either way, once the condo is sold they will have a hard time explaining how they are still residents of the People's Republic of Amherst (living in a tent at Groff Park perhaps?)

Anonymous said...

No, their legal address will be "The Streets of Amherst."

Watch them claim homelessness.....

Only in Amherst....

Anonymous said...

Legal challenge to 3% surtax?

IF it actually passes (and my guess is that even Amherst won't vote for any more property taxes in the current environment), couldn't any aggrieved taxpayer (or coalition) on the grounds that the various bodies that approved it were not legally constituted.

Taken one step further, couldn't anything done by this year's Town Meeting be thrown out on the grounds that the moderation was not a town resident at the time and thus could not have moderated?

Sort of like when a cop gets caught lying in court, all of his earlier convictions can be challenged too.