Comments on: Sharon Pandak’s Legacy of Pain

By: James Young

James Young — Wed, 30 Aug 2006 04:22:15 +0000

Anon 4:33 summarizes well my conflict over this issue. I tend to come down on the side of the property owner, as I do in virtually any conflict between the individual and the awesome power of the State applied against him.

More disturbing is Pandak’s role in the Parsons affair. My recollection is that the County took quite a bath on that one, and that Pandak was the chief attorney in an affair that unnecessarily cost County taxpayers millions.

By: Craig

Craig — Tue, 29 Aug 2006 21:03:23 +0000

This is a particularly nasty area of property rights. It may have been the right decision for the county and county tax payers but the wrong decision for those few landowners. I am not sure that there is ever a real win-win situation with eminent domain cases.

By: anon

anon — Tue, 29 Aug 2006 20:33:22 +0000

Just about every law written can have a multitude of interpretations. Was this HER interpretation - or was it the interpretation that the BOCS desired - or the interpretation that was in the best interest of the “County”…. or, or , or.

I really have no idea whose view this really represented.

While I personally would have been one ticked off property owner if this had been how *I* was treated, I have to wonder - do we as taxpayers really want our county government paying out top dollar to other citizens with OUR tax money - or do we want the county to get the best, least expensive deal possible?

On the one hand, I hate to see people cheated, but on the other hand, I don’t want to see one dime more spent out of my tax money than absolutely necessary. Seems to me that it’s a fine line to walk.

By: Riley, Not O'Reilly

Riley, Not O'Reilly — Tue, 29 Aug 2006 20:17:07 +0000

It sounds as if the county attorney interpreted the law to read this way and that would have been her responsibility.

By: anon

anon — Tue, 29 Aug 2006 19:14:58 +0000

Was Sharon Pandak responsible for setting county policy regarding offers and prices? Or was it the BOCS and the County Exec?

I really have no idea how this process works - but I would have thought the County Attorney was responsible for following the direction of the BOCS (within the legal framework) or providing them with legal opinions regarding their desired course of action.

By: Bwana

Bwana — Tue, 29 Aug 2006 19:06:37 +0000

My question, too. I remember in this time frame (early 90’s) I spent a fair amount of time at the McCout building getting permits, and the Parsons Farm folks always had a truck parked in the McCourt lot with large signs protesting the county actions, offering flyers, etc.

I seem to remember the country lost a court case on the Parsons Farm property…

By: Had to Say

Had to Say — Tue, 29 Aug 2006 17:17:17 +0000

Was Parson Farms part of this? I seem to remember that the owner of Parson Farms went round and round with county about permits etc. when the county wanted some of his property. I don’t remember any details on this because it was a few years ago.

By: Riley, Not O'Reilly

Riley, Not O'Reilly — Tue, 29 Aug 2006 17:03:35 +0000

Great find, Greg. I have my take on this up at Virtucon now.