<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2.3" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Manassas Now Free Of DOJ Complaint</title>
	<link>http://www.bvbl.net/index.php/2008/04/30/manassas-now-free-of-doj-complaint/</link>
	<description>Blog-Fu for Prince William, Manassas and Manassas Park politics.</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2012 21:14:55 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.3</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: Andy H</title>
		<link>http://www.bvbl.net/index.php/2008/04/30/manassas-now-free-of-doj-complaint/#comment-63391</link>
		<dc:creator>Andy H</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:57:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.bvbl.net/index.php/2008/04/30/manassas-now-free-of-doj-complaint/#comment-63391</guid>
		<description>I cannot comment on this other than to say that the case has not been dismissed in its entirety.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I cannot comment on this other than to say that the case has not been dismissed in its entirety.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonguy</title>
		<link>http://www.bvbl.net/index.php/2008/04/30/manassas-now-free-of-doj-complaint/#comment-63388</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonguy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:45:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.bvbl.net/index.php/2008/04/30/manassas-now-free-of-doj-complaint/#comment-63388</guid>
		<description>JM,

I believe that both you and the MJM are mistaken. The ordinance didn't establish the overcrowding taskforce or the hotline. Both predate the ordinance by at least a year. When they repealed the "definition of family" ordinance, it had no impact on the continued existance of the taskforce or the hotline. I have used it as recently as 45 days ago to re-report a house that alternates between compliant and overcrowded as often as the seasons changed. Also, just last month, an unofficial 3-house rule (you had to live within three houses to file a report) was scrapped, in favor of a "Cry Wolf" policy (if you repeatedly call on homes and there are never any violations, then you go on a special list of harrassment callers).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>JM,</p>
<p>I believe that both you and the MJM are mistaken. The ordinance didn&#8217;t establish the overcrowding taskforce or the hotline. Both predate the ordinance by at least a year. When they repealed the &#8220;definition of family&#8221; ordinance, it had no impact on the continued existance of the taskforce or the hotline. I have used it as recently as 45 days ago to re-report a house that alternates between compliant and overcrowded as often as the seasons changed. Also, just last month, an unofficial 3-house rule (you had to live within three houses to file a report) was scrapped, in favor of a &#8220;Cry Wolf&#8221; policy (if you repeatedly call on homes and there are never any violations, then you go on a special list of harrassment callers).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lindy B</title>
		<link>http://www.bvbl.net/index.php/2008/04/30/manassas-now-free-of-doj-complaint/#comment-63384</link>
		<dc:creator>Lindy B</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:35:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.bvbl.net/index.php/2008/04/30/manassas-now-free-of-doj-complaint/#comment-63384</guid>
		<description>It is my understanding that the "dismissal" reported by MJM is NOT the end of the suit.  It just narrows the focus!  It is also my understanding that  the entire council is aware of the situation at the corner of Prince William and Liberty Streets and are proceeding in an orderly constrained fashion because OF the current lawsuit.  Is this correct Andy?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is my understanding that the &#8220;dismissal&#8221; reported by MJM is NOT the end of the suit.  It just narrows the focus!  It is also my understanding that  the entire council is aware of the situation at the corner of Prince William and Liberty Streets and are proceeding in an orderly constrained fashion because OF the current lawsuit.  Is this correct Andy?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JM</title>
		<link>http://www.bvbl.net/index.php/2008/04/30/manassas-now-free-of-doj-complaint/#comment-63361</link>
		<dc:creator>JM</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2008 14:38:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.bvbl.net/index.php/2008/04/30/manassas-now-free-of-doj-complaint/#comment-63361</guid>
		<description>Unfortunately, the lawsuit was dismissed because the overcrowding ordinance and hotline were abandoned, making the lawsuit moot.

I would have preferred that the lawsuit was dismissed because the suit had no merit, and that the ordinance was upheld in the courts.  Because the city of Manassas did not have the fortitude to stand by their decisions and fight for their rights in the courts, we will never know if the courts would have backed the ordinance.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Unfortunately, the lawsuit was dismissed because the overcrowding ordinance and hotline were abandoned, making the lawsuit moot.</p>
<p>I would have preferred that the lawsuit was dismissed because the suit had no merit, and that the ordinance was upheld in the courts.  Because the city of Manassas did not have the fortitude to stand by their decisions and fight for their rights in the courts, we will never know if the courts would have backed the ordinance.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andy H</title>
		<link>http://www.bvbl.net/index.php/2008/04/30/manassas-now-free-of-doj-complaint/#comment-63326</link>
		<dc:creator>Andy H</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2008 12:49:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.bvbl.net/index.php/2008/04/30/manassas-now-free-of-doj-complaint/#comment-63326</guid>
		<description>The MJM headline is misleading.  Read the article.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The MJM headline is misleading.  Read the article.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CitizenofManassas</title>
		<link>http://www.bvbl.net/index.php/2008/04/30/manassas-now-free-of-doj-complaint/#comment-63319</link>
		<dc:creator>CitizenofManassas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2008 12:03:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.bvbl.net/index.php/2008/04/30/manassas-now-free-of-doj-complaint/#comment-63319</guid>
		<description>Hmm,  I wonder what the excuse the criminal supporters will use now that they can use the threat of a lawsuit  to discourage action against criminals. 

Though at least one of the newest members of the Council, Wolfe, seems to be more concerned with the "reputation" of the City then with combating criminals, he may have not choice but to come around as well.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hmm,  I wonder what the excuse the criminal supporters will use now that they can use the threat of a lawsuit  to discourage action against criminals. </p>
<p>Though at least one of the newest members of the Council, Wolfe, seems to be more concerned with the &#8220;reputation&#8221; of the City then with combating criminals, he may have not choice but to come around as well.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

