ANTI say Kawano not offered a 'fair price" for his property

Our ANTI friends are getting desperate. They know that the 40 million dollars of wasted taxpayer money is going to fall directly on Jim Gibson's shoulders in the school board campaign of 2010.

The new line from the ANTI camp is that Kawano would have accepted the sale of his property had he got a fair price. Then only THREE trustees would be needed to appove the sale; therefore, the forty million dollar loss was the district's fault for not offering enough or it was Kawano's fault for being greedy.

Our ANTI friends need someone, anyone to take blame for the Gibson/ Guffanti disastrous opposition to the cheap level Kawano site and the 40 million dollars of additional taxpayer money that was wasted getting another site.

My answer to blogger JustTheFacts who brought up this 'fair price' shibboleth:

As to your "fair price" lie by inference, you know an eminent domain procedure has to by law offer a fair price. There is a real estate appraisal process that makes sure the price is fair and in accordance with what could be expected on the open market. You also know that Jay Kawano was NOT negotiating for a higher price. Again saying he was not given a fair price as the reason he did not sell is bearing false witness.

Eminent domain proceeding were necessary because Kawano did not want to sell his property for any amount at that time. I have heard (not confirmed) that he now wishes he had sold the land voluntarily as VUSD was offering a better price than he could get now.

Eminent domain was used to acquire the secondary site at Melrose with Jim Gibson's vote according to an article in this newspaper so Gibson could not have any moral qualms about eminent domain. You know that the owner of the secondary site at Melrose, David Arnold, did not want to sell the property either. In fact he sued to stop the sale. Eminent Domain is often a necessity for obtaining a large chunk of land.

Also note that Arnold is the one who started the odd $5000 donation train in 2006 that went first to Guffanti who was not up for re-election. Later Guffanti donated the identical amount to Gibson who WAS up for re-election in 2006. Arnold gave no money directly to Gibson's campaign according to the article in the North County Times found here:

http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2007/02/06/news/inland/2_04_282_5_07.txt

or read what Guffanti said about it at the time here:

http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2006/10/23/opinion/commentary/102206140413.txt

Gibson and Guffanti had a duty and an obligation both moral and legal to find the best and cheapest piece of land that could be built on as quickly as possible to reduce the problem of overcrowding at the other two high schools in town. This legal duty is called their Fiduciary Duty. They violated this duty when they kept the district from purchasing the cheap level graded Kawano site.

Gibson and Guffanti were playing political games. Gibson in particular seemed to be using political opposition to both potential high school sites to raise campaign funds for himself. As I recall there were a number of local residents near the Melrose site who opposed the high school and who contributed to Gibson's 2006 campaign. I know a couple of names of nearby residents who opposed the site quite vociferously but do not think I should write their names here.