Taking it to the streets and asking each voter if they did sign the petition does make some sense, but it looks more like they are just trying to make the public uncomfortable. They asked her if she had a lawyer. I understand this is legal, but certainly intimidating to most people. They then hid their license plate as they left. Sugarhouse is clearly not listening to the public– they are trying to intimidate them and are unwilling to stand up to the people that oppose them.
On the heels of Sugarhouse’s P.I.s advising the public to retain a lawyer, Sprague, an investor in Sugarhouse provides us with reason to believe that maybe he knows how to run a court room.
if you think the proceedings and decision make sense, send me an email. The signatures were gathered in good faith. I was there, I gathered several hundred personally in freezing cold weather. There are clearly a lot of Philadelphians who are against casinos. It would appear the judge really wasn’t interested interested the will of the people.
If I read the article correctly:
– They argued over the spelling of Griffin,
– Mary agreed that it *appeared* like multiple signatures on one page “might” have been signed by the same person and
– The judge then denied further requests to question Sprague’s evidence and ruled in favor of Sugarhouse.
This is just more reason to write your councilperson. and ask him/her to support the referendum.