David Rainey Resigns from P&Z Board Over Chapel Ridge

The Platte County Citizen reports on David Rainey's resignation from the Platte County Planning and Zoning Board over Chapel Ridge:

“I want to be part of the Planning and Zoning Commission, but if our reasoning and judgment is not going to be respected, then why do it?” Rainey said. “How many hours did we spend between those two meetings? It was six or seven hours to make those decisions and if the Commission isn’t going to respect that, then I felt I wasn’t needed.”

Learn more about what happened on Dec. 2:  Jason Brown helping out his donor buddies.

Is Jason Brown truly this ignorant?

Lee Stubbs writes:

I asked [Jason Brown] about the Platte County Land Use Plan approved in March 2010. "The Land Use Plan is just one tool of many; it’s a guideline that’s already four years old,” he said. “Perhaps that document needs to be looked at again.”

Wow.  "Already four years old."  And Jason Brown has called himself a "constitutional conservative"?  Shhh, don't tell Brown, but Russell Kirk's seminal Conservative Mind  traced "conservatism" back to guiding documents thousands of years old. (Not that it matters since Jason Brown probably doesn't read  books and is historically illiterate.)  Why, even the US Constitution is over 200 years old!  Definitely needs to be tossed out à la Jason Brown's outlook.   And what about property law, much of which can be traced back to ancient Roman and Anglo-Saxon common law.  Toss it out.  In fact, let's toss out all our laws and guidelines and Jason Brown can just personally decree ad hoc laws that best serve his donor and developer buddies. (It's basically what he did on Dec. 2.) "Four years old."  Wow.  I know four-year-olds wiser than Jason Brown.

Updates:

Stubbs also quotes Brown: "You don’t buy Jason Brown. I have never traded votes for favors or money and I never will. Period.”  Umm, Brown's donor list begs to differ (see here).  So does JE Dunn.

Confidential Corruption Tips

If you know of any suspicious behavior of Jason Brown, others in Platte County government, or people in the real estate / developer industries that led to the highly suspicious and highly irregular passage of Chapel Ridge by Jason Brown single-handedly, please send confidential tips to: southplattecountyvoice@gmail.com. Your anonymity will be protected.   Thank you!

Jason Brown & Chapel Ridge to cost taxpayers $136,750,000

If people think the corruption surrounding Jason Brown's JE Dunn contract costing taxpayers $350,000 is bad, the Chapel Ridge Ponzi scheme is even worse, as it could cost taxpayers $136,750,000 over a 20-year period.   This deal in the short-term will enrich Jason Brown's donor buddies and Brian Mertz and his investors,  and in the long-term taxpayers will pick up the tab.  Shame on Jason Brown.

Related Info:

"Jason Brown Helps Buddies Out, at Expense of Platte County"

Jason Brown Helps Buddies Out, at Expense of Platte County

Well, folks, we had the county commissioner meeting today and Jason Brown single-handedly rammed the PR version of Chapel Ridge through, after making a couple cosmetic conditions of reducing a handful of houses along Countrywood and moving a fence by horses back 20 feet.

Beverlee Roper voted against Chapel Ridge.  Jason Brown, using his power of presiding commissioner, voted twice and voted in favor of Chapel Ridge.   (Duane Soper had recused himself because of his involvement with Wells Bank investment in Chapel Ridge.  Jason Brown should have recused himself too, but didn't.)

In other words, among the 15 votes on Chapel Ridge so far (6 from first P&Z hearing, 7 from second P&Z hearing, and 2 from this county commissioner hearing), there have been 14 votes against Chapel Ridge, and one person has voted in favor of it and decided it.  Doesn't sound very fair, does it?

The whole hearing was a farce.  Jason Brown (by his own admission) had secret meeting last week over Chapel Ridge (to make a few minor concessions, for appearance sake).  Some contractors were standing in the back of the room in favor of Chapel Ridge, who were probably being paid by the hour by the developer or someone else to stand there.  (Obviously they weren't too interested in the meeting.  At one point, while the contractors were horsing around, they knocked a picture off the wall.)

Nonetheless, a huge turnout against Chapel Ridge showed up, and we would like to thank everyone for taking time out of their day to show up.  The majority of people at the meeting were opposed to Chapel Ridge.

What now?  This will probably be challenged in court.  This decision has corruption and cronyism written all over it.

Why did Jason Brown turn against his constituents and vote in favor of something so at odds with the surrounding area and so unanimously opposed by people living in this area?

Simple answer:  Jason Brown is in the pocket of Platte Valley Bank (financing Chapel Ridge and set to make millions off it) and other developers and real estate interests.  (See donations list below.)  A letter was sent to Jason Brown on Oct. 2 asking him to recuse himself from voting on Chapel Ridge because of a conflict of interest (i.e. Jason Brown being in the pocket of a handful of people benefiting financially from Chapel Ridge), but apparently Brown had to help his buddies out, even if it costs him politically, as it will.  Already a Republicans Against Jason Brown committee is forming for his re-election next year. Brown will probably be challenged both in the Republican primary and the general election, and we won't forget this.

In the meantime, send an email to Beverlee Roper (beverlee.roper@co.platte.mo.us) and thank her for looking out for south Platte County.  And maybe send an email to Jason Brown (jbrown@co.platte.mo.us)  and thank him for siding with a get-rich-quick Ponzi scheme against the legitimate interests of his voting constituents.

Who Owns Jason Brown?

Brian Mertz's Phony Letter Writing Campaign

Regarding the second hideous version of Chapel Ridge, which was unanimously voted down by the planning and zoning board, it has been brought to our attention that developer Brian Mertz has employed some phony letter writing campaign. Allegedly, someone on Mertz's team (Tabb Reese?) has created some generic form letters, is taking them around to various places to have people sign them (friends of the developer, real estate offices, etc.?),  and is sending them to Dan Erickson to make it look like there is widespread support for Chapel Ridge.  Hopefully, the county commissioners will be able to see through this scam, and realize that nearly everyone in the vicinity of the proposed Chapel Ridge is against it.   Unlike Mertz's buddies set to profit from Chapel Ridge, our property values and quality of life will be devastated, and our lives and children's lives will be put at risk by the extreme doubling of traffic on K Highway and surrounding roads.  Stop Chapel Ridge!

Get involved today.

Chapel Ridge goes before the County Commissioners

Developer Brian Mertz's PR (planned residential) version of Chapel Ridge (which was unanimously voted down by the planning and zoning board on Nov. 12) will now go before the county commissioners.

Meeting info:  Monday, Dec. 2, 10:00 AM,  County Commission Meeting Room, Platte County Administration Building,  415 Third Street, Platte City, MO.  Please attend.

Let's hope that the county commissioners will side with maintaining the safety and charm of this area of Platte County, and not with some short-sighted Ponzi scheme that's completely incompatible with this area and will devastate the local property values and quality of life.

Get involved today.

Second version of Chapel Ridge unanimously voted down by P&Z Board!

Last night, Nov. 12, the Platte County Planning and Zoning board unanimously, 7 - 0, voted down developer Brian Mertz's second Chapel Ridge proposal (the PR, planned residential, version), which was barely different from his first version.

Some reasons it was voted down:

(1) Potential flooding of surrounding areas and the destruction of local waterways, such as lakes.

(2) The doubling of traffic for surrounding area, which will cost lives.

and

(3) In terms of density, Chapel Ridge is completely incompatible with the surrounding area.


Regarding density, although the PR Chapel Ridge's "gross density" is 2.51 homes per acre (as this includes streets, flood retention structures, etc.), Chapel Ridge's real density is over 6 homes per acre.  Some lots are only 7,150 ft. in size.

Here are a couple great slides the opposition used last night to illustrate the incongruity of Chapel Ridge to surrounding area.

The matter will now go before the County Commissioners.  Let's just hope that the County Commissioners have to good sense to side with truth and long-term vision to maintain this area's charm, rather than siding with the short-sighted greed and poor planning of a developer.

Let's support responsible development.  If land is to be developed, it should be rezoned to R-80 (to compliment surrounding area) and no lots smaller than 1 acre should be permitted.

Get involved today!

Revisions to Chapel Ridge: Still the same hideous Chapel Ridge

On Oct. 30, Brian Mertz submitted a new plat plan [PDF], with minor revisions to his recent PR (planned residential) zoning request for the Nov. 12 meeting.   It's still the same monstrous high-density plan, with just a few changes.  In fact, this version is barely different from the R7 version, which the Planning and Zoning board unanimously rejected on Sept. 10.

Some facts about the updated Chapel Ridge:

- Unlike the first Chapel Ridge (seeking R7 zoning), this version is seeking PR (planned residential) zoning.

- Chapel Ridge 2.0 is only 5.2% less dense than first version.

- Chapel Ridge 2.0 crams 359 houses onto 143 acres.

- Chapel Ridge 2.0 will result in the likely flooding of surrounding areas.

- Chapel Ridge 2.0 will cause an extreme increase (over doubling) of traffic on K Highway.

- Chapel Ridge 2.0 will cause the destruction of wildlife habitat, etc.

- Chapel Ridge 2.0 will cause the lowering of the quality of life and property values for the surrounding area.

- Although the "gross density" is 2.51 homes per acre (as this includes streets, flood retention structures, etc.), Chapel Ridge's real density can reach as high as nearly 6 homes per acre.  Some lots are only 7,150 ft. in size.

- PR (planned residential) zoning could be even more extreme than R7, as this is the zoning often used for multi-family housing.  Although Brian Mertz is seeking single family PR, his plan could later be amended to a higher density, or even to  include multi-family housing.

- The hundreds of students this proposal will bring to Union Chapel almost certainly will result in a drastic redistricting of Union Chapel.

- The plan does not comply with the Platte County Land Use Plan.  It is not compatible in character, density or scale to the surrounding neighborhoods.   It will disrupt the stability of our area and destroy the rural charm that we sought in moving here.

- If this plan is approved, it clears the way for more of the same which will result in greatly compounded impacts in the community, and an unsustainable drain on public resources.

- If area is to be rezoned, it should be rezoned to R80 to compliment surrounding area.  Lots should be 1 - 3 acres with no lots smaller than 1 acre permitted.

In short, say No to PR (planned residential) zoning.  It's wrong for our area. Contact the Planning and Zoning board and the county commissioners today.

 Stop Chapel Ridge.

Get involved today.

Developer Brian Mertz's Past Projects

In light of Brian Mertz's recent request for the extreme PR (planned residential) zoning for Chapel Ridge, people have been discussing Mertz's previous high-density developments.

Recently in the Platte County Landmark (Oct. 9), Sue Land wrote the following letter to the editor:

Brian Mertz, developer of the planned Chapel Ridge subdivision, using TV and newspaper interviews, and even letters to the editor, has described himself as a self-proclaimed benefactor to Platte County; a long time resident, a home-grown boy who just wants to make a living and help the county with it's needs. He's indicated, too, that this is his livelihood, his money, on the line. The property owners of the would-be-Chapel-Ridge development, have referred to the opposition as "vigilantes" and bullies. Okay, everyone is entitled to their own opinion. They are not, however, entitled to their own facts.
So let's review these facts: 

1) Mertz (or someone on his team) took the original logo used on their website and Facebook page to promote Chapel Ridge, from an unrelated development in North Carolina. That entity has since contacted him and forced him to change it. 

2) Mertz has repeatedly appeared on web-based forums whose only purpose is to find investors for pre-completed properties. Selling single family rental properties before they are even built is not about investing in our county's future, it's about grabbing a cut off the top and cutting out fast. His comments indicate a pattern of building lower-cost homes next to very high value homes, artificially raising the value of his units while decreasing those surrounding it. His comments also indicate a "get in and get out" action plan, leaving others to deal with the fall out. 

3) Tiffany Estates, a relatively new development of his, is already on the 'downhill slide' in terms of appearance and maintenance and by no small coincidence, all but two of these 18 homes are owned by persons who don't live there, essentially they are rental properties inside of only a few years 

4) Mertz repeatedly uses the term "gross density" and indicates the number of houses will be 2.65 per acre. But the real density, after you take out the land that must be allowed for roads, green space, etc, is 5-and-some-change-per-acre. 

Mertz can say whatever he wants about himself. If his support team writes enough letters, they may all begin to believe it. But the facts, ladies and gentlemen, tell a different tale. In my opinion he's not an honest man; honest men don't take other people's art work (or associate with those who do), and they don't deliberately misrepresent the truth about how many houses will be placed on a single acre. If there is nothing wrong with what he's building and where he's building it, then just spit out the actual number of houses per acre and quit trying to morph it into something that "sounds better.” 

While it is true that he is an investor of sorts, he is not investing in the betterment of Platte County, he is investing only in his pocket, and the pockets of friends. I don't have a problem with that either, but let's "tell it like it is.” Don't pretend that he's somehow 'saving' the county,” as if this county doesn't have good developers who can make a decent profit by putting R40 and R25 homes where they belong. 

And as to that hometown boy whose life savings is at risk? We have investments to defend too. If the rest of us, who have invested huge sums in our properties and the maintenance thereof, get burned by the soon-to-be-rental-district that gets parked next to us, or if people along K Highway get forced out of their homes for the eventual widening that will surely follow, you can bet Mertz doesn't care. He'll get his and then cut and run along to the next project regardless.

I have to ask, is that what what "good people" do? I don't think so. Brian Mertz is a lot of things, but he is hardly the victim here. 

--Sue Lange
Parkville

What Lang writes is verified by the facts.  Below are some slides compiled by various people opposed to Chapel Ridge.

Mertz says he is building a landscape buffer around Chapel Ridge, but here is his previous landscape buffer from Tiffany Estates:

Note too that 16 out of 18 of the homes at Tiffany Estates are owned by people out of state, which means that they have probably quickly become rental properties:

This seems to be a pattern in Mertz's development strategies:

Some screen shots from various investment websites where Brian Mertz has tried to sell properties from previous developments.  (Click on images to enlarge.)

If you're not worried about Mertz's latest proposal, you should be.

Stop Chapel Ridge.

Get involved today.

Chapel Ridge 2.0: A pig with lipstick

They say you can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still just a pig. That pretty much sums up Chapel Ridge 2.0, the newest short-sighted, get-rich-quick scheme that will go before the Platte County Planning and Zoning Board on Nov. 12.

Some info:

Unlike the first Chapel Ridge (seeking R7 zoning), this version is seeking PR (planned residential) zoning.

Chapel Ridge 2.0 is only 3.7% less dense than first version.

Chapel Ridge 2.0 crams 365 houses onto 143 acres.

All of the other problems still remain:  likely flooding of surrounding areas, extreme increase (doubling) of traffic on K Highway, destruction of wildlife habitat, etc.

Although the "gross density" is 2.55 homes per acre (as this includes streets, flood retention structures, etc.), Chapel Ridge's real density can reach as high as nearly 6 homes per acre.  Some lots are only 7,150 ft. in size.

The hundreds of students this proposal will bring to Union Chapel almost certainly will result in a drastic redistricting of Union Chapel.

PR (planned residential) zoning is even more extreme than R7, as this is the zoning used for duplexes and 4-plexes.  Although Brian Mertz is seeking single family PR, his plan could later be amended to include 4-plexes or patio homes.

Having PR zoning in our area sets a bad precedent, which will inevitable lead to lowering of surrounding property values and the destruction of quality of life.

If area is to be rezoned, it should be rezoned to R80, to compliment surrounding area.  No lots smaller than 1 acre should be allowed.


Say No to PR (planned residential) zoning.  It's wrong for our area.

Perhaps a limerick sums it up best:

A short-sighted scheme to get rich they deploy,

With new window dressing only to annoy.

Chapel Ridge is this trouble.

Traffic here it will double.

And your property value it'll destroy!

Stop Chapel Ridge.

Get involved today.

Chapel Ridge will cost lives

One of the most pertinent things to address when considering new development is the public well-being.  What problems will new development cause?  How will it affect peoples' lives?

Traffic problems will be a major consequence of the proposed Chapel Ridge.

The 2011 MODOT traffic count figured 3,333 cars per day for K Highway / Hampton Road.

The developer's own study figures that Chapel Ridge will add an additional 3,669 new traffic trips per day for the surrounding area.

This could result in 7,002 traffic trips per day on K Highway / Hampton Road, increasing traffic by 110%.

In other words, Chapel Ridge would more than double traffic on K Highway / Hampton Road.

K Highway already is a very dangerous road, narrow, winding, with steep shoulders, little visibility, etc.  People often try to pass cars on K Highway, although there is no passing lane.  K Highway has 64 street intersections and driveways in only 1.7 miles.  Already there are many serious auto accidents on K Highway, and Chapel Ridge will probably more than double these catastrophes.

In short, Chapel Ridge inevitably will cost human lives.

Typical day of cars lined up behind school bus on K Highway

If you have't already, please go here to sign the petition, and here to get more information on opposing Chapel Ridge.

Chapel Ridge Defeated by Platte County Planning & Zoning Board

Last night, rezoning to High-Density R-7 of the proposed (and ill-conceived) Chapel Ridge was firmly rejected by the planning and zoning board, with a unanimous vote of NO.  Hooray!  (It will probably still go before the county commissioners.)

If you were unable to attend the meeting, here are a few of the (many) slides presented last night by the opposition to Chapel Ridge.

Brian Mertz & Tabb Reese have been spreading the misinformation that Chapel Ridge is "2.65 homes per acre."  Mind you, this is the gross density, not the real density, as gross density includes streets, flood detention structures, flood drainage stream areas, etc. (which, by the way, are probably inadequate and would result in flooding of Countrywood Estates).  The real density of Chapel Ridge often reaches around nearly 6 homes per acre.  The image below shows their plat and the size of an acre:

The image below shows the plat of Chapel Ridge superimposed over Google Earth:

As you can clearly see, Chapel Ridge is completely incompatible and incongruent with the surrounding area.  It's a high-density monstrosity.  

Daniel Erickson has tried to compare Chapel Ridge with Thousand Oaks, but the image below shows otherwise:

As you can see, Thousand Oaks has large (often 600 ft) green buffers around it and large green spaces within it, unlike the high-density, ugly concrete jungle of the proposed Chapel Ridge.

Regardless, citizens spoke up last night.  Know the truth: No more high-density R-7 zoning for this area.  We don't want it.  We don't need it.  Keep the area AG, RE or R-80, with minimum 1 acre lots.

Best quote of the night by the planning and zoning board: "You've lowered your standards, Daniel," referencing Daniel Erickson, director of Platte County Planning and Zoning.

Which gets back to the question that a lady in the audience was overheard asking (paraphrase):  "Why has Daniel Erickson become so opposed to the interests of local citizens and hell-bent on fast-tracking such an ill-conceived plan?"

If you have't already, please go here to sign the petition, and here to get more information on opposing Chapel Ridge.

Media inquiries, contact:  Bill@wmqlaw.com

The fast-tracking of Chapel Ridge

Over at Brian Mertz / Tabb Reese's facebook page, they recently wrote:

This post almost makes it sound as if Dan Erickson is advocating for Chapel Ridge.  Is he?  Is he supposed to?  Why does Erickson seem so hell-bent on fast-tracking Chapel Ridge?

A few of my favorite things in south Platte County

While this blog hitherto has focused on some negative aspects of future development of south Platte County, it's time to take a look at some of the positive things about south Platte County --- things we want to preserve.

As Julie Andrews sang, these are a few of my favorite things about our area of south Platte County:

- Minimum 1 acre lots generally in our area of south Platte County
- Large, open green spaces  in our area of south Platte County
- That Charlotte Sawyers donated her land off Union Chapel to the Platte Land Trust.
- Abundant wildlife (deer, turkeys, groundhogs, red foxes, coyotes, bobcats, and the occasional quail)
- The fact that there aren't chain and fast-food restaurants everywhere in our area of south Platte County
- The fact that much of the 45 corridor has been kept business free
- Cafe des Amis (can be expensive but arguably the best restaurant in Platte County)
- The French Bee Bakery (a new, and welcome addition to Parkville)
- Old news, but the Vasto-Hustler feud did provide endless hours of entertainment
- The breakfasts at Frank's and Roxanne's.
- English Landing Park
- Occasional drinks at the Rusty Horse or River's Bend, or pizza at Stone Canyon.
- U-Gene's Deli in Riverside

What are a few of your favorite things?

Who owns developable land in area around proposed Chapel Ridge?

Many people have asked:  Who owns other tracts of land in this area that could potentially be developed?  Below is a brief survey.  What's interesting is that much of this land more recently is in the form of LLCs and LPs, where previously it was owned by private owners.

The land (parcel 20-5.0-16-300-001-031-000) across from the proposed Chapel Ridge (across from the Baptist church) was sold on June 10 to Westwood Partners, LLC, which is addressed to Adam Tholen, who lives down 45 Hwy.)

The land off K (parcel 20-4.0-20-100-000-003-000), just south of Union Chapel elementary school (what people have called "the man cave"), is owned by RD Owens Investment LLC, since 2011.  RD Owens Investment LLC, is addressed to Douglas Owens, who lives at the Nationals.  Prior to 2011, this tract of land was owned by Platte Clay LLC, addressed to Michael Gunn, who is an attorney, was previously arrested and allegedly maced, and used to represent Platte County Planning and Zoning.

The house at the corner of 45 & K (parcel 20-4.0-20-100-000-005-000) was purchased by Darrel's Haven LLC in 2011.  The registrant of this LLC is Robert K Kirkland of Liberty, Missouri.  Kirkland is an attorney.

Another potential big player in this area is Harmony IV LP, which owns parcels of land all up and down 45 Hwy and Brinkmeyer (parcels 20-4.0-20-100-000-011-000, 20-4.0-20-100-000-014-000, 20-4.0-20-100-000-013-000, 20-5.0-21-300-003-010-000).  Harmony IV LP is registered to a Roger L. Wagy of Lees Summit.

The land off Brinkmeyer (parcel 20-4.0-19-000-000-008-001), behind the gas station at 45 and 435, is owned by Brinkmeyer Investors LLC,  registered to Scott Sperry and Jim Nichols of Lees Summit.  The land adjacent to this (parcel 20-4.0-19-000-000-029-000) is registered to 45 Park Place, L.L.C., which in turn is represented by an agency out of Jefferson City.

As many already know, the land on the SE corner of the K / 45 intersection (parcel 20-5.0-21-200-002-001-000) is registered to John and David Barth.

The land on the NE corner of the K / 45 intersection (parcel 20-5.0-21-200-001-004-000) is owned by NBH LLC, registered to Keith Hicklin and Jennifer Snider of Platte City.

There is nothing wrong with owning land.  In fact, it's a good thing.  Many people, however, do not want reckless, irresponsible development in this area.  People do not want south Platte County to become a clone of Johnson County, KS - high-density subdivisions, apartment complexes, chain and fast-food restaurants, etc.  We like our big lots and big, open green spaces.

If you know of any other interesting potentially developable tracts of land in the area and their ownership, please post in the comments below.

Chapel Ridge and Acts of Desperation

Desperate people do desperate things, so they say.  Nowhere is this more apparent than Brian Mertz / Tabb Reese's "truth" campaign in favor of the hideous monstrosity known as Chapel Ridge.  And what is the "truth"?  Well, apparently for Mertz and Reese truth means stealing another company's logo and trying to pawn it off as their own.  That's the truth. It's well documented.  Mertz & Reese are trying to fabricate support for Chapel Ridge, such as misleading websites and a handful of well-placed yard signs reading "Know the Truth," which upon closer inspection are nearly all upon public lands, on the land of the sellers of the property, or on the properties of friends / associates of Mertz and Reese.  That's fabricated support.  Reality?  The reality is that nearly everyone in this area opposes Chapel Ridge, as it will lower the surrounding quality of life and property values.  We know the truth.

Here are some more interesting facts (Chapel Ridge, by the way, conveniently dislikes facts):

Chapel Ridge (by the developer's own study) will create 3,669 new vehicle trips a day.  Do you want 3,669 more cars driving down your street every day?

Another fact: Chapel Ridge is a dense monstrosity. 379 houses crammed onto 143 acres!  Just look at this Google overlay image:

Disgusting, isn't it?

Do everything you can to oppose Chapel Ridge.  Don't let Chapel Ridge destroy the charm of south Platte County.

More Chapel Ridge "Truth"?

Brian Mertz / Tabb Reese have set up their Facebook page, website and yard signs in favor of Chapel Ridge.  The theme of their advertising is that they're telling the "truth"; the opposition, "lies".

Here are a couple screen shots from their online "truth" ad campaign:

What is the problem here?

Well, the Chapel Ridge logo they're using in their online advertisements possibly isn't theirs.

In fact, the logo seems to come from a Chapel Ridge in North Carolina (see here, here, and here), and is possibly in violation of trademark law.

It is indeed ironic that Mertz / Reese are advertising their sites to be the "truth" versus "lies," and yet they're possibly stealing logos from other websites?  Why didn't they pay a graphic designer to make their own logo?  What about all the possible other misinformation on their webpages (such as photos of houses that do not yet exist and other possible empty promises)?  Can these people be trusted?

UPDATED:

Someone from Southstar Communities responded to someone in our No Chapel Ridge opposition and said that the above logo is Southstar's, they did not give Mertz / Reese permission to use it, and that they were going to ask them to remove it.

Since Mertz / Reese seem to be too cheap to design their own logo and have to resort to stealing another company's logo, a graphic designer in our group kindly made a logo for them (free of charge, just as they like it):

Just Say No to Chapel Ridge

Just Say No to Chapel Ridge