Update II: My response to Tucker's email below ~ Nancy Willing's Latest Wild Accusations
Shawn, puhlease, you have to know it's not always about you.
For instance, by coincidence, on the morning of June 3rd I had finally published a workforce housing post I'd been working on which drew you and other development attorneys into the story by the nature of your involvement in the business -
For The Civics, The Clock Is Ticking On Affordable Housing Accountability From New Castle County - nothing more, nothing less.
Chuck Mulholland had provided the content and I was happy to put it together as a blog post to call attention to what's been happening with these developments.
How surprised was I to hear from the grapevine later that you had made the workforce housing post "all about you" to the extent that I got an email - excerpted blow - depicting your having told others to expect a character assassination during Gordon's June 3rd civic umbrella meeting that night -"He has been attempting to gain sympathy even prior to the meeting by stating that there was going to be some sort of character assassination on him about the Bayberry Work force housing stuff and that unions were involved and are lobbying council.. Very dramatic."You were wrong. Chuck did discuss the workforce housing issue at the meeting but *GASP* never mentioned you once. These blog posts from Chuck are based on documentation firmly in hand so attempts to characterize them as libelous is a dead end.
Far worse, I received a forward of the following email sent from George Smiley to Council on Tuesday evening, June 4th. -Subject: walmart expansion plan
I just got home from the Planning Board hearings and no one from organized labor spoke against the walmart expansion. However, I did hear that the adjacent residents that support the project felt disrespected and that attempts were made to intimidate them by Ms. Willing and others last night at Executive Gordon's community leadership meeting.
George Smiley
New Castle County Council
Seventh District
395-8347 - Office
463-4250 - Cell
395-8385 - Fax
Shocking! A character assassination if I ever saw one and absolutely untrue that I tried to intimidate anyone. Bill Dunn and I had pointed out to several people at the meeting the vulnerability of deed restrictions not backed by county government. Nothing more, nothing less.
So, naturally I wondered what you, Shawn Tucker, may have had to do with George Smiley's email to Council about me and your Walmart project since George Smiley did not attend the June 3rd meeting and could not have known what transpired. Maybe you can tell me how this totally inaccurate impression of my behavior at the civic meeting ended up on George Smiley's email to council the very next day.
Be well,
Nancy
Update: Whereas it's all about "Shawn Tucker". What he calls character assassination, most people simply call a spade ~
As you know, on September 4, 2013, I sent you an e-mail politely and respectfully asking that you please stop personally attacking me, and also took some time to point out some of the more recent inaccuracies in your blogs about me and others.I got a lovely email message from Shawn Tucker a few weeks ago. He'd evidently also forwarded the email to NCC CAO David Grimaldi and who knows who else.
You responded by stating: “ Tucker can threaten all he wants”.
It is very telling that you respond to my polite request that you simply provide accurate information as a “threat”.
You then go on in your latest blog to print new falsehoods, twist my words, slander me and others by innuendo, personally attack me for my community pro bona work, and re-print many of the same inaccuracies from your last blog. Much of this conduct is libel in Delaware Ms. Willing regardless of whether you call what you do blogging or not. I will be calling it what it truly is from now on Ms. Willing – character assassination.
Indeed, I think I now know everything I need to know about you and your character assassination tactics.
It appears very clear to me now that you have no interest in the truth whatsoever or truly helping our friends and neighbors, but rather, have a personal agenda to character assassinate certain select members of our community that you simply disagree with, or perhaps that your friends disagree with.
Since you have decided to routinely print false information about me and my pro bono working for the community, I am going to now routinely monitor your pattern of tortious conduct and carefully document each and every wild accusation you make about me and others. And yes, I will certainly be sending this e-mail to many other people in our community so that your “true colors” are revealed.
When I happened to ask Grimaldi if he had read the CVS focus group blog post [Will The "CVS Focus Group" Support Removal Of Deed Restrictions At Corner Ketch and Paper Mill Road? Find Out 7:30PM September 16th In Hockessin] he said yes, he'd read it when Tucker sent him a link to it along with the forwarded email he'd sent to me (below). I suppose, therefore, it is safe to assume that Tucker forwarded this email to me to a whole lot of people ~
From: "Tucker, Shawn P."Oh My! Well, call me corrected! Mr. Tucker can threaten all he wants. I cite opinion where warranted and I repeat conversations as recollected. That is what bloggers do! (Disclaimer: the writing on the Delaware Way blog in no way represents the position of the Civic League for New Castle County for whom I am registered as a volunteer lobbyist and with whom I serve as Director along with Mark Blake. The CLNCC has its own blog and website. Go there for information about CLNCC and its positions, please.)
To: "nancyvwilling@yahoo.com (nancyvwilling@yahoo.com)"
Sent: Wednesday, September 4, 2013 1:10 PM
Subject: BlogI was forwarded you blog about the CVS project.I am very troubled by the inaccurate information contained in your blog Ms. Willing.Assuming you want to be accurate on your blog Ms. Willing, I wanted to bring several inaccuracies to your attention in regard to this particular blog:1. I am not Mr. Blake’s “friend” as you allege, nor did I support him for County Executive. I am a registered democratic for the record.2. I was never contacted by Mr. Blake in regard to WCACL, nor did I write WCACL’s articles of incorporation as you falsely claim in your blog. I am, however, very proud of the pro bono work my firm does for non-profits in many states, including Delaware non-profits like WCACL. In fact, pro bono work is one of many ways lawyers give back to the community consistent with our ethical duties and our professional responsibilities as officers of the Supreme Court of Delaware. Attached is a 50 page report from last year with many highlights of Drinker Biddle & Reath, LLP’s work in this regard.3. I attended the Planning Board meeting for Walker Farm, and neither Mr. Blake nor Councilwomen Kilpatrick engaged in “shaming” the Planning Board in any way whatsoever. I politely recommend you read the transcript from the hearing which confirms this fact. In fact, all of the immediate surrounding neighbors supported the Walker Farm project.4. Lastly, me as well as other land use attorneys in Delaware, are often asked by local civic groups for advise in regard to zoning projects. This is another way Delaware lawyers give back to the community, and it is only done when the lawyer has no involvement with the project. I have no involvement in this CVS matter, and so I was comfortable helping the community and GHADA with this matter in that I was happy to answer questions about the UDC and the zoning process. Again, I have done this before as have other land use attorneys like Mr. Tarabicos who I know you also speak with.In sum, I have received several e-mails passing on your blogs since last year, and I have to tell you I have not read a single one yet that does not either personally attack me and/or make false allegations about me.I ask that you please stop personally attacking me and otherwise publishing false information about me.I am always happy to discuss a project with you or anyone else, and I am more than willing to help you get correct facts pinned down if you are willing to spend the time to talk or correspond with me.If you are truly interested in helping Delaware residents in the world of land use, I would ask that you please consider helping them with accurate facts rather than made up rumors mill and falsehoods.My contact information is below.I truly hope you are in this for the right reasons Ms. Willing as you often claim, but I am beginning to lose faith as are many others who have been e-mailed your blogs due to the inaccurate information they seem to regularly contain.Thank you for your attention to my concerns in this regard.Regards, ST
So, back to the story: at a spring CLNCC meeting, Mark Blake had, in fact, explicitly told a group of people, which included me, that he'd asked Shawn Tucker to write the Articles of Incorporation for the new civic umbrella group around Corner Ketch as a favor, ostensibly in exchange for the work done for him on Walker Farm. Or rather, because he'd helped Shawn Tucker with Walker Farm, he could ask him for help elsewhere. Blake told the group of us that he'd asked development attorneys he's assisted on various projects for pro bono work on other projects they were not directly involved in and he rattled off several names. (Larry Tarabicos, cited by Blake and by Tucker above, since told me he has never done pro bono work for Mark Blake and has asked Blake why he was telling this to others.)
As I recall, Blake was very specific about having asked Shawn Tucker for help with the Articles of Incorporation for the White Clay Area Civic League because, as he said, Lisa Goodman couldn't write them since she was handling the CVS proposal for that area.
Blake saw nothing wrong with the practice - to avoid conflict of interest and appearance of impropriety, one lawyer fills in to help indirectly with another lawyer's project. I disagreed. I believe the practice can easily cross the line of propriety and I told him so.
And I now understand that Shawn Tucker denies he had anything to do with writing the WCACL Articles of Incorporation.........but he doesn't say he wasn't asked to write them. He does say:
I have no involvement in this CVS matter, and so I was comfortable helping the community and GHADA with this matter in that I was happy to answer questions about the UDC and the zoning process.I'd also heard from friends that Mark Blake was not happy with the CVS focus group blog post so I sent him this email cc'd to Shawn Tucker ~
From: Nancy WillingI never got a response.
To: "Markwblake@aol.com"; "shawn.tucker@dbr.com"
Sent: Wednesday, September 4, 2013 1:48 PMMark,Bill Dunn just called and said that you believe you are being blocked from commenting on the blog post about the CVS focus group meetings.There is nothing blocking anyone from comments. I don't know why you are having problems. But if you want to have the opportunity to respond the content, please send me what you want posted and I will be happy to do so. Shawn Tucker has sent some 'corrections' and I intend to give him the same courtesy.Nancy
Shawn Tucker's email has a laundry list of denials so I will let it speak for itself although I will eventually dig up the Walker Farm Planning Board transcript and News Journal article and write another blog post for the record because the demeanor of both Blake and Kilpartick toward our NCC Planning Board is seared into my memory and I do not believe I mischaracterized it in the least. And my recollection has been corroborated by at least one member of the Planning Board who felt the same way as I did: both shocked and dismayed.
I do stand corrected insofar as that I now understand that the CVS working group did have the benefit of some amount of county planning input. I am told that Mark Blake, the property owner and two members of the WCACL did meet with a NCC Land Use planner at some point to review the deed restrictions. Curiously though, NCC Land Use Department mangement claims to have no knowledge of such a meeting which begs the questions: who set it up? Why is there no record of it? I am waiting for answers.
Also, Paul Baumbach sent this along (note the invitation from Schwartz to freely forward the information to the greater community) ~
From: Nathaniel Schwartz
Date: September 15, 2013, 12:36:10 PM EDT
To: Undisclosed recipients:;
Subject: FW: Hello from Nate Schwartz - Letter to Bridleshire Farm Community - Whiteman's Garage & CVS Focus Group Update - Meeting @ Hockessin Memorial Hall - presentation @ 7:15 PM
To: Greater White Clay Area Civic League Members & SupportersBelow, please find the letter I sent out to my community, Bridleshire Farm, regarding tomorrow night’s GHADA meeting where our Focus Group will be presenting our findings. Again, I urge you to come out and listen so that everyone can make a more informed decision as to whether to SUPPORT OR OPPOSE. Hope to see many of you there tomorrow night.Again, this is a PUBLIC MEETING. Everyone is encouraged to attend. Also, please feel free to forward this information on to your greater communities.Sincerely,Nate SchwartzGWCACL, President.From: Nate Schwartz, BFMC Vice President & GWCACL PresidentSubject: Whiteman’s Garage & CVS Focus Group UpdateAs some of you know, I have been co-leading an effort over the past 7 months with a group of 20+ concerned citizens from surrounding communities in our area and Pike Creek Valley to gather information regarding the potential redevelopment of the current Whiteman’s Garage property. This is in reaction to the possibility of a CVS Pharmacy being built on the site. During this time, we have reestablished what was known as the Henderson Union Association. Our new organization’s name is the Greater White Clay Area Civic League (GWCACL).Our months of information gathering will be shared during the Greater Hockessin Area Development Association (GHADA) meeting at the Hockessin Memorial Hall located at 1225 Old Lancaster Pike, Hockessin, on Monday, September 16th at 7PM (tomorrow). The presentation portion will start around 7:15 PM or so.Last week, we learned some very important information directly from Mr. Kurt Dempsey, co-owner of Whiteman’s Garage. He and his brother have decided, no matter what the outcome is regarding the potential CVS project, THEY WILL NOT BE STAYING. They plan to sell the property to either CVS or a secondary buyer. The CVS developer had been pursuing the Dempsey’s property for over 4 years. Mr. Dempsey indicated that he and his brother thought that “a pharmacy would be the best option for the community.” He also stated that if the CVS project does not go through, regardless of whoever decides to redevelop the property he and his brother will NOT go to the County to ask for the existing deed restrictions to be lifted. Any new restrictions would be the responsibility of the developer.The CVS developer has NOT filed plans with the NCCo Land Use yet. They have been are patiently awaiting the outcome of the Focus Group. We have delayed their filing for 7 months. Our time is starting to run out.Our Focus Group has discussed many different reasons to oppose this project. We have also generated a comprehensive list of “requested concessions from CVS”. So far we have been successful getting agreement on most every aspect of our requested concessions. This group has NOT yet decided to SUPPORT OR OPPOSE. We are now going back to our communities for help to make that decision. I strongly ask you to come and attend this CVS Focus Group Information Session at Monday’s GHADA meeting. I would also urge that, if your first reaction is to oppose a CVS at the Whiteman’s Garage site, you at least hear the information that this group of concerned citizens has gathered.Sincerely,Nate SchwartzNate SchwartzBFMC Vice PresidentGWCACL President
~*~
0 comments:
Post a Comment