Quote:
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut
If Jamie REALLY wanted to **** John, he technically could've just sold the place. And really, he should've.
I saw the lease as a tactical retreat. Had they dug their heels in and attempted to block the development outright, they'd have gotten steamrolled. By leasing it, they don't actually cut off any options to fight later and in the meantime they get a bit of a cash infusion that could bankroll that battle.
It seemed to me that the writing was on the wall w/r/t the near term issues with the lease. And he still maintains ownership of the land, even with a long-term lease on it. Had Jamie refused to lease it, it was likely that the Governor was going to use eminent domain to simply transfer ownership outright and again, cut off some options.
The lease was a way to slow the burn, save some powder and regroup for a fight on firmer ground, IMO.
|
I agree. But the fact remains that everybody saw it as a betrayal. And I don't know anything about the law, but there is a pretty good argument that he breached the fiduciary responsibilities of his POA.
I know my Dad would be pissed if I did something similar with his ground and there aren't near the stakes.
Bottom line though, Jamie put them in an unsustainable position.