RE: Priest Speaks Out and Gets Kicked Out
December 20, 2011 at 4:55 am
(This post was last modified: December 20, 2011 at 4:57 am by Perhaps.)
(December 20, 2011 at 4:53 am)Rhythm Wrote: Sure, property ownership as qaulifier for residency. That handles the homeless problem well doesn't it (and renters, double bonus, renters are probably too poor to grace the streets of St. Pete as well). They arent residents, the city has no obligation to serve them or their interests, and what they are doing is illegal.
Essentially I think that would be the argument made in favor of the city government. "(and renters, double bonus, renters are probably too poor to grace the streets of St. Pete as well)" - They can show that they live in a building with a mailing address.
(December 20, 2011 at 4:53 am)Rhythm Wrote: Never mind that what they're doing is being poor, or that they might have been born just down the street from the tent city, and lived there their entire lives. It's all very frustrating. One of those things that nags at you when you want to have warm fuzzy feelings about a familiar place.
I agree completely.
Brevity is the soul of wit.
