Avon’s Traer Creek Developer – Misses Key Point

by Clayton Moore

Traer’s long winded letter (Click Here) in last week’s Fishwrap – failed to emphasize a key point in their (now years old) litigation with the Town of Avon.

Key Point?  Yes, the one that has the biggest future effect on Avon’s Taxpayer’s and Avon’s financial future.

Here is what the principles at Traer Creek wrote in their letter….


Here is what Avon’s Property Owners, Taxpayers and Voters need to know.

1 – The Judge made his Ruling based on the “Plain Language of the Agreement” written into the 1998 Annexation Agreement with Traer Creek – including all legal Amendments to that Agreement – up to the point in time when the Lawsuit(s) started.

2 – FACT:  Some current and former members of Avon’s City Council don’t like the words in the original Agreement and have insisted on trying to CHANGE that Agreement via years of litigation – and Millions in legal fees the Avon Taxpayer has paid.


3 – Should the Settlement Agreement – that is proposed FAIL and the lawsuit goes back into the Judges Courtroom – just how do you think the Judge is going to Rule?  He will Rule based on the verbiage in the original 1998 Agreement (plus legal Amendments) so that when Avon’s (inevitable?) Appeal is filed, and the Appellate Court reviews what the Judges Rulings are – AND THE BASIS for the Judge’s Rulings – Avon’ Appeal will likely lose because the Judge Ruled in a way 100% consistent with the “plain language” (as the Judge has already stated) in the original Agreement!

4 – FACT IS:  The original verbiage in the 1998 Agreement is what some Avon City Council members – don’t like.  So then…why would any REASONABLE person – work to prevent/stall any Settlement – if their ONLY legal alternative is to return to the Judge’s Courtroom and the words in the 1998 Agreement and Amendments “that they can’t stand in the first place”?

Avon’s Taxpayer’s have already paid Millions into this multi-year lawsuit, Millions more are at stake if some on Avon’s City Council insist on behaving stupidly.

The ECT’s position on this litigation is clear – the ECT is 100% pro-settlement, ECT doesn’t care who some readers would choose to ‘blame – or just who is at fault’.

Grow up and settle this.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: