Baltimore residents file petition to review "misleading" ballot question about Harborplace developme

Published: Sep 06, 2024 Duration: 00:02:14 Category: News & Politics

Trending searches: baltimore
BUT A NICE WORKWEEK. WE WILL TALK ABOUT THAT COMING UP IN A FEW MINUTES. >>> 20 BALTIMORE CITY RESIDENTS FILED A PETITION CHARGING AND BALLOT QUESTIONS SURROUNDING THE PLANS FOR THE FUTURE IN A HARBOR. THE DEVELOPER REVEALED THEIR PLANS FOR HARBORPLACE IN 2023. >> SOME BELIEVE THE BALLOT QUESTION MAY BE CONFUSING TO VOTERS. THEIR CALLING ON THE COURT TO REVIEW IT IN THE NOVEMBER ELECTIONS. JENEE' REESE'S ON YOUR CORNER WITH THE LATEST. >> Reporter: FORMER CITY AND STATE EXECUTOR STOOD BESIDE BALTIMORE CITY RESIDENTS ON FRIDAY TO PETITION BALLOT QUESTION F , ALSO KNOWN AS THE INNER HARBOR PARK CHARTER AMENDMENT . >> THIS LANGUAGE IS LIKELY TO CONFUSE AND MISLEAD VOTERS SO THAT THEY DO NOT KNOW THE ACTUAL EFFECT. >> WE NEED TO BE CLEAR WITH THE PEOPLE THAT THE LANGUAGE THAT HAS BEEN PROPOSED IS MISLEADING. >> ACCORDING TO THE MARYLAND STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS WEBSITE, QUESTION F IN PART ASKS VOTERS WHETHER OR NOT THEY WANT TO AMEND THE CHARTER TO ALLOW THE INNER HARBOR PARK TO OPEN FOR PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT. >> THIS IS WHAT THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED BY THE CITY SOLICITOR BELIEVES IS GOING TO MAKE CLEAR THAT WE ARE TRANSFERRING AND CONVERTING PUBLIC PARK LAND INTO PROPERTY ON WHICH LUXURY APARTMENTS CAN BE BUILT. >> RESIDENTS CLAIM THEY TRIED FOR MONTHS TO REVIEW THE BALLOT QUESTION BEFORE IT WAS RELEASED. >> IF ANYBODY SAYS WHY DID YOU WAIT UNTIL THE LAST SECOND? I'M HERE TO TELL YOU WE DID NOT. WE HAVE BEEN TRYING FOR FIVE MONTHS TO GET A REVIEW OF THE LANGUAGE. >> Reporter: WJZ SAT DOWN WITH MAYOR BRANDON SCOTT AND NBC REAL ESTATE DAVID BRAMBLE LAST YEAR. THEY SAID THIS IS ONE IS ONE OF MANY STEPS IN THE PROJECT. >> I CONTINUE TO SAY THIS IS A ONCE IN A GENERATION OPPORTUNITY TO RESET THE TRAJECTORY OF OUR CITY. >> WHY WE HAD TO ADD ALL OF THIS DENSE PROSE IS MISLEADING AT BEST TO SUGGEST THAT THERE IS A LEGAL NECESSITY FOR IT. IT WAS NOT NECESSARY THEN AND IT IS NOT NECESSARY NOW. >> RESIDENCE HOPE THAT

Share your thoughts