You know both of us were performing DD on the HB permit issue and we both came up with the same results, nothing was moving forward. I have not done any DD on SA, it is not as easy, because at least HB made it public information that you could get over the internet without the reliance of people to get back to you. So I am waiting to see what this inspector says about what specific violations BEHL committed. I agree with others that I would not lean to something bad, placing a business sign out near the roadway for example could be a land usage violation. Many of these cities have tight restrictions about what you can put on a piece of land including advertising. You must petition the city to get a permit to do such a thing.
It could be something that simple, but on the other hand it could very well be that the PBR pad is a violation of property easements, or the contractors failed to get the permits before upgrading an electrical system. It is purely speculative right now to think anything. Also not knowing if these are being mediated or what the story is from all of those involved is purely one sided information. The clerk does not know the specifics and the status of such violations, that is why he is being referred to the specific person who wrote them up.
If this whole thing turns out to be an issue with the PBR being built, what is the company doing to fix the issues. From my own DD I have not heard of any delays because of permits, but that does not mean there are none.
AI
Market Data 
Markets 
