(b) Why is the property owned under the name of Wisdon Ministries?
(c) If he is a developer, why did he not procure the required permits in January 2005 for…
— Grading (over 200 yards requires a permit). Alan has moved tens of thousands of yards illegally. He has topped several large hills. He has bulldozed so much that it just makes you wonder how he gets away with it. Look at a satellite picture of Alan Inn’s property in 2004. Next, look at one from 2008. This is ridiculous. For over two years he and a laborer have used a D10-sized dozer, a grater, a backhoe, water truck, and fuel truck to destroy these picturesque badlands. You can never restore the damage that he has done.
— Well permit and five water tanks (never approved).
— Construction trailer (no permit).
— Underground electrical and water pipe burial (no permit).
— B&Ps environmental control (nothing).
Even after his arrest, Alan continued to bulldoze these picturesque badlands without any permits or regard for the San Diego County planning, land use, and building requirements.
(2) Take a look at the attached pictures. Do you see any No Trespassing signs? No! Do you see a grading permit posted at the property? No! Do you see the unpermitted construction trailer, the dozer, the large amount of grading? Please consider doing some research and telling the story of the other illegal activities by Alan Inn. The San Diego County planning and building departments have been aware of Alan Inn’s illegal activities. It was officially and properly reported to them in 2005. Case #05-02211. Supervisor Horn’s office was even copied. What have they done to stop this activity since it was reported in 2005? It appears, nothing.
(3) This should be your next story. Please consider.
This emailed letter included 28 photos of Alan Inn’s land, trailer, and equipment. You can see the photos here. — Editor
What’s The Point?
Despite a promising start, Cranston’s article fails to deliver on some basic journalistic principles (“Off-Road on Private Land,” “City Lights,” July 24). If this isn’t just a “dog bites man” report, then what is Cranston’s point? Is this a cautionary tale about vigilantism, the hazards of developing once-common lands in the desert, a jab at “evil off-roaders,” or a story about an immigrant’s tragic end? Too bad, because there is plenty to say about all of these issues. The article falls flat by simply retelling Inn’s story without providing key background info like climbing population figures and housing stats in Imperial County, trespassing incident stats from the sheriff, or firm evidence linking off-roader activity to vandalism on Inn’s property or crime generally. Simply making inferences without solid research and context is poor journalism. A shame since there is so much irony in a clueless immigrant’s attempt to tame the wild west by employing the brutal methods of the outlaw.
Something New For Gnarls
Two things I noticed in your most recent issue. You had the riders printed for what bands were going to have backstage (Blurt, July 24). Gnarls Barkley’s was interesting. It was also interesting when you printed that same exact one, a year ago when they played Viejas Casino. Tell the music editors we love Barkley. We’d rather read something fresh about them in the Blurt, not the same news we’re familiar with.
Second, the idea to do the crossword puzzle this way is excellent. Although as Murphy’s Law happens to be, I’ve yet to complete one now that I can print a message. Great idea on that one.
A Gnarls Barkley contract rider was not published in the Reader last year. — Editor
Reading Duncan Shepherd’s scathing review of The Dark Knight (“Blackout,” Movie Review, July 23) was reminiscent of the times I spent participating in the class activities of my AP English language class this year. We had to read each other’s essay, make corrections, offer suggestions, and pass the essay for someone else to assess. Getting to my point, there was always that one essay that was not only mind-numbingly boring but completely inaccurate. Shepherd’s review of TDK was exactly this.
The Dark Knight was an exceptional film that was made up of all the key components of a great summer blockbuster: action, suspense, exceptional acting, and a great plot. The action and suspense went hand in hand, since the suspense stemmed from the grand action in the film. For example, as the Batman pursues the Joker on his motorcycle towards the end of the movie, everyone squirms in their seats anxiously awaiting the inevitable: the showdown between the Batman and the Joker. The acting was also phenomenal: the Joker, played by the recently deceased Heath Ledger (R.I.P.), was the best of the bunch. The way that Ledger seemed to capture the essence of the Joker reminded all of us viewers of the sick, twisted persona that we remember from reading the comics. Everyone laughed at the idea of a clown as a villain, but we readers knew of the Joker’s sick personality, and Heath Ledger has been the only actor (sorry, Mr. Nicholson) that has been able to truly personify every aspect of that notorious comic book villain. Obviously it helped Ledger that the plot was an intricate creation, something that all actors, producers, and directors wish to work with.
I could go on praising the film, or, better yet, attacking Shepherd, but I feel like everything that I stated, coupled with the actual film, proves how faulty his review of TDK really is. The Dark Knight was nothing short of a fantastic film, and anyone who claims otherwise is ignorant.
Stephen K. Eisermann
Starless Dark Knight
For any of you that are new to San Diego, or just new to the San Diego Reader, you might wonder at the way films are rated by the in-house critic Duncan Shepherd. For your benefit I will explain how he goes about his job.