Information on the Oxford Horse Park proposal

[Talk Host]

There is a great deal of discussion about this proposal that will appear on the Sumter County special ballot June 17. The developer, Michael Goldstein is moderating a forum here on Talk of The Villages. He has added a special video presentation at the top of the forum that you may find interesting and informative. Please take a moment to view it.

Click Here if your are interested in this matter.

https://www.talkofthevillages.com/smf/index.php/topic,7518.0.html

[Bucco]

Does this thread and the addition of the video now mean that TOTV is officially endorsing a YES vote ???

[Talk Host]

Does this thread and the addition of the video now mean that TOTV is officially endorsing a YES vote ???


This means

There is a great deal of discussion about this proposal that will appear on the Sumter County special ballot June 17. The developer, Michael Goldstein is moderating a forum here on Talk of The Villages. He has added a special video presentation at the top of the forum that you may find interesting and informative. Please take a moment to view it.

Click Here if your are interested in this matter.

While we do reserve the right to endorse, if we wish, this does not constitute an endorsement as we said in the early disclaimer. You have the opportunity to take advantage of the same amount of space as they have, under exactly the same conditions and agreements. If you would like to post a video that represents your view on this matter, please contact us to work out the arrangements. We will gladly post a message directing our readers to your video.

JLK

[Bucco]

I thank you for your response.

I am not a group, do not represent a group, am not a member of a group...simply one voter. Just wondered if the groups that do oppose were given the same opportunity and then turned down the opportunity to come on here to post their thoughts. As I said, not anyone official here but wondered, as you know, from the outset, if equal time was offered and refused.

[Talk Host]

I thank you for your response.

I am not a group, do not represent a group, am not a member of a group...simply one voter. Just wondered if the groups that do oppose were given the same opportunity and then turned down the opportunity to come on here to post their thoughts. As I said, not anyone official here but wondered, as you know, from the outset, if equal time was offered and refused.




Equal time was offered, there was no response and no request was ever made. If it had been requested, they would have, and still will have the same opportunity that the Vote Yes for Horse park political action committee was given.

[Bucco]

Thank you...I feel better. I was not aware that those opposed were given the exact opportunity from the beginning but turned you down.

My apologies...I just felt it was unfair but seems it was those opposed who made it that way !

[Talk Host]

bump

[Craig1]

National and statewide research into the effects of gaming industry always reveal many negative consequences of "legalized" gambling to the communities they reside in.

Why should the Villages vote for something that could have longterm negative consequences on its residents?

The Bottom line is money will leave the local economy, which hurts everyone except the Horse track developers/owners/operators.

[chelsea24]

The bottom line is that the local economy will be enhanced, the crime rate will not soar, the suicide rate will not catapult (although the lines at TooJay's would be shorter, hmm)
people will not fall into debt, the traffic will still flow, the bird's will still sing and the sun will still rise. And when the dust settles, all will be well in The Villages.

Again, CraigI, you've only posted twice and it has been to be negative to this Horse Park. You have a right to your opinion. I just question who you are, what your motive is and who your backers could be.

[samhass]

So, specifically, what is it exactly that you are afraid of? I wish you could spell it out in bullet format so I can understand. (I mean bullets as in 1,2,3.. I don't want you to come over and shoot me ;D) I honestly do want to understand why you are as opposed, as I am for, OHP. Are you a gambler that is afraid of additional temptation? That I could understand. "Longterm negative consequences" is just to nebulous a term. Heck, Life has longterm negative consequences. We're all going to die.
Money leaves this county for China every day. Will you stop shopping? Will you stop buying things made in China? China is a far greater threat to our entire economy than a small time horse park yet everyone seems curiously mum on the subject.
This isn't going to be Churchill Downs, Craig. If you don't want to play cards or dominoes, then don't. Some of us will enjoy it. Live and let live.

[Talk Host]

bump

[Golf-Tinker]

I suspect you want to keep the horse & poker fires burning, esle why the bump. Some ice time would be nice.

[Talk Host]

I suspect you want to keep the horse & poker fires burning, esle why the bump. Some ice time would be nice.


We would do the same for you if you were a paid sponsor. We support the efforts of all of our sponsors.

[Bucco]

We would do the same for you if you were a paid sponsor. We support the efforts of all of our sponsors.
__________________________________________________ __________________

I sort of understand this. Would have been nice as a service to the community to offer time and space to both sides although I dont even know if the opposition is that organized.

They surely cannot match the funds at the disposal of the corporation developing this land.

But...business is busness I suppose !

[Talk Host]

We would do the same for you if you were a paid sponsor. We support the efforts of all of our sponsors.
__________________________________________________ __________________

I sort of understand this. Would have been nice as a service to the community to offer time and space to both sides although I dont even know if the opposition is that organized.

They surely cannot match the funds at the disposal of the corporation developing this land.

But...business is busness I suppose !


Time and space has been offered since the beginning of this discussion. The "no" vote comments were posted at no charge. The vote yes committee had to pay.

[Bucco]

Time and space has been offered since the beginning of this discussion. The "no" vote comments were posted at no charge. The vote yes committee had to pay.
__________________________________________________ _______________________

I have posted NO comments and sure glad that was free !!! Where, other than the standard thread start, were these free NO comments ???? Not trying to give you a hard time but trying to understand this !!

[Talk Host]

Time and space has been offered since the beginning of this discussion. The "no" vote comments were posted at no charge. The vote yes committee had to pay.
__________________________________________________ _______________________

I have posted NO comments and sure glad that was free !!! Where, other than the standard thread start, were these free NO comments ???? Not trying to give you a hard time but trying to understand this !!


Can you point out to me where anybody with a "NO" opinion was charged. The "NO" campaigners paid to have signs made, but were not charged to post their thoughts here, where they? There were plenty of "NO" vote comments posted in the space that was paid for by the "Vote Yes" committee. Nobody on that side complained that their paid space was being used by the opposition. I just don't understand where the "NO" campaigners think they were deprived of space on TOTV to voice their opinion. Please help me here.

[Hancle704]

This is starting to occupy more attention than what it is worth. The voting started yesterday and will be over on June 17th. Why not cool it until the results are known?

I mean, aren't there any other issues worth discussing? :dontknow:

[Bucco]

Can you point out to me where anybody with a "NO" opinion was charged. The "NO" campaigners paid to have signs made, but were not charged to post their thoughts here, where they? There were plenty of "NO" vote comments posted in the space that was paid for by the "Vote Yes" committee. Nobody on that side complained that their paid space was being used by the opposition. I just don't understand where the "NO" campaigners think they were deprived of space on TOTV to voice their opinion. Please help me here.
__________________________________________________ _________

Gee....first of all I am not a "campaigner" !!!!

You are bragging that those of us who oppose this project were able to post our comments for free...that, to me,is scary. It implies that since you were paid, only positive statements should have been accepted.

I never heard any "campaigners" or just plain old Villagers complaning of being derived of space. I simply made a comment that it would be have been nice to have had a neutral site with both sides represented. You informed me that you had invited the opposition folks but they turned you down. I accept that, and was trying to understand exactly what you were saying in this thread.

If you wish us who oppose to stay out of the "special" area,fine....then it will be allthoseYES votes talking to each other !

[Muncle]

I'm going to type this real slowly so it can be readily understood:

What the :edit: is the problem???

We have an open forum here where just about anyone can post just about anything (except me when I disagree with certain people) with no restraints. I don't know the business arrangements made by the administrator with MikeG. I do know that he (MikeG) posted his first comment in a general forum and that shortly thereafter the Oxford Horse Park Information Forum was created. It seemed logical then and even more so in retrospect that since this was a hot button issue and would generate a lot of discussion, having a separate forum would allow interested viewers to more easily track comments. That Jan and Co got OHP to fund this forum was an excellent business move.

If you notice the header for the forum, it states "This is your chance to talk directly to the developer of the proposed Oxford Horse Park. Ask any question and receive a timely response." It does not say only positive comments are accepted. It does not say that posters cannot be members of any organizations opposing OHP. To the best of my knowledge, no posts have been deleted because they have been negative toward OHP or asked embarrassing questions of MikeG. Yes, some of the banter between pro and con people has gotten a tad strident at times, but never from MikeG. I think he has been ultra patient, replying to the same or at least similar questions several times. Additionally, MikeG has taken some minor abuse and been asked some questions where I'd have been tempted to reply with my infamous "FOAD, it's none of your business." But he's a business man and knows that it's best in the long run to tolerate this. And he's probably more patient (and intelligent) than I.

[mikeg]

Thanks Muncle, you are absolutely right.

I am the administrator of the OHP forum. The point of the forum is to answer questions from the residents of The Villages in an effort to inform and educate people on what actually is being proposed.

Muncle is correct in stating that I have the power to delete any post I want. Not one single post from anybody, positive or negative, has been, or will be, deleted.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I know that I am not going to change everybody's mind.

However, just as I believe that everyone has the right to choose how they want to spend their time, (gambling, fishing, golfing, golf cart riding, smoking...), I also believe in freedom of speech.

Deleting any comment that I thought was wrong, or directed at me in a negative manner would have made me a hypocrite.

Therefore, all comments were left online, allowing the OHP forum to be open for both the positive and negative viewpoints.

[samhass]

Muncle, MikeG is way more patient than I am. I liked his comment about not being a hypocrite.






I'm going to type this real slowly so it can be readily understood:

What the :edit: is the problem???

We have an open forum here where just about anyone can post just about anything (except me when I disagree with certain people) with no restraints. I don't know the business arrangements made by the administrator with MikeG. I do know that he (MikeG) posted his first comment in a general forum and that shortly thereafter the Oxford Horse Park Information Forum was created. It seemed logical then and even more so in retrospect that since this was a hot button issue and would generate a lot of discussion, having a separate forum would allow interested viewers to more easily track comments. That Jan and Co got OHP to fund this forum was an excellent business move.

If you notice the header for the forum, it states "This is your chance to talk directly to the developer of the proposed Oxford Horse Park. Ask any question and receive a timely response." It does not say only positive comments are accepted. It does not say that posters cannot be members of any organizations opposing OHP. To the best of my knowledge, no posts have been deleted because they have been negative toward OHP or asked embarrassing questions of MikeG. Yes, some of the banter between pro and con people has gotten a tad strident at times, but never from MikeG. I think he has been ultra patient, replying to the same or at least similar questions several times. Additionally, MikeG has taken some minor abuse and been asked some questions where I'd have been tempted to reply with my infamous "FOAD, it's none of your business." But he's a business man and knows that it's best in the long run to tolerate this. And he's probably more patient (and intelligent) than I.