[Northwoods]

Originally Posted by Goldwingnut

Check the documents on the Sumter County Property Appraiser's website for each parcel of property the fire stations sit on. No sale price is give and the deeds contain a statement that the property can only be used for a fire station (or similar) and that if used for anything else the property reverts back to the original owner (the developer). The only way they (a government body) can agree to a deed restriction like this is if they did not have to pay for the property.

Advogado and Stan the Man. The above information is why I made that statement. Goldwingnut has a much better understanding of this than I do.
It is nice when someone can present facts with proof.

[Aloha1]

Interesting article in the Daily Sun about this. Seems the Troika is covering their tracks with false statements as to who proposed and supported this tax. DS lists several sources so easy to check out.

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by Aloha1

Interesting article in the Daily Sun about this. Seems the Troika is covering their tracks with false statements as to who proposed and supported this tax. DS lists several sources so easy to check out.

It's a shame it isn't online but since I'm not at all interested in funding the company I won't be buying one to read the article.

Care to provide links to the sources?

[Aloha1]

it

Originally Posted by Bill14564

It's a shame it isn't online but since I'm not at all interested in funding the company I won't be buying one to read the article.

Care to provide links to the sources?

If you spent the 50 cents for the paper you would know. What was printed was :

"Estep stated he never championed the issue but in a 1/5 workshop he was the first commissioner to nudge the tax cap forward. Neither Miller nor Search opposed that move". Public record

"Wednesday nite, Miller tried to distance himself from the issue claiming on Facebook that he never saw the letter sent out to homeowners notifying them of the proposal. In truth all commissioners were asked to review the letter at the 1/26 meeting per the meeting transcripts. Chairman Breeden asked at that meeting, "Everyone looked at it? Any questions? No objections or comments were made". Again, Public record .

"On the day of this week's vote, Miller supported a Facebook post that cast Arnold as the driver of the tax cap hike yet it was Miller who made the motion at the 2/9 meeting to push it forward to vote. Search seconded." Public record

"After the public comment on Tuesday, Miller attempted to keep the tax hike alive stating they could look at it again in June or July. Miller also went on Facebook to shrug off the facts from Public records saying "If you read it in the Daily Sun it's probably wrong.""

So a politician claims the PUBLIC record is wrong? Something is rotten in Denmark.

[Bogie Shooter]

Originally Posted by Aloha1

If you spent the 50 cents for the paper you would know. What was printed was :

"Estep stated he never championed the issue but in a 1/5 workshop he was the first commissioner to nudge the tax cap forward. Neither Miller nor Search opposed that move". Public record

"Wednesday nite, Miller tried to distance himself from the issue claiming on Facebook that he never saw the letter sent out to homeowners notifying them of the proposal. In truth all commissioners were asked to review the letter at the 1/26 meeting per the meeting transcripts. Chairman Breeden asked at that meeting, "Everyone looked at it? Any questions? No objections or comments were made". Again, Public record .

"On the day of this week's vote, Miller supported a Facebook post that cast Arnold as the driver of the tax cap hike yet it was Miller who made the motion at the 2/9 meeting to push it forward to vote. Search seconded." Public record

"After the public comment on Tuesday, Miller attempt to keep the tax hike alive stating they could look at it again in June or July. Miller also went on Facebook to shrug off the facts from Public records saying "if you read in the Daily Sun it's probably wrong.""

So a politician claims the public record is wrong? Something is rotten in Denmark.

Now, where have we seen that in the last few years?
Seems Miller is using Facebook to say something different that his public statements..

[Aloha1]

Originally Posted by Bogie Shooter

Now, where have we seen that in the last few years?
Seems Miller is using Facebook to say something different that his public statements..

Yup. Pesky little things, those facts.

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by Aloha1

If you spent the 50 cents for the paper you would know. What was printed was :

Even at 50 cents I have no interest in funding that paper. If they want to convince me of something then they can get their message to me, I'm not going to pay for the privilege.

Originally Posted by Aloha1

"Estep stated he never championed the issue but in a 1/5 workshop he was the first commissioner to nudge the tax cap forward. Neither Miller nor Search opposed that move". Public record

"Wednesday nite, Miller tried to distance himself from the issue claiming on Facebook that he never saw the letter sent out to homeowners notifying them of the proposal. In truth all commissioners were asked to review the letter at the 1/26 meeting per the meeting transcripts. Chairman Breeden asked at that meeting, "Everyone looked at it? Any questions? No objections or comments were made". Again, Public record .

"On the day of this week's vote, Miller supported a Facebook post that cast Arnold as the driver of the tax cap hike yet it was Miller who made the motion at the 2/9 meeting to push it forward to vote. Search seconded." Public record

"After the public comment on Tuesday, Miller attempt to keep the tax hike alive stating they could look at it again in June or July. Miller also went on Facebook to shrug off the facts from Public records saying "if you read in the Daily Sun it's probably wrong.""

So a politician claims the public record is wrong? Something is rotten in Denmark.

It appears neither side is clean. It is unfortunate that Miller doesn't remember what seems to have been presented in two prior meetings. It is equally unfortunate that the paper characterizes the June or July meeting as an "attempt to keep the tax hike alive."

It would be so much better if both sides looked out for their constituents or customers rather than bickering with each other.

[Stu from NYC]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

Even at 50 cents I have no interest in funding that paper. If they want to convince me of something then they can get their message to me, I'm not going to pay for the privilege.



It appears neither side is clean. It is unfortunate that Miller doesn't remember what seems to have been presented in two prior meetings. It is equally unfortunate that the paper characterizes the June or July meeting as an "attempt to keep the tax hike alive."

It would be so much better if both sides looked out for their constituents or customers rather than bickering with each other.

Your right, a compromise might be best for all.

[Aloha1]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

Even at 50 cents I have no interest in funding that paper. If they want to convince me of something then they can get their message to me, I'm not going to pay for the privilege.



It appears neither side is clean. It is unfortunate that Miller doesn't remember what seems to have been presented in two prior meetings. It is equally unfortunate that the paper characterizes the June or July meeting as an "attempt to keep the tax hike alive."

It would be so much better if both sides looked out for their constituents or customers rather than bickering with each other.

Miller's own words, not the paper characterizing it.

You've been had, my friend. Just as an aside, I really do not understand the attitude of not wanting to learn both sides of the story. Your 50 cents only goes to the paper staff, not the "evil" developer. Which also bring to question if people are so unhappy here, why don't they move? It's a big country.