| Author | Post |
|---|
JJohnson
Member
| Joined: | Wed Aug 15th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 495 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 14th, 2008 07:01 pm |
|
gk wrote: The truth is pretty simple.
There are some on the GSTAC board that favor's incorporation, there are some that do not, and there are some that don't care either way. Incorporation is not their issue.
IF you blubbering whiners could stop your complaining to one another long enough to look at the facts you would see what is going on.
Sooner or later EVERYONE represented on that board will have to interface and work with one another at some point, why not do it all together out in the open so that everyone is on the same page about the true wishes of the community. Private individuals, Developers, Businessmen, and county people all interface at some point, why not take the initiative and do it all together?
What I continue to hear on this site is ...I want.....I want....I want!!! There are many other people, and other parties involved that may want something different. The dozen or so snivelers on this forum by no means represent anything except personal self interest.
If the snivelers really wanted to have a say in their community they would welcome this forum and the opportunity that it presents.
The people involved in GSTAC are the best qualified people to do something of this magnitude, and they are the professionals. If there were anyone else qualified enough, committed enough, and determined enough it would have happened by now.
What can you do? STOP WHINING!!! Make a call to the people involved. Get on one of their task forces to address specific issues. If you don't....you will have lost your only opportunity to have a real voice in this area.
Swallow your pride and do something constructive, become a part of the answer.....(or continue whining and complaining and doing nothing but feed each others hate)
I would agree with you IF the deck was not already stacked. The secrecy and distortion of the truth we have already seen does not make this a group I would want to be associated with. The people that want us to believe that this is an open process must think we are idiots. All of you BLCers are in this up to your eye balls. the more you deny the more I get scared of your capabilities. If you are willing to lie to us in the beginning then why should we trust you now?
To borrow Bambi's earlier quote "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American Public." ......Teddy Roosevelt., I will continue to criticize those that choose to rule my life without my authorization. Please substitute the appropriate names to make this quote relevant to our discussion.
Last edited on Mon Apr 14th, 2008 07:05 pm by JJohnson
|
dejavu
Member
| Joined: | Sat Jul 22nd, 2006 |
| Location: | On A Dirt Road |
| Posts: | 196 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 14th, 2008 06:54 pm |
|
| GK, very well said. I could not agree more.
|
gk
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jan 9th, 2006 |
| Location: | Tonga |
| Posts: | 1846 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 14th, 2008 06:45 pm |
|
The truth is pretty simple.
There are some on the GSTAC board that favor's incorporation, there are some that do not, and there are some that don't care either way. Incorporation is not their issue.
IF you blubbering whiners could stop your complaining to one another long enough to look at the facts you would see what is going on.
Sooner or later EVERYONE represented on that board will have to interface and work with one another at some point, why not do it all together out in the open so that everyone is on the same page about the true wishes of the community. Private individuals, Developers, Businessmen, and county people all interface at some point, why not take the initiative and do it all together?
What I continue to hear on this site is ...I want.....I want....I want!!! There are many other people, and other parties involved that may want something different. The dozen or so snivelers on this forum by no means represent anything except personal self interest.
If the snivelers really wanted to have a say in their community they would welcome this forum and the opportunity that it presents.
The people involved in GSTAC are the best qualified people to do something of this magnitude, and they are the professionals. If there were anyone else qualified enough, committed enough, and determined enough it would have happened by now.
What can you do? STOP WHINING!!! Make a call to the people involved. Get on one of their task forces to address specific issues. If you don't....you will have lost your only opportunity to have a real voice in this area.
Swallow your pride and do something constructive, become a part of the answer.....(or continue whining and complaining and doing nothing but feed each others hate)
|
Bambi
Member
| Joined: | Tue Sep 19th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2451 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 14th, 2008 06:24 pm |
|
JJohnson wrote: anne.reed wrote: The extended visioning committee still has vacancies. There will also be many opportunities to serve on the visioning task forces for those individuals who have a limited amount of time to contribute, or, who are passionate about individual issues and would be willing to volunteer for a specific cause.
For someone who claims that they are not involved and supposedly only reads the website you seem to know an aweful lot obout the inner workings. I could not find anything this specific on the website.
Please come clean and tell us what is going on. I do not believe you are a casual observer. You have been too close to the issues to be standing onthe sidelines now. Couple that with your obviously detailed knowlegde of what is going on makes me think you have been lieing to us or misleading us. Your crdibility is on the line here. Will you continue to deny your involvement or will you tell us what is really going on?
I agree with you 100% on this one. But, alas, she and the others only answer the questions they deem worth answering. They ignore those they feel hits too close to home. Another one of their "fair?" and "democratic" practices.
|
dejavu
Member
| Joined: | Sat Jul 22nd, 2006 |
| Location: | On A Dirt Road |
| Posts: | 196 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 14th, 2008 06:03 pm |
|
That would need to be the case. Otherwise the number of ruralites heard here would exceed the 4 or 5 level.
Any shirts left Ted?
|
Ted
Member
| Joined: | Tue Jan 10th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 279 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 14th, 2008 05:52 pm |
|
dejavu wrote:
Dust from dirt roads = (Voila!) Crime and meth houses.
All of us south and east of the Goldmine Mountains want to "progress" and to stop "murdering".
Ahhh but we hide it well, don't you think?
Wow, we have seen completely incomprehensible gibberish from both dejavu and from Gordon Brown within the week. Amazing. Could it be that dejavu is infact Gordon?
|
Bambi
Member
| Joined: | Tue Sep 19th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2451 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 14th, 2008 05:48 pm |
|
Ok dejavu. Speak english please, and in complete sentences, so I can discern what you are saying. thank you.
|
dejavu
Member
| Joined: | Sat Jul 22nd, 2006 |
| Location: | On A Dirt Road |
| Posts: | 196 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 14th, 2008 05:42 pm |
|
Bambi wrote: The Rurals want progress. And if they don't come on board, then you might have 2000 residents living out here, that will keep doing things the way they want to do things....such as shacks with no plumbing; mobiles with no running water; homes with no septics and running water. Dirt roads, creating dust. What does that Breed? Crime. Meth houses ( three were around me only 4 years ago.). And lack of code enforcement, which enables these tenants and residents to get away with "murder."
Dust from dirt roads = (Voila!) Crime and meth houses.
All of us south and east of the Goldmine Mountains want to "progress" and to stop "murdering".
Ahhh but we hide it well, don't you think?
|
Ted
Member
| Joined: | Tue Jan 10th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 279 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 14th, 2008 04:19 pm |
|
Good pick up AZSunshine. For those who did not read it, the last paragraph of the article says this:
"A seat at the table is likely and a seat at several tables," Brown said. "In a nutshell, we're not concerned with whose flag is going to fly. What we're concerned about is what they are going to do."
As Dansjensdad correctly pointed out, that makes absolutely no sense at all. It is perhaps the worst sentence that I have ever seen actually make it into a newspaper.
You know, we on here are always picking on Gordon for always operating in the shadows, assuming that he is doing something evil. In reality, the situation may be that Gordon is incapable of stringing together words into a coherent sentence.
|
Bambi
Member
| Joined: | Tue Sep 19th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2451 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 14th, 2008 03:56 pm |
|
JJohnson wrote: I don't understand why we would have to. Obviously we are 2 distintly different communities. I say let the ruralites have their own system and we proceed with our progressive approach to solve our problems. If the ruralites decide to live in the stone age then so be it. they don't share our values and we don't share theirs. It is kind of like us and Florence. We have very little in common and don't want to be associated with them.
JJ. I disagree with you on the Rurals not sharing your values. How many Ruralites have you heard from on here? 4 or 5 maybe? I mail out my cards to the ruralites....all 2000 of them. You are only seeing a very small representation of the rurals, and yes, we do want progress to move into our neighborhoods. None of us want to live in the stone age. We live close to that era now, because certain ones who have made themselves self appointed spokesmen for us, are wanting to stay rural, because they don't want their costs of living to go up, nor do they want someone in office that they can't control. Gordon Brown and This Coalition do not speak for anyone but themselves and their former BLC members. This is their dream....their idea of existance; their plans; their vision. I heard where Bob Dotson was contacted some time ago to contribute to their vision. Was I? No. Were any of my neighbors? No. Were any of my 40 family members that live between J.R. , S.T.H. and the Rurals contacted? NO. Just the regulars and a few proactives thru HOA.s. It is a preselected group of people who have similar visions and ideas. The Cards are Stacked. I noticed in their website, that they 1. purposely did not choose people who they considered volitile, 2. focused on one issue or 3. if they had a history of complaining, especially of not getting things done out here...............
So, here it is: If at any time in the past, we have exercised our Constitutional rights to voice our opinions, even if it is a complaint, we are not chosen to participate with this group. Exclusionary practices. Wonder where that came from?
Citizens: If you truely believe this way, then join their organization. I was emailed by Jack Malpass, for doing just that. For discussing my opinon on here. He critized me and lambasted me for my opinion. They do not believe in Blogging, as it is another form of excercising you freedom of speech. My My. And they want to show us the way, the light and the truth?
The Rurals want progress. And if they don't come on board, then you might have 2000 residents living out here, that will keep doing things the way they want to do things....such as shacks with no plumbing; mobiles with no running water; homes with no septics and running water. Dirt roads, creating dust. What does that Breed? Crime. Meth houses ( three were around me only 4 years ago.). And lack of code enforcement, which enables these tenants and residents to get away with "murder."
This entire process of organizing this coalition was not and is not a democratic process. And Gordon Brown and Anne Reed, do not speak for the Majority. Remember; they are the biggest proponants of doing away with San Tan Flats rights to exist in a free society.....they want them to be oppressed until they give in.
I will not be governed by that type of mentality.
Last edited on Mon Apr 14th, 2008 04:22 pm by Bambi
|
azsunshine
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jan 12th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 402 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 14th, 2008 03:25 pm |
|
Holy Cow!!
http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/113659
Is that a diss coming from dansjensdad towards Brown? Whats next? Are you going to come out and say secret non public meetings for a year is BAD and non elected representatives are also BAD?
Last edited on Mon Apr 14th, 2008 03:35 pm by azsunshine
|
JJohnson
Member
| Joined: | Wed Aug 15th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 495 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 14th, 2008 03:13 pm |
|
| I don't understand why we would have to. Obviously we are 2 distintly different communities. I say let the ruralites have their own system and we proceed with our progressive approach to solve our problems. If the ruralites decide to live in the stone age then so be it. they don't share our values and we don't share theirs. It is kind of like us and Florence. We have very little in common and don't want to be associated with them.
|
2 cents
Member
| Joined: | Fri Nov 2nd, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 133 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 14th, 2008 02:34 pm |
|
Did I miss something? It sounded as though there was to be earth shattering revelations in the saturday Trib. article about GSTAC. Looked like SOS.
Do the, apparently 2, factions realize that one day you are going to have to set at the same table and plan your common future?
2
|
JJohnson
Member
| Joined: | Wed Aug 15th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 495 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 14th, 2008 01:24 pm |
|
anne.reed wrote: The extended visioning committee still has vacancies. There will also be many opportunities to serve on the visioning task forces for those individuals who have a limited amount of time to contribute, or, who are passionate about individual issues and would be willing to volunteer for a specific cause.
For someone who claims that they are not involved and supposedly only reads the website you seem to know an aweful lot obout the inner workings. I could not find anything this specific on the website.
Please come clean and tell us what is going on. I do not believe you are a casual observer. You have been too close to the issues to be standing onthe sidelines now. Couple that with your obviously detailed knowlegde of what is going on makes me think you have been lieing to us or misleading us. Your crdibility is on the line here. Will you continue to deny your involvement or will you tell us what is really going on?
|
Bambi
Member
| Joined: | Tue Sep 19th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2451 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 12th, 2008 03:22 am |
|
So, for over a year the Coalition, has been designing our future. I suggest one goes to the site address Anne posted, and look at the names to the right of the article, of those who have been working on our vision.....Developers: Miller Holdings/San Tan Heights. Harold Christ/Copper Basin. And, George Johnson., and one other developer.
http://www.azcentral.com/community/pinal/articles/2008/04/10/20080410gr-santancoalition0410-ON.html
Now say what you will, but a city would make them all conform to the people's design, via the process of elections of local representatives, who provide the vision for the design.......let the people elect their representatives, who are fellow residents who "experience" the impact of what occurs out here..... Why didn't they spend that valuable time working on a city, which provides for elections? Does each Core co=leader believe that it is still possible for this area to become a city? Yes or No.
I am just trying to express my opinion about this. It does not reflect the view of everyone certainly, and this might work for some who believe in the process of appointments of representatives.
Are we not capable of forming a city now? If we go thru this "process" before we go thru the incorporation process, or to determine if we even should, I feel we will lose our window of opportunity and valuable time. Then we will be left with this quasi organization of appointees, that will end up governing us by default.
If someone can convince me otherwise, please do so. This is my own personal analysis, and is that of some others I know also. Let's organize to become incoporated. Why go thru an additional step of joining an organization that organized a year ago, who have already formed opinions based on developer and business input, along with maybe some residents, I'm not sure? QC Mayor says it's possible. Let's put our energy into forming a city, not join an existing coalition, with predetermined designs for our future. I'd rather stay County with a single elected representative in place to deal with our issues, than a half a dozen appointees, who aren't bound by the State Statutes or ethics rules.
Last edited on Sat Apr 12th, 2008 03:24 am by Bambi
|
pipeman
Member
| Joined: | Tue Oct 3rd, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 493 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 12th, 2008 12:15 am |
|
anne.reed wrote: JulieB wrote:
It does not matter about past history . . . well, it matters, but even taking that out of the equation . . . even if I admired and adored everyone who was on the committee, the people who were picked for GSTAC were hand-picked. That's the problem. If I cannot choose the people who are going to be speaking for me and communicating my wants and needs, then I don't want anyone to. I can do it myself. It should have started with a public vote right from the beginning. I'm all for a group of people starting the ball rolling on something like this, but MONTHS ago it should have went public and people should have had to run for various positions within the group. Period.
Right off the top of my head, I can come up with 3 people who I KNOW would have wanted to run for something like this.
Dear Julie:
If you know of someone who is willing to work for the betterment of their community without compensation, and who will pledge to accurately represent the majority and minority opinions from their district, I strongly suggest you have them contact the Coalition thru their website. The extended visioning committee still has vacancies. There will also be many opportunities to serve on the visioning task forces for those individuals who have a limited amount of time to contribute, or, who are passionate about individual issues and would be willing to volunteer for a specific cause.
Did you see this article? I think it's very well written.
Regards,
Anne
http://www.azcentral.com/community/pinal/articles/2008/04/10/20080410gr-santancoalition0410-ON.html
Santan residents form advocacy group
by Lynh Bui - Apr. 10, 2008 12:45 PM
The Arizona Republic
Residents in the Santan area are taking another stab at gaining control over their destiny.
Local business members, developers and residents have recently launched the Greater San Tan Area Coalition, an organization designed to advocate and develop a vision for the area.
The coalition is not a governing body, but a group that seeks to represent residents in the Santan area, said co-founder and former San Tan Area Chamber of Commerce president Jack Malpass.
"There are 46,000 people in Pinal County here (the Santan area) and they don't have a voice," Malpass said. "They don't have a voice in Pinal County government, and they don't have a voice when it comes to the surrounding municipalities deciding what they would like to do in this area."
For years, residents in the unincorporated chunk of Pinal County, that includes developments like Johnson Ranch, Copper Basin and San Tan Heights, have struggled because Santan is the size and has a population of a city but not the local control and amenities cities typically enjoy.
Malpass and others in the group have stressed that this is not an incorporation effort, but an organized effort to understand and communicate the wants and needs of Santan residents who don't have much representation beyond a single member of the county Board of Supervisors.
Political back fighting and tense opposition dogged the last two incorporation attempts and have some worried that this new coalition will drudge up more of the same hard feelings. But Malpass said people stuck in the past won't do anything to move the Santan community forward.
The coalition divides the Santan area into nine districts, with two representatives from each district. Those district representatives, or members of the "extended visioning team" will relay the opinions of residents in their district to a "core visioning committee." The core consists of five members from the development community, four members from the San Tan Area Chamber of Commerce and two co-chairs (Malpass and area resident Gordon Brown).
Once the coalition gets off the ground, members of the "core" will be replaced through elections, Malpass said.
The coalition will be in charge of collecting resident input on issues and forwarding recommendations to neighboring cities and towns or Pinal County officials on aspects such as education, economic development, transportation and quality of life.
"We want to avoid becoming a colony to where the decisions are made by other municipalities for us," Brown said. "We wanted to give the people that actually live here a voice in what their future is."
Pinal County Supervisor Sandie Smith represents the Santan area. As an elected official, she said getting opinions and a better feel of what residents want is always helpful.
"It's one more forum for the citizens to voice their opinions," Smith said.
what part of her post did you NOT understand? Sounds like all of it to me. She said if she can't vote for those representing her, then she don't want any part of it. She nor did any of us get to vote for who we would have wanted on the core team, so go push GSTAC somewhere else as we do not nor will have any part of it. Secrets Anne, remember. You can't have it both ways.
|
anne.reed
Member
|
Posted: Sat Apr 12th, 2008 12:10 am |
|
JulieB wrote:
It does not matter about past history . . . well, it matters, but even taking that out of the equation . . . even if I admired and adored everyone who was on the committee, the people who were picked for GSTAC were hand-picked. That's the problem. If I cannot choose the people who are going to be speaking for me and communicating my wants and needs, then I don't want anyone to. I can do it myself. It should have started with a public vote right from the beginning. I'm all for a group of people starting the ball rolling on something like this, but MONTHS ago it should have went public and people should have had to run for various positions within the group. Period.
Right off the top of my head, I can come up with 3 people who I KNOW would have wanted to run for something like this.
Dear Julie:
If you know of someone who is willing to work for the betterment of their community without compensation, and who will pledge to accurately represent the majority and minority opinions from their district, I strongly suggest you have them contact the Coalition thru their website. The extended visioning committee still has vacancies. There will also be many opportunities to serve on the visioning task forces for those individuals who have a limited amount of time to contribute, or, who are passionate about individual issues and would be willing to volunteer for a specific cause.
Did you see this article? I think it's very well written.
Regards,
Anne
http://www.azcentral.com/community/pinal/articles/2008/04/10/20080410gr-santancoalition0410-ON.html
Santan residents form advocacy group
by Lynh Bui - Apr. 10, 2008 12:45 PM
The Arizona Republic
Residents in the Santan area are taking another stab at gaining control over their destiny.
Local business members, developers and residents have recently launched the Greater San Tan Area Coalition, an organization designed to advocate and develop a vision for the area.
The coalition is not a governing body, but a group that seeks to represent residents in the Santan area, said co-founder and former San Tan Area Chamber of Commerce president Jack Malpass.
"There are 46,000 people in Pinal County here (the Santan area) and they don't have a voice," Malpass said. "They don't have a voice in Pinal County government, and they don't have a voice when it comes to the surrounding municipalities deciding what they would like to do in this area."
For years, residents in the unincorporated chunk of Pinal County, that includes developments like Johnson Ranch, Copper Basin and San Tan Heights, have struggled because Santan is the size and has a population of a city but not the local control and amenities cities typically enjoy.
Malpass and others in the group have stressed that this is not an incorporation effort, but an organized effort to understand and communicate the wants and needs of Santan residents who don't have much representation beyond a single member of the county Board of Supervisors.
Political back fighting and tense opposition dogged the last two incorporation attempts and have some worried that this new coalition will drudge up more of the same hard feelings. But Malpass said people stuck in the past won't do anything to move the Santan community forward.
The coalition divides the Santan area into nine districts, with two representatives from each district. Those district representatives, or members of the "extended visioning team" will relay the opinions of residents in their district to a "core visioning committee." The core consists of five members from the development community, four members from the San Tan Area Chamber of Commerce and two co-chairs (Malpass and area resident Gordon Brown).
Once the coalition gets off the ground, members of the "core" will be replaced through elections, Malpass said.
The coalition will be in charge of collecting resident input on issues and forwarding recommendations to neighboring cities and towns or Pinal County officials on aspects such as education, economic development, transportation and quality of life.
"We want to avoid becoming a colony to where the decisions are made by other municipalities for us," Brown said. "We wanted to give the people that actually live here a voice in what their future is."
Pinal County Supervisor Sandie Smith represents the Santan area. As an elected official, she said getting opinions and a better feel of what residents want is always helpful.
"It's one more forum for the citizens to voice their opinions," Smith said.
|
Bambi
Member
| Joined: | Tue Sep 19th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2451 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 11th, 2008 08:57 pm |
|
Anne. this is the statement I need claification on;
"If you have read the white paper on the ourGSTAC,com website, you know as much about this as I do at this time. The purpose of GSTAC is to give the 46,000 residents of our area a voice and provide an interim form of self governance until............"
taken from your post. Define for us your statement's meaning and structure of this "Interim form of government" you mention. Just what is it? How much "power" will they have over us? Appointees? Who does the appointing? 9 districts? Did residents have input into the formation of those districts? How do we get answers to our questions? Who is your public relations man/woman? Would they please come on this newspaper's public forum site to explain to us their mission?
No different than sending out a public statement to the papers for publication.
Last edited on Fri Apr 11th, 2008 08:58 pm by Bambi
|
Bambi
Member
| Joined: | Tue Sep 19th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2451 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 11th, 2008 08:27 pm |
|
pipeman wrote: JulieB wrote: It does not matter about past history . . . well, it matters, but even taking that out of the equation . . . even if I admired and adored everyone who was on the committee, the people who were picked for GSTAC were hand-picked. That's the problem. If I cannot choose the people who are going to be speaking for me and communicating my wants and needs, then I don't want anyone to. I can do it myself. It should have started with a public vote right from the beginning. I'm all for a group of people starting the ball rolling on something like this, but MONTHS ago it should have went public and people should have had to run for various positions within the group. Period.
Right off the top of my head, I can come up with 3 people who I KNOW would have wanted to run for something like this.
Julie, you are correct with your comment. That is the point that many of on here have been trying to make. The secrecy and hand-picking. So that does bring up the past, as one who has done that in our community for so long is on the core team. So in retrospect, history is repeating itself and rearing it's ugly head yet once again but under a new guise this time, known st GSTAC.
Yes I agree that every person on that core team should have been voted in by the community, just as with the extended committee. A ball rolling is a great thing, but not this ball and especially not with this this committee. Great post Julie.
Hint: Check out the forth coming story in Saturday's Republic on the GSTAC.
I agree with pipe. Great post Julie indeed.
|
pipeman
Member
| Joined: | Tue Oct 3rd, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 493 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 11th, 2008 08:17 pm |
|
JulieB wrote: It does not matter about past history . . . well, it matters, but even taking that out of the equation . . . even if I admired and adored everyone who was on the committee, the people who were picked for GSTAC were hand-picked. That's the problem. If I cannot choose the people who are going to be speaking for me and communicating my wants and needs, then I don't want anyone to. I can do it myself. It should have started with a public vote right from the beginning. I'm all for a group of people starting the ball rolling on something like this, but MONTHS ago it should have went public and people should have had to run for various positions within the group. Period.
Right off the top of my head, I can come up with 3 people who I KNOW would have wanted to run for something like this.
Julie, you are correct with your comment. That is the point that many of on here have been trying to make. The secrecy and hand-picking. So that does bring up the past, as one who has done that in our community for so long is on the core team. So in retrospect, history is repeating itself and rearing it's ugly head yet once again but under a new guise this time, known st GSTAC.
Yes I agree that every person on that core team should have been voted in by the community, just as with the extended committee. A ball rolling is a great thing, but not this ball and especially not with this this committee. Great post Julie.
|
JulieB
Member
|
Posted: Fri Apr 11th, 2008 07:36 pm |
|
It does not matter about past history . . . well, it matters, but even taking that out of the equation . . . even if I admired and adored everyone who was on the committee, the people who were picked for GSTAC were hand-picked. That's the problem. If I cannot choose the people who are going to be speaking for me and communicating my wants and needs, then I don't want anyone to. I can do it myself. It should have started with a public vote right from the beginning. I'm all for a group of people starting the ball rolling on something like this, but MONTHS ago it should have went public and people should have had to run for various positions within the group. Period.
Right off the top of my head, I can come up with 3 people who I KNOW would have wanted to run for something like this.
|
pipeman
Member
| Joined: | Tue Oct 3rd, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 493 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 11th, 2008 07:04 pm |
|
JJohnson wrote: Pipe,
I am not going to get into the mud slinging. I think they belive that they are doing a public service. What they may not understand is their level of respect within the community. I think Gordon over values his influence within the rural area and certainly does in the subdivisions. They have had the ear of Sandie Smith for so long and have been acting as the voice of the community based on that relationship that they think they are the community voice. Sandie Smith is caught up in the same misunderatnading of todays enviroment.
JJ, not asking you to sling mud here sir, just trying to reference that she wants the public to be notified when it was something her and her group did not want, but it is ok not to notify the public when it is about something they do. Just two-faced crap to me.
|
pipeman
Member
| Joined: | Tue Oct 3rd, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 493 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 11th, 2008 07:00 pm |
|
The funny thing about the GSTAC is that they say they will not bend to special interest groups. Well then why would they have people on the core team and possibly eeven on the extended team that are not residents of our community, like George Johnson.
Although he does run a business in our community, hE does not live here. Sounds like special interest to me.
|
JJohnson
Member
| Joined: | Wed Aug 15th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 495 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 11th, 2008 06:56 pm |
|
Pipe,
I am not going to get into the mud slinging. I think they believe that they are doing a public service. What they may not understand is their level of respect within the community. I think Gordon over values his influence within the rural area and certainly does in the subdivisions. They have had the ear of Sandie Smith for so long and have been acting as the voice of the community based on that relationship that they think they are the community voice. Sandie Smith is caught up in the same misunderatnading of todays enviroment.
Last edited on Fri Apr 11th, 2008 07:31 pm by JJohnson
|
pipeman
Member
| Joined: | Tue Oct 3rd, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 493 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 11th, 2008 06:45 pm |
|
dale wrote: Anne,
Can you please tell me when and where the GSTAC meetings have been? Can you tell me when the public was informed about this? Can you tell me when the next have been.
If the public was not informed about any meetings ahead of time, then by definition these were done in secret.
Dale, great points. And to think that Anne was whinning to JJ regarding meetings being secret and she mentioned A.R.S # stating that meetings were to be open for all to send bla, bla, bla.
JJ you remember that don't ya? It was pertaining to her abuse of the 911 system, when she made a false call to them at an incorpration meeting that she should not have been at anyways, since the rurals were pulled out by that time.
But boy it sure is ok for her group to have meetings in secret when it pertains to the community., would you not say this violates this unknown, yet made up A.R.S. # she mentioned? What a two-faced person who talks out of both sides of her mouth so as long as it benefits her, her group and her wishes. Just absolutely sickening to me.
|
dale
Member
| Joined: | Mon Mar 20th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 57 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 11th, 2008 06:34 pm |
|
Anne,
Can you please tell me when and where the GSTAC meetings have been? Can you tell me when the public was informed about this? Can you tell me when the next have been.
If the public was not informed about any meetings ahead of time, then by definition these were done in secret.
|
JJohnson
Member
| Joined: | Wed Aug 15th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 495 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 11th, 2008 06:33 pm |
|
I don't think that they have any malice in mind at all. What I think is that under the leadership of Gordon there is a bit of institutional thinking. It is that institutional thinking that has gotten us into this situation. It is also obvious that the people on the CORE team were hand selected and vetted before it was formed.
Maybe those that were on the inside "CORE team" and certain trusted members of the community were given the specific information about the meetings. The rest of us were told to wait and see. The mere appearance of secrecy is the undoing of any group that wants to be representative of the masses. Too many appointments and "after the facts" make this a fairure from the start because it won't be trusted by the people.
|
anne.reed
Member
|
Posted: Fri Apr 11th, 2008 04:34 pm |
|
Dear JJ:
The meetings which you, and others on this website, seem intent on portraying as "secret" were announced over a year ago and have been discussed intermittently throughout the year. Everyone knew the Chamber was researching the options for self governance... Where's the secret?
The Core Team which you so readily criticize and accuse, are your successful neighbors who out of generosity of spirit have volunteered countless hours to establishing the framework within which this process can begin. Next, the Extended Visioning Team will be appointed to facilitate a much needed method of communications within the nine newly designated districts. After than foundation has been established, the public process can begin.
Regards,
Anne
PS I have no inside information about this but have carefully read the information listed on the http:http://www.ourgstac.com website
|
JJohnson
Member
| Joined: | Wed Aug 15th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 495 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 11th, 2008 04:11 pm |
|
| That is laughable given the history of the individual "CORE" leaders and their recent behavior does nothing to make me think anything has changed. Secrecy and the known bedfellows tell me this is just another ruse to try and fool the people.
|
anne.reed
Member
|
Posted: Fri Apr 11th, 2008 04:01 pm |
|
gsbill wrote:
Anne,
What is your new groups position regarding the new built areas becoming their own town/city or self governed entity? Will GSTAC support that if its the will of the people? Are GSTAC members willing to work side by side with community members from the entire surrounding area in order improve the area? Improve by finding ways to build roads, community centers, parks. Develop new retail and living wage job opportunities. Work as a team to address current traffic problems.
What we are not
* We are not a decision making body.
* We are not a politically partisan body.
* We do not specifically represent any special interest group(s).
Please explain item number 2. Its been well reported that Mr Brown is Bryan Martins campaign manager. That makes your group politically partisan. The affiliation sponsorship by the San Tan Chamber makes them politically partisan. The San Tan Chamber should not be involved with this let alone sponsor your group. People pay to belong to the Chamber. Is it disclosed that the Chamber has sponsored this new group?
The Chamber is supposed to be an advocate for business members, not a political action committee.
Your mission has you in conflict with your actions. Help me and the public understand this.
Thanks for your time. I look forward to your reply.
Dear GS:
If you have read the white paper on the ourGSTAC,com website, you know as much about this as I do at this time. The purpose of GSTAC is to give the 46,000 residents of our area a voice and provide an interim form of self governance until all the options available to residents, (incorporation, annexation, status quo, or other vehicle) can be analyzed responsibly with consideration to associated benefits and costs. It is the goal of the GSTAC to provide the facts necessary for residents to make informed choices about their futures.
To your question regarding GSTAC's willingness to work with side by side with local, county and state leaders, the answer is a resounding "yes". One reason for GSTAC's creation is to allow our substantial population a "seat at the table" as this area is developed so we might also have a say in our future and the betterment of our communities.
Regarding GSTAC leadership and partisan affiliations: Every group is comprised of individuals who have diverse opinions. While GSTAC leaders and members have political preferences, each has made a commitment to forego their personal partisanship in favor of a nonpartisan agenda with respect to GSTAC business. While democrats and republicans disagree on certain issues, (though the line has blurred considerably in the past decade) there are decisions to be made that effect the futures of both republicans and democrats who reside within the boundaries of the Greater San Tan Area Coalition. We share many problems that are not partisan in nature. We are more alike than we are different.
The Chambers' primary objective is to nurture area businesses and promote opportunity for economic development. At this point, I can only assume that economic development will be one of the subjects addressed by the Extended Visioning Team and by specific task force, as it's an important factor for all area residents. While local business leaders who are Chamber members are members of GSTAC CORE, they are more importantly local citizens that have an investment in this community and are effected by the myriad of issues that challenge our community's vitality.
In summation, all groups are comprised of individuals. Individuals have varied interests and political affiliations. GSTAC, it's CORE, and it's Team Members (at all levels) have agreed to put aside their personal objectives and agreed to represent, in majority and minority, area residents. The primary objective of this group is to promote the long term stability and well being of the residents within our boundaries. To that end, lacking traditional "top-down" government, GSTAC intends to determine the people's will at the grass roots level, from the "bottom-up" and to advocate their desires to all entities and agencies who can effect positive change for local residents.
Regards,
Anne
|
Bambi
Member
| Joined: | Tue Sep 19th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2451 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 11th, 2008 01:35 pm |
|
It appears they, this group comprised of the same members plus other draftees of a former group organized to stop the city incorporation out here, are going to be silent on what they want to be silent on and vocal on what they deam you should know. Now take that mentality into a power vacumn comprised of these same people's mentality and you tell me what you get from that mixture.....they won't obviously, so we will have to guess and conjure up in our own minds their motives and members, for the "meaning" of this Coalition.
Now, come to the ourSanTanFoothills.org site and you can find out all about those players and motives of that organization. Nothing silent. We're vocal on all our actions and who we are. And we are looking to elect our leaders..... not thru appointments, but by Elections by the people. Does this Coalition provide for that democratic process Anne?
Having said that, keep in mind that the average age of the leaders of this Coalition is 63? The average age of the leaders of the City movement is 36. Whose needs do you think these leaders will most identify with?
You, the people, choose which leaders you want to lead your area.....based on what they have to offer you, the residents. We ask you to join our team and we welcome you. It appears, from the limited information, that they decide who joins their team......"the deciders." Sound democratic to you? Deciders? That's Bush's favorite phrase..."And I'm the Decider."
Anne.....best thing you could do is come on here and divulge your mission and who the missionaries are....and answer the questions of all the people, not just those you "choose" to answer.....full disclosure. You have obviously been chosen as their spokesman, as you know the goings on and we don't. And you state you are not working with any special interest groups. Is not the Chamber one? Is not a Developer one? Is not a developer's attorney one? Please explain.
Must we beg to know? We've been thru that type of governing already...secrets; closed meetings; backdoor deals....... We want change.....not more of the same.
CHANGE.
Last edited on Fri Apr 11th, 2008 01:52 pm by Bambi
|
gsbill
Member
|
Posted: Fri Apr 11th, 2008 01:13 am |
|
Anne,
What is your new groups position regarding the new built areas becoming their own town/city or self governed entity? Will GSTAC support that if its the will of the people? Are GSTAC members willing to work side by side with community members from the entire surrounding area in order improve the area? Improve by finding ways to build roads, community centers, parks. Develop new retail and living wage job opportunities. Work as a team to address current traffic problems.
What we are not
* We are not a decision making body.
* We are not a politically partisan body.
* We do not specifically represent any special interest group(s).
Please explain item number 2. Its been well reported that Mr Brown is Bryan Martins campaign manager. That makes your group politically partisan. The affiliation sponsorship by the San Tan Chamber makes them politically partisan. The San Tan Chamber should not be involved with this let alone sponsor your group. People pay to belong to the Chamber. Is it disclosed that the Chamber has sponsored this new group?
The Chamber is supposed to be an advocate for business members, not a political action committee.
Your mission has you in conflict with your actions. Help me and the public understand this.
Thanks for your time. I look forward to your reply.
|
anne.reed
Member
|
Posted: Thu Apr 10th, 2008 03:28 pm |
|
Dear QC:
I will make that suggestion.
I imagine this information will become public as soon as the Extended Visioning Team is in place.
Thanks for your interest in our area.
Regards,
Anne
|
QCVillager
Member
|
Posted: Tue Apr 8th, 2008 01:31 am |
|
i have been a strong proponent of the residents directly outside the Town of Queen Creek. We have historically been friends and neighbors in the overall Queen Creek community. I have long advocated for more local representation for the areas along the Hunt Hwy and Gary, Meridian corridors. I am not taking a personal stand on whether that should be by way of a community council or a stand-alone incorporated city since I think that is best left up to the people most directly affected.
i applaud efforts to include the residents of those areas in open, transparent, informed and honest dialog about the issues.
i have two comments...
1) it is said that some of the people involved in GSTAC (at the top of the organization) have reputations whether deserved or not as being very anti-incorporation. i could neither confirm nor deny this for myself as there was no Org Chart on the http://www.ourgstac.com website. if you don't mind, Anne, please share my idea of putting together an org chart along with Bio's of the various organizers and players.
2) i will be watching/monitoring diligently and would welcome any informational and progress updates... especially with respect to Districts 1 and 2 which are partly or entirely within TOQC's Planning Area.
|
kmarsh
Member
| Joined: | Mon Apr 7th, 2008 |
| Location: | Macon, Georgia USA |
| Posts: | 5 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 7th, 2008 08:56 pm |
|
Wondering if anyone here knows ann reed personally. If so please email me.
THanks, Kathy Marsh
|
pipeman
Member
| Joined: | Tue Oct 3rd, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 493 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 7th, 2008 04:46 am |
|
| nevermind, not worth it. Last edited on Mon Apr 7th, 2008 05:10 am by pipeman
|
gk
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jan 9th, 2006 |
| Location: | Tonga |
| Posts: | 1846 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 4th, 2008 07:19 pm |
|
Last edited on Fri Apr 4th, 2008 08:31 pm by gk
|
JJohnson
Member
| Joined: | Wed Aug 15th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 495 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 4th, 2008 07:03 pm |
|
I would bet a dollar that GK was invited to cast his vote. This group certainly is not looking like a community organization to me. Community organizations are comprised of people that best look like the people they are trying to represent. Lawyers, developers, rural residents and anti-business advocates are not what this community looks like.
I say once again stop this silliness and start over with people that best represent our community. We (the residents) should decide how our future will look. the rurals should not get equal representation if they are going to have a say on our community. Bottom line is that we don't need to combine the needs of the rurals with ours. Let the ruralites make thier decisions and we will make ours. The values are too different and the bridges that need built will be too big.
|
gk
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jan 9th, 2006 |
| Location: | Tonga |
| Posts: | 1846 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 4th, 2008 06:46 pm |
|
| ignore the post.........it's useless arguing with a coward that hides behind phoney names and lies Last edited on Fri Apr 4th, 2008 08:29 pm by gk
|
JJohnson
Member
| Joined: | Wed Aug 15th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 495 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 4th, 2008 06:37 pm |
|
| Some one woke up on the wrong side of the bed
|
gk
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jan 9th, 2006 |
| Location: | Tonga |
| Posts: | 1846 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 4th, 2008 06:34 pm |
|
| siasd Last edited on Fri Apr 4th, 2008 08:30 pm by gk
|
gk
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jan 9th, 2006 |
| Location: | Tonga |
| Posts: | 1846 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 4th, 2008 06:28 pm |
|
nwmt
Last edited on Fri Apr 4th, 2008 08:29 pm by gk
|
gsbill
Member
|
Posted: Fri Apr 4th, 2008 02:57 pm |
|
| You cant track IP addresses without the help of law enforcement and the courts. Many of today internet providers have dynamic IP addresses that change. Your fears are not based on facts.
|
Bambi
Member
| Joined: | Tue Sep 19th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2451 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 4th, 2008 02:07 pm |
|
Then History....wouldn't it perhaps have been better if you had asked that question first, that you just asked in your last post...."why would two cents post those address?" instead of "he has the right and it's public information anyway."
Words and phrases can be very volitile.
Now......your'e welcome to our site, but you must register, for our children's protection. This is Your Community Site. Make it Yours. Discuss. Meet. Plan. It's my way of giving back to the community. Feel free to be out there "freely" to speak. Some of us are meeting this morning from that site, to discuss our problems out here and how we can resolve them. 9:00 a.m. the Cafe in QC. Join us.
All I ask is be civil and honest and don't become provacative. Save that for this site. Kids don't enter these portals, as most adults can't even figure out what's going on here, let alone kids. A War Zone. But, in politics, that happens, especially during election year, so hard core debates and arguments will occur on here, and I'll probably get involved, like I have this time, with subjects that are hot. And I may get pissed off or mad and promise to leave again, only to return when my dander gets up. Look how long I've |