| Author | Post |
|---|
Bambi
Member
| Joined: | Tue Sep 19th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 3282 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Aug 5th, 2008 09:08 pm |
|
Come on Anne. You don't really mean this statement do you?
"Debate and forum concerning the implications of the citizens initiatives could be moderated by GSTAC if the citizens opt to utilize the considerable resources of it's CORE.......etc."
So......Please tell your CORE members Brian Tompsette and George Johnson that I do indeed want to utilize his resources....all of them. Thank him for that offer. He will be contacted on Monday. Could you let him know for me?
Dictionary definition of Resources: 1 a: a source of supply or support : b: a natural source of wealth or revenue —
Last edited on Tue Aug 5th, 2008 09:09 pm by Bambi
|
Molly Browne
Member
|
Posted: Tue Aug 5th, 2008 08:50 pm |
|
Molly Browne wrote: QCVillager wrote: anne.reed wrote: It seems to me that your plate is full with Queen Creek matters. Whether you personally, acknowledge the need for GSTAC or it's mission (representing the 46,000 people who live in Queen Creek, AZ, but are treated as outsiders based on arbitrary lines drawn on a map) can not be my concern.
My plate is also overflowing (with District One matters). Of which, Raised medians in Queen Creek and their effect on access to long time business associates, the safety of my friends, neighbors and fellow equine enthusiasts is only one.
How about I don't attack Queen Creek Mayor and Council and you don't attack GSTAC? Que No? We both have plenty of issues to address on behalf of "Queen Creek" residents. Let's try to apply the cooperation model to our relationship and we might both find our successes multiplied.
Regards,
Anne
this isn't an ATTACK in the least. it also isn't about me personally acknowledging GSTAC or not. this is about credibility. you made an assertion and i simply want to assess the veracity of the claim.
here was the claim...
anne.reed wrote: Dear Starleen:
GSTAC is recognized by counties, cities, utilities and other organizations, to represent the interests of our large unannexed population.
Regards,
Anne
here was my response... (note that is cannot be in any way considered an attack)
QCVillager wrote:
i don't recall seeing the proclamations/declarations. please include the declarations of the counties, cities, utilities and other organizations formally recognizing GSTAC on your website and/or provide links to same here.
ANNE: THIS IS WHERE YOU YOURSELF CLAIM THAT THE GSTAC REPRESENTS US OUT HERE IN THIS UNINCORPORATED PINAL COUNTY. THE GSTAC DOES NOT VOICE OUR OPINIONS. NEITHER DO THEY HAVE OUR BEST INTEREST AT HEART. PLEASE PUT AN END TO THAT FALSE AND FRAUDULENT ADVERTISING. BEFORE YOU ATTEMPT TO INSULT MY INTELLIGENCE, TRY TO REMEMBER WHAT YOU HAVE WRITTEN BOTH ON HERE AND ON THE GSTAC WEBSITE. OOOOHH!! HOW DOES IT FEEL TO PUBLICLY HAVE EGG ON YOUR FACE? YA BETTA CHECK YO SELF!!!! lmfao, lol, rofl......and all that jazz. WOO-HOO!! THAT'S ONE MORE FOR THE UNSINKABLE MOLLY BROWNE!!!! GO ME!!!! I'M REALLY BEGINNING TO FEEL AS THOUGH THIS AREA MAY NEED ME IN OFFICE. WHO WOULDN'T VOTE FOR ME?
Thank you,
Molly Browne
Anne? Silent on this one? You attempted to insult my intelligence when you responded to me by saying that the GSTAC does NOT represent us homeowners and residents of this area. I don't take kindly to having someone attempt to pull the wool over my eyes. I pointed out above where you had claimed they did represent us. The GSTAC and its CORE members are not the voice of the homeowners and residents here. You say one thing and then claim another by saying they represent us and then turning around to say they don't represent us. You're making my head spin!! Make up your mind!! Are you saying, today, that they do or do not represent us? Hmmm? And will you be changing your mind yet again tomorrow? Perhaps you should find another venue to spend your time. The way it looks to me, you don't seem to know what you are doing in the least. I'm growing rather frustrated by your mixed messages.
|
Bambi
Member
| Joined: | Tue Sep 19th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 3282 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Aug 5th, 2008 08:29 pm |
|
This is feedback you get from those who practice transparancy and know they have a legal obligation to answer citizens out here....timely and accurate.
The lack of answers is what we are in store for if we allow this "Group" to represent us.
I will keep my Pinal County contacts, as I trust those answers, and that is who I want representing me.....no one else.
Bambi,
I didn't do a presentation at the meeting last night. It was just an open forum about the drainage problems in the San Tan area. Three people from Maricopa County showed up to complain about the drainage from the Gold Mine Equestrian subdivision area. The remainder of about two dozen people were from the Adobe Dam/Bonanza Ranch area. I told them we were working on putting together a study of the area to determine a quick fix and a long-term solution.
A. J. Blaha, P.E.
Deputy Director
Pinal County Department of Public Works
|
JJohnson
Member
| Joined: | Wed Aug 15th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 672 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Aug 5th, 2008 07:47 pm |
|
Bump (this is getting tiresome) ...
Were the elections held last night? Was anybody in attendance? We would like to know how the GSTAC meeting went last night.
JJohnson wrote:
Anne,
I know you are busy and don't read this everyday so in case you missed it again we would like an answer to this question. We are just interested in clearing up who has recognized GSTAC officially. Also while you are at it, will there be elections at your meeting tonight? We did not see that on your website agenda.
JJohnson wrote:
BUMP.
JJohnson wrote:
anne.reed wrote:
I'm pleased you're not comparing yourself to MLK or Nelson Mandela because these were two courageous men who were not content to sit on the sidelines and talk about the ills of they world. They were anything but passive. The stood up to their opponents and for their people. As am I, albeit not in the same way. One paid with his life and the other with his freedom.
I'm biting my tongue as I don't want to address the rest of your comments. Suffice to say, sitting back and taking pot shots at those who toil to better their community isn't even remotely related to productive discourse.
Someone who has strong opinions, like you, and what is apparently a deep desire for justice and the well being of their community should get off the soap box, jump into the trenches, and "get 'er done", as Larry the CableGuy so eloquently suggests. If I was able to I would. Just not a possibility
Regards,
Anne
I also find it amazing that you were able to dig up a post from weeks ago but still can't address a simple question posed to you last week. I will not let you off the hook that easily. Why the delay in posting copies of the resolutions and proclamations of the "counties, cities, utilities and other organizations" who have recognized GSTAC to "represent the interests of" the large unannexed population.
|
2 cents
Member
| Joined: | Fri Nov 2nd, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 293 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Aug 5th, 2008 06:54 pm |
|
So, when are the old BLC warhorses going to turn over the reins?
2
|
anne.reed
Member
|
Posted: Tue Aug 5th, 2008 06:28 pm |
|
Dear San Tan Events:
Working behind the scenes often means gathering information from a variety of sources and gaining a full understanding of the issue at hand. This includes research, assessing potential solutions to and gaining a full understanding of the obstacles that impede resolution and implementation of the citizens wishes.
To paraphrase a core member, "We don't care whose flag flies over the Greater San Tan Area, only that residents within our boundaries are afforded the opportunities to have a voice in the future of their area".
GSTAC has not taken any position on annexation, incorporation or other means of self governance. Nor, was it formed to do so. Rightly, these are issues and related initiatives, that should be resident driven. Debate and forum concerning the implications of the citizens initiatives could be moderated by GSTAC if the citizens opt to utilize the considerable resources of it's core, teams and task forces. GSTAC could compile verifiable data related to the majority and minority opinions for such citizen driven issues and when requested, advocate on behalf of participating citizens to municipalities and other entities.
GSTAC can become whatever area residents are willing to make it. GSTAC will only be as successful as the citizens who hope to gain a voice in our area make it. It is designed to educate and empower citizens not to direct their destinies.
Regards,
Anne
|
SanTanEvents
Member
| Joined: | Sat Sep 16th, 2006 |
| Location: | San Tan Heights |
| Posts: | 57 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Aug 5th, 2008 04:30 am |
|
anne.reed wrote:
Dear JJ:
The fact that existing communications between JU and certain homeowners have been relegated to attorneys, limits everyone's capacity to resolve the issue.
GSTAC is working behind the scenes to determine what can be done to protect residents and to insure that incidents like this will be averted in the future. As facts become available, public meetings will be held to inform interested parties of the status.
Regards,
Anne
I don't read this board as often as I should. But it is statements like these that really get under my skin.
"GSTAC is working behind the scenes to determine what can be done to protect residents and to insure that incidents like this will be averted in the future."
This is the same group of people that were supposed to gather all the information on the incorporation process and present it to the people. Now years have gone by and we have no information. What were they doing behing the scenes?? They were creating GSTAC!!!! I trusted those people to take the initiative and provide us with the information so that we could make an educated decision on weather or not to incorporate.
Bambi, Pipeman, myself and others have done some research. In summary, the numbers don't look half bad! If anyone is interested the information we have gathered, contact us. My email is santanevents@gmail.com Nothing that we have done was behind the scenes, it's either written on here or on STE.
|
Bambi
Member
| Joined: | Tue Sep 19th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 3282 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Aug 5th, 2008 01:19 am |
|
Something just doesn't add up. I am still awaiting a legal opinion, but thanks for your advice and research. The County is working on it for me, thanks to Sandie's reference. Alot of "representation" went on during the SanTanFlats fiasco, and promises were made, both in open doors and in closed doors, as the appearance of power seemed to blend in and out between what was represented by County and what was represented by the BLC and what was represented by Dale Bell. No problem existed until the music started....then backtracking begin at a rapid pace, all to protect the constituents who lived there and the promises that were made without our knowledge or consent. I want to make sure that "Blend" doesn't occur again by being assured by County attorneys, that it will not happen again via any "quasi" form of eluding to representation of this community to others.
Representation is an all encompassing word.
Still: The Citizens Advisory Committee in our area 1b (Gordon) owes us accountability, as those were public appointments, just like the DOR in Gold Canyon that handles the influx of commercial, is comprised of local citizens appointed by Pinal County, therefore is accountable to the County.....us., and recognized as a ?quasi public body. Since Bryan Martyn belongs to that, perhaps he can explain the difference. All are to act in the open and be transparent, and should be accountable to the citizens as to their activity. Has anyone read the minutes for area 1b's Citizen Advisory committee's meetings? Has anyone read the minutes of GSTAC? That CORE part of GSTAC is run by the same guy who is is on the Citizens Advisory Committee. Should I be concerned?
So, if GSTAC is representing itself out there to other communities and corporations as the representative of this community, and has proclamations and evidence to prove that they are indeed recognized by these entitys, then what does that make them? A blend again perhaps? Lines of demarkation should be blatently obvious to everyone, in my opinion. It's not.
Last edited on Tue Aug 5th, 2008 01:22 am by Bambi
|
Molly Browne
Member
|
Posted: Tue Aug 5th, 2008 12:42 am |
|
QCVillager wrote: anne.reed wrote: It seems to me that your plate is full with Queen Creek matters. Whether you personally, acknowledge the need for GSTAC or it's mission (representing the 46,000 people who live in Queen Creek, AZ, but are treated as outsiders based on arbitrary lines drawn on a map) can not be my concern.
My plate is also overflowing (with District One matters). Of which, Raised medians in Queen Creek and their effect on access to long time business associates, the safety of my friends, neighbors and fellow equine enthusiasts is only one.
How about I don't attack Queen Creek Mayor and Council and you don't attack GSTAC? Que No? We both have plenty of issues to address on behalf of "Queen Creek" residents. Let's try to apply the cooperation model to our relationship and we might both find our successes multiplied.
Regards,
Anne
this isn't an ATTACK in the least. it also isn't about me personally acknowledging GSTAC or not. this is about credibility. you made an assertion and i simply want to assess the veracity of the claim.
here was the claim...
anne.reed wrote: Dear Starleen:
GSTAC is recognized by counties, cities, utilities and other organizations, to represent the interests of our large unannexed population.
Regards,
Anne
here was my response... (note that is cannot be in any way considered an attack)
QCVillager wrote:
i don't recall seeing the proclamations/declarations. please include the declarations of the counties, cities, utilities and other organizations formally recognizing GSTAC on your website and/or provide links to same here.
ANNE: THIS IS WHERE YOU YOURSELF CLAIM THAT THE GSTAC REPRESENTS US OUT HERE IN THIS UNINCORPORATED PINAL COUNTY. THE GSTAC DOES NOT VOICE OUR OPINIONS. NEITHER DO THEY HAVE OUR BEST INTEREST AT HEART. PLEASE PUT AN END TO THAT FALSE AND FRAUDULENT ADVERTISING. BEFORE YOU ATTEMPT TO INSULT MY INTELLIGENCE, TRY TO REMEMBER WHAT YOU HAVE WRITTEN BOTH ON HERE AND ON THE GSTAC WEBSITE. OOOOHH!! HOW DOES IT FEEL TO PUBLICLY HAVE EGG ON YOUR FACE? YA BETTA CHECK YO SELF!!!! lmfao, lol, rofl......and all that jazz. WOO-HOO!! THAT'S ONE MORE FOR THE UNSINKABLE MOLLY BROWNE!!!! GO ME!!!! I'M REALLY BEGINNING TO FEEL AS THOUGH THIS AREA MAY NEED ME IN OFFICE. WHO WOULDN'T VOTE FOR ME?
Thank you,
Molly Browne
|
2 cents
Member
| Joined: | Fri Nov 2nd, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 293 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 4th, 2008 11:34 pm |
|
Thanks JJ. Typically those that are governed by the open meeting statutes are bodies that make rules, regulations and laws. They are prohibited from having a majority, quorum, of voting members assembled in one place at one time. GSTAC is not a rule making body.
Bambi, I should have perhaps said in my example that if you were to hold a gathering and invite Sandie to speak. My error. Sorry.
2
|
JJohnson
Member
| Joined: | Wed Aug 15th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 672 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 4th, 2008 10:56 pm |
|
A public entity is one that is run by the government. Quasi public entities are companies that are monopolistic in nature and are vital to the welfare of the public. These types are generally regulated due to the required need of their service. A private entity is any other group or company. GSTAC is very plainly a private organization that can make up its own rules. It will get or lose its legitimacy through its charter and practices.
GSTAC is no different than if I called my neighbors over and told them I would represent them at the HOA meeting as one voice. Where things get sticky is in the influence that certain members have withthe government. If they are advertising that they represent the community then they may be guilty of false advertisement and fraudulent statements.
|
Bambi
Member
| Joined: | Tue Sep 19th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 3282 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 4th, 2008 10:29 pm |
|
2 cents wrote: But a public entity is not hosting the meeting. They are having a speaker who happens to work for a public entity. GSTAC is nothing more than a (your opinion here) group of like minded citizens. They are not in any way a public entity subject to the rules and regulations of open meetings. Not to be mean here but, GSTAC is not unlike you when you invite Sandie to come and speak at an event that you are holding and then you 'un-invite' Gordon and others. Sandie works for a public entity and is speaking to a private meeting organized by a private citizen.
my 2 cents
Never have had Sandie or any other public official at any "event" I have had. We are talking here about a public meeting (GSTAC's words) about a specific problem that is being addressed by a specific department in the County, which impacts all the citizens. The event I had at my place was for those running for office and was a party and no public offical or employee attended it. What are you speaking of? Also, could you please show me the law that caused you to come to the conclusion that GSTAC is not a public entity?
As I said. I am not an attorney so it is difficult to interpret the Law. I am awaiting an opinion. But based on your input, I and many others, should now be able to call AJ from Pinal, and ask him to give the same discussion at a meeting we call. That could end up being several groups asking him to attend their event/meetings, which equates to several meetings and risks that not all will be interpreted the same.
Nor did I say a public entity was "hosting" the event. It remains to be seen if GSTAC is a public entity or not. Yet, you seem to know already that they are not. What caused you to come to that conclusion? I stated that a public employee was speaking at the event about issues concerning the public, and for that purpose only....not a party or an event where the County's vision is discussed by Sandie or? And funny you should state that the GSTAC CORE members are like minded citizens. Most,if not all, the district members are going to quit as no direction or guidance is going on, and some of them are also being sued by the two CORE members from J.U.
I do not want another quasi political bodyagain, that leads us down the road of bankruptcy or litigation, via their poor judgments and decisions they say they made on our behalf. That's my own opinion that I have a right to state, based on past experience over the last 10 years, and we're heading towards that once again. If you think I am going to allow GJ and BT to represent me, well.....that's just not going to happen.
|
Molly Browne
Member
|
Posted: Mon Aug 4th, 2008 10:25 pm |
|
Bambi wrote:
It is the public policy of this State that meetings of public bodies be conducted openly and that notices and agendas be provided for such meetings which contain such information as is reasonably necessary to inform the public of the matters to be discussed or decided.
Now, if your are going to hold a meeting with a public body, AJ from Pinal County Engineering Dept. to discuss the Flood Plain issues out here, should this Law apply to your groups having a public official discuss issues involving the Public? Have you researched the Open Meeting Laws?
7.3.1 Generally. The provisions of the Open Meeting Law apply to all public bodies.
A public body is defined in A.R.S. § 38-431(6) as follows:
“Public body” means the legislature, all boards and commissions of this state or political subdivisions, all multimember governing bodies of departments, agencies, institutions and instrumentalities of the state or political subdivisions, including without limitation all corporations and other instrumentalities whose boards of directors are appointed or elected by the state or political subdivision. Public body includes all quasi-judicial bodies and all standing, special or advisory committees or subcommittees of, or appointed by, such public body. This definition specifically includes public bodies of all political subdivisions.
According to my research, you could be defined as a quasi/body. Certainly Gordon falls under this as he has been appointed by Pinal Government to the Pinal Advisory Committee for area 1b, as has another member from San Tan Pride.....see below. What meetings has he/they called for the residents to attend, to hear what he has discovered and discused thru that committee? He has to abide by the Open Meeting Laws according to my research. And GSTAC? I believe since you have stated Anne that proclamations have been sent out to other Municipalities and Corporations and Utility Companies that you are representative of the people out here, that that would make your GSTAC a political body, subject to the Open Meeting Laws, including the one tonite. Just my opinion.
A.R.S. § 38-431 amended by Laws 2007, Ch. 71, § 1:♦ Defines advisory committee or subcommittee as any entity, however designated, that is officially established on motion or order of a public body or presiding officer of the public body, and whose members have been appointed for the specific purpose of making a recommendation concerning a decision to be made or considered or a course of conduct to be taken or considered by the public.
Has he held a meeting to tell the community his findings and submissions and the County's action on such matters? Do you know where I can find the minutes to that meeting? Will you be taking minutes tonite?
Laws 2007, Ch. 71, §2 ♦ Requires subcommittees and advisory committees to take meeting minutes or record all of their meetings, including executive sessions. ♦ Requires subcommittees and advisory committees of cities and towns with websites and a population of more than 2,500 persons to post a statement describing legal actions taken during a meeting or any recording of a meeting on its website within ten working days of the meeting. Where can I go to see this? Do you know?
The policy supporting the open meeting law is to open the conduct of the business of government to the scrutiny of the public and to ban decision making in secret. Take Note below what CORE's policy about this is:
To act as a Review and Oversight Committee to deal with issues impacting the quality of life, vision and/or development within the San Tan Area.
To ensure that all activitis and actions of the Greater San Tan Coalition are transparent and open and will serve/REPRESENT THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY.
The activities and actions of the CORE will remain confidential until the public portion of the Coalition activity commences. Meeting summaries will be available upon notice for public disclosure if required. Public disclosure especially to the media will occur only upon agreement Also, I would like to make it clear that my observations and discovery about GSTAC do not reflect on the genuine concern and actions of it's members who joined in hopes of truly helping their community via their districts, as they have worked very hard to assist and to give help to their areas. It is directed ONLY at the CORE members.
Well stated Bambi!! Clearly someone here needs to go back to school.
|
JJohnson
Member
| Joined: | Wed Aug 15th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 672 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 4th, 2008 09:27 pm |
|
| I don't remember the exact numbers but in Arizona anything can become a public meeting if enough public officials are present. For instance, I can not invite all of the Supervisors to my house for dinner without following the "Public Meeting" law. I doubt this qualifies since only 1 or 2 public officials are attending and none are elected officials as best I can tell. Ufortunately this is how the whole Stan Griffis problem started. Back room deals ...
|
2 cents
Member
| Joined: | Fri Nov 2nd, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 293 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 4th, 2008 08:40 pm |
|
But a public entity is not hosting the meeting. They are having a speaker who happens to work for a public entity. GSTAC is nothing more than a (your opinion here) group of like minded citizens. They are not in any way a public entity subject to the rules and regulations of open meetings. Not to be mean here but, GSTAC is not unlike you when you invite Sandie to come and speak at an event that you are holding and then you 'un-invite' Gordon and others. Sandie works for a public entity and is speaking to a private meeting organized by a private citizen.
my 2 cents
Last edited on Mon Aug 4th, 2008 08:41 pm by 2 cents
|
Bambi
Member
| Joined: | Tue Sep 19th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 3282 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 4th, 2008 08:04 pm |
|
2 cents wrote: Bambi wrote:
It is the public policy of this State that meetings of public bodies be conducted openly and that notices and agendas be provided for such meetings which contain such information as is reasonably necessary to inform the public of the matters to be discussed or decided.
Now, if your are going to hold a meeting with a public body, AJ from Pinal County Engineering Dept. to discuss the Flood Plain issues out here, should this Law apply to your groups having a public official discuss issues involving the Public? Have you researched the Open Meeting Laws?
The answer to the question is no. GSTAC is not a public body. Just because they have a guest from a public body speaking does not make them have too abide by the Statutes. that's my understanding. 2
To ensure that all activities and actions of the Greater San Tan Coalition are transparent and open and will serve to REPRESENT THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY.
We will unify a definable community and acquire universal recognition of GSTAC GSTAC will support a representative process
resolutions and proclamations of the "counties, cities, utilities and other organizations" who have recognized GSTAC to "represent the interests of" the large unannexed population. Now, by the attendance of a public official discussing public information (Flooding issues and revamped designs to alter it) that will and does impact all the citizens, makes that a requirement in my mind, for Pinal County to abide by the open meeting laws, as the plan and discussion of it concerns all the citizens.
The public must be allowed to attend and listen to deliberations and proceedings taking place in all public meetings, A.R.S. § 38-431.01(A). If a person representing the County, a public official, is to attend the GSTAC meeting, which was called to hear the deliberations and possible resolutions to the Flood Plain issues out here,and discuss the issue, it has now become a public meeting in my opinion, and is subject to the Open Meeting Laws. Plus, it is being called a public meetng by GSTAC.
My objective here is to stop the discussions, deliberations and resolutions about our problems and solutions to our area in secret or private or in small groups. It should be out there and open, for the 46000 residents to hear and discuss. Pinal should be calling this meeting and inviting the public, not GSTAC. To me, it's more like bait, to get the public to attend so they can talk about GSTAC.
When the issue of the STMPark use of the 1000 acres for special interest was discussed, it was without public participation. Therefore, "they" all decided to give permission to their favorite group, and keep the public out. I called the Park Committee (public)on that, and who should contact me to apolgize but the head of San Tan Pride, which was also one of the special interest groups. I respect their leader, whose name escapes me now, for emailing me a letter stating he had no idea that this was wrong at the time, but sees it now, and quickly removed his group from that list. As it turned out, all of them were taken off the list and we now have that area still for the public as a Conservation area. No Meeting with the public was called, as they didn't think they had to abide by the Open Meeting Laws I guess.
http://www.azleg.state.az.us/ombudsman/Open_Meeting_Book.pdf
I am awaiting a legal opinion. Last edited on Mon Aug 4th, 2008 08:35 pm by Bambi
|
2 cents
Member
| Joined: | Fri Nov 2nd, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 293 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 4th, 2008 06:54 pm |
|
Bambi wrote:
It is the public policy of this State that meetings of public bodies be conducted openly and that notices and agendas be provided for such meetings which contain such information as is reasonably necessary to inform the public of the matters to be discussed or decided.
Now, if your are going to hold a meeting with a public body, AJ from Pinal County Engineering Dept. to discuss the Flood Plain issues out here, should this Law apply to your groups having a public official discuss issues involving the Public? Have you researched the Open Meeting Laws?
The answer to the question is no. GSTAC is not a public body. Just because they have a guest from a public body speaking does not make them have too abide by the Statutes. that's my understanding. 2
|
Bambi
Member
| Joined: | Tue Sep 19th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 3282 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 4th, 2008 06:04 pm |
|
It is the public policy of this State that meetings of public bodies be conducted openly and that notices and agendas be provided for such meetings which contain such information as is reasonably necessary to inform the public of the matters to be discussed or decided.
Now, if your are going to hold a meeting with a public body, AJ from Pinal County Engineering Dept. to discuss the Flood Plain issues out here, should this Law apply to your groups having a public official discuss issues involving the Public? Have you researched the Open Meeting Laws?
7.3.1 Generally. The provisions of the Open Meeting Law apply to all public bodies.
A public body is defined in A.R.S. § 38-431(6) as follows:
“Public body” means the legislature, all boards and commissions of this state or political subdivisions, all multimember governing bodies of departments, agencies, institutions and instrumentalities of the state or political subdivisions, including without limitation all corporations and other instrumentalities whose boards of directors are appointed or elected by the state or political subdivision. Public body includes all quasi-judicial bodies and all standing, special or advisory committees or subcommittees of, or appointed by, such public body. This definition specifically includes public bodies of all political subdivisions.
According to my research, you could be defined as a quasi/body. Certainly Gordon falls under this as he has been appointed by Pinal Government to the Pinal Advisory Committee for area 1b, as has another member from San Tan Pride.....see below. What meetings has he/they called for the residents to attend, to hear what he has discovered and discused thru that committee? He has to abide by the Open Meeting Laws according to my research. And GSTAC? I believe since you have stated Anne that proclamations have been sent out to other Municipalities and Corporations and Utility Companies that you are representative of the people out here, that that would make your GSTAC a political body, subject to the Open Meeting Laws, including the one tonite. Just my opinion.
A.R.S. § 38-431 amended by Laws 2007, Ch. 71, § 1:♦ Defines advisory committee or subcommittee as any entity, however designated, that is officially established on motion or order of a public body or presiding officer of the public body, and whose members have been appointed for the specific purpose of making a recommendation concerning a decision to be made or considered or a course of conduct to be taken or considered by the public.
Has he held a meeting to tell the community his findings and submissions and the County's action on such matters? Do you know where I can find the minutes to that meeting? Will you be taking minutes tonite?
Laws 2007, Ch. 71, §2 ♦ Requires subcommittees and advisory committees to take meeting minutes or record all of their meetings, including executive sessions. ♦ Requires subcommittees and advisory committees of cities and towns with websites and a population of more than 2,500 persons to post a statement describing legal actions taken during a meeting or any recording of a meeting on its website within ten working days of the meeting. Where can I go to see this? Do you know?
The policy supporting the open meeting law is to open the conduct of the business of government to the scrutiny of the public and to ban decision making in secret. Take Note below what CORE's policy about this is:
To act as a Review and Oversight Committee to deal with issues impacting the quality of life, vision and/or development within the San Tan Area.
To ensure that all activitis and actions of the Greater San Tan Coalition are transparent and open and will serve/REPRESENT THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY.
The activities and actions of the CORE will remain confidential until the public portion of the Coalition activity commences. Meeting summaries will be available upon notice for public disclosure if required. Public disclosure especially to the media will occur only upon agreement
Also, I would like to make it clear that my observations and discovery about GSTAC do not reflect on the genuine concern and actions of it's members who joined in hopes of truly helping their community via their districts, as they have worked very hard to assist and to give help to their areas. It is directed ONLY at the CORE members.
Last edited on Mon Aug 4th, 2008 06:54 pm by Bambi
|
anne.reed
Member
|
Posted: Mon Aug 4th, 2008 05:26 pm |
|
Molly Browne wrote:
I'm certain they will not be holding elections at tonight's meeting. I find it rather peculiar that they claim to be holding a "public" meeting when they have not informed all homeowners about such meeting. Also, this meeting was announced on this forum 3 days prior to the scheduled meeting. Hmmm.....
Anne: How DARE you insult my intelligence by claiming GSTAC is not acting as a governing board. GSTAC claims to represent us all in this area. I have never asked for those people to represent me. By doing so, I would have been given the due opportunity to vote for my representation. GSTAC only represents itself. How can they be so foolish as to believe that this community would allow JU to dictate when, where, and if JU has jeopardized this community. That could open the door to others like them who also want to do whatever they choose while possibly endangering the community without repercussion. JU has NO right to decide whether or not their actions have endangered us. That decision is reserved for TRUE governing bodies. WE NEED AN AMERICAN SOURCE OF CHECKS AND BALANCES!!!!!
Thank you,
Molly Browne
Afterthought: Perhaps I should run for office? I will certainly tolerate nothing other than fairness and equality! Also, how DARE JU sue these residents for standing up for their American right not to be put in harms way for the intention of JU to make a buck! That boils my blood!!!
GSTAC does not claim to represent you. GSTAC offers an option by which residents can be empowered to effect the changes they seek for our area. Perhaps you can attend the meeting and unearth the misconceptions under which these statements are made.
Regards,
Anne
|
anne.reed
Member
|
Posted: Mon Aug 4th, 2008 05:19 pm |
|
Bambi wrote:
It's not on their agenda, because the invite was sent out via private emails. From a email list that was acquired from a meeting held at my office last year, to just let people know about the flooding problem in the San Tan Mts, around Bonanza Ranch. She has included in the list, the former BLC members also, plus a couple of developers. Unless she can say different, the appearance being given is that it is a public meeting hosted by GSTAC, where Bob will give out information about GSTAC, to solicit members. Then, a public servant from Pinal County, AJ, will talk to them exclusively about the plans Pinal has to amiliorate the flooding problem. I have suggested to Pinal C., AJ, that the meeting be called and hosted by Pinal, to give all the people an opportunity to hear how they are going to rectify it.....not to just a few, as it effects everyone in the Foothills.
My meeting at my office last year, was announced to everyone who wanted to attend. Not just a few. It was an open meeting to dispense information, and nothing more. But, it was also a meeting where Gordon attended. He got up and spoke about some things, and discussed the need for a larger group to address these concerns. I said that was a good idea, but would he be amenable to having it called something other than BLC. He said NO. Many witnesses' heard that remark and were taken back.
So....same ole people; just a different name, plus the addition of two J.U. members to add a little "spice" to the equation perhaps?
I suggest someone attend the meeting and ask them direct questions about representation. I am out of town, but I'm sure I would not be welcome anyway, as I am in an adverserial position with them and their CORE members.
Will Anne ever give you an explanation? Probably not. They tend to only answer questions they deem answerable in vague terms in my opinion. You'll never hear from Gordon on here, and Bob and Ed, just pop in to make a comment, with no desire to follow up our questions. Will that happen at the meeting too? Selective questions with selective answers?
I'm fighting for my life here, as is Kristi, in defending myself against two CORE members of this group, who have squashed my rights to free expression. I will continue to speak out about this Group, until justice is served and the people are protected against further danger to their lives and their community.
Johnson insisted in a letter to Q.C. that they take the warning sign off their website, as it doesn't apply anymore. They said absolutely not, as they are protecting the welfare of their community by doing so, and until they hear different from ADEQ, they will continue to warn the people. That's courage on his part, but also it is is obligation to protect them. I followed up with Pinal to see if John was right. He was. As per our only elected official that we answer to, Sandie Smith, she stated that as of 3 oclock that same day, that ADEQ stated it was still in force. Credibility? Believe J.U. or our Leaders? Believe GSTAC or our Leaders? I've made my choice.
The notices were provided to those citizens who have expressed an interest in the issue and they were asked to forward it to anyone else they thought might be interested. What would be your recommendation for advertising a public meeting in this area if not by email? I would greatly appreciate your suggestions.
The only developers that are included on this list are those who currently hold property in district one and have a direct interest in resolution of the flooding issues. It is an open public meeting.
This is a district one meeting. GSTAC core members will not be in attendance, however, those who live in District one have been invited as have their neighbors.
GSTAC does hope to learn of the issues that district one residents are most concerned about and those they'd like to pursue during the course of the next year, but, participation in this brief portion of the meeting is not compulsory.
Regards,
Anne
|
Molly Browne
Member
|
Posted: Mon Aug 4th, 2008 05:17 pm |
|
I'm certain they will not be holding elections at tonight's meeting. I find it rather peculiar that they claim to be holding a "public" meeting when they have not informed all homeowners about such meeting. Also, this meeting was announced on this forum 3 days prior to the scheduled meeting. Hmmm.....
Anne: How DARE you insult my intelligence by claiming GSTAC is not acting as a governing board. GSTAC claims to represent us all in this area. I have never asked for those people to represent me. By doing so, I would have been given the due opportunity to vote for my representation. GSTAC only represents itself. How can they be so foolish as to believe that this community would allow JU to dictate when, where, and if JU has jeopardized this community. That could open the door to others like them who also want to do whatever they choose while possibly endangering the community without repercussion. JU has NO right to decide whether or not their actions have endangered us. That decision is reserved for TRUE governing bodies. WE NEED AN AMERICAN SOURCE OF CHECKS AND BALANCES!!!!!
Thank you,
Molly Browne
Afterthought: Perhaps I should run for office? I will certainly tolerate nothing other than fairness and equality! Also, how DARE JU sue these residents for standing up for their American right not to be put in harms way for the intention of JU to make a buck! That boils my blood!!!
|
Bambi
Member
| Joined: | Tue Sep 19th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 3282 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 4th, 2008 02:56 pm |
|
It's not on their agenda, because the invite was sent out via private emails. From a email list that was acquired from a meeting held at my office last year, to just let people know about the flooding problem in the San Tan Mts, around Bonanza Ranch. She has included in the list, the former BLC members also, plus a couple of developers. Unless she can say different, the appearance being given is that it is a public meeting hosted by GSTAC, where Bob will give out information about GSTAC, to solicit members. Then, a public servant from Pinal County, AJ, will talk to them exclusively about the plans Pinal has to amiliorate the flooding problem. I have suggested to Pinal C., AJ, that the meeting be called and hosted by Pinal, to give all the people an opportunity to hear how they are going to rectify it.....not to just a few, as it effects everyone in the Foothills.
My meeting at my office last year, was announced to everyone who wanted to attend. Not just a few. It was an open meeting to dispense information, and nothing more. But, it was also a meeting where Gordon attended. He got up and spoke about some things, and discussed the need for a larger group to address these concerns. I said that was a good idea, but would he be amenable to having it called something other than BLC. He said NO. Many witnesses' heard that remark and were taken back.
So....same ole people; just a different name, plus the addition of two J.U. members to add a little "spice" to the equation perhaps?
I suggest someone attend the meeting and ask them direct questions about representation. I am out of town, but I'm sure I would not be welcome anyway, as I am in an adverserial position with them and their CORE members.
Will Anne ever give you an explanation? Probably not. They tend to only answer questions they deem answerable in vague terms in my opinion. You'll never hear from Gordon on here, and Bob and Ed, just pop in to make a comment, with no desire to follow up our questions. Will that happen at the meeting too? Selective questions with selective answers?
I'm fighting for my life here, as is Kristi, in defending myself against two CORE members of this group, who have squashed my rights to free expression. I will continue to speak out about this Group, until justice is served and the people are protected against further danger to their lives and their community.
Johnson insisted in a letter to Q.C. that they take the warning sign off their website, as it doesn't apply anymore. They said absolutely not, as they are protecting the welfare of their community by doing so, and until they hear different from ADEQ, they will continue to warn the people. That's courage on his part, but also it is is obligation to protect them. I followed up with Pinal to see if John was right. He was. As per our only elected official that we answer to, Sandie Smith, she stated that as of 3 oclock that same day, that ADEQ stated it was still in force. Credibility? Believe J.U. or our Leaders? Believe GSTAC or our Leaders? I've made my choice.
Last edited on Mon Aug 4th, 2008 02:57 pm by Bambi
|
JJohnson
Member
| Joined: | Wed Aug 15th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 672 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 4th, 2008 02:26 pm |
|
Anne,
I know you are busy and don't read this everyday so in case you missed it again we would like an answer to this question. We are just interested in clearing up who has recognized GSTAC officially. Also while you are at it, will there be elections at your meeting tonight? We did not see that on your website agenda.
JJohnson wrote:
BUMP.
JJohnson wrote:
anne.reed wrote:
I'm pleased you're not comparing yourself to MLK or Nelson Mandela because these were two courageous men who were not content to sit on the sidelines and talk about the ills of they world. They were anything but passive. The stood up to their opponents and for their people. As am I, albeit not in the same way. One paid with his life and the other with his freedom.
I'm biting my tongue as I don't want to address the rest of your comments. Suffice to say, sitting back and taking pot shots at those who toil to better their community isn't even remotely related to productive discourse.
Someone who has strong opinions, like you, and what is apparently a deep desire for justice and the well being of their community should get off the soap box, jump into the trenches, and "get 'er done", as Larry the CableGuy so eloquently suggests. If I was able to I would. Just not a possibility
Regards,
Anne
I also find it amazing that you were able to dig up a post from weeks ago but still can't address a simple question posed to you last week. I will not let you off the hook that easily. Why the delay in posting copies of the resolutions and proclamations of the "counties, cities, utilities and other organizations" who have recognized GSTAC to "represent the interests of" the large unannexed population.
|
Bambi
Member
| Joined: | Tue Sep 19th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 3282 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Aug 3rd, 2008 09:40 pm |
|
More research on GSTAC and it's members:
Representation: Joan Perry is our representative to Pinal Town Hall, according to their website. Has anyone ever heard a report back from her? Organizations she belongs to: BLC and GSTAC are the only ones I am aware of.
Representation. Gordon Brown is our rep. to Pinal County, via the Citizens Advisory Committee. Has anyone heard from him or heard a report on activities? Organizations he belongs to? BLC and GSTAC are all I am aware of.
Reresentation: George Johnson and Brian Tompsette are two CORE members with GSTAC. Has anyone heard from them about what they are doing for us? According to the GSTAC website, they are supposed to be dealing with issues that impact our quality of life out here. They feel confident that they state they will be fair and balanced in their representation of our wants and needs? Can they sue residents for disagreeing with them? Yes. They have. Conflict? Their Utiltiy Company impacts our quality of life out here, yet GSTAC has refused to deal with that Company, regarding J.U. negative impact to our quality of life.....the sewage spill. GSTAC? Please answer what you will do for the young mother who is being sued by your CORE members who are also her representatives? A young mother who is afraid of the impact the sewage spill would have on her children who was first seeking out an answer. But found none. No one to help her. Thus her cries for help and other means of acquring notice for a safe area for her family in Pecan Creek, went unheeded, except for the law suit. That was the response she got from GSTAC CORE members George Johnson and Brian Tompsette. And not a word from their fellow CORE members.
If I am incorrect in the above rendition, then please correct me, as all the information was derived from various websites.
My research is now complete and I am ready to put my case together for submission to the Courts.
Last edited on Sun Aug 3rd, 2008 09:41 pm by Bambi
|
Bambi
Member
| Joined: | Tue Sep 19th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 3282 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Aug 3rd, 2008 03:14 pm |
|
anne.reed wrote: Dear Molly:
GSTAC is not a governing body.
It has no agenda except to provide citizens a vehicle to provide input concerning the development of our community, a forum where they can voice concerns about our community, host public informational meetings, hear suggestions for solutions to area problems and bring them to the attention of the community at large, and otherwise bring a voice to residents who have previously felt disenfranchised.
Those who choose to get involved (with GSTAC or any other local organizations) will have the opportunity to join forces with their neighbors and other residents of the Greater San Tan Area, to effect the type of changes they would like to see in their districts and in the Greater San Tan Area.
Those who wait too long may lose their opportunity to speak as surrounding municipalities continue to expand their planning areas to include commercial that surrounds us. This strategy would provide them a generous source of sales tax revenue without the cost of providing the services that annexed rooftops would demand.
Regards,
Anne Reed To Govern
transitive verb1 a: to exercise continuous sovereign authority over; especially : to control and direct the making and administration of policy in b: to rule without sovereign power and usually without having the authority to determine basic policy2 aarchaic : manipulate b: to control the speed of (as a machine) especially by automatic means3 a: to control, direct, or strongly influence the actions and conduct of b: to exert a determining or guiding influence in or over <income must govern expenditure> c: to hold in check : restrain4: to require (a word) to be in a certain case5: to serve as a precedent or deciding principle for <customs that govern human decisions>intransitive verb1: to prevail or have decisive influence : control2: to exercise authority
GSTAC: Does not do the above: But, it provides citizens a "vehicle" (please define)to:
1.provide input for the development of the community
2.Forum
3.Public Infomational Meetings
4.Bring concerns from citizens to the community at large
5.Voice
The vehicle you speak about is the "one voice" you mention on your site. That speaks of representation to me. When you state that you are recognized by others as that voice, you are indeed engaging in representation, so you are now a political body in my opinion.
.
"calling a (public) meeting is a political act in itself"- Daniel Goleman
"no one group (your one voice) can represent all the people." Sandie Smith
"You have to have the authority to represent the people." me.
"What touches all must be approved by all" (quod )
"political representation refers to an arrangement whereby one is enabled to speak and act with authority in the behalf of some other."
consent of the majority must be given "either by themselves or their representatives chosen by them. John Locke.
the representative is a trustee authorized to judge and act independently of the constituency's "opinions." Edmund Burke
If you are a representative of GSTAC, consent must be given to represent. You are a political representative body of the people if you are indeed "One Voice" as you state, to deal with the affairs of the Community. That's political in my mind, just by definition. And by asking to be recognized by other political and nonpolitical bodies, you are have engaged in representation of a community....political.
Taken From GSTAC's Website
Together we can be proactive - Together we are one voice - Together we will be heard – Together we can build a community
It is the intent of the GSTAC that what is implemented as a result of these strategies will endure as the The Voice of the Greater San Tan Area and be respected and supported as such by Pinal County and adjoining municipalities
Will receive our power and authority from the residents of the Greater San Tan Area as well as acceptance by the surrounding municipalities and the Pinal County Government
Sponsored by the San Tan Area Chamber of Commerce
We will unify a definable community and acquire universal recognition of GSTAC GSTAC will support a representative process to identify and select members of the Review and Oversight Committee and other committees.
..........to afford the citizens of this community a genuine grass roots opportunity to create for themselves a rational, efficient, and cost effective representative entity sufficient to ensure full representation throughout and within the Nine District boundary area, sufficient to accurately and inclusively define a shared vision, and sufficient to see that vision implemented and endure.
CORE: This is the cou de grace in my opinion......... CORE members of which two are George Johnson and Bryan Thompsette, both Johnson Utility members, and you have asked them to do the following on our behalf?
To act as a Review and Oversight Committee to deal with issues impacting the quality of life, vision and/or development within the San Tan Area.
To ensure that all activities and actions of the Greater San Tan Coalition are transparent and open and will serve/represent the entire community.
The activities and actions of the CORE will remain confidential until the public portion of the Coalition activity commences. Meeting summaries will be available upon notice for public disclosure if required. Public disclosure especially to the media will occur only upon agreement
It is sponsored by the San Tan Area Chamber of Commerce as an independent group. The CORE members were selected not only for their diverse perspectives but also for their internal compulsion to build real community and for their experience in transforming ideas and possibilities into reality.
Now tell me you are not attempting to represent all the people out here. Tell me you are not a political body.
Your judgement in picking these CORE members is a slap in the people of the San Tans face. George Johnson, Bryan Thompsette are in litigation with me and another San Tan resident, and you continue to support him and his cohort and continue to give them authority over us to accomplish your objectives? The Objective being total control, meaning one voice, by your group which includes adversaries of the people, both here and in Queen Creek, and in other towns and cities in our State. Are you kidding me?
Just for that reason alone, the people are not joining your group and you wonder why? You have exercised poor judgment; poor decisions; No Transparancy and no accountability.
Start Over; eliminate your CORE members and revise your white paper and your vision of total representation.....then people may start joining.
Sorry Molly for jumping in there. You can take over now.
Last edited on Mon Aug 4th, 2008 03:28 pm by Bambi
|
anne.reed
Member
|
Posted: Sun Aug 3rd, 2008 04:46 am |
|
Dear Molly:
GSTAC is not a governing body.
It has no agenda except to provide citizens a vehicle to provide input concerning the development of our community, a forum where they can voice concerns about our community, host public informational meetings, hear suggestions for solutions to area problems and bring them to the attention of the community at large, and otherwise bring a voice to residents who have previously felt disenfranchised.
Those who choose to get involved (with GSTAC or any other local organizations) will have the opportunity to join forces with their neighbors and other residents of the Greater San Tan Area, to effect the type of changes they would like to see in their districts and in the Greater San Tan Area.
Those who wait too long may lose their opportunity to speak as surrounding municipalities continue to expand their planning areas to include commercial that surrounds us. This strategy would provide them a generous source of sales tax revenue without the cost of providing the services that annexed rooftops would demand.
Regards,
Anne Reed
|
Bambi
Member
| Joined: | Tue Sep 19th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 3282 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Aug 1st, 2008 08:58 pm |
|
http://www.ourgstac.com First public meeting announced. Received via email. See the following:
Dear Friends and Neighbors:
GSTAC, District One, will be hosting it's first public meeting on behalf of area residents. Bob Dotson will be making a brief presentation on GSTAC's mission, how residents can get involved and serve their community, and how we, as a team, can positively impact all District One residents.
As our time will be limited at this meeting, please compile a short list of issues (written or oral) that you feel are most urgent to District One residents for attention in the upcoming year. We can discuss these briefly and list their prioritization as an action item for the next regularly scheduled public meeting.
Our guest speaker will be AJ Blaja, Assistant Public Works Director of Pinal County. He will be updating Foothills residents regarding progress made toward implementing a comprehensive solution to alleviate flooding in the San Tan Foothills and interim plans we might employ until the final proposal(s) can be implemented. This will be of particular interest to the residents of Adobe Dam and Bonanza Ranch. Flooding issues at the J-curve and the north slope of Gold Mine Mountain will also be discussed.
The meeting will be held at the entry station to San Tan Mountain Regional Park 1 mile west Thompson Road at the end of Phillips Road (see attached map) on Monday, August 4th, 2008, 7-8:30 PM. Please pass this notice on to others who will be interested in this update.
Please arrive timely as the seating will be limited.
Kind Regards,
Anne Reed
Anne: I put this on my site also, along with your gstac website. Hopefully, you will have a good turn out. It's not on your website, so don't you think it would be a good idea to post it there, instead of sending out emails to the people that gave them to you at the Meeting I held at my office. What about informing the absentee owners and the investors? How will you reach them? Good luck. I would be careful about stating who you represent, based on my research.Last edited on Fri Aug 1st, 2008 09:02 pm by Bambi
|
pipeman
Member
| Joined: | Tue Oct 3rd, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 562 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Aug 1st, 2008 05:04 pm |
|
Molly Browne wrote: bigwavedave wrote: starleen wrote: BUMP
QCVillager wrote:
QCVillager wrote: anne.reed wrote: Dear Starleen:
GSTAC is recognized by counties, cities, utilities and other organizations, to represent the interests of our large unannexed population.
Regards,
Anne
it is ? i don't recall seeing the proclamations/declarations. please include the declarations of the counties, cities, utilities and other organizations formally recognizing GSTAC on your website and/or provide links to same here.
Anne Reed ? are you out there ? i would think your assertion above would be something you would be rejoicing and shouting from the roof tops, so why the delay in posting copies of the resolutions and proclamations of the "counties, cities, utilities and other organizations" who have recognized GSTAC to "represent the interests of" the large unannexed population.
Generally, when someone is asked a direct question and they can not/will not answer, the silence gives you the answer. Anne, since you have not chosen to answer the question can we reasonably infer from your silence you cannot back up your assertion? A simple question asking for a simple answer.
Anne? Hello? Yeah, go figure. Kinda hard to answer this when you have no answers. Perhaps you should remain permanently silenced. Everything you put on here is an example of your "foot in mouth" syndrome. I have read every single thread regarding Pinal County. I have read all of your posts and every reply to them from residents of this area on this site. I have also checked out your (not the people's) GSTAC website. Is that site supposed to be informative? More like a waste of space and time. Much like the waste of space and time you, anne, and rest of the GSTAC and its CORE are to the resident homeowners and families out here. Perhaps you see the residents of this area as having minimal intellect. Not everyone here has the same mentality as you, anne. You can pull the wool over the eyes of some. Then there those like myself who will stop at nothing to see change in this area!!! Get off your high horse, the ride is over.
Thank you,
Molly Browne
right on Molly. I have been fairly quiet but I am so sick and tired of reading this crap that spews from these peoples blowholes. CQVillager has been asking the same question over and over, as I did to Anne with no reply. CQV should know whether his town recognizes GSTAC or not so from his continual question, we can only assume that they in fact DO NOT. Nor do many of out here recognize them as our voice. Their site is not only a waste of space and time, those sitting in their thinking they represent us without us asking them or electing them to do so is a watse as well. Until we vote and put in who we want, they can go fly a freaking kite. BRING ON THE ELECTIONS ALREADY....... WE WANT YOU PEOPLE OUT OF THERE. SO REAL PEOPLE FROM THE COMMUNITY, WITH REAL COMMUNITY INTERSTS CAN STAND UP AND CREATE A COLLECTIVE VOICE OF THE COMMUNITY. BECAUSE YOU PEOPLE ARE NOT IT.
|
Molly Browne
Member
|
Posted: Thu Jul 31st, 2008 11:17 pm |
|
bigwavedave wrote: starleen wrote: BUMP
QCVillager wrote:
QCVillager wrote: anne.reed wrote: Dear Starleen:
GSTAC is recognized by counties, cities, utilities and other organizations, to represent the interests of our large unannexed population.
Regards,
Anne
it i | | |