| Author | Post |
|---|
pipeman
Member
|
Posted: Wed Jun 17th, 2009 08:27 am |
|
Lovethisarea wrote: Where do people go to vote on a name? I think it would be a good idea to put this information on a big banner (with a deadline shown) and put it up on major intersections in the area. I emailed the address posted on santanevents and no response.
LTA, the last email I received said the voting will take place on Monday June 22, at a community meeting. She did say that if you can't make the meeting you can fax in your ballot or vote on-line. She then said, she will follow up with where and how to access it asap.
Just so everyone is aware, the "ONLY" names that will be on the ballot will be the names allowed by the USPS, So many suggestions will not show up on the ballot. And there may not be many choices.
I did notice the little blurb she put in the email, "as well as an option to keep things as they are" . HMMMMMMM sounds fishy to me, yet once again.
I wonder, will only those included in the boundaries drawn up going to be allowed to vote? I see a great potential for more shananigans by certain people, as happened in the past.
|
nunya
Member
|
Posted: Wed Jun 17th, 2009 08:10 am |
|
Good idea LTA.
Bryan, thanks for coming on here and explaining what is going on. Makes more sense tro me now. Also apparent that the name that is chosen will be here to stay since letterheads would have to change, etc.
|
Lovethisarea
Member
|
Posted: Wed Jun 17th, 2009 08:06 am |
|
| Where do people go to vote on a name? I think it would be a good idea to put this information on a big banner (with a deadline shown) and put it up on major intersections in the area. I emailed the address posted on santanevents and no response.
|
ndbracing
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jun 17th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 17th, 2009 07:55 am |
|
Last edited on Wed Jun 17th, 2009 07:59 am by ndbracing
|
BryanMartyn
Member
|
Posted: Wed Jun 17th, 2009 07:38 am |
|
Community,
Much has been questioned about the current name change process. Please
allow me to explain the process and I ask for your help to get the word out.
The reason for the accelerated timeline has nothing to do with pushing an
agenda. It has more to do with convenience for the businesses and citizens.
As you may or may not know, the zip codes are changing on July 1st, 2009.
Although we have a year to make the transition, many businesses/individuals
are in the process of changing letterhead and the like. The costs
associated with these changes can be into the thousands of dollars. Therein
lies the rush. How do we get a name/zip change at the same time? We hustle
and try to talk to as many citizens as possible given the constraints of
time and money. With no newspaper in the community, that is a tough task.
We quickly started the process of talking to various HOAs throughout the
community to get some ideas about a name. The Greater San Tan Area is
currently home to almost 80,000 people spread over 67 square miles. It was
quickly apparent that this would be an exercise in compromise. The HOAs in
the north chose names that they identified with; Pecan Groves, The Groves,
etc... The communities in the south leaned towards San Tan-centric names;
San Tan Foothills, San Tan Heights, etc... This is where the compromise
comes in.
We explained that San Tan, AZ is a community in the Gila Reservation and was
not an option. Then we went on to explain that the name should not be area
specific. The following is a list of some of the names that met the
criteria of compromise:
Historical Precedent- Johnson Ranch, AZ; Schnepf, AZ; Gantzel, AZ; Combs,
AZ; Magma, AZ; Poston, AZ
Native Plants- Ironwood, AZ; Mesquite, AZ; Ocotillo, AZ
Landmarks- Bella Vista, AZ; Meridian, AZ; Skyline, AZ; San Tan Vistas, AZ
Of course, there are dozens and dozens of names available. But, we are
looking for a name that represents a compromise. Consistently, Bella Vista,
AZ was the most common compromise. Was it perfect? No, but could most
people live with it? Yes.
This is were I humbly ask for your help. A decision needs to be made.
Given the constraints of time and resources, I made a decision to go with
Bella Vista, AZ. It was, in fact, not my personal favorite. San Tan
Vistas, AZ was my choice (even though it could be argued as area specific).
Nonetheless, Tisha Castillo has offered to help get the word out. I have
asked the US Postal Service for and additional week. They originally asked for two weeks. The goal is to have a name and the zip change at the same time.
Sincerely,
Bryan
My fellow bloggers,
As many of you, I am anxious to move forward. This name could be debated for years. But, it would be irresponsible of me to pass up an opportunity to get as much input as possible within the time constraints. Thank you for your patience as we attempt to include as much of the community as possible.
Bryan
Last edited on Wed Jun 17th, 2009 07:46 am by BryanMartyn
|
pipeman
Member
|
Posted: Wed Jun 17th, 2009 07:18 am |
|
PJ22 wrote: I think it's a leap to compare disgruntled adults of the GSTA to 2 year olds. Having the mentality that our elected leaders know what's best lays the groundwork for a dictatorship. Our area is full of successful, educated adults who have the right to be disgruntled about the process. Many of us are unhappy that Obama and the democrats are in power, but we accept the results because the process was fair. Bryan's process was chaotic and unfair. Even he admitted that he could have done it better. Judging by the list of names on a petition that I saw, MANY people are disgruntled; they're just not on these boards.
Bottom line: if he alone is going to make the decision then don't pretend that homeowners actually have a voice in it and don't put up meaningless polls. If he is going to seek a public vote on it, seek to get the word out so people have a chance to have their voices heard.
It'll be interesting to see if anything results from the delay of the name change...
There are several reasons why it went down the way it did. The biggest reason has to do with local businesses.
The zip code is changing and the local businesses will need to change their letterhead, envelops, stationary, etc.. so it all has the new zip code on it. It would be foolish, a waste of money, and frankly downright insensitive to allow them to make these changes and then expect them to have to change it again when a name was decided on, like that would have happened anyways. There is NO possible way for 80,000 people to agree on a name.....period.
There is a lot more going on around in our community that your time would best be used to fight against, or for, than a name.
|
nunya
Member
|
Posted: Wed Jun 17th, 2009 07:16 am |
|
PJ22 wrote: I think it's a leap to compare disgruntled adults of the GSTA to 2 year olds. Having the mentality that our elected leaders know what's best lays the groundwork for a dictatorship. Our area is full of successful, educated adults who have the right to be disgruntled about the process. Many of us are unhappy that Obama and the democrats are in power, but we accept the results because the process was fair. Bryan's process was chaotic and unfair. Even he admitted that he could have done it better. Judging by the list of names on a petition that I saw, MANY people are disgruntled; they're just not on these boards.
Bottom line: if he alone is going to make the decision then don't pretend that homeowners actually have a voice in it and don't put up meaningless polls. If he is going to seek a public vote on it, seek to get the word out so people have a chance to have their voices heard.
It'll be interesting to see if anything results from the delay of the name change...
I'm really turned off by all of the drama on both sides but I agree 100% with what PJ22 said.
Believe it or not Bella Vista has actually grown on me some and I'm as dead set against it as I was - I still prefer three or four other names...
What irks me is how Bryan came on here pretending we had a choice and then proceeds to ram the name of his choosing down our throats. Then doesn't come around to explain what's going on. Several on here have said they've spoken to him so he obviously knows all about the controversy.
I also think that "Do Nothing" should be one of the choices.
There's no requirement that this be done right now. I see these fake USPS deadlines for what they are - an excuse to DO SOMETHING, ANYTHING even if it's not the right thing all the while attempting to put the blame on the USPS. The only requirement is that we start using our new zip codes and we've got a year to do that. To me this looks more like ambition than anything else. If Bryan was a resident of this area he would definitely have some more credibility in my book.
BTW, I did vote for Bryan in the last election based in some part on the open communication I saw from him on these forums. I appreciate him also starting off communicating this issue on these forums but it seems when the controversy started he's been nowhere to be found.
Also, anyone who thinks the name will be changed after it is on USPS docs, maps, return addresses, etc is kidding themselves. The only way it would be changed is if something really extreme happened.
|
PJ22
Member
| Joined: | Sat Mar 28th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 164 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 17th, 2009 06:25 am |
|
I think it's a leap to compare disgruntled adults of the GSTA to 2 year olds. Having the mentality that our elected leaders know what's best lays the groundwork for a dictatorship. Our area is full of successful, educated adults who have the right to be disgruntled about the process. Many of us are unhappy that Obama and the democrats are in power, but we accept the results because the process was fair. Bryan's process was chaotic and unfair. Even he admitted that he could have done it better. Judging by the list of names on a petition that I saw, MANY people are disgruntled; they're just not on these boards.
Bottom line: if he alone is going to make the decision then don't pretend that homeowners actually have a voice in it and don't put up meaningless polls. If he is going to seek a public vote on it, seek to get the word out so people have a chance to have their voices heard.
It'll be interesting to see if anything results from the delay of the name change...
|
starleen
Member
| Joined: | Wed Dec 26th, 2007 |
| Location: | Coolidge |
| Posts: | 679 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 17th, 2009 05:33 am |
|
PJ22 wrote: If that's the case then why did he post 4 polls on the issue and why did he bother to go the HOA's?
I guess you'll have to ask him, but just because 4 polls and HOA clamor for something else, whatever that would be, doesn't make a concensus and doesn't make it the best decision. Just because you have input doesn't mean you get your way. Like the kids crying in the checkout lane for candy bars. Someone has to take charge and it shouldn't be the two-year old.
|
PJ22
Member
| Joined: | Sat Mar 28th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 164 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 17th, 2009 04:52 am |
|
If that's the case then why did he post 4 polls on the issue and why did he bother to go the HOA's?
|
starleen
Member
| Joined: | Wed Dec 26th, 2007 |
| Location: | Coolidge |
| Posts: | 679 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 17th, 2009 04:30 am |
|
PJ22 wrote: Bottom line: inform ALL of the residents, and give us a chance to have our voices heard.
The people's voices were heard on election day. "Bryan won." This is a representative government, not a true democracy, thank goodness. Otherwise we'd spend countless dollars on the "residents" (in all their wisdom) fighting over stupid things like this. Ask 20,000 people what the name should be and you'll get 10.000 different answers. Like Bum$%^& and Johnson and Lizard Bend.
What's next, we debate what the color of the d**n street signs should be?
|
pipeman
Member
|
Posted: Wed Jun 17th, 2009 04:03 am |
|
bobthebuilder wrote: http://www.dramabutton.com/
Love it bob. Simply amazing isn't it.
To show this much emotion about something that can change. I surely did not see anyone jumping up and down when a certain someone drove businesses that wanted to build out here away from Hunt. A name can be changed down the road, but those businesses will never come back. A lose of revenue and jobs, but no bit&hing did I see except for the select few.
|
PJ22
Member
| Joined: | Sat Mar 28th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 164 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 17th, 2009 04:00 am |
|
That's so funny. I was just getting ready to delete my posts and disengage.
|
bobthebuilder
Member
|
Posted: Wed Jun 17th, 2009 03:54 am |
|
| http://www.dramabutton.com/
|
PJ22
Member
| Joined: | Sat Mar 28th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 164 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 17th, 2009 03:26 am |
|
Last edited on Wed Jun 17th, 2009 04:00 am by PJ22
|
Bambi2
Member
| Joined: | Tue Apr 7th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 336 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 17th, 2009 02:06 am |
|
PJ22 wrote: By 'moralizing' I mean judging others that dare have an opinion that differs from your own. You tend to put others down to lift yourself up, as evident by the way you end your snarky post. Part of the beauty of our country is the right to have our voices heard; not just blindly submitting to our elected leaders. It doesn't make you better or worse than anyone else to be on Bryan's side of this issue; and those of us that are unhappy with him are not worse nor less moral than you.
You have judged me since you signed up. You just don't appear to like me or what I say, even though you've never met me. That's ok with me. I don't know who you are anyway, so nothing lost and nothing gained. I cast no judgment. I just state my opinion. I may be opinionated, but that goes with my territory at this point in my life.
I argue my points, as I am supposed to do. I didn't call anyone names, as you have done. And, I have alot of friends on here who understand where I come from and know that I'm not trying to put myself up. Up to what level? At my age, it's even hard to get up, so I can use all the help I can get . You're just guessing.
But let's take a look at your previous post to analyze your "put downs".........
PJ22
I think that is what is so maddening; he puts a pretend poll up and ignores the actual results. When people across the valley scratch their heads at our strange new name, we need to make sure they know exactly who chose it for us and made us the laughing stock of the valley.
It's funny that some people think we should avoid San Tan anything because it is over-used; I say it's logical to use something that is already well used. Just like Fountain Hills has a name that describes their area, San Tan Hills or San Tan Foothills seemed logical to describe the area down this way.
Heck, why don't we just name it after our leaders that choose names for us: Dufus, AZ?
Checkmate.
Now settle back and enjoy these discussions. No one is trying to put down anyone. We're debating issues. Let's not spend time on the blame game.
|
PJ22
Member
| Joined: | Sat Mar 28th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 164 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 17th, 2009 01:52 am |
|
Last edited on Wed Jun 17th, 2009 04:01 am by PJ22
|
Bambi2
Member
| Joined: | Tue Apr 7th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 336 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 17th, 2009 01:36 am |
|
PJ22 wrote: The day he made his decision I posted the totals from all 4 "polls"; it's somewhere in the thread. The heart of the problem is that it seems as though the majority of the residents had absolutely no voice in this, and Bryan is acting as though we did. What it boils down to is he came up with a name and pushed it on the residents using his own rationale. The e-mail that has been posted on these forums implies that Bryan recognizes he could have handled this better.
Bottom line: inform ALL of the residents, and give us a chance to have our voices heard.
We seem to be having a communication problem here.
First of all, those votes/polls on here were jemmied in my opinion, as they kept changing. That's not Bryan's fault. He's not aware of that. It happens on here off and on, depending on what's being polled. All you need is a person who has multiple characters on here to cast all their characters votes for one item to skew the results. Is that fair and balanced? I think not.
How do you intend on informing ALL the residents in the time allowed? Would you have the taxpayers pay for sending out 80,000 letters, express mail, to capture their vote on a name in the time allowed? How? How do you engage 80,000 people in a week?
If a person is that concerned about the recent actions of Bryan in trying to secure a name in the time allowed, then they should have called him when this all started imo. As I said before, it's not his responsibility to do this for us. It's ours. But no one was doing anything about it, so he took it upon himself as the leader we elected, How many people emailed their Supervisor to give him their voice for a name in the last few weeks, or even after he first posted this? Did you pj22?
He can just as easily STOP this process as fast as he started it, then perhaps you pj22 can take on this massive task of making sure everyone (ALL) has a voice within these times constraints. It's the Post Office who has put this time restraint upon us. Not Bryan. That's who we should be contacting, to give us more time to research a name. Have you attempted to contact them? Sure we want our voices heard, but maybe it's the post office that should be hearing those voices....not Bryan.
Stop my Moralizing? A community can be moral. The basic moral values of a community implies conformity to a standard that is right and good for all. We all hopefully hold that standard as well as Bryan, our elected leader, as he holds that standard up for us publicaly. I will continue my "moralizing."
Name? At this point in time, I would bet that just about any name will satisfy the majority.....just so they have an identity and it isn't Queen Creek. I think QC would agree.
Keep up the Good work for us Bryan. We (or most of us anyway) appreciate what you're doing for us.
B.
Last edited on Wed Jun 17th, 2009 01:48 am by Bambi2
|
PJ22
Member
| Joined: | Sat Mar 28th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 164 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 17th, 2009 12:24 am |
|
The day he made his decision I posted the totals from all 4 "polls"; it's somewhere in the thread. The heart of the problem is that it seems as though the majority of the residents had absolutely no voice in this, and Bryan is acting as though we did. What it boils down to is he came up with a name and pushed it on the residents using his own rationale. The e-mail that has been posted on these forums implies that Bryan recognizes he could have handled this better.
Bottom line: inform ALL of the residents, and give us a chance to have our voices heard.
|
GSBill
Member
|
Posted: Tue Jun 16th, 2009 11:39 pm |
|
PJ22 wrote:
Bambi, enough with your moralizing. YOU are happy with Bryan's actions. Yippee for you. I am not happy with his pretense of a poll that he put on here; I have a right to express my displeasure at his rationale for ignoring the results of the poll that he put on here. Nothing you say will change my displeasure for his pretend poll.
30 votes???
|
PJ22
Member
| Joined: | Sat Mar 28th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 164 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 16th, 2009 10:30 pm |
|
Bambi, enough with your moralizing. YOU are happy with Bryan's actions. Yippee for you. I am not happy with his pretense of a poll that he put on here; I have a right to express my displeasure at his rationale for ignoring the results of the poll that he put on here. Nothing you say will change my displeasure for his pretend poll.
|
Bambi2
Member
| Joined: | Tue Apr 7th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 336 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 16th, 2009 04:49 pm |
|
| Thank you Bob for that very informative post. It helps in my understanding of our pursuit for our own identity and how one accomplishes that feat.
|
bobdotson
Member
|
Posted: Tue Jun 16th, 2009 04:36 pm |
|
I believe this has been asked and answered before. I understand that the USPS primary means for mail delivery is by ZIP code, not city/state. In my discussions in the past with the Post Master and USPS regional manager in Phoenix, postal operations take on differnent roles, but that 'Postal Branches' (with post masters) are only opened in 'Named Places' (i.e. the 'Queen Creek' Post Office is a USPS 'Postal Branch' which carries the name of the 'Named Place' 'Queen Creek, AZ'. You can receive mail addressed San Tan Foothills, AZ 85242 that is handled by the 'Queen Creek' Postal Branch. It is also my understanding that just because UNPC becomes a 'Named Place' does not necessarily mean the USPS will open a Postal Branch in the newly named community.
So, I'm not sure what track Supervisor Martyn is pursuing in this particular case.
I was in attendance a STH Block Watch meeting where Supervisor Martyn discussed the naming proposal. He pointed out to be that because the UNPC Urban area is not incorporated, that there is a substantial amount of State sales tax revenue share (State sales tax collected within incorporated cities/towns boundry are shared with that entity) left to the state each year, and the county does not get that money for that population.
I know that the first step in establishing an official recognized community identity is to become a 'Named Place' (this an be done as a stand alone activity or in conjunction with an Incorporation) per the process in my last post. In my conservations with Supervisor Martyn, he has indicated his interest of 'enabling' (not deciding for) the UNPC population (as encompassed in his proposed 'Bella Vista' Boundary Map) in establishing a community identity with the eventual goal of incorporation.
I do agree with Supervisor Martyn on the fact that somehow the Community Identity issue needs to move forward. Just speculating here, but I would guess he would welcome wider active constructive participation to that goal.
Bob Dotson
|
Bambi2
Member
| Joined: | Tue Apr 7th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 336 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 16th, 2009 03:53 pm |
|
Bullwinkle wrote: According to a e-mail sent out my Tisha, the naming for the area has been put off for a week, to allow her time to run her own polls for a new name. She states that Bryan is on board with this. I hope things don't get screwed up on this, just when I thought we were finally moving forward. I liked Bella Vista, but no matter what the name we need a name. Yes I believe she is part of GSTAC.
Good to know. Thank you.
You realize that GSTAC has only developers in their leadership roles imo. That would include George Johnson, who has been quoted as not wanting this area to become a city. GSTAC was formed as a governing entity in lieu of becoming a city. So I question her motivations in stopping this process.
Here we go again.
|
Bullwinkle
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jun 4th, 2009 |
| Location: | Arizona USA |
| Posts: | 7 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 16th, 2009 03:43 pm |
|
According to a e-mail sent out my Tisha, the naming for the area has been put off for a week, to allow her time to run her own polls for a new name. She states that Bryan is on board with this. I hope things don't get screwed up on this, just when I thought we were finally moving forward. I liked Bella Vista, but no matter what the name we need a name. Yes I believe she is part of GSTAC.
|
Bambi2
Member
| Joined: | Tue Apr 7th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 336 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 16th, 2009 03:27 pm |
|
PJ22 wrote: I haven't seen anyone yet either that has heard him speak at their HOA meetings. If he only consulted 200 people out of 80,000 that's pretty ridiculous. He should have done everyone a favor and foregone his pretend polls. The day he announced it was going to be Bella Vista, San Tan Vista was actually the winner. Can anyone imagine using his logic to our national elections? "Barack Obama didn't win by an overwhelming majority, so therefore John McCain is the president. I talked to a couple small towns and they all seemed to favor McCain, and since Obama didn't win by an overwhelming margin it's going to be McCain."
Bryan is working diligently on improving our lot in life out here. Before you go and condemn him for his actions on our behalf, call him. Ask to go to his office and SEE what he's doing for us. Let's not discourage him for working on our behalf.
Yes, I can imagine using Bryan's logic for anything. He studies it first, then he acts upon it. That's how he was trained, and he's exercising that training. At least he is showing some action and results on this "crowding" problem that has caused alot of suffering in our community for the last 5 or so years. And he's going about it with other communities around us, planning to make this happen for us. And he's only been in office for what? 5 months? Let's not discourage him for working on our behalf.....unless of course you want to take his place.
I'm proud of his efforts for us. He's taking the bull by the horns and getting it done. No one else has been able to get this far without a blockade by the resistance of those who didn't want to become a city. I see no blockade happening at this point, except over a name on here. That to me is a sidebar. What's critical is the numbers must crunch for this city to happen. If they don't crunch, then the ballot will fail. Simple as that. That's where the people make their choice....at the voting booth.
So let's get those numbers crunching, while Bryan lays the groundwork for us. Who on here wants to take that on for us? I'll start a topic on that so you can reveal your names to Bryan and offer your help to make this happen.
Question: New poster Trisha. Are you a member of GSTAC?
Last edited on Tue Jun 16th, 2009 03:32 pm by Bambi2
|
HenryEstes
Member
|
Posted: Tue Jun 16th, 2009 07:08 am |
|
nunya wrote: Funny that Bryan hasn't posted much since he told us that despite the voting in the two polls it would be Bella Vista. Maybe he's too busy making this happen after all it has to be done by July 1 (why I don't know).
I'm curious about specifically which HOA meetings he spoke at about this issue. I haven't seen anyone post on here (maybe I missed it) who heard him speak about this issue. Supposedly there are "about 200" people he's spoken to...
Bryan appeared at the Rancho Bella Vista South HOA Meeting on May 21. He told us that Bella Vista was the perfect choice for naming this area. There was no discussion about a name nor was there any request to think about a name and let him know. To me, Bella Vista is too "artsy-fartsy". Means nothing. I much prefer Ironwood.
He also spoke to the issue of the annexation of Banner and the Fry's at Combs and Gantzel. He said that in a recent meeting he had with Banner and others, QC would not be annexing Banner and the Fry's. He now seems to have backed away from that.
|
PJ22
Member
| Joined: | Sat Mar 28th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 164 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 16th, 2009 06:58 am |
|
I haven't seen anyone yet either that has heard him speak at their HOA meetings. If he only consulted 200 people out of 80,000 that's pretty ridiculous. He should have done everyone a favor and foregone his pretend polls. The day he announced it was going to be Bella Vista, San Tan Vista was actually the winner. Can anyone imagine using his logic to our national elections? "Barack Obama didn't win by an overwhelming majority, so therefore John McCain is the president. I talked to a couple small towns and they all seemed to favor McCain, and since Obama didn't win by an overwhelming margin it's going to be McCain."
|
nunya
Member
|
Posted: Tue Jun 16th, 2009 12:15 am |
|
Funny that Bryan hasn't posted much since he told us that despite the voting in the two polls it would be Bella Vista. Maybe he's too busy making this happen after all it has to be done by July 1 (why I don't know).
I'm curious about specifically which HOA meetings he spoke at about this issue. I haven't seen anyone post on here (maybe I missed it) who heard him speak about this issue. Supposedly there are "about 200" people he's spoken to...
|
pipeman
Member
|
Posted: Mon Jun 15th, 2009 10:58 pm |
|
QCVillager wrote: pipeman wrote:
You are correct, the county would turn everything over to the new city July 1, the following year after incorpration. So timing is very important to remain in their checkbook for as long as possible.
i am not sure that is necessarily true. look how long Town of Queen Creek had been incorporated before taking ownership of the roads for instance. we are going on 20 years incorporated and didn't own all the roads for a long time. Maricopa County retained ownership/responsibility until just two years ago.
we didnt have a Town fire dept until just over a year ago, so your area whether it remains in Pinal County or if it ever becomes a city could retain Rural Metro (Scottsdale did it until a few years ago)
police service could likely be contracted with PCSO the way TOQC does with MCSO
QCV, you are correct. I was just posting what League of C&T has in their incorporation booklet. I think Bambi hit it on the head when she mentioned negotiations with the county. But according to the book, it said july after the first year of incorpration.
Police and fire protection would require contracts. As well as several other items, until a city could get established and on their feet. It is more than doable.
|
nybrian
Member
| Joined: | Fri Jul 11th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 314 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 15th, 2009 10:01 pm |
|
Republican_and_PROUD wrote: Living,
You got it right. NYBRIAN is a liberal and is attacking Bryan for doing the same things he glorifies Obama for?!??! Bryan is doing things and making things happen...keep in mind no one will be 100% happy with any elected official unless it is themselves. Sandie retired because she knew she couldn't be re-elected and decided to go out with in a positive way. Bryan made a decision which is what we elected him to do!!! Keep in mind, this is a republican form of government not a democracy. That means our voice was heard when we elected Bryan, we now have to allow him to do what he thinks is best for us. That doesn't mean we don't question him, that doesn't mean that we just accept what he says as gospel truth BUT we elected him and that is that. If you don't like it then in 2012 step up and run against him.....
How is this a liberal or conservative issue?
|
Bambi2
Member
| Joined: | Tue Apr 7th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 336 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 15th, 2009 06:23 pm |
|
From the site you posted........
"The board considers information provided by the proponent, opponents, if any, and the board's staff in its deliberations on proposed names. The board's support staff contacts governmental agencies, Native American tribal governments, land owners, interested individuals and affected counties, and also conducts independent, systematic, thorough research for background on the historical and current local usage of a proposed name. This can take some time, therefore, the more documentation the board receives from a proponent, the easier it is for the board to decide on a name proposal.
These procedures allow anyone from the public or a government agency to propose a name and allow for public input at open meetings, both for and against a proposed name. The board goes to this effort in furtherance of its statutory charge to preserve and protect the state's history as reflected in Arizona's geographic names."
I'm confused .....again. Is the name Bella Vista going to be the name which the people have consented to? Is Bryan going thru this process for the community? Do I have to go thru this process to name our (my) rural area San Tan Foothills first, before adding that name in my address? Will the Post Office acknowledge that name before this is done?
I believe you have gone thru this Bob once before with the name San Tan Foothills. Can you give us some direction other than the site you posted in layman's terms?
|
bobdotson
Member
|
Posted: Mon Jun 15th, 2009 05:44 pm |
|
A note on the process of community naming. In Arizona, the Arizona State Board on Geographic and Historic Names has statutory responsibility for determining the most appropriate names for place names in Arizona. Information about how that responsibility is exercised can be found at:
http://www.lib.az.us/about/bghn.cfm
The makeup of the board as of 1/27/2009 can be found at:
http://www.lib.az.us/about/pdf/Membership01-27-09.pdf
Anyone can suggest the naming of a place. The form for that is at:
http://www.lib.az.us/about/pdf/app08.pdf
Once an application is in the system for consideration, anyone can contact the board to support or object to the name proposal. The application requires the applicant to loosely specify conceptual boundaries and a conceptual geographic center, but I've learned that they are just that, conceptual, not bound by any statutory requirement or implication. The board wants to hear from a significant portion of stakeholders, and the greatest weight appears to be given to government stakeholders (i.e County Supervisors, and nearby City Council representatives), and organized groups (signature petitions). But everyone gets the opportunity to weigh in if they want. The State process does not happen overnight. And once the State approves a new named place, it takes at least 5 years before the USGS national register of named places will officially recognize it. I believe the State Board on Geographic and Historic Names, and the The Arizona Geographic Information Council (AGIC) meet 4 time each year, and a particular proposal may not be dispositioned the first time it goes before the board.
The keys for success: widely supported in writing, little opposition, strong (non-passive) support from government stakeholders. Silence or passive voice from government stakeholders or pravailing opposition can kill an application.
So I say --- PRESS!
Bob Dotson
Last edited on Mon Jun 15th, 2009 05:46 pm by bobdotson
|
Bambi2
Member
| Joined: | Tue Apr 7th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 336 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 15th, 2009 03:41 pm |
|
I look at it this way. You have a motivated Supervisor(s) who wants you on your own, as he has publicaly stated that you are too big in numbers and needs for the county to serve you effectively. The County is ready to "cut the cord." Bryan's out there making it "start" to happen. That means you have their cooperation and a willing participant in this. That usually ends up as a win/win conclusion. The next step is negotiations with them......that would be takeovers and takings and givings and obligations, etc. etc. etc, along with the analysis and feasibility studies of incorporation or annexation. They're ready to listen and talk. As is Florence I bet, as they need industry and commercial too, and you will have plenty of it to go around.
And if JU would cut a deal with Florence again, with a more realistic price, you'd have that utility company too by annexing into Florence. All GJ has to do is bring it up to snuff, then cut the price by about $40 million. He's suffering now, with fewer hookups, so he would be much more motivated today than back when the boom was going on.
Who's going to step up to the Plate?
Just ideas that come to me while I sit and drink my morning cup of joe....and watch my birds and other critters scurry around. Love it out here I'm sitting outside and feeling cool. What's up?
|
QCVillager
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 15th, 2009 03:14 pm |
|
pipeman wrote:
You are correct, the county would turn everything over to the new city July 1, the following year after incorpration. So timing is very important to remain in their checkbook for as long as possible.
i am not sure that is necessarily true. look how long Town of Queen Creek had been incorporated before taking ownership of the roads for instance. we are going on 20 years incorporated and didn't own all the roads for a long time. Maricopa County retained ownership/responsibility until just two years ago.
we didnt have a Town fire dept until just over a year ago, so your area whether it remains in Pinal County or if it ever becomes a city could retain Rural Metro (Scottsdale did it until a few years ago)
police service could likely be contracted with PCSO the way TOQC does with MCSO
|
pipeman
Member
|
Posted: Mon Jun 15th, 2009 02:58 am |
|
H, yes I meant it would be just as costly to annex. Sure there would be some up front costs incorporating as you pointed out.
I am on the same page with you regarding research, research, research before moving ahead like in the past. I as I don't think anyone would just want to jump head first into the unknown. (at least I hope noone would be that risky)What I mean about real figures is that it is an estimated gues (sure there will be past history to look at from other towns/cities) but within a scope there is always scope creep derived from risks and poorly laid out plans. I bet no city/town budgeted for this down turn in the economy, which is one of the reasons I am saying a budget is an estimation. One can forecast all they want but as the old saying goes, "sh%# happens". This is why I am saying not to rule incorpration out before forecasts are completed. Hey if it is not feasible, it's not feasible, then we need to look at another direction. The thing about annexation is, TOQC does not want us, nor does TOF, as we extend to far out from their towns centers.
I would assume that you are close on the amount Maricopa paid for their special census, I will find out for sure exactly what that was. Yes, I will agree that there are benfits to annexation, but as stated, nobody wants us stepchildren out here, they only want to get their hands on all the revenue they can.
I apologize if I was wrong about you wanting to be anexed into TOQC. I though at one time I had read that from you. Sure there are benefits from annexation, for which I will admit. But, we are to far removed from either possible town for this to be a benfit for us, as well as them not wanting us.
You are correct, the county would turn everything over to the new city July 1, the following year after incorpration. So timing is very important to remain in their checkbook for as long as possible.
Last edited on Mon Jun 15th, 2009 05:00 am by pipeman
|
History_101
Member
| Joined: | Thu Feb 16th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 235 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 15th, 2009 12:34 am |
|
Pipe, what you said was, "We also need to question what it would cost each home in our community the cost to be annexed. This would be just as costly to us." I took this to mean you meant it would be just as costly to be annexed which I disagree with. Most of the upfront costs for attorney-related costs, engineering-related costs, such as for drawing boundaries, fees to the county recorder's office for lists of registered voters, costs associated with obtaining budget estimates and other community assessments, costs associated with flyers and pamphlets publicizing incorporation and costs associated with dinners, coffees, and other informational public meetings would all be borne by the annexing town/city. These are costs that the incorporation committee would have to pay for out of their own pockets unless they can find donations from somewhere. Incorporation is a political process and money collected and spent must be tracked through PAC's.
In the end, yes some of the costs associated with incorporation would also be looking us in the face if we were to be annexed. To mention a few would be, 1) an increase in sales tax at our current retail outlets from 2-3 percent, 2) possible additional taxes on utilities, (towns/cities love to get money from those with deep pockets, but remember, the residents always end up paying one way or another) 3) for sure additional property taxes (no way to get around this in today's economy).
I'm not a proponent of annexation into Queen Creek. I'm a proponent for annexation vs. incorporation. In the end, I'm not sure which town/city would be best for us and I really don't know if we are going to have a choice if that happens.
Coming up with a realistic budget isn't out of the question. It would be a very tedious process and much research would have to be done. Before you could do anything, you'd have to determine how many residents reside within the new town/city limits. State revenues are paid out by head count. They will SWAG a number, but if you really want you are owed, a special census would have to be done. I'm trying to remember what Maricopa paid and for some reason $800K keeps coming to mind. I could be wrong on that number and I'd have to research it to be sure, but no matter what it is, the new town/city would have to pick up that cost. If you really want some late night reading, look up Casa Grande's budget and see what they are paying out for revenues and taking in. At one time they were comparable to our size.
There are many things to consider such as attorneys on staff, insurance (rest assured the town/city will be sued at some point in time), City Manager (plus their staff), inspectors, road maintenance personnel and equipment for same, safety personnel (law enforcement), jails, court house, firemen and equipment unless you contract with Rural Metro, administrative buildings (not to include public safety or fire) the list goes on and on and on. Oh, don't forget about that library. Take a look at what Queen Creek just paid to get theirs and put that figure in your budget. Even considering the day of incorporation is important. The further you can get away from July 1st the better as the county relinquishes services on that date following incorporation. Now if you could incorporate on July 2nd, you'd have 364 days to get your ducks in a row. Just something to think about. It all has to do with when you turn in your paperwork as everything can be figured from that date.
As you can see, there is much work to be done. It could take a year or two to do everything right, not the couple of months like was tried last time. I say the assessment needs to be done first and doing anything before that is accomplished is like putting the cart before the horse.
|
pipeman
Member
|
Posted: Sun Jun 14th, 2009 10:03 pm |
|
History_101 wrote: Bambi, Yes, I'll agree, "The bottom line is that it can be done....incorporation.", but at what cost? No one, not even the prior incorporation team really put together a realistic cost proposal. That is what I'm talking about. Before we jump off that bridge, I want to make sure my bungee cord is the correct length as I don't want to smash into those rocks at the bottom. Any responsible resident would want to see such numbers. H, I totally agree that numbers would have to be put together. Yet for someone to put exact numbers together would be really hard to do and crazy to be asked. All that could be done is a budget, which in every business is just a educated guess and nothing more. I would certainly hope that there is not anyone on here that would just jump in headfirst without making sure there is water in the pool.
Pipe, I disagree when you say, "This would be just as costly to us." First, we as residents won't have the upfront costs incorporation brings. If I'm not mistaken, Queen Creek and Florence both have administrative buildings and personnel in place, neither of which we currently have. Ture to a point, but the personnel would need to be expanded and we are just way to far away from eith town mentioned for them to be of any benefit to us out here. Sure I have heard people say that hey you could just take over once you were annxed, well it just doesn't work that way either. We have police and fire buildings currently in our area that could go to the annexing town/city. They surely aren't going to be torn down. OK, you are right, but the same ciuld be said that these could stay with a stand alone city as well.Weather we annex or incorporate, we will need personnel to man these stations. It is much easier to amend a current contract and add personnel then start from scratch.
Queen Creek and Florence both have been towns for many years with loads of prior experience. They have personnel on their pay roles that know what they are doing, I'd hope. LOL A new incorporation would require a very long costly learning curve plus a search would have to be done to find a City Manager. That search alone could cost more than the first years salary of the individual being hired. Now how about all of the administrative personnel you have to go out and look for. Adding one or two individuals to current payrolls is much easier then starting from scratch. Starting from scratch you'd need the entire personnel structure from top to bottom, not just one or two grunts to do the work. Once annexed, you'd be eligible to run for elected office and I'd think we could get one or more elected from our area. That would be more local control then we have now. I understand that you are a big proponent for being annexed into TOQC and I respect that. Don't get me wrong, I would sign on the dotted line in a second if that was my only choice, (in my head TOF is completely out of my wants) but it is not our only choice. Do you think that all the cities were not told the same things you are mentioning as well as things others have mentioned? Of course they were, yet they moved forward and did what was said can't be done. just like, "The little train that could".
All I'm saying is annexation cannot be more expensive then incorporation for our local residents. Until someone shows me the numbers I just won't believe it and every resident should be looking at it that way. We shouldn't be buying into an unknown now especially with the way the economy is today. H, I never said annexation is more expensive. I said it is just as costly. Either way, we CAN NOT remain as we are. We are to big to be unicorprated.Keep posting my friend, I always respect your thoughts. All I'm saying is incorpration should not be overlooked and shunned until and if the numbers are not exceptable to us.
Last edited on Sun Jun 14th, 2009 10:53 pm by pipeman
|
History_101
Member
| Joined: | Thu Feb 16th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 235 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 14th, 2009 05:38 pm |
|
Bambi, Yes, I'll agree, "The bottom line is that it can be done....incorporation.", but at what cost? No one, not even the prior incorporation team really put together a realistic cost proposal. That is what I'm talking about. Before we jump off that bridge, I want to make sure my bungee cord is the correct length as I don't want to smash into those rocks at the bottom. Any responsible resident would want to see such numbers. \
Pipe, I disagree when you say, "This would be just as costly to us." First, we as residents won't have the upfront costs incorporation brings. If I'm not mistaken, Queen Creek and Florence both have administrative buildings and personnel in place, neither of which we currently have. We have police and fire buildings currently in our area that could go to the annexing town/city. They surely aren't going to be torn down. Weather we annex or incorporate, we will need personnel to man these stations. It is much easier to amend a current contract and add personnel then start from scratch.
Queen Creek and Florence both have been towns for many years with loads of prior experience. They have personnel on their pay roles that know what they are doing, I'd hope. A new incorporation would require a very long costly learning curve plus a search would have to be done to find a City Manager. That search alone could cost more than the first years salary of the individual being hired. Now how about all of the administrative personnel you have to go out and look for. Adding one or two individuals to current payrolls is much easier then starting from scratch. Starting from scratch you'd need the entire personnel structure from top to bottom, not just one or two grunts to do the work. Once annexed, you'd be eligible to run for elected office and I'd think we could get one or more elected from our area. That would be more local control then we have now.
All I'm saying is annexation cannot be more expensive then incorporation for our local residents. Until someone shows me the numbers I just won't believe it and every resident should be looking at it that way. We shouldn't be buying into an unknown now especially with the way the economy is today.
|
pipeman
Member
|
Posted: Sun Jun 14th, 2009 04:32 pm |
|
Bambi2 wrote: The bottom line is that it can be done....incorporation. The question is "can we afford it?" or do we want to take on those expenses and costs related to being a city? There will be additional expenses, that's a given. What will it costs the residents, per household, to become a city? That's the number we are looking for.
Bambi, good questions. We also need to question what it would cost each home in our community the cost to be annexed. This would be just as costly to us. People always say, we would have to build buildings, etc.. well the same goes with annexation. Fire stations, police stations need to be built. These stations need to be manned, these employees need to be paid, provided benefits, etc..
|
Bambi2
Member
| Joined: | Tue Apr 7th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 336 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 14th, 2009 04:15 pm |
|
| The bottom line is that it can be done....incorporation. The question is "can we afford it?" or do we want to take on those expenses and costs related to being a city? There will be additional expenses, that's a given. What will it costs the residents, per household, to become a city? That's the number we are looking for.
|
Bambi2
Member
| Joined: | Tue Apr 7th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 336 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 14th, 2009 03:05 pm |
|
I don't mean to offend you Republican/Proud poster, but we have been discussing JU and his influence out here for many years. You have missed his long detailed history and it's effects on us out here. To go thru it again is too painful...too detailed.....and too risky, as he police's this forum to "catch ya" saying something derogatory about him, imo, and his plant......then he sues u.
He's also been appointed to serve in an overseeing and development capacity of our area....without our permission. That would be GSTAC.
I'm biased you say? Yu may want to think about that a tad longer after you read all those newspaper articles, the hundreds of EPA violations, the ADEQ citations, and the Corporation Commissions meetings about him. Don't forget to read the article in the New TImes....Big Bad Wolf. That pretty much says it all.
Thankful he came out here? Could profit have been his motive perhaps? Do you think he came out here to "serve the people's welfare"? He did not build his plant to ADEQ specifications, so where was that concern for the people's welfare?. It was only discovered thru a spill....or two. HIs pumps were 25 HP., when they should have been 75 hp. That's one of the short cuts I spoke about, prompted by the profit motive imo. What else is he not disclosing?
You are focused too much on theory imo. You need to dig deeper to discover the truth. THen post those findings if you must. And check the hundreds of EPA violations against his water over the years. Has he filed his water report timely for this year for 08? Due in April I think. He's been fined for late filings many times. Check the State's annual reports.
Attend the Corporation Commission's meeting about him in August. You'll find out more about his behaviors in the Corporate world he operates for the public. Check the Court records and discover how much litigation he has been involved in with the people or the people's reps. Ask our attorney general how it feels to be sued by him.
Everything you're saying has already been rehashed on here explicitly. He named Johnson Ranch for a legacy purpose. He wants this area to retain the name Johnson Ranch. The results of the poll speaks to that possibility.
How do you think he is going to feel about us taking away his legacy? Retribution perhaps? I won't be in the line of fire. I'm drilling a well.....that is if he left any aquifers for me to use. My neighbor went down 1300 ft., and no water. He has to haul his water now for his 12 children. Fun? Not. It'a an undue hardship brought on by unchecked profit motives, imo.
And the only way we the people can solve this problem is thru government intervention....not another developer or corporate entity speaking for us, or GSTAC who has developers serving as leaders. The People are the Government. I would suggest that a person not take their shots at the People but at runaway private enterprise, who shuns government intervention./regulation.
Last edited on Sun Jun 14th, 2009 03:07 pm by Bambi2
|
History_101
Member
| Joined: | Thu Feb 16th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 235 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 14th, 2009 02:55 pm |
|
Republican and PROUD, just how do you figure this? "If we get the funds THAT IS THE BUDGET we’d be starting with a balanced budget based on the money we would get!!!" And that balanced budget would last about a minute and a half. Do you really believe those funds will pay for the land and buildings we'd need? Not a chance. What about the salary for a City Manager? Now that is only about $100K+ a year not to mention his/her staff. Granted we don't have to pay the Mayor or City Council members, but they aren't the ones that are doing the grunt work either. The City Manager and his/her staff is doing that work.
You are talking off the cuff with no actual facts to back up what you are saying. Once again I say, sit down and do the math. Calculate just how much money would be coming in from state revenues and how much you will have to spend to provide the services. Granted, you can contract for police/fire services, but that is still money that must be spent by the city. Contract services aren't always a bargain. How about all of these city officials, i.e., department heads, clerks, inspectors and the like? How about road maintenance? Even if you contract road maintenance out to the county like Queen Creek did for many years, it still is a cost to the city. Actual projected costs and revenues is what we need to see and actual projected costs and revenues is what is needed to be presented to the residents so they can make an educated decision.
Has anyone sat down and determined how we are going to fund this incorporation drive? Funding an incorporation drive is a formidable task. Those organizing the drive are responsible for all costs incurred before incorporation and these costs are not refunded after the city or town successfully incorporates. Be prepared to incur the following costs:
• Attorney-related costs
• Engineering-related costs, such as for drawing boundaries
• Fees to the county recorder's office for lists of registered voters
• Costs associated with obtaining budget estimates and other community assessments
• Costs associated with flyers and pamphlets publicizing incorporation
• Costs associated with dinners, coffees, and other informational public meetings
Has anyone actually done a real community assessment of our area? Before starting any incorporation effort, it is important that the unincorporated community conduct a thorough community assessment. The information accumulated during this step can later be used to justify support for or opposition to incorporation, and to inform voters. Yes, inform the voters with real and honest facts. That is something that is rarely done. So, what does a community assessment consist of?
• Analyze the reasons both for incorporating and for not incorporating.
• Analyze any past efforts to incorporate or change governmental forms and boundaries.
• Decide where the boundaries will fall.
• Analyze the community’s characteristics, strengths, weaknesses, and major issues.
• Analyze existing services and governing arrangements.
• Estimate potential revenues.
• Estimate potential expenditures, including what services the town wants to provide and how they will be provided.
• Analyze alternatives to incorporation: status quo, annexation, special districts, or community councils.
Come on folks. let's not make the same mistakes that happened 5 years ago. Let's be honest with our friends and neighbors and give them the real facts so they can make an educated decision. The idea of incorporation may or may not be a good idea at this time or for that matter ever, but at least let's be honest with our friends and neighbors.
|
Republican_and_PROUD
Member
| Joined: | Sat May 2nd, 2009 |
| Location: | Bella Vista, AZ |
| Posts: | 56 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 14th, 2009 06:37 am |
|
| 6
|
pipeman
Member
|
Posted: Sun Jun 14th, 2009 06:09 am |
|
Republican_and_PROUD wrote: I have lived in BELLA VISTA, AZ for a few years, why?
what is a few yeras?
|
Republican_and_PROUD
Member
| Joined: | Sat May 2nd, 2009 |
| Location: | Bella Vista, AZ |
| Posts: | 56 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 14th, 2009 05:56 am |
|
| I have lived in BELLA VISTA, AZ for a few years, why?
|
pipeman
Member
|
Posted: Sun Jun 14th, 2009 05:45 am |
|
| duplicate post Last edited on Sun Jun 14th, 2009 05:47 am by pipeman
|
pipeman
Member
|
Posted: Sun Jun 14th, 2009 05:45 am |
|
Republican_and_PROUD wrote: Why not incorporate? Everyone says that "we would spend so much money" or "we'd have to raise taxes to make up the money" or any other umpteen things about the money. We'd get a piece of the state revenue and there is nothing that says we have to have a paid Mayor or council to govern. There is nothing that says we can't phase in services. We contract with the Sheriff's Dept and continue to have a relationship with Rural/Metro as it stands now.If we incorporate it does ease the burden on the county and help us at the same time.
My favorite statement on this topic so far has been this one by History 101 “The HURF/LTAF funds and other sources of state revenue that would come into a new city wouldn't come close to balancing a budget.” History, if we get the funds THAT IS THE BUDGET we’d be starting with a balanced budget based on the money we would get!!!
I think some people are just really resistant to change at the local level because it really impacts us…
Oh yeah on the name thing…..is it really that serious of an issue if we become Bella Vista, AZ? I love how people claim that the democratic process is being usurped and they aren’t being heard because the evil Republican is making a decision. Ask yourself this (if you are one of these people): when you moved to Arizona were you allowed to vote on the name of the state? When you moved to Queen Creek were you all for changing the name because you didn’t have a say in picking it?!?? What about Pinal County—was democracy trampled in naming the county? NO….we are finally getting some identity apart from Queen Creek and it is a good thing!
Right on.
Some people would like us to think that annexing into an existing town/city will be penny free. Well, I am here to say that is BS. It would be just as costly to annex. We would still have to buy land and build police and fire stations out here, buy firetrucks, police cars, pay salaries, provide benefits ect.. improve roads, infrastructure, build parks, etc... All on our dime and we still would not have local representation. So if I am going to pay for these things, I want it to be as our own city. I want my taxes to stay right here and benefit all of us in our community. Or of course we can remain as we are and keep getting what little scraps the county provides. It is time to sh&$ or get off the pot.
|
pipeman
Member
|
Posted: Sun Jun 14th, 2009 05:36 am |
|
Republican_and_PROUD wrote: Ya know, after reading posts in the last few days my observation is that the issues aren’t really with JU, they are with the ADEQ and State. Your issues are basically with the lack of regulation on JU not really with JU as a company; your opinion is a little biased based on the history between you and JU though. Let’s look at this objectively and put our opinions aside:
1. JU is what we have and it will take an act of congress (probably literally) for it to be taken over by a government entity. I don’t think that will happen either because George Johnson rightfully owns the company.
2. If JU wasn’t built according to ADEQ specs wouldn’t JU have to make changes?
3. Is JU providing us good clean water? The answer to this one is yes; I said in a post awhile back that I work for a company with the resources and laboratories to analyze water. I sent a sample in just to see what would come back. The water was contaminant free, had high TDS (1232 ppm; which is normal for AZ), hardness was around 17gpg (also normal for AZ), the copper was within acceptable levels as were all other metals, minerals, and heavy metals. The water out here is perfectly safe and in comparison to other MUNICIPALLY run sources (Phoenix—I tested theirs too) who have very high levels of copper which can be harmful.
4. Comparing the cost of water in Gilbert to the water out here isn’t a fair comparison because to DEVELOP the water infrastructure the people had to pay higher taxes. George Johnson on the other hand didn’t have us pay up front for the development we are paying on the back end.
5. Capitalism is the ultimate regulator. IF JU were to operate in a manner that was so egregious he would lose his business, reputation, clout, and probably a lot of money. He would end up bankrupt and his company would go to the public anyway (GM). You are making assumptions that Government doesn’t operate out of self-interest, control, and greed—which it does!!
6. Seizing a person’s well-being isn’t a democracy. I agree that the resident’s health and welfare is the ultimate goal behind providing water. But, objectively, ask yourself—has JU harmed anyone? I don’t know the answer to this question so I may be wrong but for the time I have lived out here I haven’t heard of anyone being harmed by the water out here.
7. I would agree that the Government doesn’t typically sue individuals (I’m not even sure its allowed)
8. You don’t agree that JU should self-regulate because it is a private company but you are okay with the Government self-regulating when it is typically much more corrupt—especially out here in Pinal County! I’m only saying there has to be a balance—I don’t believe in 100% unregulated capitalism because of greed nor do I believe in 100% government control because of corruption. I’m a Republican not a Libertarian!!
9. A Democracy isn’t about making the people 100% happy because that is impossible. Besides, (I have said this a few times) WE ARE NOT A DEMOCRACY, WE ARE A REPRESENTATIVE REPUBLIC!!! Under your definition of Democracy you believe that we should all be provided what we need and contribute as we are able and that is not the American way. There is nothing in the U.S. or Arizona Constitution that says “the government will provide all basic life-sustaining stuff” we should feel blessed that George Johnson decided to make an investment out here so we could have the infrastructure need to bring us water.
10. SRP is a for profit company that made $47 million in revenue in 2008 and it is a private company partnered with a State run district.
My final thought is that some individuals have a personal vendetta to serve against JU and no amount of state regulation will satisfy them. I don’t feel that we pay that much more than other municipalities for water and they have plenty of issues with their water too!!
http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/35324
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/0125phxwater25.html
http://www3.signonsandiego.com/stories/2009/mar/24/bn24watmain-warnings-continue/
How long have you lived here?
|
Republican_and_PROUD
Member
| Joined: | Sat May 2nd, 2009 |
| Location: | Bella Vista, AZ |
| Posts: | 56 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 14th, 2009 02:57 am |
|
Why not incorporate? Everyone says that "we would spend so much money" or "we'd have to raise taxes to make up the money" or any other umpteen things about the money. We'd get a piece of the state revenue and there is nothing that says we have to have a paid Mayor or council to govern. There is nothing that says we can't phase in services. We contract with the Sheriff's Dept and continue to have a relationship with Rural/Metro as it stands now.If we incorporate it does ease the burden on the county and help us at the same time.
My favorite statement on this topic so far has been this one by History 101 “The HURF/LTAF funds and other sources of state revenue that would come into a new city wouldn't come close to balancing a budget.” History, if we get the funds THAT IS THE BUDGET we’d be starting with a balanced budget based on the money we would get!!!
I think some people are just really resistant to change at the local level because it really impacts us…
Oh yeah on the name thing…..is it really that serious of an issue if we become Bella Vista, AZ? I love how people claim that the democratic process is being usurped and they aren’t being heard because the evil Republican is making a decision. Ask yourself this (if you are one of these people): when you moved to Arizona were you allowed to vote on the name of the state? When you moved to Queen Creek were you all for changing the name because you didn’t have a say in picking it?!?? What about Pinal County—was democracy trampled in naming the county? NO….we are finally getting some identity apart from Queen Creek and it is a good thing!
|
Current time is 05:23 am | Page:   1 2 3 4   |
|
|
|