| Author | Post |
|---|
Ed Dison
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jul 16th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 231 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 27th, 2009 05:05 pm |
|
Billy and Jill wrote: My husband and I have wintered the past three winters in Apache Junction. We are from MO and have brought our horses with us and stayed in our "living quarter" horse trailer on the grounds of the stable where we boarded our horses. For the counsel members who do not have horses, please let me explain that "horse people" will not tolerate not being able to be camped where their horse is stabled. We ride everyday that we are in Apache Junction and our horses need to be monitored by us closely. We would not be able to do this if we had to park our horse trailer with living quarters on a site different from where our horses are stabled. Horses are not the strong animals that they are protrayed to be. They are fragile animals, becoming ill with no warning, even to the point of the possibility of dying and no one knows our horses like we do. They are like our children.
We spend a substantial amount of money in your community every winter. We shop at your stores, eat at the restaurants, attend the entertainment that is offered, purchase large amount of fuel, along with purchasing many souvenirs. Many of the winter visitors have even purchased property in Apache Junction because of the horse back riding offered in your area. So to force the horse winter visitors to go to a "RV" park is just not an acceptable solution. As for us we would find another place in the US to winter where they allow us to "camp" where our horses are stabled.
It is our desire to return to Apache Junction. We love the community and hope that the counsel members will take to heart the way the winter vistors feel and realize that this is the only workable solution is to allow the "horse winter visitors" to camp where their horse is stabled.
Thank-you for your consideration.
|
J&JFarms
Member
| Joined: | Sun Mar 1st, 2009 |
| Location: | USA |
| Posts: | 370 |
| Status: |
Online
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 26th, 2009 06:51 am |
|
dzrtrat67 wrote: Or...... just going out on a limb here.... do people need to READ the city codes before signing those mortgage papers??
Just a thought.
Joe
The problem is that the rules are changing mid-game.
|
J&JFarms
Member
| Joined: | Sun Mar 1st, 2009 |
| Location: | USA |
| Posts: | 370 |
| Status: |
Online
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 26th, 2009 06:51 am |
|
dzrtrat67 wrote: Or...... just going out on a limb here.... do people need to READ the city codes before signing those mortgage papers??
Just a thought.
Joe
The problem is that the rules are changing mid-game.
|
J&JFarms
Member
| Joined: | Sun Mar 1st, 2009 |
| Location: | USA |
| Posts: | 370 |
| Status: |
Online
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 26th, 2009 06:49 am |
|
cacomistle wrote: J&JFarms wrote:I'd love to start a pig farm. While their effluence is quite aromatic, the fiduciary and culinary benefits outweigh the local objections.
mmmm...bacon.
I'm not sure that collaboration will help things get better. Often times too much public input is nothing short of anarchy. Too many ideas in competition for scant few resources only emboldens descent, encourages political tumult and results in economic covetousness.
Targeting boarding facilities for some type of use tax seems dubious, but I can see why EF has an axe to grind.
The best thing Government can do is interject itself as sparingly as possible.
Guess what? According to current zoning here, you are allowed to open a pig farm, stockyard or even a slaughter house right in the middle of town! The General Plan needs a drastic overhaul.
No, you're not. You've obviously never been near one.
Sec. 9-1-3 A.5 for starters...
|
dzrtrat67
Member
| Joined: | Thu Aug 3rd, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 212 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 26th, 2009 03:19 am |
|
Or...... just going out on a limb here.... do people need to READ the city codes before signing those mortgage papers??
Just a thought.
Joe
|
cacomistle
Member
| Joined: | Tue Jun 3rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 119 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 25th, 2009 07:16 pm |
|
J&JFarms wrote:I'd love to start a pig farm. While their effluence is quite aromatic, the fiduciary and culinary benefits outweigh the local objections.
mmmm...bacon.
I'm not sure that collaboration will help things get better. Often times too much public input is nothing short of anarchy. Too many ideas in competition for scant few resources only emboldens descent, encourages political tumult and results in economic covetousness.
Targeting boarding facilities for some type of use tax seems dubious, but I can see why EF has an axe to grind.
The best thing Government can do is interject itself as sparingly as possible.
Guess what? According to current zoning here, you are allowed to open a pig farm, stockyard or even a slaughter house right in the middle of town! The General Plan needs a drastic overhaul.
|
flygad1
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 25th, 2009 12:41 pm |
|
Ed and J-amp
I am only just begining to get a grasp of what you guys are talking about here. I am quite sure there is a remedy!
I have years of experience in Apache Junction with the promoting a activist position or concern.
I never claimed to be correct 100% of the time . I have won a couple of legal skirmishes .
Like I told Shanon and others they have power. I suspect Ed and his horseman association have some as well.
If you guys sense a resistance to your positions you likely are correct. Do you gentleman understand the power you have with Title 19? To effect whatever you want?
With the AJ establishment or without?
EF
|
Ed Dison
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jul 16th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 231 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 25th, 2009 06:58 am |
|
cacomistle wrote: Camping in horse trailers with living quarters would be permitted under the 1 trailer per horse provision. The question is about whether full size RVs should be allowed. The RV camping provision would allow 1 RV per horse, plus 1 horse trailer without limit on size of trailer per horse, plus two vehicles per campsite. The horse trailer allowed could be a single horse trailer or up to a 6-8 horse trailer, with or without living quarters. NOBODY wants to stop anyone from being close to their horses. But, if the boarding facilities want to allow full blown RV camping, they should have to abide by the same rules as a regular RV park for things like sanitation, electric, ect.
cacomistle, I suggest you read AM-6-08, 6.0130, proposed, b. 2, again. You seem to have missed something.
Ed Dison
|
J&JFarms
Member
| Joined: | Sun Mar 1st, 2009 |
| Location: | USA |
| Posts: | 370 |
| Status: |
Online
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 25th, 2009 06:36 am |
|
Christa_Rizzi wrote: flygad1 wrote: Caco...
Herein is a problem for Apache Junction-
The position of Mr Stern was I was getting something of value therefore I was guilty of this violation.
If they demand I pay for license and taxes for roomates why should horse boarding facilities be allowed to do this?
Now I am not against your position/ problem but this will be a issue for Apache Junction.
The number of dogs you can have is regulated but we're allowed unlimited horses..
We just have to work together
I'd love to start a pig farm. While their effluence is quite aromatic, the fiduciary and culinary benefits outweigh the local objections.
mmmm...bacon.
I'm not sure that collaboration will help things get better. Often times too much public input is nothing short of anarchy. Too many ideas in competition for scant few resources only emboldens descent, encourages political tumult and results in economic covetousness.
Targeting boarding facilities for some type of use tax seems dubious, but I can see why EF has an axe to grind.
The best thing Government can do is interject itself as sparingly as possible.
|
Ed Dison
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jul 16th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 231 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 25th, 2009 06:34 am |
|
flygad1 wrote: Caco...
Herein is a problem for Apache Junction- I was prosecuted by the City Attorney of Apache Junction for not obtaining a business license at my address when I allowed a roomate to occupy a room.
The position of Mr Stern was I was getting something of value therefore I was guilty of this violation.
Never mind the fact it was not my name on the deed of the property. It was my sister!
It is the position of Apache Junction anything of value is construed as " Rent" therefore a business license is required.
If the boarding stables allow you be housed this will be considered something of value!
If they demand I pay for license and taxes for roomates why should horse boarding facilities be allowed to do this?
The license is for horse boarding not human habitation! See the problem?
Now I am not against your position/ problem but this will be a issue for Apache Junction.
Mr Fisher, you do understand that boarding stables pay taxes on boarding and camping, correct? Did you do any research at all on this issue?
Ed Dison
|
Ed Dison
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jul 16th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 231 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 25th, 2009 06:20 am |
|
Christa_Rizzi wrote: flygad1 wrote: Caco...
Herein is a problem for Apache Junction- I was prosecuted by the City Attorney of Apache Junction for not obtaining a business license at my address when I allowed a roomate to occupy a room.
The position of Mr Stern was I was getting something of value therefore I was guilty of this violation.
Never mind the fact it was not my name on the deed of the property. It was my sister!
It is the position of Apache Junction anything of value is construed as " Rent" therefore a business license is required.
If the boarding stables allow you be housed this will be considered something of value!
If they demand I pay for license and taxes for roomates why should horse boarding facilities be allowed to do this?
The license is for horse boarding not human habitation! See the problem?
Now I am not against your position/ problem but this will be a issue for Apache Junction.
There are many similar issues ..
The number of dogs you can have is regulated but we're allowed unlimited horses..
It's going to take some time to sort out all the out dated ordinances but with time and patience it can be done
We just have to work together
Christa Rizzi
Ms Rizzi, Do you know why the number of dogs is regulated? Do you know why the city does kennel inspections, and requires a permit ? Are you comparing horses to dogs? Do you know the differences?
Are you suggesting the number of horses one may have should be regulated? Is this included in your references regarding "out dated ordinances"?
Ed Dison
|
Christa_Rizzi
Member
| Joined: | Fri Jan 30th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 786 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 25th, 2009 05:02 am |
|
flygad1 wrote: Caco...
Herein is a problem for Apache Junction- I was prosecuted by the City Attorney of Apache Junction for not obtaining a business license at my address when I allowed a roomate to occupy a room.
The position of Mr Stern was I was getting something of value therefore I was guilty of this violation.
Never mind the fact it was not my name on the deed of the property. It was my sister!
It is the position of Apache Junction anything of value is construed as " Rent" therefore a business license is required.
If the boarding stables allow you be housed this will be considered something of value!
If they demand I pay for license and taxes for roomates why should horse boarding facilities be allowed to do this?
The license is for horse boarding not human habitation! See the problem?
Now I am not against your position/ problem but this will be a issue for Apache Junction.
There are many similar issues ..
The number of dogs you can have is regulated but we're allowed unlimited horses..
It's going to take some time to sort out all the out dated ordinances but with time and patience it can be done
We just have to work together
Christa Rizzi
|
morningstar
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jun 24th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 25th, 2009 04:13 am |
|
I heartily concur with the opinions expressed by both of these individuals. I find myself perplexed as to why the city counsel would be interested in passing an ordinance that, in a defacto manner, essentially prohibits on site horse quartering on established horse facilities; either as they currently exist or my be constituted in the future. The positive financial benefits to the community by winter horse owners is nicely spelled out here as is the, implicit, negative impact should winter horse owners elect to seek a warmer welcome else where.
I have been told that one member on the counsel believes that the fly problem generated by horse stables poses an unacceptable esthetic and health issue to the community. On this point I can comment that I have visited two stables locally and found fewer fly’s in evidence on those sites than I did in the dumpster behind Fry’s supermarket; no offense to Frys intended here. Likewise I am also informed that the counsel wishes to prohibit on site waste (sewage dumps) for reasons that remain rather obscure. Such prohibition would, of course, make it worth the effort for horse owner visitors to relocate to another town; the financial implication having already covered earlier. A third point of interest to me is the counsels’ ordinance prohibiting a fence taller than five feet. I was told that one city counsel member, a former resident of Tennessee as I recall, stated that no horse could jump over a fence over four feet tall. If so he may find that such a though is not consonant with the facts. Note that BLM requires a fence higher than 6 feet when a new owner takes possession of a Mustang. I’ve witnessed my quarter horse, only 15.2 hands, clear a four foot fence with ease; and he’s not a jumper! So, feature this, a 900 to 1200 pound horse panics, jumps the "unjumpable" four foot fence and slams into a car or passer by on the street with tragic results; all of which would have been avoided with a 6-7 foot fence.
My last thought is Arizona is the WEST. The history of the west was written by a horse. Wherever a man put his foot a horse print was right beside it. Horses and riders are part of what we are. I’m reminded of that every time I ride up to the Mammoth Saloon and am asked, “Can I pet your horse?” or "Can you take my picture with your horse"? Children and adults both! For our non horse owning visitors horse are pure magic. A way for them to recapture, if only for a moment, what America once was and, hopefully, may yet be again. In conclusion I’d like to ask the counsel reflect on that thought in their current and future deliberations regarding horse and horse facility ordinances.
|
flygad1
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 25th, 2009 03:19 am |
|
Caco...
Herein is a problem for Apache Junction- I was prosecuted by the City Attorney of Apache Junction for not obtaining a business license at my address when I allowed a roomate to occupy a room.
The position of Mr Stern was I was getting something of value therefore I was guilty of this violation.
Never mind the fact it was not my name on the deed of the property. It was my sister!
It is the position of Apache Junction anything of value is construed as " Rent" therefore a business license is required.
If the boarding stables allow you be housed this will be considered something of value!
If they demand I pay for license and taxes for roomates why should horse boarding facilities be allowed to do this?
The license is for horse boarding not human habitation! See the problem?
Now I am not against your position/ problem but this will be a issue for Apache Junction.
|
cacomistle
Member
| Joined: | Tue Jun 3rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 119 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 25th, 2009 02:37 am |
|
| Camping in horse trailers with living quarters would be permitted under the 1 trailer per horse provision. The question is about whether full size RVs should be allowed. The RV camping provision would allow 1 RV per horse, plus 1 horse trailer without limit on size of trailer per horse, plus two vehicles per campsite. The horse trailer allowed could be a single horse trailer or up to a 6-8 horse trailer, with or without living quarters. NOBODY wants to stop anyone from being close to their horses. But, if the boarding facilities want to allow full blown RV camping, they should have to abide by the same rules as a regular RV park for things like sanitation, electric, ect.
|
Billy and Jill
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jun 24th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 25th, 2009 02:19 am |
|
My husband and I have wintered the past three winters in Apache Junction. We are from MO and have brought our horses with us and stayed in our "living quarter" horse trailer on the grounds of the stable where we boarded our horses. For the counsel members who do not have horses, please let me explain that "horse people" will not tolerate not being able to be camped where their horse is stabled. We ride everyday that we are in Apache Junction and our horses need to be monitored by us closely. We would not be able to do this if we had to park our horse trailer with living quarters on a site different from where our horses are stabled. Horses are not the strong animals that they are protrayed to be. They are fragile animals, becoming ill with no warning, even to the point of the possibility of dying and no one knows our horses like we do. They are like our children.
We spend a substantial amount of money in your community every winter. We shop at your stores, eat at the restaurants, attend the entertainment that is offered, purchase large amount of fuel, along with purchasing many souvenirs. Many of the winter visitors have even purchased property in Apache Junction because of the horse back riding offered in your area. So to force the horse winter visitors to go to a "RV" park is just not an acceptable solution. As for us we would find another place in the US to winter where they allow us to "camp" where our horses are stabled.
It is our desire to return to Apache Junction. We love the community and hope that the counsel members will take to heart the way the winter vistors feel and realize that this is the only workable solution is to allow the "horse winter visitors" to camp where their horse is stabled.
Thank-you for your consideration.
|
Current time is 06:58 am | |
|