Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Lepard LLC

County Government Opinion / Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« on: April 07, 2007, 09:20:09 PM »
Bottom line is, I will not support a raise for the Commissioners budget called a "Law Enforcement Tax." This concept can doom it to failure.

Are you saying it is not possible to make it mandatory that the commissioners not reduce his funding? A County Ordinance to that effect can not be done?

Off to Phelps County I go because once again I can not get the Shower Door I need here. Be glad when Lowes opens here. Tired of having to give Phelps my tax dollars.

It won't. That is my point. 1/4 cent will yield the sheriff's department approximately 900,000.   He already has a 1.2 mil. budget.   What would make commissioners year-after-year continue to give sheriff's the 1.2 mil.?   I assure you in a bad fiscal year, the 1.2 mil. would melt away--rapidly.

County Government Opinion / Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« on: April 07, 2007, 08:52:40 PM »
I would not support that unless the approximate 1.2 million JB has been getting does not just go to be used for Commissioners discretion. The money that JB has been getting must not just become surplus for Commissioners, not an acceptable alternative, and I feel would hurt it's chances of passing. My plan raises taxes 1/4 and your raises taxes 1/2, why is that better? Mine saves tax payers 800,000 a year over yours, unless yours rolls back Commissioners money.

Rick, Farnham's idea won't work. JB already has a 1.2 mill. budget. At best a 1/2 cent will net about 1.6 mill or so. OK, that is 4 or 500,000 more than he now has; however that will not do everything he wants to do. Will it help, yes. OK, if you go with 1/4 cent, he or whoever is sheriff will always be, as the mercy of the commission for that other 800,000 or so. Names change and political friends/opponents get elected. Also, the city of Richland will not roll back their tax, unless they can improve the money. I think it should be a 1/2 cent and worded as close as possible exactly how it will be used, for the county sheriff's department. The one in Camden county was worded quite ambiguous and included a bunch of stuff on roads and 911. Just like the one they tried to pass here several years ago that failed miserably. First step is getting it on the ballot, then campaign it successfully. I do not know how to get it on the ballot.

County Government Opinion / Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« on: April 07, 2007, 03:16:16 PM »
Yes it did pass. They have plans to roll it back if a county wide tax passes that includes cities.

From what I understand the le tax past overwhelmingly in Richland.  I haven't actually seen the total but I did hear that of coarse you can't always believe what you hear.  That 1/4 cent sounds good rick that way the county gets a little money freed up for other places and the sheriffs department will seemingly almost double their money.

County Government Opinion / Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« on: April 07, 2007, 03:15:08 PM »
He may have been refering to my proposal.

I think rick said 1/4 + 1/4 which equals 1/2--- that was the farnham proposal.  

County Government Opinion / Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« on: April 07, 2007, 03:25:42 AM »
I just read the Daily Guide and got a better perspective on the tax Farnham has proposed. If 1/4 goes to JB and 1/4 quarter is split between the cities, and as long as JB keeps his current level of funding along with the city police departments, then I would support that.
I would not want it to be a replacement tax, that then in reality just gives the cities more money, and not the police departments.

Restaurant Opinion / Re: KFC
« on: April 07, 2007, 03:07:31 AM »
I was told Brian McCarty does not own it after the divorce, and that he moved to the Jeff City area, and I could not find his number.
Rick, I asked one of the long time employees the other day and she said Brian got the KFC in the divorce settlement, so you can probably call him.

Local News / Re: Election Results
« on: April 07, 2007, 02:14:51 AM »
Lets again let the Daily Guide answer this question.

Richland chief explains police tax plans

Published: Friday, April 6, 2007 3:51 PM CDT
E-mail this story | Print this page
Darrell Todd Maurina

Richland Police Chief M.J. Hurney said he hopes to know by July 1 precisely how much money the law enforcement sales tax approved Tuesday by voters will generate so he and city council members can begin budget planning for his department.

Early estimates show the half-cent sales tax will generate about $100,000 per year in additional revenue for a department whose annual budget usually hovers around $200,000. The current year’s budget was somewhat higher at $240,000 because of special federal grants, Hurney said.

“We as the police team will be good custodians of where the money goes and make Richland as safe as possible,” Hurney said.

The law enforcement sales tax will be used for a variety of purposes, Hurney said, focusing on improving officer pay and equipment.

“The primary thing I want to do is to be able to attract and keep quality officers, make it a place they will be able to stay long-term and make it a good place,” Hurney said. “We need to put our equipment on a rotation plan so our officers have the equipment they need to do their job. I want to get cars on a rotation plan; it should have been done years ago.”

Hurney’s proposed rotation plan calls for purchasing a police car every one to two years, depending on budget situations. For a small department such as Richland, that should be enough allow the police to avoid patrolling the city with older cars that aren’t mechanically sound.

“If you have a fleet of three or four cars and we buy a car every year or two, in three or four years you will get back to (replacing) that car,” Hurney said.

While he expects that vehicle replacement will be the biggest single capital expense, Hurney said he realizes in some years, other expenses will take priority.

“We need to sit down and discuss; ultimately it comes down to the city council,” Hurney said. “If we need to buy bulletproof vests, you are set for seven years, but the next year your big expense might be something else we need to concentrate on as far as a capital upgrade. Right now for the last 10 years the money has not been there to do things.”

Richland has had to substantially reduce its police protection in recent years due to escalating costs. When Hurney was first hired in 1996 as a dispatcher, the city still had its own jail and dispatch services but now relies on the Pulaski County 911 center to handle its dispatching and has had rapid turnover of officers who leave Richland for better pay in other departments.

Hurney was among the officers who left; after working as a Richland police officer from 1997 to 2001, he left in 2001 for a position out of state and returned to Richland last year ago to become its police chief.

Hurney said there’s no plan to increase the total number of personnel in the department, which currently has four fulltime officers in addition to the chief, a regular part-time officer, two occasional part-time officers, and three reserve officers, or return to having local dispatchers in Richland.

“The 911 center has not been doing too bad; the only thing I don’t like is there isn’t a centralized point for our people to come to after hours. Having an officer on duty is probably going to be enough for now, I think,” Hurney said. “I am not looking at hiring a whole bunch of new policemen, but I do want to take care of the ones we have and keep them.”

Hurney said he’s not sure what would happen if Pulaski County voters pass their own countywide law enforcement sales tax. Commissioner Bill Farnham has proposed a countywide half-cent sales tax with a quarter-cent designated for the sheriff’s department and another quarter-cent to be divided between each of the county’s five municipal police departments.

“You’d have to see how it was written and see how the funds would be allocated and we’d see if we even needed a local sales tax anymore,” Hurney said. “From what I read from the city council up here, basically the way we decided in the board meetings was if there came a time that this tax went countywide we would look at what we’d be getting out of it and see how it would compare to our local ordinance here and basically go from there.”

Ed, if I remember right they were setting it up so if the County passed a LE Tax then the Richland tax would be discontinued.  That way the support is there no matter what.

Local News / Re: Election Results
« on: April 07, 2007, 02:12:32 AM »
Sorry I missed your question. Lets have Daily Guide answer this question for you.

911 re-vote gets different result

Published: Friday, April 6, 2007 3:51 PM CDT
E-mail this story | Print this page
Darrell Todd Maurina

Waynesville fire chief, assistant police chief elected to county board

Tuesday’s re-vote for members of the Pulaski County 911 Board generated a different result from the first election held in November.

When voters in the Waynesville, St. Robert, Laquey, Hooker and Big Piney precincts went to the polls on Nov. 7, they found spaces on the ballot to vote for incumbent 911 Board member Bob Carter or candidates Doug Yurecko, Mary Pero, and Daniella (Donna) Flynn. Dixon voters were supposed to have that same choice, but didn’t.

Carter, the assistant chief of the Waynesville Police Department, and Donna Flynn, a former employee of the Pulaski County Ambulance District, received the highest vote totals in November. However, that election had to be redone because the 911 board election was inadvertently left off the ballot in the Dixon precinct. County Clerk Diana Linnenbringer apologized and took responsibility for the error at the time and rescheduled the vote for April.

In Tuesday’s election, Carter received 577 votes compared to 474 for Yurecko, the Waynesville Rural Fire Chief, 443 for Flynn, and 254 for Pero, a former Pulaski County Sewer District operations manager.

The votes weren’t consistent across the county. Yurecko was the highest vote-getter in Waynesville with 230 votes compared to 207 for Carter, 131 for Flynn, and 71 for Pero, and in St. Robert, where he received 101 votes compared to 68 for Flynn, 67 for Carter and 47 for Pero. However, Yurecko came in last place in Dixon with 61 votes compared to 186 for Carter, 162 for Flynn and 82 for Pero, and third in Big Piney and Laquey. Flynn was first in Big Piney with 28 votes compared to 27 for Carter, 19 for Yurecko, and nine for Pero. In addition to Dixon, Carter came in first in Laquey where he had 52 votes compared to 35 for Flynn, 33 for Yurecko and 27 for Pero.

Although Dixon firefighters and police handle much of their own dispatching and communications through the Dixon Police Department, voters in that area still have the right to vote for who serves on the countywide 911 board and calls placed by Dixon residents for 911 service are routed through the 911 Communications Center in Waynesville before being transferred to Dixon emergency personnel.

St. Robert police also handle their own dispatching and Waynesville police handle their own dispatching during daytime hours but not on nights and weekends.

While eastern district voters had an election because four people were running for two seats, western district voters did not have to vote this year because the same number of people filed for the election as were to be elected. That’s a cost-saving measure used with school districts, fire districts, water districts, and some other groups that rarely have contested races; an election is only held if too many or too few candidates file for office.

Yurecko and Carter both said they look forward to serving on the board for their four-year terms.

Carter said he believes the 911 service quality and training of personnel have greatly improved since the 911 Board became an independent organization with its own sales tax revenue base.

“Overall the entire staff and board members are continuously striving to make improvements in communications and better serve the community and emergency systems, fire, ambulance and police,” Carter said. “I will continue to look for better was to serve the citizens of Pulaski County.”

Those plans will include service to Fort Leonard Wood and GPS tracking of cell phone callers, Carter said.

“We’re going to work with Fort Leonard Wood on ways to better serve emergency calls,” Carter said. “We will look for new and innovative ways coming on the market to improve GPS tracking systems that are available.”

Yurecko said he looks forward to being part of that progress and doesn’t plan to bring any agenda for change to the board.

“I plan to continue the consistency they have now; I think they are doing a good job,” Yurecko said.

Rick, did I miss the 911 Board winners?

County Government Opinion / Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« on: April 07, 2007, 01:11:55 AM »
It would be close to a million dollar a year raise (Taking into consideration Lowes opening.). Almost double what he has now. It requires the commissioners to commit to never reducing the amount below what he received this year (Although I'd be happy with them leaving it at a flat million, which would free up 200,000 or more right away, for other county services.)  That puts the sheriff at no less than 1.8 million his first year. In the long run it increases the county's budget for other areas, as their tax money increases they won't be giving any more to the sheriff than he gets now, and the sheriff's money will increase each year as sales in the community grow. It is a win win situation for all involved. Even St. Robert officials might could swallow the quarter cent a bit easier..

Win Win Win
This plan makes commissioners happy because they get more money for other departments that need it, it makes JB happy because he gets more money, it makes all elected officials in every department happy because they all get a slice of the pie, and it's an easier pill for cities to swallow. The cities risk this being a half cent, therefore it would be smart for them to support this 1/4 cent idea.

Well to begin with we need to decide what kind of LE tax do we want...Do we want the full LE tax of 1/2 percent or can we do the 1/4 percent and the Sheriff Department can keep what they received from the general fund now.....That would be a less tax for the people in the county but would still help the Sheriff Department give the deputies a raise in pay so that we can keep some of these good deputies and they can support their families too.....What does everyone think about this.....Or does anyone else have some ides.....This is what we need is ideas on the LE Tax then maybe we can discuss it with the commissioners at one of their meetings...... &^^&&^^ &^^&&^^

Restaurant Opinion / Re: KFC
« on: April 07, 2007, 01:06:44 AM »
That is the problem, we do not know who it is anymore. I used to know the owner, he does not own it any more.

Okay So in the past year, I think instead of doing so much complaining about it, Someone should inform the owner of the St. Roberts KFC, What would it hurt to tell him that his management sucks.

Restaurant Opinion / Re: KFC
« on: April 07, 2007, 12:43:52 AM »
Been longer than just 3 months. I haven't been there in 3 months.

In the past few months Kfc Has lost some of the best management that place has ever seen thus for it what it is today, Crappy. 

Restaurant Opinion / Re: KFC
« on: April 06, 2007, 11:33:04 PM »
Traitor. LOL

Please nobody faint, but I went there on Thursday and I will fail to make it back for some time. When a garbage gut like me will not go, you got a problem,.



City Government Opinion / Re: Waynesville Nuisance Abatement Board
« on: April 06, 2007, 03:12:57 PM »

I say...yes you CAN judge a person by their yard. 

Any one else heard this?

Night Club, Bars, Night Life. / Re: Has anyone heard the rumor?
« on: April 06, 2007, 01:06:04 AM »
Leave my chair alone, stay away from it.

Never been in there. They have a worn out lap dance chair named after you.

Night Club, Bars, Night Life. / Re: Has anyone heard the rumor?
« on: April 05, 2007, 09:26:55 PM »
Wouldn't know what the inside of that place looks like. Do the have the mules like I hear Tijuana has? LOL

Yeah, another unpopular view. I have never been in Big Louis or Big Daddy's, but have been in plenty of strip clubs over the years. It is not like guys just sit by the stage drooling OK, You can sit there, drink a beer, enjoy the view and BS with a friend just like any other bar. No, it is not for everyone. Neither is race car tracks, motorcycle rallies, knitting parties, or what ever it is you are into. I don't know about how these big ones like Big Louis are, but there was less sex going coming out of a strip club than there is a regular night club. Most of the strippers were just working girls, made some money and went home. Nothing more that a waitress in a truck stop. Just a working girl. You may not like what she does, but so what. If you never go there, what goes on there does not affect you so it should not offend you.
If there is a crime going on, then like any establishment, they should be shut down, but just because you find that in your world it is immoral, too bad. Stay in your world, and it will stay in its.

3197 Have ya seen this?

I've also recently started a blog to create a centralized location for Pulaski/Phelps County historical links as well as outdoor information.  An offshoot of this blog will have a link to images of my Pulaski County postcard collection.  It will be updated as I get the time (which right now, isn't looking too great). LOL

Here is the blog site (very preliminary) -

Sneak Peek Sheriff's View / Re: Law Enforcement Tax Poll
« on: April 05, 2007, 01:16:33 PM »
All this says is tax levy.

Sneak Peek Sheriff's View / Re: Law Enforcement Tax Poll
« on: April 05, 2007, 01:15:42 PM »
COUNTY OF CAMDEN-TAX LEVY                                                                                                       
VOTE FOR ONE                                                                                                       
YES 1633 89   70   99   96   154   82   33   17   70   25   8   106   63   64   23   73   125   83   62   12   30   86   57   77   29   
NO 1973 94   63   94   77   174   80   83   53   80   27   39   137   75   100   39   128   116   123   63   38   28   87   37   119   19   
Disturbing news: I just heard Camden County LE tax failed. Is that true? Can anyone verify?

Music, Bands, Concerts? / You know the dumb song "My Humps?"
« on: April 05, 2007, 01:23:14 AM »
Here's Alanis Morrisette making fun of "My Humps" by the Black Eyed Peas.

I believe only retail items to include drinks, can be taxed. Lap dances can't I'd say, that falls under service. LOL.

LOL, Ban you?

The sheriff doesn't have the luxury to have a surplus, 911 does.

If the sheriff ever gets too much money, you can count on me pointing it out.

What will 911 do with just the extra money Lowes will supply?

I'd bet money 911 could roll back to a third cent for now, refinance the building and still have a surplus.

I'd almost bet everything I own that they wouldn't ever consider any of this.

Darrel Daily Guide, have you seen a budget? Where can we get it?

How is that different from the sheriffs? Which, I'm only saying them as the obvious, because that is who you strongly support. That could apply to anyone, including our government, Fort Leonard Wood, the schools.... And, by-the-way, a little surplus in an emergency fund, for capital replacements is in fact a wise and fiscally responsible plan. Think about it Rick, if people would have been wiser and if we had a replacement fund for cars, JB could have new cars coming in to replace old ones (a plan I strongly advocated when I was a commissioner).  I just think 911 has superior management...and had superior planning and vision in the beginning...sorry Rick, I hope you don't ban me.

What happens when the building is paid off? How long is the note? They will spend it all, so as to not lose face, I am sure. I have absolutely no doubt that they are spending every dime as they know what their income is, and absolutely have to see to it there are no surpluses. If they were to have a surplus that would look bad, now wouldn't it? It is a fact they have probably put their selves in a position to now need to have that income due to having built the building, but, there will come a time when they have way, way too much money. That time is fast approaching. Where is their budget? I'd like to see it, actually I'd like to see an expense report more.

Ghost, you are thinking property taxes. They can be rolled back, not sales tax. You cannot roll back a sales tax. You can sunset it, but you can't roll it back like you do property tax.

That aside, they have to pay payroll, payroll taxes, insurance, work. comp. etc. The money they make from 1/4 cent will just barely cover that along with the building payment. 

Their budget is far less than the sheriff's. That is what I mean by incorrect information. The sheriff has about a 1.2 million dollar budget. The 911 about half of that (if that much, I'm not sure, I'll try to find out).

Not correct, I knew how much money they had.

I am not attacking you at all, but I strongly disagree. They are NOT over-funded. I think Rick thought that because he thought it was 1/2 cent, but it is a 1/4 cent tax. Voted in "by the people" by a very popular vote. 911 is just as important as any of the rest of us. 911 saves life and further harm.  No need to take their funding and give to the sheriff's department (which isn't legal anyway).

Wow, I must have hit the nail on the head with this one.

None the less, what obscene amount of money will 911 get once Lowe's is up and running? Eventually you will all come to understand they have too much money. I don't care who does not like it, it is a fact, and will only get more obscene in the future. Attack my opinion all you want, but someday you will realize I am right. I think they have such a surplus of money that they have equipment, and software they aren't even trained well enough to operate. Please someone prove my suspicions wrong. Your turn. Wheres the global positioning we were promised? It was on its way two years ago, last I heard. I don't mind eating crow, please someone prove me wrong.

I have nothing personal against anyone at 911, for that matter I don't even know anyone at 911 well. It may be unpopular to say what I am saying, but I believe I am right, others agree with me, and I have the cojones to say so.

County Government Opinion / Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« on: April 04, 2007, 02:50:54 PM »
I had not noticed your negative karma. I am shocked. Gary does not deserve this negative Karma.

Yes, and keep giving me the bad karma, hahaha,    that merely means I am telling the truth and it often hurts.

City Government Opinion / Re: Waynesville Nuisance Abatement Board
« on: April 04, 2007, 02:03:57 PM »
I might add that St. Robert has been doing this for a while with not near as much controversy.

Sneak Peek Sheriff's View / Re: Law Enforcement Tax Poll
« on: April 04, 2007, 01:57:39 PM »
Still would be nice to have a plan in place most can agree on. I have some new ideas for polls.

    Bluntly stated Big Bird, when you don't get on the ballot, you don't need a sales pitch.


City Government Opinion / Re: Waynesville Nuisance Abatement Board
« on: April 04, 2007, 01:54:06 PM »
Congratulations on your election win yesterday Luge.

We did meet at Starbuck's Monday and I just have not had the time to sit and write a response.  I was hoping that Biker would give his opinion.  We had a good discussion about the process.  The City has a good ordinance and like any new idea, there are a few things to be ironed out.  At our Economic Development meeting last night, we discussed some of the concerns that have been aired by citizens of Waynesville.  Most all the responses I have gotten have been favorable toward our efforts and I beleive, my re-election last night confirmed the desire of my Ward for the Council to continue our efforts to clean up our town.  As a committee we determined that the priorities for the nuisance ordinance should be 1. the health and welfare of our citizens and 2.  the businesses along Route 66, as they hinder economic development.  Those will be the focus of the City and then, let the process work, as neighbors begin to work with each other to correct specific things in their neighborhoods.  In fact, at the Starbuck's meeting a citizen came in and asked how to go about beginning the process.

    The people who met at Starbuck's all agreed that the intention of the ordinance is good.  The process is being perceived as too aggressive by some.  But the City is dedicated to being fair in their enforcement.  That is all I can say to allay some of the fears of people. Some people are saying some things that are not true and not being constructive in anyway.  Like Avery, our overriding concern is protecting property rights and property values of our neighborhoods in Waynesville.  Neglect and non-enforcement of existing ordinances was allowed for so long that it will take an complete change of attitude for some people in our community. 

    Hope this helps and I pledge myself to being fair and open-minded.   Biker, Avery and several others,  I appreciate your comments; as they are constructive.

Sneak Peek Sheriff's View / Re: Law Enforcement Tax Poll
« on: April 04, 2007, 05:29:15 AM »
OZARK CO LAW ENFORCEMENT TAX -- 100 of 100 precincts reporting
 YES 778 67% (X)
 NO 390 33%


Bet JB is jealous... Some one please call this county and learn their sales pitch.