Shoutbox

Refresh History
  • littlebit: Makes sense.
    July 16, 2017, 04:40:28 AM
  • Lepard LLC: Boards will stay open for a place people can find history information longer. I am not allowing anyone to sign up for now because of so many foreginers just wanting to promote their business..
    December 10, 2016, 05:10:27 AM
  • Lepard LLC: Not sure why didn't look, I may be shutting down these message boards..
    November 17, 2016, 12:42:43 AM
  • ~kathy~: rick why is the timestamp showing up a day in advance?
    September 13, 2016, 12:27:46 AM
  • Valor7: What I tried to say is that the actual money would not be there that quick. But a loan against that would work if they are willing to do that.
    August 08, 2016, 01:51:51 PM
  • Lepard LLC: Why so long before it comes online? 911 took out a loan or bond with the known guarantee payment and began building..
    August 08, 2016, 07:46:34 AM
  • Valor7: Actually no it is not, a dependable Revenue stream will not come on line until the 4th quarter of 2017 so 2018 budget will be up in the air, not quite sure what they will have. By 2019 budget all will be well.
    August 04, 2016, 09:27:17 PM
  • Valor7: You mean that tax that the Commissioners would not put on the ballot for so many years? Strange things happened when the citizens got a chance to vote on that issue.
    August 03, 2016, 06:43:06 PM
  • Lepard LLC: Back up is now available withe the new tax..
    August 03, 2016, 05:01:35 PM
  • Valor7: Thanks a lot Ladies!!
    July 29, 2016, 01:16:13 PM
  • littlebit: ((*(*&
    July 27, 2016, 03:47:52 PM
  • ~kathy~: lol
    July 15, 2016, 09:34:56 AM
  • Valor7: A guy could get killed around here while waiting for backup!
    July 13, 2016, 07:31:58 PM
  • Lepard LLC: You are not alone..
    July 13, 2016, 07:28:53 PM
  • Valor7: I just hate it when I talk to myself!!!!
    July 08, 2016, 12:54:09 PM
  • Valor7: I could have worded that better, we talked details, options, the pros and cons of each, in  order to arrive at the best ballot language to present to the voters. Hope that makes this clearer.
    April 15, 2016, 06:36:14 PM
  • Valor7: sorry about the typos still working with just one arm in action
    April 13, 2016, 01:10:42 PM
  • Valor7: Yes and no. We talked details and options until we were blue in the face but I never heardbring it over, it was always the time was not right for the issue to pass. Glad to see the time in now right and I for one shall vote yes on the ballot. I would urge all others to do the sameour county is busting at the seams crimewise and no matter how many bad guys we send off there always seems to someone to replace them. The Sheriff's Office needs the help.
    April 13, 2016, 01:08:35 PM
  • Lepard LLC: Is that true Valor? Did he ask you what you wanted?
    March 01, 2016, 04:55:37 AM
  • Lepard LLC: Gene Newkirk Rick I have waited for a Sheriff to bring it to me on what he wanted. I have pushed Mr long for a while to get it to me. He told me he was close to having or done. Now hopefully the people will get to decide on it. I spoke with Steve about this a few times.
    March 01, 2016, 04:54:54 AM
  • Kimberly: Wow- I have a new name..........
    February 23, 2016, 10:25:15 PM
  • Lepard LLC: Works on mine, improvements are being done here. I may kick back into her a lot and post but working on different technologies right now. Seeing how things interact.
    January 18, 2016, 09:01:20 AM
  • Valor7: Yes it is working. If you need a laugh the wife showed me how to correctly use the silly thing.
    January 04, 2016, 05:32:59 PM
  • Valor7: Think so, mine is trying to work but it is now user and password protected and I dont know mine
    December 17, 2015, 01:32:16 PM
  • "DJ": Is there still a working android app for the PCSD
    December 14, 2015, 08:14:53 PM

Author Topic: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT  (Read 105752 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline crazy horse

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 596
  • Karma: +513416/-1802
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #210 on: March 30, 2008, 04:50:46 PM »

Share/Bookmark

Fort Wood Hotel

Boards

Devils Elbow

Attractions

Sports

St. Robert

Waynesville

PC Daily

Dixon

Menu Guide

Fun Links

Homework

Crocker

Fort Wood

Swedeborg

Big Piney

Laquey

Classifieds

Restaurants

Richland

Fort  Hotels

And in fairness, JB and Farnham are close friends and political allies.
I do appreciate your kindness Fedup. I have often thought, when I was going through cancer I was given a pass by nobody (and I mean political people, many people were wonderful and many churches prayed for me) so I want to make this clear, the press, the politicians; especially JB's & Bill's supporters were vicious.  In fact Farnham hammered me relentlessly about missing meetings. Then, he missed a bunch over back problems. If that would have been reversed I would never have said a word as I considered that without honor.
Fedup, you are correct, Dennis knows that budget by heart. And he is frustrated because people blame commissioners and falsely accuse them of being against the cops, when there is no money. They are not hiding money from the sheriff. That is ludicrous. There is no money.
Matrsnot, you are a good man who has been been mislead and bought in to it lock, stock and barrel. But, I like ya and hope you get over it someday. 

Offline matrsnot

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 7612
  • Karma: +489606/-6227
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #211 on: March 30, 2008, 05:47:46 PM »
Actually, the best financed area of the county will have to pull out some money.  I don't have much to asy about Franham.  He is in the Eastern District.  Thornsberry and Ransdall are another cup of tea altogether.  I have read many of their arrogant statements and they feel they should be ruling us all.  Ransdall is a professional politician who wants and has, for the moment, power.  At least it is perceived.  Ok, Farnham went over his budget for salt.  So, one of the other areas, perhaps the newly named position for the secretary at Roads and bridges  will have to be sacrificed.  They are still talking layoffs for people who can't afford it.   Why is that?  Because they "miscalculated" on the budget, is why.  I ca'nt stand either of them ans as long as they have a weekly bash the Sheriff, no matter WHO the sheriff is, I will continue to bash them.  What they do publicly with their speaking is reprehensible at best.  And keep in mind, they seem to be covering for Crismon and his road promises and downplaying the boat sale too.  They also REFUSE to have evening meetings because the statutes dont' say they have to have them then.  A great way to dodge those of us working for a living.

Offline crazy horse

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 596
  • Karma: +513416/-1802
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #212 on: March 30, 2008, 06:23:20 PM »
matrsnot, I am curious and tickled by this, I hope you understand this is in fun. But, I have often wondered, knowing your better half thinks a lot of Bill Ransdall...do you have interesting dinner conversations, or is it not talked about. It makes me think of James Carville and his wife, Mary Matalin. Old 'Snake Head' is of course a brilliant democrat consultant and loves the Clintons with great passion. Mary a top Republican consultant. Often wonder how their dinner conversations go.

Offline Valor7

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 2543
  • Karma: +190488/-54
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #213 on: March 30, 2008, 06:58:16 PM »
matrsnot, I am curious and tickled by this, I hope you understand this is in fun. But, I have often wondered, knowing your better half thinks a lot of Bill Ransdall...do you have interesting dinner conversations, or is it not talked about. It makes me think of James Carville and his wife, Mary Matalin. Old 'Snake Head' is of course a brilliant democrat consultant and loves the Clintons with great passion. Mary a top Republican consultant. Often wonder how their dinner conversations go.


   Dinner talk! I have waited for the media to cover their gunfight on the front lawn over politics! Talk about the odd couple. They are worse than me and Crazy Horse together. Maybe?

    JB

Offline Valor7

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 2543
  • Karma: +190488/-54
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #214 on: March 30, 2008, 07:01:40 PM »
Farnham did make a comment to me about the tire issue story in the paper, something to the effect that the reported info was wrong, most was paid for from last years budget. I will have to remember to ask him for some details and post on here..
JB

Offline matrsnot

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 7612
  • Karma: +489606/-6227
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #215 on: March 30, 2008, 09:24:30 PM »
We are still together, because we don't necessarily agree on everything.  She has the right to think what she wants about Bill.  She knows where I stand about him too.  We just don't argue about it.  and youa re right, it is in fun.  Heck she even has him on her email list I think.  Such is life.

Offline FedUp

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 242
  • Karma: +7320/-427
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #216 on: March 30, 2008, 09:58:24 PM »
Gary, your signs were in my yard when all around me were Farnham's.  I've always felt you got a bad break and yes I remember Farnham bashing you on the absent issue and several others, now he's not half the commissioner you were. He can't manage a budget.  Yet he gets a free pass because he makes a motion on occassion that supports the Sheriffs office.  I've already mentioned in this thread how I felt and made recommendations that I thought would help. I may not agree with JB on everything but he's  been nice to me and didn't have to be.  That alone means I will respect his views, even if I disagree with them.  I'm not a commissioner and probably never will be, but being cordial is usually the first step to finding a solution that works for the county.  We live in a small community and can't afford, literally and figuratively, the gridlock and nastiness that is in Washington and Jeff City.  Hence my screen name, FedUp.

Offline Valor7

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 2543
  • Karma: +190488/-54
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #217 on: March 31, 2008, 12:27:06 AM »
Gary, your signs were in my yard when all around me were Farnham's.  I've always felt you got a bad break and yes I remember Farnham bashing you on the absent issue and several others, now he's not half the commissioner you were. He can't manage a budget.  Yet he gets a free pass because he makes a motion on occassion that supports the Sheriffs office.  I've already mentioned in this thread how I felt and made recommendations that I thought would help. I may not agree with JB on everything but he's  been nice to me and didn't have to be.  That alone means I will respect his views, even if I disagree with them.  I'm not a commissioner and probably never will be, but being cordial is usually the first step to finding a solution that works for the county.  We live in a small community and can't afford, literally and figuratively, the gridlock and nastiness that is in Washington and Jeff City.  Hence my screen name, FedUp.


     Maybe you should be a Commissioner, at least you listen, and then think about the issue. Here is an example; I have been after the Commission to put a medical company like Advanced Correctional Healthcare (ACH) in the jail. They will not do so because it would cost between $30 to $50 thousand more each year then what we pay the local doctor.

But here is what we get. No walking inmates down the street to the doc. No rescue or escape attempts. Nurse in jail 20-40 hours per week your choice. Doctor and nurse always on call, they come to you. And last but NOT least, all medical liability issues are taken off the shoulders of Pulaski County and placed on a medical corporation. We DO NOT LOSE THE LAWSUIT, the medical company does.

I consider this to be extremely cost effective and a very wise move. I barely got a discussion going before they chopped the idea. What would you think about this idea?

   JB

Offline FedUp

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 242
  • Karma: +7320/-427
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #218 on: March 31, 2008, 04:28:49 PM »
JB on it's face it sounds great, but as with all great proposals a cost benefit analysis should be done that provides statistics to prove your point.  I have to do that with all my Fed proposals in order to get my point across.  Sometimes it's hard for commissioners (or other folks) to fully understand the benefits even when it's spoken in plain english, while statistics provide a good foundation and ignoring those stats increases their risks.  Still, it sounds like a good proposal to me, now the countering argument is what gets cut in order to provide that new service, or how much will get saved? Answer those and I would hope they would listen.   

Sheriff J. B. King

  • Guest
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #219 on: March 31, 2008, 06:58:26 PM »
JB on it's face it sounds great, but as with all great proposals a cost benefit analysis should be done that provides statistics to prove your point.  I have to do that with all my Fed proposals in order to get my point across.  Sometimes it's hard for commissioners (or other folks) to fully understand the benefits even when it's spoken in plain english, while statistics provide a good foundation and ignoring those stats increases their risks.  Still, it sounds like a good proposal to me, now the countering argument is what gets cut in order to provide that new service, or how much will get saved? Answer those and I would hope they would listen.   
Probably a moot point, there is nothing to cut. And savings are a matter of view. The other selling points are that the inmates in your custody get better care and the medical legal issue is diverted from the County. Does not directly save the County the money but if we lose several cases then the insurance company will cancel us or raise our rates. Both of those would create a real delicate problem. Last payout by Insurance Company is unknown but had to be over $50K and the one before that was $340K. Those were cases under JT and no that is not a slam on JT he was in the same boat I am now. Limited jail staff help and jail staff or Sheriff making complex MEDICAL decisions. It should be done by a Doctor.
So bottom line I cannot say that we would save X amount. That is an unknown. But for the care of the inmates and to prevent the County being canceled it would be the right thing to do.
JB
 

Offline Yankee Trader

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 2028
  • Karma: +470557/-165
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #220 on: March 31, 2008, 08:43:37 PM »
Let's see....340k divided by lets say top number 50k = 6.8.  That would be almost 7 years of premiums. What happens if an inmate wins a multimillion dollar lawsuit against the County?? That second civil paper server would have almost paid for the yearly premium with the profit for the County???
Another thought......would the Counties insurance premium go down because of the liability taken off it?? Perhaps more savings.

Offline Valor7

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 2543
  • Karma: +190488/-54
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #221 on: March 31, 2008, 11:12:27 PM »
Farnham did make a comment to me about the tire issue story in the paper, something to the effect that the reported info was wrong, most was paid for from last years budget. I will have to remember to ask him for some details and post on here..
JB


   I walked into the Commission meeting this morning at the tail end of the explanation of the tire issue to the DG reporter. I suspect the paper tomorrow will carry the details.
JB

Offline cowboy

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 2065
  • Karma: +89530/-9529
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #222 on: March 31, 2008, 11:18:13 PM »
Let's see....340k divided by lets say top number 50k = 6.8.  That would be almost 7 years of premiums. What happens if an inmate wins a multimillion dollar lawsuit against the County?? That second civil paper server would have almost paid for the yearly premium with the profit for the County???
Another thought......would the Counties insurance premium go down because of the liability taken off it?? Perhaps more savings.

didn't the insurance company pay the lawsuit? If so then your math is all wrong.

Offline Yankee Trader

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 2028
  • Karma: +470557/-165
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #223 on: April 01, 2008, 01:17:09 AM »
didn't the insurance company pay the lawsuit? If so then your math is all wrong.

You must not have read the part about the insurance company increasing rates or canceling the policy.  I was simply showing an example.

Offline crazy horse

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 596
  • Karma: +513416/-1802
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #224 on: April 01, 2008, 01:33:12 AM »
No sheriff should be making medical decisions--ever! What the paramedics and the ER doc decide should be done. The sheriff nor his staff should ever over-ride the medical folks. There is no excuse for that.

Offline FedUp

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 242
  • Karma: +7320/-427
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #225 on: April 01, 2008, 01:40:55 AM »
Probably a moot point, there is nothing to cut. And savings are a matter of view. The other selling points are that the inmates in your custody get better care and the medical legal issue is diverted from the County. Does not directly save the County the money but if we lose several cases then the insurance company will cancel us or raise our rates. Both of those would create a real delicate problem. Last payout by Insurance Company is unknown but had to be over $50K and the one before that was $340K. Those were cases under JT and no that is not a slam on JT he was in the same boat I am now. Limited jail staff help and jail staff or Sheriff making complex MEDICAL decisions. It should be done by a Doctor.
So bottom line I cannot say that we would save X amount. That is an unknown. But for the care of the inmates and to prevent the County being canceled it would be the right thing to do.
JB
It is a good idea.  And I think the public safety part should definitely be included.  This example reminds me of the traffic light argument.  The one where public officials say there haven't been any, or not enough, accidents to justify the cost of a traffic light.  Then someone gets killed at that intersection and the following week a light is put up.  The public already paid the costs by higher insurance rates and a person dying.  But those officials hadn't seen statistics to convince them it was needed.  And I do like that the legal aspect is transferred to the company and away from the county.  JB you have some stats, even if they were under JT, may want to use those as examples.
 

Offline cowboy

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 2065
  • Karma: +89530/-9529
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #226 on: April 01, 2008, 03:00:52 AM »
You must not have read the part about the insurance company increasing rates or canceling the policy.  I was simply showing an example.

You were simply misrepresenting the facts.

Offline 02Tundra

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 662
  • Karma: +9924/-20
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #227 on: April 01, 2008, 05:32:09 PM »
The survey was mentioned in the DG about a week before it came out.  The problem was that if you make people go get a publication and then take the survey to another location, many will not bother.  My wife and I were two of the 22 yes votes.  I still think they need to place it on the ballet, but without controls I will not support it at all.  I will not give Ransdal the ability to get his hands on any more money.

I've been out of town for about five days and had to look up what the poll results were and I got exactly what I thought I would see.  Why is it so damn hard to get something this simple before the voter's?  I really don't understand why our elected officials act the way they do, but I'm getting about fed up with it. 

Offline peon

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 79
  • Karma: +3378/-154
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #228 on: April 01, 2008, 05:50:58 PM »
also tundra, the pcw said that the ballots that were no votes were all similar handwriting on the envelopes, and some people went to find newspapers and couldn't?  something underhanded going on here, can you tell?

Offline 02Tundra

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 662
  • Karma: +9924/-20
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #229 on: April 01, 2008, 08:29:06 PM »
I don't know if I would go so far as to say something underhanded was going on!  I would say that the poll was not very well planned out. If that was the case, you would have seen hundreds of votes, we saw 60.  I don't anything about the similar handwriting on the envelopes, but that doesn't mean anything either.

I would think there could be a special day (Saturday) that at all the polling placing in the County they have a poll (for registered voter's only) and we come in and say yes or no and be done with it!  If yes wins they get it one the ballet ASAP and we vote for it in real life.  If no, then it's over.  If that doesn't work, I would say just put it on the ballet and let the voter's decide. 

Offline Lepard LLC

  • Activist
  • Administrator
  • ***************
  • Posts: 6215
  • Karma: +2241359/-8
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #230 on: April 01, 2008, 11:01:49 PM »
The thing that struck me as odd was, Ransdall had downplayed the poll as unscientific, yet, when the results came out in his favor he acted like it was gospel.

My opinion is this.. The are using smoke and mirrors to unseat Pro Law enforcement candidates, making it look like they are considering it, thus making this upcoming election not about the tax... Once the election is over it will be to late to organize opposition to their candidates. Just my humble opinion..

They tore up law when she visited, looked like Ransdall is leaning away from it now. Read the article in the Guide.
 
Sorry Arnold, I am backing Farnham, if we don't hear from you on this within the week..

Offline ♥♣ ~Maynard~♣♥

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 10503
  • Karma: +3034109/-159781
  • Gender: Male
  • GOING GREEN: Save a tree,eat a beaver.
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #231 on: April 03, 2008, 01:14:58 AM »
Has anyone read what Bill Anderson has said about this website??


"His first foray into partisan politics hasn’t been completely enjoyable, Anderson said, and he told local Democrats that he doesn’t like the tone of political commentary on some area web sites."

“People can sign up and say whatever they say with no accountability,” Anderson said. “Don’t get badly concerned until they put their name behind it.”

http://www.waynesvilledailyguide.com/articles/2008/04/02/news/news03.txt


related article.

http://www.waynesvilledailyguide.com/articles/2008/04/02/news/news06.txt
Remember I'm a nudist so when you respond to one of my post yor talking to a naked man  :)


For entertainment purposes only. Any resemblance to real persons living or dead is purely coincidental.

Offline Lepard LLC

  • Activist
  • Administrator
  • ***************
  • Posts: 6215
  • Karma: +2241359/-8
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #232 on: April 03, 2008, 01:58:00 AM »
I love how Darrel Todd Maurina always includes the exact quote, when he quotes people..He could be nice and word it better, but he knows that some of us notice, and enjoy. Thanks Darrel..
 
 
 
Has anyone read what Bill Anderson has said about this website??


"His first foray into partisan politics hasn’t been completely enjoyable, Anderson said, and he told local Democrats that he doesn’t like the tone of political commentary on some area web sites."

“People can sign up and say whatever they say with no accountability,” Anderson said. “Don’t get badly concerned until they put their name behind it.”

http://www.waynesvilledailyguide.com/articles/2008/04/02/news/news03.txt


related article.

http://www.waynesvilledailyguide.com/articles/2008/04/02/news/news06.txt

Offline Yankee Trader

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 2028
  • Karma: +470557/-165
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #233 on: April 03, 2008, 02:39:31 AM »
It's gonna be an interesting election cycle.

Offline littlebit

  • Cunning Linguist
  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 12946
  • Karma: +2370369/-241
  • Gender: Male
  • Home is what you make it.
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #234 on: April 03, 2008, 02:52:40 AM »
Any chance of a public debate?
Some people are like Slinkies... Not really good for anything, but they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down a flight of stairs.

I'd give my left arm to be ambidextrous...


“The truth is, everyone is going to end up hurting you. You just have to find the ones who are worth suffering for.”

Offline Yankee Trader

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 2028
  • Karma: +470557/-165
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #235 on: April 03, 2008, 03:03:50 AM »
I just want to know what they think they can improve with what there is to work with.

Offline laciesmom

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 508
  • Karma: +64678/-4
  • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #236 on: April 03, 2008, 03:51:16 AM »
Me too Yankee Trader, very good question, and the sas part is if they work there now they know there isn't anything to help improve the situation with the budget as it is.
I just want to know what they think they can improve with what there is to work with.
Real love stories never have endings.
Richard Bach

Offline Law101

  • Global Moderator
  • **************
  • Posts: 1432
  • Karma: +691373/-13
  • Gender: Female
  • Big Piney Community Activist
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #237 on: April 03, 2008, 01:04:40 PM »
I don't think many of the candidates for any of the offices, have utilized all the avenues of communication that are available to them.  And it is almost time for the primary election. 

As far as this board goes, there are a greater number of thoughtful people here, who give an honest, well thought out response, than there are those who just like to stir things up. 

Offline matrsnot

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 7612
  • Karma: +489606/-6227
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #238 on: April 03, 2008, 01:45:49 PM »
Biker and I disagree on Bill.  As I said before, my PERCEPTION of him is that he is a power seeker.  Yeah, he gave up his cushy job on post, and they are right, this is not about money.  It is about POWER.  What improvements is he proposing that the monies provided will allow him to do?  Notice he is not running a patrol car anymore.  Not since that unauthorized shooting incident a few years ago.  I am gonna be voting for JB, no matter what.

Offline jclapp

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 30
  • Karma: +2990/-1
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #239 on: April 03, 2008, 02:24:04 PM »
Yes, money is a consideration also.  Check out what the salary will be after the election.