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 106193 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 #30 on: April 07, 2007, 05:25:05 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

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 now...at 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.

Offline Lepard LLC

  • Activist
  • Administrator
  • ***************
  • Posts: 6215
  • Karma: +2241359/-8
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #31 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 now...at 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.

Offline crazy horse

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 596
  • Karma: +513416/-1802
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #32 on: April 07, 2007, 08:58:19 PM »
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.

Offline Lepard LLC

  • Activist
  • Administrator
  • ***************
  • Posts: 6215
  • Karma: +2241359/-8
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #33 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.

Offline Lepard LLC

  • Activist
  • Administrator
  • ***************
  • Posts: 6215
  • Karma: +2241359/-8
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #34 on: April 07, 2007, 09:32:40 PM »
I do, we just need to work out the details, and I am ready to get the signatures. I just want to know what the best idea is that can work.. I need wording in the petition that the masses can agree on... I just need help from people like you who know the laws, so I don't go off in the wrong direction..



I do not know how to get it on the ballot.

Offline crazy horse

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 596
  • Karma: +513416/-1802
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #35 on: April 07, 2007, 10:28:24 PM »
I'll help you. I'd say you, JB and I should get together. Also, JB should contact sheriff's with successful results and get samples of their wording (they usually have a Missouri Sheriff's Association group) with samples of what worked in other areas. Then, we could get together and fine tune for our area. We also need a method of verification that the signatures are by registered voters. If not, it will fail to apprise the commissioners of the citizen's intent and support.

Offline crazy horse

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 596
  • Karma: +513416/-1802
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #36 on: April 07, 2007, 10:33:30 PM »
Rick, he has to go for the 1/2 cent though. JB can verify this, but a 1/4 cent would be worse off than he currently is. It is imperative to pass a 1/2 cent for any chance to improve the sheriff department's budget. And, word it whereas the money goes directly to the sheriff's department. I do not like or agree with Farnham's proposal. It will not work and is a weak and ineffective compromise at best.

Offline Valor7

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 2543
  • Karma: +190488/-54
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #37 on: April 07, 2007, 11:41:59 PM »
Rick, he has to go for the 1/2 cent though. JB can verify this, but a 1/4 cent would be worse off than he currently is. It is imperative to pass a 1/2 cent for any chance to improve the sheriff department's budget. And, word it whereas the money goes directly to the sheriff's department. I do not like or agree with Farnham's proposal. It will not work and is a weak and ineffective compromise at best.

   Right on the money. As I see it the PCSD needs right at 2.5 million to have a chance of doing a good job. The current .5 county sales tax brings in 1.73 million. Add a second 1.73 million LE tax for us. Have the commission add 800K more to our budget and the Commission would still have 900K to do with as they please. I see this as a win/win all around. If we try to do it cheap the end result will be cheap and short of the goal. The bottom line is Pulaski Counrty has grown and continues to grow. In just a year or so the .25 tax would fall flat. In baseball terms we need a solid double to left field for the team to win.

    JB

Offline Lepard LLC

  • Activist
  • Administrator
  • ***************
  • Posts: 6215
  • Karma: +2241359/-8
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #38 on: April 08, 2007, 12:18:45 AM »
Now we are right back at, who is to say the Commissioners will still give you that money? Growth should not cause you to fall flat, as sales taxes grow with it.

Personally I am not big on non binding petitions also. Your thoughts?

   Right on the money. As I see it the PCSD needs right at 2.5 million to have a chance of doing a good job. The current .5 county sales tax brings in 1.73 million. Add a second 1.73 million LE tax for us. Have the commission add 800K more to our budget and the Commission would still have 900K to do with as they please. I see this as a win/win all around. If we try to do it cheap the end result will be cheap and short of the goal. The bottom line is Pulaski Counrty has grown and continues to grow. In just a year or so the .25 tax would fall flat. In baseball terms we need a solid double to left field for the team to win.

    JB

Offline Lepard LLC

  • Activist
  • Administrator
  • ***************
  • Posts: 6215
  • Karma: +2241359/-8
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #39 on: April 08, 2007, 01:01:26 AM »
No way to force it with a binding petition?

I do not think they will. I think it has to be a 1/2 cent and that the sheriff will have to manage with a 1.7 mil. budget...that is my opinion. I do not think, at least right now that the sheriff will get 2. whatever mil. It isn't in this counties budget.

Offline crazy horse

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 596
  • Karma: +513416/-1802
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #40 on: April 08, 2007, 01:03:57 AM »
Not that I know of.

watson

  • Guest
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #41 on: April 08, 2007, 01:05:35 AM »
Now wait a minute...why would he have to live with it the way it is you haven't even discussed it with the commissioners yet......now I do not agree that it is a done deal....there is always a way to compromise....always....it just takes a little bending and rearranging and everyone can win in the end.....It takes alot of discussions....but to just say till 2011...that is crazy to say...

watson

  • Guest
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #42 on: April 08, 2007, 01:07:24 AM »
Why isn't 2 mil in this counties budget....explain to me that....we are always building in this county so how can you predict that...I do not understand that.....please explain.....

Offline crazy horse

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 596
  • Karma: +513416/-1802
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #43 on: April 08, 2007, 01:12:20 AM »
watson, the county will be lucky to stay in the black this year. If they had the extra money, they would give it. It isn't there.

Offline crazy horse

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 596
  • Karma: +513416/-1802
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #44 on: April 08, 2007, 01:13:05 AM »
That is why we are discussing a LE tax.

watson

  • Guest
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #45 on: April 08, 2007, 01:14:14 AM »
I may not know as much as you two do...but I want to learn because I want to be involved in this and I am going to be involved in this if I have to get a copy of all the regulations to do it...
Now please take the time to explain to me ......please....

watson

  • Guest
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #46 on: April 08, 2007, 01:15:51 AM »
watson, the county will be lucky to stay in the black this year. If they had the extra money, they would give it. It isn't there.



O.K. that part I understand but they were that way last year too.  but there is another election before 2009 so why can it not be discussed rationally between a bunch of people and come up with a solution on this LE tax that everyone can agree on....

watson

  • Guest
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #47 on: April 08, 2007, 01:17:33 AM »
Are you trying to tell me that a solution cannot be found to present and discuss with the commissioners and put on the table to be voted on until 2009 or beyond...that is what I donot understand and definately do not agree with....

watson

  • Guest
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #48 on: April 08, 2007, 01:19:22 AM »
I mean I understand business and I understand taxes and I understand budget but I do not understand not coming up with a solution to a problem that needs solved.....

watson

  • Guest
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #49 on: April 08, 2007, 01:22:38 AM »
I agree with you watson, I really do. But, it will take two commissioners to vote to put it on the ballot. I don't know how to get that.



Now Crazy horse I thought that I had read that you were a commisioner once is that not correct....well are you saying that the rest of the commissioners will not bend a little to help their county solve some major money issues....Are you saying that the other two commissioners do not have the interest of the county in their hearts and will not help.....I would have to come up with a couple of ideas and present it to them and see that for myself.....I personally think if we could have a meeting and sit and discuss some ideas and come up with a solution that we could get it on the ballot.....I think all they really want is something that everyone will be happy with that is all.... and I can understand that...

watson

  • Guest
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #50 on: April 08, 2007, 01:24:36 AM »
If the commission stays as is, then you will have to see if it changes in 2008. Then, it would take until 2009 to get it done, then until 2010 to see additional money. That is why JB is so distressed watson.


If the commissioners stay as they are now and they will not try to help the county of Pulaski then there will be another vote in 2008....they will not be there......take is as you wish......they will not be there after that.....

watson

  • Guest
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #51 on: April 08, 2007, 01:28:02 AM »
I have never been in a position like that and I am sure there are rules and regulations and so forth.....but where there is a will there is always a way....I would consider quitting my job and going door to door throughout Pulaski County if need me to get this county back on its feet.....and I am talking all of Pulaski county....but right now this Sheriff Department is a problem and I am sure after that there will be another.....you just take one problem at a time and come up with a solution or maybe two or three that we can work on so that we can bend and turn and everyone is happy....Why can it not be put back on the table this year....

Offline crazy horse

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 596
  • Karma: +513416/-1802
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #52 on: April 08, 2007, 01:29:04 AM »
Man, has this ever changed. I have been the one saying for a long time that we need to work with the commissioners to try and do this with respect and common courtesy. I am the one who has been against the badmouthing and negative statements on here. I have made suggestion after suggestion, that is usually ignored (except by Rick). So today, I thought Rick was talking about a petition to try and persuade the commissioners to put it on the ballot. I misunderstood what he meant. I am not speaking for the commissioners at all.  

Offline Lepard LLC

  • Activist
  • Administrator
  • ***************
  • Posts: 6215
  • Karma: +2241359/-8
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #53 on: April 08, 2007, 01:30:46 AM »
Should we all commit to supporting Thornsberry in the next election, if he were to step up to the plate now?
It's for sure we won't support him if he doesn't.

watson

  • Guest
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #54 on: April 08, 2007, 01:32:09 AM »
JB, if you are here have you found any grants that we qualify for for the county yet.....

Offline Lepard LLC

  • Activist
  • Administrator
  • ***************
  • Posts: 6215
  • Karma: +2241359/-8
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #55 on: April 08, 2007, 01:33:09 AM »
Every time I walk by a can of WD40 I think about the law enforcement tax. Today I bought the can. Get it?

WBT

  • Guest
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #56 on: April 08, 2007, 01:36:08 AM »
watson, the county will be lucky to stay in the black this year. If they had the extra money, they would give it. It isn't there.
I agree with you watson, I really do. But, it will take two commissioners to vote to put it on the ballot. I don't know how to get that.
Tell me what it would take to impeach or recall Ransdall or Dennis T. then Gary.
That seems like a much better idea anyway.
 Gary

watson

  • Guest
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #57 on: April 08, 2007, 01:39:10 AM »
Man, has this ever changed. I have been the one saying for a long time that we need to work with the commissioners to try and do this with respect and common courtesy. I am the one who has been against the badmouthing and negative statements on here. I have made suggestion after suggestion, that is usually ignored (except by Rick). So today, I thought Rick was talking about a petition to try and persuade the commissioners to put it on the ballot. I misunderstood what he meant. I am not speaking for the commissioners at all.  



What has changed......I have always been for putting it on the ballot for the commissioners to vote on....I am the one that was attending meetings for awhile and listening to the meetings and trying to ask questions.....I do not hate the commissioners but I do not understand why all those men cannot come up with a compromise solution to this problem....that is what I do not understand......it does not take a rocket scientist to come up with a solution to make everyone happy now if there is one bad apple that absolutely refuses to try to bend to help the county then that one person would have to explain to the public why he will not bend especially since he is supposed to be supporting the county.....I have always been for talking and solving this problem.....so what are you talking about when you say Man has this changed......explain in my terms please..... I am not against you either I want to understand.....

watson

  • Guest
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #58 on: April 08, 2007, 01:42:00 AM »
Rick can you help me....maybe he doesn't understand me....WBT maybe you can explain to him.....maybe my words are just not the right words or something.....

watson

  • Guest
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #59 on: April 08, 2007, 01:46:09 AM »
Everytime I have asked you for an explanation you avoid me or change the subject.....I am a citizen in this county also and I am like the ordinary county citizen and want answers...Yes I do have a little more education than most citizens and I do understand a little bit more....but that should not stop you from explaining things for people who are out there wanting to understand and with you being a commissioner before you should be able to explain exactly what they are facing and why maybe they might be afraid to do this.....other businesses maybe putting the squeeze on them.....friends they know.....what......