Options exist in city annex proposal
read more recent story comments Reader comments| jimenicholls2 Tuesday, July 3, 2012: 12:51 pm More from jimenicholls2  | “it’s to everyone’s collective benefit.” it would be better to lighten the load on those paying taxes.” SOCIALIST DRIVEL! |
| jimenicholls2 Tuesday, July 3, 2012: 12:56 pm More from jimenicholls2 | If this annexation goes through, this mayor and council will forever be known as the "big government, higher taxes, anti-liberty" group, I will make sure of it. On those grounds, they will, for the most part, be voted out next election day. Billboards, signs, trailers will be adorned with your names and what you voted, either yes or no, for the world to see. Your moral character will be naked for all of us to see when you vote. So, think twice. |
| Moose 65 Tuesday, July 3, 2012: 6:56 pm More from Moose 65 | I don't think they can see the hand writing on the wall. NO ANNEXATION... Of course they never will |
| outsider Tuesday, July 3, 2012: 8:05 pm More from outsider | These options seem like the mayor and council simply trying to appease the people being annexed with a short term solution for their (Mayor Deckard, City Council) benefit. Any reasonable person should be able to see right through their tactics. The "lock box" idea is great for the people who are being annexed, but what about those who had to pay extra so that this work begins? By appealing to one group you are forgetting the other. With the current economic situation the last thing anyone whose annual income puts them in the middle class or lower needs is higher taxes. "The mayor said neither comments nor questions would be heard from the public at Monday’s meeting." Why? Are you choosing to ignore the public that elected you into your position? Are you tired of hearing the criticism of your plans? Why, Mayor Deckard, are you ignoring the residents whom you are directly affecting with your grand plans? “The city is in reasonably good financial shape,” Seever said. “This is not a money grab, but it would be better to lighten the load on those paying taxes.” I, like most modern Americans am very skeptical. If the Mayor, City Council, and Mary Lou Peden can provide documentation publicly supporting this statement, I'm sure that everyone would love to see it. |
| jeanne Wednesday, July 4, 2012: 12:30 am More from jeanne | I agree, the mayor was trying to make it sound like a good thing for us to be annexed. It's easy to say the city is not in trouble, where's the proof? Should we just take the mayors word for it, we all know he would never lie. Since when do we have to pay to drive on city streets ? Do the people from the city never drive on county roads, we pay taxes and gas taxes wheel taxes, school taxes.The mayor seems to thank we are getting a free ride.I thank they made a little slip up last when they said the bigger the city is, the more money they get from the state goverment, so lets see ,it's not a money grap, they just get our tax money, plus more goverment money, just what would you call that? Perhaps the mayor could set up toll booths, and when people from the county drive on the city streets we could pay a toll, we want to make sure we pay our fair share. |
| Moose 65 Wednesday, July 4, 2012: 7:48 am More from Moose 65 | Are we looking at Chicago style Politics? One side of the mouth sounds good and then after the election you find it was the opposite. I still believe this area is not going to grow until I 69 is coming up the highway. Then it may not as there are a lot of empty buildings in the Plainfield area and around Indianapolis area that need filled. They are also closer to I-65, I-74 and I-70. Why would you build here? Maybe Lowe's or Home Depot but how many people would they employ and what taxes would they pay? Remember Lowes did look here and backed out, why? From a business stand point it doesn't smell good and from manufacturing even worse. If I was to start a medium size business I would go towards Indianapolis or Bloomington and Martinsville would be a blink in the eye as I drive by. My opinion. |
| To The Point Wednesday, July 4, 2012: 8:09 am More from To The Point | To Jeanne: Perhaps you're off your medications, or maybe your prescription has run out...but, I was at the same meeting and somehow, I didn't hear the Mayor giving any opinion on the annexation. What I did hear him say....were statements of fact to correct some of the "untruthful" statements being made by you and others regarding erroneous comments made about "money grab"..."city in financial problems"..."taking land by Eminent Domain"...."secret meetings"..."power grab", etc. The Mayor also asked the Council if any of this was true, he also asked the Council if they were having secret meetings that he was not aware of? He also asked the Council if they had ever entertained the idea of taking Land by Eminent Domain. And, if you remember, the Council Members stated "NO"...and, Councilman Bowlen even commented that it was Illegal. Remember? He also asked the Clerk-Treasurer (Mary Lou Peden) about the financial condition of the City, to which she acknowledged there were no problems. Jeanne, which part do you really not understand? The Mayor does not vote on these matters....the Mayor does not spend the money by himself or write the checks.. To be such a bitter person, your life must be most miserable. If I were the Mayor, and if annexation should be passed, I believe I would try to not include your property because you would probably be a most unhappy "customer" to deal with. Just sayin'..... |
| To The Point Wednesday, July 4, 2012: 8:29 am More from To The Point | Oh Jeanne: By the way...since the financial records of the City of Martinsville are kept and maintained at the City Clerk-Treasurer's Office (Mary Lou Peden)...and, since these records are open and available to the "Public", and since you asked the Mayor to give proof of the financial condition....why don't you go to the Clerk-Treasurer's Office and check these things out? Then, you could report the facts to the rest of us. |
| outsider Wednesday, July 4, 2012: 11:05 am More from outsider | Remember simple math subtract the TIF loans and interest the real bottom line number will appear.Loans are not ours until they are paid in full.Our city leaders tend to borrow money to keep the books in the black now how will they pay! HIGHER TAXES,ANNEXATION you tell me. Mayor Deckard is confident that the annexation will happen confidence is something you have before you do a really stupid act. Holloway you will not change his mind he has 1.5 million reasons not to.This administration will leave office a legacy and most definitely will top Jimmy G in our city's history book and that I would not want. |
| MarkMcDaniel Wednesday, July 4, 2012: 1:23 pm More from MarkMcDaniel | "To The Point" Tina Chaffee, OK Tina we get it, you are the City's cheerleader and my question is are you off your meds? You must be, anyone who would attend every city meeting for the last 12 years must have the most empty life in central Indiana. What do you get out of those public meetings where you are not allowed to speak? Sounds like a great way to spend an evening. Most of the rest of us are not into idol worship. Unfortunately you are one of only three stooges the City can find to defend their actions so we will probably hear more of your dribble. Not to mention that you don't even live in the annexed area. |
| GregBader Wednesday, July 4, 2012: 4:49 pm More from GregBader | The un honorable mayor said "neither comments nor questions would be heard from the public at Monday’s meeting". How convenient to not field questions from the taxpayers. What is this? Iraq, Syria, or Saudi Arabia? Mr. Mayor, why do you not want to hear questions from the public when you propose new ways to fleece the people? Why no questions? The people know you are trying to trick them. Quit blowing smoke up our butts with the "lockbox" stuff. The only thing that a lockbox proves is that this IS all about money and you are just willing to wait a couple years to get our money. The city will still get the money so a lockbox is nothing but a smokescreen for "we can out wait you". |
| GregBader Wednesday, July 4, 2012: 4:53 pm More from GregBader | To the point, Read closer what Eric said. He said it is illegal for the city to take "business property" thru eminent domain. FYI, it is NOT illegal for them to take private property,ie your home, then develop it. They can either then lease it to a business or sell it to a business. You need to read what he said, analyze it , and then interpret what he said, not what you want to hear. |
| 45 comments found | |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Most Recent | Next |
Add a comment
Posting comments on this web site requires you to be logged in. • Create your account• Log in to your account
» more
TABLE OF CONTENTS »
NEWS
Today
Obituaries
Local
Police
Court news
Weather
Business
Property transfers
Area salaries & stats
Education
State
Nation/World
Photo galleries
Videos
SPORTS
Sports
MD-T sports
IU sports blog
Martinsville
Mooresville
Decatur Central
Eminence
Indian Creek
Monrovia
Tabernacle Christian
Fantasy racing league
BLOGS
All blogs
Quit Smoking...Do It
Sci-Fi Sojourns
The Hoosier Scoop
Hoosier Wine Cellar
Gaming Guru
Mellenblog
