Quoted from 147

And you just came from church.  Nice.

Actually, I was just on my way to church when I posted that ... but my sentiments haven't changed since
I got back home.

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

The real property records don't tell the whole story.   In fact, the information is outdated.
You don't know my personal finances  ... and if you continue to make public lies about them ...
I will be very happy to sue you back to the Stone Ages.  
You and your kind ... pretend to be the advocates of American democracy .. but you are a bunch
of ignorant elitists who practice the politics of personal destruction on persons who dare to
challenge you.
I will not stop challenging you and your kind.

              I would not say that I or my kind are elitist at all.  I and my kind believe the net cost to Rotterdam residents will be dramatically less than the taxing district with a pre-selected provider which is NOT Democratic in any form or fashion.  It is not like the so called "elitists" will enjoy ambulance service, and the non-elitists will do wiithout.  That is the scare tactic you and your kind promote.  Let the health insurance companies pay the cost, and if there is a co-pay, so be it.  It is an abuse of power, and unethical to force a tax to support something that is being offered.  Most Rotterdam residents may never need an ambulance, and you want them to pay for those who do when this service is covered under health insurance.  How democratic is/was it for the Town Board to redistribute 100's of thousands of tax payer dollars to support REMS when alternatives were available?  I and my kind are much more fiscally responsible with other people's money, that's all.

              Let you, or anyone, present a legitimate argument for the tax district over privatization.  We see this as a redistribution of wealth especially since most seniors have a substantial reduction in their property taxes alreaady that the rest of the Town property owners are covering.  I, the elitists, and the Forum await . . . . .  

Just thinking about this some more.

One property owner, gets one vote. Is that "PER property" - or one vote in total?

Scenario. I'm a major developer in town. I own apartment buildings, commercial properties (which may contain multiple buildings and thus, different tax map/bills).  Do I now get one vote per property/tax bill?  Could one developer, let's say Larned, Riitano or Iovinello (as examples) now sway the vote by filing 6 - 10 - 20 votes total - thus leading to a "rigged" or "fixed" (as RS likes to call it) vote?

According to what I've seen by the rest of us armchair lawyers here and various discussions, it's ONE vote for EACH property/tax bill.  If it's one vote TOTAL, how will that be enforced?

Has anyone actually seen the official criteria or outline of who will be allowed to vote, location and announcement yet? If so, where is it? Where can it be obtained?

Quoted from 147

Just thinking about this some more.

One property owner, gets one vote. Is that "PER property" - or one vote in total?

Scenario. I'm a major developer in town. I own apartment buildings, commercial properties (which may contain multiple buildings and thus, different tax map/bills).  Do I now get one vote per property/tax bill?  Could one developer, let's say Larned, Riitano or Iovinello (as examples) now sway the vote by filing 6 - 10 - 20 votes total - thus leading to a "rigged" or "fixed" (as RS likes to call it) vote?

According to what I've seen by the rest of us armchair lawyers here and various discussions, it's ONE vote for EACH property/tax bill.  If it's one vote TOTAL, how will that be enforced?

Has anyone actually seen the official criteria or outline of who will be allowed to vote, location and announcement yet? If so, where is it? Where can it be obtained?

     It hasn't been publicized yet.  The last I heard was it was a vote for every property owner on the tax roll.  If a parcel has multiple "owners" they apparently all get a vote.  You points are wel ltaken, What is the quality control on people that can legally vote, and how do you monitor how many times they vote?
At this juncture probably the Town attorney would have to clarify these issues.

Interesting - so if two people showed up to vote, a homeowner and a 2 property developer, the election could be 2-1, in favor of that particular persons interests.

Talk about corrupt?  I thought there was going to be transparency. Guess not.

Guess we'll have to sit back and take it. (NOT!)

Quoted from 147

Interesting - so if two people showed up to vote, a homeowner and a 2 property developer, the election could be 2-1, in favor of that particular persons interests.

Talk about corrupt?  I thought there was going to be transparency. Guess not.

Guess we'll have to sit back and take it. (NOT!)

Actually, Gadfly probably has the inside track on how the vote will be structured.  Maybe if Gadfly reads this, or gets a private message from someone, Gadfly might weigh in on this subject.

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

The real property records don't tell the whole story.   In fact, the information is outdated.
You don't know my personal finances  ... and if you continue to make public lies about them ...
I will be very happy to sue you back to the Stone Ages.  
You and your kind ... pretend to be the advocates of American democracy .. but you are a bunch
of ignorant elitists who practice the politics of personal destruction on persons who dare to
challenge you.
I will not stop challenging you and your kind.

Don't worry Ron, I will go to Town Hall and FOIL for property you supposedly own AND pay taxes
on.  Then you can put your mind to rest and you won't have to threatenen to file any law suits.
I will also send that information along to the Gazette and spotlight.

Quoted from AVON

              I would not say that I or my kind are elitist at all.  I and my kind believe the net cost to Rotterdam residents will be dramatically less than the taxing district with a pre-selected provider which is NOT Democratic in any form or fashion.  It is not like the so called "elitists" will enjoy ambulance service, and the non-elitists will do wiithout.  That is the scare tactic you and your kind promote.  Let the health insurance companies pay the cost, and if there is a co-pay, so be it.  It is an abuse of power, and unethical to force a tax to support something that is being offered.  Most Rotterdam residents may never need an ambulance, and you want them to pay for those who do when this service is covered under health insurance.  How democratic is/was it for the Town Board to redistribute 100's of thousands of tax payer dollars to support REMS when alternatives were available?  I and my kind are much more fiscally responsible with other people's money, that's all.

              Let you, or anyone, present a legitimate argument for the tax district over privatization.  We see this as a redistribution of wealth especially since most seniors have a substantial reduction in their property taxes alreaady that the rest of the Town property owners are covering.  I, the elitists, and the Forum await . . . . .  

I just want to give you a GREAT BIG-------CHA-CHING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Quoted from marymagdelene1234

Don't worry Ron, I will go to Town Hall and FOIL for property you supposedly own AND pay taxes
on.  Then you can put your mind to rest and you won't have to threatenen to file any law suits.
I will also send that information along to the Gazette and spotlight.

you would have to know which town to foil in

and as for helping pay the taxes on family property here ... you can't foil for personal banking records

life saving ambulance service via BLS is a lie.....just like 'memory-care' facilities are..........

The private ambulance service can not promise more that 1 ambulance  24/7/365.

IF you can provide a 100% guarantee -- that we will never have a tragedy like the one in Albany ..where
a child died because the private ambulance services vehicles were ALL  miles away .... IF you can
provide that guarantee.    I would consider changing my mind on the ambulance tax district.

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

The private ambulance service can not promise more that 1 ambulance  24/7/365.

IF you can provide a 100% guarantee -- that we will never have a tragedy like the one in Albany ..where
a child died because the private ambulance services vehicles were ALL  miles away .... IF you can
provide that guarantee.    I would consider changing my mind on the ambulance tax district.

Can REMS make that promise?

It's just a matter of time. Statistics.

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

The private ambulance service can not promise more that 1 ambulance  24/7/365.

IF you can provide a 100% guarantee -- that we will never have a tragedy like the one in Albany ..where
a child died because the private ambulance services vehicles were ALL  miles away .... IF you can
provide that guarantee.    I would consider changing my mind on the ambulance tax district.

There will ALWAYS be a tragedy.....I dont care where you live or who you are.......they cant promise more than 1 NOW......dont
tell half truths......maybe Princetown would like to bone-up for an ambulance service.....why are their taxes so low? why why why?????

Quoted from senders

There will ALWAYS be a tragedy.....I dont care where you live or who you are.......they cant promise more than 1 NOW......dont
tell half truths......maybe Princetown would like to bone-up for an ambulance service.....why are their taxes so low? why why why?????

Princetown doesn't have a police department ... most of the town doesn't have public water or public
sewers.
Princetown is basically .. offering the bare minimum levelof government required by law ...