And by the way, infomration that YOU might think is "your private business," if it is public records, then sorry, it is NOT your "private business"     It doesn't take a rocket scientist to perform mathematical calculations based on official public records and come facts that you might not like but can't deny

Quoted from mikechristine1

Since you refuse to provide proof, and proof has not been found by going to the FBI website, then obviously the facts are that you are making it up.  If you want to be believed, then provide proof of the thiings you say.

We have a thread about the pension padding in Schenectady.  You have the nerve to post on it but ABSOTELY REFUSE to state your opinion.    
  

Also, what about the homebound people who are opposed to this, are they going to be given abentee ballots?  How about the military people, are they to be given military ballots?   Or are the these two groups of people going to be denied their right to vote?

It was from the FBI website -- the data that I gave was accurate.   I am not going to argue that point any
further.

As for the pension padding - I only posted AFTER you ... you in particular .. kept accusing me of supporting it and even at one point insinuating I was a part of it.     I don't know all the details about the issue ... from
what I have read about it in the Gazette ...  it apparently is a practice that has happened a number of timesin the past and by at least 2 previous mayors  --  I have never supported "pension padding"  in any of its
various manifestations.  

As for the issue of absentee ballots -- I have been on the record publicly ... at town board meetings ..
asking why they were not made available.    If you recall, the town attorney at the time said that it was not possible .. but I checked further .. and he admitted that it was possible but that it required " a lot of work
on our end"   --- and that the individuals would have to come down to town hall to request the absentee
ballot.     The first part of his response was unacceptable to me -- a little extra work to ensure full
participation in a democracy is not too much to ask.     The second part of his response .. the going down to
town hall to request the absentee ballot ... is unfortunately the way it would have to be done ... the whole
process is overseen at the town-level and NOT at the County Board of Elections.

I will go one step further in saying .. I think the town should have allowed ALL registered voters in the town
to vote -- and not just property owners.    The argument against it -- was whether the ambulance district is more like voting for a fire district or more like voting for a water or sewer district.     Mr. Salamone argued
quite eloquently that it was more like voting for a fire district --- thus allowing ALL registered voters the
right to vote.   The town attorney believed it was more like voting for a sewer or water district and wanted to
avoid a possible legal challenge.       Bottom line --- my position ... I would rather have erred on the side of
allowing MORE people to vote and dealing with a legal challenge later on -- when a good argument could be
made to support the reasoning for EXPANDING the definition of those allowed to vote.   Again, it is always
better to err on the side of MORE democracy than on the side of LESS democracy.

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

As for the issue of absentee ballots -- I have been on the record publicly ... at town board meetings ..
asking why they were not made available.    If you recall, the town attorney at the time said that it was not possible .. but I checked further .. and he admitted that it was possible but that it required " a lot of work
on our end"   --- and that the individuals would have to come down to town hall to request the absentee
ballot.     The first part of his response was unacceptable to me -- a little extra work to ensure full
participation in a democracy is not too much to ask.     The second part of his response .. the going down to
town hall to request the absentee ballot ... is unfortunately the way it would have to be done ... the whole
process is overseen at the town-level and NOT at the County Board of Elections.

I will go one step further in saying .. I think the town should have allowed ALL registered voters in the town
to vote -- and not just property owners.    The argument against it -- was whether the ambulance district is more like voting for a fire district or more like voting for a water or sewer district.     Mr. Salamone argued
quite eloquently that it was more like voting for a fire district --- thus allowing ALL registered voters the
right to vote.   The town attorney believed it was more like voting for a sewer or water district and wanted to
avoid a possible legal challenge.       Bottom line --- my position ... I would rather have erred on the side of
allowing MORE people to vote and dealing with a legal challenge later on -- when a good argument could be
made to support the reasoning for EXPANDING the definition of those allowed to vote.   Again, it is always
better to err on the side of MORE democracy than on the side of LESS democracy.

The Town Attorney is a liar...and you never had to check "further", as the absentee ballots were originally promised when the first
vote was scheduled...already aware of the work involved...until people unexpectedly started to actually ask for them...and Doogie
Howser yanked them at the eleventh hour. Liccardi is simply picking up Doogie's part in this scheme, in addition to his own.

So there was nothing to "admit"...except the real reason he doesn't want to be bothered qualifying voters for absentees...and
the real reason he conveniently considers this to be more like a water district and claims to be avoiding legal challenges that would
not happen...which is that he is utilizing every means conceivable to suppress oppostion turnout to the greatest extent possible.

And while he will never admit THAT...these actions, among others, are conducive to a rigged vote.

Quoted from gadfly

The Town Attorney is a liar...and you never had to check "further", as the absentee ballots were originally promised when the first
vote was scheduled...already aware of the work involved...until people unexpectedly started to actually ask for them...and Doogie
Howser yanked them at the eleventh hour. Liccardi is simply picking up Doogie's part in this scheme, in addition to his own.

I most certainly DID check it out further ... because I did not believe what I was told .. and I should have
said by the Deputy Town Attorney earlier.

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

Again -- you and your ilk expose yourself for what you are ... a bunch of elitists who look down on the
average person.    Making that comment that supporters of the tax district drink septic water --- is all
the evidence I need to prove that you and your ilk are a bunch of totalitarian elitists.

BTW ---- if the folks have to wait an EXTRA 10 to 15 minutes for Mohawk to respond from God knows where
there ambulances will be --- IT WILL MAKE A DIFFERENCE  ---   an extra 10 to 15 minute response time
has cost lives in the past and would do so in the future.
Obviously, you know NOTHING about health or medicine by making such a foolish comment that an extra
10 to 15 minutes doesn't  matter.

I am an average person with reasonable logic. I am an average person who pays for what they want/need. The scare tactics of the
elected elitists is astounding. BTW I am a nurse and there is no cure for fear. And for the elected elitists to use it as a tool against the
ignorant,,,,,,well shame shame shame on them. Going around setting up 'just in case'  crap and then using it at the election
podium is pure selfishness......they dont see past the end of their noses or the horizon past their fences....hence the election of FDG and
posse.......

Quoted Text

Rotterdam gears up for tax district vote
REMS holding series of informational forums
Thursday, December 2, 2010
By Justin Mason (Contact)
Gazette Reporter


ROTTERDAM — It’s campaign season again in Rotterdam.
Makeshift billboards are popping up at area intersections along with campaign signs on lawns. Glossy fliers are turning up in area mailboxes and forums are being hosted around town.
The town is preparing for another contentious vote, just four weeks after November’s general election. Only this time, residents will be choosing whether to adopt a tax district to support Rotterdam Emergency Medical Services Inc., the town’s not-for-profit ambulance service................>>>>...............>>>>...............http://www.dailygazette.com/news/2010/dec/02/1202_rems/

Quoted Text

Unwise to create taxing district for nonprofit

    Rotterdam has vote Dec. 14 over the formation of an ambulance taxing district. Rotterdam Emergency Medical Services (REMS) would be the designated ambulance service if this vote passes.
    My concern is with forming a taxing district for a nonprofit company — a nonprofit that charges a fee for the service they provide.
    In contrast, our town fire, water and sewer services have taxing districts, funded by the residents, for the purpose of supporting the basic necessities for future growth and public health and safety. These taxing districts fund the infrastructure and maintenance costs that allow these services to operate — like sewer lines, sewer treatment, water mains, water towers and fire hydrants. These town services are not billed per use, but rather are part of the permanent infrastructure for all residents to use.
    Creating a taxing district for a nonprofit ambulance service that charges fees for their service places them in the same category as any other nonprofi t, such as Proctors, Boys and Girls Club or the YMCA. If, in the future, these nonprofits begin going through fi nancial difficulty due to mismanagement, are we going to form a permanent taxing district for them as well? I would hope not.
I fully support our community’s notfor-profits and appreciate the services they provide. But I see this vote as being unnecessary and setting a dangerous precedent re the formation of taxing districts. For the future prosperity of the town, this should be [rejected].

JOANN SCHROM
Rotterdam

http://www.dailygazette.net/De.....r01303&AppName=1

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

I most certainly DID check it out further ... because I did not believe what I was told .. and I should have
said by the Deputy Town Attorney earlier.

There was nothing to "check out"...the first question asked when the first vote was scheduled was posed by Tracie Donovan who
asked if absentee ballots would be available, to which they replied "yes"...and I should have clarified that BOTH are liars.

Ms DiLeva is right about the "letter" drafted by Liccardi...it would be laughable if it weren't so grossly and intentionally misleading...calling the vote
an "election"...telling people what the "estimated" tax will be when it can be calculated EXACTLY simply by telling them the truth...which is EXACTLY
ten cents per thousand of assessed property value. I wouldn't be surprised if that is also intentional...then Liccardi will blame the Board for not
sending it out at all because they couldn't agree on content...knowing that no informed, honest person would.

Nikki is full of CRAP!  And I will leave it at that!

Quoted from 778

Nikki is full of CRAP!  And I will leave it at that!

How so? Did you see the kindergarteten level letter and approve of its deceptive statements? Or are you just leaving it "at that"
because you have no idea of its content? Or is it just an empty, off-the-cuff anti-DiLeva statement?

Quoted from gadfly

There was nothing to "check out"...the first question asked when the first vote was scheduled was posed by Tracie Donovan who
asked if absentee ballots would be available, to which they replied "yes"...and I should have clarified that BOTH are liars.

I am not going to argue with you about what I DID CHECK OUT -- I know because I had the
conversation  -- and you were NOT there .. and I did check out the issue .. and again YOU WERE NOT THERE.
The fact is that they went back and forth on several issues -- absentee ballots, who could and who could not
vote, how many polling places, etc.

DiLeva for Supervisor in the next election!

Nikki had every opportunity to craft a letter.  She declined.  She is full of more CRAP now than my last post!

once the vote is over ... I guess we won't have anything left to discuss