Quoted from 147

MR & MRS? sorry, 1 vote, total even tho both incomes go to pay the tax bills

      MT, are you sure on this?  I thought that every owner of record was eligible to vote, but you could only vote once if you owned multiple properties.  Some properties are in "trust" to children, and all of their names are on the deed.  I thought that everyone could vote that is legally recorded as an owner.  No??

Quoted from AVON

      MT, are you sure on this?  I thought that every owner of record was eligible to vote, but you could only vote once if you owned multiple properties.  Some properties are in "trust" to children, and all of their names are on the deed.  I thought that everyone could vote that is legally recorded as an owner.  No??

Yes...that is correct.

Quoted from gadfly

Yes...that is correct.

        Gadfly, who is correct??

Who is correct ?  The people who support REMS and will vote YES on December 14.

I have received a copy of the mailer that the town is sending out.  This has been forwarded to the Admin to request that they post the 3 page PDF.  If anyone wants a copy of it, they can send me their e-mail address.  As far as who can vote, this is specifically in the letter:

Quoted Text

VOTER INFORMATION

Who May Vote:

Anyone who owns property within the Town of Rotterdam is eligible to vote in the special election.  If you are a co-owner of property, such as a husband and wife, joint tenants, or tenants in common on a property deed, then all property owners are entitled to a vote.  If you own more than one parcel of property, you are only eligible to vote once.

Corporations, partnerships, limited liability companies, and estates are entitled to vote through a designated agent.  A trustee may vote on behalf of a trust.  An entity that owns more than one parcel of property is only eligible to vote once.

               Thanks Kevin, that is how I understood it, but this still appears to be an evolving process!

Quoted from AVON

               Thanks Kevin, that is how I understood it, but this still appears to be an evolving process!

Not a problem, but that is the official statement being sent out, so I don't see how it can evolve any more (in that instance) over the next week and a half.

The letter, which was very well written, explains AGAIN what has been said all along.

I'm glad to see Tracy D and the local Republicans are protecting the elderly and homebound in Rotterdam.  I guess we should expect Gerard to request a postponement of the vote, backed up with a threat of a lawsuit, until a change in election rules are put in place to address these problems.  The Democrats don't care about our elderly in this democratic process.

Way to go Rotterdam Reps, boomer will be proud of ya!!!

Ron - you should be the poster child for FAILblog.

http://www.keepandshare.com/htm/file_sharing/file_hosting/free_private_pdf_hosting.php

All taxpayers should have the opportunity to vote on this referendum.  Absentee ballots should have been an option for anyone whether they be elderly or not.  There also should have been at least two more voting locations like Mohonasen and Schalmont schools to be fair to all residents.

The Tommasone administration would put out a newsletter a few times a year.  Why wasn't a newsletter with other important information for Rotterdam residents drafted?  Not everyone has access to computers and websites.  This certainly isn't a recent topic and there was plenty of time to provide the pros and cons to residents.  

I haven't received any information from the town officially on this referendum.  I read this forum, the town website and the newspaper and that's how I keep informed on what's happening in Rotterdam.

Quoted from huskyhowls

All taxpayers should have the opportunity to vote on this referendum.  Absentee ballots should have been an option for anyone whether they be elderly or not.  There also should have been at least two more  voting locations like Mohonasen and Schalmont schools to be fair to all residents.

When it comes to referendums on creating a new tax district -- the state law provides that only PROPERTY
OWNERS are allowed to vote   -- that is what happens when a tax district is being voted on for sewer and
water districts.   The Town Board can NOT change the state law --- so to keep arguing that all residents should
be able to vote is not a valid argument.

As for the number of polling places - I know that the cost of poll workers for the referendum is a cost that
town would have to bear and there is a question as to whether or not the two schools mentioned would
actually give permission for the polling places to be set up there.     As it is now -- for Primaries and General
elections .. a number of school districts no longer allow polling places to be located in their schools.

Quoted from huskyhowls
All taxpayers should have the opportunity to vote on this referendum.  Absentee ballots should have been an option for anyone whether they be elderly or not.  There also should have been at least two more  voting locations like Mohonasen and Schalmont schools to be fair to all residents.

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

When it comes to referendums on creating a new tax district -- the state law provides that only PROPERTY
OWNERS are allowed to vote   -- that is what happens when a tax district is being voted on for sewer and
water districts.   The Town Board can NOT change the state law --- so to keep arguing that all residents should
be able to vote is not a valid argument.

As for the number of polling places - I know that the cost of poll workers for the referendum is a cost that
town would have to bear and there is a question as to whether or not the two schools mentioned would
actually give permission for the polling places to be set up there.     As it is now -- for Primaries and General
elections .. a number of school districts no longer allow polling places to be located in their schools.

---

          I beleve you are to quick to pull the trigger.  I believe huskyhowls was inferring property owner taxpayers in his post.  They get it!

Thanks DVR, Okay, let me be clear, ALL property owning taxpayers.  If you pay property taxes in Rotterdam, then you should be able to vote.

Schalmont and Mohonasen are typically polling places.  I have volunteered for the school budget vote for a number of years at Mohonasen.  Would they have to be paid poll workers for a referendum?  

Seems like there needs to be some more issues resolved before this vote should proceed.  Why can't we table it for a few months?  I believe in our right to vote.  It seems like the opportunities for all property owning taxpayers are somewhat limiting.

Quoted Text

As for the number of polling places - I know that the cost of poll workers for the referendum is a cost that
town would have to bear and there is a question as to whether or not the two schools mentioned would
actually give permission for the polling places to be set up there.  

If the schools wouldn't grant permission, there are many other locations that could serve as polling places
including the Senior Center, the local fire stations, and churches.  Further, the cost of a few poll workers is
minimal.  The argument in defense of a single polling place is disingenuous.