| Author | Post |
|---|
EditorPS
Administrator
| Joined: | Oct 2nd, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 242 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |  |
|
Posted: Nov 18th, 2006 02:17 pm |
|
I stand corrected, and appreciate that being pointed out, Salty. Dwayne Crawford did not specifically say that he was blind copying dozens of Concerned Citizens, only that he was blind copying dozens of ???. My bad for assuming, though I believe if he were copying town council members and others who are not afraid to be known, he would not have felt the need to blind copy them.
With that said, I have edited my earlier post and apologize to any Concerned Citizens who were missed on the blind copy e-mail.
|
FatPappy
Member
| Joined: | Oct 25th, 2005 |
| Location: | Summerfield, USA |
| Posts: | 3245 |
| Status: |
Online
|
| Mana: |   |
|
Posted: Nov 18th, 2006 02:33 pm |
|
S. Smith wrote:
If I were considered a key member of a group, whether it be the Concerned Citizens or the Kiwanis or the PTA board, and one person was sending out information implying that it was being done for the entire group, I'd be furious.
I'd a least be concerned.
These are all interestin' questions that I'm curious to find out the answers to an' I'm glad y'all brought 'em up.
Besides who's zoomin' who, I'm concerned (no pun intended there) with the truth or accuracy of what whoever is saying. Ms Dunham, fer example, gets up there at the podium just about every month an' rattles off how the mayor is personally responsible fer ever'thang from the heartbreak o' psoriasis to the Lindburg kidnappin'. Sometimes I have no clue what she's talkin' about, but it gener'ly sounds bad. Yet we never, or rarely ever, hear any official response to her claims. I wish there was some way fer the council to publicly address her concerns an' put us out of her misery. She makes some pretty serious charges sometimes that I'm sure leave some lesser-informed people wonderin'.
They could prob'ly just sit down an' make a one-time list of answers an' post it on the wall. Since most of her charges seem to be the same each time it might be good fer a year or two.
____________________
How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four; calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.
--Abraham Lincoln
|
EditorPS
Administrator
| Joined: | Oct 2nd, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 242 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Nov 18th, 2006 02:47 pm |
|
Pappy,
I agreed wholeheartedly and think that it's time those of us who are concerned about the allegations of the Concerned Citizens send a formal request to the council that the allegations of the CCs be publicly addressed. There is no doubt that the people who do not watch the affairs of the town closely could be persuaded to believe that we are being governed by a majority representation of tax-spending, unethical, careless, unresponsive and incompetent group of individuals who are compelled to serve our town purely to meet their own personal and selfish interests. And furthermore, they could be persuaded, and based on the last election were persuaded to believe that the only hope we have of salvation is the two newest council members who are driven to serve so that they can represent the whole of the town's constituents and save us from demise. The Concerned Citizens speak loudly, if not accurately, and those who only tune in occasionally will hear their voices far above the quiet, and often silent majority.
Last edited on Nov 18th, 2006 02:49 pm by EditorPS
|
FatPappy
Member
| Joined: | Oct 25th, 2005 |
| Location: | Summerfield, USA |
| Posts: | 3245 |
| Status: |
Online
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Nov 18th, 2006 03:00 pm |
|
Skiddles wrote:
Presently my concerns with all of the website shenanigans are there are no checks and balances in place yet; the town can not have this happen again. Mr. Crawford has proven to me that he can not be trusted now to do the website update.
Howdy, Skiddles. Pappy strongly agrees! Crawford's actions have shown that he is perfectly comfortable with pushin' our trust under the bus if it gets in his way. The town website is there for all the people an' the authenticity an' accuracy of the information on it MUST be beyond question, with allowances fer the occassional typo an' such.
An' furthermore, Monsewer Crawford lists Peterson as the source of much of his "inside" information and the interpretation of its significance. If that's true, then I think he needs to branch out a little an' maybe, you know, talk to another person now an' then.
____________________
How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four; calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.
--Abraham Lincoln
|
S. Smith
Moderator
|
Posted: Nov 18th, 2006 03:07 pm |
|
FatPappy wrote: Ms Dunham, fer example, gets up there at the podium just about every month an' rattles off how the mayor is personally responsible fer ever'thang from the heartbreak o' psoriasis to the Lindburg kidnappin'. Sometimes I have no clue what she's talkin' about, but it gener'ly sounds bad. Yet we never, or rarely ever, hear any official response to her claims. I wish there was some way fer the council to publicly address her concerns an' put us out of her misery.
The town attorney has given his opinion of Ms. Strickland's abuse of power against the mayor at two meetings now. According to attorney Bill Hill, Mark Brown did not abuse his office by asking staff to look into a Planned Unit Development (PUD) ordinance. Why the town would spend money at something like $125 an hour to have Mr. Hill put that in writing to satisfy Ms. Dunham is beyond me. She can listen to the tape of the meeting -- which could easily be supplied by Mr. Crawford and not even bother town staff.
I am not aware of Mark Brown making any "multi-million dollar decisions" on behalf of the town regarding an amphitheater -- which is one of Ms. Dunham's most recent allegations. If I learn of anything such as this, I will report on it immediately. I can say, however, that I was at a public meeting (the park meeting on Nov. 4) in which an overwhelming amount of the people there voted in favor of some kind of outdoor meeting area, amphitheater, etc. Everyone who attended that meeting received the results of it via e-mail from the PTCOG, and I can produce it if anyone is interested in seeing it.
Ms. Dunham also charged council members with having an illegal meeting because 4 of them were at that park meeting and it was not advertised as a public meeting. However, I did not witness Mark Brown, Bob Williams, Becky Strickland or Dwayne Crawford conducting any town business at that meeting -- in fact, I didn't even see them or even the 3 of them that can vote together talking at any point (although I admit it could have happened since I wasn't with them at all times). If Ms. Dunham or any of the Concerned Citizens were so concerned about that, it seems that Strickland and/or Crawford could have left at any time.
Regarding abuse of power, I'm wondering if Crawford should be accused of that very thing by posting the historical document on the town Web site. This is merely a question, because I didn't see it and understand it has now been removed. If it was in a place where it clearly says it was a historical document, and if in fact it was the version that was mailed out to citizens, I have no issue. But if it was posted on the front page of the town's Web site, what was the purpose in that? Since it touts the "no services, no taxes" mantra that has been embraced by the Concerned Citizens, it seems to me as if it were done for nothing other than purely political purposes -- and has no business being posted there in that manner.
If I were a citizen of Summerfield (which I admit I'm not, although it is my "adopted" town since I regularly report on it), I'd be demanding some answers at a public meeting on this one. I'd also likely demand that one council member not be allowed to decide what goes on the Web site -- that should either go before the council (typically a waste of their time, but something that may have to be done now) or it should be done by town staff, who can at least monitor items and have the discretion of asking for a concensus from the council before allowing something to be posted that might be controversial. I believe someone mentioned the League of Municipalities do this, but I don't think it should be left up to someone who is not familiar with the goings-on in the town.
Sorry for the length of this post -- I got wound up!
|
FatPappy
Member
| Joined: | Oct 25th, 2005 |
| Location: | Summerfield, USA |
| Posts: | 3245 |
| Status: |
Online
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Nov 18th, 2006 03:09 pm |
|
EditorPS wrote:
Pappy,
I agreed wholeheartedly and think that it's time those of us who are concerned about the allegations of the Concerned Citizens send a formal request to the council that the allegations of the CCs be publicly addressed.
You're right. It's time.
Mebbe we should start with a list of what their allegations actually are an' then present that to the council at the next meetin'. Or is there a better way to go about it?
____________________
How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four; calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.
--Abraham Lincoln
|
Skiddles
Member
| Joined: | Nov 4th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 622 |
| Status: |
Online
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Nov 18th, 2006 03:18 pm |
|
FatPappy wrote: An' furthermore, Monsewer Crawford lists Peterson as the source of much of his "inside" information and the interpretation of its significance. If that's true, then I think he needs to branch out a little an' maybe, you know, talk to another person now an' then.
I know I get a bit claustrophobic standing in a box for a long time, looking at the same side of things... all of the time. Dwayne may need to step out of his box, fur' sure Pappy, and look at the box from the outside in..... It works for me.
|
FatPappy
Member
| Joined: | Oct 25th, 2005 |
| Location: | Summerfield, USA |
| Posts: | 3245 |
| Status: |
Online
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Nov 18th, 2006 03:20 pm |
|
Much obliged fer puttin' it in perspective, Sandra. The forum's great, but we need to go beyond it sometimes.
We'll work on it.
____________________
How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four; calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.
--Abraham Lincoln
|
Steve Adkins
Member
| Joined: | Oct 14th, 2005 |
| Location: | Summerfield |
| Posts: | 1669 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Nov 18th, 2006 04:03 pm |
|
S. Smith wrote: Ms. Dunham also charged council members with having an illegal meeting because 4 of them were at that park meeting and it was not advertised as a public meeting. However, I did not witness Mark Brown, Bob Williams, Becky Strickland or Dwayne Crawford conducting any town business at that meeting -- in fact, I didn't even see them or even the 3 of them that can vote together talking at any point (although I admit it could have happened since I wasn't with them at all times). If Ms. Dunham or any of the Concerned Citizens were so concerned about that, it seems that Strickland and/or Crawford could have left at any time.
Oh this is a dandy.
So by being present at a meeting where they can interface with their constituents (like elected officials are supposed to do), they are doing something illegal? By listening to what is said in the community by the people they represent, they're doing something illegal?
By all shopping at food lion at the same time by mistake, they are doing something illegal?
By driving thru the McDonalds drive thru at the same time, so they're all on McDonalds property at the same time, they're doing something illegal?
How ridiculous an argument can someone dream up?????
I'm with Patti - CONCERNED CITIZENS (who the heck ever you are in the BCC world), COME OUT OF THE CLOSET.
Last edited on Nov 18th, 2006 04:12 pm by Steve Adkins
|
FatPappy
Member
| Joined: | Oct 25th, 2005 |
| Location: | Summerfield, USA |
| Posts: | 3245 |
| Status: |
Online
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Nov 18th, 2006 06:53 pm |
|
Which is the greater sin?
Concealin' one's identity, but bein' honest with one's opinions...
OR
Bein' open about one's identity, but bein' dishonest about what one says?
I vote for the latter.
(Bein' as how I got a quorum o' Pappies with me, I'll call it a unanomous vote at a legal meetin' o' the minds.)
____________________
How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four; calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.
--Abraham Lincoln
|
FatPappy
Member
| Joined: | Oct 25th, 2005 |
| Location: | Summerfield, USA |
| Posts: | 3245 |
| Status: |
Online
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Nov 18th, 2006 07:52 pm |
|
Pappy risked a brown recluse spidey bite in order to dig out my copy o' that infamous town incorporation memo from 1996. I ain't sure what version it is, but the first "fact" you come to under the heading FACTS TO CONSIDER says:
• The town of Summerfield will levy NO TAXES. In fact, the town charter requires a public vote for taxes above twenty cents. The town will receive enough income that taxes will not be required.
Well, now. We talked about this earlier, but I can't get over it. This is what Crawford sold his public trust for so he could post it on the town website? This?! Why do you think this is so incriminating? Dang, Crawford, have you read this? Look what it says.
The town will levy no taxes, yes, but right there in the very next sentence it says BUT we can levy up to 20 cents witout a vote! So we can levy taxes if the situation calls for it! It also says in the next sentence that taxes won't be necessary because the town will receive enough income! It's right there in the document you "revealed"! Why do you think this is so damaging?
Those sentences are under the FACTS TO CONSIDER heading. Are they in fact facts? Let's look this calf over...
The first sentence is not really a fact but a PREDICTION based on the suppositions and circumstances of the time. That sentence does not appear in the town charter, by the way.
The second is a fact; it does appear in the town charter.
The last sentence--not a fact, again it's a prediction based on supposition and circumstances. Also not in the town charter.
Why did you think "revealing" this would devastate us? Your thinking doesn't make sense! You did serious damage to your credibility for NOTHING!
____________________
How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four; calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.
--Abraham Lincoln
|
Waytago
Member
| Joined: | Jan 24th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 175 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Nov 18th, 2006 09:08 pm |
|
FatPappy wrote: Why did you think "revealing" this would devastate us? Your thinking doesn't make sense! You did serious damage to your credibility for NOTHING!
A person has to HAVE some credibility in order to damage it.
|
SaltyDog
Member
| Joined: | Oct 24th, 2005 |
| Location: | Summerfield |
| Posts: | 58 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Nov 19th, 2006 12:25 am |
|
Hmmmm....That Dwayne sure has snookered us here on the forum
He thinks we want to pay taxes - Wrong - We just think there are some services that our town should provide and we are willing to pay for them.
He thinks we want to suppress a historical town document - Wrong - We question his personal authority to post documents on the Town's website.
He thinks we are shocked to see the 'No Tax' clause in the 1996 Flyer - Wrong - The 'No Tax' pledge was based on conditions that existed in 1996 when it was the policy of county commissioners to distribute sales tax revenues to municipalities. We all know that during the economic slump of 2001-2003 the State Government could not balance their budget so they kept more of the county's sales tax money in Raleigh - this in turn caused the county commissioners to change their policy about distribution to municipalities. With that change in the revenue stream the Town of Summerfield had to rethink its tax policy. Dwayne seems to have a problem understanding this.
He thinks that skulking around trying to identify anonymous members of this forum will shut us up - Wrong - We're still posting.
He thinks we can't see the hypocracy of him sending an email calling out forum members who are ananymous and yet sending that same email to "dozens" on a BCC list - Wrong - That one's obvious.
Let's recap - Wrong, Wrong, Wrong, Wrong and Wrong. At least he's consistent - Right?
Signed,
Unconcerned Citizen, Salty Dog
Last edited on Nov 19th, 2006 12:30 am by SaltyDog
____________________
SaltyDog - Alive and Posting
|
Steve Adkins
Member
| Joined: | Oct 14th, 2005 |
| Location: | Summerfield |
| Posts: | 1669 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Nov 19th, 2006 01:10 am |
|
Poor Dwayne.............he just can't get it right, the poor dear must be terribly frustrated.........yeah, right.
However Mr or Ms Dawg, whatever you are, one thing I must disagree on.
Hmmmm....That Dwayne sure has snookered us here on the forum
Summerfield is full of very intelligent people, this forum is full of the same intelligent people. No question they can see thru Dwayne (non CC) and all other CC manipulations and distortions. I have not lived here since 1996, but there's a whole slew of people that have. The true story is readily available.....and these proud Summerfield folks aren't willing to keep quiet any longer.
It's show time....................
Last edited on Nov 19th, 2006 01:11 am by Steve Adkins
|
Starcatchr
Member
| Joined: | Nov 3rd, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 205 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Nov 19th, 2006 01:35 am |
|
| Thank you Pappy and Salty for pointing out the details of the 1996 inc. memo, 'cause some of us might have read just a smattering of it and might have thought in meant no taxes from here to eternity.
|
|
|
|
|
