Candidates finalized for House Dist. 19 race

[WHITEY]

So Whitey - when are you going to answer my question? You posted that Kim Curl had once quit the school board when he didn't get his way. I know for a fact that this is not true.

 

To be credible Whitey, when you are making accusations such as this on a public message forum, you should "own up" to what you have posted and be able to prove it. The only thing you have succeeded in doing is changing the subject.

First Beach Bum, I will put my credibility up there among you and other posters on this board,and nothing you can do or say can take that away.

 

Secondly You continue to state that I have made "accusations" on a public message forum,Now ..................... I certainly do not have the 30 years of experience that you protend to have in the legal field, But I do know the difference between a question and an accusation, May I suggest that you read the following very slowly and take a few moments to let it sink in..........Pubby stated"First off, the comment of Whitey is protected speech that says that basically there would have to specific malice on the part of the writer for it to rise to the level of actionable defamation. And yes, I've quoted the landmark case several times. It is Sullivan v. NYTimes (1964) and it applies to all sorts of public figures. By definition an elected official is a public person."

 

I have no intentions of discussing this matter any further, This is a moot issue,Has nothing to do with any further discussion of this thread, And if you feel that you must continue discussion of this, You leave me with no alternative but to make friends with the IGNORE button

BTW you are really getting borderline yourself, I am not a public figure as described above

[Beach Bum]

First Beach Bum, I will put my credibility up there among you and other posters on this board,and nothing you can do or say can take that away.

 

Secondly You continue to state that I have made "accusations" on a public message forum,Now ..................... I certainly do not have the 30 years of experience that you protend to have in the legal field, But I do know the difference between a question and an accusation, May I suggest that you read the following very slowly and take a few moments to let it sink in..........Pubby stated"First off, the comment of Whitey is protected speech that says that basically there would have to specific malice on the part of the writer for it to rise to the level of actionable defamation. And yes, I've quoted the landmark case several times. It is Sullivan v. NYTimes (1964) and it applies to all sorts of public figures. By definition an elected official is a public person."

 

I have no intentions of discussing this matter any further, This is a moot issue,Has nothing to do with any further discussion of this thread, And if you feel that you must continue discussion of this, You leave me with no alternative but to make friends with the IGNORE button

BTW you are really getting borderline yourself, I am not a public figure as described above

 

As for my legal experience Whitey, I have no reason whatsoever to fabricate or lie about that. For the record, I have worked with not only firms in this area but also with some top AV rated firms in Atlanta, never been fired or even laid off and have recently opened my own business contracting out paralegal services for several different firms - thankfully, it has gone really well and I am very proud and thankful of what I have accomplished.

 

Second, Pubby is not an attorney so you can take his advice all you want but I personally will be taking my advice from a "real" attorney.

 

Third, I am of the opinion that you most certainly insinuated that about Kim Curl and I believe any reasonable person would view it that way. You can put your credibility up there all day long with mine and it would not matter in the least little bit to me - I have enough common sense not to post things on a public message forum that I can't back up. I personally find it despicable when people insinuate and state things and then won't back them up with facts.

 

Lastly, in my opinion and I am speaking for myself and myself only, you blew any credibility that you might have had with me when you refused to back up what you stated here on p.com about Kim Curl. Twist it around Whitey and pretend it was only a question if it makes you feel better about it. As I stated, I am of the opinion that this was an attempt to impugn the reputaton of Mr. Curl and I know for a fact that it is viewed that way by others.

[DallasRed]

Are you threatening Whitey with a lawsuit now? I think he has the right to ask political questions. Would you say calling Obama a crookis a potentially harmful statement?

 

 

Why does this not surprise me

 

Tis offical..The PF is now the IC

[Beach Bum]

Why does this not surprise me

 

Tis offical..The PF is now the IC

 

Can you not speak in "real words" instead of "codes"? Come on DR - why speak in codes, why not just come right out and say you are thinking?

[NewsJunky]

Why does this not surprise me

 

Tis offical..The PF is now the IC

 

I have no clue what you are referring to.

[JohnnyJ]

I have no clue what you are referring to.

 

Let me assist you.

 

Why does this not surprise me

 

Tis offical..The Political Forum is now the Internet Cafe.

[NewsJunky]

Let me assist you.

 

Why does this not surprise me

 

Tis offical..The Political Forum is now the Internet Cafe.

 

Thank you! I would never have figured that out!

[JohnnyJ]

[DallasRed]

Let me assist you.

 

Why does this not surprise me

 

Tis offical..The Political Forum is now the Internet Cafe.

 

 

Hey JJ Thanks for helping out. And while you are at it let BB know she isn't allowed to respond to my posts...Seems she cant follow the rules. But by reading this THREAD she thinks everyone else should

Edited January 31, 2010 by DallasRed

[Cabe]

Hey JJ Thanks for helping out. And while you are at it let BB know she isn't allowed to respond to my posts...Seems she cant follow the rules. But by reading this THREAD she thinks everyone else should

 

[Beach Bum]

Just doing the same thing that others here are allowed to do as "forbidden" replies to my posts (after a warning in the past and which I have printed by the way)have occured. Maybe there were consequences for the violator and maybe there were not - the moderators simply need to provide proof if there were. Have any of you ever heard that phrase "what is good for the goose is good for the gander"?

[gpatt0n]

As for my legal experience Whitey, I have no reason whatsoever to fabricate or lie about that. For the record, I have worked with not only firms in this area but also with some top AV rated firms in Atlanta, never been fired or even laid off and have recently opened my own business contracting out paralegal services for several different firms - thankfully, it has gone really well and I am very proud and thankful of what I have accomplished.

 

Second, Pubby is not an attorney so you can take his advice all you want but I personally will be taking my advice from a "real" attorney.

 

Third, I am of the opinion that you most certainly insinuated that about Kim Curl and I believe any reasonable person would view it that way. You can put your credibility up there all day long with mine and it would not matter in the least little bit to me - I have enough common sense not to post things on a public message forum that I can't back up. I personally find it despicable when people insinuate and state things and then won't back them up with facts.

 

Lastly, in my opinion and I am speaking for myself and myself only, you blew any credibility that you might have had with me when you refused to back up what you stated here on p.com about Kim Curl. Twist it around Whitey and pretend it was only a question if it makes you feel better about it. As I stated, I am of the opinion that this was an attempt to impugn the reputaton of Mr. Curl and I know for a fact that it is viewed that way by others.

 

BB:

 

Among the things you've not accomplished is a law degree. Even if you did have a law degree, it would not be within

 

I missed whitey's statement but I would suggest that by trying to make it a cause celeb, all you've done is exacerbate things.

 

Further your effort to stifle discussion through the insinuation that folks are somehow opening themselves to litigation is tiresome. Consider that your second warning as fear to speak does not belong in the discussion of politics - state, local or national. That is the key message of Sullivan v. NYTimes. Go read it sometime. You might become enlightened as you surely aren't now.

 

Alternately, if you find something that you think is defamatory, untrue, etc. report it and we will look at it. That our judgment doesn't coincide with yours is no reason to not report and comment. I mean you might be right and someone may have crossed the line as that does happen ever so often.

 

pubby

 

PS: I see the topic has been moved to paulding place.

 

Actually, it belongs is countywide news.

 

Politics should not be in the cafe; real news should not be in the cafe.

 

maybe the mods will move it to the CWNews.

 

pubby

[Beach Bum]

BB:

 

Among the things you've not accomplished is a law degree. Even if you did have a law degree, it would not be within

 

I missed whitey's statement but I would suggest that by trying to make it a cause celeb, all you've done is exacerbate things.

 

Further your effort to stifle discussion through the insinuation that folks are somehow opening themselves to litigation is tiresome. Consider that your second warning as fear to speak does not belong in the discussion of politics - state, local or national. That is the key message of Sullivan v. NYTimes. Go read it sometime. You might become enlightened as you surely aren't now.

 

Alternately, if you find something that you think is defamatory, untrue, etc. report it and we will look at it. That our judgment doesn't coincide with yours is no reason to not report and comment. I mean you might be right and someone may have crossed the line as that does happen ever so often.

 

pubby

 

PS: I see the topic has been moved to paulding place.

 

Actually, it belongs is countywide news.

 

Politics should not be in the cafe; real news should not be in the cafe.

 

maybe the mods will move it to the CWNews.

 

pubby

 

So Pubby - I have a question for you. Do you condone members here posting inaccurate information about other people?

[gpatt0n]

Just doing the same thing that others here are allowed to do as "forbidden" replies to my posts (after a warning in the past and which I have printed by the way)have occured. Maybe there were consequences for the violator and maybe there were not - the moderators simply need to provide proof if there were. Have any of you ever heard that phrase "what is good for the goose is good for the gander"?

 

We've do not report sanctions placed on individuals. That is between the site admin/mods and the individual member and is covered by our privacy agreement. Indeed, just because you're nosy is no reason for any of the mods to violate our privacy agreement. That would be stupid on our part.

 

Indeed mods, I've seen several requests from BB that would be stupid on our part to comply with. Just yesterday she was insisting that we make visiable again a post that she thought was defamatory which would, if she were correct, have made us a party to the alleged defamation. While I know the comment was not actionable as a tort, I felt the insinuation was absolutely untrue and therefore a violation of the Pcom terms of service and was removed. Still, BB is so proud of her association with the group that Shakespeare suggested should be the first victims (instead of the last) that the odor of carrion in cages seems to waif through the screen. It doesn't smell good.

 

Bottom line, as said above, encourage her to report posts, but make an independent judgment based on your knowledge and experience.

 

pubby

[Beach Bum]

BB:

 

Among the things you've not accomplished is a law degree. Even if you did have a law degree, it would not be within

 

I missed whitey's statement but I would suggest that by trying to make it a cause celeb, all you've done is exacerbate things.

 

Further your effort to stifle discussion through the insinuation that folks are somehow opening themselves to litigation is tiresome. Consider that your second warning as fear to speak does not belong in the discussion of politics - state, local or national. That is the key message of Sullivan v. NYTimes. Go read it sometime. You might become enlightened as you surely aren't now.

 

Alternately, if you find something that you think is defamatory, untrue, etc. report it and we will look at it. That our judgment doesn't coincide with yours is no reason to not report and comment. I mean you might be right and someone may have crossed the line as that does happen ever so often.

 

pubby

 

PS: I see the topic has been moved to paulding place.

 

Actually, it belongs is countywide news.

 

Politics should not be in the cafe; real news should not be in the cafe.

 

maybe the mods will move it to the CWNews.

 

pubby

 

Absolutely I have NOT accomplished a law degree nor have I ever claimed to or sought to. You haven't accomplished a law degree either Pubby.

 

As to missing Whitey's statement, it is in Post 33 of this very thread ready for you to look at if you will just take the time to do so.

 

Furthermore, I certainly don't believe that you should "stifle" my opinions and views here either Pubby. Why should I not be afforded the same privileges as Whitey, et al - after all, I am just defending people that untruths are being posted about.

 

As to reporting, I have done that on several occasions and have record thereof. If you choose to ignore the reports, that is fine. You should consider though that you are not the ULTIMATE Judge and Jury - you might be here on p.com but not in the "real world".

[lotstodo]

I was against the $200 million dollar bond and I agree with most of the above post, but have to state that this problem cannot totally on the school board or even the county commissioners, the state law causes it's share of the problems also. The Impact Fee law that Georgia has is very close to unusable, it places many restrictions on the use of the fees that have serious drawbacks. Cherokee is one of the few counties I've heard of that even tried to use it.

 

I felt during the bond campaigns, and still feel, that the proper solution should have been a smaller bond, with Speaker Glenn and Sen Heath and Rep Maxwell, working together to change the Georgia Impact Fee law into a valid solution that wouldn't handicap the school board with worthless restrictions and has the builders and county citizens to fund the required schools *together*, without a overly heavy load on either. After a small bond to get us past the critical needs, an impact fee and the SPLOST should have been enough to supply the funding for growth in the schools as needed, since the more homes built, the more money the board would get.

 

However, when I wrote Sen Heath, Rep Maxwell and Rep Richardson about changing the law, only Sen Heath even bothered to reply, (though to give Maxwell the benefit of a doubt, I heard later than his wife had been very sick at that time), and his reply was that in their meetings with the county commission and school board, no one had shown any interest in changing the law and he wasn't going to work on it without a county request. Of course, when I brought Heath's letter up at a county public meeting to Chairman Jerry, he said in the meeting that Heath was wrong, they had strongly asked for it. Of the two, I think I believe Heath. That was one of the primary reasons I voted against Jerry, I won't vote for someone I no longer trust.

 

We have to get politicians in office at *all* levels that are willing to write laws that *work*, not screwed up by special interest exclusions.

 

This recession has slowed building, giving us a special chance to build a better solution for the growth issue before the problem become critical again and the School board gives us another 200+ million dollar band-aid like Obama's stimulus.

 

I don't care if it's a Republican, Democrat or Independent. If someone will show me they want to *fix* problems, I'll vote for them at this point.

 

I will be writing again to all of my elected officials directly before the next election as Beach Bum has suggested to see just what they support. If they don't have some good answers, (or don't answer at all, like Richardson) I'll do my best to find someone that does and vote for them. While I can't vote in this special election, I suggest to those that can, you should do the same for the candidates you have.

 

Good luck, for all our sakes.

 

I agree. I believe that there was a proposal a while back for a constitutional amendment giving school boards the power to directly assess impact fees without the approval of the BOC. I believe that it may have gotten stuck in committee thanks to the Reynolds brothers and their ilk. We have to do something to reassert taxpayer control over growth, Right now, the rate of growth is entirely controlled by the developers and their buddies on the BOC. The School Board, however can and should do more than simply bending over and taking it. If you are not part of the solution, then you are part of the problem. When you threaten the property owners with a drastic increase in millage rate if they don't go along with the bond, then that is blackmail. School taxes are the largest part of local government, and the one over which the taxpayers have the least control. We need to stop Developers from shifting the cost of their projects on to the taxpayers. Uncontrolled growth for the sake of growth leads to outrageous taxes.

 

I will vote for the candidate that I believe will represent the taxpayers instead of any special interest, including those special interests closely associated with the republican platform. I want my State Representative to concentrate on providing the necessary services of State Government for the highest value, not chasing some personal or political agenda or trying to raise money for reelection. That is why I am very conscious of where campaign funding has been coming from for each candidate for Governor, and why I will be very interested when the District 19 candidate disclosures become public.

[Cabe]

Now I know why Pubby is so fond of Obama . . . he embraces arrogance.

[gpatt0n]

So Pubby - I have a question for you. Do you condone members here posting inaccurate information about other people?

 

Certainly I don't condone it.

 

But there is a lot of wiggle room. I know someone called you a snob here recently. Are you a snob? I wouldn't say so but some folks are more sensitive to things like that than I. And that is an opinion.

 

Facts, which might constitute defamation would be assertions of things like falsely asserting a private individual's membership in the communist party or being a shoplifter or thief or an invasion of their privacy by posting pictures from their bedroom. Those kinds of things are rather blatantly damaging to one's reputation and well may rise to the tort of defamation.

 

However, truth is always a defense in libel and not being omnipotent, I can say with absolute certainty that I don't know what they know.

 

Generally speaking it is just impossible to require a sworn deposition for every statement, people talk and what they say and how they say it - whether they are catty or nice - is in the big picture journalism as it gives a record of the local scene. As such is valuable, interesting and engaging and it is something I highly encourage.

 

I take umbrage with those who through their hunky dory attitude seek to raise the fear of those posting to suggest they should not post for fear of being embroiled in litigation.

 

So take that last comment to heart BB, because I see that as the role you've decided to play ... and it really is a bit part.

 

pubby

[gpatt0n]

Absolutely I have NOT accomplished a law degree nor have I ever claimed to or sought to. You haven't accomplished a law degree either Pubby.

 

As to missing Whitey's statement, it is in Post 33 of this very thread ready for you to look at if you will just take the time to do so.

 

Furthermore, I certainly don't believe that you should "stifle" my opinions and views here either Pubby. Why should I not be afforded the same privileges as Whitey, et al - after all, I am just defending people that untruths are being posted about.

 

As to reporting, I have done that on several occasions and have record thereof. If you choose to ignore the reports, that is fine. You should consider though that you are not the ULTIMATE Judge and Jury - you might be here on p.com but not in the "real world".

 

There is absolutely nothing defamatory in Whitey's post.

 

You've got a old conservative democrat who is probably more against property taxes than the midway flash. He's just sought to blame a sitting school board member who was on the board when the $125 million school bond was passed that he frankly fought.

 

So what?

 

See, that's what I mean ... anyone who disagrees with your opinion is going to be threatened with a baseless charge.

 

Oh, and Madea ... I'm not arrogant, I've just run out of patience with those who employ fear in the manner that BB has been over the past two days.

 

pubby

[Lady Raider]

 

Good Lawd this topic needs to be in the political Piranha forum..

 

 

There is no news in this topic it is a he said she said, prove this, prove that, topic now..

[DallasRed]

YEARS is more like it

[Beach Bum]

There is absolutely nothing defamatory in Whitey's post.

 

You've got a old conservative democrat who is probably more against property taxes than the midway flash. He's just sought to blame a sitting school board member who was on the board when the $125 million school bond was passed that he frankly fought.

 

So what?

 

See, that's what I mean ... anyone who disagrees with your opinion is going to be threatened with a baseless charge.

 

Oh, and Madea ... I'm not arrogant, I've just run out of patience with those who employ fear in the manner that BB has been over the past two days.

 

pubby

 

You know we can all become too complacent and comfortable in our opinions and once again, you can decide yourself that Whitey's statements are not defamatory here on p.com; however, in the end, it MIGHT not ultimately be your decison.

 

And for the record, I am not trying to "bully" anyone as bullying is not one of my personality traits. I will however defend anyone who has untruths spoken about him or her, and especially on a public message forum for the "world" to see. You know, people's reputations are very valuable to them and when someone seeks to impugn another's character and reputation unjustly, well....that is just not fair.

 

 

Good Lawd this topic needs to be in the political Piranha forum..

 

 

There is no news in this topic it is a he said she said, prove this, prove that, topic now..

 

I can prove my point LR; however, I am not the one making the accusations so, just as in any court of law, the "accuser" has the burden of proof.

[lotstodo]

Some where way back there PUBBY brought up the question of the Census and redistricting gerrymandering. The State of Georgia is the absolute poster child for that practice ever since Section 5 of the VRA turned the question of redistricting over to the DOJ. In 2001 the DOJ was republican, and the Supreme Court was Conservative, and for the first time in history the act of gerrymandering was thrown directly into the faces of the Democratic Statehouse in Georgia. For the first time since 1964 the Democrats had to justify districts that looked like snakes taking just enough Republican votes away from adjacent districts to empower the Democrats and disenfranchise the conservative voters. For the first time since 1964 the State of Georgia had to abide by the longstanding litmus test of common interests that every other state in the union not under section 5 control has to abide by. Assuming that the Republicans retain power in 2010 and 2012 in this State, that fact alone will make the standoff between Obama's DOJ and the Georgia legislature one to watch.

 

I believe that since this is the most partisan of issues there is in State politics, that any Republican representative of the district will try to see to it that any redistricting will preserve the common interests of the majority of the residents of east Paulding, and that any Democrat will try to see to it that the 13th absorbs more of the 11th and the 3rd, or that an entirely new district is used to carve out a Democratic majority in the west and southwest metro area.

[NewsJunky]

Some where way back there PUBBY brought up the question of the Census and redistricting gerrymandering. The State of Georgia is the absolute poster child for that practice ever since Section 5 of the VRA turned the question of redistricting over to the DOJ. In 2001 the DOJ was republican, and the Supreme Court was Conservative, and for the first time in history the act of gerrymandering was thrown directly into the faces of the Democratic Statehouse in Georgia. For the first time since 1964 the Democrats had to justify districts that looked like snakes taking just enough Republican votes away from adjacent districts to empower the Democrats and disenfranchise the conservative voters. For the first time since 1964 the State of Georgia had to abide by the longstanding litmus test of common interests that every other state in the union not under section 5 control has to abide by. Assuming that the Republicans retain power in 2010 and 2012 in this State, that fact alone will make the standoff between Obama's DOJ and the Georgia legislature one to watch.

 

I believe that since this is the most partisan of issues there is in State politics, that any Republican representative of the district will try to see to it that any redistricting will preserve the common interests of the majority of the residents of east Paulding, and that any Democrat will try to see to it that the 13th absorbs more of the 11th and the 3rd, or that an entirely new district is used to carve out a Democratic majority in the west and southwest metro area.

I agree. I will be choosing my candidate carefully and he will not be part of any special interest group. I expect to see more candidates step out in the general election. It will prove to be interesting.

[Beach Bum]

I agree. I will be choosing my candidate carefully and he will not be part of any special interest group. I expect to see more candidates step out in the general election. It will prove to be interesting.

 

I agree NewsJunky. I will be choosing my candidate very carefully also. I think you are correct in that more candidates will step out in the general electon. I don't know enough about any of the current candidates to form an opinion yet but I will do my level best to do the appropriate research and find out which of them will be the better choice to represent us.

[Dreamwriter]

Hey JJ Thanks for helping out. And while you are at it let BB know she isn't allowed to respond to my posts...Seems she cant follow the rules. But by reading this THREAD she thinks everyone else should

Maybe if you don't post, she won't.

[Dreamwriter]

You know we can all become too complacent and comfortable in our opinions and once again, you can decide yourself that Whitey's statements are not defamatory here on p.com; however, in the end, it MIGHT not ultimately be your decison.

 

 

 

Bet no bullet flew either.

 

And for the record, I am not trying to "bully" anyone as bullying is not one of my personality traits. I will however defend anyone who has untruths spoken about him or her, and especially on a public message forum for the "world" to see. You know, people's reputations are very valuable to them and when someone seeks to impugn another's character and reputation unjustly, well....that is just not fair.

 

 

 

I can prove my point LR; however, I am not the one making the accusations so, just as in any court of law, the "accuser" has the burden of proof.

[WHITEY]

I agree. I believe that there was a proposal a while back for a constitutional amendment giving school boards the power to directly assess impact fees without the approval of the BOC. I believe that it may have gotten stuck in committee thanks to the Reynolds brothers and their ilk. We have to do something to reassert taxpayer control over growth, Right now, the rate of growth is entirely controlled by the developers and their buddies on the BOC. The School Board, however can and should do more than simply bending over and taking it. If you are not part of the solution, then you are part of the problem. When you threaten the property owners with a drastic increase in millage rate if they don't go along with the bond, then that is blackmail. School taxes are the largest part of local government, and the one over which the taxpayers have the least control. We need to stop Developers from shifting the cost of their projects on to the taxpayers. Uncontrolled growth for the sake of growth leads to outrageous taxes.

 

I will vote for the candidate that I believe will represent the taxpayers instead of any special interest, including those special interests closely associated with the republican platform. I want my State Representative to concentrate on providing the necessary services of State Government for the highest value, not chasing some personal or political agenda or trying to raise money for reelection. That is why I am very conscious of where campaign funding has been coming from for each candidate for Governor, and why I will be very interested when the District 19 candidate disclosures become public.

I do agree with this post,That is why I checked the web this morning on the campaign contributions, The problem with this election is that most of the contributions will never be available until after the votes have been cast and counted

[WHITEY]

There is absolutely nothing defamatory in Whitey's post.

 

You've got a old conservative democrat who is probably more against property taxes than the midway flash. He's just sought to blame a sitting school board member who was on the board when the $125 million school bond was passed that he frankly fought.

 

So what?

 

See, that's what I mean ... anyone who disagrees with your opinion is going to be threatened with a baseless charge.

 

Oh, and Madea ... I'm not arrogant, I've just run out of patience with those who employ fear in the manner that BB has been over the past two days.

 

pubby

Thanks Pubby

[Beach Bum]

Thanks Pubby

 

Like I said earlier, Pubby might have the final word here on p.com; however he MIGHT not ultimately have THE final word. You never know...... No threats, veiled or otherwise, just practical common sense.

[Lady Raider]

Like I said earlier, Pubby might have the final word here on p.com; however he MIGHT not ultimately have THE final word. You never know...... No threats, veiled or otherwise, just practical common sense.

 

 

Hey girlie are you trying to be top poster again today

[lotstodo]

I do agree with this post,That is why I checked the web this morning on the campaign contributions, The problem with this election is that most of the contributions will never be available until after the votes have been cast and counted

I'm not sure when the disclosures are due. So Far none have been filed. Surely they will require them prior to the election. If not what's the point?

 

When the information is available, it should be posted HERE on the Secretary of State Website.

[Beach Bum]

Hey girlie are you trying to be top poster again today

 

No I promise I am not - I can assure you I don't want to be the "top poster". N and the kids are at B's parents house today and hubby is helping Butch with building the new house in North Georgia today - it was way too cold for me to be outside all day. It is really quiet here today and I am bored - want to come and keep me company?

[Lady Raider]

No I promise I am not - I can assure you I don't want to be the "top poster". N and the kids are at B's parents house today and hubby is helping Butch with building the new house in North Georgia today - it was way too cold for me to be outside all day. It is really quite here today and I am bored - want to come and keep me company?

 

 

so you are home alone? shoot if I could play pool I would come over and we would shoot some po0l LOL

[Beach Bum]

so you are home alone? shoot if I could play pool I would come over and we would shoot some po0l LOL

 

I'm afraid I can't help you there. I am not very good at shooting pool - I just sit there and watch everyone else! I've made a mean pot of homemade brunswick stew though that I am willing to share with you.

[Lady Raider]

I'm afraid I can't help you there. I am not very good at shooting pool - I just sit there and watch everyone else! I've made a mean pot of homemade brunswick stew though that I am willing to share with you.

 

 

homemade brunswick stew you know who that made me think of don;'t you?

 

I guess I better stop hi jacking this thread.. before I get in to trouble.. LOL

[Beach Bum]

homemade brunswick stew you know who that made me think of don;'t you?

 

I guess I better stop hi jacking this thread.. before I get in to trouble.. LOL

 

I do know and I thought about you and of course her when I posted this. It was a little sad making this today as she so loved my homemade brunswick stew. I think that is the last thing she ate that she really enjoyed.

[The Sound Guy]

I agree. I believe that there was a proposal a while back for a constitutional amendment giving school boards the power to directly assess impact fees without the approval of the BOC. I believe that it may have gotten stuck in committee thanks to the Reynolds brothers and their ilk. We have to do something to reassert taxpayer control over growth, Right now, the rate of growth is entirely controlled by the developers and their buddies on the BOC. The School Board, however can and should do more than simply bending over and taking it. If you are not part of the solution, then you are part of the problem. When you threaten the property owners with a drastic increase in millage rate if they don't go along with the bond, then that is blackmail. School taxes are the largest part of local government, and the one over which the taxpayers have the least control. We need to stop Developers from shifting the cost of their projects on to the taxpayers. Uncontrolled growth for the sake of growth leads to outrageous taxes.

 

Oh, I agree that the school board played their part... my biggest gripe was that they were proposing the bond before any of the schools promised for the SPLOST several years before were even started and threatening us with double sessions at the same time.

 

However, with them stuck with a BOC that loved developers and state representatives that didn't care, they only had two legal options that they alone controlled: Raise the money for new schools through a bond/base tax rate or let the schools go to double sessions sooner or later. Do you see another option they had that did not require the BOC and State to assist? So they put the two options they had up to the voters. I knew if it failed the first time we would see it again, it was their only option.

 

The BOE does not have the legal power to force the BOC or the state to do their bidding and give them another legal option that would work. That is our job as voters. Jerry is gone, but others from that developer based commission remain.

 

We just have to remember that this bond was only a five year band-aid. As soon as growth in this area picks up again, we'll be right in the middle of it again and will see another bond if nothing changes.

 

I strongly urge any voter who doesn't want to see another bond on the ballot in the next five years to bombard your commissioner, BOE representative and state leaders with letters asking them to fix the impact fee law NOW, while we have time and for those in the 19th, to ask the candidate they are planning on voting for how they stand on the matter.

[NewsJunky]

Oh, I agree that the school board played their part... my biggest gripe was that they were proposing the bond before any of the schools promised for the SPLOST several years before were even started and threatening us with double sessions at the same time.

 

However, with them stuck with a BOC that loved developers and state representatives that didn't care, they only had two legal options that they alone controlled: Raise the money for new schools through a bond/base tax rate or let the schools go to double sessions sooner or later. Do you see another option they had that did not require the BOC and State to assist? So they put the two options they had up to the voters. I knew if it failed the first time we would see it again, it was their only option.

 

The BOE does not have the legal power to force the BOC or the state to do their bidding and give them another legal option that would work. That is our job as voters. Jerry is gone, but others from that developer based commission remain.

 

We just have to remember that this bond was only a five year band-aid. As soon as growth in this area picks up again, we'll be right in the middle of it again and will see another bond if nothing changes.

 

I strongly urge any voter who doesn't want to see another bond on the ballot in the next five years to bombard your commissioner, BOE representative and state leaders with letters asking them to fix the impact fee law NOW, while we have time and for those in the 19th, to ask the candidate they are planning on voting for how they stand on the matter.

I second that. Right now the BOE is looking at less funds coming from the state and they are facing teacher furloughs. In my opinion they need to be working on impact fees and outright cuts to the budget. I have said before that the Paulding taxpayer well is dry. Taxpayers won't take kindly to an increase in taxes by the BOE or the BOC. JMO

[The Sound Guy]

I'm not sure when the disclosures are due. So Far none have been filed. Surely they will require them prior to the election. If not what's the point?

 

When the information is available, it should be posted HERE on the Secretary of State Website.

 

I looked at the schedules on the Secretary of State website, but there is not one for a special election in Feb.

 

I found these general rules:

 

Personal Financial Disclosure Schedule

Candidate for Public Office:

A Personal Financial Disclosure Statement covering the period of the preceding calendar year shall be filed no later than the fifteenth day following the date of qualifying as a candidate. Candidates for state wide office file not later than seven days after qualifying for office. Only one Personal Financial Disclosure Statement is required per calendar year.

 

Notes for Candidates

 

* Persons elected to office in each year following the year in which the election occurs

* Contributions of $1,000 or more, if received between the last report due before an election and the election must be reported within two business days of receipt.

* Persons leaving office with excess funds until such funds are expended as provided in the Act

* Unsuccessful candidates with excess funds, or who receive contributions to retire debt incurred, until such funds are expended, or such unpaid debts are satisfied December 31 filing only)

 

Notes for Independent Committees

 

* On the first day of each of the two calendar months preceding any such election.

* Two weeks prior to the date of such election.

* Within the two-week period prior to the election date any contributions or expenditure of more than $1,000.00 will be reported within two business days.

* December 31 of the year in which the election is held.

 

 

So it looks like 2 weeks before the election. But they can go a week over that with no fine, and it looks like the fine is only $25 up to the date of the election, and only $75 if you go past the election.

 

So I doubt we'll see any reports. Don't you love toothless ethics laws?

 

State filing Schedules