Letters to the Editors

9/2/14

Vote to Kill Incorporation Study Important

Dear Editor:

Mr. Gerry Miller and a few of his friends are looking for the majority of the Community Club Member to finance and support an effort of a minority, much like many of our elected officials, in order to avoid any personal exposure.

Mr. Millers position is wrong for two major reasons:

First: If this is to be a study of the impact on the Community Club as a result of an incorporation effort, it should be done after an independent group met the requirements for an incorporation effort to be pursued.

Why should the Community Club spend any money until there is a potential for this subject to go to a ballot?

Second: Unfortunately, if you look at the last paragraph on the survey ballot introduction, somehow, an incorporation feasibility study had been included to determine if incorporation is even possible.

This effort should not be done with Community Club money unless every single property, developer, and time share owner has a secret ballot input, resulting in approval of that approach.

I have previously stated that I will file a Class Action suit to prevent any spending that includes “incorporation feasibility” without the vote of all property owners, including timeshare.

It is obvious that those that are so hot to see us incorporated don’t want to have any of their skin in the game. Let big brother pay for it. I strongly recommend a “$0” response to this survey.

Even this survey is not going out to all of the people in the Glade who receive other Glade transmissions. Email, and newspaper notifications won’t include all the residents even, let alone the absent property owners.

Incorporation of the Glade means one thing to the residents, higher taxes.

The two or three proponents have not been willing to discuss this aspects of incorporation. The absolute minimum tax rate is $0.26/$100 of assess value ($390 for a $150K home).

They immediately say that we all paid higher taxes where we came from, so this is nothing.

My first response is, “You and I came here for lower taxes” and show me one politician who has not wanted to raise taxes”.

You ask them about the staff and facilities to run the city? Answer – That won’t be that much. Ask them about taking over club assets in the future. Some say we will just take it over. (Wrong).

All assets have to be purchased for fair market value. So you ask them how are they going to pay for it? We will be able to borrow money as a city. So you are going to buy an asset we already own, borrow money to do it, and we will get pay for it again only this time with interest added.

We will not receive any sales tax money for 15 years, so everything we would do, would come from property taxes.

With the state having passed the annexation law that requires that the people must approve being annexed, that giant boogieman has gone away.

Because of overlap laws, several areas to the south and north of the Fairfield complex will not be allowed to be incorporated into the new city.

What impact will that have on the sale of assets to the city? Several efforts to override the overlap law has failed and very big money spent losing.

There is no way that this dog hunts. Previous Boards have come to the same conclusion. It is time to drop the Community Club involvement and not spend any more time or money on it.

 

T. E. Reigle

Fairfield Glade

 

Clarification given

Dear Editor:

In last week’s Vista, there were two letters written in response to my Letter urging a positive “vote” on an incorporation feasibility study.

Without such a study, we will never have the facts on which residents can make an informed decision on whether to incorporate or not.

The letters by Robert Daumiller and John Byers are excellent examples of forming an opinion on incorporation without having all of the facts at hand.

Mr. Daumiller said that I  “have been on a quest to incorporate Fairfield Glade for years.”  That is factually untrue. My “quest”  has been for a credible study on the feasibility of incorporation.

This would provide us with facts on the model, governance option, services, and the relevant financials.

Only then would members be a position to make an informed opinion on incorporation whatever that may be for them.

Emotional opinions without the facts help no one.  I have no opinion on incorporation because I have yet to see the facts necessary on which my opinion can be based.

This is why the proposed feasibility study is so critical in the decision making process.

I can only hope that enough residents agree and a feasibility study goes forward.

 

Gerry Miller

Fairfield Glade