User profile: Avenger
Joined: Sept. 8, 2006
Comments posted: 124
Contact Avenger (log-in required)
Comments by Avenger
Page 1 of 11 | Next
Posted on September 20 at 7:18 p.m.
WW,
Get real—“Nothing was said by me to identify her.” Ha! When I listened to the council meeting live, I knew immediately to whom you were referring.
You know they record these meetings, right? So if anyone is interested in what WW said, check out this link from the City of Marco Island web site:
http://ecweb4.ecstreams.com/public/dy...
-Click on City Council meeting 9-15-2008, then click “View selected program”
-In the viewing window that pops up, select item 6, City council communications…
-Fast forward to about 10:47 into that segment
WW talks about
-A letter to the editor that “ripped us (city council) very hard…”
- “by a young lady, won’t use her name…”
-“She had claimed City of Marco Island had caused her real estate taxes to go up $300…”
Now, that description pretty much narrows the identity of said individual down to one person only, to anyone who reads the newspaper. When she happened to be there, and spoke up, Trotter cut her off by saying “I don’t think we need to continue the discussion.”
At the risk of repeating myself, I will say that your actions were unseemly and contrary to civility and good government. Shame on you.
Posted on September 19 at 7:44 p.m.
Steve, that first paragraph of yours is BS, and I don’t mean “before Steve.” Spin what happened all you want, but the BL (bottom line) is that Marco’s millage rate last year was 1.2084, and for the upcoming property tax season it will be 1.3917 mils. Only in the alternate universe of Marco Island could both the City Manager and a newspaper reporter call that “tax relief” and “tax rate falls."
On Guest commentary: Tax rate falls and the quality work of the city continues
Posted on September 17 at 10:10 p.m.
Geez, Monte—among other reasons, your posts linking to that inflammatory website that further links to copyrighted material are violations of the marconews Terms of Use. That’s why they’re taken down.
And we’re not falling for your ridiculous tactic—dredging up 20 year-old allegations to distract from the real issues of today. To quote somebody: “It’s the economy, stupid.”
Posted on September 17 at 5:35 p.m.
Yes, Fossil, I think you’ve nailed it. Monte and his bois must really be worried about what Bill has uncovered to go after him the way they are doing.
On Marco councilor rejects committee member’s allegations of impropriety
Posted on September 17 at 5:23 p.m.
Waldack,
What you did at the last council meeting was unseemly and contrary to civility and good government. Shame on you. Your attack during council communications on a citizen whom you condescendingly referred to as “young lady” speaks volumes about your character.
And then you felt compelled to further beat a dead horse by writing this commentary. When I read this sentence, I nearly fell off my chair:
“My prior involvement with the League of Florida Cities provides me a vast understanding of the budget process, further how a well run city should be funded.”
Funny how you never mentioned this “involvement” during your interviews with the newspaper or talked about it at the candidates’ forums before the elections. I would characterize the “understanding of the budget process” that you demonstrated during this recent budget cycle as very little, and nowhere near “vast.”
By the way, there is no such entity as the League of Florida Cities, although there is an organization called the Florida League of Cities, of which Marco Island is a member. Maybe you should try to study the reams of paperwork that Marco Island produces during the budget process, instead of playing Gestapo agent against Marco Island citizens.
On Guest commentary: Tax notices should be reviewed carefully, thoughtfully
Posted on September 13 at 6:28 p.m.
My goodness, Leroy, you certainly are even more venomous than usual today! But thanks—by posting the data from the link in my comment #5, you’re just proven my point that either:
Sailor doesn’t know how to subtract. 5008 – 3322 does not equal Waldack receiving “over 3000 more votes than neylon” as Sailor asserts in post #4.
Or Sailor does knows how to subtract, but for some odd reason felt compelled to nearly double Waldack’s spread.
That’s what I’m curious about—the fab four councilors were elected by a substantial margin, yet folks like Sailor and Issler have some weird compulsion to exaggerate those numbers.
Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but making up numbers? Some would call that lying.
But hey, don't let the facts get in the way of a good hate!
Posted on September 12 at 4 p.m.
Well, Sailor, I guess you were educated at the Edward Issler Institute of Neo-Mathematics, and can’t subtract one number from another correctly. Don’t take my word for it; go to the Collier County Election website and look up the results of the January 2008 election. Here’s the link:
http://www.colliervotes.com/results.a...
I’m still wondering what drives you supporters of the fab four councilors to consistently exaggerate the margin of victory…
Posted on September 1 at 10:03 p.m.
Well, Mr. Waldack, it’s clear you don’t understand what I’ve been saying, and I shall waste no more of my time. By the way, you should learn how to post the URL of the site with the info you’re citing. That’s really the only way to assure readers that you haven’t made up or edited the data.
Speaking of data, you never did answer the questions I asked after your “makes cents to me” LTR.
Posted on September 1 at 10:22 a.m.
Mr. Waldack, please pay attention. Tomorrow you will be voting on the resolution shown at this link:
http://www.cityofmarcoisland.com/Publ...
RESOLUTION NO. 08-______
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF MARCO ISLAND, FLORIDA, APPROVING THE FISCAL YEAR 2008-09 NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT ROLLS FOR THE TIGERTAIL, SOUTH BARFIELD, NORTH BARFIELD, WEST WINTERBERRY, NORTH MARCO, OLD MARCO AND PORT MARCO ASSESSMENT AREAS; APPROVING THE ASSESSMENT ROLL PERTAINING TO CERTAIN PROPERTY OWNERS WHO VOLUNTARILY ENTERED INTO DEFERRED PAYMENT AGREEMENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 2.04(B)(2) OF CITY RESOLUTION NO. 06-46; DIRECTING CERTIFICATION OF THE ASSESSMENT ROLLS TO THE COLLIER COUNTY TAX COLLECTOR; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Reads a lot like the Lighthouse Point resolution, doesn’t it? Following your logic, (and Issler’s), this resolution must mean that this will be the first time that all those listed areas had to pay non-ad valorem assessments. But wait! Go to this link, which shows a very similar resolution from September 4, 2007:
http://www.cityofmarcoisland.com/Publ...
RESOLUTION NO. 07-046
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF MARCO ISLAND, FLORIDA, RELATING TO THE APPROVAL AND CERTIFICATION OF NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT ROLLS; APPROVING AN ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR OWNERS OF CERTAIN PROPERTY WHO HAVE ENTERED INTO DEFERRED PAYMENT AGREEMENTS PROVIDING FOR IMPOSITION OF A CONSENSUAL SPECIAL ASSESSMENT UPON SUCH PROPERTY; CONFIRMING THE ASSESSMENT ROLLS FOR THE TIGERTAIL AND SOUTH BARFIELD ASSESSMENT AREAS; DIRECTING CERTIFICATION OF THE ASSESSMENT ROLLS TO THE COLLIER COUNTY TAX COLLECTOR; PROVIDING FOR NOTICE OF ASSESSMENTS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
As you can see, the Tigertail and South Barfield assessment areas had to pay those non-ad valorem fees in 2007.
So you can cut and paste from 2008 Lighthouse Point resolutions all you want. It will not change the fact that Lighthouse Point has had a fire assessment in place for 10 years.
I recommend you devote more time to reading City of Marco Island resolutions. Or, better yet, concentrate on all the material you have for the upcoming September 2, 2008 City Council meeting.
Page 1 of 11 | Next
Posted on September 21 at 5:10 p.m.
NtJstUrMarco wasn’t the first poster to bring up national politics in this tread, although he was the first to make any sense. Why aren’t you telling van (#16), ejburger (#17), and playballonK (#22) to go elsewhere and get a grip, Issler?
On Marco council unanimously approves tax relief