PDA

View Full Version : Preservation Society - page 3



rhoda
07-12-2002, 05:33 PM
U.D.Cide, so when someone's opinion doesn't fit into YOUR "own little world", is all you can muster a personal attack? Stick to the topic please, start another one, or take your comments to abusefest and designate your cash for the parks. I think Mr. Voiers has raised a reasonable question. I personally believe that the preservation society should not be contributing funds to either side of an issue that is being put before the voters.

Becky Davis
07-12-2002, 06:39 PM
Ditto Rhoda. And that is exactly what Mr. Voiers said.

just wondering
07-12-2002, 06:40 PM
Thank you rhoda for being a person of reason.

Royal Alcott
07-12-2002, 09:45 PM
Rhoda-

What is controversial about the tax being put before the voters as required by law?

There must be reasons for opposing the tax but I have not seen them yet.

Nor have I seen any alternatives for funding the Parks & Recreation Commission.

Should Eureka Springs do away with the commission, the City Council that appointed it or the currrent members of the commission?

Should the city abandon Lake Leatherwood and let it go to seed as it has Black Bass Lake?

What makes a tax that funds improvements to the appearance of the city a controversial issue comparable to a choice between candidates?

jf501
07-13-2002, 04:32 AM
It is sad when debate becomes a personal thing and objections to a popular issue become NEGATIVE just because it isn't exactly what the opposition wants to hear.

If we didn't have debate of issues what a lopsided world this would be.

I have witnessed a lot of wasted $$$$ in the lake leatherwood project and have been 'LABELED' as being a NEGATIVE person when all I was trying to do was help them save money from my experiences in development of this kind of a project in the past.

I am not pointing fingers and feel that this was a well intended project that has been grossly mismanaged.

I feel sorry for the KIDS most of all.

I would only hope the voters become well informed before they vote on increasing anymore spending on that project!

This is a Sales tax issue, although I don't live in Eureka Springs proper I spend a great deal of money in this COMMUNITY and feel I should have a voice although I can't vote on it!

I would have to say my vote would be NO!

I don' think the answers to this are solved simply by attending a meeting or two, I would suggest talking to a lot of people that have witnessed what has went astray with this project.

Eureka Springs needs to QUIT OPERATING on EMOTIONS and start reasoning with REALITY!


Sorry for being NEGATIVE!
Or more appropriately OBJECTIVE!



[This message has been edited by jf501 (edited 07-13-2002).]

JET
07-13-2002, 05:02 AM
JF, Thanks for the post. The thing about the sales tax, does it have an end? How long would we pay this.

cheeto
07-13-2002, 05:54 AM
jf501...good post my friend...jet...no end to this one,not even a sunset clause,it goes on and on just like the bunny.

jf501
07-13-2002, 07:05 AM
One other thing and then I will leave this alone.

All of the people that have worked on this project are good people, but a very wise man once said to me along time ago, YOU NEED TO HAVE THE RIGHT TOOLS TO GET THE JOB DONE RIGHT!

In other words maybe we donít have the right people for the job! We donít have to re-invent the wheel as some think is always the answer, maybe we just need the right people!

Kaye Miller
07-13-2002, 08:17 AM
Thanks jf501. Your concerns are very valid. Most of us have valid concerns. However, when we post them we are "negetive". And, like you, many of us cannot vote on any issues so this is the only avenue we have. We can, and I do, let the councilmen/commission members know how we feel. Pick up that phone.

Royal, perhaps rather than belittling everyone who posts an opinion you could drag your soapbox up to the friends at the CAPC and talk to THEM about what is necessary in advertising. I would think some of this would be rubbing off on them by now.

As for your telling all of us things are not being done right, Brother, you are preaching to the choir!! Try telling those in control of this mess.

jf50l, don't leave this alone. Your posts are important.

Steve Beacham
07-13-2002, 08:52 AM
Is anyone aware that Harrison uses a percentage of its CAPC money to fund its parks. The state ordinance for the CAPC allows for that, however the local city CAPC ordinace does not. If the Council chose to do so, they could adopt the state ordinace and include funding for parks out of the existing tax. This does not even have to go for a vote unless a petition is passed to bring it to the people.

I think Branson also uses its CAPC fund in this way.

[This message has been edited by Steve Beacham (edited 07-13-2002).]

Lucinda
07-13-2002, 08:58 AM
JF, I find your information interesting and a point of view responsibly expressed, unlike Ernstís accusations which I guess were meant to speak to the same topic. There is a huge difference between good intentions mixed with less than perfect money management and ďphony accountingĒ.

However, if you have been tracking P&Rís current situation, there is simply no way for that commission to function without funding. No tax = no funds = no operating expenses or improvements = no P&R. It would be nice to think that the businesses and citizens of Eureka could get together each year to fund raise and donate sufficiently to keep P&R afloat without a tax increase but we know that would never happen. Voting no on this tax will be the death of P&R unless someone on this BBS has a new suggestion to keep the agency functioning with less fiscal impact to the community.

At my first council meeting, when I first heard of this proposed tax increase, my initial response to my friend attending with me was ďare they crazy?Ē Eureka is going to have a sales tax higher than LA? But, as I began to understand the facts and finances behind the P&R plight, I donít really see another way. Somehow, over the years, thereís got to be a ďmake your bed and then lie in itĒ analogy here. Is Eureka now paying for mismanagement, malaise and otherwise from years/decades of P&R neglect? How is Eureka supposed to put on a pretty face to the tourists it bases itís livelihood upon without P&R?

Therefore, supporting the tax increase, in my opinion seems rational, not emotional. It IS an ugly thought, however, having to explain a 10% or 12% tax to a visitor. Wish some genius could come up with a more palatable plan.

Other points:
There is a city council meeting on Monday and this topic is a main agenda item. Perhaps those of you who oppose the tax might want to attend and voice your opposition and offer valid options.

From what Iíve gathered, over the months of reading this BBS, many of the councilpersons do read this forum, therefore stating your opinions here many very well help form opinions. Yet, this is not a substitute for good ole grass roots activism.

Kaye, you must be referring to some other post of Royals, in the past. I donít find the one above in the least bit belittling to anyone. As often stated here, everyone is entitled to an opinion whereas Royal was simply posing questions. His question of the commission vs the council vs the commission members is a very good one and Iíd love to here thoughts on that from yíall.

I find each and every contributor here a valuable asset and any opinion, negative or positive worth reading. Itís the deeply personal attacks, statements which border on liable & cloaked behind an alias which are hard to take. Yet, they are often the most informative to a newcomer and show just how deep the chasm is.

Lucinda
07-13-2002, 09:04 AM
There you go! I nominate Steve Beacham as the BBS genius representative to attend the city council meeting on Monday to propose this as a possible alternative for P&R. I'm certain there would be MANY people with MANY reasons why the CAPC can not handle this added fiscal responsibility, however, it adds an option as a solution and opens the subject to debate. Was enough time spent searching for alternative solutions to funding P&R?

Kaye Miller
07-13-2002, 10:16 AM
I doubt the city would vote to give a percentage of CAPC tax now collected to P&R. That would mean taking away from The! Auditorium or doing away with capc employees. We are now paying dearly to "bring everything in house".

I certainly wouldn't mind seeing a percentage spent on P&R. Better there than some of the useless advertising the tax is being spent on now.

If I could vote on this tax, the thing I would be most interested in would be a sunset clause. If November brings good changes, many of these things may work out. It is so important to have people working for the good of all than personal agendas. Keep this in mind when you vote in November.

Royal Alcott
07-13-2002, 10:50 AM
The City Council voted to put this tax on the ballot.

In doing this, the City Council admitted that Eureka Springs could not afford to fund the Parks & Recreation Commission from general revenues.

The tax vote is a referendum on "Shall the City of Eureka Springs do away with the Parks & Recreation Commission?"

Ms Miller, you seem to know who will be running for office in November.

The rest of us are waiting to see who files for a position on the ballot.

You could save us a lot of guess work if you would announce the candidates now.

Would you rather drop enigmatic hints than show and tell?

Privileged knowledge and all that.

Kaye Miller
07-13-2002, 11:26 AM
Royal, no where did I drop any hints. This is a prime example of reading more into something than is there. I simply made a statement.

If I was going to drop an enigmatic hint, wanna know where I would drop it???!!!

oldguy
07-13-2002, 01:04 PM
Does anybody know what the real $ cost that need funded to support what we have now.

How much to finish project that are in the works

what would be needed for a total maintanance once everything is done that is in the works.

It would seen as though we could get a short term tax with a set dollar amount for the in work projects. Then drop back to maintanance level. 1/2% for so many months then when the funds are there drop back to 1/4% or what is need while other income producing options are sought. May a % could come from CAPC we also are saving with the inhouse web service. Maybe public works could take some slack like a shared person for mowing or thing that they both do. Maybe JF could figure a quote for work he is equiped to do that his company could do more cost effective, and be a set amount so budgets could be more accurate.
The town has never looked so good. How much short would we be if the tax was just continued?
Maybe the CDP would fund the projects that they anounced at the Bass lake or shift there focas to complete Leatherwood.

sweetness&light
07-13-2002, 02:16 PM
Hey old dude, reading my mind...kinda. I was thinking of the CDP since their mission is to rennovate and beautify the town, is this only to buildings and possibly a huge project like Bass Lake OR could they incorporate things like gardening for all the city pocket gardens like Sweet Springs, Harding, Magnetic Springs and the big flower planter on Planer Hill? I remember several years ago when Margie was the city gardener, she spent a lot of her own money buying flowers for the parks AND the best thing was that a lot of locals shared their over abundance from their flower gardens with her for the use of the parks. One home owner even turned on the sprinkler during the hot summer when needed...nothing back breaking, just being neighborly and living nearby.

I'm not sure if the city gardener is paid out of P&R budget or Kirby's. Let's say the funding comes from Kirby and CDP plus resident gardeners who want to share their plants and maybe some energy take over some of the duties and a little of the cost for new flowers. Could that money saved be diverted to P&R? I'm certainly not wanting to eliminate any employees from gardening jobs because they do a wonderful job; I'm just trying to see where money could be donated as in sweat equity and the money saved could go to whatever the P&R needs.

Maybe those CDP volunteers who can't find a paintbrush to fit their hand would be more comfortable planting and smelling the flowers. I know a guy who sells wonderful mulches to keep weeding and watering to a minimum and you know how minimalistic I am.

Since I don't know the inner budgetary workings, it's just a thought. Community gardens in New York's toughest neighborhoods are a resounding success; why not here in peaceful Eureka?

kf5wd
07-13-2002, 06:55 PM
At the risk of bringing down upon myself the wrath that seems to be waiting for the unexpected, I think we all need to go back an re-read Mr. Voiers intitial post on this subject. He asked if it was true that the PS had given $300 for the PR's use in trying to influence the outcome of an election and if it was proper to do so and what could be expected next. He did not question the worthiness of the cause.It seemed to me to be a reasonable question. However many of you have used this as an opportunity for personal attacks on him (and others) rather than addressing the question.
You can read for yourself what the IRS has to say about political contributions by 501C organizatin by visiting the site below. My interpretation of the IRS rules governing 501C(6) organizations' "Exemption Requirements" do allow for donations to a political cause as long as: 1- it's main actvity is not political intervention, 2-it notifies it's members of the donation and 3- reportes the donation on it's 1099. The donation would be taxable.

http://www.irs.ustreas.gov/exempt/business/display/0,,i1%3D3%26i2%3D17%26genericId%3D6854,00.html

Larry Williams
07-13-2002, 08:22 PM
kf5wd,

Perhaps you should limit your interpretation of IRS rules as it appears you don't understand what you're looking at. You're interpreting IRS rules for "Business League Organizations." The ESPS is not a business league organization. I'd tell you what to look for but I'm concerned about your demonstrated understanding of what you're trying to interpret.

Becky Davis
07-13-2002, 08:35 PM
It is hard for me to think of anything more worthy than spending money on parks.
If I am back in Eureka by election day, I will most definitely vote yes for the tax.
I know we are almost taxed to death it seems. But this is a tax we have all been paying and should be used to by now. Wasn't it voted in for two years?
Someone correct me if I am wrong, because I honestly cannot remember.
As far as the Preservation Society donating three hundred dollars...I probably would not think a thing about it if it were not an election year. It could smack of trying to persuade the results, if the amount were not so low.
However, Steve Beacham has a great idea too about the CAPC footing the bills. How steady would the work and money coming in be?

[This message has been edited by Becky Davis (edited 07-13-2002).]

Larry Williams
07-13-2002, 09:30 PM
kf5wd,

I want to apologize for my curt reply.

This whole mess centers around a lot of friends who are important in my life. I find it frustrating trying to figure out what's actually going on. It also involves at least three organizations that I think are worthwhile and truly interested in doing the right thing for everyone.

I've read and re-read a lot of posts here trying to read between the lines. It reminds me of watching good friends divorce. I can't really say for sure what wounds have precipitated this but some people appear to me to be skirting their real issues. It's sad and the ultimate looser will be the people of Eureka Springs regardless of the outcome of any tax vote.

Sometimes small-town life isnít all itís cracked up to be.

jf501
07-14-2002, 05:40 AM
Ditto Larry!

[This message has been edited by jf501 (edited 07-14-2002).]