Business owner states agenda
Updated 04/11/2007 12:03:09 AM EDT
After reading the story in the Herald-Standard that reviewed the opinions of most of the candidates that
are competing for the title of commissioner, I was bothered with the fact that many pieces of the puzzle were missing. Their
lashing opinions were stuck on tax increases and "who did what." None of the candidates made mention of several issues that
are causing a breakdown in the social climate and stopping our county from moving forward.
Several months ago, I was contemplating to put my viewpoints on record and take a challenge for the reason
to be a neutral candidate that would do what is right for the business owners and those that are employed or temporarily unemployed
in our county. Petitions were received and I began to question many business owners as to "what they disliked most about our
county." The conclusion of my discussions were the same viewpoints that I had while contemplating whether to run for one of
The candidates can allude to the fact that the 60 percent tax increase topic is so important but any business owner would
then need to recount the issues that have caused the need to initiate the tax increase. None of the candidates confronted
the following issues:
- Increased crime due to those that intend not to be employed on a full-time basis. Too much
time on their hands to get into trouble, which in turn, is very costly for our police and court system to process the enormous
- Low-income housing in respect to our working population is at an unbalanced percentage. Thriving communities
keep this in check due to the fact that it can get in the way of economic development.
- The education system needs
to be addressed. Students aren't prepared for the initial process in their job search. When was the last time that you saw
a county commissioner work along with the school systems? To encourage the fact that there are important trade skills that
can be a promising future for those that don't want to leave the county for continued education.
- Taking interest
in the reciprocation of business to local business owners that are the main fabric of the county's tax base. The solicitation
of chain businesses to locate in our area instead of supporting and assisting local businesses that have roughed-it-out over
the years has hit the local business owner right in the pocket. Local businesses spend thousands of dollars training entry-level
employees in a job duty and then to have an outside business move in and drag employees away by offering short-term incentives
in lieu of spending the time and money that it takes to train an employee at entry-level.
- Develop a bid-advantage
policy for Fayette County-owned businesses to compete on all items purchased by the county. This is done in other areas to
assist the local businesses for long-term survival.
Now, this may seem like a lot to put on the plate of a county commissioner
candidate, but these are some issues that should be addressed and followed through with.
Keep in mind, there is still
time for a viable candidate that stands up for the local business owner to throw his or her hat in the general election as
I'm sure if that person would take a position as such, that their success in winning could be a task
to be accomplished. Mmmmm ... wonder who that person could be?
Eminent Domain Supreme Power
Jun 24, 05 The Supreme Court members who voted
that local governments can utilize eminent domain to take private property for economic development surely don't believe anybody
would dare to take THEIR property.
Imagine how this will work.
Supreme Court Justice owns a mansion in
New London Connecticutt. The mansion is right smack near proposed waterfront development, with let's say, ten acres
of woods separing the industrial zoned area from the Justice's property. The city leaders want to impose eminent domain
on the Justice. Ha. What's that. No city council member in his or her right mind would ever dare to attempt
to take the Justice's property. The topic wouldn't even come up. It wouldn't ever be considered because the Justice
is well known and powerful.
The little guy, those seven New London property owners who have refused to sell, are not
treated equally under the U.S. Constitution. They have no power.
The members of the Supreme Court, whose names
are held in high regard, are protected because no city would dare, ever, to take their property by eminent domain for economic
This would hold true for the well-connected in any urban area for other "powerful" people.
about the local mayor. Think he/she would ever have board members of city council use eminent domain on property he/she
owns. When pigs fly.
Governments abuse power. Absolutely. Not only are governments capable of abusing power, governments are corruptible.
Every community in this country can point to at least one instance wherein properties have been incorrectly and illegally
zoned. Who does the zoning? The same local governments that are corruptible.
This action by five Supreme
Court justices more than sets a precedent all around the county, it is an open barn door - anything can become a public benefit
use project. Anything at all.
Very sad - this shows that the Constitution is ignored.http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,160566,00.html