CHARTER TO BE RECONSIDERED???The article in the St Augustine Record this morning about the Charter being revisited for a place on the November ballot was almost laughable. I say "almost" because if the people behind this poorly written document get their way, it may get shoved down the county's throat anyway! ALL districts voted SOUNDLY to defeat this issue, with ONE EXCEPTION: Ponte Vedra. Who drafted this Charter without ANY oversight what so ever? A group in Ponte Vedra. I don't know about the rest of you, but I smell a dead fish here somewhere! The Charter was defeated. The "Admendments" were all voted in favor of...that was IF THE CHARTER HAD BEEN PASSED. I don't know about the rest of you that voted against the Charter, but the way the ballot was worded didn't confuse me or my wife in the least! The Admendments were "IF" the Charter had been passed. Meaning to me that IF by some miracle this Charter WERE passed, then THESE are the Admendments that must be added to it. THE CHARTER DID NOT PASS! NOT EVEN CLOSE! IT DOES NOT BELONG ON THE NOVEMBER BALLOT!!! The Charter needs to be revisited by a DIVERSE committee comprised of members from all over the County, WITH OVERSIGHT, and legal aid. THEN if it is written in an acceptable way, no "Admendments" would be necessary on the same ballot. It would be Charter or No Charter. I don't know why certain people are so fired up to ram this Charter through. But from my life's experience, when things like this are hammered on AFTER the voters have REJECTED it, it usually means that someone, some where, stands to benefit from this Charter...and it's NOT the majority voters of St Johns County. Food for thought folks, just food for thought. This is all in my humble, abet learned, opinion. Submitted by Claude91098 on Sat, 09/06/2008 - 10:28am.
I am amazed that only ONE person chimed in on this subject! gasbag, I guess it's up to you and me to keep ringing the bell!!!
Submitted by Gasbag on Wed, 09/10/2008 - 9:22am.
I have to admire Cyndi Stevenson. Apparently, she takes her position as a representative seriously. The clip below from a St. John's Sun article below says it all. Way to go Stevenson, you'll get my vote for the foreseeable future. Bryant, Manual and Sanchez, don't count on it. Vice chair Cyndi Stevenson, who campaigned as a charter supporter, said she had "no choice but to oppose this. I don't think it's the commission's role to determine the legality of advertising. I was very distressed (the charter) didn't pass. I mourn that failure but believe the people have spoken." Submitted by Claude91098 on Sun, 09/14/2008 - 9:09am.
I agree gasbag! I emailed Cyndi and told her so. Actually, I asked if she had voted yes or no on the Nov ballot initiative. I don't keep up that much. Obviously she voted NO...Way to go Cyndi! I also mentioned to her that 5 or 6 of her large Blue Diamand campaign signs were still along CR 210 and that the workers that took the time to place them there need to be gracious enough to get out there and remove them now. I have noticed that this year, unlike years in the past, the candidates' workers have been pretty good at removing the campaign signs in a timely manner. While there are still a few out there, besides Stevenson's, most are gone! GOOD JOB!!!
Submitted by MacMitchell on Mon, 09/15/2008 - 2:58pm.
Claude.... I believe Cyndi's campaign signs are legally allowed to be displayed as her name will appear on the Nov. ballot. She will be running against Merrill Paul Roland, an independent candidate. So she still has a reason to display her signs. Keep in mind that isn't fact, as I have not checked with the Supervisor of Elections, but I believe that is the case. We have received the same commentary from a number of callers as well. Submitted by Claude91098 on Tue, 09/23/2008 - 8:13pm.
Thanks Mac....I was unaware that she was going to be on the Nov ballot as well. We love Cyndi and she'll get our votes for certain. I sent her an email commending her for dissenting on the Charter reconsideration and I mentioned her signs being up, she hasn't answered but if they are ok to still be up, I withdraw my observation of their being up still. Submitted by rrripit on Wed, 09/24/2008 - 9:07pm.
Those who do not study history are bound to repeat it! Remember the Roman Empire?
Oops did I say charter twice? My mistake, I thought we voted against it. In my opinion, I was under the impression that our votes counted. Were there hanging chads? Lost ballots?
Somebody educate me on the proper way to vote. Please! Oh yeah, one more thing...I think the guy who lost the election for Dist. 3 should be investigated. |
Who's online
There are currently 0 users and 10 guests online.
Recent comments |
I agree.
There was nothing confusing about the wording of the amendments on the ballot. They were clearly stated as contingent upon passage of the charter. If the pro-charter people are using some kind of argument that these were confusing as justification for placing the charter back on the ballot in November, then we should all be very suspicious of their real motives.