|
|
Post by admin on Mar 9, 2006 15:04:59 GMT -6
Before another topic takes off on this tangent, I am going to open a thread for this.
Here is the thing about the Vote Yes donors, at least we know who they are.
I have not seen one person or group that has donated to CFO. Who would benefit the most ITFR? Construction groups that specialize in additions? Mobile classroom builders? Brach Brodie? Their lawyers. So where did all this CFO money come from? They certainly didn't have it last year.
|
|
|
|
Post by blankcheck on Mar 9, 2006 15:14:51 GMT -6
It looks like they moved over a little over $3,000 for last year. Basically, they have over $30,000 to work with. CFO has a little over $600.00 at last report. And yes, I do think it is a conflict of interest when your board member's company (especially a bank) donates to the campaign. Many of the other cast of characters have not appeared as of yet (Sodexco, Laidlaw). To remind everyone who may be new, Sodexco is your food service contract, Laidlaw is your bus contract. Interesting that Macom has not appeared yet. Big donors last time with $10,000.00. Any guesses why?
|
|
|
|
Post by admin on Mar 9, 2006 15:16:16 GMT -6
Sector G
Can I get a link to the disclosures?
|
|
|
|
Post by kae on Mar 9, 2006 15:23:46 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by kae on Mar 9, 2006 15:31:20 GMT -6
Before another topic takes off on this tangent, I am going to open a thread for this. Here is the thing about the Vote Yes donors, at least we know who they are. I have not seen one person or group that has donated to CFO. Who would benefit the most ITFR? Construction groups that specialize in additions? Mobile classroom builders? Brach Brodie? Their lawyers. So where did all this CFO money come from? They certainly didn't have it last year. I guess I don't know what you mean by "where did all this CFO money come from?" I don't see a lot of money in what CFO does. Their handouts were not glossy thick door hangers; it was a one page/one sided printout from their website on crappy green paper. Like I've said before. I don't think CFO has any major backers like 204thekids does. I think the people at CFO are all residents that don't think that the referendum is the right answer. The 204thekids PAC is a well oiled machine with lots of funding from donors that will profit from the passage of the referendum. I still say that most of the stuff that gets handed out is paid for by a handful of residents that probably don't even turn the bill into CFO. |
|
|
|
Post by admin on Mar 9, 2006 15:34:16 GMT -6
CFO: For a group that is worried about debt. Their only money is a loan
So who is paying for all these flyers and the signs if they have no money? And who is paying for the website?
There are no expenses at all except for a Sun ad. Something fishy about this.
|
|
|
|
Post by gumby on Mar 9, 2006 15:40:51 GMT -6
I think the people at CFO are all residents that don't think that the referendum is the right answer. Or do not like the thought of spending money. I know it is not about the cheapness for everybody, but I get this niggling feeling it is for most. There is little harm in a 3rd HS and many advantages. Money in most cases trumps all however, since that really appears to be the overriding theme in the CFO message. You are right. But there is nothing wrong with that. Since when was job creation a bad thing? If there is no self-dealing, which I do not think there is (the Oxford Bank thing is a red herring), the fact that there are other benefits other than providing a good education for our kids and their kids and helpful for maintaining the D204 reputation, is not a bad thing like some would imply. |
|
|
|
Post by blankcheck on Mar 9, 2006 15:42:31 GMT -6
Not sure how much it costs to print flyers on plain paper at Office Max. I'm sure you can make a lot for $600.00 Many times you can create a web site a minimal fee. Hostitwise (who does the 204the kids) donated $3,000.00 as In kind donation. They have to disclose - and they will. It will nothing compared to what 204thekids has taken in.
|
|
|
|
Post by gumby on Mar 9, 2006 15:43:43 GMT -6
So?
|
|
|
|
Post by blankcheck on Mar 9, 2006 15:45:14 GMT -6
Gumby - Little harm in a third high school? Hello! How about the tax implications? This is not for free you know. The Oxford Bank issue is not a red herring it is a fact.
|
|
|
|
Post by gumby on Mar 9, 2006 15:51:12 GMT -6
Tax implications are small. We have already seen that it is nominal relative to the benefit.
The OB thing is legal. The statutes allow it. There has not been any wrongdoing, unless you would like to allege otherwise.
|
|
|
|
Post by blankcheck on Mar 9, 2006 15:56:43 GMT -6
Not alleging Gumby - questioning. Tax implications are small - ARE YOU KIDDING ME!!!!!! They may present that they will be small but they won't. As proof I have all my old tax bills. You think they are small (relatively speaking) now, you just wait. Hey BTW - Are you planning on staying here to pay those tax bills or are you someone who transfers quite a bit? If it is the later, please do us folks who are here for the long haul a favor and don't vote for something you will not be writting the check out for.
|
|
|
|
Post by admin on Mar 9, 2006 15:58:54 GMT -6
Blankcheck, your rising taxes are due more to appreciation than tax hikes.
I plan on being here until at least 2026 and don't mind the extra $10,000 I will pay in B&I from 2017 to 2026.
You can start putting that money away now to pay for that tax increase in 2017. That is 11 years from now for my first $1200 extra tax increase.
|
|
|
|
Post by gumby on Mar 9, 2006 16:05:34 GMT -6
I plan on being here for another 20 years or so. I've been here since 1991. My youngest is 3, so I'll be here until he graduates.
There's no chance of me being transferred and there are too many jobs in this area for me to move--unless I get something really big!
|
|
|
|
Post by momof3 on Mar 9, 2006 16:09:08 GMT -6
Topher please check your PM
|
|
