BCC set millage rate at Last years rate

[Bob Wells]

WCTA I have been talking about the County budget. The services provided by SWFD is something I pay for as well, gladly.

 

[WCTA]

WCTA I have been talking about the County budget. The services provided by SWFD is something I pay for as well, gladly.

[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]BCC Property Tax Collections[FONT=&quot]

1998[/FONT] $ 19,359,386.00
1999 $ 22,413.322.00
2000 $ 25,348,536.00
2001 $ 24,721,551.00
2002 $ 29,032,863.00
2003 $ 34,469,108.00
2004 $ 41,656,251.00
2005 $ 55,685,493.00
2006 $ 61,822,498.00

Between 1998 and 2006 BCC Ad valoreum Taxe Revenues Increased +171.27 %

[FONT=&quot]Population Growth +[/FONT]47.69%

Quite a comparison

 

[Bob Wells]

Sounds as though increased demand for services for a county that maybe considered rural that had a real estate boom because of it location, I wonder what Counties that don't have the area we have but still have to meet the needs of its citizens. Holmes, Jackson, Washinton counties come to mind. Think about Husfelt, Supt of Schools in Bay said he can justify a tax increase for the schools because he does not want to lay anyone else off obviously even he who ran on trimming the fat can't see himself from cutting off an arm. What was the ad valroem increases for each of those years? Has the level of service increased? Are we receiving more services for the increased amount we are paying? I think these will be the questions answered after we see the decreased services. Based on the power point BCC Budget, with the decrease in ad valorem of $7.4 million where do you suggest the cuts be made? Even I realize that anything I say here is made moot because the rate has been set, but at this point I have had my opportunity to get on my box and say my piece. In the end we may disagree but I still respect your right to your opinion.

 

[Andy A]

Don't understand why you say I'm aging any differently than you. The 79 years is what i heard it would take to payoff the debt created since January.

Check your thought process.
Posted via Mobile Device

With all due respect, sometimes he doesn't have any. Other times, not so much, once in a while, lots.

 

[Here4Good]

With all due respect, sometimes he doesn't have any. Other times, not so much, once in a while, lots.

I always try to factor in the time of day on those posts.

 

[wrobert]

Can you provide some documentation for your rant

I can.

 

[wrobert]

Robert, have you not looked at the power point, 2009 they were down 21 postions I think these are 911/ dispatched which were picked up by WCSO and for 2010 they have 3 unfunded and 1 eliminated position. There you go again, when confronted you throw out a what I suppose I am to think is a slam. Proud UNION Member here. First I am opposing all layoff, if they are through attrition and and they are not filling open positions I can't and won't argue, but if they are laying off then it would affect services even more. FYI maybe Robert you should look at the number of folks NFPA says should be on scene to fight a fire. The State of Florida says unless life is endangered you should have a 2 in 2 out rule at a minimum. Talk to Chief Rivers, oh never mind its all about the money. As for my employment, you know I do. I work for 2 departments, one part-time and the other full time. Maybe those things you have mentioned should be those things we cut instead of the folks. I am more than willing to stop improving parks and buying cheaper uniforms, and cutting trips and the such. Didn't you work for the county once? I guess to disagree with you, seems to alway bring an attempt at an attack by you. Sorry that my comments offend you.

Here4Good between 2009 and 2010 my count in positions lost whether thru attrtion, layoff or unfunded is 42.5 positions. I am also unsure how many more positions are going to be eliminated because we will not have the same money as last year. I will admit I am only reading what it says and I could definitiely not be interpeting it the same way you are. Although WCTA did say after the recent vote they would be reviewing the impact, so maybe there are going to be additional cuts to services and personnel.

Then why are you guys not up there telling them to get more firefighters hired because the situation they have is unsafe?

I guess I just do not understand the immediate response to budget cuts is that emergency services are going to be cut. I do not want to see us have less public safety personnel, teachers, or anyone for that matter. I want them to quit wasting money and doing what I consider silly stuff with it. If they stopped all of that, and we need to raise taxes to keep our level of protection the same, then let us raise taxes. But do not ask for more money until the inefficiency is under control.

 

[wrobert]

Sounds as though increased demand for services for a county that maybe considered rural that had a real estate boom because of it location, I wonder what Counties that don't have the area we have but still have to meet the needs of its citizens. Holmes, Jackson, Washinton counties come to mind. Think about Husfelt, Supt of Schools in Bay said he can justify a tax increase for the schools because he does not want to lay anyone else off obviously even he who ran on trimming the fat can't see himself from cutting off an arm. What was the ad valroem increases for each of those years? Has the level of service increased? Are we receiving more services for the increased amount we are paying? I think these will be the questions answered after we see the decreased services. Based on the power point BCC Budget, with the decrease in ad valorem of $7.4 million where do you suggest the cuts be made? Even I realize that anything I say here is made moot because the rate has been set, but at this point I have had my opportunity to get on my box and say my piece. In the end we may disagree but I still respect your right to your opinion.

You know it is admirable to not want to lay off a teacher. But if you have 1000 fewer students to teach, and you get paid per student to teach them, how can you justify keeping all those teachers?

Keeping in mind as you keep those teachers your future pension costs are going up, requiring an ever increasing amount of your budget, making it even harder to do the job without raising taxes the next year.

The government is GM on steroids.

 

[Matt J]

Don't understand why you say I'm aging any differently than you. The 79 years is what i heard it would take to payoff the debt created since January.

Check your thought process.
Posted via Mobile Device

You said another 79 years, implying that you are currently 79 years old. Just a month ago you were 72.

Perhaps Bob and Bob should keep notes on your age so these little errors will stop popping up.

 

[ShallowsNole]

You said another 79 years, implying that you are currently 79 years old. Just a month ago you were 72.

Perhaps Bob and Bob should keep notes on your age so these little errors will stop popping up.

Sometimes I wonder who y'all think I really am...:roll: