Where is Bill this week?

[MorningGlory]

QUESTION: Where does Commissioner Imfeld stand on customary use this week???

He couldn't make up his mind a few weeks ago. He voted NO at the board table but in his commercial a few days afterwards he's is in favor of it. In this commercial he says that some might think that citizens of Walton County have short memories and that maybe they are none too smart! (His choice of words , not mine) I wonder if he shares those thoughts? hmmmm? All I can say for sure is my memory isn't that short!!! How about the rest of you?

So again, where does Commissioner Imfeld stand these days?? Or maybe I should say today? I guess it's apt to change if the wind blows just right??? Just saying...

 

[Dawn]

QUESTION: Where does Commissioner Imfeld stand on customary use this week???

He couldn't make up his mind a few weeks ago. He voted NO at the board table but in his commercial a few days afterwards he's is in favor of it. In this commercial he says that some might think that citizens of Walton County have short memories and that maybe they are none too smart! (His choice of words , not mine) I wonder if he shares those thoughts? hmmmm? All I can say for sure is my memory isn't that short!!! How about the rest of you?

So again, where does Commissioner Imfeld stand these days?? Or maybe I should say today? I guess it's apt to change if the wind blows just right??? Just saying...

Are you for Nipper or Dixon? Why not tell us why you are for someone instead of negative?

 

[MorningGlory]

Are you for Nipper or Dixon? Why not tell us why you are for someone instead of negative?

Better question: why can't our seated commissioner make up his mind? His not being able to do so makes me question. As far as negativity is concerned, I guess when our elected leadership is so confused or whatever the case may be so as to not be able to make a stand either way on such an important issue for the county that they are supposed to be representing, it does create a few not so positive questions. Dawn, many times the truth isn't always rosey and positive but it doesn't change the FACT that it is still the truth.

I guess the only thing that I can offer to those who can't handle that is to make like an ostrich and stick their heads in a hole so they can't see or hear the UGLY TRUTH! I just hope that they realize what's left exposed while their heads in the hole. That's not a plan of action! That's avoidance!!!

Almost forgot!!! Who I'm for is my business, not yours! However I can take a pretty good guess who you're for. Thanks

 

[Dawn]

Better question: why can't our seated commissioner make up his mind? His not being able to do so makes me question. As far as negativity is concerned, I guess when our elected leadership is so confused or whatever the case may be so as to not be able to make a stand either way on such an important issue for the county that they are supposed to be representing, it does create a few not so positive questions. Dawn, many times the truth isn't always rosey and positive but it doesn't change the FACT that it is still the truth.

I guess the only thing that I can offer to those who can't handle that is to make like an ostrich and stick their heads in a hole so they can't see or hear the UGLY TRUTH! I just hope that they realize what's left exposed while their heads in the hole. That's not a plan of action! That's avoidance!!!

Almost forgot!!! Who I'm for is my business, not yours! However I can take a pretty good guess who you're for. Thanks

I am not able to vote sadly, as I am a registered independent. I ask questions because I want to know the truth. And you ain't got none. You just lost all credibility with me and I am sure many others because of your rambling post and refusal to answer a simple question.

If I could vote my instinct would be to vote against the dark money of Our Generation PAC but it is very disturbing just voting against something so I would have to look closer at the records.

If Imfeld voted against customary use that would be a problem with me. However I have no problem with leaders changing their minds on an issue if they are using their brains.

 

[Misty]

I can think of about $2 million dollars worth of reasons to vote no on Imfield but to be honest I'm having just as hard a time supporting Dixon and I'm very leery of Nipper.

I had a conversation a few days ago on FB with a woman who failed to qualify in that race (not enough signatures to get on the ballot) and Dixon was a party to that conversation. This woman is a wealth of misinformation, including, that Nipper knows or knew who Our Generation is which isn't true, neither she nor Bill Fletcher knew when the first ads came out who was behind them. I think there has been enough information put out now, that if you don't know who was behind them you should at least have a partial clue. John Dixon is under the impression that the opportunity to discuss the issues went out the window when these people hijacked the election and he believes it was a distraction from the beach issue. I don't believe they have hijacked anything and Customary Use won't be an issue in the Aug. primaries because it's now in the hands of attorneys. However, both Bills in the beginning both voted no on the ordinance to remove signs, ropes, chains and fences and didn't switch positions until it became abundantly clear that it might be the focal point of the primaries. It's not now. Personally, I don't believe for a minute that either of the Bills are FOR Customary Use but are saying what they are being told to say to get re-elected.

In addition to the conversation with this woman (a wealth of misinformation) she also told me in private msgs she wouldn't be supporting Mike Davis for Superintendent because he was the county attorney. I literally almost fell out of my chair laughing at that one. Mike Davis IS NOT the county attorney but he is the brother of Mark Davis who is! Mark Davis (the county attorney) is retiring from the school board this year. You just can't make this stuff up. LOL! She actually said that!! .( Mike is also a great guy and has got my vote!

This woman also passed (shared) the bogus story about the flesh eating bacteria being in our coastal waters that was passed around on social media after a news story out of all places...Chicago. That story was later retracted by the new station involved. My point being that you can't depend on everything you see read or hear in the news or on social media. To be an informed voter you need to do your own research. Listening to the good ole guys/gals is not real beneficial either....obviously.

I suspect Vivian Ann Vivarttas is another "Blue" plant! Like Amy Wise Coble she has done absolutely no campaigning, has filed no candidate statement, has reported absolutely no campaign contributions, has been a no show at all community forums and was simply dropped into the race by the "Blue's Crew" for one more shot in the November election if Nipper defeats Bill Imfield which I highly doubt will happen.. The "Blue's Crew" luvs them some Imfield.

 

[MorningGlory]

Just for clarification purposes, I was the one asking a very valid question about a commissioner/candidate that I will be voting on in the upcoming election!!! Which by the way you didn't address or answer. I also stated facts about his views and vote at the board meeting on a specific issue. (Which I'm guessing you didn't attend.) The truth is Commissioner Imfeld voted NO to customary use at the board table as was heard at the meeting and reported in the local newspapers. Then in his political ad/ commercial he states very clearly he's for it!
If you are so concerned and want to be well informed , I commend you!!! I wish more would have that same desire. So, Im saying very respectfully to you to get involved yourself, go to the meetings yourself, do the leg work yourself! Then you don't have to seek answers from us that, in your opinion, have no credibility. PROBLEM SOLVED!
All the best to you on your journey to seek out the truth!! You Have a great day now!

 

[FactorFiction]

Just for clarification purposes, I was the one asking a very valid question about a commissioner/candidate that I will be voting on in the upcoming election!!! Which by the way you didn't address or answer. I also stated facts about his views and vote at the board meeting on a specific issue. (Which I'm guessing you didn't attend.) The truth is Commissioner Imfeld voted NO to customary use at the board table as was heard at the meeting and reported in the local newspapers. Then in his political ad/ commercial he states very clearly he's for it!
If you are so concerned and want to be well informed , I commend you!!! I wish more would have that same desire. So, Im saying very respectfully to you to get involved yourself, go to the meetings yourself, do the leg work yourself! Then you don't have to seek answers from us that, in your opinion, have no credibility. PROBLEM SOLVED!
All the best to you on your journey to seek out the truth!! You Have a great day now!

The vote that you are referring to was not actually on customary use, it was on the amended beach ordinance to remove all ropes, chains, signs, etc. As I understood Mr. Imfeld and Mr. Chapman, their no votes were not against customary use at all, but they did not want to be crosswise with the law (FL statutes and more) regarding owner's rights to post their property against trespassing. They actually proposed some options to the wording that created the issues, but were voted down. Many people have interpreted their votes on the ordinance as a vote against customary use, but it was clear at the meeting (yes, I was in attendance) that the vote was not about customary use at all. I can; however, understand how the amended ordinance appears to be a pre-cursor to the customary use case that is likely to weave its way through the court system over the next several (or many) years at great taxpayer cost.

 

[MorningGlory]

The vote that you are referring to was not actually on customary use, it was on the amended beach ordinance to remove all ropes, chains, signs, etc. As I understood Mr. Imfeld and Mr. Chapman, their no votes were not against customary use at all, but they did not want to be crosswise with the law (FL statutes and more) regarding owner's rights to post their property against trespassing. They actually proposed some options to the wording that created the issues, but were voted down. Many people have interpreted their votes on the ordinance as a vote against customary use, but it was clear at the meeting (yes, I was in attendance) that the vote was not about customary use at all. I can; however, understand how the amended ordinance appears to be a pre-cursor to the customary use case that is likely to weave its way through the court system over the next several (or many) years at great taxpayer cost.

Thank you, FactorFiction. That is USEFUL information.

 

[Dawn]

I can think of about $2 million dollars worth of reasons to vote no on Imfield but to be honest I'm having just as hard a time supporting Dixon and I'm very leery of Nipper.

I had a conversation a few days ago on FB with a woman who failed to qualify in that race (not enough signatures to get on the ballot) and Dixon was a party to that conversation. This woman is a wealth of misinformation, including, that Nipper knows or knew who Our Generation is which isn't true, neither she nor Bill Fletcher knew when the first ads came out who was behind them. I think there has been enough information put out now, that if you don't know who was behind them you should at least have a partial clue. John Dixon is under the impression that the opportunity to discuss the issues went out the window when these people hijacked the election and he believes it was a distraction from the beach issue. I don't believe they have hijacked anything and Customary Use won't be an issue in the Aug. primaries because it's now in the hands of attorneys. However, both Bills in the beginning both voted no on the ordinance to remove signs, ropes, chains and fences and didn't switch positions until it became abundantly clear that it might be the focal point of the primaries. It's not now. Personally, I don't believe for a minute that either of the Bills are FOR Customary Use but are saying what they are being told to say to get re-elected.

In addition to the conversation with this woman (a wealth of misinformation) she also told me in private msgs she wouldn't be supporting Mike Davis for Superintendent because he was the county attorney. I literally almost fell out of my chair laughing at that one. Mike Davis IS NOT the county attorney but he is the brother of Mark Davis who is! Mark Davis (the county attorney) is retiring from the school board this year. You just can't make this stuff up. LOL! She actually said that!! .( Mike is also a great guy and has got my vote!

This woman also passed (shared) the bogus story about the flesh eating bacteria being in our coastal waters that was passed around on social media after a news story out of all places...Chicago. That story was later retracted by the new station involved. My point being that you can't depend on everything you see read or hear in the news or on social media. To be an informed voter you need to do your own research. Listening to the good ole guys/gals is not real beneficial either....obviously.

I suspect Vivian Ann Vivarttas is another "Blue" plant! Like Amy Wise Coble she has done absolutely no campaigning, has filed no candidate statement, has reported absolutely no campaign contributions, has been a no show at all community forums and was simply dropped into the race by the "Blue's Crew" for one more shot in the November election if Nipper defeats Bill Imfield which I highly doubt will happen.. The "Blue's Crew" luvs them some Imfield.

Hearsay like this from some unattributed person on facebook, who can't even get the name or identity of a candidate correct, is not acceptable or appreciated. If you want to post what you know to be true, or your opinion, that is fine.

 

[Misty]

Hearsay like this from some unattributed person on facebook, who can't even get the name or identity of a candidate correct, is not acceptable or appreciated. If you want to post what you know to be true, or your opinion, that is fine.

Dawn really? Can you not figure out who I had this conversation with by going to the SOE website and looking at who didn't qualify because she didn't have the signatures needed to get on the ballot? Please...use a little of your own common sense. It's not rocket science.

This isn't rumor, this is not innuendo, I had the conversation with this woman! I know I had the conversation with her! Not with someone else with her.

You are so quick to dispute most any comments I make here or play moderator without checking your own resources first. Do us both a favor and please get your facts straight! Thank you.