Ever wonder if Milton would be as tumultuous if different candidates had won? Since '06, every campaign season is on fire with accusations and vigor. Thus, Accessmilton.com thought it would be fun, on this day prior to the third Milton election, for our devoted readers to put the pieces together if they could do it over again!Below you find the names of all candidates who ran in Milton's three elections to date. In the comments section below, place the district and name of your top choice for each if you controlled Milton. This should be interesting, folks...
District 11. Karen Thurman
2. Bernard Wolff
District 2
1. Julie Zahner Bailey
2. Gordon Hunter
3. Roger Santi
District 3
1. Jon Carroll
2. Clint Johnson
3. Marty Lock
4. Bill Lusk
5. Paul Moore
6. Al Trevillyan
District 4
1. Sam Bottoms
2. Tim Enloe
3. Burt Hewitt
4. Eddie Moore
5. Neal O'Brien
6. Vince Pisano
District 5
1. Tina D'Aversa
2. Joe Longoria
District 6
1. Rick Mohrig
2. Alan Tart
Mayor
1. Joe Lockwood
2. George Ragsdale
19 comments:
Tim: Are you really trying to start a fight? :-)
I think if Julie Bailey had stayed as an activist with BHA and not been elected our city would be much better off.
I would agree. Julie should have remained an activist. I am decided in the Lusk - Trevillyan race I still remain undecided in the Thurman - Wolff race and simply because I know of Bernards close ties with Julie.
Tina and Joes race I remain undecided in and do not know that I could vote for either. I think Milton will lose having either candidate in the seat.
I'll make it simple a vote for Tina, Bernard, or Allen is a vote for JZB.
We need to start planning for her defeat in 2 years.
Was Sam Bottoms even really eligible? Didn't think he was old enough, or was that something that the Ogre (jan jones) changed?
Paranoia runs rampant. Each of these campaigns are running their own race. Julie is not driving them. They are each smart, strong, professional people with their own ideas. If anyone looks past this tripe at the individuals, what they have accomplished and what they have to say about their plans, it is obvious.
The 7 people in the "they are out to get us crowd need to give it a rest and take their medication.
you people need to take a hard long look at the reasons you all moved here. Take in the beautiful vistas of trees, large lots, and roads less traveled because if this election goes the way of Lusk, Thurmon and Longoria you can kiss it all goodbye!
Keep Alan, Tina and Julie, and start over with the rest.
Or Bernard? Take a look at the following email. What is his motivation, be a puppet for Julie or sell his land? If he sells the "development rights" what part of Milton will get the "density"?
Would this be a conflict of interest if he got elected?
-----Original Message-----
From: Bernard Wolff
To: John McD Wolff Susan Lindley ; Marian Nolan ; ferrelln9@hotmail.com; Charles Wolff
Sent: Fri, Oct 30, 2009 12:28 pm
Subject: Fw: Preserving Farms
I haven't had a chance to review these (I shall tonight), but these appear to be examples of what I'm considering for Lahkapani and the City of Milton, or Milton + Roswell jointly.
Both Roswell and Milton are anxious to acquire park & recreational property for their citizens. It adds attractiveness to a community, which results in a better (affluent, law abiding, tax paying etc) citizenry, increasing land values, and decreased need for services.
To our benefit, it offers us a chance to sell Lahkapani before the housing market recovers, at a market price to us, & a discounted price to the municipality. If feasible, the way this would work is:
Price/acre desired: $100,000
Lease to city for 3 years at acceptable annual rent (say, $200,000/year) with option to purchase at end of lease. The Purchase contract will require that the City purchase the Property (at the end of the lease) if development rights are removed and the property use is perpetually as farm or park land (which reduces its value).
As the lease period ends and the purchase date arrives, we would
>sell develoment rights for, say, $60K/Acre to a developer to use in another area.
>We would then sell the property to the city for, say $40K/acre.
We get the targeted $100K/acre, the City purchases the park land for $40K/acre.
The numbers and transaction details may be different, but the basic concept is the same.
Thanks,
Brother
Let us all now close our eyes and visualize what this City would look like today if Julie hadn't lucked out the first election. Gordon or Roger would have been excellent choices and we would have had a council that really could have moved the ball forward in Milton.
Julie was an outstanding community volunteer, but sometimes those qualities and skillset just do not translate into good governing skills. The same is true for Tina.
100 acres for $40k per acre, and a lease option for years to figure out the funding? Are you complaining?? We'd have the best parks in the state, and we can afford that. We'd be done.
Go Bernard.
Lots of unlawful and immoral activities go on in parks by some real upstanding citizens.
12:25 poster: you are part of the problem, please move
Jule is still an activist even though she is also on the council. That is the problem.
12:35 poster, are you nuts? Roger Santi?
Have you met the guy? He's arrogant and doesn't know squat about the area.
Gordon Hunter would have been a much better choice than him.
But only if Brooke packed her bags and left Milton with the milkman. She is a hateful, sad person.
See what Thurman's been up to. Not lies at all. Here you go...
http://www.bindermalter.com/files/12-19-08-10-01-43.pdf
You Zahnerites are absolute idiots, or disengenuous...maybe just both.
I just got an autodial from Julie, of all people.
She is "all in", as they say in Vegas. Invariably, she hides in the shadows like the wimpy Wizard of Oz, operating via dupes like Leona Cole, Paula Moore, pathetic Carol and nutty Nikky. This time, she is so desperate, the One herself has come out for her cast of candidates.
Her call says Milton will be the same if we vote her way...and it WILL!!!
In other words, no improvement, no parks, no quality of life increases, no tax relief, nothing.
Just a desperate longing for something that only exists in some minds every fall during elections. Anyone who really wants to protect, improve, save Milton needs to run away from the Z-ites as fast as they can.
Let's really do something innovative with our horse community, get parks that are the envy of the region, keep one acre,(regardless of who connects to EXISTING sewer pipes to protect the environment). Julie and her gang haven't done anything innovative in their lives. Look at Tina: uses co-hosts for events she hasn't gotten permission from, signs in places without permission, when corrected she extorts concessions or fires from City committees. She tried to veto the parks authority, didn't start disability awareness as claimed, didn't do much of anything. When an apparently reasonable opponent surfaces, she tries to bribe him to drop out...so she can save her sacred seat & title. Oh, she isn't a professor, she is an "instructor". Doesn't sound so cool.
We should be much more concerned about a man's brother going public saying he is unfit for a position of public trust, than some silly trumped up claim of an obscure company scandal.
Get real, go vote. The only truth is this IS an important election. In Dist 5, if Tina does win, we will have to pay $100k for a special election, undoubtedly, unless the City sues Tina due to her misconduct and makes her pay...which she can't.
Julie and her gang haven't run a business, held a job and most seem to have trouble selecting spellcheck when they blog. Do you really want moonbats running a $20million business, with your money and your property value at stake?
I don't.
Wow you guys need to learn to behave your selves!
Post a Comment