Everyone seems to think the issue is the free water, sewer and trash. This is not the issue.
You claim Sue was trying to meet the "deadline" well the meeting was 5/25/06 the checks were made out in 4/07 & 5/07. So there was plenty of time to conduct business or expenditures properly. But this was never brought back to the council as requested.
There are several ways that this can be fixed. But since I know there is only a small part of the VFD Volunteers on here trying to stir up a mess to save Sue's butt, maybe all the qualified help at city hall can figure it out.
By the way, in the 80's yes there was tax laws that covered "wages and compensation" That is when the IRS decided a waitress's tips were to be included in as wages and allowed employers to lower their actual wages for pay.
I don't believe that anyone does not support the VFD. I do believe that some citizens did get the idea that a certain group of volunteers were making threats to the residents of this community. The words of: "YOU KNOW WHAT:
ALL YOU OUTZ PEOPLE LIKE WHITE, THOMPSON, GUNNAR, POWELL, TREVINO ECT. ARE GOING TO KEEP PISSING WITH THESE FIREMEN AND YOU MIGHT GET SOMETHING I'M NOT SURE YOUR READY TO DEAL WITH. WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO IF THEY FINALLY HAVE ENOUGH OF YOUR BULLSHIT AND ALL OF THEM SHOW UP AT A COUNCIL MEETING AND QUIT RIGHT THERE AND THEN? WHO IS GOING TO SAVE YOUR ASS IF YOUR HOUSE CATCHES ON FIRE OR IT FLOODS OR YOU GET HURT?"
This statement alone regardless if you are with the VFD or not leaves a bad image on those that do serve this community.
This issue is about how it was handled, no one knew about it until the mid-year budget amendment. That is not how information or business should be done.
For anyone in out Police Dept. or Fire Dept. to make a political stand for a candidate is wrong. No church would openly support a candidate. Now an issue is a whole different subject. But those certain few where not making a stand about an issue, they were doing it in support of a candidate.
Like it was said, there are things that the volunteers should be informed of to offset what the compensation is. There is also another way that this could be handled. I also like the idea of making donations to the VFD.
Call the IRS, check out other cities but quit thinking within a small box when you want to accuse or blame someone.
There are only a few VFF that want to keep this issue burning.
| Comments:| | oh give me a break 
hmmmmm no answer 19.05.07 23:08 oh give me a break
do you not also think it wrong that the "lockheed pac" took out an ad supporting the mayor? 19.05.07 19:01 oh give me a break
so since you think the firemen were supporting a specific candidate and you say that is wrong do you not also think it is wrong that one of our beloved council men took out a paid political ad supporting a candidate? 19.05.07 19:00 give me a break #1
can i get an amen? ron white would have all of you believe that this was all done on the part of sue, don and gary, and when he thinks you are not buying it tries to get the focus off of the subject and on to the car lot! 19.05.07 18:47 Anonymous
I agree with Yeah. The Mayor knew exactly what he was doing. He is an asshole for doing it. But remember he said "I am not going to let that fire dept bend ME over a stump. 19.05.07 12:52 Yeah
The Mayor had control of the council and that is what the Mayor wanted so they did it. The firemen have not been getting a bill for water for decades and they should not have one now. 19.05.07 12:36 Ronald A. White
Untrue. The city council at the time said there would be NO exclusions from paying the fee. They voted on the issue, not the mayor. By the way, are you aware that the owner of the Texas Motors Ford property on Cherry lane REPORTEDLY did not pay the fee during the time it was unoccupied? Even though it was specifically directed by the council that vacant properties would receive bills for the fee? Seems there was a "billing" snafu there as well. So, you and I had to pay, but, it appears the car lot owner did not. Now, is that fair to the citizens of this community? 19.05.07 11:34 Yeah
And I think the Mayor wanted to stick it to the firemen. They should have waived the fee for the fire dept volunteers to begin with. Mayor wanted to open the can of worms. He instructed Dena not to go talk to the fire dept about the new fee being added and they had no clue therefor. 19.05.07 11:08 Ronald A. White
By the way, I believe as others do, that mistakes were made regarding the presentation of the Storm Water run off fees and the 1099 issue for the Fire Men. I believe the city should share in the expense because of the error. However, I do not support the way it was handled by Sue, Don and Garry. Meeting as they did and giving direct instructions to city staff is just plain wrong. Texas Open Meetings Laws and City Charter Requirements support that. If they had wanted this problem corrected when it was first brought up why did they not do it then? Why wait until just before the next election (re-elect Sue)to do so? Does anyone see a pattern there? Sue Miller and her crew had AT LEAST 9 MONTHS TO FIX THE PEROBLEM. I think the majority of the Fire Men are smart enough to recognize this as fact. I also think it is unfortunate that a few bad apples are "allowed" to speak for all of the good ones. 19.05.07 10:17 Ronald A. White
Correction, although it is of little consequence, but the dates the checks were written and the signatures of James Ouzts and Sue Miller were AUTOMATICALLY STAMPED on each check, are as follows; 3/28/2007(9 checks), 3/14/2007(1 check),4/4/2007(3 checks),4/24/2007(1 check).Check amounts range from $1,360.00 to $293.00. Total cost incurred was $8,940.00, which included tax refund checks to payee and tax preparation fees to outside tax accountant. I wonder where the balance ($1,060.00)of the budgeted $10,000.00 went to? Hmmm, Fuzzy Math? 19.05.07 10:02 |
Add comment
| |