Light-up McIntosh December 15
Light-up McIntosh will begin at the Civic Center at 6:30 p.m. The event will host Santa Clause and an area choir from six local churches will sing.
11.12.06 -- POLL: Who should have a say?
Sunday, November 12, 2006
During a discussion of the historic board ordinance, the idea that only people living in the historic district should be able to voice an opinion over what goes in the ordinance. This idea also came up time and time again when McIntosh dealt with the CRA. What do you think? Who should have a say in issues like these?
posted by Cher @ 6:33 PM,
47 Comments:
-
At November 13, 2006 6:52 PM ,
Cher said...
-
I am concerned that I am going to have to suspend the historic board poll because someone has been hitting it multiple times to throw the numbers. If not suspend, make known the following:
There is a sitemeter on the blog that counts the number of hits and page views the site gets. I can't tell who is doing what -- so no one worry about privacy issues. But I noticed this morning that there were more votes than hits for the historic district poll. This poll has registered about 8-10 more votes than there have been people logging in, if I subtract myself from the total hits to the blog. Generally, this means someone is tricking the poll.
It's unfortunate because it kind of wrecks the fun aspect of a poll. But I thought everyone should be aware that because of this, I believe these numbers to be skewed.
Not that the polls were ever scientific but they are fun. And it is a curious thing to find that this question means enough to someone out there to want to vote several times for it.
Thoughts? Do I keep it up there and see what happens? What do you think? -
At November 14, 2006 1:06 AM ,
said...
-
What value is the poll under these
circumstances? -
At November 14, 2006 6:01 AM ,
Cher said...
-
Excellent question.
I was thinking last night that another indication the numbers were padded on the historic board ordinance poll is the difference between the two polls is about 11 votes. Click on the results link in the polls and you can see for yourself. As of right now, the tree committee poll (which I actually think is in line with the sites total hits) is at 28 and the historic poll is at 39 total votes.
I don't think we can put a traditional value on this poll. But there is an underlying issue that I'd like to throw out there for discussion. Clearly, this issue means enough to someone or some someones in this community to pad the vote. Why is that? I'd really like to hear everyone's thoughts on that.
What do you think? Does this poll stay live? What do you think I should do with it? -
At November 14, 2006 8:21 AM ,
said...
-
I would just take it off. Why bother with it. The real pole should be Why is a council member going after revenge?
-
At November 14, 2006 11:12 AM ,
Cher said...
-
Anonymous said...
I would just take it off. Why bother with it. The real pole should be Why is a council member going after revenge?
Well, I think taking it off would be contrary to the idea of the blog. I only edit and pull things down from the blog in the most extreme circumstance. I'd rather leave it up and talk about it reasonably.
Part of the reason to bother with it is because this question obviously did strike a cord with someone. It's an interesting question. Who should have a say in the laws our elected officials make and how they impact our community? Everyone, or a select few who own property in specific places?
As for your question about a council member going after revenge... who are you talking about and why do you think that person is seeking revenge? -
At November 14, 2006 12:29 PM ,
said...
-
He wants to put mobile homes on his property - without the HD, he can.... But everyone already knows this, that is why he orchestated the new makeup of the council. Shouldnt we rename McIntosh? how about McInTrash or Willcutyaville?
-
At November 14, 2006 1:06 PM ,
Cher said...
-
Now, we're getting somewhere, finally.
I have questions.
1. Does this mean you believe the historic ordinance's purpose is to keep one of the councilmen from putting trailers on his property?
2. What leads you to believe that the council re-examining the historic ordinance, or allowing people who live in other parts of town, like the West side or Robert's Acres, an opinion in how that ordinance is shaped will mean that one of the councilmen can put trailers on his property?
3. Looking at the male councilmen, Frank Ciotti's properties are both in the district but he saw little wrong with the current ordinance. That leaves Lee Deaderick and Howard Walkup who I think both own property outside the district. Wouldn't the LPA have more to do with zoning land to bring in trailers if that is what one of them wanted? Help me, and everyone, understand how the potential of trailers outside the district would be a threat to McIntosh.
4. Why would bringing trailers into town mean having to rename the town McIntrash? -
At November 14, 2006 1:58 PM ,
said...
-
Good Questions!
Most of them can be answered by reflecting upon the current HD codes - a "buffer" is to be maintained around the district. This fact has been overlooked for years until recently. Even if someone does not own property "in" the district, they have standards that must be met if they are adjacent to it.
Name Change? We already have a park on 441 north that is a magnet for weekly rentals and visits by the cops - if we add one to the south, we would really look trashy, coming and going.
Many of us have spent a lot of money to live in the historic district, and cherish the honor of living in one -
Now a question for you: why should someone be allowed to make mega-bucks to downgrade the property values of the entire town for short term gain?
It just seems too apparent that someone is going to manipulate the zoning to get what they want, make a quick milllion and leave. -
At November 14, 2006 3:22 PM ,
Cher said...
-
Thank you for your reply. Good information.
I'd like to redirect.
You say that most of my questions can be answered by reflecting on the current historic district ordinance.
However, from what I understand about the old Land Development Code governing the historic district is that its purpose was to "impose special development restrictions" for the historic district "based on the need for special protective measures."
I understand that to mean the historic ordinance deals with the historic district. Period. The old LDC didn't mention an historic buffer that I could see, at all. Point me towards it, if I missed it.
It seems to me that management of the other areas of town should not come under the historic ordinance and the historic preservation board. To include other areas of town could be construed as a power grab on the part of the historic preservation board.
As for the new ordinance, I don't have my copy of it with me, but if it does include a buffer, that means, hands down, people living outside the district should absolutely have a say in how that ordinance is shaped. Going back to the original question that led us to this debate.
It also means that the council's taking the ordinance back up for consideration is worth EVERYONE'S consideration. A large number of people in town voted to prohibit expansion of the historic district. A buffer like you describe seems a bit like expansion. One thing I do recall reading in the new ordinance is a method for expanding the district -- something McIntosh's residents having voted against.
As for your question about whether someone should be allowed to make mega-bucks from downgrading their property... well, this is assuming that that is what councilman you mentioned has planned.
Since Howard Walkup owns the land south of town, I ruled out Deaderick and called Walkup, leaving a message. He was not available for comment but should I reach him, I will ask this question and post the answer.
As for trailers coming and going into town, weekly rentals and visits from cops ... I suppose you could take that up with the owners of the trailer park north of town.
Who is making a quick million in McIntosh?? Which zones have been changed? -
At November 14, 2006 4:16 PM ,
said...
-
Wow. Someone is bitter. Regardless, my main question is wouldn't if you owned Howard's land wouldn't you want to be able to do whatever you wanted to with your land?
-
At November 14, 2006 4:31 PM ,
said...
-
I think everyone of us that has purchased a historic home, restored it and now enjoy living in a historic district will be very bitter if our investment and chosen lifestyle goes awray! I have also heard of the mobile home park on the south side. NIMBY!!!
-
At November 14, 2006 4:31 PM ,
Cher said...
-
Oh! Wait a minute, which one of us is the bitter one?
All you anonymouses need to come up with screennames if you aren't going to sign your real names so I can tell people apart. -
At November 14, 2006 5:34 PM ,
said...
-
Ok I don't care if someone wants to do something with their land just I expect them to take their neibors in consideration and how it will effect everyone else's property value around them. And as far as the historic district this one is very easy going check and see what you could do in Ocala or Gainesville that will give you some education on how historic districts could be run. We all know that in a perfect world we would not need rules but this world is so far from perfect we do need rules maybe not to tough but definitely protective.
signed,
McIntosh Protector -
At November 14, 2006 5:41 PM ,
said...
-
Oh and I forgot something. The tree ordinance is to protect the trees from people like the other negative council member. Who preaches positive against the comities.
signed,
McIntosh Protector
(SAVE OUR TREES) -
At November 14, 2006 5:46 PM ,
said...
-
Oh one more thing I did not write the other one's Cher.
signed,
McIntosh Protector -
At November 14, 2006 6:09 PM ,
McIntosh Flash said...
-
I agree - our trees are our town's heritage! Protect them, keep the committee!
If consideration is to be given to nearby owners prior to development of a mobile home park - great!, but why are they trying to do away with our legal protections of a historic district? The last year in this town has taught me not to trust ANYONE!!! -
At November 14, 2006 6:13 PM ,
said...
-
I am the bitter one!
call me = bitter -
At November 14, 2006 6:23 PM ,
Cher said...
-
Per my above comment, Councilman Howard Walkup returned my call. I explained to him the comments made here. Out of fairness, I asked for his rebuttal.
Walkup told me he absolutely does not plan on putting a trailer park on his property south of McIntosh.
"That's a damned lie," he said. (And I doublechecked with him to see if I could quote him on the d-word. He said yes.)
"I never told anybody I was going to put a trailer park there," Walkup said. "I have no intention of doing anything like that with my property."
He did say that over a year ago he applied for rezoning for some of his property. He said the reason he did it then and the only reason he would do anything with his land was if his family needed it. (This is consistent with another interview I had with him in February. As I explained to him on the phone, I hesitated to include that interview in this specific discussion without talking to him first.)
"It's never been anything more than that," Walkup said.
Since someone above commented here that Walkup orchestrated the makeup of the new council, I asked him if he felt this was the case.
He said no and "probably no more than anyone else involved in the recall petition."
With a few others in town, including Casey Girardin, Walkup circulated the recall petitions for former council president Danaya Wright and former councilman Jim Strange. But he said many people signed the petitions other than just him.
"The people spoke," he said.
I also asked Walkup what he thought of people thinking and posting here that he is seeking revenge.
"I can't help what people perceive," he said. He also did not like this question saying there is no good answer for it.
Walkup did not agree to answering comments like these from the blog because without signed names, he said the comments made here amount to rumor. For instance, he said that anyone can take anything he told me tonight and say he's a liar and there is nothing he can do about it.
"Anybody who contradicts my statement needs to sign their names and provide proof," he said. "Anyone who can't do that should shut up."
### -
At November 14, 2006 7:42 PM ,
Cher said...
-
Cool.
Y'all have some kind of identity. I'm liking that, alot.
As we've talked about in past comments, I take anonymous comments because I think people are still afraid to openly say what they think. I still think that's true. I still hear that sentiment from people. From the above post, you can see that Howard Walkup didn't agree with me about that and that's his opinion. He has a point. When you can't substantiate statements, they do tend to amount to rumor. But for now, I am still taking anonymous comments.
But I do like the screennames. You can not imagine how confusing it was today trying to figure if I was talking with one person or a bunch of them. -
At November 14, 2006 8:49 PM ,
said...
-
I guess that he has learned to keep his cards close to the chest. You were not around when he plead guilty to several Florida Ethics Commission charges, and then paid the fines. Since then he has never been very candid. Would a re-cap of those cases be good reading in the blog? Will he tell us why he plead guilty instead of going before a judge or jury?
Bitter -
At November 14, 2006 9:02 PM ,
Cher said...
-
No need. I've heard. What's done is done and at this point neither relevant or newsworthy.
The screen name suits you.
Thanks for reading. -
At November 15, 2006 8:49 AM ,
said...
-
Well I give him credit for calling you this means he cares what people think.
signed,
McIntosh Protector
PS:Did the other council member call? -
At November 15, 2006 10:39 AM ,
Cher said...
-
Howard was the only one I called because he was the male council member who fit the description.
-
At November 15, 2006 11:39 AM ,
said...
-
Oh well then strike the last remark that I wrote if you called him and he did not call you.
signed,
McIntosh Protector -
At November 15, 2006 5:07 PM ,
said...
-
My secrect identity name is mcintrailer. i will protect the trailer parks. and trees in them.
-
At November 15, 2006 5:12 PM ,
said...
-
McIntosh Protector
What does the statement "Oh one more thing I didn't write the other one's Cher," mean? Please explain?? -
At November 15, 2006 6:39 PM ,
said...
-
I think that the McIntosh protector is Fred b/c he always spells neighbor wrong!!!!!!! Your idenity has been revealed.
-
At November 15, 2006 9:18 PM ,
said...
-
Wrong that is not fred he is in hear but under a different name.
-
At November 15, 2006 9:29 PM ,
said...
-
who is bitter?
mcintrailer -
At November 15, 2006 9:34 PM ,
said...
-
Hey you would know if it is me i have the worst spelling of all. Fred
-
At November 15, 2006 9:34 PM ,
Cher said...
-
Who is John Galt?
Y'all are cracking me up. -
At November 15, 2006 10:18 PM ,
said...
-
John Galt? sorry dont know, Fred
-
At November 15, 2006 11:12 PM ,
Cher said...
-
It was a joke. There's a book called "Atlas Shrugged" -- one of my all-time favorite books, which I read around New Year's every year -- that has a recurring question all the way through it, "Who is John Galt?"
Galt is a man and a metaphor for everything that is wrong with the world that could be right if people would take the time to work on it.... or something like that. Rand isn't altruistic, by any means. -
At November 15, 2006 11:30 PM ,
said...
-
Hey isnt it our historic distirct? (meaning the whole towns) Its McIntosh Hisorical District the one I dirve through to get to my post office. If only the residence in the historical district can vote on it what happens if someone owns more than one parcile do they vote twice? Thhere are a lot of lines to draw in the sand to see where would stand or fight over!Its the towns and the whole town should say what happens!!!!
-
At November 16, 2006 8:16 AM ,
said...
-
When it comes to politics nobody has the same opinion I personally take them lightly but when it effects our property value people like me who has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars we get defensive to avoid having to sue people which just cost more money. I personally think that our town is very easy going and don't want to see it go down hill. You can say all you want but I have seen towns that have let people do just about anything and they were ruined just go south. To bring you up to speed south problems are coming up this way and it wont be long so don't you think that some protection of our investments is the least we can do.
Fred -
At November 16, 2006 8:27 AM ,
said...
-
If we are discussing Atlas Shrugged, let us apply it to our little town, and our "trees". When lightning strikes and we look inside, will that show us that it was already dead for years - ?
Oops, did I step on someones toes saying that?
Things that make you say "huh?" -
At November 16, 2006 9:31 AM ,
Cher said...
-
Fred: What specific problems are coming down the pike? Humor me, I like specifics.
If we truly applied Atlas Shrugged and the metaphor in question to McIntosh, my concern would extend far beyond the trees. -
At November 16, 2006 10:12 AM ,
said...
-
If you feel that this town is dead then you aren't getting around enough.
-
At November 16, 2006 10:25 AM ,
Cher said...
-
Ah, well, I didn't say I felt the town was dead. No group of people with the fight in them, or the desire to heal, that many in this town have could be viewed as dead.
Besides, dead doesn't realize the larger meaning of that metaphor. -
At November 16, 2006 11:11 AM ,
said...
-
well you are right that people should get involved more.
-
At November 16, 2006 2:49 PM ,
said...
-
In no way was this refering to the literal definition of dead - it aludes to the moral decay that is always present, but never seen until an outside influence exposes it for what it is... or has become.
-
At November 16, 2006 5:35 PM ,
said...
-
do we have to talk in metaphors? i am really smart but all this is confusing me!!!!!!!!
-
At November 17, 2006 8:35 AM ,
said...
-
why bother this is just a joke site
-
At November 17, 2006 9:33 AM ,
Cher said...
-
Ah, criticism. Always means we're doing something right.
Joke Site: personally e-mail me and I can point you to some enlightening sites and stories about the citizen and civic journalism trend and the role blogs like the McIntosh Mirror play in that trend. No joke. : ) -
At November 17, 2006 6:18 PM ,
said...
-
Well,if it's a "joke site", what does that say about you? After all, you are spending time reading it.
-
At November 19, 2006 7:29 AM ,
said...
-
Everyone has a right to an opinion. That's what is nice about this site.
We are able to read and stay aware of the actions of the various committees. We are then able to express frustrations and concerns here on an open forum rather than screaming at each other in public meetings.Play nice. -
At November 28, 2006 2:39 PM ,
said...
-
As far as I know, Howard has never said he wanted a trailer park. What he said was he could not stop trailers being put on his property if he sold the lots. The only property in town that cannot have trailers is the historic district. Without design standards, ANY lot in McIntosh can have one. Want one in your backyard?
Editor
Editor and Publisher:
I'm Cher From McIntosh, FL I'm a graduate student at the University of Florida working on a master's degree in Mass Communication. While I was finishing my undergrad degree in journalism last year, I reported on McIntosh, Fla. for an in-depth reporting class. I figured that the reporting and the public record files should go somewhere people can access them. Reporters don't report to keep the information they find to themselves. Some of that reporting is included here in a forum that allows response. McIntosh suffers because with no news coverage, the local government and the rumor mill have too much potential to run rampant over residents. I moved to McIntosh in the fall of 1999. My profile
About This Blog
The primary purpose of this blog is to accurately reflect what happens in town public meetings and dispel rumors. I record the meetings and make them available for download. One of the goals of this blog is to offer residents a place to voice opinions. The comments, views and opinions expressed there are not necessarily those of the editor.
