Jump to content



Photo

PTA-BOA

What the heck is that?

  • Please log in to reply
108 replies to this topic

#41 kelley

kelley

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,126 posts

Posted 31 January 2015 - 07:26 AM

I'm sure Haire can handle herself. But you're concern is commendable.



Cute. My concern is not for Haire. As Martina's friend, I think her being a professional PIA would be the more fun and lucrative route, but she has to be all civic minded and stuff.

That point was for the conflict-adverse decision makers reading.
  • Donna likes this

#42 Jeff all my Life

Jeff all my Life

    Commissioner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,210 posts

Posted 31 January 2015 - 07:27 AM

I'm not speaking for her. The ones bending over backwards to do anything but the easiest and most legal thing are the ones giving that appearance and saying as much in their excuses.

How easy would it be to just follow the statute and appoint the qualified Republican who has expressed interest? Yet they can't do it and have instead tabled the appointments twice.


I haven't read or posted anything like that. And anyone trying to infer that is probably just throwing a fit because they want their way.

The only I have seen and posted was the voters have spoken and other elected officials shouldn't ignore that or give the appearance of setting her up for the next election.

#43 kelley

kelley

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,126 posts

Posted 31 January 2015 - 07:33 AM

I haven't read or posted anything like that. And anyone trying to infer that is probably just throwing a fit because they want their way.

The only I have seen and posted was the voters have spoken and other elected officials shouldn't ignore that or give the appearance of setting her up for the next election.



I have no idea where you got the impression I was talking about you or anything said here. Do you have appointment authority or other influence in this appointment we don't know about?

#44 Jeff all my Life

Jeff all my Life

    Commissioner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,210 posts

Posted 31 January 2015 - 07:42 AM

I'm only speaking to statements made here and on election day.

#45 snowman

snowman

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,673 posts

Posted 31 January 2015 - 07:43 AM

 I don't doubt the knowledge etc.,  Ethics....but if the shoe was on the other foot there'd be a howl heard from here....all the way to Cowboy Alley.  :laugh:

 

Also ....it's perhaps, mildly interesting that nobody here on the chatter mentioned who we were talking about until this recent post. Funny.   

 

Of course the Commissioners should pause before they make such an appointment. It would be a rotten idea. Even if every call was top notch some would claim any decision that overturned the decision was from other motives. I thought the chatterers wanted impeccable unimpeachable operators? Like...integrity....it matters. 

 

so you're good with good ol boy kinda stuff. i think it sucks.


  • Beading Lady likes this

#46 Jeff all my Life

Jeff all my Life

    Commissioner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,210 posts

Posted 31 January 2015 - 07:53 AM

so you're good with good ol boy kinda stuff. i think it sucks.


This would be the exact opposite.

This would be a defeated candidate gets passed over for an unknown to prevent even the appearance of impropriety.

#47 snowman

snowman

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,673 posts

Posted 31 January 2015 - 08:07 AM

This would be the exact opposite.

This would be a defeated candidate gets passed over for an unknown to prevent even the appearance of impropriety.

gawd that's even worse.



#48 kelley

kelley

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,126 posts

Posted 31 January 2015 - 08:14 AM

Oh, yes. This board virtually none of us knew existed before this came up will shoot her straight into whatever office she wants to run for next. Though she'll be only one member of the board and the only Republican and Haire will be sitting there as a non-voting member, she'll totally run that B and any decisions the full board makes will be her doing and subject to suspicion.

Silly.
  • IntegrityMatters likes this

#49 GrumpyGranny

GrumpyGranny

    Local Legend

  • Administrators
  • 5,169 posts

Posted 31 January 2015 - 08:31 AM

So I'm reading "the voters spoke", and "losing candidate" but no one is saying that 48.89%, over 14,000 of the approximately 30,000 votes cast (sorry, can't remember the exact number) of the voters "spoke" for Tina. Why would those who voted for her not trust her to fill this position in an honorable manner? Also, wouldn't Tina only be one of several on this board? If, so why would it be Tina vs Vicki when Tina is only one of several?

 

I don't know Vicki, or indeed anything about her. I don't have enough knowledge of her position and her job performance to question whether she does a good job, but I am willing to assume she must be. From my bit of reading on this site, the oversight board is there for the county residents who feel their assessment is wrong. I would assume there is some sort of computer system in place that helps the assessor's office with the assessment of the property...I doubt Vicki or anyone who works in the office arbitrarily goes down a list of thousands of parcels of property and says ok, this one is worth $100,000; this one next door is worth $50,000... What I'm trying to say is I would look at any appeal as an appeal of the system that decided my property was worth a lot more than I feel it is worth, not as a declaration that Vicki herself is wrong.

 

And bear in mind, I am not a republican or a democrat. I care about doing the right thing, never mind the party. If the board is now all one party, and those on the board do not meet the qualifications, then changes need to be made to the board. Tina is one qualified candidate for the board. Who else is there qualified from either party? If there are other qualified citizens, why do they not step forward? I would ask them to step up so that there would be more than one qualified candidate to choose from...

 

And then again, maybe I don't understand and have no idea what I'm talking about!   :shrug1:


  • IntegrityMatters, kelley, snowman and 1 other like this

#50 kelley

kelley

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,126 posts

Posted 31 January 2015 - 08:50 AM

So I'm reading "the voters spoke", and "losing candidate" but no one is saying that 48.89%, over 14,000 of the approximately 30,000 votes cast (sorry, can't remember the exact number) of the voters "spoke" for Tina. Why would those who voted for her not trust her to fill this position in an honorable manner? Also, wouldn't Tina only be one of several on this board? If, so why would it be Tina vs Vicki when Tina is only one of several?
 
I don't know Vicki, or indeed anything about her. I don't have enough knowledge of her position and her job performance to question whether she does a good job, but I am willing to assume she must be. From my bit of reading on this site, the oversight board is there for the county residents who feel their assessment is wrong. I would assume there is some sort of computer system in place that helps the assessor's office with the assessment of the property...I doubt Vicki or anyone who works in the office arbitrarily goes down a list of thousands of parcels of property and says ok, this one is worth $100,000; this one next door is worth $50,000... What I'm trying to say is I would look at any appeal as an appeal of the system that decided my property was worth a lot more than I feel it is worth, not as a declaration that Vicki herself is wrong.
 
And bear in mind, I am not a republican or a democrat. I care about doing the right thing, never mind the party. If the board is now all one party, and those on the board do not meet the qualifications, then changes need to be made to the board. Tina is one qualified candidate for the board. Who else is there qualified from either party? If there are other qualified citizens, why do they not step forward? I would ask them to step up so that there would be more than one qualified candidate to choose from...
 
And then again, maybe I don't understand and have no idea what I'm talking about!   :shrug1:


No. You're on the right track. A contractor does the assessments. I believe computer models are used.

It's those resisting the easy, legal appointment who are making this about personalities instead of just appointing the qualified individual and letting everyone play their roles.
  • Donna likes this

#51 Jeff all my Life

Jeff all my Life

    Commissioner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,210 posts

Posted 31 January 2015 - 09:00 AM

I'll just reminds everyone that John Perkins was an easy, legal appointment. Do we need to go back and find everyone's views on that?

(And no I wouldn't vote for Perkins for dog catcher)

#52 kelley

kelley

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,126 posts

Posted 31 January 2015 - 09:15 AM

There were not criteria laid out for the office by statute that Perkins uniquely met.

This appointment would not be to the very position the appointee ran for, lost, and, in fact, came in third in the primary behind the winner and a guy who didn't actively campaign.

Edited by kelley, 31 January 2015 - 09:16 AM.

  • Donna likes this

#53 Pesty Version 2

Pesty Version 2

    Commissioner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,953 posts

Posted 31 January 2015 - 10:33 AM

Who did the County Council appoint? What were the credentials?  Did Tina try for that? What was the vote?

 

Who are the two people who were up for reappointment that some here are against? What are their credentials?

 

Anyone know?  

 

(Please PM me if you don't want to make a public post...Thanks)


Edited by Pesty Version 2, 31 January 2015 - 10:34 AM.


#54 snowman

snowman

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,673 posts

Posted 31 January 2015 - 10:40 AM

the two men who served previously on the board were the other two... now whether they went ahead and appointed one who they knew the political party affiliation of, i don't know.  i don't recall either of their names.

 

as well as party affiliation, there was the question of credentials and i don't know the status for either of the two.


Edited by snowman, 31 January 2015 - 10:43 AM.


#55 kelley

kelley

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,126 posts

Posted 31 January 2015 - 11:00 AM

Who did the County Council appoint? What were the credentials? Did Tina try for that? What was the vote?

Who are the two people who were up for reappointment that some here are against? What are their credentials?

Anyone know?

(Please PM me if you don't want to make a public post...Thanks)


There are PDFs out there that list the level 2 and 3 assessors, but darned if I know how to attach.

I can't track down the name of the individual appointed by the council. She was requested by the assessor who appealed directly to the council for the appointment and provided the individual's resume. When council members asked whether the potential appointee was a certified level 3 assessor, the council was told this individual was, "above that; she's an appraiser."

I'm told there is no "above that." The statute certainly doesn't mention an "above that." I'm further told the vote was 6-1 with Kelly Khuri alone in voting against.

No one here has said they're "against" the other potential appointees. However, taken together and with the council appointment, the board will be constituted contrary to statute with them both serving.

Edited by kelley, 31 January 2015 - 11:02 AM.


#56 Savile Row

Savile Row

    Key Club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,922 posts

Posted 31 January 2015 - 11:05 AM

Check out:
"Property Tax Replacement Credit! Is it coming back?"
under the state and national thread.
 

The implications of a changed property tax policy
have negatively impacted Clark County.



#57 Pesty Version 2

Pesty Version 2

    Commissioner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,953 posts

Posted 31 January 2015 - 11:11 AM

The Council voted 6 to 1 against this person...but you want the Commissioners to override that?  That doesn't help. But thanks, Kelley, for the info.

 

Does anyone know WHO the people we are talking about are? Their credentials? TIA



#58 IntegrityMatters

IntegrityMatters

    Key Club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,995 posts

Posted 31 January 2015 - 11:29 AM

The Commissioners didn't know the credentials of the others when they voted -- or even what party they belonged to.   It was pathetic --- very embarrassing for the commissioners.   They were clueless.


  • kelley likes this

#59 GrumpyGranny

GrumpyGranny

    Local Legend

  • Administrators
  • 5,169 posts

Posted 31 January 2015 - 11:31 AM

Kelley, maybe these are the right lists for levels 2 and 3 assessors...

 

Level 2:   http://www.in.gov/dl..._12_17_2014.pdf

 

Level 3:   http://www.in.gov/dl..._12_17_2014.pdf

 

According to the lists, there are 8 level 2 assessors and 4 level 3 assessors in Clark County.


  • kelley likes this

#60 IntegrityMatters

IntegrityMatters

    Key Club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,995 posts

Posted 31 January 2015 - 11:38 AM

Interesting that the other two candidates who the Commissioners voted on are not on either list.   I don't believe the person appointed by the Council is either.  






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users