|
|
Post by Clipper on Oct 25, 2008 18:21:57 GMT -5
Arkangel posted to Strikes blog today, and referenced numbers that address the actual tax losses that will impact NH residents as a result of the shenanigans of Reed and Associates, along with those misguided souls on the county board of legislators that voted for the PILOT program. EVERYONE NEEDS TO READ THAT POST. It is really enlightening, and also just plain disheartening to think that our county politicians would support such a plan. For those that live in New Hartford, I can't feel too sorry, if you don't rid yourselves of the crooks that are milking you like old jersey cows for their own agendas and ambitions. Only our own Larry Tanoury Jr. and a couple of other legislators stood up for the people's interests and voted against this travesty of justice. Good job Larry. Keep up the good work. It WILL make a difference. Your efforts will not show progress over night, but will prevail if you can stand your ground and gain support as you go along and gain a reputation for honesty and hard work. It simply amazes me what passes for politics in NH. I am surprised and shocked that someone hasn't been indicted yet for some of the bullshit they pull there. Their time will come, and we will have the last little chuckle when their little house of cards comes tumbling down. Read strikes blog. Arkangel's post and the numbers are really shocking but real. Strike's blog is at strikeslip.blogspot.com |
|
|
|
Post by Swimmy on Oct 25, 2008 19:13:22 GMT -5
I might also suggest: This organization was successful in forcing the town to comply with state law when the town finally decided to open up the stormwater advisory committee meetings. The next meeting is Monday at 5:30 in the New Hartford Town Library for those interested. |
|
|
|
Post by Clipper on Oct 25, 2008 19:50:05 GMT -5
The money they stand to lose on the Hartford building and the Hartford move is absolutely unbelievable. What the hell are they thinking? the hundred's of thousands loss in tax revenues on those properties will have to be made up by the citizens.
There is someone lining some pockets somewhere. NOBODY is that stupid. Somebody is getting monetary fulfillment from all this idioscy.I just have a feeling that somewhere down the road, the other shoe will fall, and SOMEONE WILL be indicted and jailed for some of the shady crap that goes on in NH politics. Unfortunately, it will be too late, and the money lost will not be recoupable.
|
|
|
|
Post by clarencebunsen on Oct 25, 2008 21:09:50 GMT -5
Oncer again it's Clarence the Contrarian (I'm negotiating to get the Governator to play me in the movie.
$157K seems like rather small potatoes if it keeps 600 or 500 people employed in New Hartford. If St. E's moves a few hundred jobs here maybe my younger daughter will find something to keep her in the area rather than move to South Carolina like her big sister.
Furthermore, counting the loss in tax revenue on a project that probably wouldn't have been started without a PILOT really seems like a case of counting your chickens before they are hatched. How much revenue was there before the project was started? This sounds just like the groups who publish numbers on the tax revenue lost by not enforcing the Supreme Court decision on cigarette sales by the OIN.
This area struggles just to retain jobs and loses a lot of those struggles. We might want to examine why we can't attract any. My opinion is that the number one reason is taxes and number 2 is the automatic opposition to any development.
|
|
|
|
Post by Clipper on Oct 25, 2008 21:23:55 GMT -5
clarence, if you read the "rearranging the deck chairs" thread on Strikeslips blog, and read the post by arkangel, there is a lot more at stake than the $157K.
|
|
|
|
Post by Swimmy on Oct 25, 2008 23:26:51 GMT -5
Guaranty AgreementI guess this depends on how one defines "development." No new jobs are being created. And, according to the agreement, the Hartford is not required to retain any jobs or expand their services. Sorry, but that is just asinine to knock people against this project for immediately being against development. The Hartford is vacating a perfectly good facility. Why? If it was for the same reasons that St. Es is looking into the Hartford's old building (to expand its services), then sure, I'd agree and might be less likely to object to the blatant violations of Open Meetings Law, Education Law, and SEQRA. The laws are in place for a reason, not to be ignored!
|
|
|
|
Post by frankcor on Oct 27, 2008 13:18:11 GMT -5
One reason claimed by the Hartford for the new building is that it permits them to consolidate offices in several buidlings into one.
|
|
|
|
Post by smiley on Oct 29, 2008 7:21:47 GMT -5
The Hartford currently leases the building on Middle Settlement Road where there are about 500 employees. They also have employees at the PAR Technology Park where they lease space for about one hundred employees. Both of the leases are up. The new building will allow both offices to be consolidated as well as adding additional training rooms for nationwide training which will in turn bring employees from all over the United Stated to the area for training thus the restuarants,hotels and economy will benefit. The Hartford is always hiring as needed. I don't believe there are plans for any large scale hiring.
|
|
|
|
Post by Swimmy on Oct 29, 2008 11:46:08 GMT -5
That's the point, this move is not creating any jobs! And we were not in danger of losing any, either!
|
|
