NH Redistricting

[Mugwump]

There have been several posts which suggest that May Newberger has some sort of obligation to check herself out of the hospital and spearhead this issue. Obvious nonsense, and shame on those who suggest it. (I'm no fan of hers, but that's really kicking when someone is, literally, down.)

However, the issue is no less real. Is there anyone out there who is legitimately in the loop who can tell us what they're planning to do over in Town Hall regarding this issue? Does anyone over there have a clue? If so, would they be willing to lend it to a Councilman for a few minutes?

Inquiring minds want to know.
________
Problems From Depakote (http://www.classactionsettlements.org/lawsuit/depakote/)

[Row B]

It seems to me the proper thing for the Council members to do is to stay out of it. Let the thing run its course. If it passes, it passes. If it fails, nobody can blame the Town Board for torpedoing it. Otherwise, the Board's in a no-win situation.

[Albertson Civic]

Your right, Town Board should stay out of it. So the Board of Elections should draw the lines and the council districts should be in place for this Novembers election.
________
Ordinary life insurance forum (http://www.insurance-forums.org/ordinary-life-insurance/)

[Row B]

Don't put words in my mouth. I never said the Board should not implement the referendum. Chapter 15-A of the Town Code (passed unanimously by the all-Republican Town Board in 1987) clearly puts the authority to draw the lines with the Town Board, much the same way the Town of Hempstead's Code gives the Hempstead Town Board the power to draw the lines.

Clearly, though, under the circumstances, the Town Board should not be influencing the outcome of the referendum itself.

Besides, there are two Board members elected in 2001 for four-year terms. Are you saying that they should be displaced. I'm sure, as a Republican, you wouldn't seek to put O'Connor and Ferrara in that position.

[Row B]

Ive changed my mind!

[no name]

I don't know about May, but if the Reps don't do something soon, the Dems could try to kill the council district thing.

Funny how neither May or any of the board members have come out in favor of the referendum.

ALL THOSE INTERESTED IN MORE REPRESENTATIVE GOV'T. IN NORTH HEMPSTEAD BETTER ACT SOON OR RISK LOSING A HISTORIC OPPORTUNITY.
________
Extreme vaporizers (http://www.vaporshop.com/extreme-q-vaporizer.html)

[anonymouse]

It is just like the "Chicken(sh**) Little" Republicans to cry, "The Dems are plotting against us!".

They're afraid they'll lose this vote so are looking for someone to blame for their incompetence.

The Town government has taken a hands-off approach, which is proper. It is up to individuals to press the issue or not.

May is for districts and has said so on many an occasion.

[gop1]

Can't you be more creative and substantive than mere name calling? Just like a Democrat.

I do not see any Republicans crying, but I do see alot of Democratic hypocracy. And, I do not think the Republicans are afraid that they will lose, just calling like they see it. Who is quietly arranging for all the meetings w/ the civics in Town to try to scuttle the initiative? Joe Galante, John Fabio and other Democrats, of course. They say they want to "inform" people about the issue, but they are actually trying to have people turn negative on a very good thing.

And, BTW, what is your definition of incompetence? I say the Democrats played this wrong all the way, and I think the Republicans rammed it down their throats.

Let's just see what happens on the 29th of April. Either the Democrats will be crowing (more hypocracy) or the Republicans (and the residents of North Hempstead) will have gained a victory.
________
Druze Forums (http://www.religionboard.org/druze/)

[anonymouse]

gop1:

1) I'm an Independent ("blank")

2) You're unsubstantiated claims show a PR job gone bad. Just like a Republican to set up blame before an outcome. Whiner.

3) It is only your OPINION that districts are a good thing. There is no proof. And I want some proof before I let career politicians (both sides) and hacks monkey with any form of government.

4) Incompetence is losing every elected position in the town. Instead of making itself relevant to the voters, the NH GOP seeks to change the rules. The Democrats were able to take a majority in a majority Republican-registered county by appealing to the voters. The strawman "Great Neck rules everything" argument is only cover for bad management, bad candidates and poor politics.

5) Thanks for the added tax burden to hold an off-cycle election. If the measure passes, will you also blame the cost to enact districts on the Democrats as well?

[gop1]

Do you really think that Pollack was a better candidate than Jim O'Connor or Angelo Ferrara, or that Dwyer was a better candidate than Tim O'Connell??

From your last response, I assume you will say "yes", so that kills all your credibility.

And, I am not sure what unsubstantiated claims you are rreferrring to. The post included FACTS.

Anyway, if you are truly and blank, you should know that the lone Independence Party member (I know, it is not the same, but...) on the Council District commission supported the Republican position on districts. And, the non-partisan (usually Dem leaning) Neighborhood Network is also in support, as is Newsday.

If you are truly independent, I would hope you look at the FACTS and reality. Not just be a shill for the Democrats.

BTW, the Republican position was, all alnog, that council districts should not in any way increase the cost of government. There is more than enough room for economies to be found in the NH budget to afford more reprsentative government. And, yes, the cost of the referendum could have been avoided if the Town Board had acted on the Commission report to hold this in :LAST YEAR's election. But, cynically, thye did not.

If you are truly looking for the best solution to government as usual, look at the merits of districts, not the political bullsh**t. That only obfuscates the obvious.

(See, I am not above trying to convince someone that is, maybe not truly, but arguably still trying to make up his or her mind).

________
Mazda porter (http://www.ford-wiki.com/wiki/Mazda_Porter)

[RepWard]

Its obvious from demographics that without Councelmatic districts the residents in the lower part of the town would rairly be able to elect a person to the Town Board who the majority of the people from there area want elected to represent them. That is the problem we have no voice on the Town Board. If the cost is about the same it makes sence to allow us to pick a person from our area to represent us. The way it is set up now the People from the North Shore pick the entire slate and therefor the person assigned to represent us.

On April 29th you will decide do you want to elect your reprentative or do you want the entire town to pick your representative
________
Mazda mx-5 10th anniversary model picture (http://www.ford-wiki.com/wiki/Mazda_MX-5_10th_Anniversary_Model)

[anonymouse]

1) I liked O'Connor, didn't like Ferrara and didn't get a chance to see O'Connell in action. You allow your emotions to cloud your argument. This initial set-up non-argument, along with your "answer" kills all YOUR credibility. We can all see who the "shill" is here.

2) I'm Independent, not a member of the non-independent Independence Party.

3) Costs will increase regardless of your OPINION. You try to sell a bill of goods and hope for offset savings to found later. That may be good PR and politics, but it's bad business for the taxpayer. If 6 districts are approved in the measure, by definition, the cost of the Town Board will increase 50%. Where are your facts now?

If the "southern tier" could elect an O'Connor and Ferrara despite the "northern tier"'s participation, they can do it again. My understanding is that O'Connell came close last election. He should try again. And remember, not everyone in the "southern tier" is Republican and not everyone in the "northern tier" is a Democrat.

Your "us vs. them" argument also calls into question your credibility and shows your unswerving partisanship.