Boy. Last night's vote is probably sticking in Henry's throat this morning.

If the city paid more than 15% of the properties value; then they got ripped off or someone needs to be investigated.

I'm just saying, if it quacks like a duck, looks like a duck, it's crooked. Can't wait until election time again, or someone is standing in front of a federal judge; both work for me!

Have a nice day,everyone.

; )

With all this having been said, is the site in question the best one for the plant? If it is then the city should vote to buy the land. If not then they should move on and buy the site that is. It's high time they quit dragging their feet and get on with construction.

It's true, transperency should be paramount in government for discussion and voting. Executive sessions that require contract negotiating or personnel process is also a necessary fucntion of an open and protective government process. Reporting to the public immediately after a executive session would be advantageous as well. It would be good to know what was discussed (not detail or proprietary) but that the result would be voted on immediately or at a later date.

Victoria15 has created an accoutability factor for the council. This is good. Whether they like or not, that is no longer an issue. It is now part of the process and the public has come to expect accountability because of the creation of Victoria15.

The seven members on the council are now public figures. With that comes more accountability, politicaly, professionally and personally. These seven people are now accountable to the public that put them there. So now the public actually does have a right to question what has happened in the past with a elected official. It's just further tranperency. And the public deserves the truth from that public official. This should also apply to any individual seeking public office. The public, in the electoral process, has a right to know.

With that said, that same public elected those seven people to vote on issues. Vote being the key word there. Hashing out personal agendas are not what the citizens of Victoria elected those seven to.

The actions that the council has taken on some matters are shameful. All of them. There is not one that is immune to this. From the mayor down to the newest council member. Do something for the city. Vote the best and most logical decision you can. Don't ride the fence, take a stand and please stick to it and work the plan.

Public chastation of city employees is uncalled for and wrong. That definitely is a executive session matter and for council members to basically threaten staff in public is just wrong.

This ramble is over.

You just reminded me of something matt?

My mother was dating a guy, who I believed had an ownership stack in the TV station. All I remember is his "mustache" and that he had lots of money.

Thanks for the memory

seems to me the voters might need to file for recalling these officials or impeachment or what ever they call it at this level for neglecting to do their job in a manor that is open and transparent. Keeping the public informed about the issues should be high on the priority list if they want us to foot the bill for projects of this size. failure to do so does indeed seems like they have something to hide or that there is something shady going on behind closed doors.

Only a sewer plant is worthy of this level of malfeasance.

Matt

Thanks for your info on the study. Do you know what other locations were also included in that study or were also considered for the plant? I would like to know this info so I can see for myself if they are also sites that should still be considered as possible alternatives to the one being talked about now.

Thanks in advance.

Exresident

I was not parroting anyones statement just the fact where I saw that bit of info in reply to one of your posts.

It is common knowledge that governments and businesses do hire outside groups to do studies on issues like this. I was only stating the obvious in a reply to another post by someone that I felt was out of line with the comments they posted as the reason why the plant was being considered for construction at that site. You however IMO seem to want to belittle every post that is made. For what purpose I haven't a clue unless it is just to annoy the poster. Whom ever it is.

Maybe Matt Ocker can help out in finding info on what engineering consultant was hired by the city to do the site surveys? He is one of the few people here that takes the time to attend the meetings on a regular basis. His vocal presence has made him real "popular " with the city officials. I commend him for his record on this. Although as a county resident i do not attend many meetings held by the city I do try to keep up to date with what takes place and what issues are discussed in those meetings because what the city does has a major impact on issues that will affect people who live outside the city limits.

I would hope Matt could post some of the facts he has knowledge of about this subject to help me locate where and/or who i would need to talk to to get information on the engineering study refered to by the mayor in his letter to the editor. Also maybe a list of what other sites were included in this study as well.

Dewitt68
I believe there is some truth to what you have to say on the matter of Victoria’s proposed sewer plant site. The smoke screen is about logical engineering (there are other factors to unearth). It’s possible that there is a lot of validity about the south side having the best piece of property. But lets not dismiss the fact that if the proposed property where in a more affluent area we would see a much greater storm ahead of us.

Protectliberty.... Why don't you ask your friend "enlightened" to post something on this thread.

Protectliberty....

When you have some substance to bring to the discussion then you might be heard. Please, bring us something to read other than low remarks. "Cough", what's that?

Holly1...

"The site for the sewer plant was determined from a study done by an outside engineering firm. Based on sound logic and principles of fluid dynamics. ( the old saying of crap runs down hill) so you can understand what fluid dynamics means."
I never disputed the facts... I only added some truths. Think about it logically. Say there was a very prim piece of property behind, or next to, WOODWAY subdivision that logically met every standard needed by this same engineering group. Do you honestly think that is where we would see our new sewer plant constructed? NO!! You are the one not living on the same planet as the rest of us. It's amazing to me when weak minded individuals such as yourself becomes upset when a Spade is call a Spade.

exresident

as put forth by mayor Armstrong in his letter to the editor posted here.

The city did hire an engineering firm to conduct a study to determine the best location for the plant. I'm sure that info can be obtained from the city.

Maybe you can answer this question for me while you are posting your next little bit of sarcastic wisdom?

Why is it that you only post comments on this forum that denigrate the opinions posted by others? could it be because you are not willing to stand up here and inform us what your position is on this and other issues? It seems to me that one not willing to express their stance on an issue before posting replys to others stated opinions is proof that you do not have the courage to put forth that opinion and have an intelligent debate on the issues. Posting lame, snide remarks to others opinions is spineless if you can't also take a position on the subject and honor us with your ever so enlightened wisdom.

Matt

read the last few lines of my last post to you for 1 example of what I was talking about. If you need me to take the time to go back over all your posts to compile a list of examples I can but to what point!! you will just dismiss them as being taken out of context or misrepresented by me. All i was trying to point out is if you reread them from a self-critical position you would be doing yourself a favor. thats all

Obviously you did not read my last post that basicly stated I AGREE with most of your points of view. I was trying to get you to self examine how you word some of them. If another poster had said this to me I would have went back and reviewed some of my posts before I rushed to post a reply expousing the lack of examples as a reason to dismiss their statement as lacking any merit or being unfounded.

Lastly In every reply I have made to your replys I have tried to explain what I was saying. YOU are the one who seems to want to continue keeping this thread about YOU by returning to my first post. So if you feel like you need to beat your own drum be my guest.

Dewitt-68

"the site for the sewer treatment plant is not based on race or the poor, It,s about the above."

This statement proves how completely off base and out of line your belief system is.

The site for the sewer plant was determined from a study done by an outside engineering firm. Based on sound logic and principles of fluid dynamics. ( the old saying of crap runs down hill) so you can understand what fluid dynamics means.

Your post here is just as ignorant as the statement made by the writer of this letter to the editor putting the selection of the site in the context of being done because of race. They both have no place in a civilized, modern society respectful of everyones rights. So for our benefit please keep these types of comments to yourself as they have no place here.

MattOcker

I think you are misreading the context of my posts.

As I stated before, I agree with a lot of the points you have brought up in your posts HERE on the VA blogs. I have also expressed my opinion on where I felt the city council/city government has made unwise choices in handling some of the problems and issues the city of victoria has or is contending with now.

If you take a look at some of my past posts You will also see that I have expressed my opinion of how the appraisal district has been completely out of line in the way they assess property values. I have stated many times over that a 33.80% increase in assessed value on my property and a majority of victoria's land owners in a 3 year timespan since 2006 is excessive and is directly responceable for the loss of a lot of jobs due to relocation or closing of businesses here in victoria. (33.80% figure taken from my tax statements) This is in almost complete agreement with the point of view you have expressed at meetings you have attended and posted on your website.

As for your "for those you are attempting to stick up for" statement. I have never in any of my posts attempted to stick up for any of the city officials. All I have said is that IMO they felt THEY were doing what they thought was best for victoria. I very seldomly agreed with any of the choices they have made in our best interest. I only stated that the jobs they do are difficult at best due to the fact that no matter which way they vote they will upset some group of victoria's population.

So when i stated you should go back and reread your posts for examples I assumed that you might just do that and when reading them from a point in time removed from when they were posted, you would see how they might appear to be a little on the negitive side. If you don't have this ability to self criticize your positions and look at them from points of view that don't agree with your own. How can you think that you can persuade these people to see an issue from your point of view. I would think as one who is or wants to run for public office you would want to see the issues from every side so you can better represent the people you want to serve.

I have found that being diplomatic does not mean cheerleading. It is just a better way to attempt to win over others to your point of view.

Lastly for an example " I can't expect a snake to get off his belly" is that good enough for you. If not then I feel that your bid for public office will be a hopeless one doomed to fail because you have alienated the very people you will need to get elected.

D-68:
Thanks ever so much for the profound wisdom... cough

I’m going to speak candidly, and upset some people in the process. It’s not about race. It’s about a standard in which one holds them selves...... Please….. Say we (Those that pay into the system, "The heaviest taxed") put about $200,000 into new sidewalks, street repairs, cleaning up trash (broken down cars, discarded sofas on the curbs, garbage tossed about, removing graffiti..) and etc. into the south "poor" part of town. How long do you think it would take before things would roll back to square one? Not long. It's about culture and a standard level of living. Some people live in squalor and think nothing of it. Their parents did, and their parents before them and so on. You can spend time and money to change the surroundings but you can't change the people who inhabit the area. It's like having dogs that dig holes and tears up the yard. You can fill the holes with dirt and make the needed repairs, but the dogs will continue the same behavior. What do you do? 1. You can live like the dogs yourself. 2. Keep breaking your back to fix what the dog’s destroys, or 3. Put the dog’s way in the back "south" part of the yard and fence him off so they can live in squallier. Now say you choose option 3 for the preservation of the rest of your property. Later you have to add a hog pen. Where are you going to put it? Up front or way out back by the dogs?
The site for our sewage plant is not based on race or the poor. It’s about the above.

MattOcker

I have been reading your comments here for some time now and have visited you youtube site. Although you have not said any "untruths" You do tend to dismiss every move our officials make with negitive comments on their action or in-action. I would encourage you to go back and reread your posts they tend to be negitive in regards to your opinion of the job these people are doing. My point is you will get better results in your quest to improve victoria by being less critical and more diplomatic on your posts. As for giving examples I say again go back and reread your posts you will find all the examples you need.

Although I do agree with a lot of your lines of thinking The way you present some of them are a little harsh. I was not trying to be critical of your style of putting forth your ideas. I was just letting you know that sometimes it's better to use a less confrontational approach to get your point accross.

A point to ponder upon. If someone who agrees with you thinks they way i do about some of your post, how do you think the fence-sitters and people who don't agree with you feel about them.

I never said or implied that you were disrespectful to anyone. I simply stated what IMO it seems to be a negitive point of view of the way the officials are handling the jobs they do in your posts on THIS website. Other than an occasional "I agree with" or other short affirmation of something they did a majority of the comments are either leaning towards the negitive or neutral.

MattOcker

I understand the point you are trying to make but it seems to me that you have the same (Beat up on the city/county officials) responce to every issue you comment on. This will not help you win over many voters in your possible run for office. In fact it will more than likely cost you votes! By you pointing out, In your opinion, how badly the current office holders are doing over and over without putting forth better ideas or solutions in a less combative way, the only thing you accomplish is to set public opinion against you. While I agree that the people in office could be doing a better job of handling this issue. They were acting in what they thought was the best interests of all the people of victoria. So If I may give you a bit of advice, give your constant bashing of them a rest for a while. It will serve you better in the long run.

Serving as a public office holder is not a easy job. No matter what stance you take on a issue you can never please everyone. The only people you have to please are the ones you represent and then you will not please all of them either. So the next time you have a point to make, please try to be a little more diplomatic in the way you come accross. Because however right your position is, if you turn the people you are trying to reach against the way it's delivered, It will not be taken seriously.

Mr perez.

let me ask you this. Would you rather have raw sewage backing up in the system because it is no longer large enough to handle the volumn of wastes generated by a growing population?

Residents on the south side sould be forwarned if that happens guess where it will back up first? You live on the down hill side of the system and as the old saying goes crap runs down hill.

Also race has nothing to do with this issue it's all about location you can not build a sewer treatment plant just anywhere it has to be constructed at a site favorable to its overall operation and the proposed site meets that requirement. The option of building a new plant near the one on US 59 is cost prohibitive due to the fact it would be in an active flood zone. the record flood of 1998 should have taught this lesson well. any future construction in flood zones of city/county infrastructure should be ruled out of the question as not in the best interest of the people these projects serve.

It would be in the best interest of the entire community if comments posted by you trying to make this a race based issue were put where they belong. IN THE TRASH WITH THE REST OF THE GARBAGE. Why is it that people with no good arguements on an issue always play the RACE CARD to support their ideas. In doing so they usually end up showing how little the know about the subject they are commenting on or how RACIST they are. Lets leave race out of this as it has no place in this issue!!!

I wish where I lived had the public water and sewer services you are so set against being built at that location. I would be thankful to have that facility built near my house if it were an option. I would rather have a new treatment plant next door than a rundown soon to be over-capacity system that backs up from being to small to handle the volume produced by our ever growing population.

As far as the idea that only 30 acres are needed, by buying all 76 acres now it allows for the expansion of the sewer plant for future growth with out the hassle of trying to find another piece of land in the future that would cost even more at the time it was bought.

New technology in handling wastes have evolved to the point that the waste water they discharge is cleaner than the river water it's released into. Some areas are developing policies where that water is being put back into the public water supply as a way to meet the growing demand for more water.

So lets do the right thing and approve this site and get started on construction.

TxEx, do you disagree with his assessment?

More self pontification from MO.

Here we go lets turn it into a racial issue not a whats practical issue. I hope the City Council sees right through that.

i really don't think this is a racial issue.