Reply
or ReplyNewSubject
Section 5: OPA Board Subject: Board Punts on Slots Msg# 527556
|
||||||
|
For me, to ask for something that clearly is in opposition to the intent and letter of the Bill is wrong. Interesting comment. Taken to a logical conclusion it would mean no passed legislation should ever be amended or discarded. Incredible. Lots of ignorance on the part of our elected officials who vote on emotion and not the law itself. But after the bill is passed we should consider no changes. Incredible. |
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
For reference, the above message is a reply to a message where: Joe, I was going to ignore you but this needs a response. I am under the impression that Mathias and Conway added the percents for OC and Berlin on their own. What really happened, I do not know (and I could be wrong). For me, to ask for something that clearly is in opposition to the intent and letter of the Bill is wrong. It is my impression after listening to both Conway and Mathias that they were/are not aware of the words of the Bill. In our meeting with Mathias, he was mistaken on the words that apply to 589, and we corrected him. It is my impression that they just made a political "move" based on concerns from the voters in OC and Berlin. Had we made our concerns known and those two included us we would not have even known what happened. This lack of understanding what is in legislation is something I observed in the Atlantic Coastal Bays process. Lots of ignorance on the part of our elected officials who vote on emotion and not the law itself. Anyway, that's the way I see it, and no BS from you will change my mind on what I thought long and hard on and came to the conclusion is the proper way to go. Bill |