Incorporation of the South end

[Born&Bread]

If we have a good district 5 commissioner then incorporation will do more harm than good. We all know who is behind it. Some have good intentions but some just want control of the South end and the bed tax money. If you look at Cindo's donors you will see a lot of the same name's pushing for incorporation. The North end of this county supported the South up until about 30 years ago and now since the South end is doing better a small group is pushing for incorporation.
Take that petition and rip it up. Then start a petition to dismantle the TDC. The North end of the county deserves help from the South end. I can just see the people running for the City board and Major. They will ruin this beach.
Our most important need is more infrastructure on the South end. More public beach and parking. More parks in the North end.
What we really need is less government and less complainers. Incorporation is only going to do the opposite of that.

 

[Sherm]

Well said

 

[Danny Glidewell]

I am not for or against incorporating the south end because I do not live in the south end nor do I plan to. If they start talking about incorporating Gaskin or Glendale then I will get involved. But who the District 5 commissioner is has little to do with whether or not it is in the best interests of the citizens of South Walton. Mainly because a significant part of South Walton is in Districts 1 and 4. 2nd, incorporation has absolutely nothing to do with the bed tax money or county property taxes for that matter. The TDC is part of the county government and county property taxes will still go to the BCC even if the area incorporates. Ask DeFuniak residents if they still pay county taxes. Dismantling the TDC will do what? It will cut the taxes that tourists pay but it would also mean that all the things the TDC pays for: beach cleanup and access maintenance, code enforcement, lifeguards and acquiring new beach property to name a few, would either be discontinued or the BCC would have to pay for them out of property taxes. So dismantling the TDC is a terrible idea for North Walton as what little we currently get would be cut to pay for things that the TDC currently provides. No one is going to not clean the beaches or provide lifeguards or do anything that would harm the economic engine of the county.
County parks will remain county parks. Schools will remain under the school board and county roads will remain county roads. If the city wants additional services than what the county provides then the city taxes would pay for those services.
What I do not support is trying to suppress the people's right to self-determination or their right to vote. So let the citizens decide what they want. If you do not want another layer of government or more taxes or if you want municipal type services is up to you. But please keep the north end out of this fight. The south incorporating might even be a good thing for the north. If the BCC did not have to worry so much about the south, then maybe we might get a little attention from them.

 

[John G]

1) there was nothing here 30 years ago for the North and to support.

2) there is a real fear from Folks up north that is the South End incorporates they will lose their gravy train and a lot of control of the cash flow.

3) I've never said I was for incorporation and I am still skeptical of it. However posts like this make me want to look at it even closer and pushes me to the side of the incorporation people.

4) the people should have the right to vote on this in a referendum style event. It sounds like you just mad as you won't be able to vote in that referendum assuming you don't live down here.

At least Danny Glidewell outlines some facts for people to consider.

I do agree with your statement about dismantling the TDC and I would gladly sign that petition.

 

[Bob Wells]

If we have a good district 5 commissioner then incorporation will do more harm than good. We all know who is behind it. Some have good intentions but some just want control of the South end and the bed tax money. If you look at Cindo's donors you will see a lot of the same name's pushing for incorporation. The North end of this county supported the South up until about 30 years ago and now since the South end is doing better a small group is pushing for incorporation.
Take that petition and rip it up. Then start a petition to dismantle the TDC. The North end of the county deserves help from the South end. I can just see the people running for the City board and Major. They will ruin this beach.
Our most important need is more infrastructure on the South end. More public beach and parking. More parks in the North end.
What we really need is less government and less complainers. Incorporation is only going to do the opposite of that.

I just want you, if you would please, break down each item of what you said and justify it. Thank you

 

[Danny Glidewell]

John G, first of all the north end is not on any "gravy train," We pay taxes based on the millage rate and our property values same as anyone else. Not to mention that many of the items that the county pays for in the north: Landfill, jail, county shop, etc. benefit the south as much or more than they do the north. There were beach homes and businesses in the south since the county has existed and the north did pay the freight for the county until the early 80's. Finally, whether the south incorporates or not WILL NOT exempt anyone from paying county taxes and will not cause the BCC to lose control over those tax funds. I do not care what you do regarding incorporation, but trying to use the north end as a "boogie man" to scare people into a vote is not right. This is 100% about the south, the north is not involved. We are too busy trying to create an economy that pays a living wage to most of its workers with little to no attention from county government.

 

[Indestructible]

I agree with most of what Danny wrote, but I also agree with the initial post.

From a South Walton resident's perspective, there are a few things I have heard in support of incorporation. The one that is the most convincing from a governance perspective is about land use and zoning, and giving local residents more of a say over these matters. I think that is spot on in terms of a definite need.

However, this isn't just a South Walton issue, and let me explain why I say that.

If you listen to some of the rhetoric that doesn't appear on the Better South Walton website or at the forums, but at events and person to person, as I have, some (not all) the proponents of incorporation do bring up North Walton frequently. Comments calling South Walton "the golden goose" and referring to our tax dollars as "the gravy train" are purposefully divisive and designed to sway people towards incorporation by telling people what is being taken from them and by who.

I guarantee you that if this gets onto the ballot, if the proponents of incorporation want to win the vote, that is the message they will use because it's the only thing that can win. Because people don't vote on zoning or land use, they vote on money. So it's divisive and maybe there's no way around that.

All of that aside, my biggest concern about incorporation are not the political aspects, but three things: what this does to taxes, what this does to small businesses, and what this does related to development.

On taxes, I find it difficult to believe taxes will not go up. At some point they will.

On small businesses, everyone should know that there are corporate interests promoting the incorporation agenda that would like nothing more than to pass rules that would make it impossible for some of our great local establishments to continue to operate; they desperately want to expand Into the 30a market and need the land to do it.

Finally, if you turn over control of land use I worry that development will get worse, not be restrained...because it's easier and cheaper to win a city council election than a county commission race.

 

[Misty]

I don't have a dog in the incorporation fight. Don't care if they do, don't care if they don't but like Danny, I would love to see a BCC that can focus on issues north of the bay not just south of it!

 

[Misty]

I agree with most of what Danny wrote, but I also agree with the initial post.

From a South Walton resident's perspective, there are a few things I have heard in support of incorporation. The one that is the most convincing from a governance perspective is about land use and zoning, and giving local residents more of a say over these matters. I think that is spot on in terms of a definite need.

However, this isn't just a South Walton issue, and let me explain why I say that.

If you listen to some of the rhetoric that doesn't appear on the Better South Walton website or at the forums, but at events and person to person, as I have, some (not all) the proponents of incorporation do bring up North Walton frequently. Comments calling South Walton "the golden goose" and referring to our tax dollars as "the gravy train" are purposefully divisive and designed to sway people towards incorporation by telling people what is being taken from them and by who.

I guarantee you that if this gets onto the ballot, if the proponents of incorporation want to win the vote, that is the message they will use because it's the only thing that can win. Because people don't vote on zoning or land use, they vote on money. So it's divisive and maybe there's no way around that.

All of that aside, my biggest concern about incorporation are not the political aspects, but three things: what this does to taxes, what this does to small businesses, and what this does related to development.

On taxes, I find it difficult to believe taxes will not go up. At some point they will.

On small businesses, everyone should know that there are corporate interests promoting the incorporation agenda that would like nothing more than to pass rules that would make it impossible for some of our great local establishments to continue to operate; they desperately want to expand Into the 30a market and need the land to do it.

Finally, if you turn over control of land use I worry that development will get worse, not be restrained...because it's easier and cheaper to win a city council election than a county commission race.

Spoken like a well rehearsed politician endorsed by the SBA!

 

[Danny Glidewell]

Indestructible, the original post was an attempt to insinuate the incorporation discussion into the District 5 BCC race. But the logic is flawed because the writers definition of who would be a "good" district 5 commissioner is probably vastly different than many people in the south. Many believe that Ms. Meadows is the voice for protecting them against over-development and that Mr. Anderson is backed by people who wish to open up the south to any development that will make them money. Whether you agree with those opinions or not, that is what many people perceive. So, logically, an Anderson victory will further drive these people to support incorporation and a Meadows victory would slow that drive down.
Really, incorporation is not a county issue and should have no bearing on a commissioner's race.