Vote no on 4A

KINCAIDSPRINGS wrote:

MountainGirl44 wrote: Kincaid Springs....where are you getting your $19.99 threshold from? I do the financial reporting for the Friends of Elk Creek Fire issue committee and we are only obligated to report a contribution from a person if the contribution is $100 or more. This comes directly from the Campaign Finance section of the Colorado Secretary of State Website. What I find curious is that the Colorado Union of Taxpayers, who sponsored the opposition piece that was mailed recently has not filed their expenditure on the website per state law. The last expenditures I see reported from them was from 2011 where they gave money and then in 2012 where they received some money back on this issue. Nothing this year. We are being transparent and abiding by the laws of the state.

$20.00 is the threshold for donations to a PAC. If issue committees are at $100.00 than that is cool did anyone donate more than 99.99?

As far as the CUT, Colorado union of Tax payers is a non profit not a PAC or and Issue committee. Because the are a 501, they are not required to disclose donations, contributions or expenditures. So they are within the law for the current status of disclosure. For an ongoing entity, that tackles more than just one issue this is appropriate.

Gheeesh.......... I read the crap KINCAIDSPRINGS posts and it makes me feel dirty. It's as if his filth and lies put off a gaseous stench that sticks to your skin. Logging off now. I think I need a very hot shower.

I am feeling the same way Zen.

Does anyone else see the irony. That about 98% of the people on this thread are using alias names to post. If you look at the member profile, they have filled out nothing. Real or otherwise. And I am the BAD guy for using an alias to create a website? ( the email is real. It works)

Walter. Science chick, the PIO and the insurance sales lady are the only ones disclosing names. And while i respect that, It isn't needed. Just like the rest of you hypocrites don't have to say who you are! Do you know what the best part of that is? A M E R I C A! That we live someplace that this is ok!

I am sorry you feel dirty. I am sorry that Colorado political laws make you feel dirty. I didn't write the 501 non profit rules. I was called out for not filing paper work that isn't required. When I have stated something in error, I have corrected or apologized... Still waiting for the apology back on that accusation.

Do you wonder. What will happen in two weeks.... Will we be friends? Community members? Will you say hi at the vfw breakfasts, Or will you all still turn and whisper. Either way the vote goes... I am cool with it. Again. Because we live in American and have these great rights that allow us to voice our opinions, to vote our opinions and to move on when the vote s done.

Now.... I am going to go join you all in the shower. I have to go to work so i have money to pay back to everyone else's shortfalls! Lol

blah blah blah

Michael_Davis wrote:

GO UNION wrote: Why does'nt elk creek bill for the services in these parks?

The parks don't pay property taxes, so Elk Creek Fire Protection District doesn't receive any funding from the parks.

If someone get's hurt on a trail, we respond and find them. We provide first aid in the field and we help get them out of the forest. IF they are hurt badly enough that they have to be transported to an area hospital; Elk Creek will bill their insurance for the transport (ambulance ride to the hospital). However, if they are not transported, there is no charge for our services.

And frankly ECFD should mind its own business and focus its money and assets on their own district. The Parks have their own aid. Alpine Rescue is hugely better equipped for mountain rescues than ECFD who has poor leadership and can't manage its own self. Same with Park County Search and Rescue. They are much better equipped.

The USFS has its own approach and has the ability to bring in quite a number of people in a short period of time if necessary. ECFD or any district who responds is secondary. So how about focusing on your own District and stop trying to spread taxpayers monies around to other areas that they already pay for with state and federal funds.

If ECFD's area is too big to handle give some to other districts who are better equipped to handle.

Michael_Davis wrote: Wildland Fires: The entire District has a significant potential for involvement in major wildland fires. There have been several major wild fires nearby since 1996: Buffalo Creek, Hi-Meadow, Schoonover, Snaking, Black Mountain, Hayman, and the Lower North Fork fires. The Lower North Fork fire in 2012 destroyed 27 homes and killed 3 people.

Of the 40 communities in the district, 25 are at extreme fire risk (Elk Creek Community Wildfire Protection Plan [2005]). The risk is typically building construction, forest fuel loads, steep topography, and limited water access.

Many areas only have a single road access. In a fire, residents could be trapped.

And of those fires which were in your district that ECFD was the lead? Black Mountain? And wasn't that part of the national forest?

I don't feel a need to contribute more money for ECFD when they haven't proven their own leadership and management in their own District. You make it sound like we need to provide for all the other districts. As I understand the agreement it is a mutual exchange with districts. I don't want or need to support all the other districts by having more fire equipment and personnel than what is required w/i our own District.

KINCAIDSPRINGS wrote: Does anyone else see the irony. That about 98% of the people on this thread are using alias names to post. If you look at the member profile, they have filled out nothing. Real or otherwise. And I am the BAD guy for using an alias to create a website? ( the email is real. It works)

[snip]

For everyones information

Prevalence of False Contact Information
for Registered Domain Names

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d06165.pdf

frogger wrote: blah blah blah

And this from one of the people that have asked others to be respectful.

You make snap judgments about things and yet you want others to be respectful.

Well you are right. We all do. Look at all the people who have come to this website vs. the old 285bound w/o knowing what the contract has to say.

So then you won't be surprised when people won't support SC's business nor the businesses who advertise on her website because of her views and her filthy mouth and her personal attacks.

The same with Michael Davis. He was way ahead as a POI instead of POS when he opened his mouth and started villifying others w/o any proof. He should have stuck with his mission. But isn't he just typical of how ECFD is these days? After the decades of support that I and others have provided to ECFD, it won't happen any more. Thank you Michael Davis and Friends of Elk Creek for pointing out just how bad the ECF District is.

KINCAIDSPRINGS wrote:
[snip]

Walter. Science chick, the PIO and the insurance sales lady are the only ones disclosing names. And while i respect that, It isn't needed. Just like the rest of you hypocrites don't have to say who you are! Do you know what the best part of that is? A M E R I C A! That we live someplace that this is ok!

[snip]

In my case it is absolutely needed. When I realized that I was going to be covering this issue for a upcoming issue of The Flume, I started using my real name and picture on 285Bound and of course that was carried over to here when SC upgraded the site.

I had previously use a number of nicknames on the forum, changing them numerous times as the mood stuck me.

It is needed if I want to retain any credibility writing about this issue and many more issues I will be covering in the future. My honesty and integrity is more important to me than the ability to hide behind false information and lurk in the shadows.

I have a certain pride. Of course, that's just me.

And for the record, SC, a group of residents off of Kuehster, won't mention the road, were in North Fork Fire District which was very hard for them to access, they had the choice of using Elk Creek Fire Department or InterCanyon and they chose InterCanyon because of access and because of their professionalism. Yea there are those who clearly do not want to be associated with Elk Creek Fire Department. Their previous history, not to mention their current unprofessionalism, precedes them. Maybe a few more of us should petition out of ECFD than watching the fiasco that continues as ECFD. Yep just throw more money at ECFD as if that would make it better.

Vote NO on 4A, my extensive family did.

Thank you for making it easy to make the decision Friends of Elk Creek.