Farmington city council strikes down proposed Albuquerque flight...

There are 20 comments on the Farmington Daily Times story from May 11, 2013, titled Farmington city council strikes down proposed Albuquerque flight.... In it, Farmington Daily Times reports that:

Farmington city council did not approve a proposed subsidized flight route from Four Corners Regional Airport to Albuquerque during a special work session Friday morning.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Farmington Daily Times.

Hairy L Knuckles

United States

#41 May 17, 2013
Cary L Nickel wrote:
<quoted text>
Ahh, so you read, but didn't comprehend? There's nothing in the article about food and medicine tax exemptions being eliminated anywhere in New Mexico. What IS going to happen is that the state is going to phase out transferring state tax monies to cities that were hurt by the elimination of the gross receipts tax on groceries and medicine.
And again, tax cuts are not in the least bit similar to "giveaways.
Maybe you should see a doctor about the "throwing up in your mouth" thing. That's not normal.
Acid Reflux, perhaps?
As for Susana, she's got my vote next time too!
I think you're the one with the comprehension malady. If Sucia gives tax breaks to corporations, that means less revenue for the state, then one of the ways to make up for the lost revenue is to decrease or eliminate the payouts to municipalities (which were done so that muni's could exempt food & medicine from sales taxes). This is discussed in the article.

If these revenues are decreased or eliminated, then municipalities (most of whom are already having budget shortfalls for fy14) have no choice but to decrease or elimate services or restore the taxes on food and medicine. This also is discussed in the article.

No matter how you try to spin it, we get to the same conclusion - those of us middle class folk who depend on food and medicine end up subsidizing corporations.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#42 May 17, 2013
Hairy L Knuckles wrote:
<quoted text>
I think you're the one with the comprehension malady. If Sucia gives tax breaks to corporations, that means less revenue for the state, then one of the ways to make up for the lost revenue is to decrease or eliminate the payouts to municipalities (which were done so that muni's could exempt food & medicine from sales taxes). This is discussed in the article.
If these revenues are decreased or eliminated, then municipalities (most of whom are already having budget shortfalls for fy14) have no choice but to decrease or elimate services or restore the taxes on food and medicine. This also is discussed in the article.
No matter how you try to spin it, we get to the same conclusion - those of us middle class folk who depend on food and medicine end up subsidizing corporations.
Gross receipt taxes cannot be levied upon groceries or medicine by state statute, so your assertion that they will be is a "red herring" meant to scare people, and nothing more.

So unless the Democrats in the state legislature decide to change that law, you have nothing to worry about, so relax.

Might the gross receipt tax go up on other taxable goods? Yes, it might. Local government will have the legal authority to raise local gross receipts taxes by an amount that doesn't even touch 1 percent. Seems I read it was 3/4 of a percent or so. That is up to each individual municipality. That's called "local government", and thats a good thing. The citizens of each municipality can then decide if their representatives are doing a good job or not by raising taxes, and vote accordingly.

Decrease of eliminate services? Government already does way more than it should, and if local government cannot find wasteful spending to eliminate in order to save money, then they aren't really trying. Forcing local government to examine it's priorities is, again, a good thing.

And that's not even taking into account the increased business activity in New Mexico thanks to the new tax structure, which will lead to increased revenues for local and state government.

Lower taxes are ALWAYS a good thing for everyone.

Yay Susanna!
more

Santa Fe, NM

#43 May 17, 2013
Cary L Nickel wrote:
<quoted text>
the New Mexico Pit Rule:
BS - water is more important than anything else in NM.
Wondering

Farmington, NM

#44 May 17, 2013
Cary L Nickel wrote:
<quoted text>
Job killing Democrat laws in New Mexico? Well, let's start with the "grand-daddy" of them all, the New Mexico Pit Rule: "the stupidest rule ever crafted by man", according to Representative James Strickler. That one rule is responsible for killing more jobs in New Mexico than likely any other single law, since the Uranium mining business was legislated out of existence in New Mexico 20 years ago. Why, the pit rule even killed Diane Denish's job!
If low natural gas prices are hurting the biz all over the state, how is that so many other states have figured out how to keep their natural gas business profitable, so that so many companies have simply picked up and moved their operations there, taking the jobs, and in many cases, employees with them?
Just in my family alone, three members born and raised here are now working in the natural gas business in Texas. A good friend of mine has picked up his family, including his kids born here, and is moving to Pennsylvania to work in the gas fields there. He's already been working there for a couple of years, hoping New Mexico legislators would pull their heads out of their posteriors so he could find work here again and not have to uproot his family. And one of my wife's best friends from high school moved, with her family, including kids born here, to North Dakota to work in the booming gas fields there. Add to that the myriad local friends of mine who are working out of state while trying to keep their families here, or who left the business when their company packed up and moved to greener natural gas pastures elsewhere.
How can natural gas be such a booming, profitable business everywhere else but here in New Mexico, despite low prices? Why, we know why! The Pit Rule!
And as for that big oil boom in the south? Sure, that will go on while prices are high. Companies flush with cash can afford all the fees and regulations. But wait till the price of oil falls, and then watch that industry shrivel up and blow on out of here just like natural gas did.
There are plenty of states that want the jobs New Mexico Democrats continually throw away.
You do know that it was revealed last year that Rep. Strickler recieved 100% of his campaign money fron the oil & gas industry didn't you? He is also in the Oil & gas business himself, so obviously ther is NO chance of of predjudice on his part. How long have you worked in the O&G industry? The move to other states have to do with deliverabilities from each well, the recoverable reserves, and in many cases, the contractural or lease agreement requiring development in a specified time frame. The governor promised in her campaign to eliminate the 'pit rule". She hasn't delivered on her promise. Either she lied or she is ineffectual in negotiating with Democrats.
The same can be said for her "top priority" of eliminating drivers liscense for illegals. I fully agree with her stated stance n the
DL's, but have NO faith in her delivering.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#45 May 17, 2013
more wrote:
<quoted text>
BS - water is more important than anything else in NM.
And the water was, and is, just fine. That being the case, the economy was more important.

There was no evidence, ANYWHERE in New Mexico, that indicated that the pit rule was needed to protect water. Nor is there any evidence that the pit rule does anything to protect our water.

Thus, Democrats in the state legislature, along with former Governor Bill Richardson, supported a job-killing piece of legislation that served no useful purpose.

And it even cost Diane Denish HER job, thankfully.

And to this day, the Democrats in the state legislature refuse to address the situation of driving a vital industry out of New Mexico.

I'm sure states like Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and North Dakota are very pleased!

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#46 May 17, 2013
I don't dispute much of what you said.

Why does Susa promise what she can't deliver?
Cary L Nickel wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you know how government works? The governor doesn't make the laws. She's promised to vote for any bill that is presented to her by the legislature that will eliminate the pit rule, but the legislature hasn't stepped up to do so, because the Democrats there don't really care about the oil and gas business, and they are too ignorant to see the correlation between high paying jobs that take advantage of the resources New Mexico actually has, and prosperity.
Why do you think drilling companies are tapping New Mexico's gas fields from across the border in Texas and Colorado? They have that technology, and it's cheaper to drill from there than to jump through the hoops New Mexico present to them.
If the people of New Mexico ever wise up and stop voting for Democrats like Pavlov's dog salivating at the ring of a bell, we can get this state moving again. Until then, Governor Martinez has to play the hand she was dealt, and the people of New Mexico have dealt her a crappy hand by keeping the same old anti-oil and gas dinosaurs in the state legislature.
The Farmington area would be better represented politically if we seceded from New Mexico and became part of Utah.
more

Santa Fe, NM

#47 May 17, 2013
Cary L Nickel wrote:
<quoted text>
And the water was, and is, just fine. That being the case, the economy was more important.
There was no evidence, ANYWHERE in New Mexico, that indicated that the pit rule was needed to protect water. Nor is there any evidence that the pit rule does anything to protect our water.
Thus, Democrats in the state legislature, along with former Governor Bill Richardson, supported a job-killing piece of legislation that served no useful purpose.
And it even cost Diane Denish HER job, thankfully.
And to this day, the Democrats in the state legislature refuse to address the situation of driving a vital industry out of New Mexico.
I'm sure states like Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and North Dakota are very pleased!
BS

There are at least 421 cases of known ground water contamination caused by drilling pits; most were self-reported by industry. It is unknown how many other cases there are because, until the Pit Rule was implemented, most pits were buried in place and no testing was required.


http://www.abqjournal.com/opinion/guest_colum...

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#48 May 17, 2013
more wrote:
<quoted text>
BS
There are at least 421 cases of known ground water contamination caused by drilling pits; most were self-reported by industry. It is unknown how many other cases there are because, until the Pit Rule was implemented, most pits were buried in place and no testing was required.
http://www.abqjournal.com/opinion/guest_colum...
Wrong.

"The New Mexico Oil and Gas Division (NMOCD)
routinely contends in the media that the Pit Rule
was created to prevent ground water
contamination, and boasts,“that there has not been
a single case of ground water contamination since
the passage of the rule.” The sad truth is that there
was not a single case of ground water
contamination due to a drilling reserve pit before
the rule went into effect."

http://www.ipanm.org/images/library/File/Pit-...

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#49 May 17, 2013
x-and-o wrote:
I don't dispute much of what you said.
Why does Susa promise what she can't deliver?
<quoted text>
She doesn't.

She promised to work towards getting the pit rule rescinded. She has.

She promised to sign a repeal of the pit rule. She will.

Give our Governor a legislature that isn't obstructionist in nature, and it will free up our state to economic development.
nope

Santa Fe, NM

#50 May 17, 2013
Cary L Nickel wrote:
<quoted text>
I trust the regulators more the polluters. I see Susanna's new corrupt crew at the ENMRD have hidden the data in their website. Just as has been done with the NMED, driving out all the good people.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#51 May 17, 2013
nope wrote:
<quoted text>
I trust the regulators more the polluters. I see Susanna's new corrupt crew at the ENMRD have hidden the data in their website. Just as has been done with the NMED, driving out all the good people.
And I trust the private sector who create the jobs and pay the taxes over the regulators with an agenda, and a need to justify their existence and perpetuate their jobs. That last thing a government employee wants if for the taxpayer to realize they don't need 'em!

You should be able to get yourself a tinfoil hat from one of your neighbors there in Santa Fe. That ought to alleviate that "feeling of conspiracy" you seem to be afflicted with.
another

Santa Fe, NM

#52 May 17, 2013
Cary L Nickel wrote:
<quoted text>

.
inane post. The agenda of the polluter is to piss in the well and leave the mess for others to clean up. Pure corruption.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#53 May 17, 2013
another wrote:
<quoted text>
inane post. The agenda of the polluter is to piss in the well and leave the mess for others to clean up. Pure corruption.
Of course you believe that. Your a big-government liberal who thinks government is your savior, and therefore altruistic and infallible (as long as Democrats are in charge).

You'd better read a newspaper, because your savior's halo is losing it's luster.
Wondering

Farmington, NM

#54 May 17, 2013
Cary L Nickel wrote:
<quoted text>
She doesn't.
She promised to work towards getting the pit rule rescinded. She has.
She promised to sign a repeal of the pit rule. She will.
Give our Governor a legislature that isn't obstructionist in nature, and it will free up our state to economic development.
Wrong. She promised to REPEAL (not try to repeal) the pit rule. She came in to a legislature that was in large part, the SAME members that had passed the law in the first. She DEMANDED they recind the law because she was now in charge. It was basically a my way or the highway approach. We see how that worked out for her. She has "0" negotiation skills.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#55 May 18, 2013
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>Wrong. She promised to REPEAL (not try to repeal) the pit rule. She came in to a legislature that was in large part, the SAME members that had passed the law in the first. She DEMANDED they recind the law because she was now in charge. It was basically a my way or the highway approach. We see how that worked out for her. She has "0" negotiation skills.
So? I demand that the legislature repeal the job-killing pit rule as well, and the obstructionist, anti-prosperity Democrats in the legislature don't listen to me either.

That's why I vote against Democrats in New Mexico.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#56 May 18, 2013
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
You do know that it was revealed last year that Rep. Strickler recieved 100% of his campaign money fron the oil & gas industry didn't you? He is also in the Oil & gas business himself, so obviously ther is NO chance of of predjudice on his part. How long have you worked in the O&G industry? The move to other states have to do with deliverabilities from each well, the recoverable reserves, and in many cases, the contractural or lease agreement requiring development in a specified time frame. The governor promised in her campaign to eliminate the 'pit rule". She hasn't delivered on her promise. Either she lied or she is ineffectual in negotiating with Democrats.
The same can be said for her "top priority" of eliminating drivers liscense for illegals. I fully agree with her stated stance n the
DL's, but have NO faith in her delivering.
What you seem to fail to understand is that I don't care that James Strickler gets all of his campaign money from the oil and gas industry. The oil and gas industry is not the enemy, government is.

Government, in today's day and age, stands for obstruction.

How long have YOU worked in the oil and gas industry? The move to other states has to do with PROFIT, or, more precisely, the lack of it.

The natural gas industry vacating New Mexico can be summed up in one sentence, spoken by a friend of mine. It goes like this: "Why would anybody want to pay $200,000 dollars to drill a well in New Mexico, when they can drill in other states for free?"

When prices for natural gas are as low as they are today, free is the best option.

Governor Martinez doesn't need to negotiate with the Democrats in the New Mexico legislature. The Democrats have already made it plain they aren't going to budge on the pit rule or on driver's licenses for illegals. Thus we, the citizens, need to throw the Democrats in the New Mexico legislature out of the legislature at the next election.
coo

Santa Fe, NM

#57 May 18, 2013
Cary L Nickel wrote:
<quoted text>
koo.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#58 May 18, 2013
coo wrote:
<quoted text>
koo.
I knew folks could teach some birds to talk, but I didn't know they could teach 'em to run a computer!

Or are you a virtual bird?
Wondering

Farmington, NM

#59 May 18, 2013
Cary L Nickel wrote:
<quoted text>
What you seem to fail to understand is that I don't care that James Strickler gets all of his campaign money from the oil and gas industry. The oil and gas industry is not the enemy, government is.
Government, in today's day and age, stands for obstruction.
How long have YOU worked in the oil and gas industry? The move to other states has to do with PROFIT, or, more precisely, the lack of it.
The natural gas industry vacating New Mexico can be summed up in one sentence, spoken by a friend of mine. It goes like this: "Why would anybody want to pay $200,000 dollars to drill a well in New Mexico, when they can drill in other states for free?"
When prices for natural gas are as low as they are today, free is the best option.
Governor Martinez doesn't need to negotiate with the Democrats in the New Mexico legislature. The Democrats have already made it plain they aren't going to budge on the pit rule or on driver's licenses for illegals. Thus we, the citizens, need to throw the Democrats in the New Mexico legislature out of the legislature at the next election.
You asked 2 questions:
1. I have worked in the O&G business for 35+ years and counting, thank you. And you?
2. Your "friend" obviously does not have and concept of drilling econcomics. First, NOTHING ANYWHERE is free. I have no idea what he means by the $200,000 number. I can assure you that no one can drill and complete any well anywhere for $200,000. Each drilling project has its own ecomomics that it must pass.
Wondering

Farmington, NM

#60 May 18, 2013
Cary L Nickel wrote:
<quoted text>
So? I demand that the legislature repeal the job-killing pit rule as well, and the obstructionist, anti-prosperity Democrats in the legislature don't listen to me either.
That's why I vote against Democrats in New Mexico.
Your "DEMAND" has even less impact than the one made by our Governor, if that is possible. You won't get much of a chance to vote against DEMOCRATS in SJ county until the 2014 election when Gov. Martinez will be challenged (She will win SJC easily). No realistic Democrats run for office in SJ county.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Los Alamos Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Martinez prefers to stick to issues (Jun '10) Apr 28 Corinn 6,370
Los Alamos Music Forum (Nov '12) Apr 28 Musikologist 15
News ICE Arrests Evangelical Youth Minister Indicted... (Jun '10) Apr 17 swedenforever 28
Car accident? Mar '15 LaVel 1
News Small town takes on Corporate America Mar '15 Shopper 2
News Will the Puerto Rico Powerball winner pay Feder... Feb '15 El Cacique 11
espanola nm corruption ;) , i am everywhere a m... Feb '15 thomas 2
More from around the web

Los Alamos People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]