Council Votes Not To Charge Evergreen Walk For Easements

[Syd]

I'm sick of reading this lie !!!!! Wayne Gerlt the former Town Attorney does not beleive this Lie. He has done research and is convinced that the town would get the money.

The current town attorney does not have a clue. Read the old Post Office lease and you will know he is either driving a ding dong cart or is working for anyone but the town. Unless it is the incompetence of the Town Manager ????

We report you decide. Syd News Network.

Citizen wrote:

<quoted text>
What part don't you get? The $130K would go to the state. If the town hadn't offered an incentive, Evergreen walk would be at a different address, and residents like you and I would be paying more taxes. All a no vote can accomplish is to increase traffic. It's time you wake up and come to your senses.

[Watch Dog]

Syd wrote:

I'm sick of reading this lie !!!!! Wayne Gerlt the former Town Attorney does not beleive this Lie. He has done research and is convinced that the town would get the money.
The current town attorney does not have a clue. Read the old Post Office lease and you will know he is either driving a ding dong cart or is working for anyone but the town. Unless it is the incompetence of the Town Manager ????
We report you decide. Syd News Network.
<quoted text>

Now the sleeping people are waking up! time to make changes in our Town like the Town Charter! also any elected people and people appointed should show all finical records! Millions are spent to Elect some one to have a volunteer position (Hello) wake up for Gods sake lets get rid of all this filth in our Town! Also why didn't the Town Atty go after the people who sold the bad fire house land? who the hell are they protecting not the Tax payers!

[Watch Dog]

To our Town TC and Town manger what are you doing to our Town? who are you helping it is not the Town Citizens who work hard every day to pay Town taxes? and you gave ALDI a 7 year tax break for what? and you advertise it in the papers before any hearings as a done deal! you once again broken our Town Charter rules and State statures why did you go out of your way to have a hearing on ALDI when it was a done deal? you wasted Tax payers time and in the mean time you sat in your chairs and inside you were laughing in side at the tax payers because you new all along you were going to do what you wanted! you had your fun now and you are going to see changes!

[Guess Who]

Did you hear? The Starbucks in Evergreen Walk is being closed by the corporate.
Why is no one talking about the $11K monthly rent being paid by the Town for the old post office???

[SANDYCREEK]

Hey WATCH DOG .....are you and I the only ones wondering WHAT'S GOING ON UNDER THE RADAR? The ALDI fiasco is another example why people don't attend TC meetings, because THE TC DOESN'T LISTEN, DOESN'T CARE and DOESN'T RESPECT THE COMMUNITY. Two reasons for this is that they don't have knowledge of properly exercising their role as elected officials and because of that, they feel the Town Manager's "speeches" hold substance without question.(to who's benefit?????)
GUESS WHO == does that answer your question?

[Citizen]

Syd wrote:

I'm sick of reading this lie !!!!! Wayne Gerlt the former Town Attorney does not beleive this Lie. He has done research and is convinced that the town would get the money.
The current town attorney does not have a clue. Read the old Post Office lease and you will know he is either driving a ding dong cart or is working for anyone but the town. Unless it is the incompetence of the Town Manager ????
We report you decide. Syd News Network.
<quoted text>

Mr. Gerlt filed 22 frivolous lawsuits of which one survives based on the technicality of how an easement is defined. Having to defend these cases has wasted sigificant energy and taxpayer money. Consider that your anger is mis-directed. Mr. Gerlt is 1/22 on the matter, perhaps you should believe the town and their attorney instead.

[concerned SW citizen]

Please view detailed information about this issue. A vote is up on 9/9/08 and you should be well informed.

http://www.stopthegiveaway.com

[Get the facts Jack]

You really must get your facts straight. He has had atleast 4-6 of his lawsuits against Evergreen walk and the town reviewed by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court doesn't waste their time on "frivolous lawsuits". Nice Try!

Citizen wrote:

<quoted text>
Mr. Gerlt filed 22 frivolous lawsuits of which one survives based on the technicality of how an easement is defined. Having to defend these cases has wasted sigificant energy and taxpayer money. Consider that your anger is mis-directed. Mr. Gerlt is 1/22 on the matter, perhaps you should believe the town and their attorney instead.

[Get the facts Jack]

Once again, nice try. It will not close the road, just force another referendum with a real dollar amount this time. You really don't know what your talking about.

Visit: www.stopthegiveaway.com . Atleast, Atty Gerlt is watching out for the taxpayers, the town council isn't.

Citizen wrote:

<quoted text>
A vote against the easement referendum would be foolish. At this point all it can accomplish is closing an entrance to Evergreen Walk and increasing traffic. Nothing good could come from a no vote. Let's not be silly.

[Get the facts Jack]

No, you don't get it. The taxpayers are mad as hell and we have had enough of this free ride. Time to stand up and vote "NO". Nothing will happen. The town will receive the money. Nice try with your scare tactics!

Citizen wrote:

<quoted text>
What part don't you get? The $130K would go to the state. If the town hadn't offered an incentive, Evergreen walk would be at a different address, and residents like you and I would be paying more taxes. All a no vote can accomplish is to increase traffic. It's time you wake up and come to your senses.

[new to SW]

My husband and I are relatively new to South Windsor and are searching for some facts on this issue before we vote on Tuesday...
Some questions:
Has an economic analysis been done on whether or not the incremental tax revenue from the expansion of Evergreen Walk will outweigh the $7 million we (South Windsor) would be foregoing as part of this transaction? Or, in other words, what would the payback period be?
Also, does anyone have facts on the ramifications of us selling the land at fair market value vs. giving the land at no consideration with respect to the developer's future actions? Any threat of Evergreen Walk losing funding/support from the developers as a result of having to pay for the easement?
And to clarify, on Wayne Gerlt's website, www.stopthegiveaway.com , he states that the money from the sale of the easement would STAY in South Windsor as the result of a Supreme Court decision; many of you claim it will go to the state. As posted on his site: "The 5/28/04 Court decision means the money paid by the developers for the use of the town property does not have to be paid to the State of Connecticut but may be retained by the town."
Mr. Gerlt also provides documentation such as meeting minutes, maps, and court decisions on his website if anyone is interested.
Thanks for anyone who can clarify the FACTS.

[allen]

new to SW wrote:

My husband and I are relatively new to South Windsor and are searching for some facts on this issue before we vote on Tuesday...
Some questions:
Has an economic analysis been done on whether or not the incremental tax revenue from the expansion of Evergreen Walk will outweigh the $7 million we (South Windsor) would be foregoing as part of this transaction? Or, in other words, what would the payback period be?
Also, does anyone have facts on the ramifications of us selling the land at fair market value vs. giving the land at no consideration with respect to the developer's future actions? Any threat of Evergreen Walk losing funding/support from the developers as a result of having to pay for the easement?
And to clarify, on Wayne Gerlt's website, www.stopthegiveaway.com , he states that the money from the sale of the easement would STAY in South Windsor as the result of a Supreme Court decision; many of you claim it will go to the state. As posted on his site: "The 5/28/04 Court decision means the money paid by the developers for the use of the town property does not have to be paid to the State of Connecticut but may be retained by the town."
Mr. Gerlt also provides documentation such as meeting minutes, maps, and court decisions on his website if anyone is interested.
Thanks for anyone who can clarify the FACTS.

Perhaps you are over analyzing the issue. Evergreen Walk is a business. The town has regulations for businesses. The town has regulations for selling or transferring public property and easements.

Question is about choices - treat all businesses alike or give away town property to some of them.

I think its wrong to give town property to businesses for free. The property belongs to taxpayers. Next the town will give away the Priest Farm to a developer for a recreation center - the Foster Farm to a developer for condominiums - Ellsworth School to a developer for apartments - the Senior Center to a management company to rent out space to seniors...

Voting no on the easements sends a message to the TC. Look at the town ambulance corps - private for profit corporation using town space for virtually nothing. Having a building built for them for practically nothing. They make big profits and are unregulated by the town.

Developers like Evergreen Walk care about profits. Do they share their profits with the town?

The huge liquor store going up on Buckland Road - good for the town? The huge massage parlor at Evergreen Run - good for the town?

Evergreen Walk might be upset about paying for easements. They should respect the taxpayers and the taxpayers should respect them. That is the foundation of a good business relationship.

Slippery slope to eminent domain and seizing private property for a business. Next - town council will seize private properties and give them to developers to please them and keep them happy. Does Evergreen Walk need some private property? Would you vote to seize that property and give it to them?

Vote NO. Evergreen Walk should pay a fair price for the easements. Follow the town regulations and treat everyone the same.

[votingNO]

Citizen wrote:

<quoted text>
Mr. Gerlt filed 22 frivolous lawsuits of which one survives based on the technicality of how an easement is defined. Having to defend these cases has wasted sigificant energy and taxpayer money. Consider that your anger is mis-directed. Mr. Gerlt is 1/22 on the matter, perhaps you should believe the town and their attorney instead.

Again..I agree with getthefactsJack..you're just completely wrong on the issues and facts. Again. And, btw, if he was so wrong, why have 3-4 of the cases gone to the Supreme Court? The SC doesn't pick up "frivolous" cases. Mr. Gerlt has received NOTHING for these lawsuits nor has the town even been sued. Hello? Don't you even read the paper? Evergreen Walk got sued. The town has paid NOTHING for this. Though they should bc THEY are the ones that have SCREWED UP.

I just LOVE it that no matter what the results are..that the TC and town are exposed...to all of CT. They look like imbeciles who don't even kow their own charter. Give me a break! This would never have happened in West Hartford. Those towns people have it together and would never let the town get away with this type of thing. Let's hope our citizens are like them.

The money will go to the town. It's even documented by the Supreme Court. And no matter who tries to cover this fact up with their "angle"...what's written is written. It's time for us to stand up for our town. We're already expected to pay more taxes...maybe at least this money can help us and NOT the TC.

[votingNO]

Tom wrote:

<quoted text>
Your taxes went up for a variety of reasons, not the least of which involves the general economic state of the nation. Get out of your little box and look at the big picture. Inflation is up to 4.2% and rising. Were you paying $4.39 for a gallon of gas last year at this time? Without Evergreen, your taxes would have gone up more. What sense does it make to charge them an easement, when the money will go to the state. Windsor had nothing to gain. Your Town COUNCIL acted appropriately in this case.

Nothing to gain? Are you kidding? You obviously don't live in town or just don't pay your taxes bc we have A LOT to gain. Evergreen Walk has done NOTHING to lower taxes for us. NOTHING!