Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS

Annexation deal needed

April 21, 2013

The town of Johnstown and Glove Cities must remember the area needs development....

« Back to Article

sort: oldest | newest




Apr-21-13 2:21 AM

Combine it all under one county government, eliminate the redundant layers, save the taxpayers money, and eliminate the need for such measures.

13 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-21-13 8:10 AM

Taxedtoomuch, you beat me to it. Having all these layers of tiny governments is ridiculous in this day and age. All of this municipal bickering is tiresome and impedes progress.

11 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-21-13 8:59 AM

That was another crime perpetrated by Mayor King, he uses strong arm tactics against our friends. Mayor Slingerland also used her power to stymie Walmart building and it is not in the areas best interest to do so. Merging the entire county may sound great and it may even be the best answer... but do you see the greed of the few allowing it to benefit the many? It will take some honest people in the right places to get this done and that is not where we are at today!

4 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-21-13 9:56 AM

An "annexation deal" is exactly what is not needed. What is being proposed is an illegal taking from one municipality, in this case, the Town of Johnstown, by a separate municpality, the City of Johnstown. The benefit is to the hostile taker, the city and the landowner. The city would reap increased property and sales tax revenue while the landowner would realize an extreme increase in the value of their property. The town would get nothing, other than the realization like the numerous past annexation's of what if feels like to be fleeced.

If the region needs land for development, and this is a very big if, given the empty store front's and undeveloped land in the cities, the entity with the land, the towns, should realize an equal share of the benefits. The town has the undeveloped land where developers want to develop.

Recent proposal's by the cities have been totally unreasonable since they continue to follow the fleecing's of the past, to the town's demise.

5 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-21-13 10:08 AM

Agreed, but if all wish to survive then one county government is the answer. Our total population is equal to that of a small "real" city. Also Wal-Mart is not out to save G'ville, I overheard(hearsay) that they have renewed their lease for quite a period to keep any competitors out of their current location.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-21-13 4:56 PM

Let's develop all the rural farmland and move all the chickens into the city.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-22-13 10:11 AM

Development yes. Does either area need more apartments?

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-22-13 12:20 PM

Taxedtoomuch, can you please elaborate on the 'overheard' re-signing the lease? I was under the impression that they owned the land, but could be wrong.

Either way, 'I overheard(hearsay) that they have renewed their lease for quite a period to keep any competitors out of their current location."

That's how EVERY business model works. The entire foundation rests upon that one simple tenet- knock out the competition.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-22-13 2:03 PM

I am talking about the old store where they do not own the land. I overheard some business people discussing that the lease was re-signed with a belief to keep a competitor out(of the old/current location) until they are firmly established at the new location.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-22-13 4:03 PM

"overheard"...."Belief that..." so you don't have anything real other than speculation and hearsay? why, youshould have a show just like Glenn Beck does....he's never let facts get in the way of churning out a good rumor either.

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-22-13 5:15 PM

Hence the term overheard and hearsay. Maybe someone has loose lips? Time will tell and if that is the case our "Savior of Gloversville" is depriving the county and town of potential tax revenue and jobs. Good for business, bad corporate neighbor.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-23-13 10:07 AM

Look at all who agree here with downsizing the government in Fulton County. Why can't this happen? If enough people get their heads together, we can make a change. I, for one, will work endlessly for a smaller government for Fulton County. Who will join me?

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-24-13 7:36 PM

Annexation only treats the symptoms of Fulton County,and just about anywhere else,problems..END unfunded mandates is the place to start.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 13 of 13 comments

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
Remember my email address.


I am looking for:
News, Blogs & Events Web