SHFR Needs Adult Supervision

SHFR Needs Adult Supervision

I have been following the yes/no controversy regarding the upcoming election about the future of the Spring Hill Fire Rescue District.

It has been clearly explained that the taxpayers will not see any change regarding their coverage and safety as a result of a "no" vote.

It is quite obvious that a "yes" vote will carry some ambiguous details that actually are quite clear after I attended some meetings and overheard some troubling comments of standing commissioners and the general attitude of department members and their families and supporters.

To overhear a comment by current commissioners say "we built this and we are not going to give it away" troubles me. The taxpayers of Spring Hill paid for the fire department and should be represented by objective fiscal decisions. The current board is not at all acting in the best interest of the taxpayer. And after reading about the candidates for commissioner to be elected Tuesday, it is quite clear that they are also all about the independence of SHFR.

The voters must stop this runaway train and get local control that will be fair and objective.

If it goes independent, under the state we can expect to see some drastic and expensive programs that will result in much higher costs to the taxpayer.

I have great respect and admiration for our firefighters as they are ranked with the best in the state, but they are enjoying a sweetheart deal as far as wages and benefits. The economy of Hernando County and the entire country is not in a position to continue passing out raises and benefits as generous as has been done in the past.

When the recent pay increase to the fire chief was given (the second this year) one of the commissioners defended it by saying the retirees on Social Security are enjoying a 5.8 percent increase in benefits so they can handle it. Well, since they feel we should share the wealth will them consider my application to reimburse me for the 47 percent decrease in my IRA.

I strongly appeal to the voters in Spring Hill to vote "no" on this issue and get this organization under local and transparent control.

Should this pass with a "yes" vote, there will be no transparency, just as it has been in recent years. The current commissioners have made it difficult for the public to obtain information regarding the budget and the operation of what is now a multi-million dollar operation. After reading the comments of the candidates, this will not change.

Should you decide to vote "yes" just leave a blank check in the ballot box!

Phillip Woodward

Spring Hill

Editor's note: Clarification of supervisor of elections recommendation published on Tuesday, Oct. 28, in Hernando Today.

This newspaper's recommendation of Shirley Anderson for supervisor of elections included our interpretation of comments made by one of Anderson's opponents, Gus Guadagnino. We understood his response to interviewers' questions was that he would not work full time; he takes exception with our understanding and tells us that he would work full time if elected. Below is his rebuttal to our recommendation.

Guadagnino Rebuttal

I wish that my reply to your recommendation of another candidate for Hernando County Supervisor of Elections could focus entirely on why I am the most qualified, sensible and most fiscally conservative candidate in this race.

Instead, I must use part of my rebuttal to deny an outrageous lie in your recommendation.

You wrote "Guadagnino stated this will not be a full-time job for him ..."

I have never stated that to anyone, including your newspaper.

In fact, I have stated just the opposite many times. I have said in speeches, on my Web site and in paid advertisements that I am retiring from my private business. If your staff had attended any of these events, or done the most basic research, they would have known this. And if your only objection to my candidacy was your erroneous assumption that I would not be a full-time elected official, why not confirm it before printing?

You have a right to recommend any candidate you choose. But for you to make such a major mistake one week before Election Day is not just sloppy, it demonstrates a reckless disregard for the truth. You owe your readers an apology and an explanation.

I promise voters I will work for them 24/7. I promise them I will cut the budget without cutting services. I also promise that for the next four years I will donate 25 percent of my salary to increase voter turnout. I have a detailed plan about how to do that at www.vote4gus.com. I urge your readers - and your editor - to research it.

On Nov. 4 remember: A vote for Gus is a vote for Us!

Gus Guadagnino, candidate

supervisor of elections

Russell Rebuttal

Unlike my opponent, I am not a career politician. I am beholden to no one but you. I have not taken $148,000 from finance and insurance PACs. As a member of the House Finance Committee and three associated subcommittees the incumbent had nothing to say until America's unfolding economic collapse was fully under way. "Experienced" people have run our economy aground, and motivated people with fresh ideas are needed to save it. Many of us also know that Ginny supported privatization of Social Security before she was against it. She also was firmly against drilling off our coast before she was for it. Ginny is very principled in her positions isn't she?

As your representative, I will be engaged in the work of representing your interests in Congress, not those of the powerful. As a former financial adviser and as a nurse practitioner with an MBA, I have well developed proposals on most relevant issues in contrast to my opponent. I offer you a backbone as an independent-minded Democrat who has stood up for what is right and have the scars to prove it. I humbly ask for your vote.

John Russell

Democratic candidate,

U.S. House District 5

Rowden's Rebuttal

Holds No Water

In Diane Rowden's rebuttal, she stated she opposes "the developers who bulldoze our land." Back in 2007, Rowden did oppose runaway growth with her vote of "no" on Hickory Hill. I was pleased to see that we had at least one commissioner who represented us in the Spring Lake area as the vote was 4-1 in favor of Hickory Hill. I even wrote a letter to Hernando Today to commend Rowden for her vote.

But then, Rowden turned right around and voted for Sunrise Development, which was much larger than Hickory Hill. The vote on Sunrise was 5-0 in favor of this huge development. The Sunrise Development would contain 4,800 acres with an estimated 24,000 future residents on the east side of our county near Interstate 75.

This development would contain 4,200 houses, 600 apartments, enough commercial space for two Wal-Mart Supercenters, offices, a hotel and a golf course. Rowden, did you or did you not vote for Sunrise?

Vote out Rowden, Stabins and Kingsley in this election, and just wait to eliminate the other two commissioners, Rocco and Russell, in the next election. Hernando County taxpayers deserve commissioners who will not put this extra tax burden on us for schools, roads, water projects, etc. for new developments while we have existing roads crumbling and school yards filled with portable classrooms.

Betty Dobson

Brooksville