Rlyons's blog

Alrighty then……..this would be Roy Lyons’ wife writing.   I didn’t want to start my own blog site because it requires a different e-mail, etc., etc., etc. ……so I wrote the blog about the CAN debate on Roy’s blog.   I am sorry if I upset all you people.   I was just tired of everyone putting down my husband.  He is tougher than I am and I guess more understanding.   Bloggers really need to get a life.   I am done with reading them because I have more important things to do and if I want something done or have an opinion I don’t sit at home and grip about it or scrutinize other people I go out and do something about it.   I am not going to make up a “code name” as I am not ashamed of how I feel and what I say, so I don’t need to hide my identify from the public.    As I said, I am sorry I wrote the blog in a fit of defensiveness.  My husband is a wonderful man who has done a lot of good work for Clay County and will continue to do so.  He does not deserve to be maligned by bloggers who sit home in their safe little cubicles and offer no solution or leave those safe little cubicles and go out and accomplish something.   See?   I can’t not get defensive.   Roy has his face out there……where is yours?   Also, I must add that Jane Padgett and cohorts also have their faces out there…..bloggers….where’s yours?

CAN, I am sorry that blog appeared , and it had my name signed to it. The only thing I can say is  I found out about it from a phone call. I did not write it nor have I expressed that to anyone.

All I can say is I am sorry that it appeared and even more sorry it had my name on it.

the thing I did write was the one where I said I thought your group were doing good things for the county.

The needs of the people to have an elected gov't which is accountable to each and everyone of us.When you call a CC under five single he or she will ask you if you have spoken to the person that represents you, you can then spout off but to no avail because that elected offical is not accountable to you, only their district. 80% of the people making decisions for you, you can't vote for. 

Hello, I would like to say that I have not and will not make excuses, I have been in many debates and this format , which I knew about before ,is the hardest for me. There was no chance for rebuttel or closing remarks. The reason so many people are against 5/2 is money , what we in our group would like you and others to consider is better gov't. The added 2 CC would increase cost about 50 cents per year per registered voter, which is what I said. The 5 single member has been rejected by Clay county voters after it was implemented because it did not meet the needs of the people, that is the same reason st. johns county after only two  years of single member went back to  five at large, if you don't learn from your mistakes you are bound to repeat them. 74 % of charter counties in this state have a mixed CC because it fits best with the needs of county gov't . I also said this, can you imagine dividing the state into five sections and each section have their leader of the state for a year, which is the form of gov't the CTLAC is advocating for our county.

Hello everyone it has been a while since I have written a blog, but I will gladly join in. I would like to thank the CAN for putting on the debate in the interest of the people of Clay County. I would like to answer some of the questions that have come up on the blog. That I did not seem prepared, I……… had no idea what to expect and did not have the questions in advance. Some of the questions such as the one on cost of a campaign, I did not do a good job replying. If you have never been involved in a campaign I was very hard to follow. Money is important but not the most important thing whether it’s a local or state issue, the CTLAC would have you believe money is the only issue. A successful campaign is more than money,it is work, work, work.  You have to walk the neighborhoods, make the calls, etc., etc.   Locally we have had candidates win with little or no money, in fact just recently in St. Johns county a CC was elected that did not raise anywhere near the money the incumbent did and  the incumbent lost.  If you look to Washington State there is a lady running that has nothing and is second in the polls. There are many other examples.  Speaking of St. Johns County they followed the proceeding of the CRC very closely and they are currently trying to become a Charter County such as ours. It was interesting that one of the bloggers noted that they did not want a 5/2. It would be nice if he or she also noted that St. Johns voted in 5 single member and two years later voted out single member and went back to 5 at large because it gave the citizens more say in their gov't. The CC is now 100% accountable to people. This is what we had until the CTLAC went to work to limit the accountability of the people of Clay County to just one CC or 20% of the people that make decisions for us. I have been citied for supporting bigger gov't. What I, as part of the CRC, was trying to set up was a gov't where the people were in control, where the people had more people to call or complain too that were also accountable to them. Under the 5/2 the people have 3 people in which to say I won't vote for you if you vote a certain way on an issue. Under single member you only have one. It has been a while since I was involved in a debate such as the one the CAN hosted  and I can assure you that the next one will be just as much fun and I look forward to it. Oh, just a side note the petition process is difficult, they must be written and abide by all the laws, I have noticed some real problems with the petitions of the CTLAC, story to follow later. Roy Lyons  

In Response to Hypocrite in Clay.

 First why can’t you sign what you write ??????

 Let me respond – first Mr. Debusk did originally put in for 155 houses but as time went by the number of homes was lowered, not once but several times.

I have been asked to answer several questions, they are all related.

Would like to make explanation on name of Blog on Citizens for Protection of Voter’s Rights.   The blog indicated a PACT, that was a typographical error.   The correct term is a PAC has been  formed under the heading of Citizens for Protection of Voter’s Rights.   Apologies to anyone who misunderstood.

It has been very interesting to me all the comments on the PAC I have formed. I will answer the questions at this time.

I am no longer chairmen of the Republican Party of Clay County. I have been involved with the party both locally and at the State level for 25 years. I have retired form the Navy, I have retired form Teaching, I have retired form the Republican Party.

 I had the privilage of serving on the CRC this past time. We worked long and hard , as the Charter reccomends. We came up with a form of gov't that will be the best for the county. The model we used was our Federal gov't ,our State Gov't which has servered us well for over 200years.

PACT FORMED FOR INFORMATION TO PUBLIC ON ITEMS ON UPCOMING BALLOT IN NOVEMBER 2008.  VERY IMPORTANT YOU READ THIS!!!  

The Citizens for the Protection of Voters Rights have formed a political action committee for the purpose of educating the voting public on the 3 amendments being added to the ballot in November 2008.