The services and improvements that will be brought by SPLOST are well-deserved and needed. It's just unfortunate that there is so much wasteful spending that all of these things could not be funded by the taxes we ALREADY pay. We can't (and shouldn't) get used to funding CORE services with SPECIAL taxes. All of these agencies still need to go back and figure ways to pay for services with their REGULAR budget allotments.

SPLOST passed, but not by much. I believe this is because many people are getting tired of more and more taxes. Sure, it's only "1%" but that comes out to be a lot (especially in these economic times) when you do the math. Paying 'nickels and dimes' ALL the time can really add up.

The passage of the SPLOST is, in my opinion, a major step forward for the Rome/Floyd community. Those who were against the SPLOST probably do not fully understand the scope of the communication problems our local emergency responders face on a day to day basis. They, and every citizen in this county deserve better, and since the federal government has mandated change anyway, this was the best solution. While there may have been cheaper solutions, ridiculous statements like the addition of a GPS system in patrol cars misses the point and demonstrates that the author has no concept of the true problems facing our public safety personnel. Perhaps the suggestion was not intended to be serious, but too many uninformed readers probably assume it to be true.

Finally, congratulations to the three successful candidates in the Rome City Commission race. Duane Reid and Jamie Doss held firm to their beliefs and refused to be cowed by a vocal minority.

Great lack of logic and facts, Anonymous. Have you ever been inside the 911 call center? Do you think it's a little old lady with a crank phone?

And, you know, you had the chance to vote two council people out this time. Did you vote at all?

Great liberal logic there Rusty.

Those jokers who are in charge now don't have a clue how to manage money.

How about voting them out the next time we get a chance.

Put someone in there who might make due with what we have coming in.

Why not get a satellite phone for each fire house and the 911 center?

If road signs getting blown down is a problem, why not put a gps in every county emergency vehicle so they can go right to a certain address with road signs? Wow, that might could work for 100 dollars per vehicle.

The point is, there's always a less costly way to solve a problem.

All they want to do is spend spend spend on junk like town greens and walkways across a river.

Correct the graph or the story. The graph on the left hand side of page says yes 1808 and no 1787.

From what I have seen of the politics in this county, what local politicians want, they get; so everyone who voted no, I hope you really enjoy the higher/new taxes that will come down the pike for these pet projects and necessary projects like the updated 911 communications system. They will find a way to get them so we will be stuck with those costs instead of sharing those costs with everyone who does business in this county.

Don't be silly. Wal-Mart provides jobs for people who might otherwise not have the chance for employment. Big employers like that provide jobs for an uneducated, unskilled work force.

"...and the passage of a referendum with a YES! vote is a great indicator of how deserving and how welcoming a community will be to large new businesses."

Do you mean companies such as Walmart who exploit the local workforce, who let the local government subsidize their workforce by making masses of subsidized housing available for the working poor. The working poor that are not paid a living wage by their employers.

"...many other communities will be rejecting their referendums, which means that those communities who pass them now will stand out among their peers. And of course, those communities that stand out will attract new business and more jobs..."

Who are you, caligalan? You are using mobster methods to scare and intimidate people, crawl back under your rock.

I read with interest the some of the opinions published in the newspaper regarding the SPLOST referendum which is on the ballot for the Nov. 3 election. Six local projects stand to gain some $43 million in funding through the extension of the current sales tax rate at 7% if the SPLOST referendum is passed. But some opinions indicate a misunderstanding as to what is being asked on the ballot, believing that the question is one of popularity of each one of the projects, although this is not the case. Voters are being asked to decide whether to permit funding through sales taxes of all six projects at once. Voters are not being asked on the ballot to choose one project or another. Choices regarding which projects to fund or drop were made this summer in the democratic process followed in the citizens meetings held in The Forum. Voters who may feel that they do not support one of the projects should not take that as a reason to vote no, because they will be eliminating all six projects in the process! However, voters who support even one of the projects should vote YES! if they wish it to be funded and accomplished.

The candidate interviews that have been published in the Rome News-Tribune over the past few days were most enlightening as to each candidate’s understanding and position on progress in Floyd County. I noted the unwillingness by the challengers to office to support the latest SPLOST initiative, while the incumbents indicated their support for the SPLOST. The candidate interviews could have been more appealing if they had asked a follow up question regarding how the candidate planned to fund progress in Rome and Floyd County if they do not utilize the SPLOST funding. I would like to ask each of the readers of this newspaper that same question. It is difficult to look around Rome and not find a project that has been positively impacted by SPLOST funding. These projects would have taken many years or decades longer to accomplish considering the alternative methods of funding, which are basically limited to utilization of property taxes. How high would your property taxes be if you were to have all of these projects without the income from the previous SPLOST initiatives? Alternatively, which of these projects would you give up if you did not use a SPLOST or property taxes to pay for them? And if not the SPLOST, how else will you pay for the six projects which are subject to funding this time? By this reasoning, one who does not believe in this SPLOST is either in support of stagnation, or in support of higher property taxes.

So the candidates to office and each voter in Floyd County must ask themselves if and how they are prepared to fund all six projects on the ballot. The experienced incumbents knew the best answer to this question when they indicated their support for SPLOST. But voters should also realize that with their vote, they are not only determining whether to fund these projects or not, but that they are also determining the future of development and progress in Floyd County. The incumbents already know that development consultants, who bring jobs with new businesses to Rome and Floyd County, always ask about the results of the latest citizen’s referendum, because those consultants only want to bring new businesses to progressive, forward-thinking communities, and the passage of a referendum with a YES! vote is a great indicator of how deserving and how welcoming a community will be to large new businesses. Nowadays, due to the poor economy, many other communities will be rejecting their referendums, which means that those communities who pass them now will stand out among their peers. And of course, those communities that stand out will attract new business and more jobs. Hopefully the voting citizens of Floyd County already know the best answer is a YES! vote on Tuesday Nov. 3 regarding the SPLOST. If they have reasons to believe otherwise, they can research more on this issue at www.splost2009.com which is a website set up by local resident citizens of Floyd County to promote progress.