Comments

Thanks wrote on Jun 8, 2009 11:11 PM:

" I'd assume Palmer stay as it is, that way everyone will continue to spend their money in Wasilla. At least you guys can buy some socks at Fred Meyers though. "




Power Wagon wrote on Jun 8, 2009 3:14 PM:

" if Rob really believes any of that, I take it he has never ventured very far out of the valley to get a dose of reality. Might give him a better perspective on Palmer vs. most other towns/cities. "




Rob wrote on Jun 6, 2009 6:07 PM:

" Pamela, Palmer is a corrupt, dirty little backwater town, that does only what the "Palmer Machine" allows to be done. It is already "anytown USA" because of the presence of a few "families" who have made Palmer just like everywhere else so they can profit personally. Get over it, that quaint little town you desire no longer exists. "




Rusty wrote on Jun 6, 2009 5:44 PM:

" Straight Talk and JP are right. This was a nice quaint little town until the likes of creeps like Friends of Mat Su came along. They now have a contract with the Borough mafia to create a "green infrastructure" plan for the core area. Welcome to L.A. North. If you think Bill Allen has the devious plans for this community, you are not paying attention. The deviants are at FoMS and they are planning your future. They are the ones you need to watch. "




Pamela wrote on Jun 3, 2009 10:37 PM:

" Palmer is a unique, historic, friendly, and healthy place to live.

Traffic is not a problem because the people are courteous drivers overall. Palmer is a scenic, peaceful, and beautiful town with wonderful people. It is worth protecting.

To those who are so eager to turn Palmer into another "Anytown U.S.A" - I say, love it for what it is - or leave it. There are plenty of generic places in the world - devoid of character and full of pollution and crime to pick from. "




To Lud Larson Re Fair Track wrote on Jun 3, 2009 10:32 PM:

" Lud, the city of Palmer isn't tearing up anything at the Fair. The Fair wanted to build a race track, so they did. The first year the noise was terrible, so the fair came back to Palmer and said they were going to voluntarily initiate noise-mitigation efforts, which they did and they worked wonders. The next year they came back to the city and said that racing wasn't turning out to be as big a draw as they had hoped (gas was at $4.30/gallon) so they weren't going to race outside of Fair time. It was entirely a voluntary choice. "




Glester wrote on Jun 3, 2009 7:58 PM:

" Stop belly aching about taxes, roads, schools, produce, tourist, fuel just halt everything, let the world go on by and keep Palmer pristine and quaint. You'll have every opportunity to laze in your yards and count the cars going by. Don't vote it's not going to effect you, don't worry the state fair is once a year just close your curtains if it stays in Palmer. Hope you keep your fire and police department when people tire from the increase in property taxes. We deserve more for our money, growth can be healthy "




Straight Talk wrote on Jun 3, 2009 2:07 PM:

" Is growth always necessary or even desirable? Is the quality of life "better" in Anchorage or Phoenix than it was 50 years ago?NO!!! In many cases bigger isn't better. Many urbanites from the Lower 48 come to Alaska dreaming of living in or near a pleasant,friendly,low stress,low crime small town like Palmer is today. They have become sick of the big city,the bureacray and regulations that bind them. Once here they see ways things can be "improved" by just a little more government. After a time the new home becomes the same as the place they hated and left. Strange,huh? "




Pamela wrote on Jun 3, 2009 12:52 PM:

" To Ben C: For once I fully agree with you! Walmart is terrible for communities. The couplet is a lousy idea, and I see no need for annexation.

Palmer is perfect the way it is. I've lived and traveled all over the U.S. and Europe, and Palmer is my idea of heaven - just the way it is!

Those who don't appreciate Palmer can go elsewhere. Those who don't love Palmer the way it is - and appreciate its unique charm and beauty - ought to leave it rather than ruin it with their ill-conceived schemes. "




jp wrote on Jun 3, 2009 8:40 AM:

" palmer was a small farming community, lots of lush fertile farmland, great for self-supporting families.
Then along came the people who want to create their own little anchorage away from anchorage, and ruin this beautiful little town.
take your box stores, traffic lights, condo complexes, and low income housing units back to anchorage!
and say No to more taxes!
if you want to live in a big city, move into one, don't ruin everyone elses lives for it! "




Ben C wrote on Jun 2, 2009 10:30 PM:

" RahRah;
I understand your point in not wanting to 'give' our money to Wasilla, etc. And it is a good point. But there's a slippery slope we begin to descend when we start asking for those same services here. Where do we stop? I spent a few years in a small town in the lower 48 that was very similar to Palmer. And I saw the same complaints. Now, that town is jammed with traffic, lights, and looks terrible. Another small variety store or two? OK. But no Wal-Marts, strip-malls, etc etc. Let's leave Palmer small-town. "




RahRah wrote on Jun 2, 2009 8:18 PM:

" I don't want to drive the miles OR give Wasilla my money,Surely we can get some basic needs without it being OVERWHELMING and make us another corrupt city in Alaska as you're implying! Why do I want to shop in those towns! Why does a variety store scare people in Palmer? I have better things to do then waste 1 hr of my time driving round-trip just to shop in Wasilla and waste gas. Funny how you moan about these towns but give them your hard earned money!
Pioneers came to make Palmer not just settle. "




Ben C wrote on Jun 2, 2009 7:40 PM:

" RahRah;
Well, than we're at an impasse. If you honestly view 15 miles as being too far to drive (again, why not move to Wasilla?) then there's nothing more to debate.
It's hard for me to fathom that there's Alaskans that view 15 miles as being "too far". Most of us view that as being barely further than the end of our driveway. I guess you're a different.
So, then it stands to reason that the idea of having Palmer become 'Wasilla II' sounds 'neat'. Then we'll 'develop' Sutton, Glennallen, Healy, etc etc. until Alaska looks like the lower 48. "




RahRah wrote on Jun 2, 2009 3:36 PM:

" 30+ yrs ago, that long and arduous trip to Wasilla was a dirt road, Palmer hopefully has grown. You bet 15 miles is too long, why should I give my hard earned money here in Palmer to Wasilla for basic needs. We don't have to have big box stores on every corner but we do need growth. Why should we continue to pay for gift shops and artsy fartsy shops that come and go? most of us have supported Palmer but our needs are not met. Just let me buy a table, clothing without it being used goods "




Ben C wrote on Jun 2, 2009 10:59 AM:

" to RahRah;
If you don't like having to make that long, arduous drive to Wasilla (it's what?...15 miles?) to get those services you can't get here...then why do you live here? Do we REALLY need TWO Wasillas within 15 miles of each other? That just strikes me as lazy. So then what...pave and develop Sutton next? Just keep working our way up the highway?
to Lud: No "flashing signs"? Good! "




Outer Springer Resident wrote on Jun 2, 2009 9:30 AM:

" Palmer wants to expand using legal methods that circumvent the will of those they wish to absorb. Here is a way to do it that Bill Allen and John Combs have likely never considered. Let's have a VOTE OF THE PEOPLE IN THE AFFECTED AREAS who will decide if we want annexation along with the new taxes,new regulations and the same old petty Palmer city politics or if we are happy with life as is. This matter should be soley decided by by the will of the people in the outlying areas not by coercive government force. That is fair. "




RahRah wrote on Jun 2, 2009 7:43 AM:

" Ben C - businesses come and go in Palmer, lived here 34 years this October, enough with the gift shops for the tourist, when do you cater to the needs of the community? This community would not support or warrant stores drawn to Wasilla BUT we do need one that supplies basic needs, clothes, shoes, sporting equipment, furniture so that Palmer is self sufficient. Why should we drive to Anchorage or Wasilla? Why should we waste our time and gas for basic needs. Palmer isn't a resort area by no stretch of the imagination! "




Lud Larson wrote on Jun 1, 2009 7:46 PM:

" The City of Palmer is basically anti business and taxes its residents for auto fuel, utilities and even rent. 3% on $3.00/ gal. fuel is 9 cents folks, added to each gallon. They kill business with no lighted flashing signs. They don't like the box stores and they tear up the new dirt race track at the Fair Grounds. It goes on & on! I'm glad I sold my business in Palmer. I will never go back. With all the people they hired to help them grow now needs more tax base to pay them. ANIXATION= MORE $. "




Ben C wrote on Jun 1, 2009 7:45 PM:

" to 'Sad' (mental state) "Get with the rest of the valley" means that the entire valley looks like Wasilla? Hey moron...that would make it Anchorage, now wouldn't it? And if we wanted to live in that sort of rat-race....we would move there! I suppose you think good progress means paving and developing the entire state?
to 'Rah Rah'; Palmer is 'dying'? Really? How long you lived here? How old are you? Palmer has GROWN in the last 30 years! Just because it hasn't exploded (thank God!) like Wasilla doesn't mean it's 'dying'! Move to Anchorage already! "




RahRah wrote on Jun 1, 2009 4:54 PM:

" Palmer "Down Town" area has plenty of empty shops and buildings, what ya gonna attract? mice? Carrs mall is one of the poorest looking building around, Evergreen street has empty buildings, B & B Bargains is a fire trap, the Valley Hotel Caboose-just look up at all the cobwebs and no smoke ventilation. This town is a hoot, raising caine and it's little shop of horrors don't want competition. Clean up Palmer business' and make them accountable before they get a say in who and what can be built in Palmer. Palmer is complacent and dying "




brvak wrote on Jun 1, 2009 3:09 PM:

" Websters defines progress like this
2: a forward or onward movement (as to an objective or to a goal) : advance
3: gradual betterment ; especially : the progressive development of humankind
— in progress : going on : occurring
Seems to me the annexation and improvements in the road systems fall into this category. I never see Palmer falling into the Wasilla mold. That was cast years ago. Of course progress is like Art, It's different things to different people. I also believe for every NIMBY- screamer there are 100 people willing to accept the future and move on. "




marc wrote on Jun 1, 2009 1:29 PM:

" Most large businesses build within city limits.
Wal-Mart, Fred Meyers, Safeway, Sears, Sportman warehouse, Target...they are all in the city limit, for a reason.
I would not go to 4 corners to avoid a 2-3% tax, I prefer to shop in town. I like downtown Palmer and like the direction and leadership. "




SAD wrote on Jun 1, 2009 12:29 PM:

" HEY PALMER IF YOU DON'T WANT TO GET WITH THE REST OF THE VALLEY THEN QUITE COMING TO WASILLA AND MAKING PROBLEMS. YOU ALL WANT TO WORK OVER HERE BUT YOU DON'T WANT WALMART/KOHLS OVER YOUR WAY SO YOU STAY AWAY, I STAY AWAY FROM PALMER SINCE WE ARE WASILLA TRASH. "




Another Wasilla wrote on Jun 1, 2009 11:28 AM:

" What I think most people concerned with Palmer turning into "another Wasilla" don't realize is that annexation will aid development in the area so that Palmer doesn't develop in a similar manner to Wasilla. Leaders will be able to control what gets built through zoning. If you want Palmer to develop into strip mall heaven then lax leadership is what you want. "




Just Say No wrote on Jun 1, 2009 8:43 AM:

" Annexation is a bad idea promoted by those who long to see Palmer turn into another Wasilla. Most large businesses will not build in both Palmer and Wasilla and Wasilla has already had most of them build there. Future revenue growth will land primarily on the backs of City home owners who receive little in return except a cumbersome and meddling bureacracy. Area residents support Palmer with sales taxes. Remember City Council we can spend elsewhere. The next City Council meeting will be June 9 at 7 PM. Make your feelings about Annexation known during "audience participation".It's your right. "




lee wrote on May 31, 2009 7:56 PM:

" they "Palmer Politics" want only one thing, a Bigger Tax base..there is no purported enterest in the people, just more bureaucratic strongholds on more residents for more revenue period...geesus can you politicians for once not lie through youre teeth, be honest and admit you just want more revenue. "




Ben C wrote on May 31, 2009 6:04 PM:

" We don't WANT to get bigger! We don't WANT Wal-Mart! Quit trying to develop, pave and turn Palmer into another Wasilla! If we want those services, we'll DRIVE to Wasilla or Anchorage! If you live in Palmer and wish those services were closer...MOVE! "




marc wrote on May 31, 2009 4:33 PM:

" If they do some GOOD PLANNING then I'm all for it.
I own several places in Palmer and only 2 that are in the city limits. I would pay for good planning, good roads, bike paths, pedestrian friendly & services.....basically a well laid plan, that is what attracts decent people, not no zoning & planning...you can go to big lake, the butte and houston for that nonsense. "




Palmer area Farmer wrote on May 31, 2009 12:31 PM:

" The city council is being poorly led. The city of Palmer has seen significant financial growth for all of the past ten years. Double digit growth for many years.

It is time to investigate the conflict of interest that some members of the council have. we do know that council members who have advocated for annexation have also owned land that would have been annexed. Once the land is annexed it can then be provided with city water and sewer in effect adding value for subdividing and development.

local political corruption? "




Heather wrote on May 31, 2009 12:22 PM:

" We DO NOT want annexation!!!!! Leave Palmer alone before it turns into another Wasilla. Greed has ruined many small towns. Let's preserve Palmer, as it is. "




Make a plan wrote on May 31, 2009 11:05 AM:

" If you got the juice annexation goes around your place. Look at the map! "




Nimby wrote on May 31, 2009 9:42 AM:

" Go away Palmer! If you can't make it with the revenue you pull in now you sure as he!! won't make it any better by annexing large tracts of undeveloped hay fields/farm lands. "




Forced taxation wrote on May 31, 2009 9:22 AM:

" This is forced taxation for the benefit of a few and waste of others like the city of Palmer leaders, what a shame. Palmer does not even promote small business, they annex acreage to get some money for nothing from the landowners. "




Wondering wrote on May 31, 2009 8:58 AM:

" If the question of annexation is going to be handled in the same manner as the couplet in Palmer, then we are in a world of hurts. There is no need of a couplet in Palmer, only a serious look at the traffic patterns and perhaps a staggering of work hours for the largest businesses and the traffic concerns would be fixed. If Walmart wants to build in Palmer, let them, they will pay more in sales taxes then the rest of the city's business combined do now. "




RahRah wrote on May 31, 2009 7:34 AM:

" No then No now.......Palmer still has some unpaved streets within the city, and you want us outside Palmer to pay for them? You show us you can handle the city needs before more growth. "




Observer wrote on May 30, 2009 9:04 PM:

" The latest Annexation Battle in Palmer is about to errupt. In 2006 -2007 the will of the people was overwhelming and annexation was thwarted. Those of us outside the city are pretty independent and support the economy of Palmer when we shop there and pay Palmer sales tax. We support you. You don"t subsidize us. John Combs dreamed of a "Greater Palmer" and foolishly commited over $7,000,000 of taxpayer funds to building a sewage line way over to the new hospital. My family should not be responsible for your error. You want revenue but chased Walmart's Golden Goose away.Dumb!!!!!!!!! "




Observer wrote on May 30, 2009 8:43 PM:

" This meeting was not well advertised . Many of us outside city boundaries are very interestedin this topic. WE DID NOT WANT ANNEXATION IN 2006 and the vast majority DO NOT WANT ANNEXATION NOW!!!!!!!! For Allen and Combs it is about CONTROL and REVENUEand little else. They constantly whine poverty but squander precious taxpayer funds on Agnew Beck to sell "a pig in a poke"-to find a legal way to force their way into our lives. They offer us nothing we need in the outlying areas. We don't need the Palmer Police more zonong or petty politics. No thanks Annexation!!!! "