May 25, 2013 |
63° Partly Cloudy
See complete forecast
Copy and paste the link:
What is Blss Sports?
what exactly is the city negotiating? the contracts seem to be just a formality.
If the negotiators don't give away the farm, building that is not the end of reality, for me. I'll probably be dead of old ages effects, anyway, before they ever pay $ that off.
But, It seems as if 75K people around here, will pay, in whatever $ way, for the privileges, that a hand full of 35 ", or whoever", want, at a time when the economy is gone to heck' in a hand basket, for many other folks and Brownie is passing the bills back to Lawrence, without a bottle of antacids ( a regular guy like george w bush-happy deficits! Hope you have a political party hat & a horn to blow, or others money to in debt or blow !!!!
How funny is it, .........to call those who are pushing this project along, "as being slow"; because they also should have asked the council for a free car, a free home , as well as a Chauffeur or an armored car to drivet whoever to the bank, with their future $ winnings at the public feed trough off this, is REALLY what they need. PLEASE !!!!!!!!
God bless the KU Endowment for the $ & i know that without KU, Lawrence would be a ghost town.
Lived in so. O.P. for years.
20 miles to downtown KC.
40 miles to KCI airport, easily.
I deserve compensation for my choices of avoiding midtown KC's lifestyle challenges and being with in 1 miles distance from a Walmart, Super Target, Costco, 3 big grocers who failed to consider that the preceding stores were coming to reduce their numbers to one, 119th shopping, two Hospitals, where schools were stable and property values held if you just kept things up.
Just sharing their joke on us!
Just demand compensation because you must do whatever! Do not be outdone! They might just pay you! Ha, ha, ha!
I am not wanting to be hard on others or call them names. Just bewildered by this willingness to spend at this moment so freely while others could use our help and Brownie is billing us for nothing and whatever, more or less. I just do not get it! Enlighten me please, as i am slow to get it!
" Commissioners also heard from parents of Lawrence children who said the city had fallen far behind what other communities offer in terms of indoor recreation space."
Johnson County Metro has a much larger tax base. I suggest some parents move to Johnson County simply because a small town tax base has never been able to keep up with a tax base of
2 million people. Lawrence is a tax base of about 68,000.
Do a majority of taxpayers want the city commission to spend 25 million tax $$$$ in this fashion?
Apparently it is irrelevant.
I've not heard any voices against a neighborhood rec center.
Should the public taxpayers have the opportunity to vote on the $25 million Field House Project aka PLAY?
I assume that the upcoming elections will produce some concern about the taxpayers ability to be wayyyyy more involved in the spending of OUR money.
Taxpayer participation needs to be in ordinance form to protect our tax dollars. Considering an "ordinance" or some such document was passed to bypass voter approval on tax dollar projects according to city hall last night. Time to reverse that agreement as well as the document that allows city government to BAN protest documents. Local big government in action.
After all it is the taxpayers that are responsible for backing up $12 million $$$ tax dollar exemptions , the $20 million USD 497 athletic investment and a potentially $40-$50 million $$$ field house project. There will plenty of expenses once the this project is given to taxpayers.
About commerce ... does anyone know of any Rubbermaid buildings or cabinets for sale?
those are not eco friendly. I would recommend a bale house or a mud hut.
ku insists on using fritzel for our community rec proposal? No. KU can insist on that for their own buildings, but for our taxpayer buildings we deserve an open bidding process as well as a ballot question.
Exactly. This whole situation reeks, but the fishiest aspect is the refusal to use an open bid process. I see no downside to an open bid process and a lot of potential upside to the taxpayers. The refusal to use an open bid process should be a deal breaker, IMO.
Fritzell has the best city commissioners that money can buy.
City Hall will not mess with KU. In spite of the fact nothing has been put in writing. It will be interesting to see if what transpired at the commission meeting will be reflected in the final agreements.
Non-revenue sports represented in the form of eye candy show up to encourage spending of city residents money on their games. I think emails between city commissioners and the KU athletes should be checked.
Why do the same idiots who lie to the city continue to get work in this town??? Amazed that Lawrence hands out projects to the same 4-5 idiots who already own half the city!!! Talk about corrupt city govt. Ridiculous!!!
“We know this project is going to guarantee us a world-class facility on a municipal budget,” City Commissioner Mike Dever said. “That is an opportunity I can’t turn down.”
“I believe the economic benefits of this facility will be real, but I’m not relying on those numbers to make this decision,” City Commissioner Hugh Carter said. “I’m thoroughly convinced of the community need for this center. First and foremost, this center will serve the recreation needs of this community.”
If this is such a slam-dunk great deal, why are you so afraid of making that case to the taxpayers of Lawrence, and then letting them vote on it?
BTW, whose vote was against? I guessing Amyx. Is that correct?
Even, better, if it is such a guaranteed money-maker, why isn't some enterprising private businessman building and operating it?
Well, if the source of the revenue is in the form of increased sales taxes from the increased business activity the facility generates, and not from the facility itself, then it would not be something a private businessman would do. Unless of course, that private businessman could collect all the sales taxes from restaurants, hotels, T-shirts shops. Add in the new jobs created and their spending with the businessman collecting all the taxes they produce. But that's not what you're suggesting, is it?
Not even the city expects to pay for this through increased tax collections.
Then maybe the city shouldn't participate in this project.
However, each new dollar that comes into this community can be expected to be spent 8 times. Each time it's spent, it's taxed. With all these transactions, merchants will need employees to accommodate that commerce.
I'm making an assumption that jobs in Lawrence is something we all benefit from and something we should all be striving for. Facilitating job creation, even in the private sector, is a legitimate function of government.
We all know that not every government function needs turn a profit. We operate the "T", libraries, fund shelters, lots of things. Those are legitimate functions of government. If a determination is made that there is an overall net benefit, do it. If not, then don't.
Creating a bunch of part-time low-wage no-benefit jobs in hotels, restaurants and stores will do next to nothing to raise the standard of living for those working those jobs.
If the project was economically feasible without subsidies, some astute developer would have built it and operated it themselves. The rhetoric about it creating jobs and hypothetical tax revenue is a smokescreen for yet another taxpayer-subsidized boondoggle. I'd think those of you in Lawrence would be about tired of paying ever-increasing property taxes so that a few rich guys can get richer.
"Creating a bunch of part-time low-wage no benefit jobs in hotels, restaurants and stores will do next to nothing to raise the standard of living for those working those jobs".
Did I miss something? Did some manufacturing plant decide to build a factory here in Lawrence providing hundreds of high wage union jobs with full benefits? No, deec, I didn't miss something. If the choice is bad or worse, then you choose bad. Low wage jobs are better than no jobs.
Besides, Lawrence is awash with young people looking for just those sorts of jobs. People who work at a restaurant during their freshman year, a clothing store their sophomore year, desk clerk at a hotel their junior year, bartender their senior year and they're gone the next. Even if those high wage union jobs with full benefits existed, which they don't, but even if they did, we have many who are not in any position to accept that type of job.
But, hey, deec, if you want to build such a factory, providing hundreds of high paying union jobs with full benefits, not only will you have my full support, I'd even be in favor of giving you some abatements, given the overall benefit to the community. Will you build such a factory, deec? Will you?
Basically KU is telling the city we are going to build a $33 mil propject and you can buy it for $25 mil and the city thinks this is a great deal. Have you seen the the late night tv infommercials where the guy says he bought a house with nothing down and made $50,000? It's the same thing. On paper there is a $8mil up side but its only a real gain if someone pays $33mil for it which won't happen. The second issue is KU controls the build out. Any builder in this situation is going to use the lowest grade and cheapest building material possible. Using bare minimum building standards and cutting every corner possible. Like I said, this is a dog with fleas and our leaders are being blinded by this infommercial real estate way of thinking. BTW, at the end of day, I would bet the cost is well under the $25 mil price tag.
Email the commissioners and let them know what you think. I vote 'NO' but if the majority wants it, build it.
Who is the one good commissioner who voted against it? That guy should stay but the rest of them should get voted out next election.
Commissioner Mike Amyx was the voice of reason.
I'd be interested in the reactions of people who attended last night's city commission meetings, especially those who went into the meeting with an open mind.
Does anyone know which commissioner voted against this project? The article states a 4-1 vote in support of proposal.
What contract negotiations... I thought they said Snitzel was going to build it???
Mike Amyx voted for a project on the city owned property near the high school.
It's like Corliss said if tax growth ever hits 1% this community has got problems. Tax growth has been chugging along at 3%-3.5%. Corliss I believe was basing his numbers on a 2% growth.
If republicans in Washington and Topeka keep getting in the way anything can happen even a 1% tax growth.
The fact that this economy is STILL measured in a big way by housing starts tells me politicians are off their rockers.
When I hear local politicians getting excited over the "the change" in this economy in the past few months it tells me they are trying to sell us something. 11-17 million people still need decent paying long term employment which is not just around the corner.
Isn't there some way to force this to a vote?
Shall we have a vote on Obamacare since it was shoved down our throats?
We had one last week.
Using that argument, the vote for the rec. center was held when we had city commission elections.
Hardly-- Republicans spent literally $billion making Obamacare the litmus issue in that election (they even did it in state legislature races, where it's largely irrelevant) and they lost that bet.
This rec center wasn't even remotely an issue in the last city commission election, since it hadn't even been proposed.
I'm happy you're in this forum to correctly interpret the will and intent of every voter in this nation.
I seem to remember something said about foreign relations, obstructionism in Washington, Pro-Life, Pro-Choice, education, debt ceilings, fiscal cliffs, etc. But you've synthesized it all down to Obamacare and gotten down to the root of what that election means, as opposed to your astute interpretation of what every voter in Lawrence intended when they voted for the city commissioners.
It wasn't all about Obamacare, but that issue clearly eclipsed all others, by the Republicans' own doing, whether you care to acknowledge that or not.
What's truly indisputable is that this rec center wasn't an issue in the last city commission election. Certainly no more than Obamacare was an issue in 2008.
Eclipsed all others. Pulling stuff out of thin air, or a dark place. Obstructionism in Washington, taxes, debt, national security, foreign policy. Eclipsed it all, huh.
It was without a doubt the poster child for Republicans in this election. And it failed to get as much traction that they wanted.
we also voted in the current city commission so you are making my point bozo...thanks!
This was forced to a vote in 1994 when tax revenue was set aside for such projects. This was forced to a vote two City Commissions ago, when a comprehensive assessment of Park & Rec needs was produced. This was brought to a vote when the current City Commission was elected as our representative government.
As the principal benefactor to a project benefitting both KU and Lawrence residents, KU understandably demands control of the architecture and the contractor to ensure the highest standards will be used (reference other campus buildings, including sports facilities). If the builder happens to be Fritzel Construction, that's even better -- a local employer with local employees.
Thanks to all the City Commissioners for doing what they're elected to do; thank goodness we're moving forward (as opposed to having NOnew library, NO new downtown development, NO new SLT, NO new 15th St. interchange, NO new Community Theater, etc. ...Which is apparently precisely where we'd be if the blogosphere were in charge).
This was NOT an issue in the last city commission election. And a vote taken 18 years ago that has financed several very major projects since that vote doesn't provide carte blanche to this commission to now drop all available financing for parks and rec for the next couple of decades on a single project whose value is greater than all previous projects over the last 18 years COMBINED.
And really, does KUAC/Endowment really think that the city can't be trusted to oversee a quality construction? At any rate, it'll be the city's building, not theirs.
The more reasonable conclusion is that this is an inside deal among well-connected folks looking to line their pockets at taxpayer expense.
Do you mean to spend money......at a time right now where the state is causing us to spend additional funds to pay for___whatever they can, for a statically functional community, that is not yet upside down in their car, as they say
The principle benefactor will be a scumbag developer and a few assorted cronies who undoubtedly claim to hate taxes and "big gummit" yet have no problem taking tens of millions through political payoffs and bold-and-sold city commissioners. This entire rec center debate was settled behind closed doors some time ago and now we're just enduring the farce of a "public debate."
Well, I see my decision to not go in person to protest this extravaganza was well advised. The proponents stuffed the box.
Those with a moneyed interest and those who might use it are certainly welcome to proclaim their support. I wonder how many of the students will be around to pay the tax after graduation? In fact, I wonder how many of the developers/builders will stay around after they make their “millions”. I bet they all head out to warmer climes and leave those wedded to good old Lawrence to pay the bill.
Whatever, given our small civic facilities that put the rest of us in the parking lot. Isn’t Democracy grand?
Mr. Carter has a strange understanding of democracy. Twenty years ago somebody voted for a series of improvements. Now he argues that vote binds those of us not even born to continue to pay for a new and only slightly related structure. I wonder how many of our “lawgivers” will be around to pay for this?
I suspect that one reason they don't want to put this to a vote is because it would likely have to coincide with the city commission elections, which will happen in March and April.
That would make it THE primary issue. So, not only could the Mover and Shaker faction lose the referendum, on the coattails of that referendum they could also lose those seats on the commission.
Hmmm...I think I see a great way to save $25 million.
Whatis Bliss Sports?
Commenting has been disabled for this item.
Find more businesses on Marketplace
Arts & Entertainment ·