Advertisement

Discussions

Reader comments

On Mayor wants more information on KU-Fritzel agreements before final approval of rec center plan

Comments

oneeye_wilbur 1 year, 2 months ago

It is a done deal. The only way to get it on a ballot is to force the issue and fast and it will still pass. Most all candidates and their backers will make certain. It will pass as will the school bond issue. ThenJournalWorld will endorse both favorably.

0

makeshift 1 year, 2 months ago

This is becoming the new South Lawrence Trafficway...

0

Gootsie 1 year, 2 months ago

OMG. Seriously? 11 pages with 10 blank; yes we'll give you the details - wait, no we won't. I can't believe that you aren't setting this completely aside and getting on with honest and up front business deals.

How does this help the city? Will it be something Joe Average can use? I am in shock that the commission would even be willing to do the ordinance on this.

Pig lipstick - couldn't have said it better.

If this goes further, not one of the current commissioners who consider passing this should be re-elected.

0

irvan moore 1 year, 2 months ago

Mayor Schumm, please table this issue while we wait for the details to be made public, it is worrisome that you and the other commissioners will vote to approve a project when you admit you don't know all the relevant information. why in the world would you have a vote to approve at this time before even knowing exactly what you are voting on.

2

Bob Forer 1 year, 2 months ago

"Fritzel told the Journal-World in January that he would make the agreements public once they were finalized, but when contacted Monday, he declined to do so."

Another Fritzel lie. Yet the CC is still hell bent on pushing this through. Can it get any dirtier?

1

deec 1 year, 2 months ago

"The agreement lists 11 exhibits that are a part of the development agreement, but 10 of the 11 exhibits were left blank with the understanding that they would be filled in later. Schumm has said he expects many of those exhibits to be completed by the time the city approves the document on second reading. "

Why in the world is the city even thinking about giving first approval to a scheme that has blanks? My folks taught me to NEVER sign off on anything with a blank on it.

1

Stain 1 year, 2 months ago

This whole project should be scrapped. The whole thing just smells.

I'd like to see a YMCA come here. Not a huge mega-center that will cost a fortune and that the city does not need and the citizens (aside from the profit-makers and Bonnie) do not want.

4

jack22 1 year, 2 months ago

I can remember my father telling me about the real estate deals that he made years ago in several different cities. In one he donated 5 of his 20 acres so the city could have a place to build a water tower and in exchange the city brought in the roads and sewers and changed his zoning to allow a mixed us of commercial and residential development. In another he proposed that he'd give the city 10 acres for soccer and baseball fields in exchange for a change in zoning from agricultural to residential so he could build houses on the remaining 40 acres. In another the city came to him with a proposal to build a distribution center on his land. The city wanted to increase their tax base and add jobs, so they built the roads, sewers, and put in the necessary street lights to bring the business there. In exchange we agreed to sell the land to a large corporation at cost, with the benefit to us being that the rest of our land was now ready for development as the city paid the cost of the needed infrastructure. All of these deals benefited both the city and the developer. In this current deal the benefit is almost entirely with the developer. If Fritzel wanted to, or if the city had any negotiating skills, he could give us the land, built the recreation center, and give both as a gift to the city. In exchange, we would bring in the streets, sewers, and other utilities, pay for the maintenance of the recreation center, and he'd still make a handsome profit when he sells or rents the remainder of the property we paid to develop.

3

Don Brennaman 1 year, 2 months ago

can brownbackenomics explain this to us? seems like someone is part of the 47% feeding off of my meager collection of nickels and dimes.

0

lunacydetector 1 year, 2 months ago

i might be more comfortable if the whole deal wasn't so confusing, expensive and how elected and appointed government officials have been pushing so hard for this thing to happen.

i guess we're supposed to turn a blind eye. the library boondoggle is hard enough to stomach.

1

cheeseburger 1 year, 2 months ago

As someone who initially supported the rec center concept, I am now so disappointed in the underhandedness of KUEA and Fritzel that I'm not sure I support city participation any longer.

8

Steven Gaudreau 1 year, 2 months ago

I'm sick of reading about this every day. We all know it's gonna get done regardless of what the tax payers want. Just sign off and let the fleecing begin. Acting like you care and wanting to read a regurgitated piece of information that is ambiguous and non binding is not really doing us any good., ie. Varsity House all over again.
I wonder if the city follows the same logic when buying a car as they are with this stink bomb project. The sticker says its worth $50,000 and we only paid $45,000 so we made $5,000!!!

1

Hadley_says 1 year, 2 months ago

If there isn't something noxious in the KUEA-Fritzel agreement, it would have already been released.

I hope the commissioners would start to understand this. This thing needs to be examined and discussed in the community before any so-called second-reading of the ordinance.

8

Keith Richards 1 year, 2 months ago

City pays for the majority of the infrastructure >$8 million through no bid process controlled by Fritzel. Advantage Fritzel/KU Endowment

City pays $1 million for land when the city already owns similar land not needing infrastructure improvements 1 mile away. Advantage Fritzel/KU Endowment.

KU/Fritzel is supposedly building a $50 million sporting park, but somehow KU gets stuck with the infrastructure costs for their park. Advantage Fritzel/KU Endowment.

Secret backdoor meetings with lies about document release from KU/Endowment. Advantage Fritzel/KU Endowment.

Regardless of if the bid for the city rec center is $10, $15, or $18 million the city will still end up paying over $26 million for said rec center. Advantage Fritzel/KU Endowment.

The city is rushing to approve everything before their own agreements and exhibits are completed. Advantage Fritzel/KU Endowment.

The city gets an $18 million dollar rec center that will be used by out of town teams on 32 of the 52 weekends a year. Advantage No One.

8

jhawk1998 1 year, 2 months ago

A sale item is only a good deal if you were going to buy it anyway. In this case the city is being convinced of something it had not previously determined we needed. Regardless of the hard sell this doesn't fit into the city plans. This impromptu long-term planning needs to stop.

7

Stacy Napier 1 year, 2 months ago

Do you really want government to did into every business before they grant permits. It think that oversteps government regulation. How about the city look into your finances and loan app before they grant a permit for you to build a house. Or less before they grant a permit for you to put in a pool, deck, etc.

While I agree Fritzel may be holding out on the money he will make I don't think the city can hold up a development based on that.

1

Missingit 1 year, 2 months ago

That's cost over runs sorry about that

0

Missingit 1 year, 2 months ago

The more and more I read this my concern is this infrastructure. It seem like Lawrence could fall victim to the Fritzels the way Junction City did. Since this is a no bid I bet he charges the city an extra 2-4 million for infrastructure compared to a bid process and then the great deal becomes more of a rip off Nd the rec center has to be downside to pay for the cot over runs. I bet Junction City felt like the houses Fritzels built were gonna be a good deal as well

5

3up3down 1 year, 2 months ago

Make Fritzel pay his back taxes of 3 point some odd million first.

7

somebodynew 1 year, 2 months ago

"Those costs are not included in the city’s $25 million price tag for the project. "

And it starts before they even sign the paperwork. Why is it I have this feeling this won't be the last time we read this words if this thing moves forward ??

I am surprised that Mr. Schumm is demanding these agreements, but also agree that more time is needed to be able to read them. Plus, the City has apparently not made full disclosure of their part yet. Slow down !!!

5

Number_1_Grandma 1 year, 2 months ago

Finally, Mayor Schumm is showing some leadership by requiring all the information before proceeding as should be. This is what you were elected to do!

Either they provide any and all information requested or stop with the nonsense here and now.

Thanks Mayor Schumm.

4

Keith Richards 1 year, 2 months ago

Seuferling/KU Endowment is beyond shady and apparently they are liars as well. What is in this agreement that caused you decide not to release the document?

Schumm, you should release the exhibits and the KU documents weeks before a vote is taken. The public deserves time to review and then make comment. To release "many of those exhibits to be completed by the time the city approves the document on second reading." is a disservice and unethical.

The price tag for the public goes continually higher, and "deal" we are receiving gets continually worse by the day.

9

Commenting has been disabled for this item.