Advertisement

Letters to the Editor

Time for change

March 19, 2007

Advertisement

To the editor:

As we approach the April general election for City Commission, I can't help but think back to the days when Lawrence was a thriving community that averaged no less than 2.5 percent growth per year, had a strong tax base, attracted homebuyers, builders, retailers and employers, and maintained a clean, structurally sound infrastructure.

Today, after six years of "progressive" leadership, we find ourselves woefully short on all of the above. What were we, next to last for growth in Kansas? I, for one, have had enough. I am voting for a broader tax base and better roads and sewers.

It is time for a change. Our taxes continue to climb, while at the same time our services and amenities are lagging behind other cities our size.

Deb Passig, Lawrence

Comments

Michael Capra 7 years, 9 months ago

Deb get this one roundabout at barker and 19th final COST 1.2 MILLION DOLLARS

HOW many people could we feed with that and that is just one thing wana know how much they have wasted

You could have built two new librarys and a new pool

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 7 years, 9 months ago

"Today, after six years of "progressive" leadership,"

Hmm, considering the "progressive leadership" was only elected 4 years ago, that's a pretty good indicator of how reality-based this letter writer is.

But even she is more reality-based than 458casul.

Richard Heckler 7 years, 9 months ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

Michael Capra 7 years, 9 months ago

merill your the biggest problem on the planning commision.You and your buddies Rundle,Boog,Schauner have hurt this town bad to the point it will take years to straighten out the mess and get Hasse,burress,and all the nuts off the planning commision that have brought this town to its knees. DEB your on the money our taxes are being wasted studys,roundabouts,planners to tell us to build roe housing that cost 400.000 a unit.. I am with you get them out now

commuter 7 years, 9 months ago

Merrill:

You are also forgetting your progessive buddies have a huge hunger to spend tax payer money on their agenda. Art, roundabouts, traffic calming devices etc.

Without more businessess coming to Lawrence or a growth of businessess, our taxes will increases. I personally do not beleive Schauner and Boog are doing anything to promote Lawrence in a positive light. Look at additional ordinances for businesses, both old and new.

Yep, Merrill if I wanted to have my businessess move to Lawrence, do I want to be able to run it or do I want a hippy lawyer, a union lawyer and a grocery clerk run it? I trust myself.

KsTwister 7 years, 9 months ago

No conflict of interest? Really Merrill? Any relation to Steven Maynard-Moody, chairman of the library committee and associate professor of public administration?

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 7 years, 9 months ago

Not to mention that a huge percentage of the work on the intersection at 19th and Barker was on the aging water and sewer infrastructure underneath the intersection, or that the planning for the work there began well before 2003.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 7 years, 9 months ago

Um, KsTwister, of what possible relevance to the city commission race is a link to a 17-year-old article containing a few comments by Steven Maynard-Moody about the KU library?

jafs 7 years, 9 months ago

While I generally agree that our commission seems to be a bit wasteful with their spending, and expensive roundabouts aren't my first priority either, I think that more unplanned growth is not the answer.

BTW, the figure I got from a city employee was about $800,000 for that roundabout, and it included some work on the sewer and water lines beneath the intersection.

First, the obvious financial motive of the builder/developer/real estate community must be noted. More building and selling of real estate benefits them directly.

Next, the question of whether new growth pays for itself or raises the cost to existing homeowners/taxpayers should be considered.

Finally, there are costs to new growth which are less tangible but no less real - for example, we seem to have become a divided community of "old" vs. "new" Lawrence.

PS - If we offer businesses tax abatements to relocate to Lawrence, we are not in fact broadening the tax base - only if businesses pay their fair share of taxes might the burden on residential taxes be spread around a bit.

Richard Heckler 7 years, 9 months ago

So many complain about special interest money in Washington D.C. yet this somehow is acceptable? How is that?

If during the almost 20 year reign of the chamber growth machine retail impact studies/economic impact studies/residential impact studies would have been the order of the day Lawrence would likely NOT be experiencing a retail and residential over load today. Our personal property taxes might also be more realistic thus saving all of us money and some on fixed incomes would not be forced from their homes.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 7 years, 9 months ago

"BTW, the figure I got from a city employee was about $800,000 for that roundabout, and it included some work on the sewer and water lines beneath the intersection."

It should also be pointed out that 25 or 30 years ago, when Lawrence's population was 55,000 or so, the 4-way stop at 19th and Barker was perfectly adequate. Growth necessitated a major change in that intersection, and the expense on that intersection was yet another example of the many costs of growth.

And it's also no secret that the more traffic there is on a city's streets, the faster they deteriorate. Still another example of an expense that is increased by growth.

WWoftheW 7 years, 9 months ago

Did anyone notice that Deb said the progressives had been office 6 (six) years. As for the taxes going up the City Commission has kept the tax stable. The taxes going up is USD 497 and those County commissioners who need $32,000 a year pay for part time which is better than most make in this town for full tme. Also western Kansas is doing far worse than Lawrence is.

In the 80's the Chamber laughed at their annual meetings about being a bedroom community. The developers built Lawrence on the basis that Lawrence was unique with very expensive houses surrounding fancy private golf courses. Then Johnson County and others said we can do that to. And now there is no reason to live in pricey Lawrence. Have the developers changed to fit the times. NO! They still want to build expensive development on land that another developer gouged them on and who pays the price? The neighborhoods and tax payers.

Still let's rubber stamp those developers plans so that they can make big profits and the community pays and pays and pays.

Four years of progressive have only been able to get thing into place that will protect the tax payer better, and take care of the infrastructure that had been neglected in order to build, build, build, vacancies in every field from commercial to over priced homes. Check out west and see the fields of vacant new expensive houses.

Don Zimmer 7 years, 9 months ago

Did growth ever pay for itself (in any decade)?

Of course we did not have consultants to tell us.

the jury is still out on cost of growth, each side can present their reports and consultants. But I do not have confidence in the present amigos if impact fees are established that they will not lower taxes but instead spend the increased revenue on their agendas.Did you ever know any governmental agency to save surplusses?

Michael Capra 7 years, 9 months ago

Allright heres what happened at 19th and barker for those that say utillitys needed to be done.All of them have to go in easments at the otherside of curb water, sewer, sbc, cable,power and no one ask sbc,weststar,or any others what it would cost the three pretty ones just said ohhhh thats pretty and thats how it cost 1.2million with rundles art in the middle

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 7 years, 9 months ago

I'm sure glad we have you around to "clarify" things, 485casul. But if your grasp of the facts are as good as your grasp of the English language.....

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 7 years, 9 months ago

Hey, Pilgrim, all the sychophantin' has you dribblin down your chin. Where's your hankie?

altarego 7 years, 9 months ago

Hawk on a perch:

If what you say is true about Deb Passig, then thank her for me.

But here is whats bothering me today. Don't you think the brain would more likely stay downtown with a convenient Hooter's location? Having to venture up to the bird every friday lunch time is unfair to you. As a matter of fact, I will check it myself this week. Just to give you, like, a rest.

jonas 7 years, 9 months ago

"As we approach the April general election for City Commission, I can't help but think back to the days when Lawrence was a thriving community that averaged no less than 2.5 percent growth per year, had a strong tax base, attracted homebuyers, builders, retailers and employers, and maintained a clean, structurally sound infrastructure."

And then I remember that this utopian world only exists in my mind! Teehee.

jafs 7 years, 9 months ago

I've lived in the area for about 10 years.

In my experience, the growth over that time has had positive and negative aspects.

We have more restaurants, coffee shops, and retail outlets, but also more congestion, traffic, crime, and homelessness.

There may be more job opportunities (my family hasn't been affected personally so I don't know).

We have largely lost the sense of community that was here when I moved here (and was a big part of what I liked about Lawrence), and become divided into "East" and "West" Lawrence.

New housing developments have eradicated some beautiful natural areas around the edges of town.

It's more and more difficult to find affordable housing - when we first looked, you could find a "dump" for about $40K, then $75K, now it's hard to find anything much under $100K.

The growth in population has increased demands on infrastructure and required the city to upgrade major systems.

It's not at all clear to me that this overall has been an improvement. Also, not clear that one must go "forward" or "backward". What's wrong with a sustainable, functional situation?

altarego 7 years, 9 months ago

"We have largely lost the sense of community that was here when I moved here (and was a big part of what I liked about Lawrence), and become divided into "East" and "West" Lawrence." I haven't been around long enough to see any older sense of community. What I have seen is the East v West division mainly fostered by those living on the east.

"New housing developments have eradicated some beautiful natural areas around the edges of town. " At one point, so did your house.

"What's wrong with a sustainable, functional situation?" Well, here we agree. These false divisions have us sniping at each other rather than accomplishing anything.

We have issues that are non-issues. Living wage? Get out of here. This is basically an honor system that will have absolutely no effect on anyones life or wage.

Tax abatements? The dollar amounts actually involved here are miniscule. This is more about raising a thumb or flipping a finger to the business community.

The idea that success (meaning the balanced and sustainable growth of which you speak) will be accomplished with an acknowledgement of the importance of a dynamic public/private partnership is as obvious to me as knowing the NCAA champions will be the team that scored the most points.

Whose to blame?

I blame the current and past commissions for creating an air of mistrust and corruption. I blame the current and past chambers for abdicating their responsibility to promote Lawrence as a destination. I blame all of you for allowing both to happen.

opinion 7 years, 9 months ago

Altarego,

" I blame all of you for allowing both to happen."

Blame accepted. I will be voting and campaigning for change.

altarego 7 years, 9 months ago

Perchedhawk,

MMmmmm, I loves me some chicken wwAAAAngs!!!!

Should I thank Deb Passig for raising 62.4 million dollars so my kids have enough time to eat at school? If so, then thanks. What a nice gesture. Apologies if I read too much into your expose (zay) above.

Twernt for the children, there'd be no one to pave the new roads.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 7 years, 9 months ago

"We have issues that are non-issues. Living wage? Get out of here. This is basically an honor system that will have absolutely no effect on anyones life or wage."

Unless you are the one who will or, as you prefer, won't get a living wage.

"Tax abatements? The dollar amounts actually involved here are miniscule. This is more about raising a thumb or flipping a finger to the business community."

If the amounts are so miniscule, then businesses wouldn't base their decisions on location or expansion on them, would they? But they do, and laugh all the way to the bank as they flip their middle fingers at the city's taxpayers.

"I blame all of you for allowing both to happen."

But it would appear from your postings here that you bring no respite to the divisions that have developed here.

SoundMind 7 years, 9 months ago

So how long does one have to have lived in Lawrence before they were not part of the "growth" problem?

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 7 years, 9 months ago

The "growth" problem is when the businesses that promote it and profit from it expect the taxpayers who are already here to subsidize their investments for them, and when the growth is poorly planned, creating overused and poorly maintained infrastructure and services.

SoundMind 7 years, 9 months ago

But businesses wouldn't "promote" growth or "profit" from growth if there weren't people moving to Lawrence to consumer the product offered. So when, in the past, did it stop being okay, and start being bad? Ten years ago?

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 7 years, 9 months ago

"So when, in the past, did it stop being okay, and start being bad?"

When they started asking for the taxpayers to subsidize their businesses.

SoundMind 7 years, 9 months ago

Decades? You mean like 30, 40 years? And these subsidies that you're talking about - are they implicit or explicit?

SoundMind 7 years, 9 months ago

"well just vote for DEVER then and we will have totally uncontrolled growth since he believe in building the SLT and promoting growth."

Are you speaking to me? If so, why this sort of response? I'm simply trying to get a handle on who I'll vote for - my mind is not made up at this point. That's why I'd like clarification on just what the growth/subsidy issue is. Can you help?

altarego 7 years, 9 months ago

bussed_bozo

You've fallen for it. There is not now, or will there ever be any person that will receive a higher wage because of this "Living Wage" farce.

Tax abatements are smoke and mirrors. The monies that the city misses in revenue won't be enough to pave Kasold no matter who doesn't foot the bill. The funniest story I've heard so far is when the local computer store tried to pay the full tax because they fell below the agreement threshold. The City treasurer had no mechanics for accepting the non-abated tax. Actually, I liked your comment on that thread, but this is the mess we get into when the city is involved with such matters. Its not about the tax, or the actual monies involved, it's about the blah blah.

I don't know what the hoopla is about. There is a small handful of companies with abatements. In the scheme of things not much money involved. Why do they use abatements base decisions to locate or expand? I'm not sure to what level they actually do, but its all psychological. They fall for the same blah blah you fell for with the "Living Wage" debacle. I've never said that chamber members aren't bozos that may or may not have missed the bus also.

As far as the the divisions in this town, hey, all I'm trying to do is vote. Stop referring to my home as sprawl and I'll stop calling yours the slums. There. See? We can do this. I feel warmth.

staff04 7 years, 9 months ago

Apologies for not having time to read everyone's comments, but about halfway through it occurred to me that no one is placing any blame for Lawrence's lack of growth on the overall lack of growth in the economy in the United States over the last 5 or 6 years.

Isn't that a reasonable explanation, or should Lawrence be viewed as though it exists in a vacuum?

Pull your head out, Deb--there is a lot more than just what happens in your little world that is contributing to this.

altarego 7 years, 9 months ago

Posted by just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) on March 20, 2007 at 12:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"When was that?"

It's been going on for decades.


Thats another way of saying "Yahh, whatevar".

Thanks

Godot 7 years, 9 months ago

staff04 wrote: "Apologies for not having time to read everyone's comments, but about halfway through it occurred to me that no one is placing any blame for Lawrence's lack of growth on the overall lack of growth in the economy in the United States over the last 5 or 6 years."

staff04 lives in an alternate reality.

Michael Capra 7 years, 9 months ago

the MERC was wanting to bring the farmers market for the sake of profit over public safety does that make them EVIL

staff04 7 years, 9 months ago

And Godot lives in the same vacuum as Deb.

staff04 7 years, 9 months ago

"The Merc is also begging to its members to send money to "update equipment"."

And the problem with that is? If the members want to toss their money to what you view as a lost cause, isn't it their right to make that mistake? Why do you care? You obviously spend SO much time there.

There are a lot of things in this world that people do with their money based on principle, or at least based on a perceived principle.

I guess the point that I'm making is that you seem to spend a fair amount of time railing against the MERC and I'm not sure why. After all, it is their money to do with what they wish, no?

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 7 years, 9 months ago

"I'm not sure to what level they actually do, but its all psychological."

I'm sure it's partly psychological, but as the saying goes, a million here, and a million there and sooner or later, you're talking about real money. Any company locating here will cost the city real money to service its needs, and the needs of its employees. If sufficient revenue isn't collected to do that, then somebody else picks up the tab, or the city can't operate optimally. There is nothing smoke and mirrors about that.

"Stop referring to my home as sprawl and I'll stop calling yours the slums."

Call them whatever you want, but the slums have been required to subsidize your sprawl. The slums have decided they don't want to do that any more, and I've yet to see any good reason they should.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 7 years, 9 months ago

"Thats another way of saying "Yahh, whatevar"."

No, it means that it's been going on for decades.

SoundMind 7 years, 9 months ago

I would still like to hear more about these subsidies. Implicit or explicit?

staff04 7 years, 9 months ago

Marion:

I wasn't aware that the Commission had endorsed a business.

My bad.

I don't need to tell you this, but I am obviously not a growth at any cost/capitalism at any cost kind of guy. I don't really have a problem telling large corporate entities that they have to share the wealth. Personally, I'm not so in love with my money that I am not willing to spend a few extra pennies on what I perceive as a good cause--or to oppose something I see as lacking social responsibility.

Anyway, your argument is fair enough, assuming it is based in fact or at least your perception of fact.

shockchalk 7 years, 9 months ago

Right on Marion! Bring on the election so we can finally have some positive change in Lawrence! The quicker we can get rid of the 3 amigos, the better!

altarego 7 years, 9 months ago

SoundMind:

Is that a yes or no question?

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 7 years, 9 months ago

"The Merc is also begging to its members to send money to "update equipment". The Merc cannot generate enough sales to handle its own maintainence."

This meets Marion's normal level of accuracy, which is to say it has absolutely none.

The Merc is asking its members to loan money for the rather major upgrades planned for the store. It has borrowed similarly from its members in the past. The loans will be repaid just as any other business borrows money, and then repays it.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 7 years, 9 months ago

"I would still like to hear more about these subsidies. Implicit or explicit?"

Taxpayer money is spent to subsidize the building of new infrastructure for new development, and the majority of those taxpayers derive little or no benefit from this additional infrastructure. Whether that is explicit or implicit, I leave to you.

And did I say that it's been going on for decades?

shockchalk 7 years, 9 months ago

I'm not sure who you're referring to JackR. I do work in Lawrence and have for years. I don't live in OP but I might consider living in Lawrence if the next election changes the face of the city commission. Until I see a chance for some positive growth, I'll stay in the county.

SoundMind 7 years, 9 months ago

"Taxpayer money is spent to subsidize the building of new infrastructure for new development,"

Like roads? Sewers? Is that the sort of infrastructure we're talking about?

So are you saying that 30-40 years ago, tax receipts did NOT fund roads and sewers? And it's just in the last few decades (i.e., 30-40 years) that tax receipts HAVE funded infrastructure?

So when Hillcrest School was built, did people complain about building it? When any of the structures built west of Iowa were built (which pretty much didn't exist 30-40 years ago) did people complain about growth, then?

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 7 years, 9 months ago

"Like roads? Sewers? Is that the sort of infrastructure we're talking about?"

Yes, and schools, fire stations, and any other infrastructure and service needs that an expanding population and city footprint would require.

"So are you saying that 30-40 years ago, tax receipts did NOT fund roads and sewers?"

No, I would say that they very likely did, and the older neighborhoods were subsidizing new development as far back as that, too. By now, most of that has been paid for, to a large extent by people who didn't really need it and wouldn't use it. By now the areas around Hillcrest are part of the older neighborhoods that are subsidizing newer growth.

"So when Hillcrest School was built, did people complain about building it?"

Before my time here, but people have always complained about taxes. Not sure if they made the connection between the need for new schools for new neighborhoods and rising taxes or not.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 7 years, 9 months ago

People most certainly did complain about the closing of Centennial and East Heights schools, clearly necessitated by changes in the nature of the neighborhoods as a result of growth.

SoundMind 7 years, 9 months ago

"By now the areas around Hillcrest are part of the older neighborhoods that are subsidizing newer growth."

But, if these types of subsidies are what everyone is so worked up about - then nothing in this city ever should have been built. Or, why was it okay 30-40 years ago - but not now?

That's what I'm trying to figure out. What/how has anything changed? Where is the dividing line between what was, in the past, "good" growth, and what is now, today, "bad" growth?

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 7 years, 9 months ago

"That is true, but to say the taxpayers derive no benefit from new fire stations, new schools, improved sewer plants, etc is about as fallacious as it gets."

Yea, what benefit is derived? Were the old ones on the old side of town inadequate? How will I be better off if the sh*t that gets flushed down my toilet gets funneled through the new sewage treatment plant rather than the old one?

Michael Capra 7 years, 9 months ago

bozo wont have a voice after april thank god

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 7 years, 9 months ago

You can't answer the question, so you go for the cutesy little one-liner.

altarego 7 years, 9 months ago

bozo carries the self centered rightousness characteristic of those who stand still for a long long time.

If I could hear over that noise, I would actually join him/her for certain fixed tax rates for retirees and/or certain sections of town.

jafs 7 years, 9 months ago

I think care must be taken when discussing whether growth benefits "the whole town" or not.

Improving existing services/infrastructure may indeed benefit the whole town.

Building new plants, etc. may, but may not be necessary if growth hadn't been so rampant.

The question about growth is not so much "good" vs. "bad" growth, but how much is enough? And, when do the costs/downsides of growth outweigh the benefits?

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 7 years, 9 months ago

"My first answer stands."

No, your first answer remains vacuously inadequate as ever. If the current sewer treatment plant needs upgrades, my tax dollars should be spent on making those upgrades, not on building a new sewer treatment plant that my house won't even be connected to.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 7 years, 9 months ago

"The new one will replace the old one, so yes, your house will be connected to it."

First I've heard of that. But I'm pretty sure you're wrong, so no surprise there.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 7 years, 9 months ago

This should be interesting-- will Pilgrim actually be able to admit that he wrong about something? (especially considering that he is wrong about nearly everything)

http://www.lawrenceutilities.org/wwrf/faq.shtml#q17

Q: Why is the study focusing on the Wakarusa River instead of the Kaw River? A: In previous work, the Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE) had more stringent discharge limits on the Wakarusa River than on the Kansas (Kaw) River. However, with KDHE's impending surface water nutrient reduction plan, the discharge limits on the Kaw and Wakarusa Rivers will be similar. The results of the 2003 Wastewater Master Plan showed that it was more economical to expand Lawrence's capacity to process sewage by adding a new plant to the south along the Wakarusa River rather than increasing the capacity of the existing plant along the Kaw River due to the cost of a sewage pipeline delivery system. (Public Meeting #3)

Baille 7 years, 9 months ago

Nothing like a selective memory.

I remember when Lawrence grew like a cancer stripping the center of town of its residential homes, leaving the city center schools empty husks, and overburdening the infrastructure. And now people are advocating for a return?

Doesn't Lawrence have enough two-models-three-color neighborhoods? Do we really want to continue our abandonment of what makes us special in order to become just like everyone else? Our city is decaying from the inside out and our people seem to be buying into the pro-cancer, dumb-growth propoganda of those who seek only to get rich of the process of killing our community.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 7 years, 9 months ago

"Where's the outrage over that growth issue?"

I've seen plenty from you, and it ain't anywhere near $80 million.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 7 years, 9 months ago

That says a lot about you, Pilgrim. You're all for subsidies that really accomplish nothing but fattening the wallets of the wealthiest people in town, but you get all in a tizzy about a bus service that is invaluable for just day-to-day survival for single moms, retired folks who no longer can or should drive, people who can't walk or see, people just trying to get across to town to a job that doesn't pay enough to support them and a car.

You're a real piece of work.

altarego 7 years, 9 months ago

It would be cheaper to give the handful of people you refer to (that aren't handicapped) a car rather than fund the money hole that is the T. The buses are empty. Thats not public transportation. That's wasting gas and causing needless pollution.

jafs 7 years, 9 months ago

Since Lawrence has a constantly changing supply of college student residents that provide an ongoing source of demand for goods/services, it is very unlikely that we will wind up like Oskaloosa, or other small towns where young folks leave and no one comes in to replace them.

The "T" is indeed rather inefficient, but only accounts for a very small percentage of the budget. I agree it should be improved, in many ways.

There are pie charts available from the City Manager's budget department showing the breakdown of expenditures.

The 3 largest slices are police, fire, and financial (a somewhat unclear section) with about 20-25% each.

Our bus system accounts for about 1% of the overall budget.

rhd99 7 years, 9 months ago

The PLC & David "the DUNCE" Dunfield are to blame for this partisanship that has divided Lawrence. If you have a chance, read Dunfield's editorial. Seems to me that he forgets what really counts here in Lawrence that he & the other stupid politicians fail to understand: WE elect them to do a job. OUR voices need to be heard more & louder to tell them when enough is enough. YOUR money & MY money continually erode unnecessarily because of WASTE that Dunfield & others like him along with the PLC has produced while at City Hall. 10% voter turnout is PITIFUL. Let's get out there, & VOTE & send the ambulance chasers a pink slip with a message of the following: YOU created the waste that Lawrence did not deserve, PAY UP!

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 7 years, 9 months ago

I see you're doing quite well in those Newspeak classes, rhd99.

KsTwister 7 years, 9 months ago

Under the PLC I've seen more businesses go up rapidly in the last 10 years. Unfortunately, they are mostly retail in the area of Wal-Mart (and low starting wages of $6.00 hour). The very build up people blast Dever about. Boog and Highberger were backed by the PLC in 2003(when they weren't going to spend more than $500 on campaigns), although both collected above or close to $15K. Guess they didn't spend it? So considering my roots here go back to 1829, I am very involved with wanting some accountability for money spent on special interests instead of upkeep for the city that it deserves, for homes built in floodplains (or high ground with bad drainage), for high property taxes, and I am tired of watching companies get 3-5 years in tax abatements and leave town. Our schools since 1978 have periodically been closed and consolidated only to have us paying millions for a new one that still isn't big enough. I don't want to become an Olathe but I do want a balance. Better yet build the SLT so people will go around, we use to like it that way before K-10 (435) was built. We can't do any worse than what the last 10 years have given us so clear the table I want new people sitting down who will try harder, set priorities, push to complete them and add numbers better than consultants. For all the problems just maybe Lawrence can get back the pride we use to see.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 7 years, 9 months ago

There's a major disconnect in your thinking-- you apparently want to elect commissioners who will return precisely to doing things the same old ways that created everything you lament in your rather lengthy post.

Doing things the same way, over and over, and expecting different results.....

Commenting has been disabled for this item.