LJWorld.com

Discussion

LJWorld.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post.
Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.

1. 7 February 2008
   at 9 a.m.

   Suggest removal

   Permalink

   

   salad (Anonymous) says…

   David Kay Johnston has a new book about tax law that goes into TIF's in depth. He was on NPR two weeks ago and explained that when a developer or retailer gets a TIF, that WE still pay sales tax at the business, but the sales tax now goes to the developer!!! The city gets nothing for the duration of the TIF, but must still provide services (fire, police, etc..) to the business. Usually the developer/retailer will use the threat of going down the road to the next city to build unless they get the TIF. In Lawrence, a TIF is pure insanity…I mean, where they gonna go build their hotel? Eudora? Make em pay, and ditch the TIF, which is bad for ANY city.

2. 7 February 2008
   at 10:14 a.m.

   Suggest removal

   Permalink

   

   JackRipper (Anonymous) says…

   And how many other hotels in Lawrence got TIF's? Did the new Holiday Inn down south get one? It is a monstrous project in the first place in an area that is busy enough. I thought the idea of a TIF was to help revitalize blighted areas in urban areas. Hardly that!

3. 7 February 2008
   at 10:51 a.m.

   Suggest removal

   Permalink

   

   JackRipper (Anonymous) says…

   Well that is interesting cool because Lawrence Freenet was going to get an even greater savings on their interest rate if the city backed them and it would have actually provided direct services for the city. If this tif passes it will be obvious as heck how business gets done in this town and who controls it.

4. 7 February 2008
   at 11:09 a.m.

   Suggest removal

   Permalink

   

   beatle919 (Marcy McGuffie) says…

   Well, it's obvious that the city has no problem spending our hard earned dollars on ridiculous projects. Do we really need this fancy hotel? Well, if the developers want to take risks out of their own pockets - fine. The city has no business using our money to finance it. We do still live in a capitalistic society, correct?

   From reading the ljworld forums for sometime, I realize there is strong opposition to some of the crap going on with our city's finances. Money is too tight to be throwing it at the big developers. So, I advise people to get off their butts and stop gritching online and actually get out there and make voices be heard!

   Saturday morning at the library seems like a decent place to start. I'm sure there is a petition to sign, too…

5. 7 February 2008
   at 11:20 a.m.

   Suggest removal

   Permalink

   

   rumor_man (Anonymous) says…

   Don't forget that Cool is an architect that is just ticked because he wasn't hired by the Fritzel family and therefore holds a grudge against anything that they're involved in…

6. 7 February 2008
   at 11:21 a.m.

   Suggest removal

   Permalink

   

   rumor_man (Anonymous) says…

   just sayin'

7. 7 February 2008
   at 11:25 a.m.

   Suggest removal

   Permalink

   

   rumor_man (Anonymous) says…

   …breathe Cool breathe….

8. 7 February 2008
   at 11:28 a.m.

   Suggest removal

   Permalink

   

   beatle919 (Marcy McGuffie) says…

   rumor_man (Anonymous) says:

   Don't forget that Cool is an architect that is just ticked because he wasn't hired by the Fritzel family and therefore holds a grudge against anything that they're involved in:
   _________________

   Dude, your name is rumor_man. Is this a fact, or a rumor you refer to?

   Well, just to let you know, I have no involvement with the Fritzel family…that doesn't stop me from thinking something stinks.

9. 7 February 2008
   at 11:36 a.m.

   Suggest removal

   Permalink

   

   rumor_man (Anonymous) says…

   beatle919 (Marcy McGuffie),

   It's all done tongue in cheek.

   I find it funny that Cool's an architect that has posted the same comments hundreds of times on this subject.

   I truly hope it gets built but that the Fritzel family finds funding on their own, not from the city.

   But I can see why they are asking the city…everyone else does…enough is enough.

10. 7 February 2008
    at 11:37 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Permalink

    

    BalkansHawk (Anonymous) says…

    If there is a petition, will a citizen/resident of Lawrence have an avenue to sign it (say an online option) even if they are out of the country and have no direct access to the petition?

11. 7 February 2008
    at 11:39 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Permalink

    

    rumor_man (Anonymous) says…

    Cool is also an architect that never graduated from architecture school. (not a rumor)

12. 7 February 2008
    at 11:40 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Permalink

    

    JackRipper (Anonymous) says…

    See there you go again offtotheright wanting the government to make the winners and losers. You seem confused about what a conservative is.

13. 7 February 2008
    at 11:46 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Permalink

    

    swan_diver (Anonymous) says…

    This latest fraud perpetrated upon the taxpayers of Lawrence can and should be interdicted by a host of lawsuits. What's become of all the public-interest lawyers in this community? I haven't heard about anyone stepping up to the plate.

14. 7 February 2008
    at 11:49 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Permalink

    

    rumor_man (Anonymous) says…

    Sven aka Cool,

    But it says here that you graduated from KU in 1975.

    http://www.dreamgreenhomes.com/aboutus/p…

    Is this true? Yes or no.

    Thanks,
    Rumor_Man

15. 7 February 2008
    at 11:50 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Permalink

    

    rumor_man (Anonymous) says…

    http://www.dreamgreenhomes.com/aboutu…

    this link works.

16. 7 February 2008
    at 11:54 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Permalink

    

    rumor_man (Anonymous) says…

    http://www.dreamgreenhomes.com/aboutu…

    Sven will need to change his picture when the hotel is built. :-)

17. 7 February 2008
    at noon

    Suggest removal

    Permalink

    

    mamacita123 (Dacia McCabe Maher) says…

    rumor_man (Anonymous):

    If you would like to support the project or the investors wanting to make money off of the project, then that's just great. Do it.

    Please quit trying to squabble with other posters. It's a pathetic attempt to take the focus off of community discussion (aka: disgust) about a public tax subsidy for private development.

    Also, feel free to attend the meeting if you have anything of value to say about the TIF. If you are only interested in petty bickering to deflect the focus off of the real issues, then no thanks. Have a great day Mr. Anonymous.

18. 7 February 2008
    at 12:02 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Permalink

    

    rumor_man (Anonymous) says…

    ….my plan has worked for the day…good bye…

19. 7 February 2008
    at 12:07 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Permalink

    

    JackRipper (Anonymous) says…

    Well Bowhunter, when Freenet asked for a guarantee on a loan in which they actually provides services to the city sooner then 11 years and nothing in costs I think you balked. You also thought it was ok to be able to have non competitive restrictions in leases. Have we asked the other hotels in Lawrence how they feel about the city assisting in helping their future competition? It's ok for the city to create winners and losers?

20. 7 February 2008
    at 12:35 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Permalink

    

    KU_cynic (Anonymous) says…

    When the value of my home goes up after I put in a new deck, some landscaping, and new windows I want my assessed value frozen at the pre-improvement value. Afterall, all these repairs and improvements generate economic activity in the city and enhance the appearance and value of my home and consequently my neighborhood. Yeah, I'll pocket some of the value of the improvments when I sell my home (eventually), but why shouldn't I enjoy the fruits of my investment.

    exact same logic as tif. why not for me?

21. 7 February 2008
    at 12:40 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Permalink

    

    beatle919 (Marcy McGuffie) says…

    offtotheright (Anonymous) says:
    It's going to be built, and with a TIF. I can't wait!
    ___________
    Seriously?

    I have no problem with it being built, but I have a huge problem with the TIF. If these guys want to build it the old fashioned capitalistic way, that's fine. Build it, see if the customers come. Thrive or die out. That's what this country is supposed to be about!

    Why exactly would you want the TIF? I'm curious, what's your interest in this?

22. 7 February 2008
    at 1:26 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Permalink

    

    JackRipper (Anonymous) says…

    Egos? Have the Fritzels spent a lot of time in that area to suddenly say, hey we should have a gigantic hotel here. Shoot, that was a nice place for a lot of college students to hang out. Everybody wants to burb the environments. A long time ago the Union, the place where you could go hang out comfortably started looking like a hotel lobby, maybe that is where the hotel could be built, especially since it is always under construction anyway. Better view of the stadium too. Get the students to pay for it too like everything else they are saddled with. And if you want egos, shoot look at the monument the Dockings built for themselves, couldn't even get it right, what is it doing off to the side like it is?

23. 7 February 2008
    at 1:47 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Permalink

    

    JackRipper (Anonymous) says…

    Well except a few times a year I'm not sure if we are hurting for hotel space. If you build this one what happens to other hotels that need the business for the majority of the year? Is it good business for the city to get involved in making the winners and the losers?

    Lawrence is probably hurt by its location to KC more then anything. Since many of you seem to think attracting large corporations is the solution why would someone come here when they can have it all in KC? The out of control bedroom community seem to bring people here and now they don't want to commute and some how the city is suppose to be providing jobs. That is what we get with growth that has the darn cart out in front of the horse.

24. 7 February 2008
    at 1:48 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Permalink

    

    blessed3x (Anonymous) says…

    Salad said…

    “Make em pay, and ditch the TIF, which is bad for ANY city.”

    I beg to differ. I have seen many TIF programs implemented in the KCK area and while, sure, the developer gets a great deal, the city also ended up taking blighted crime ridden areas to areas that are producing tax income, creating jobs and building safer areas within the city. And after all the tax break is only temporary.

25. 7 February 2008
    at 1:53 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Permalink

    

    JackRipper (Anonymous) says…

    And blessed3x that is what a tif program should be about. I wouldn't say the north campus area is blighted just because it isn't maxing out tax potential. I get nervous when the city doesn't want to live in its means and is looking to milk everything it can. Look across the border to KCMO and look at how the tif program has turned into what Lawrence is trying to do. I think we need to get Funky!

26. 7 February 2008
    at 2:16 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Permalink

    

    beatle919 (Marcy McGuffie) says…

    “Private money is ignoring Lawrence. Local money isn't as rich as everyone thinks!”

    Curious. You're correct in that local money isn't as rich as everyone thinks. We, Lawrence, don't have the money to be throwing at the developers! Can someone show me where the numbers add up that by using the TIF, it will actually benefit our town? Maybe they need more financial backing from the banks, just like anyone else wanting to build a business. Let the banks take the risk - not the taxpayers! Oh, that's right…banks aren't doing too well right now because they've overextended themselves, lending money to builders…

    I dunno…the risk seems to great for US to have to pay.

27. 7 February 2008
    at 2:21 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Permalink

    

    beatle919 (Marcy McGuffie) says…

    rumor_man -

    What plan for the day is this that you speak of? Unless I read incorrectly, you don't want the TIF to be used, but would like the hotel to be built. So, why all this “tongue-in-cheek” action? Do you enjoy chiding people for speaking their minds? I'm sincerely baffled why you have such a hard on for harassing a poster who feels passionately about something that you “sort of” agree with…

    Enlighten me, please (as long as you don't feel the need to attack certain posters).

28. 7 February 2008
    at 3:14 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Permalink

    

    mamacita123 (Dacia McCabe Maher) says…

    BalkansHawk (Anonymous) says:
    “If there is a petition, will a citizen/resident of Lawrence have an avenue to sign it (say an online option) even if they are out of the country and have no direct access to the petition?”

    No online options. There is a petition that has been circulated over the last month by a few people. It has no legal value. The city commission can and probably will completely ignore it. I was simply tired of hearing the proponents of this project and members of the city commission talk about how great this project is and how there has been widespread community support with very little opposition.

    If this TIF passes, there will be a legal petition circulated in Lawrence. Possibly filing a K.S.A. 12-3013 initiative referenda petion, but we're still looking into our options. Thanks for your interest in this issue.

29. 7 February 2008
    at 4:08 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Permalink

    

    JackRipper (Anonymous) says…

    Why don't they build those student apartment houses that are going out by Walmart in the spot they want to build the hotel? If we were thinking on a big picture plan we would have apartments close to campus, like they use to be and the students can leave the car behind so less traffic. Shoot, build the hotel out by Walmart and bus those people in for the games. Shoot, can you imagine at that spot how much room you'd have for condo's and build it many stories high, no one would care. Gee a solution for multiple problems.

30. 7 February 2008
    at 4:31 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Permalink

    

    merrill (Anonymous) says…

    Well, what is tax increment financing? I'll tell you what it is. You go to the store with your goods, you pay for it at Wal-Mart, and there's a very good chance that that store has made a deal with the government that the sales taxes you are required to pay, that government requires you to pay, never go to the government. Instead, those sales taxes are kept by Wal-Mart and used to pay the cost of the store. And typically in those deals, the store is tax exempt, just like a church.

    Now, there are two ways that it's important to think about this. One is, that means your kid's schools, your police department, your library, your parks are not getting that money. And you'll notice we keep saying we're starved for money. We're twice as wealthy as we were in 1980, but we've got to close hospitals, and we've got to close schools, and we don't have money for all sorts of things like after-school programs, even though we're twice as wealthy. The second thing to think about is, imagine that you own Amy Goodman's or Juan's department store across the street. You suddenly have to compete with people whom the government is giving a huge leg up on. You think you would go broke after a while? Well, in fact, you will.

    And I tell about a man named Jim Weaknecht who owned a little store in the Poconos of Pennsylvania. He sold fishing tackle, hunting gear, stuff like that. And the way he made his living in his little tiny store, enough that he was able to have his wife stay at home and raise their three kids full time, was by charging less than a company called Cabela's. Well, then Cabela's came to town. This little city of 4,000 people made a deal to give Cabela's $36 million to build a store. That's more than the city budget for that town for ten years. It's $8,000 for every man, woman, and child in that town to have this store. And even though he charged lower prices, he was pretty quickly run out of business.

    That's not market capitalism, which is what Ronald Reagan said he was going to bring us. He said, you know, government's the problem, we need markets as a solution. Well, that's not the market. That's corporate socialism. And what we've gotten is corporate socialism for the politically connected rich-not all the rich, the politically connected rich-and market capitalism for everybody else.

    juan gonzalez: And, of course, many of those folks need lobbyists to be able to get these kinds of breaks from the government, and you talk about the explosion of lobbyists and their influence on government.

    david cay johnston: There are twice as many registered lobbyists in Washington today as there were in 1980. If the lobbying community had grown in revenues since the '70s at the same rate as the economy, there would be one-tenth as many lobbyists in Washington. And those people are not there doing the good of the public. You know, the Constitution's Preamble talks about the-

31. 7 February 2008
    at 5:09 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Permalink

    

    beatle919 (Marcy McGuffie) says…

    And since offtotheright has made yet another appearance, I would appreciate an answer to my question.

    What is your interest in this? Why are you so pro-tif? Shouldn't a developer get funding from the banks to finance a private project? Why should we take the risk? Mostly, tifs are intended to be used to brighten up blighted areas, thus spurring further economic development in a neighborhood. That just doesn't fit in this case.

    offtotheright, please answer me these two questions:
    1. How is using TIF in this instance a good thing?
    2. What are your interests/involvement in this case, that you are soooo hoping it happens?

32. 7 February 2008
    at 5:53 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Permalink

    

    JackRipper (Anonymous) says…

    Well because I don't think we need either but if they are going to cost me as a tax payer I'll put my $.02 out there.

33. 7 February 2008
    at 8:43 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Permalink

    

    merrill (Anonymous) says…

    *Bring on Impact Fees!:
    Donovan Scruggs, Ocean Springs director of community development and planning, said the city's current budget. crunch can be tied directly to infrastructure expenses needed to serve new housing developments.

    “If residential growth paid for itself and was financially positive, we would not be in a budget crunch,” Scruggs said. “But with increased numbers of houses you have increased demand on services, and historically the funding of revenues generated by single-family housing does not pay for the services, they require from a municipality.”

    Scruggs said there have been two studies done on impact fees. One 100-page study was on services for police and fire protection, administration and parks. A second study was done on infrastructure related impacts on roads, water and water.

    The current proposal calls for the fees to be collected separately.

    “We want. to make sure we tie the fees as closely as possible to when the demand is being generated,” Scruggs said. “Water and sewer fees would be collected when the subdivision is constructed. Services more related to occupancy and homes being constructed would be collected later. For example, no one will have a need for a park until there are kids in that neighborhood.”

    While developers pay for onsite water, sewer and road infrastructure, Scruggs said it is costly to pay for offsite upgrades needed, such as enlarging lift stations and raising water towers.

    “Now if we have to upgrade a lift station, it is paid for by the general fund revenue paid by each taxpayer in the city,” Scruggs said. “Someone on the west side of town would have to pay for subsidizing the growth in demand caused by the development in the east part of town.”

    The eastern part of town is where the greatest residential growth is being seen. Scruggs said there has been so much growth in recent years that the city has to elevate its water towers to keep pressure at adequate levels. “That was a direct result caused by the growth,” he said.

    Scruggs said that impact fees are legal if they are done properly.

    “Madison's impact fee program had problems,” Scruggs said. “Ours will not have those problems. It can be done right.”

    Ocean Springs had 120 homes constructed in 2000, 90 in 2001 and is on track to have 120 homes constructed in 2002. If impact fees had been collected on the 310 homes built in three years, the city would have extra revenues of about $2.1 million.

    In order for the city to have orderly growth, developers need to be responsible for a certain amount of the infrastructure. Most builders understand impact fees are for a purpose that improves their development.”

34. 7 February 2008
    at 9:38 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Permalink

    

    Godot (Anonymous) says…

    TIF is not meant for situations like we have with Oread Inn. The area is not blighted.

    It is disgusting to see the city fathers and mother embrace the idea of wrapping this project up as something that is worthy of TIF or even historic preservation. What a joke.

    All of the funds being used, regardless of which “grant” or “tax forbearance” are yours, you, the taxpayer.

    Someone mentioned that TIF worked well in Kansas City, Kansas.

    That remains to be seen.

    Who, of all who love Lawrence, would compare 12th & Indiana to 5th & Quindaro and say they require the same economic revitalization?

35. 8 February 2008
    at 2:39 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Permalink

    

    emilyhadley (Emily Hadley) says…

    “This Saturday the Lawrence Townsite Alliance is hosting a public forum at the Lawrence Public Library from 10 a.m. to noon”

    I hope everyone who is concerned about this can come. Strength in numbers!

36. 8 February 2008
    at 2:57 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Permalink

    

    beatle919 (Marcy McGuffie) says…

    “Now try to pretend you are really concerned about additional traffic destroying the ambiance of the neighborhood.”

    Oh max1…I used to teach reading. Do you need help with your comprehension??? Have I not stated again and again that I don't care if they build the friggin' hotel? I jdon't want my dollars financing it. Simple enough. If the developers can come up with the moola on their own…free enterprise, baby.

    emilyhadley (Emily Hadley) says:
    “This Saturday the Lawrence Townsite Alliance is hosting a public forum at the Lawrence Public Library from 10 a.m. to noon”

    I hope everyone who is concerned about this can come. Strength in numbers!

    ___________

    And, that is what this is truly about!

37. 8 February 2008
    at 6:24 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Permalink

    

    beatle919 (Marcy McGuffie) says…

    max1 (Anonymous) says:
    “Oh max1:I used to teach reading.” -beatle919

    Well, aren't you special!
    _______________________
    Thus, proving the fact that you lack comprehension. I don't appreciate idiots putting words in my mouth. Simple enough? Probably not, considering you don't actually read what people say.

38. 8 February 2008
    at 6:28 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Permalink

    

    beatle919 (Marcy McGuffie) says…

    Um, yeah…I apologize for that last comment. I shouldn't give into those who chide because it's fun. I guess I'm just as guilty.

    Anyway, I hope there's a good turnout at the library tomorrow.

39. 8 February 2008
    at 6:29 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Permalink

    

    swan_diver (Anonymous) says…

    Who are all the morons attacking neighborhood organizations on this blogg? Why don't you all get your butts over to Johnson County as soon as possible — if you can afford it? I agree that there are a lot of dim bulbs participating in these groups, on any given meeting night — and it's been like this for years. Take the standing Oread Neighborhood Association, for instance — and their 'support' for this disgraceful 'whites-only' party-palace, to be built with public subsidy. But in the larger view — Lawrence itself was virtually saved from being paved over by our brilliant business leaders in the 70s and 80s — who wanted to scrape the Civil War-era downtown clean — and bulldoze the rest of the older neighborhoods for a parking lot for the new mega-mall. Old West, Old East, North Lawrence — and to some extent, an Oread organization of a better day, organized their hearts out — and blocked the criminal intent of the banking and real estate interests here — who could have given a damn about the fact that the town site was all that remained, to honor the two hundred men and boys who were murdered in cold blood, seven weeks after the Confederacy met its match at Gettysburg, in the summer of 1863.

    Attacking residents who attempt to organize their neighbors and neighboring property owners, in defense of the sanctity of their homes and lives, and the community in general, is both vulgar, and cowardly. Stay under your damp rocks, please. Your time is up.

40. 8 February 2008
    at 6:29 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Permalink

    

    beatle919 (Marcy McGuffie) says…

    in to

    oops - I wish we could edit our comments!

41. 8 February 2008
    at 8:31 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Permalink

    

    swan_diver (Anonymous) says…

    Francisco and other Oread 'leaders' are employees of Kansas University — and do their bidding — and little else. No big secret here. Oread in fact has no real neighborhood organization — in that they represent virtually no one in the district besides a handful of the few remaining single-family property owners left, and a host of slum-lords on the side of Mt. Oread. Why these individuals have choosen to shaft the historic preservation movement in Lawrence — to please bosses, or former bosses — I don't know. But no one can disparrage the neighborhood orgaization movement in general — because of these folks' shameless, selfish and foolish actions on behalf of this proposal for a 'whites-only welfare hotel.'

    Sadly — in testament to the ineptitude and stupidity of neighborhood groups in Lawrence, the Lawrence Association of Neighborhoods, the so-called 'Grass-roots Action' group — and even the Lawrence Preservation Alliance — there is virtually no organized opposition to this criminal disfigurement of the northeastern flank of the Razorback glacial ridge in question. Progressives in Lawrence have disgraced themselves, once again, in their response to yet another daylight bank robbery here, in my view.

42. 8 February 2008
    at 10:59 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Permalink

    

    not_dolph (Anonymous) says…

    cool is a tool - not TIF

43. 8 February 2008
    at 11:23 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Permalink

    

    beatle919 (Marcy McGuffie) says…

    not_dolph -

    Nice way to contribute to conversation. Howzabout your reasons you think TIF is good? Seems a bit more mature than going around with a hard-on for one poster. I checked your comment history. In recent comments, you rarely actually contribute anything to a civilized conversation. Instead, you focus on name calling. Does your mommy know you're on the 'net?

44. 8 February 2008
    at 11:29 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Permalink

    

    not_dolph (Anonymous) says…

    Dear Marcy -

    What I meant to say was cool is a tool - not TIF. I could care less what financial process they use to build the hotel. People on the LJW blog are tired of the BS that Sven puts out.

    You can stalk… I mean check my comments all you want. Don't care sweetie.

45. 8 February 2008
    at 11:36 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Permalink

    

    Stain (Anonymous) says…

    Legal stealing.