Advertisement

Archive for Sunday, August 5, 2012

No to rec center

August 5, 2012

Advertisement

If the City Commission continues to go ahead with the grand rec center, the City of Lawrence is in trouble. As one with limited income, I cannot purchase “big ticket” items for my home without already having the required funds. We are always getting reports about ongoing financial problems locally and nationally. How can the City Commission possibly believe the citizens can survive another foolish investment. The big winner will be the developer getting free road and infrastructure through his property.

Friday’s newspaper report should be enough to wake everyone up and make everyone concerned. Frisco, Texas, is in debt for a million dollars with their complex. There are already two existing facilities in Johnson County. Financially, the city is not in a position where it can say, “Build it and they will come.” That only happens in the movies. Money still does not grow on trees.

 However,  I assume we can take the approach that it won’t happen to us. I suppose that’s what Stockton, Calif., thought while they were over-obligating. Now that city has filed for bankruptcy. Listen people. We are in deep financial trouble personally, locally and nationally. Maybe it is time the City Commission takes a three-year moratorium on building the “gee whiz” items and save money for a rainy day like the common people do.  

Comments

John Hampton 1 year, 8 months ago

Say no to development west of Iowa!

Say no to more downtown development!

Building Clinton Lake is a huge mistake!

I-70 who needs it?

The city is ruined....

Wait, sorry I was channeling the Ghosts of Whiners with lack of Foresights Past.

0

OonlyBonly 1 year, 8 months ago

Jus' another Lawrence boondoggle. Oh yes, it'll pass and be a drain on the economy for years to come.

0

Jayhawker07 1 year, 8 months ago

Good read on that URL merril, he brings up some very good points. And also has the credentials to boot. The city would be wise to hire him as an advisor or consultant. Also the developers did advise us that they wanted to compare it to Frisco, TX. Well, we know now how that is working for them. We (the city) have been warned, now will we (the city) listen.

0

Richard Heckler 1 year, 8 months ago

Do the pros outweigh the cons of the new proposed sports complex? The answer appears to be no. (Taxpayers are on the hook for the more than $20 million USD 497 sports project as we speak).

http://www.lawrencesmartgrowth.blogspot.com/

1

El_Mysterioso 1 year, 8 months ago

Good letter, Roger.

Remember folks - the consulting firm that told Frisco their complex would be a money maker is the same one telling Dave Corliss that Lawrence's will. But of course, they tell 100% of their clients that. But they've been wrong many times: Frisco, Washington DC, Minneapolis, Boston, and on and on. Corliss needs to be more careful with our money.

But then Cromwell is married to a Fritzel. Go figure.

0

Flap Doodle 1 year, 8 months ago

Das les isn't concerned with little things such as plagiarism as long as his talking points get across.

0

Steve Jacob 1 year, 8 months ago

I do support the new center, but we have to be aware of the risk. We voted for a library with no beneficial financial impact for the city.

0

oneeye_wilbur 1 year, 8 months ago

Sorry Jack, should have read, Does Not Grow Our Individual Incomes ref: growing the local economy. Hasn' yet

0

oneeye_wilbur 1 year, 8 months ago

Mr. McKee, growing the local economy does grow our individual incomes. Thus far, not one development in Lawrence , commercial, residential or governmental has decreased property taxes. Until the school district takes the lead to drop the mill levy, and no one gets it that it takes 100 homes valued at $200,000 to pay a superintendent's wages , until reality sets in, this rec center thing is a financial drain on everyone. Now I have thought Mr. McKee might be a tad bit smarter but am wondering about that now, but nonetheless will offer the same $100 reward to Mr. McKee if he/she/it can layout to wilbur online how the Fritzels are giving to the community with their not for profit foundation and the community in return gives them 1.2 million a year for 20 years. That is what one calls "GIVING". Next, is the 'free" 50 acres just that or is going to be a donation with a taxable value for IRS purposes? Come on folks, either we is getting free and the givers are really giving or are they?

If KU is to benefit the most, because is is fact the overall community will not, then KU AD can build the thing and charge any local resident or county resident or out of county resident a fee to use the place.

I don't know how much simpler it could be. Right now, I am quite frankly, shocked, that Mr. Duane would align himself in this quagmire of nonsense.

wilbur

2

Prairielander 1 year, 8 months ago

Allen Field House is ON-campus. The Rec Center will be OFF-campus. Big difference for the AAU touneys.

0

cummingshawk 1 year, 8 months ago

It seems I recall that when AAU basketball teams played here that Allen Fieldhouse was placed off-limits as a possible unfair recruiting advantage for the Hawks. If KU has any say in this luxury rec-center, isn't it possible that all these speculative games might not be allowed here also for the same reason? Of course with Misery gone to the sec, maybe nobody else will notice.

0

classclown 1 year, 8 months ago

LesBlevins you are as bad as cait. These "facts" you posted were copy and pasted from a satirical website. It is slanderous/libelous to be posted in such a way as to convince people these are truly facts.

I'm surprised the Lawrence Journal World is even allowing it to stay. Quite frankly, this sort of behavior merits your removal from this site. People have been disappearded for less.

2

observant 1 year, 8 months ago

See how easy to do nothing useful.

See how easy to do nothing useful. by observant

0

classclown 1 year, 8 months ago

"There are already two existing facilities in Johnson County."

===========================================

That is true. However, this being Douglass County, we are snobbier than they are therefore better.

0

grammaddy 1 year, 8 months ago

Cus putting the football team first above all else worked so well for Penn State, huh.

3

rockchalker52 1 year, 8 months ago

You are dead on right about this, Jack.

0

JackMcKee 1 year, 8 months ago

Two things, Roger. First, technically, we're all on limited income. That is an excellent reason that we should be trying to grow our local economy. Secondly, the facilities in surrounding areas don't have the lure of KU athletics. There is no doubt this will be a huge success and bring millions of dollars into the city coffers and local economy. It's the first good idea I've heard out of city hall in a long time. I don't think it's any coincidence that it started outside of the typical local politicians and bureaucrats. Those idiots are stuck on wasting money on things don't create any economic windfall at all, i.e. the M-T and the library. I'm not really concerned about a few people getting some benefits out of the deal because it's going to improve the entire community.

1

Jason Johnson 1 year, 8 months ago

I'm tired of the east side of Lawrence getting ignored. :(

3

Richard Heckler 1 year, 8 months ago

1994 Sales tax money

It is time in my estimation to revisit this 1994 sales tax and ask voters how elected officials should be spending this money. For any group of politicians to believe that voters blindly trust politicians with their tax dollars is not real and hasn't been for at least 50 years.

Bring the voting taxpayers back into the process after all we are the largest group of stakeholders in Lawrence,Kansas.

"Can the city approve this “Field House” without a public vote?" Yes they can.... Which could easily become $40 million or more. This project will need a very large advertising budget.

However there is nothing stopping them from putting this matter on the upcoming ballot which I believe is the ethical approach.

Politicians believe because they have the authority to spend tax dollars anyway they desire, no questions should be asked and voters should simply trust their motivations. I know very few taxpayers who accept this position.

This 1994 sales tax is not dedicated to the park department in spite of the fact a large chunk has been funding park department projects. This money could be spent to rehab our elementary schools and remove the portable class rooms that has been talked about for years thereby avoiding a tax increase or a bond issue.

This money could be spent to rehab the library thereby eliminating the tax increase as I introduced to the city commission perhaps a year ago. The LJW more or less supported this proposal in an editorial. In fact 5%-10% of this sales tax could be dedicated to the library for operations still leaving 90% for other uses that benefit all taxpayers.

This money could build this community a nice Vo-Tech center. College grads could improve their opportunities for employment. High school grads could improve their opportunities for employment. Laid off employees could improve their opportunities for employment. Anyone seeking to broaden their horizons could improve their opportunities.

Providing a nice Vo-Tech would be expanding on the higher education industry. Investing further into the industry of higher education would be a solid investment. Students are good for economic growth and they love Lawrence,Kansas.

Committing tax dollars to the "field house project" may appear on the upcoming city commission agenda which I believe is rushing it. Considering the amount of concern being voiced from just about every corner in Lawrence,Kansas.

1

Les Blevins 1 year, 8 months ago

You are absolutely correct Mr. Powell. And if the Republican Party goes ahead with their heir apparent candidate they too are in trouble. Mr. Romney's tax returns have been obtained by hackers who reported that; Romney campaign spokeswoman Andrea Saul stated last week that “there has been no year in which Romney paid zero taxes”. In 2008, this was true. He earned $23,425,316 and paid $412.18 in federal income taxes. This calculates to a federal tax rate of 0.0018%. How did Romney get his tax burden so low? According to his return, he had approximately $23,407,000 in itemized deductions. These deductions ranged from $78,923 for “Toupee Creators Unlimited” and $41,826 for “Spray-on tan services” to a $3.8 million dollar write-off for a trip to Las Vegas with potential campaign donors. The Romney family also paid salaries to their numerous employees including, two yacht captains, three pilots for their private jets, two professional dog walkers, one toupee stylist and a “live-in contortionist”. What someone does with a live-in contortionist, one can only speculate. However, the $891,064 Romney spent on an “EWS Donor Party at the Pennsylvania Mansion” might give us a clue. While the return does not indicate what “EWS” stands for, given that the deducted supplies for the party included “Venetian masks, alcohol, lubricant and various Egyptian leather accessories” it was most likely an “Eyes Wide Shut” party.

0

grammaddy 1 year, 8 months ago

Agreed! Let's spend the money where it will do the most good- our schools.Education is the ONLY way out of poverty.

4

Floyd Craig 1 year, 8 months ago

we dont need another rec center we have som enow thats not being used much if any if the rich kids cant use the ones we have already then stay at home n play your video games

0

Bruce Bertsch 1 year, 8 months ago

Bringing the Big XII track meeet and Soccer tourney here on occasion would certainly add to the city coffers. Stockton CA is a poor analogy as the real estate bubble was the key to their bankruptcy. The center will keep construction workers employed and help, not hurt the local economy.

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.