Advertisement

Previous poll Next poll

Do you support the decision by the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals to uphold the state’s approved route of South Lawrence Trafficway through the Baker Wetlands?

Response Percent Votes
Yes
 
75% 637
No
 
19% 163
Not sure
 
4% 40
Total 840

Comments

classclown 1 year, 9 months ago

Since it's not 51% to 49%, can it still be called a mandate?

0

cletus26 1 year, 9 months ago

well i be.. let the animals have some room to play; leave the wetlands alone. this has been in debate a long time, i know, and i'll be glad when they leave it be.

0

David Albertson 1 year, 9 months ago

They've been debating this for most of my life. I'll be glad to see it completed. It will be so nice to bypass 23rd st on the way to the lake from Eudora. When are they going to tie K10 to I70 on the East side?

1

Beth Bird 1 year, 9 months ago

The simple answer is no. The highway should NOT go through the Wetlands.

0

JackMcKee 1 year, 9 months ago

The 100 or so people that voted 'no' ride the bus everyday and haven't left the city limits of Lawrence for a decade. They's like all of us to be trapped in the Lawrence bubble with them.

0

cheeseburger 1 year, 9 months ago

Oh, a sad dad indeed to be Eye, Heckler, Hyde, Tuschie, Caron, and all the other obstructionists.

But then again, isn't every day?

0

George Lippencott 1 year, 9 months ago

Interesting question? I thought we are a nation of laws and the courts interpret them. Are we now deferring to the mob?

0

treeforest 1 year, 9 months ago

I mourn for another crushing blow to Native Americans - their reasons for wanting to protect this scared site are so often looked over. One would think that after 300+ years of chipping away at Native American interests in the name of progress, development and civilization, modern government would say "Okay, okay. You can have this site that is sacred to you and full of history." No, it must be destroyed for the sake of commerce.

0

Flap Doodle 1 year, 9 months ago

But, but, this was approved in an election! How can you dispute the will of the people? (from a source)

0

Richard Heckler 1 year, 9 months ago

The SLT will increase Douglas County taxes perhaps more than we are never being told. Grab your tax dollar wallets.

The more Lawrence expands the larger the tax dollar money hole. Why?

The community has never stopped expanding long enough to catch up with the ever expanding cost of paying for the helter skelter growth decisions. In other words Lawrence has never been in a position where new growth is paying for itself.

There is one consequence of helter skelter aimless growth that usually goes unmentioned by the local media,city hall and elected officials - local profiteers are draining our pocketbooks and raising our taxes.

Developers and EmpT cars are quite large budget items. Cars demanding a $250-$300 million roadway which only covers construction. Then come the millions necessary for maintenance and snow removal. All one monster tax increase.

1

ShePrecedes 1 year, 9 months ago

I get really, really disgusted and angry with the local developers and unchecked urban sprawl in this town. We all end up paying in increased taxes for their ability to make millions. This is not fair. It is not just. It is not reasonable.

My suggestion is that we make all developers in the area, including those that do the road construction, pay for all the effects of their developing this are. Or triple tax them for every single thing that they do.

1

Jason Johnson 1 year, 9 months ago

Thank God! I'm tired of taking a good half hour or more to tow my boat through town! I want to get out to the lake in just a few minutes, which the SLT will let me do!

Other than a place for tree-huggers to make love in the mosquito clouds, do the wetlands serve any purpose other than to be a road-kill generator? Or a bug-juice splatter manufacturer?

4

jackbinkelman 1 year, 9 months ago

South Lawrence Traffic Way Helping to bring East Topeka to West Lawrence!

2

RETICENT_IRREVERENT 1 year, 9 months ago

Now lets get the ball rolling on the East Lawrence Bypass.

1

Clearly4Kansas 1 year, 9 months ago

If Bob Eye is elected to congress, he'll put a stop to this trafficway. Congressmen do those types of things.

0

jlw53 1 year, 9 months ago

The court has spoken.

Move Forward!

1

Indigenous_Intellect 1 year, 9 months ago

How foolish minded people can be? Hope you have fun destroying your children's future, you won't be here to remedy your actions, it will be their problem right?

2

billbodiggens 1 year, 9 months ago

PLEASE BUILD THE DARNED THING, ALREADY. FOR THE SAKE OF ALL THAT IS HOLY AND UNHOLY, BUILD THE THING, ALREADY. WITHOUT IT LAWRENCE WILL CONTINUE TO BE A STAGNANT, TRAFFIC CONSTIPATED, COMPLETELY DYSFUNCTIONAL BURG. Pardon me for yelling.

5

consumer1 1 year, 9 months ago

For far too long a few noisey people who are anti growth have been dictating to the commissioners. It is time for the rest of us to get involved. Anti growth equall higher taxes for those of us who live here year round, and own property.

2

dlkrm 1 year, 9 months ago

75% YES as of 9:24am. Watch that figure drop as the paid protesters, tree huggers, and Obamatons start to roll out of bed in a couple of hours.

1

senior_citizen 1 year, 9 months ago

This is a sad day for taxpayers in general, and conservationists in particular. "Developers" and other speculators will now use even more of our paying taxpayers' money to pave the wetlands, build ugly high-rises, and increase the already-high rate of vehicular homicide by idiots racing along a "southern bypass". P.S. A concise and readable brief would have helped the cause of the good guys.

1

KS 1 year, 9 months ago

Get r done! Quit wasting time and money.

6

Larry Sturm 1 year, 9 months ago

This should have done 20 years ago when it would have cost 30 t0 50 million instead of 150 million plus and all the court costs.

8

Commenting has been disabled for this item.