Advertisement

MDODC

Follow

Comment history

City gives preliminary approval to development agreement for $25M recreation center

The only reason you want to seat another commission is because you don't like the position the majority of our currently elected officials now have. Have you even attended any of the meetings on this topic yourself? How much more transparent could it be? Everything is online. Everything is in the paper. The commission has held multiple meetings and provided multiple opportunities for the public to share their opinions and ask questions. What would you have done differently. Even Mike Amyx, who is not in support of the complex, has publicly stated that the process has been fully transparent. You seem to enjoy throwing stones and calling people names but offer little in return as far as substance or alternative solutions.

February 21, 2013 at 12:22 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

City gives preliminary approval to development agreement for $25M recreation center

I would be open to seeing alternative numbers and projections. If you have the data, please present the information so they rest of us can begin making" well-reasoned" decisions about our community.

February 21, 2013 at 12:07 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

City gives preliminary approval to development agreement for $25M recreation center

I was not "slamming you" for posting anonymously. I have no issue with that . With that said, i think it's pretty weak and irresponsible for someone to anonymously make an accusation, or statement, that implies that our elected representatives are somehow engaged in unethical or illegal behavior without any evidence to support that position.

February 21, 2013 at 12:04 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

City gives preliminary approval to development agreement for $25M recreation center

You've already had an opportunity to vote... you had the opportunity to elect commissioners who are paid to review all of the info and then make recommendations and vote on our behalf. Their purpose is to spend the time, that the majority of the public cannot spend, to review the information and then serve as our elected representatives by voting on these types of issues. If you are unhappy with your elected commissioners you have the right to elect/re-elect new representatives.

February 21, 2013 at 10:35 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

City gives preliminary approval to development agreement for $25M recreation center

Well... I'm clearly a proponent of the project and my personal opinions on the project are based on the data that has been provided. So... here is a summary of what the economic experts have said (this information can be found at www.lawrenceks.org)....

"The cumulative net economic and fiscal impacts of both construction and operations
over a one‐year construction period and a 30‐year operating period in today’s dollars
(NPV) is estimated to be approximately $164 million in new direct spending, $235
million in total new economic output, $4.2 million in new taxes, 170 new full and part‐
time jobs and $76 million in personal earnings generated in the City of Lawrence.
It should be noted that the economic and fiscal impacts described herein include only
those associated with the recreational portion of the project.    As such, additional
economic and fiscal impacts could be generated to the City via potential ancillary
development surrounding the proposed Lawrence Sports Village, as well as from the
sale of liquor at area restaurants and bars, among various other potential impacts."

In my opinion, from a purely economic perspective...I think that represents a substantial return on a $25 million investment. So....back to the original question. What evidence do you have to support your claim that "more than likely, it'll take substantial subsidies from the vast majority of taxpayers" to pay for this facility?

February 20, 2013 at 6:14 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

City gives preliminary approval to development agreement for $25M recreation center

Just because you don't like the "who" doesn't mean that our commissioners are not concerned with the "how". It's pretty lame to make that accusation behind a false name on a public blog/forum. Come on... the residents, volunteers, and public servants of this community are better than that!

February 20, 2013 at 2:15 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

City gives preliminary approval to development agreement for $25M recreation center

Why do you say "more than likely, it'll take substantial subsidies from the vast majority of taxpayers" ? What evidence do you have to support that assertion? Saying it, and believing, doesn't make it fact or probable. While I think you're probably absolutely correct that the "residents whose lives are consumed by elite athletic competition"... will continue to drive out of town for competitions, i think you're discounting the benefit of hosting those events in our own community. Based upon economic projections, which I think are conservative, the fact remains that the economic benefit of hosting 30+ elite athletic tournament/competitions a year in our own city will benefit our city far more than not having those revenue generating events in our community.

February 20, 2013 at 2:03 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

City gives preliminary approval to development agreement for $25M recreation center

Thousands of families who currently live in Lawrence are already financially burdened with the expense of having to travel all over the state to participate in activities that require this type of space. Lawrence doesn't have the facilities it needs so, in many ways, aren't many families in our community already paying a tax to participate in activities and services the city should already be obligated, and should be allowed to provide. Why should the residents of Lawrence, who already travel to other cities to find indoor space spend their money in those cities. It makes more sense to me to build the facilities our community already needs and then tax the residents of other communities when those individuals come to our city to use the facilities they don't have themselves. As mentioned last night, 2/3 of the indoor aquatics centers operating budget is generated by swim meets, events, etc. That's other peoples money, from outside of our community, that is providing the majority of money needed to operate that facility. The additional money spent by those visitors helps support our local economy and that generates more income for individuals and business of Lawrence. All of these issues are economically interconnected and I think it is easy to see the economic benefits that these facilities (KU and RCP) would provide.

February 20, 2013 at 12:36 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

City gives preliminary approval to development agreement for $25M recreation center

If you attended the meeting last night, the "how" comment was in regards to "how" the facility is going to be built not "how" the facility is going to be paid for. The "how" this project will be funded has already been answer and wasn't the subject of real debate last night. From my perspective, the debate has primarily centered around "who" will be building the facility, the ideal location of that facility, and whether the size of the building is appropriate. Based upon the vast majority of the comments last night, the location and the size of the project is really no longer being contested. So.... the original comment “I’m afraid with some of the emotions that have gotten involved in this project that we have the let the ‘how’ of this project get in the way of the ‘why' , I think is very valid. I completely agree. ..the "how " it is built and the "who" it is built by should not be used by others as a way of distracting the public away from the primary focus which should remain firmly centered on the needs of the community.

February 20, 2013 at 9:56 a.m. ( | suggest removal )