Comment history

Business-oriented political action committee gets big donations, endorses Chestnut, Farmer, Riordan in City Commission race

Sounds like "Lawrence United" is another name for the Oread Hotel Condo Owner's Association

March 19, 2013 at 6:51 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Lawrence Association of Neighborhoods calls for public vote on recreation center project, expresses concern about bidding process; two public meetings set on project

Will the city at least have a say on whether they use real grass or the stupid fake turf?

January 4, 2013 at 2:20 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Rumblings of Menards coming to Lawrence may be impacted by retailer's decision to pull back on Kansas City area expansion, which it blames on Obama

I guess I am not sure I understand your argument. Sure the regulations are changing, but you are basing your possibility of expansion on this $63 per employee fee. This is a yearly fee assessment that begins in 2014 and will decrease per year until gradually fazed out in 2017. Are you saying that you are not expanding your business or creating 8-10 new jobs today, because you might have to pay roughly $1500 for these new jobs over the course of 5 years. Oh, and this only applies to companies with 50 or more employees. I am sure you will respond that this is just a sign of uncertainty, which is valid. But I think you should do the math before you make such claims.

In response to your other judgement, my husband and I own a small business which supports our family. I also consider myself to be intelligent, and I do my research on claims before I make them. We employ 4 people currently, and I would gladly expand and higher more people if the business was there...and if this fee applied to our company, I would gladly plan for it and pay it, if it meant we were growing our business.

December 13, 2012 at 9:43 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Town Talk: City trying to determine what type of fine it can levy on Varsity House project; Deciphera undertaking new strategy, rumors of layoffs

Fritzel knew what he was doing the whole time, just ask anyone who works on his construction crew. There was no thought or concern for returning the building in any sort of recognizable fashion. He swindled the city and he will do it again with no hesitation. Unfortunately, he will probably get a way with it, again....hopefully, the city will be all the wiser the next time he needs a building permit though.

October 30, 2012 at 2:59 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Zoning code change targets truck stops

Agree with you about the needless apartments. But I feel that a truck stop is not the right business to bring to our town. If we are concerned about driving away "outside" money, maybe we shouldn't be building a road that will physically "drive" them around our town.

August 29, 2012 at 12:03 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Mother of two urges legislators to reject Brownback plan to eliminate EITC

No facts??? Just in case you missed it..."it is nothing more than just enough free money to buy some sneakers they don't need and/or a new flat screen TV, just like the article says" This is not fact - you cited it from someone else's post about a story they heard from a friend, who heard it from a friend.... not the article or any other credible source.

March 12, 2012 at 6:41 p.m. ( | suggest removal )