Comments by Intheknow
Page 1 of 10 | Next
Posted on November 5 at 10:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Bob Graham says "reasonable" cost. Wow. 2 million dollars is reasonable?
I guess a million isn't much - if it isn't your own money.
So much for the Vitality project not costing the city taxpayer.
On Open house to showcase Vitality Center, Jacobson building
Posted on November 5 at 8:11 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The AL Trib did run a photo spread of newer buildings that the planning commission design standards would find unaceptable and it was ridiculous how many nice buildings didn't meet their "standards.". (Adam's accounting, Enger foot clinic, to name a couple)
The window requirements are particularly irksome in that they don't relate to a building's solar orientation. How many people would put that many windows on the north side of our homes?
As politically correct as these people are - they should address solar energy issues.
And where is city manager Vicotoria on this issue - or is she too busy "not spending money" on the Vitality project?
Posted on November 4 at 6:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)
It is way too easy to dismiss anyone with even educated viewpoints as "negative" unless they agree with what is happening at city hall.
Why not consider that their and my viewpoint is also valid and perhaps could be useful to our current know-it-all city leaders.
Many of us are afraid to put our name on our posts or speak out at a meeting because we are then labeled as ignorant backward and negative.
So much for transparency and open dialogue in city hall.
Posted on November 4 at 4:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)
And how exactly will Bob Graham "count" the building design standard as a success? How will he know the number of businesses that didn't locate here or expand here because of overly precriptive design requirements?
Kind of like counting the number of jobs the stimulus bill "saved".
Posted on October 28 at 9:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Mankind - interesting that this was a closer vote (4 to 3) than expected considering that it was pushed as such a great deal.
Perhaps Council members are catching on to the fact that maybe they don't have all the information they should be provided with by the city manager or that they should keep asking questions and even seek outside advice from a business saavy contact?
Posted on October 28 at 8:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)
So its a done deal - but once again the city manager has failed to negotiate for the good of the city.
Sure, it seems like a fabulous deal but not when the teardown and maintenance costs are figured in.
They couldn't have given it away to any nonprofit because knowing the asbestos issue, who would take it.
And at least the city mananger could have negotiated a broader use option on the property.
Doesn't anyone have any business sense?
Its just one mistake after another. Aren't we fed up with victoria learning to be a city mananger on our dime?
Posted on October 28 at 5:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Its kind of like going out for dinner and drinks - and then expecting someone else to pick up the tab. Everytime.
Maybe this explains the mentality of our current city leadership (city manager).
Quality of life - but someone else pays.
Posted on October 27 at 5:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The city can't afford to keep current services funded and facities open ... So Victoria decides to start a whole new program and in yet another facility?
Sure she gets lots of publicity and beefs up her resume but meanwhile
What current city staff hours or positions will be cut to fund this?
Police? Fire?
Posted on October 26 at 12:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)
So was this the same independent appraisal company that was used to justify the inflated price per acre the city manager recently paid for property out by the arena?
What is really going on?
Page 1 of 10 | Next
Posted on November 18 at 6:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I agree with Ken about the problems with the ever expanding federal deficit but I wonder how his own political record would stand up to his requirement of non-deficit spending.
What kind of salary and benefit increases were there at District 241 while Ken was school board president? Were teachers and administrators promised more than the district could afford and was the long term fiscal viability of the district ignored?
Yes, teachers need to be well paid but if the state isn't providing the money and the local taxpayer can't afford another referendum, maybe our local politicians have to say no.
On Federal gov’t needs to stop deficit spending