The Last Stand
Comments by WZ007
Page 1 of 1
On Rec center up to voters
(anonymous)
September 5, 2007 at 8:02 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Hammurabi - great comment.
The average is quite fictitious as it is not based on what everyone will have to pay.
The average is an average of what precisely?
Your cost per $100,000 is way more meaningful BUT unfortunately for the advocates of the indoor Rec Center such a cost will look a lot more expensive to us “average” residents than the “average” they quote. This is just another method the City employees are using to “sell” the deal. Be aware that in the end City employees are legally not allowed to support the referendum and if they do we should all report then for doing so! They already have their hands in this pot – will they be able to stop before their actions are undeniably illegal under Colorado and Federal law??
By the way, we have recently agreed to a number of multi million dollar projects to fund within the City and County. I recall a new school and a new library; both extremely valuable causes for a large cross section of the community and with untold benefits in terms of helping our community members grow and achieve their dreams – especially the young members of our community. So now, the “give-away-folks” want to add further tax burdens that provide for the few.
I also recall that the new high school was turned down by the vote of the residents and was resurrected in a much improved format and at a much improved cost that was approved for construction. The residents of this City have proven once before that they can tell government how to plan and spend wisely – lets do it again!!
On Rec center up to voters
(anonymous)
September 5, 2007 at 7:42 a.m.
› Suggest removal
I do not believe anyone in the City has given any thought to how much our size of community can reasonably afford either in terms of funding captal cost or in terms of funding operating cost. Watch out, it won't stop at $34 million given the history of project underestimations and cost over runs (remember the tennis bubble, it overran by 50% on a much smaller project, the City department that managed that fiasco is the same one managing the Rec center) - be prepared to fund more than $40 million in capital cost then be prepared for the City to increase taxes to cover operating cost shortfalls since many of the people who want a rec center are looking for a government subsidized facility (if they wanted to pay they would have joined Health and recs)!
Vote NO!
On Council to debate ballot language
(anonymous)
August 29, 2007 at 5:56 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Just_10
I find your comments way off track.
I did attend many of the City council meetings on this issue and, along with others, pointed out to the Consultants that they presented significant mathematical errors in their presentations.
So please do not lecture me on “being there done that” and go check their maths yourself.
If you knew the history and if you had attended the City Council sessions you would understand that the Parks and Recs organization over ran their approved cost on the Tennis Bubble by 50%. So you may want to ask the question “How certain are they that they will deliver on their promises to spend your $30 million tax dollars or will they over run again and come back for more?”. Also, they chose a tent color that did not match the recommendation of City Council (had you been there you would have heard that discussion).
Members of the committee formed by City Council are not happy that they were bypassed. Check that one out.
I would still like you to explain to ignorant old me how this City of Steamboat Springs can afford a $30 million Rec center.
Crank your calculator and tell me HOW?
Looking forward to seeing your maths!
On Council to debate ballot language
(anonymous)
August 28, 2007 at 9:25 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Just_10….
Name is WZ007 - not W2007… thanks.
Grateful if you can explain how a town of 9000 (11,000 unofficially) citizens can afford a $30 million plus facility with all the other services required to maintain our current infrastructure?? Show me the sound economics.
Also, grateful if you can explain why the tennis Bubble over ran by 50% in flat market???? Maybe poor project management was a cause. This was only a small project so how can you guarantee the same people will successfully deliver a $30 million plus project?? Did the architect take this kind of over run history into account???
There is a special committee formed by the City Council with a mix of proponents and non proponents of the rec center. this committee was bypassed when Chris Wilson told City Council he was ready to put it on the ballot and they agreed. You should probably ask some of the members of this committee and check the City council minutes.
Grateful if you can explain how a City that receives all its income from taxes can possible spend $30 million without adding taxes - sounds like alchemy to me!
On Council to debate ballot language
(anonymous)
August 28, 2007 at 6:31 a.m.
› Suggest removal
I am really concerned about the course this whole Rec center planning has taken.
Originally it was a $12 million price tag, now the architect is involved it seems we have risen to a $30 million price tag and possibly more. Is this because it is the facility the city wants or is it because the percentage fees for the architect who builds it get a whole lot larger??
Something seems to be going on within the City departments that are driving the Rec center.
- Parks and Recs management participated in the original alliance that pushed for the Rec Center – isn’t this conflict of interest, doesn’t the law forbid this: is it a case of the bigger we build it the greater our domain!
- Parks and Recs department make City Council agree to put Rec center on ballot even though the City Council appointed committee has not yet advised – didn’t they circumvent public government by going around the committee appointed by the City Council! And why did the City Council accept this?
- City Manager has plans to put Rec center under the cost radar by not requiring a vote on the cost – so we will pay a lot more in some other new taxes! Why is he trying to go around the vote; I seem to recall the architect recommended it so maybe the architect realizes his super high price tag will get voted down and he wants to make sure the huge cost goes ahead with the huge fees attached.
The City Council needs to get control of this and do the best for the tax paying Citizens of Steamboat Springs. I believe the cost is far too great for our small community and will be a major burden we will regret. I am also concerned that previous construction projects, such as the Tennis Bubble, have over run so much (50% in that case) that we will get financially hammered even more than we see in the proposals.
On Howelsen, Hot Springs still on table
(anonymous)
August 24, 2007 at 6:58 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Rec center Wild West Hold Up!
Folks we are being fleeced in a politically traditional and unscrupulous way.
Underhanded plans are afoot as follows:
- Parks and Recs management on the supposed Rec center citizens committee – conflict of interest: the bigger we build it the greater our domain!
- Parks and Recs department make City Council agree to put Rec center on ballot even though the City Council appointed committee has not yet advised – circumventing public government!
- City Manager has plans to put Rec center under the cost radar by not requiring a vote on the cost – so we will pay tons more in some other new taxes!
- wake up, speak up and shut down this huge rip off of residents – by the few for the few; by City Departments for themselves!!!
Original price was around $12 million now it is going north of $30 million.
Page 1 of 1
RSS
On Rec center committee begins campaign (anonymous)
September 9, 2007 at 8:08 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Steamvent,
good note on Julie's comment.
I thought the same.
Pity she did not state clearly that it is illegal for City employees to spend City money or their City time to support the Rec center proponents committee. That is the one to watch since one senior member of the Parks Recs management team is a member of the original Recs Proponent Committee.