1. The price of 2,000,000 is not the real cost. The real cost is 2.65 million when one adds up the additonal costs ----repairing the creek walls plus changing the course of the stream up top of the lake. The city may try to bypass the prudent levy limits as given by the finanical advisor, Ehlers and Associates, by putting the creek walls expense in the stormwater utility, but the bottom line remains----the city debt is at the prudent limit and puts the city in a difficult position to face unexpected emergencies.
2. Incurring debt, municipal debt, during a time of local and national financial crisis should be for essentials, and not for fluff.
3. Incurring debt for the kids----for non essentials---- is not wise. If we would incur debt, and much debt has been proposed for our elementary school--44 million to be exact---for schools....schools are MORE important than millponds. Some school debt IS reasonably forseeable in the next 10 years. Denying that this is coming is not helpful for our community.
4. There is a natural process, and Lake Leota is just returning to its natural state.
5. The days of the 1930's have gone the way of the Camp Douglas wayside---they are sentimental, but times have passed. Rebuilding the lake will not restore anyone's youth. The city has placed substantial money in the Westside park and has moved to serve this new development area.
6. There is just as much prestige real estate to be gotten around millponds as around lakes---the greed of a few is not the cause for extensive public indebtedness.
7. At the Evansville Planning Commission, council members almost approved the resolution that would have come within $200,000 of exhausting what the financial planners have called a prudent limit to municipal indebtedness for Evansville, or 60% of the 5% of assessed valuation of our property. NOBODY asked the question what would happen if that assessed valuation went down from the 2005 assessment which occured at the tip of the real estate boom.
8. For months, the estimate of the project was 1.5 million. Suddenly it became 2.0 million. Why? Where is the extra half million going? Check it out.
9. Improved commercial development comes before millpond investment.
10. Fixing the current water flow problems near 6th and Vision is more important than millpond development.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The storm water tax just started this month and already they what to steal money from that tax to pay for the mill pond. This is your goverment at work. This is why our country is where it is. If this tax is taken for the mill pond they should all be fired.
ReplyDeleteI have been thinking about this 'advisory' referendum a lot. My thought was they can all kiss their positions good bye , if they by pass the results of the referendum and go a head with the lake, as there will be a recall. But then I realized if the lake was to pass, which I don't believe it will. But if it were to they the council have the same power to say no we can not do this to the taxpayers with the economy the way it is. So if it were to pass does not mean it would happen. Time to start putting pressure on council members now, to as your sign says just say no.
ReplyDeleteReason #11: GEESE. The damn geese are gone and good riddance. Who needs those thing crapping all over the place like they do? It was such a mess. The kids have the POOL to swim in. The swimmin' hole will be a liablity, when will life guards come in, that'll be the NEXT thing. We didn't have to worry about being sued back in-whatever decade you could last really swim in this thing. I think it's a bad idea. It has not smelled bad since very shortly after they drained it. It will firm up and then it can be part of the park, with a stream running through it, would probably be really nice. Take down the berms, level it out, plant some real trees, YEAH it'll need to be mowed like the rest of the park. It WAS a millpond, it is NOT a lake! Maybe another soccer field or whatever can be in there.
ReplyDeleteThere are people losing jobs, losing their homes, losing their retirement, and the city wants to move forward with rebuilding this "lake"? The city has to focus on NEEDS, not a worthless pond. Our taxes are already too high. We simply cannot afford to take on this project in these hard times. I'll be there for the recall if they proceed on a "No" referrendum result.
ReplyDelete