In the last week or so I've noticed that the Kingman Daily Miner website has been putting responses to on line articles and columns in less than a weeks time, which has most likely spurred others to respond to the responses. One on line column has over 20 some odd contributions from readers (scroll down on that link) and I believe that leads to better community conversations.
There have been good conversations going on at the local TOPIX.net site for almost a year. Although some of the conversation did 'jump the shark' once efforts to slander certain individuals took hold.
I have even been impressed to some degree with RAID's website. There are many contributions there from the president on down the membership, water issues are covered, the 'opinion' page offers us a glimpse into RAID's take on issues (but hurry if you want to read those, I've noticed that articles tend to disappear), and even the feedback to RAID page is worth a hoot if you like reading the ramblings from the 'anonymous' (one of these submissions will be the focus today).
All in all though, it is good to see more folks coming together and at least be given the opportunity to see what others are talking about in regards to issues in the local community.
It also gives me the opportunity to get out the scissors and do some cutting and apply just the right amount of fisking when I find something that warrants it.
Lets take a look at what I found today shall we??
This one comes from the 'feedback to RAID' page on their website. Of course, like with ALL of the other feedback submissions... it was offered by someone who wished to remain anonymous. To be honest, there was one submission to the 'feedback' that did have a name attributed to it, but it has been removed. I heard that the particular (now missing) submission was sorta critical of RAID and I guess that is not allowed over there.
Anyway, strap yourselves in for this one. Might be a bumpy ride.
----- Original Message -----
FROM: Withheld by Request
Fraidy Cat, Fraidy Cat... I feel compelled to use 'Fraidy Cat' when responding to the following. I know I would be fearful of using my name if I wrote what Fraidy Cat wrote.
Hey Vestar, what part of the ballot measures not passing don't you understand? There will be no deal with the city. Not withstanding your reputation, the city (citizens) are not here to partner with you. If you want to start a business here, you're going to have to do it on your own dime just like everyone else. And that includes the interchange too.
Yeah folks, the above is real.
First of all Vestar was NOT on the ballot on November 6. But... the voters may have actually helped Vestar to some degree. I've covered that before, and even the KDM covered that this week.
The last bit in bold makes for a real interesting showdown if the contributor here is either in the RAID camp or the Good Old Boys camp.
Medcath says they are not dependant on the T.I. and they are on their own (investor) money to develop their (hospital) business. Nice try, Vestar, tring to force our hand by selling them 35 acres.
Sorry folks, I'm simply having a difficult time doing this because of all the laughter the above has caused.
And also... Fraidy Cat says 'screw you' if you need emergency services and live on the wrong side of the Interstate. This hospital plan was basically and evil ploy on behalf of the developers so nothing to see here, please move along.
Fraidy Cat would rather see people in need of emergency services suffer than the city of Kingman letting a developer front the money for needed infrastructure. Fraidy Cat comes across as a real meanie.
To the mayor and city council. What part of NO don't you understand? The city government is not a business to joint venture with a company. Where is your (AROC) license? If anyone approaches you about (sales tax) reimbursement to build, you have to turn them away.
Fraidy Cat... are you sure?? Somebody inform the communities Queen Creek and Gilbert here in Arizona. I didn't see either city on the AROC list of contractors and they both have reimbursement agreements with this particular developer.
This is hysterical. Never mind the state statutes or anything, only the AROC applies.
Our tax money is not to be given away. Having no primary property tax is enough incentive to develop and build. Are you going to adjust impact fees with Vestar? The people put you in office to represent the masses, not the special interests. Trying to circumvent the people by creating funding mechanisms including sales tax reimbursements and improvement districts won't fly.
The funny thing here is there is still more Kool-Aid for Fraidy Cat to drink. I'm not even kidding. I don't see the city creating funding mechanisms... I see the city (if it chooses to even investigate this opportunity to let someone else pay for infrastructure) copying what other communities have done, and have done so legally by state statutes.
Having the city residences (27,000) foot the bill is ridiculous. The only acceptable funding mechanism is for Vestar to use their own (investor) money.
Fraidy Cat... would this demand be the same for any and ALL parties that have an interest in a new interchange along the Interstate?? This is a serious question.
To the other developers / builders. What would happen if you tried for city reimbursement? The answer wouldn't be no but HELL NO.
Somebody get Fraidy Cat a new tinfoil hat.
And explain to me again how freezing the city property for several years benefit the citizens. Competition is good for business.
The voters, for all intents and purposes, just 'froze' out the resident owned property. Again, the irony is delicious. I wanted our property to be that competition, but RAID helped convince the voters to stand with Vestar to give them plenty of what they wanted.
In short, the city cannot partner with any business because of conflicts of interest. The council would have to recuse themselves on almost any P&Z or C.U.P. matter.
In a reimbursement agreement, the city does not give up its sovereignty to a private interest. There is no real partnership. The city simply agrees to allow the developer to front money for public infrastructure and agrees to pay the developer back over time out of sales tax dollars that are generated only at the developers project. AND only if the project is meeting the benchmarks and the criteria in the agreement. The developer still has a huge risk if the project does not perform in the way that the original 'feasibility' study shows.
Fraidy Cat, just what are you so afraid of anyway?? Kingman would not be the guinea pigs here, these agreements have happened before all over the state, and even in Mohave County.
It's real easy, Vestar. You're not going to make a ton of money on the backs of the citizens, You'll have to do it the old fashioned way, "you'll have to earn it."
I'll just let this one speak for itself.
Name withheld by request.
And that is probably for the best.
No comments:
Post a Comment