First off, it was packed to the gills and that was good to see.
I took some notes from each of the various contributors on the panel and I'll share them with you. I'm sure later today the link will be up from the Daily Miner as well (when I was on my walk this morning in my neighborhood I glanced at a neighbors paper to read the front page).
City Councilman Tom Spear was the first to present his view of the issues surrounding Kingman Crossing and the traffic interchange. He passed out a copy of a presentation from April 16th and basically recited from that presentation for his 10 minutes of time.
He did throw in that the initial proposal that was proposed by a local Realtor broker a couple of years ago amounted to a high risk and responsibility with the potential for a low reward for the residents of Kingman. It sounded very similar to what the current city manager stated at the end of the last City Council meeting on July 2nd. My opinion here is that Mr. Spear isn't getting the ALL the facts from city staffers on the original proposal that since has turned into the city hiring expensive consultants and the talk of back room deals.
He did mention that the city currently hasn't the funding for the Rattlesnake Wash interchange and that the city will have to manage their best asset (the city owned 168 or so acres near Kingman Crossing) in order to raise the funds needed later on for RW. Overall Mr. Spear feels that these decisions on the interchanges are Kingman's future.
Next up was the KGVAR representative, David Hollingsworth. Dave was the local Realtor broker that proposed a plan to build a traffic interchange at Kingman Crossing a couple of years ago. He reiterated that his clients proposal called for the construction to be paid for by private interests only with no money coming from the city coffers and that tenants lined up for the project at the time included Target and Kohl's. Further along he noted that Target is building a regional store now in Bullhead City and likely won't have plans in Kingman for at least another 5 years or so, the same would go for Kohl's. According to Mr. Hollingsworth, the deal he had in place would have netted the city of Kingman $15 million dollars and one privately funded traffic interchange.
He mentioned that in our current economy that many private businesses are tightening belts, but the city just passed a budget that doubled in size. He strongly feels that the city doesn't need to pay an outside consulting firm 14% of the eventual sale of city lands when there are more than capable local resources that could accomplish this task for far less cost.
Dave then presented a fair idea and said that the city should stop everything that is happening at the staff level on this project and create a blue-ribbon panel of representatives of community groups (similar to what was represented on the forum's panel) along with the private developers at Kingman Crossing to come to a consensus on solutions that would benefit the developers and the community as a whole.
He spoke of one of the controversial emails from the city that has been uncovered talking about the city manager stating that since the city owned lands is partially being used as a dumping ground, the city could classify the city owned lands as redevelopment or 'blighted' lands and wouldn't need the blessing of the voters to sell the property as the city sees fit. I believe this is the big concern here and Dave's idea about community groups having a say right now speaks to this. Dave's quote was basically if we did the blue-ribbon panel idea we (the residents) wouldn't be 'blighted' by the city. Strong stuff indeed.
John Kirby of the Builders Association was next. I know the local chapter of the Builders Association only recently was organized and it is good on them for how far they have come along to this point. John quickly spoke about the organization efforts of the local builders and stated that the builders recognize the importance of growth and even more shopping needs for the residents. I'll do my best to paraphrase one shining comment... John said that the folks they have talked to really wish there was more shopping choices in the community, how badly it is needed... and that was just the men they talked to. I butchered it, but his delivery was clever.
He also hoped that the out of town developer would consider using the local builders and contractors for the new projects.
Marvin Robertson of RAID was next on the panel. His most memorable quote was something along the lines of RAID was organized to get the city government out of the closet. I'm not sure if it was some sort of double entendre or not. I had higher hopes for Marvin with his time, but he mainly reviewed the history of RAID and how they got their start and how they've managed to get referendums on the ballot. Then he passed around copies of the RAID vision statement. Nothing against him or RAID, I guess I was just expecting more from the leading community watchdog group. No proposed solutions offered, in my opinion, to my dismay.
Representatives from Vanderbilt Farms (land owner of north side of Kingman Crossing) and Vestar (the developer) were next. Sort of a "hello, how you all doing" kind of thing at first, but I think them getting to know us and us getting to know them had to start somewhere. Please more, please talk to us directly about your plans and not through the city at this time. If you can tell, not many have all that much faith in the city at the moment.
Ryan Desmond from Vestar spoke at some length about the difference between an 'incentive' deal and a 'reimbursement' program, and how Vestar could likely ask for a 'reimbursement' deal at some point after their fact finding is finished. Again, I'm hoping that they continue to shed light on the matter to clear up what I feel are misconceptions running rampant at the moment.
It was then time for questions from the audience. 'Questions' was the key word, but the first to stand up directed a comment at the developers stating that their project would ruin the character of Kingman and that he didn't want to see this place turn into the 'peoples soviet socialist republic of California'. First impressions hopefully aren't everything.
I had hoped the question and answer period would have offered something better than what was seen on the whole, but the issue is still very hot and many are impassioned one way or the other a bit too much I suppose. But... this is why more public forums are needed moving forward. More of the information needs to be revealed and addressed. Last night was a good first step in that direction... but there is much work that needs to be done.
No comments:
Post a Comment