Oh my goodness.
I have never seen such a public outcry. I have been doing this blog for nearly six months. Yesterday I had more visits, and more comments, than I have had in any previous MONTH.
Several observations here.
The nature of the Internet is that it is anonymous, and even if you sign your name, there is no way to know who is really posting.
When you feel you were not listened to, it can leave a bad taste politically, but there is plenty you can do if you are serious.
The work session meetings are open meetings, just as the regular meetings are.
Showing up and speaking out in the public comment time is still your best bet. That is televised and people see it and there is no question as to whether it is a real person.
I have seen huge change take place in other cities.
I remember, in South Carolina, this little old lady who was ticked about her property taxes doubling. She went to every meeting, questioned every penny, demanded copies of every scrap of paper that existed. In two years she started a movement and EVERY member of the commission was voted out of office. It can happen but it takes persistence and ummmmm intestinal fortitude. I do appreciate all the comments on here, but it takes more than typing comments while sipping coffee to make things happen.
I thought those people were crazy at the time. But then I moved to Kansas and saw my property taxes more than double. hmmmmmm, now I'm not so sure.
I am not taking sides in this fight. I do think it is a shame that the proposal was not at least listened to, but ... still I am not taking sides.
Two commissioners did accuse me at the meeting of being biased in our reporting - reporting too much for the pro side and not enough for the con side, in our regular news pages. You know Scott was one of them obviously.
I really don't think we were. Patrick even said we didn't report enough of the pro-side. (My general rule is, if you please both sides, or aggravate both sides, you were probably balanced in your reporting.)
I do think we could have reported more before the fact. I just ran out of time.
This debate needs to continue. It is not really about the big box or about Lowe's. It is about the direction of the city and our future. So don't give up. Just put some action behind your rage. I'm not sure a recall is the answer. I still believe showing up, investigating thoroughly and speaking out, is the best bet.
An old preacher used to tell me, "half of the fight is just showing up."
I have asked before ... what do you want and what are you willing to do to make it happen.
They talked about the feasibility study that would have to be done. Now it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that this report already exists. Had the matter passed we would have had a copy by the end of the week.
I would like to get my hands on a copy, and Ill try. If i do ill share it of course.
I asked Doug Russell about it after the meeting.
He said I would have to go through the developer.
I will say that I believe Dotty thinks she voted the will of the people. Whether she was correct is another matter, but after talking with her yesterday, I am pretty sure she is sincere in her belief.
After attending earlier meetings, I was not surprised at the vote at all. Sides were drawn pretty early in this fight. The question is, were their votes based on public input or on their own agendas. Dotty was the "wild card." Going into the meeting, I thought there was a chance she might vote for it, but her vote was the only one I was not pretty certain about.
David Allen made an astute observation in his blog. Three commissioners who were sitting at this time last year, who are not now members, all spoke for the development. Had the vote been taken a year ago, the result would have been different.
Some have commented about Mel's "attack" on the developer and about his remarks about "hicks."
I do believe in fairness. The attorney and the developer were less than forthcoming with the truth, so Mel pressed them. We know now that the developer did indeed get rejected in Winfield before he came to Arkansas City.
Also, I really don't recall Mel saying the people of Arkansas City are hicks. Ive been to about all the meetings and I think I would remember that. He might have used the word, but ... context is everything.
Today is another day.
The story will continue I'm sure.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
28 comments:
I'm sorry, I don't believe what you say about Mayor Dotty. I don't believe she had the interest of the people in mind at all. After the developer was brought up to explain the situation she brought (without input or suggestion from the audience) a lawyer hired by a private individual (Curtis Eaton) to speak. This was before the public hearing had been opened. This lawyer, working only for the private individual, not the public, not the city, went on to describe how bad a TIF was to a community. How did a private individual get to make such a presentation? Mayor Dotty had to have known about it. Did the rest of the commission? This program was a setup. The hearing was a sham. The THREE AMIGOS almost certainly had this planned out from the start. I believe in so blatant circumstances that a recall is our only choice to protect the people and make sure we have a say in our own future.
The people who do fesability studies do them for the people paying for it(the developers) so they inevitably are favorable for the project. If you really want real info. why have you not asked for the 77 corridor study and looked in the back at page c7 or c8 or whereever it is they said it states that we can not support a Lowes or Home depot? Why is noone checking on that? You even cut it out of the quote on the back page of the paper. It also helps if you comment with a nickname so that we know if it's all 3 people or 20 and which people said what. Yes it's still annonomous, but with poeple being cursed at and businesses threatened no one is likely to speak out in public again.
Lowes hires local plumers, they very well could have hired Mel's guy's. Also Doti could have gotten supplies for her rentals there. This was NOT their personal decisions. They did talk to a lot of people who were too scared for their businesses to speak in public and after all I've read here maybe they were the smart business owners. It takes a lot to stand up and fight in public for what you believe is right and the business owners and commissioners deserve better treatment. Who do you think you will have to vote for next time? What idiot would risk this kind of treatment for doing what they thought was right? No one with any brains will even run thanks to you. It's OK to disagree, even down right American, but it's not OK to threaten people, call them names and that is the least of what has happened here.
In speaking of a feasibility study...that would have been a free prize worth tens of thousands of dollars, just for listening to the next step.
Lets say we were given the opportunity to listen to the plan, the lawyers, and the ability to support it are all a TERRIBLE prospect for our city. We still would walk away with a multi-thousand dollar feasibility study for free just for going that next step. I know the Commission is a hard job. I know they are people and deserve an amount of personal respect. But people are angered and frustrated because the whole point is - We didn't go to the full public knowledge step. The decision not to let the public be made fully aware speaks more of personal agenda and not the search for true public feelings on the issue. Who can argue that? Who can argue, well the majority just didn't want a free study and full knowledge?
Just for the record . . . we ALL deserve decent treatment. Including the people who were spoken down to by those very commissioners being defended in the posting by "me". I don't agree with anyone threatening anyone else, but don't single out just the supporters of this as being the bad guys to the business owners and commissioners.
Since the commission thought it was in the best interest to turn down this offer, my question to them becomes . . . what is YOUR plan to attract INDUSTRY here? You didn't like this plan, don't just sit on your backside, get up and show us YOUR ideas.
THIS IS INTERESTING...HOW DO WE GET A COPY OF THE REPORT THIS PERSON TALKS ABOUT?
HOW DO WE GET A COPY OF THIS REPORT???? HELP US AC TRAVELER
"For the person who said the Corridor Study stated we could not support a Lowe's or Home Depot... MAYBE that is why they needed the TIF to get started?"
Yes the TIF could have used to get the project started and completed. That is not the issue with the corridor study...it states that this community of 28,000 can not support a Lowes or Home Depot, this is due to the lack of population in which to draw from...intead it suggests that a store more in the size of Sutherlands be implemented. Still don't believe this? That is fine and I understand many people have hurt feelings, feelings of betrayal and feelings that the door has been closed in Ark City. There are many many studies on the negative after-effects of National Big Box retailers in small communities. I tried to stay open-minded and looked for the same studies that should be out there disputing them. I could not find any. I searched with Google, the Kansas Dept. of Commerce, asked economic professors at KU and KSU. Even went to my Alum OU to find some answers. There are no studies out the to say differently, if there were wouldn't Wal-Mart want them out to the public?
Col. Lind says the pottys are in disrepair at Woods and Bryant's. I still feel that if Zach Bryant puts in a new bathroom it is not going to affect his business base, but it will improve his marketability for future growth. Amazingly enough, Zach has found a renter for the collectable side of Bryant's. All he will say is that they will remodel, install ADA toilets and be a nice draw for downtown...who knows maybe they will. Question is, will any of those that wanted Lowe's hold a grudge for so long even this new renter will not make it, because they rent from Bryant's? Are all of you so mad that friendships will not be repaired? You have to at least understand that Zach is not to be blamed, yes he was against a TIF district, be he has been quoted that if Lowe's comes on it's own dime, then that would be fine. If your livelyhood was to be affected you would be against it too. Be honest with yourself and think like a new businessman, if you just bought a business and now it's very exsistance is in the sights to be destroyed what would you do? I happen to know many of you think it was Zach's poor decision for buying in to a crumpled up old building, and I have heard that, "he knew the condition of the bldg. before he bought..." I also know that Roger Brown of AC Industries gave Zach his "Personal Guarantee" that the Big Box Store issue was dead. One month after Bryant's was bought, here comes AC Industries out with the Big Box Proposition. Maybe it was coiencidence....
In any event, I respect each of your thoughts, hope we can heal the dispute...but moreover please do not hate the businessmen for trying to keep a level retail playing field. No, you do not have to shop in AC ever again, but at least be friendly when you see a businessman.
One more comparision:
Think of a Union Strike all of you GE workers....do you have the Guts to cross that picket line for something you believe in, or do you just call in sick that day, so you don't have to confront anyone? Well the businessmen did not have the option of calling in sick!!!
AN open letter to the Citizens of Arkansas City:
There has been much damge done by those who did not get their way last night. Murmurings of a recall vote, boycotting the retailers, name calling and yes even a tire slashing and paint scratching on a businessman's car....SHAME ON YOU!
Give us some FACTS on how Lowe's would help build industry here.
Fact is Retail does not build Industry, it is the other way around. Industry creates retail.
Come on, Scott Margolis, Mel Kuhn, and Doty all did what they believed to be right for the city. Seems like you are all mad because you wanted a Lowes to shop at. What about the amount of courage they had to stand up to the ArkCity MAFIA aka Ark City Industries!! This was the first time any commission took a stand against these old money power players. By the way...Blue Skies was the one that put Scott Margolis on the ballot and supported him, they approached Scott, he did not approach them.
What in the World is BLUE SKIES???
AN open letter to the Citizens of Arkansas City:
There has been much damge done by those who did not get their way last night. Murmurings of a recall vote, boycotting the retailers, name calling and yes even a tire slashing and paint scratching on a businessman's car....SHAME ON YOU!
Give us some FACTS on how Lowe's would help build industry here.
Fact is Retail does not build Industry, it is the other way around. Industry creates retail.
Come on, Scott Margolis, Mel Kuhn, and Doty all did what they believed to be right for the city. Seems like you are all mad because you wanted a Lowes to shop at. What about the amount of courage they had to stand up to the ArkCity MAFIA aka Ark City Industries!! This was the first time any commission took a stand against these old money power players. By the way...Blue Skies was the one that put Scott Margolis on the ballot and supported him, they approached Scott, he did not approach them.
ATTA BOY SCOTT, MEL & Dottie
YOU DID GREAT!!!
I want a RECALL VOTE of Joel Hockenbury and Patrick McDonald. They were the ones asking no question of the developers, just wanted to RUBBER STAMP the AC Industries plan
While we are at it let's impeach the city manager too....
Funny it is not disclosed that he sits on the board of Ark City Industries with all the other players....can you say, " HELLO PUPPET"!
Correction. The public comments at the commission meetinga are not telivised for the channel 7 replay.[They should be] [The work sessions should be moved out of the city managers office into the commission chambers] Maybe off topic, since this topic brought so many people out. I challenge the school board to hold a "truely" public hearing on the school bond issue at least 10 days prior to the election. The middle school would be a good location.
I am relatively new to AC (6 years). I came from a town the same size as AC. That town had pretty much the same attitude people have here. Attract Industry, and the town will grow. Well, they attracted industry (multiple)with tax incentives, but these companies only employ about 25-30% of their employees from the town; the rest come from two nearby cities, cities with retail and entertainment/dining options (not just fast food and Wally World). So the town then said "Let's build a new school, that will attract people to live here". So they built a new school (after 2 failed bond-issue attempts), and both the school and town population has continued to decrease over the past 5 years. The town still has the same boring eating places (Braums, McD's, Taco Bell), and the Walmart, but it is a dying town, because they cannot attract any new blood to the town. There is "nothing" to do, pretty much what I have been hearing people here say lately. So, I was dismayed when the city decided not to even look at the possibility of whatever-big-box store it is. I understand the small business owner's issue, but to "just say no" doesn't represent the "people". So I think it is sad situation. I also think it is ironic that people who are strongly against this issue (which, from what I have read and heard, is not an issue of Lowe's being here, but giving them some sort of deal on their taxes), are the same people who are pushing hard to raise my taxes a $100 a year to improve the school's facilities (I also think Dr. Ballard's mention that the school would lose some state funding if more people in the district were employed was inappropriate). My opinion is that the commission should have voted yes, and let it go to the next step. As for a recall, I am not really into that, but I beleive a couple of the "no vote" commissioners should really step back and consider if they actually represented the people they are suppose to represent, just a select few who screamed the loudest.
I can't help but jump in and add to the above post. When Creekstone, well it was Future Beef then, was being shoved down our throats as 'all good', I remember ALL the jobs they claimed would be filled by folks right here in town! Well, guess what, very few were filled 'from right here in town' as we all know. The openings were filled with outsiders of which we now have quite a sizable population. Our crime rate, gang rate, murder rate, and graffiti rate went up too. And, they continue to recieve a 'break' on their water bill while yours and mine continue to be raised over a ten year period. So, what exactly have we gained from the industry of Creekstone? Besides the fact they don't even provide a truck wash and I get to follow behind those trucks sometimes while all the liquid cow stuff gets strung all over the road and smells up the whole countryside. Oh yeah, we got some new apartment buildings for all the outsiders who moved here also.
For the person that asked for the people for the development who asked:
"Give us some FACTS on how Lowe's would help build industry here."
I'm afraid there is no information. The commissioners killed it before the proposal, the negotiations, the feasability study, or anything else had been done.
All that was supposed to happen Tuesday night was to declare that new area a development zone. Once that was done, all of the information was to come out onto the table. Unfortunately the commissioners just didn't want to hear it. It's a shame, there just might have been something that could have been worked out.
The commissioners had an obligation to at least find out if there were benefits. Or if other things or different strategies could have been accomplished in the process.
We will never know. That is the only thing the commission did for us. Make certain we will never know what we might have had or what we might have been able to do.
As someone who left Ark City due to the lack of quality jobs, this issue was something I was interested in. I am interested in seeing Ark City grow, I grew up in that area and still return there almost every weekend.
Whether or not the big box store would have been a good thing is questionable. However as someone posted before me what is the commissions ideas on how to grow Ark City?
I think now living in a much larger city still that itself is still trying to grow. I have noticed you have to attract and retain the younger generations.
How many of A.C. graduating students choose to stay in Ark City or are employed in Ark City versus those that leave the area? Why do they leave, is it lack of jobs, lack of entertainment?
I chose to raise my kids in Ark City because of the family environment and I don't want that environment to change. I do however want enough growth to think that when my children grow up if they so choose they can stay in Ark City an have ample employment opportunities.
Anyone can complain or point out a problem, what truly brings about change is when those people bring solutions to the table.
If you don't like the decisions folks in office made, don't vote them in next go round.
The beauty of the Internet is the wealth of information available. The Arkansas City Traveler has archives of its previous issues. It is enlightening to go back and read the reports of the candidate forums held prior to the city commission election. You can access them at these links:
http://www.arkcity.net/stories/022007/com_0002.shtml
http://www.arkcity.net/stories/032907/com_0002.shtml
Of the three candidates elected, only Mel Kuhn has been consistent. In the debate, "Kuhn said there isn't just one big problem, and that there is not just one little problem.
And it is not helpful to compare Ark City to Winfield or Wichita. "Why not let's look
within and support that?" he said."
Dotty Smith and Scott Margolius, however, have not been.
During the forum, "the candidates ... were asked: What is the biggest need for Ark City and what actions would you take to support further economic development?
Margolius noted that to some people beautification of the town is important, but "it
doesn't necessarily bring in new business."
"Our biggest need I think is people's vision," Margolius said. "If there's negativity,
that really needs to be confronted."
"I don't have my own agenda," he said. "I do believe we are stuck in ways we've done things in the past."
Economic development is a priority, he said. "We need new people to think things through
critically, and I want to do what's right for you," Margolius said.
A stronger partnership between government and the citizens is needed, Margolius added.
Smith agreed that the City Commission has a specific job to fulfill, but in doing so
the commission should consider what the citizens want.
"I like to talk to people I recognize as who (an issue) affects," she said. "I'm a
good listener and I don't think I'm necessarily the wisest on any issue."
If they were truly interested in economic development and the "will of the people", they would have voted differently. The Vision 20/20 survey data presented by Sid Regnier showed that 87% of respondants favored bringing in new retail outlets and restaurants.
Two of the Vision 20/20 goals are to "provide incentives to develop more retail businesses" and to
"expand the number and variety of retail businesses in the county."
In addition, the commissioners were presented with hundreds of signatures on petitions. Instead, they (and Mayor Smith in particular) listened to a vocal MINORITY who had a vested interest in keeping out a potential competitor.
We certainly should not fault Bryant's Hardware and Midwest Electric from doing what is best for their businesses.
However, the role of the city commission is to represent the MAJORITY that elected it. It is disingenuous ... and unfortunately much too common in government ... to say one thing to get elected and then do the opposite.
Yeah, it had to have cost them $30-$40k to put together and they are not going to GIVE it to us now for fun.
After the way the developers were treated and humiliated in at the meeting I don't think they would even sell it to us. It's one thing to turn down an opportunity its another to chase them away.
THis is a post i posted earlier and deleted, just needed to make a few changes.
just fixing my mistakes :)
I believe Dotty Smith was sincere in her belief that she was represented the majority.
as for the feasibility study ... it is done, and its out there somewhere, im trying to find it.
at the worksession Monday, the city manager told me that if the vote passed the study would be "done" by Friday (today.) and that it would be a public document.
Tuesday night after the meeting, he said he thought it would not be completed now.
I guess it depends on what your definition of "IS" is ...
or in this case, what your definition of "done" is.
anyways, im sure the developer had a ton of information or else he would not have been trying to get the deal ... and the city had lots of information too.
the pages that make up the study had probably not been put in a binder with a cover sheet ... and probably wont .. so in that sense it will never be done.
but ...
those pages exist somewhere :)
Ok Ok OK,
I just have to ask you Charles, how do you know the Commisioners did not represent the majority? Are you so vain as to think the proponents had to be the majority? Why is it the proponents keep finding it necessary to blame someone? YOU LOST, GET OVER IT!!!
I did finally get to read the US 77 Corridor Study....
Guess What? We have been lied to:
It does say our area can not support a Lowe's or Home Depot...I just can not believe it. Anyone else wanna read it, it is at the city managers office.
It is hard to understand what "Charles" is saying about being inconsistent. What he quotes of the commissioners is what they did. What am I missing?
It seems clear we voted out the old guard because the old guard would have rubber-stamped this according to David Seaton's article. Now, they want the old guard back for this decision? I keep hearing from people that the "power players" whoever they are who's on ACI? Anyone know? directed everything and people didn't like it. Now there is shock and dismay when a commission takes an independent stand. I'm trying to understand, but I think I'm missing something.
I would like to see the the 20/20 plan's questions and responses for the results that it shows. Is there a reason to distrust it? Charles, what are you trying to use the results for really? Are you the same Charles that was a past commissioner? I think you may be. If so, I wonder if you would look at the questions the same way if you hadn't been one.
If James gets ahold of the study results, I will be the first to see how the data you talk about is used. I'm tired of this. I want progress too. Looking back is what people have been doing here for far too long. If this is the Charles that lost in the last race, maybe you should run again if you think you have the support of the people. You shouldn't try to take advantage of this opportunity by choosing what you think is the more popular side now after the fact. If you are so opinionated, you should have stood up at the meeting. Like what these 3 so-called "amigos" did or not, but didn't it appear to anyone that Pat and Joel had their minds made up too? Toss them all if you want, but avoid people who just want to be popular or who are afraid to stand up for what they believe.
After watching the replay of the meeting a few times I have a serious problem with the attorney hired by Mr. Eton. When asked directly about the benefits of using TIF to bring in Lowe's he hemmed and hawwed and would not give a direct answer. Working for Mr. Eton he had to defend Mr. Eton's stance and could not say yes. If you watch he can't say no so he asks questions in return. I never seen a lawyer dance like that before except in the movies. It's still playing. Watch it and judge for yourself.
I never seen a lawyer dance like that before except in the movies. It's still playing. Watch it a
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
both lawyers did their share of dancing.
thats what lawyers do, they interpret the facts to fit their client's position.
Eaton's lawyer danced, but the lawyer for the developer did too.
So to me the lawyers cancel each other out.
Both sides believe the facts support their position .. sometimes they even point to the same data.
The developer's lawyer danced because the information wasn't to come out unless the commission created the developement zone. After the zone was created they were supposed to lay all their cards on the table. The commission just had no interest in seeing what there was. Or did they just want to make sure we didn't see what there could have been?
Post a Comment