The good stuff's always in the comments:
I want to know one thing from each Council member: Are you for a downtown PAC or not. Period. If you are for it, then work together to make it happen. Put aside egos and stop hedging your political futures on which way you think the wind is blowing with regards to the PAC. Show some leadership and show some collaboration that is reflective of the same expectations you have asked of a massive civic volunteer force. Stop airing petty grievances - valid or not - during the Council meetings.
GSO has a huge opportunity to update our crumbling civic infrastructure and add a crucial element to downtown with one shot.
Let's not blow it, please.
GSO has a huge opportunity to update our crumbling civic infrastructure and add a crucial element to downtown with one shot.
Let's not blow it, please.
Best quote I have seen so far.
Posted by: PACer | Dec 11, 2012 at 11:19 AM
With no established bond, private or city funding, we are in fact blowing it, despite the hopes of anonymous commenters. This deal is so bad it will fail without opposition.
Posted by: Fec | Dec 11, 2012 at 02:13 PM
Interesting to note the direction El Paso took and wonder if it would be instructive for Greensboro. Strategically, if they are going to go the route of bonds, better to package the PAC with other items that provide benefit beyond downtown - i.e., economic development bonds for east Greensboro and the airport, neighborhood park retrofits, money for implementing neighborhood plans. Note that they were packed as "quality of life" bonds. I doubt we have the stomach for the amount of money they sought, but it is another approach to look at.
Posted by: Brian | Dec 13, 2012 at 01:30 PM
Brian, are you suggesting misleading the public again?
"Downtown Greensboro needs a performing arts center, the sooner the better, and we don’t think the issue should go to a voter referendum. The decision is better left to the people we elected to take steward- ship of the city."
"Voters turned down a bond the aquatic center twice, before a sneaky city council couched it in a parks & recreation bond, creating distrust and ill will between city departments and among citizens."
"...We should add that we find Mayor Robbie Perkins’ zeal for this project to be off-putting and more than a little suspect — he is in the real estate business, after all."
"The naysayers already gather, online and elsewhere, with a plan to thwart this facility by vote, just as they have every time the city tries to do something great. This time we should shut them down before they have a chance to do it again."
http://www.yesweekly.com/triad/article-15251-a-surprising-position-on-the-gpac.html
.
.
Yes Weekly is with you Brian.
They say the Swim Center is a great success so far,
although it has already cost the city several million more.
The Swim Center may be a very nice appendage for the hotel and restaurant owners to profit from, but as we have recently found from the Grimsly High pool sit rep, the swim center will cost much more in the future to keep very nice and shiny.
What happens to privately owned downtown businesses be damned?
Does anyone even know what the annual loss projections are?
If we are going to jump in head first,
shouldn't we know how deep the water is before hand?
Posted by: Hartzman | Dec 13, 2012 at 02:07 PM
Where have I mislead the public before George? Don't worry, I won't hold my breath for a retraction. More obtuse questions coming in 3,2,1...
Posted by: Brian | Dec 13, 2012 at 02:31 PM
He still thinks that downtown businesses will be hurt by a PAC. It's hard to reason with that.
Posted by: Andrew Brod | Dec 13, 2012 at 03:10 PM