County Redevelopment Changes
I was pleased to see Manila taken off the list of communities in the proposed county redevelopment plan. It's also good to see the Supes taking what seems to be a more cautious approach to the whole issue.
I kind of wish they'd drop the whole idea entirely.
posted by Fred Mangels @ 8:28 AM
5 comments
5 Comments:
Kudos to the board for doing so.Manilla residents voted a while back to be excluded from the plan.Redevelopment can work if done correctly,but this plan here just is too far out there,and has no emphasis on our looming energy crisis,or cost of living increases,or provide anything necessary to help keep schools open when a financial crisis occurs.( should be a necessity in any redevelopment plan)
Redevelopment here in Eureka has only worked to benefit those directly involved in building the projects.Yeah sure, Old Town is a much nicer place to go now and probably because of redevelopment,but has it helped the city as a whole:hell no,if redevelopment funds were instead put back into the school district we have actually prevented some of these recent closures.Providing an education for kids is building infrastructure.
"Providing an education for kids is building infrastructure.".
Yeah, but the way it is now, seems to me it's just throwing good money after bad.
The improvements in old town have made the lives of almost all Eurekans as well as the city's economy better. I'm sure the increase in taxes and jobs will soon recoup the investment. As far as the county plan goes, it yet to be determined.
Providing an education for kids is already the lion's share of the state's budget, and should not be a part of any redevelopment plan, mresquan.
Geist was right, it's crazy to take out a (redevelopment) loan with a 40 year life span for infrastructure with a 15-20 year life span. Inject a little sanity into the discussion.
Post a Comment
<< Home