Jump to content
Thanks for the clarification of what you meant by private user. This is a numbers issue. The more outfitters, the more crowds, the more problems. Expansion of outfitters, good or bad stewards, will only over crowd the resource and cost the City more money.
"The Parks and Recreation Commission proposed the working group because it believes parks and rec amenities are not being adequately funded and improved by the city's general fund."
What is the City properly funding? Sidewalks downtown?
Is it reasonable to add new parks if the current ones lack adequate funding?
Does the City have too many irons in the fire?
"Parks and Recreation Commissioner Doug Tumminello said it was unfair for the city to burden commercial river outfitters with regulations and fees while leaving private river users unregulated."
If there is anything unfair about this discussion, it's the idea that locals need to be regulated and charged a fee because the government has over sold the use of public space to for profit ventures.
Wow, you can't make this stuff up if you wanted to!
It is far harder to fall out of wealth than it is to climb out of poverty.
This might be helpful to form a broader perspective. http://newjimcrow.com/
The City ruled out the current location when the property was almost sold out from under the PD. The fact that no one from the PD was asking for a new building at the time, should cause great concern. This process was started for the wrong reasons and the time and money spent seems to have been largely wasted. At this time, Steamboat would be better served if the Council put a complete halt to their need to be a development company. The community deserves nothing less than the undivided attention of the Council in an effort to rebuild the management structure of the City and the public trust.
If yampa st is to be the entertainment/drunken corridor and we already have a vacancy issue downtown,
Why does Rae start the meeting by blaming the alleged victims for the meeting?
Does this article fully describe the tone Rae uses during the meeting, such as yelling, swearing, shouting and breaking down crying?
Why is Rae so mad at the beginning of the meeting?
Why can't Rae control his emotions during this meeting?
Is a yelling, screaming, swearing out of control police chief qualified to lead a meeting about maintaining your emotions and de-escalating tense situations?
Why if this is such a big deal, did Rae wait so long to address it?
“This is just the icing on the cake,” Rae said. “It just so happens that our next lawsuit from Mr. David Weaver is at home snuggled up in his little house in Missouri 11 miles from Ferguson. What are the odds?”
Why does the leader of the City's most powerful enterprise seemingly show such deep contempt for the alleged victims?
Is the Ferguson comment intended to delegitimize Mr. Weaver to the officers in the room?
“ruined it for all of us” What was ruined? Secrecy? Lack of oversight? Sitting in his office doing nothing?
If Rae believes the alleged victims are to blame for the problem, how can he oversee an internal investigation of alleged abuse?
How can a small PD do an internal investigation on itself, when a negative outcome reflects negatively on those conducting the investigation?
What types and how many de-escalation trainings have been offered to officers since the Ferrugia incident?
Can adequate and reasonable de-escalation training take place during a one hour department meeting?
How much training can $100,000 and counting, buy?
If obstruction arrests are not condoned by the department, why does it take 34 for Rae to take action?
"City Manager Deb Hinsvark said it is the city attorney's position that if Lettunich is copied on any emails, they are not public record regardless of the content."
This is the level of contempt the two top people in City government feel about transparency and the citizens right to know how they conduct business.
All the City has to do is CC the City attorney on every email and nothing is public?
I’m not a big fan of dept, person or government. But the more I watch our system spin around the more I believe the national debt is an absolute requirement of the ponzi scheme accony we all live by. Sure, we could cut spending or we could raise taxes or maybe the combination of both. But without new dollars in the system to feed the monster that requires more. more, more, grow, grow, grow, the system will collapse. Is the national debt really the problem we make it out to be? Or is it just an inevitable requirement of a growth based economy that is no longer growing at the required rate?
It seems our politicians know the answer, because both parties love to spend money and rack up debt.
Last login: Thursday, March 26, 2015
Contents of this site are © Copyright 2015 Steamboat Pilot & Today. All rights reserved.