Jump to content
I'm surprised you disagree. Criticism from a bystander carries a different weight than criticism from an opposing candidate. You can't assume every reader knows you are a candidate. Seems you would want them to know?
I'm used to seeing the Pilot provide free equal column space and also market rate advertising space to candidates.
If you will be running for Dianne's seat, could you say so as we hear from you in the coming months? It is an important disclosure on your part when you are speaking about Dianne. It also creates an invitation for voters to ask for your positions on issues that matter to them.
I don't think Yampa Street can say "Oops, we don't have enough to buy it." The math today is no different than it was when the October Election Guide dedicated the $900,000 to buying the park.
From the numbers I've heard they do have to find more $ to buy the park, and the promenade being mentioned would cost 3x more than the park property.
"Yampa trust broken" is not a label I would choose for my letter above. Yes those owners need to honor their 2A campaign promises. I think they will.
My real disappointment is with staff at the City and the Pilot who should have remembered those same campaign promises. Public trust?
I'm not ready to write off Yampa Street. I owe that to the lady at Mainstreet who has been working her ass off to make downtown better. She preceded me in reminding the City that this $900,000 is promised to a park.
Yampa St should do what they told the voters they would do.
The Pilot's (October 16) 2013 Election Guide on 2A: “The $900,000 contribution from the lodging tax would be used to purchase a property at Yampa and Seventh streets to convert into a park. It then would be up to downtown business owners to secure the funding for the remainder of the project.”
The 2A proponents advertisement in that same Election Guide: "Your YES vote dedicates the funds to Acquisition of Yampa Riverfront park space."
This was in an email from Mark Scully in September, "This allocation of funds is limited and specifically dedicated only for the purchase of the land at 7th and Yampa. This allows us to have land for a bridge over Yampa someday. Maintenance of this simple land area will reside with the owner - the city. Our next efforts include additional efforts to raise funds to create the Promenade. This will take time. The landowners along Yampa will pay this maintenance."
I copied the City and Mainstreet on that information. Both acknowledged the text. If the text was not going to be true, why was there no correction?
Trust is a precious commodity. Particularly so, as downtown stakeholders approach a vote to tax themselves in a Business Improvement District (BID).
What you say before the vote should matter after the vote.
"the already established BID in downtown Steamboat" - This is to say the Business Improvement District boundaries were established at the assessor's office. The district is dormant because the tax that would go with it failed to gain approval.
Attending the URA/BID meetings last winter, I learned BIDs do not fund serious improvements. BIDs fund maintenance and/or marketing. It was my understanding this is per Colorado Statutes. Yes, a BID is a new tax that commercial owners vote onto themselves, but residential owners and commercial tenants in that district also vote in the BID question.
An Urban Renewal Authority (URA) builds improvements. A URA is a much bigger funding source, typically funded by Tax Increment Financing (TIF), where any new tax revenue increases (due to to NEW redevelopment or development) are diverted for 25 years to use by the URA. A TIF is not new taxes, just a diversion of them to the URA.
I believe the editorial has a URA in mind, not a BID, when it advocates improvements.
In defense of Texans…
Way back in the day, I held several jobs shuttling and serving our tourists. Thought of myself as a local and them as my paycheck. That changed when 6 Texans invited me skiing. It seemed like at any given moment 2 of them were upside down. It was pure carnage. At the end of the day I just couldn't remember having that much fun or sharing bigger smiles with my homies.
It took a few Texans to define my own home for me - the most fun place on earth. I no longer care where people are from. The bigger your smile, the more you belong in Steamboat.
I'm not worried about Joe. He'll be back.
Scott, the Update does ask my question, and you are right, there is a middle approach between the 2 extremes of emphasizing growth out West or emphasizing Infill. Here is the City page with a link to each of the 3 Alternatives.
I haven't a strong preference. But like Omar, I would like to see my community's preference being followed. If we have a community requesting dense infill, great. If we have a community requesting Western growth, great. Same for the middle option. But until we see that community preference made clear, Up-zoning our existing densities and building heights is uncalled for - existing owners bought into a given character and they should have a voice in changing that character.
The Update can guide both public and private investment. (Sorry Danny M. found that to be untrue with his unfortunate timing.) We'll need adequate infrastructure where we plan to grow. Re: the regional thing, I agree people will drive to suit their needs. You and I had that argument years ago. You win.
Thanks for the snowpack graph Michael, and the reminder. 2011 was so, so epic. We could step from the rafts right into the kitchen at Box Elder 1. Let it snow.
Last login: Wednesday, March 5, 2014
Contents of this site are © Copyright 2014 Steamboat Pilot & Today. All rights reserved.