Buying Skippers with money we don’t have
Published on Thu, Apr 29, 2010 by John PierreRead More The Constant Curmudgeon
What's happening here in Edmonds?
Anybody'd think we're trying to emulate the federal government in wild spending.
I keep hearing that we are a few million dollars short of keeping up with our municipal obligations and, then, our City Council (with two exceptions), in its "wisdom", decides it'd be okay to offer 1.1 million for a small piece of property (the old Skippers eatery) near the waterfront.
I wonder if the phrase "We ain't got the money" might ring a bell with the five yea votes?
This agreement to spend non-existent funds seems completely ridiculous to me. Where are we going to find the money?
I'll guaran-dang-tee that voters aren't going to approve any kind of a new property tax levy or any other new cost of living increase during these very difficult times if this nonsense continues. It's tough enough for most of them to keep up with their individual day-to-day expenses.
Hello! City Council? I have news for you.
Unlike the feds, we can't print money to pay our way out of debt. If we were so inclined, some of the city officials might spend a few years in federally provided housing... replete with bars.
And I would add, contrary to what one Council member stated, the Skippers property does not look like a slum except upon very close scrutiny.
Granted, the hedges aren't trimmed properly and the lawn could use a mowing but those deficiencies are only apparent to someone who is actively trying to find an excuse for dumping a bunch of money there.
And I notice we danced nimbly by the "up to $100,000" lost money to affect a feasibility and environmental impact study. That's money down the drain.
Let me add the proverbial straw.
Everything I have read so far leads me to believe that the council members who voted for this stupidity haven't the remotest notion what they are going to do with the property once acquired.
And don't tell me we need a new park... we already have some 60 of them. One of which is directly across the tracks from the subject property.
No more frivolous spending, Council!
Enough already!
Anybody'd think we're trying to emulate the federal government in wild spending.
I keep hearing that we are a few million dollars short of keeping up with our municipal obligations and, then, our City Council (with two exceptions), in its "wisdom", decides it'd be okay to offer 1.1 million for a small piece of property (the old Skippers eatery) near the waterfront.
I wonder if the phrase "We ain't got the money" might ring a bell with the five yea votes?
This agreement to spend non-existent funds seems completely ridiculous to me. Where are we going to find the money?
I'll guaran-dang-tee that voters aren't going to approve any kind of a new property tax levy or any other new cost of living increase during these very difficult times if this nonsense continues. It's tough enough for most of them to keep up with their individual day-to-day expenses.
Hello! City Council? I have news for you.
Unlike the feds, we can't print money to pay our way out of debt. If we were so inclined, some of the city officials might spend a few years in federally provided housing... replete with bars.
And I would add, contrary to what one Council member stated, the Skippers property does not look like a slum except upon very close scrutiny.
Granted, the hedges aren't trimmed properly and the lawn could use a mowing but those deficiencies are only apparent to someone who is actively trying to find an excuse for dumping a bunch of money there.
And I notice we danced nimbly by the "up to $100,000" lost money to affect a feasibility and environmental impact study. That's money down the drain.
Let me add the proverbial straw.
Everything I have read so far leads me to believe that the council members who voted for this stupidity haven't the remotest notion what they are going to do with the property once acquired.
And don't tell me we need a new park... we already have some 60 of them. One of which is directly across the tracks from the subject property.
No more frivolous spending, Council!
Enough already!