- Elisa Gutierrez @ Mr. Jorge Vera: Well then, if the information of the wetland is farce, what is it considered? I would like to know and so many others.
- Tricia Cortez We thank Councilman Vera for his response, which is no longer showing up for some reason -- Jorge Vera wrote: "It's only three acres that will be altered, the green space where the palm trees will be spared. The information that the area is a wetland i...See More
- Virginia Elizabeth The reason why Laredo can't be like Austin and San Antonio is that it doesn't have as many wetlands as those places!
- Tricia Cortez In response to the points that Jorge Vera raises: 1) This area IS FEDERALLY DESIGNATED as "wetland" and "waters of the United States." This has been confirmed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and in a study by PBS&J, a private engineering firm out o...See More
- Tricia Cortez P.S. One last comment in response to Jorge Vera -- yes, the Corps of Engineers gave the green light to fill nearly all of this wetland. They almost always do. However, this does not mean that it has to be done. The will and voice of the people should a...See More
- Elisa Gutierrez This is a plea to the City Councilmen, whom WE voted in, to consider the preservation of the wetland and to cherish and treasure what nature has given Laredo for the future of our city. Build the mall but SAVE the WETLAND. Laredo may not have as many wetlands as other cities but MORE reason to preserve what we do have. Do the RIGHT THING COUNCILMEN......
- Arturo Trevino this so called wetlands is not even a park....how will the childrens children benefit from this.....we need jobs and growth to boost economy,get over it,publish the real blueprint plans....right now its he said she said syndrome....besides this area is not public land,its man made....
- Tricia Cortez Art -- Lake Casa Blanca is manmade, so is Falcon Dam, so is Amistad Dam. They are all manmade but with time they have become highly functioning eco-systems. Not just that, the Rio Grande Valley has taken advantage of its green spaces. Nature tourism, l...See More
- Ernie Treviño We really need to protect our natural resources. Look what we have done to our rivers and our atmosphere. When do we say "no" to destroying everything for the sake of a dollar. "We need jobs and growth?" Look around when has the economy in Laredo slowed down. Jobs -- how many "Help Wanted" signs are all over town.
- David Hunt Over the last year I have spent less than 2 hours and less than $50.00 at our mall. I spend many days and lots of money enjoying wild places. Will my money and I always have to leave Laredo to do this? I'm sure there are less obtrusive places Laredo can grow.
- Arturo Trevino we can have both...Amistad and Falcon dam is our only choice of drinking water ....not the lake...dont compare it to this....so who is righton the blueprints..
- Virginia Elizabeth It's true...we can have an economy that's respects need for jobs and nature, but we are relying on our decision makers to make smart choices for us -choices that take everyone's values into account. We are counting on our decision makers to recognize ...See More
- Elisa Gutierrez About 2 or 3 years ago the Amazon Kingfisher was spotted along the Zacate Creek, I was just a novice at bird watching but I was amazed at the people that had arrived from Kansas, Lousiana, Canada, Tennessee and other parts of the USA just to take a gli...See More
- C.j. Soto Hey guys I stopped by the wetland today, our brother palm trees miss our company. We should throw another walk!
- Rob Simonton The right balance enhances the shopping experience! That area if preserved and integrated into the project could attract even more customers and tourism dollars. San Antonio has several shopping areas that have done this well and they are the best places to shop in the city.
- Tom Wade Just a suggestion....Loop 20 is prime real estate for business. Everyone knew it when it was built, and everyone expected development along the loop to occur.
- C.j. Soto Some people just needa open their eyes thats all. Life belongs there, another crap mall wont satisfy the whole world and meet job quota, unless your a business man. In that case stick to your field, leave ours alone. Excuse me, leave nature alone. Like it has been for the last, not 30 but over 65 years. Peace!
- Elisa Gutierrez I am 65 years old and that oasis has been there since I can remember. It didn't just develop 30 years ago....
- Tom Wade Elisa, CJ, I am talking about the retention pond, not the other trees or area, being about 30 years old. CJ if you are so narrow minded to not include the business world in this discussion, so be it. Keep you mind closed dude. Peace
- C.j. Soto I didnt say dont build the mall DUDE, therefor it isnt a closed minded statement. Again, just build around the beloved WETLAND and both parties live happily, including Wildlife.
- David Hunt What I'd like to hear from developers is an answer to the question "Why not just leave it alone?" Yes, I understand there are already plans. They can be changed.
- Tricia Cortez Tom Wade, I understand that you are a birder! And that you actually like to bird off Ranchito Road near this wetland. So why is it that you are so ready to just have it taken out? Do you not believe in balance, and sustainable development?
- Tricia Cortez And speaking of how much money the retail center is projected to bring in -- we believe that is a great thing for the city! But we also believe that this wetland can also enhance the tourism industry in Laredo. Today there were birders there from British Columbia, Vermont and Pennsylvania, awe-struck by the beauty of that place and diversity of bird species that they saw in it. A&M-College Station released a report in April 2012 that showed nature tourism contributes $463 million to the economy in the Rio Grande Valley and sustains 6,600 FT and PT jobs. That is serious stuff. Why take out a place that has the potential to begin doing this for Laredo???
- Tom Wade Trish my problem has never been with preserving areas for nature. I consider myself a conservationist, but not an environmentalist. The whole problem here is that the center ( RGISC) is acting in a reactionary fashion, beginning it's protest long after the city and the developer have invested hundreds of thousands of dollars in the process of identifying markets, properties, and financing. Around 2005 the center waited until the city had leased property to the developer then started complaining. No one had even heard of this "wetland" until then. The center put together a petition made up mostly of children who thought Lake Casablanca was being destroyed. The center forced a Corp of Engineers hearing. All of this could have been avoided by being proactive. If you truly want to protect these types of areas, they should be identified (inventoried city wide) and then that list taken to the city ahead of time. When has the center ever approached a landowner and said, hey, you have some very interesting wildlife/plants here and should consider saving this land for just such a purpose, versus waiting until a landowner has invested hard earned money in developing the land? Why has the center not worked towards getting land around the lake classified as a wildlife preserve? Again, a proactive measure that would stop development at the lake. I suggested this in a post earlier in this string, and what did I hear...."Life belongs there, another crap mall wont satisfy the whole world and meet job quota, unless your a business man. In that case stick to your field, leave ours alone. Excuse me, leave nature alone." That and other post tell me that this group is only interested in confrontation, not long term vision. That is pretty sad. Again, if you talk with the city, you might just get some money out of this deal to look at starting the process to build a wildlife refuge somewhere along the east/south side of the lake. But your time is running out, as I-60 spur is being considered along 59 hwy. Your center needs not only the city, but the landowners to buy into what you are trying to accomplish. Confrontation after plans are initiated to invest millions of dollars will not work. And if you win this battle, you may save a few acres, but will lose out on the opportunity to do something big.
Sunday, February 3, 2013
Casablanca Retention Pond Battle II. A lack of vision.
Here is a string off Facebook concerning the Casablanca Retention Pond. Please add your thoughts.
Thursday, January 24, 2013
Feinstein's Proposed Gun Control Law
If you look at the two rifles on the right, you may be surprised to learn that there is no difference in either as far a caliber (bullet size), action (semi-automatic), or capability to use high capacity magazines.
The big lies you are being told:
1. The assault rifles that are sold to the general public are "Weapons of War."
The general public cannot own "weapons of war." Unless of course you live in Mexico where the criminals use hand grenades, fully automatic weapons, grenade launchers mounted on rifles, etc... And that is with a very strict ban on weapons in place. All combat rifles issued to U.S. servicemen are capable of fully automatic fire. The only semi-automatic rifles the military uses are for snipers. No U.S. citizen can own a fully automatic rifle without special permitting from the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.
2. By banning large capacity magazines, fewer people will be killed in a mass shooting scenario.
Not true. If you figure it will take the police at least 5 minutes (I am being very generous to police response times here) to confront an active shooter once the they receive the call, an average person can shoot and reload a magazine of say 10 bullets in about 15 seconds....in that 5 minutes of time until he is confronted by the police he can discharge a couple hundred rounds. With 30 round magazines the number will be higher but not by that much. Again, 200 rounds tops the number of shots fired at any of the mass shootings in the last 50 years. And I can't think of one of those incidents where the police confronted the shooter in less than 5 minutes.
3. Assault rifles are never used for hunting.
Assault rifles (actually semi automatic rifles that allow you easily attach optics, lights, and other items to increase the functionality of the rifle) make great hunting rifles. And they are used extensively in the hunting of predators, varmints, and other small to medium game. Their popularity for hunting is growing every day.
4. Assault rifles cannot be used for self defense.
Assault rifles make very good home self defense weapons. One reason is because it is easy to mount special optics (quick sights/lasers) for increased accuracy, and it is easy to mount small flashlights to the weapon for use in the dark. More and more police departments are using assault rifles for their defense in day to day operations.
5. Bans work.
Oh yeah they do....alcohol, drugs, etc.....
6. If guns were registered there would be less crime.
Another line of BS. Criminals will not register their guns...get it? The only thing a government list of guns will accomplish is that the government will have a list of legal gun owners. That is not good for legal gun owners. See incidents in New York where the newspaper published a list of gun owners and their addresses.
6. Any law is worth it even if we save only one life.
Sorry, that does not wash in America. Our freedoms are much more important than a single life.
The bottom line is that I hope these proposed laws are defeated and that we will enforce the laws that are already on the books.
PS, those that are trying to paint the NRA as a "terrorist organization, or evil gun lobby who cares more about guns than human life........you are fools.
Women Allowed in All Combat Positions - Be careful what you wish for.
 |
| Gives new meaning to the term Ma-Deuce..for those that know |
That is where you come in ladies, let's hear what you think.
I personalty have no problem with certain women serving in any combat role. What I do have a problem with is what could happen if a group of feminist is not happy with the washout rate of women who want in combat arms positions is significantly higher than men (which it will be). Will they do as they have done in the past, and want the prerequisites for the position changed to accommodate the woman combat soldier? Will the training standards have to change? Of course they will, if we are to integrate men and women in to cohesive combat units, they will have to train together at the squad level. That means sharing tents, latrines, and all other things a solider and his/her squad faces in the field.
The effectiveness of this policy will be seen once the military commanders begin the process of complete integration.
One thing I think men and women, especially fathers and mothers might want to ponder is what will happen to the DRAFT? You know, that requirement that people involuntarily serve in the military during a serious conflict. We have not had the draft since the 1970's, but could in a matter of minutes, have it reinstated depending of the whims of some of the insane leaders in this volatile world. (Note today's headline about N Korea and their nuclear weapons delivery platforms (rockets) being tested for use on the U.S.)
Will this change in policy mean young women who reach the age of 18 will now have to register for selective service, as all young men do today? If you say no, why not?
Again, I am not sure that this new policy may have been well thought out. But of course, we have come to expect that with our politicians.
Thursday, December 27, 2012
Brain Dead Kids? Is the computer ruining our children?
.jpg)
In August 2011, I wrote(View Article) about the lack of imagination that our children seem to have these days. I listed the internet and video games as a likely cause. Now, "The Mail" has published their own article.
If you have a 10 year old boy and he has never held a hammer, a piece of wood, and nails in his hands and tried to build something, shame on you as a parent. You cannot let the sterile inside of a house or computer screen drive your child's imagination. They must have alone time outdoors, away from you and your spouse.
If you have a 10 year old daughter who has not done the same as a 10 year old boy, shame on you. Even though few girls take up any kind of building, it is about imagination and creativity.
Let kids be kids. This is why I stand so strongly against 3K and preK education. Once the kids enter the walls of the education establishment, they are in it for the next 13 to 20 years. In the education system they will deal with structured learning and creativity. Yes, even the creativity is structured as it is graded and fawned over.
Yet, if allowed to discover on their own, and allowed to be kids without overly strict guidelines, they garner experiences that no school will ever teach them. They see things through the eyes of the innocent. This is where they develop curiosity and the desire to learn.
Don't get me wrong. The internet is the best thing to come along since sliced bread. But, it must be used for what it was designed as, a tool, not a replacement for learning, common sense, and hands on experiences.
Even today, we see parents with their heads stuck in the Ipad, Iphone, or laptop. I am as guilty as anyone in this sense, and am trying to spend less time online.
Your thoughts...........
Wednesday, December 26, 2012
Laredo Town Center Alive and Well
Looks like the Laredo Town Center is coming back to life. For those that do not remember, there was a huge fight between the Rio Grande International Study Center and the owners of the Laredo Town Center (LTC) over the "wetland" area just south of the big hill of dirt. The US Corp. or Engineers has apparently ruled. I am assuming since the LTC is back on the books that the US COE ruling went the way of the developers.
What new tactics, if any, will the RGISC employ now to keep the project from moving forward?
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
A-2012-SC-07
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
1110 HOUSTON STREET
LAREDO, TEXAS 78040
DECEMBER 27, 2012
12:15 P.M.
V. INTRODUCTORY ORDINANCE
2. Ordinance approving the sale of a tract of land containing 88.6913 acres,
more or less, legally described as Lot Numbers One (1), Two (2), and Three
(3), in Block Number Two (2), Laredo International Airport Passenger
Terminal Subdivision, as per Plat recorded in Volume 16, pages 45-47, Webb
County Plat Records and authorizing the City Manager to execute all
conveyance documents to Laredo Town Center, L.P., in the amount of
$15,865,000.00 and providing for effective date.
Thursday, December 20, 2012
Quit Scaring the Kids
Why did so many school districts in the United States rush to practice their security drills immediately after the shooting? What real purpose did is serve except to scare the kids?
Explain to me how scaring elementary school age kids is going to make them safer? I remember as a kid in third or fourth grade having to get under my desk in school, or "duck and cover" while on the playground in a exercise that was supposed to prevent us from being vaporized if a nuclear bomb were to go off in the neighborhood. Even as kids, we knew these drills were futile, the TV people told us so. So, we went to bed at night dreaming about being vaporized.
Would we have dreamed about it anyway? Maybe, as it was all over the news. But the schools were the only real re-enforcement that such an incident was possible. If you are a kid, you do not understand probability, or risk analysis, you only understand what adults tell you. And if you are told to practice something, you, as a kid, assume that practice is for an upcoming event. This is not to mean I am against practicing emergency drills, but let's be careful about how we explain them to the kids.
I would like to see a quick poll of how many elementary kids think they are in danger of being shot and killed while at school. Unfortunately, I would bet that number is extraordinarily high while the chances that a kid would be shot at school are microscopically slight.
I know people say "We must do anything to protect the children, there is no limit." Well friends it is time for the adults in the room to stand up and say, yes, there are limits and we need to analyze and understand our actions and what the unintended consequences are before we implement something.
Tom, how can you say we do not do everything we can to prevent children from being killed? I will give you a couple of examples and you can go from there:
1. Cars, we allow kids to ride in cars traveling 75 mph in Texas. Many parents drive much faster than that, even with speed being the number one cause of traffic accidents. Parents still run red lights with their kids in the car. Parents drive with kids in the car after having a drink or two. A quick, kneejerk fix: at a national level, we could reduce the speed limit to 20 mph. At that speed traffic deaths would be minimal, if there were any at all. Hello, I am talking about saving lives here. In 2009 there were 1,314 kids under 14 killed in automobile accidents, and over 179,000 injured. Where is the outrage? Lower the speed limit to 20 mph? Save the kids.
2. Swimming pools. Swimming is one of the top killers of children. Yet, fly over Laredo and look at the swimming pools.
Both of the above are examples of risk. Both have bad consequences if abused foolishly. Yet both are legal and are practiced with the understanding that children will die in accidents that could be prevented if very strict laws and bans were put in place.
So, after all this, my point is, do we put our children in school prisons, with metal detectors, razor wire, steel doors with no windows, playgrounds surrounded by 20 foot high walls with armed security guards manning towers? Or do we learn to understand risk and make adjustments to our security without scaring our kids?
What say you?
Bans and Laws That Work
Here is a comprehensive list of banned items that criminals use or produce that are no longer used or produced by criminals:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
and so on......
Here is a list of criminal actions that are against the law and are never violated:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
and so on......
Oh well.................
Wednesday, December 19, 2012
Betty Flores to Run For A County Seat (Treasurer????)
I just saw on Facebook where it looks like former Laredo mayor Betty Flores may run for a county office.
My sources think it will be for the Treasurers seat.
My sources think it will be for the Treasurers seat.
Update on Gun Issues
I do not support President Obama on many issues of the day. However, and we will see how it progresses I do support his call for a group to really study the causes of mass murders.
I am ready for the adult dialogue on this issue, which would review gun usage mental heath issues, the impacts of specific actions a mass murderer may perform or encounter on a regular basis.
Mass murder really boils down to a type of mindset that must be identified and then remove the ability of the mass murder to commit these acts.
Hopefully, politics will not lead the investigation.
I am ready for the adult dialogue on this issue, which would review gun usage mental heath issues, the impacts of specific actions a mass murderer may perform or encounter on a regular basis.
Mass murder really boils down to a type of mindset that must be identified and then remove the ability of the mass murder to commit these acts.
Hopefully, politics will not lead the investigation.
Tuesday, December 18, 2012
Assault Weapons Ban - Will it matter?
 |
| A friend I taught to shoot. |
This mass shooting, as they all do, re-opened the questions about banning certain types of firearms and accessories. However, this time, the timing is a little different. We have a newly re-elected President Obama, who has in the past supported banning certain types of firearms, and we have a lame-duck congress with a lot of members not returning as they were defeated in the last election. Plus the fact that the majority of the victims in this case were 5 and 6 year old kids, makes the climate in Washington and the country different than it has been in the past. But, this fact remain the same. Banning the "assault rifle" will have no real effect on mass murders.
I really will not put a lot of data on this initial post, as I will respond to each comment I get with facts and my opinions. The only data I will list on the top page is this:
Newtown, Ct shooting 12-14-2012: Shooter used a Bushmaster rifle as the primary weapon, killed 26.
Binghamton, Ny shooting 4-3-2009: Shooter used pistol as his only weapon, 13 killed, 4 wounded.
Ft. Hood, Tx. shooting 11-5-2009: Shooter used FN Five Seven pistol, 13 killed, 29 wounded.
Killeen, Tx shooting 10-16-1991: Shooter used Glock 17 and Ruger P89 pistols, 23 killed and 20 wounded.
Of course I did not list all the mass murders, and I was selective in picking those murders committed with only handguns. The point is, the rifles have done no more killing in mass murders than handguns at any single event. The assault weapon ban, in my opinion, will do nothing to reduce mass murder.
PS, more people are killed in the United States each year by clubs, hands/feet, knives, and shotguns, than are killed by rifles. Facts are pesky are they not?
Now, please comment here, and let's start the discussion. Please be civil.
I have been out for a while.
I am back to updating the blog now. I hope to start reporting more often. The gun control debate has brought me back.
Thanks for viewing.
Saturday, September 22, 2012
Top Five Items From Last Week
Here is a list of my top five issues that popped up this week. They are abbreviated, and beg your thoughts and discussion.
(Presented in no particular order)
1. Romney's tax return and summary for his taxes. The Romney's paid 14.1% in effective tax rate for 2011. Why less than the 15% capital gains tax, of which most of his income is based on? Because of charitable donations to his church and foundation. He actually donated less to charity to keep his tax rate higher so the tax the rich whiners would maybe be silenced a bit. Ain't that great, he had to give LESS TO CHARITY, to appease democrats. So goes the world.
What really struck me was that his 2011 tax return was 379 pages long. No wonder small business is having a hard time. PS, you regulation is good folks, just imagine the cost, time, and effort required to fill out 379 pages of IRS forms.
2. The national news media is again in the tank for the president. No mention at all about how the administration failed in protecting the US Embassy in Libya. It was a "planned" terrorist attack which we were warned about. Yet the president and state department failed in providing protection for our ambassador and embassy employees. And nothing in the media except the administrations claim that the attacks are because of a stupid 14 min U Tube video.
3. Letter to the editor today on wanting to limit corporations from spending by corporations in elections. Well I suggest those who might agree with the letter writer read the comments from the US Supreme Court Justices before getting all worked up to defend his comments. First of, just remember that all the major media sources are, wait for it, CORPORATIONS..........Now do you start to see the issue. If a corporation could not spend money on elections, the news media (and this is just one example used in the justice's comments) would not be able to report on election news. No corporation would be allowed to publish information on elections.
But Tom....the news media would only have to quit editorializing and print only the facts. This would be good, but totally unenforceable, just because of the simple journalistic practice of subjective story admission or deletion. For example, posting only good stories about one candidate, and only bad stories about the other. Simple and effective, and in practice today. See number 2.
Anyway USCOTUS got it right on the Citizens United ruling, and thank goodness for it.
4. Local politicians again stating that money from the state or federal government is not tax dollars and does not cost Laredoans a thing. Please, quit lying to the public. Every Laredoan pays for anything that comes from the state or federal government. We may pay less state and federal taxes than a more successful area (note I did not say richer area, as they are more successful for a reason).
5. City politics. I still cannot understand why locals only support democrats and thier policies. All I hear on the blogs is the constant discontent with the local governments. This town is full of masochist.
(Presented in no particular order)
1. Romney's tax return and summary for his taxes. The Romney's paid 14.1% in effective tax rate for 2011. Why less than the 15% capital gains tax, of which most of his income is based on? Because of charitable donations to his church and foundation. He actually donated less to charity to keep his tax rate higher so the tax the rich whiners would maybe be silenced a bit. Ain't that great, he had to give LESS TO CHARITY, to appease democrats. So goes the world.
What really struck me was that his 2011 tax return was 379 pages long. No wonder small business is having a hard time. PS, you regulation is good folks, just imagine the cost, time, and effort required to fill out 379 pages of IRS forms.
2. The national news media is again in the tank for the president. No mention at all about how the administration failed in protecting the US Embassy in Libya. It was a "planned" terrorist attack which we were warned about. Yet the president and state department failed in providing protection for our ambassador and embassy employees. And nothing in the media except the administrations claim that the attacks are because of a stupid 14 min U Tube video.
3. Letter to the editor today on wanting to limit corporations from spending by corporations in elections. Well I suggest those who might agree with the letter writer read the comments from the US Supreme Court Justices before getting all worked up to defend his comments. First of, just remember that all the major media sources are, wait for it, CORPORATIONS..........Now do you start to see the issue. If a corporation could not spend money on elections, the news media (and this is just one example used in the justice's comments) would not be able to report on election news. No corporation would be allowed to publish information on elections.
But Tom....the news media would only have to quit editorializing and print only the facts. This would be good, but totally unenforceable, just because of the simple journalistic practice of subjective story admission or deletion. For example, posting only good stories about one candidate, and only bad stories about the other. Simple and effective, and in practice today. See number 2.
Anyway USCOTUS got it right on the Citizens United ruling, and thank goodness for it.
4. Local politicians again stating that money from the state or federal government is not tax dollars and does not cost Laredoans a thing. Please, quit lying to the public. Every Laredoan pays for anything that comes from the state or federal government. We may pay less state and federal taxes than a more successful area (note I did not say richer area, as they are more successful for a reason).
5. City politics. I still cannot understand why locals only support democrats and thier policies. All I hear on the blogs is the constant discontent with the local governments. This town is full of masochist.
Thursday, September 13, 2012
First Responder Fees - They are in the works
In talking with a certain city staffer today, it appears the fire department is investigating the idea of charging "non-residents", and maybe even local residents, a fee for each LFD response to an vehicle accident or other emergency.
We already pay an extra fee for ambulance service that is provided by the fire department, and now we may be asked to pay for a fire department response to an auto accident. Most of these fees are covered by a persons health, auto, or home owners insurance. The plan is to charge those with insurance for responses.
I was told that the idea that non-residents may be charged for accidents that occur in the Laredo city limits. I did not ask about a potential fee structure, as the LFD appears to be in the very early stages of studying this idea. But the staffer stated over and over that the fee would be paid by insurance carriers and not the victim. I of course disputed that by saying that insurance rates at some point would have to increase to cover the new cost.
There are many municipalities that collect fees for fire department, and some police, responses to accidents, and other "emergency calls." These fee collections have been deemed legal if the state has statutory provisions that allow them. Apparently Texas has such a statute. I have yet to read it.
So my friends, it is your turn to start the discussions.
Some of my worries:
a. we already pay for this service, and if we charge our insurance rates could go up, even if we are not at fault.
b. if only the person at fault is to be charged, who is going to determine who is at fault, and how many more court cases will flood the dockets?
c. how will this affect international travelers from Mexico?
d. at first accidents, then where does the fee charging lead to, suspicious persons calls, house and car fires, grass fires?
e. will the "new revenue" be used to reduce taxes that we already pay for these services?
What say you?
Tuesday, September 4, 2012
That McAllen Cannot Make Convention Center Work- Does not bode well for Laredo
This is the headline from the McAllen Monitor on August 31, 2012:
Chamber proposes taking over McAllen's money-losing convention center
 |
| McAllen Convention Center |
As you may or may not know, a few years back McAllen spent $62 million on a new convention center. As you can see now, it is not producing. These two paragraphs from the article say it all:
“When we’re giving it away free — meaning to any association that’s going to come down here and it doesn’t cost them anything to rent the facility, and we’re still being told ‘No’ — that tells me we’re in the wrong place,” said McAllen Chamber of Commerce President and CEO Steve Ahlenius, speaking Tuesday night to the City Commission about the convention market.
In the past 18 months, three groups have rejected the convention center despite being offered free meeting space, said Nancy Millar, vice president of the McAllen Convention and Visitors Bureau.
The reason I post this, is that your city council, which is in the process of implementing a huge number of fee increases, has had a new convention center on it's mind for the last few years.
Why do you think they are trying to sell the Civic Center to LISD? In order to generate the need for a new convention center.
Now if the McAllen region, which we all honestly must agree, has many more things to do than the Laredo region, cannot make a convention center work, then how does the City of Laredo, and city council think that Laredo will make a convention center work?
Beware of Kell Nunoz and gang who have tried to sell the convention center idea in the past.
PS, watch out for city council when they try to convert the "1/4 cent Sports Venue Tax" to an economic development tax. I support that idea, but not if they are going to use that as a vehicle for a new convention center. So, if and when this idea comes up for a public vote, which is required by law, we must press the city council and get them to commit what the funds will and will not be used for.
Frac-A-Phobes: More bad news
Read Story Here
This cannot be good new for the hardcore environmentalist who wants to see the world revert back to caveman technologies.
Monday, September 3, 2012
Massive Fee Increases - Are they a good idea?
 |
| The cost to build a new business or home in Laredo is going up with the proposed fee increases that will be implemented by city council. |
The increases range from clean up at the library to doubling and tripling the cost of adding sewer connections to houses.
One to note was the new $50 fee each new business will have to pay to file with the city. File for what? Any new business must file with the state and federal governments and pay those taxes. What is next in line I guess is a new business tax to come down the pike at some point.
These fee hikes, many of which may not even be noticed to the general public (except in utilities bills), could be detrimental to the city in the long run. When new businesses run cost analysis to determine where to build, many of these fee hikes will come into play.
Here are just a few of the fee hikes that will be voted on tomorrow:
building cost on housing
cabs
parking meter and lot rates
garbage pickup
swimming pool fees, including swimming lessons
health department clinic visits
birth certificate fees
death certificate fees
restaurant inspection fees
plumbing permit fees
library meeting fees
civic center rental fees
new garage sale permit fee
zoning change fees
and many more too numerous to list. Many of these fees are dramatic, especially in the building, planning, and utility divisions with fees going up thousands of dollars. They will add greatly to the cost of building in Laredo.
What you see here is a morphing of a city government that has grown beyond it's means and is now charging for the very services we taxpayers originally intended to pay for with our tax base. This shows that the city is not in as good of financial shape as some may have you believe.
Most of these fee increases will greatly affect the poor. Yes, you heard it here, local Democrats are hurting the poor.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)