Tuesday, February 14, 2017


Tuesday, February 7, 2017

This comes as VERY SAD news to me. I expected better from Colorado Springs.
According to Mayor John Suthers the possibility of a downtown sports & events center (funded in part by state money/private donations/city money AFTER approval by taxpayers) is pretty much dead. In a cover story in this morning's Gazette and an online video Suthers said the only currently viable fourth project to take advantage of millions in state tourist money is relocating the World War Two Aviation Museum to a four acre site that is currently private property near the downtown. I am disappointed that eve with millions of dollars of state funding the city has not been able sell the public on construction of a downtown facility.

Brian Edwards I thought I heard on the station news, that there was not enough in private funding needed to go forward with the project.
LikeReply3 hrs
John Mark I bet raising taxes last year had something to do with lack of interest on the publics part, especially seeing how the streets haven't gotten that much better.
LikeReply13 hrs
Jeff Miztah Rogers If it is a profitable venture then let private entities risk their own money and leave all of the taxpayer funding for other more important things.

It is not the job of the middle class and the lower class to be funding the building of the playgrounds for the rich. NO TAXES for this project!!!
LikeReply73 hrs
Ed Duffy If the market really wanted it, it wouldn't need any public funding. It's jewelry. Good news.
LikeReply23 hrs
Jeff Miztah Rogers Richard Randall, from your statement above, here is where I have a problem.

"...downtown sports & events center (funded in part by state money/private donations/city money AFTER approval by taxpayers).

Let's see it starts with "State Money" (read taxpayer dollars), it ends with "City money (after approval by taxpayers)". And squeezed in the middle, is this idea of "Private donations".

Why not leave off the first and the last and see what can be done with these private donations. If this complex is so essential to the well -being of our community than surely there are deep enough private pockets to take care of the entire thing.

Don't get me wrong. I served 21 years in the Air Force. I would love to have an aviation museum here locally . Such a museum I would be willing to fund by my purchase of a ticket to get into the museum.

Why is it with some conservatives, (not necessarily you) that we talk all day about the virtues of the free market and how we want government out of the business of peoples lives, but we would be willing to strap on onerous and abusive taxes to pay for non-essentials like this.

I support the project, just NOT the current funding mode.
LikeReply13 hrsEdited
Patrick M. Faley Richard Randall I share your disappointment that this project will not happen anytime soon. Neither will the City of Champions, a downtown baseball stadium, or Light Rail or even Passenger rail services. But the reason this city will continue to decline and not keep up like many cities of it's size is because of the fact that the city is under control of short-sighted, uniformed, Conservatives that are not willing to invest in our city's future. They have this false notion that their taxes are already too high and want them even further reduced . They can not comprehend the basic business model that you have to spend money to make money. Investing now in projects to revitalize downtown and in other projects to increase tourism that would greatly improve the economy of the region would reap tremendous benifit's in the future.
LikeReply3 hrs
Jeff Miztah Rogers Patrick, then spend private money if there is such a great opportunity for a great return on this money then you would not be opposed to donating your own money. But not all of us are convinced of the value of these projects. So don't saddle the entirety of the population with the obligation.

That is the regulatory effect of the free market. When you risk your own money you are more likely to do so with the understanding that it the venture will be prosperous. But when you risk other peoples money often times these projects fail because there was really no "Skin in the game"
LikeReply43 hrs
Deborah James O'Loughlin We already have a sports venue, would change the landscape, no change in roads there are just as bad, we dont have enough tourists to support it and the majority of people in the Springs dont make enough money to support it. We need to fix our airport and bring in viable companies to make a viable affordable place to fly out of and use our railroad tracks for a train that supports taking people to and from Denver. Public transportation frankly sucks. Why is it all or nothing. Why is the light rail not an option without downtown complex?
LikeReply22 hrsEdited
Jeff Chapdelaine govt money is always the best cuz its "free" to the Serf's... free money ROCKS !!!
LikeReply2 hrs
Patrick M. Faley Public works projects like we are discussing are just that. Improvements to the city's infrastructure to improve the city and benefit the city public. Public Works projects that in the long run will benifit the city taxpayer's should be paid for by those taxpayers. Relying on private funding for municipal projects, perticulary in this financially conservative city, to fund public projects is irresponsible and a surefire way to make sure these vital projects are never build. After the projects are built private investors will be able to become involved with other aspects of these projects and will be able to help recoup the city's initial investment.
LikeReply2 hrs
Chad Ginsburg You expected better? You expected us to waste money while the roads and real infrastructure are falling apart? Dear God, you really are just a Hamiltonian monocrat that does whatever the Party handlers want. I was hoping it was partly an act for on-air purposes, but here you sit defending a attempt at theiving finances and of property the People for something they do not want while talking of officials as thought they're trustees. You are no Jeffersonian. You are no real republican. Saddens me Richard. In fact, you are so sick, and so far off from Jefferson and real republic you think we'd need to still pay to access these centers and their events as locals and Coloradans even though as a republic we would be authorized access to these locations at all times because we'd have paid for it. Oh, do we forget that of republic?
LikeReply2 hrs
Jeff Miztah Rogers Chad, while the idea for this project is a progressive scheme, and flies in the face of true republican ideas of the free market and Jeffersonian liberty, it is not helpful to be calling Richard a "Hamiltonian Monocrat".... That is a horrible thing to call anyone. While he may be espousing ideas that follow the pattern and political strategy of the leftist progressives, I do believe he is a committed Conservative Republican. just not on this project.
LikeReply2 hrs
Chad Ginsburg He's not. I have Jefferson o. my mantel and would never spit on my father the way he and all party republicans do. You right it is a terrible thing to be called and worse thong to be. Guess he should stop putting finance and illicit law before the republic. In fact, Jefferson would already be engaged in a new system not trying to save this distorted and long dead government as he actually understood Locke, not feigned it for political power.
LikeReply2 hrs
Jeff Miztah Rogers They benefit a clear minority and they are intended as money making ventures. Patrick, as you said in your previous post, "You have to spend money to make money". If that is the case as you believe it then if there is money to be made, let it be made by those willing to invest. Form a consortium of like minded people with money.

But if it is a public works venture as you assert, where is the pay back to those of us who will never use it. Will I get a refund on the tax moneys that are confiscated from me against my will after the project becomes profitable, as is the promise? No it is doubtful I will ever see any money from this.

The city has or had a golf course... Never been there, but my taxes supported it? When did i ever see any profit sharing? Never. Public ventures are fine when they affect EVERYONE, like highways, fire department law enforcement... and little else.
LikeReply2 hrs
Jeff Miztah Rogers As I said earlier... how is it that otherwise conservative people will turn this corner against free market ideas and support what is in essence the stalwart of Progressiveism.

This is just the thing that progressives support, government involvement in everything.
LikeReply2 hrs
Terry Sullivan The operative word is"approval by taxpayers" which means NO deal has been struck with the State or Federal funds. This open ended statement by John Suthers for Mayor needs numbers actually verified and is just useless rhetoric by a politician. Maybe our State Representatives in this district can approach this issue with a modicum of intelligence.
LikeReply2 hrs
Jeff Miztah Rogers Or maybe the people have been heard clearly over the last 6 years.... "Taxed Enough Already"... and if Republicans want to continue to win elections they need to pay attention to that TEA party sentiment that has not gone anywhere.
LikeReply2 hrs
Terry Sullivan Or be creative
LikeReply2 hrs
Jeff Miztah Rogers Creative without public money. Why not be creative with private money??
LikeReply2 hrs
LikeReply2 hrs
Donald Womack When the world arena was trying to get off the ground the voters voted it down once or twice. The only reason it there now is private donations, that's what the wall with all the names are for. I wonder how many people that voted down the world arena have been there for some event in the last 22 plus years.
LikeReply1 hr
Jeff Miztah Rogers If I have been, I paid to get in... Not a real convincing argument Donald.
LikeReply1 hr
Jym Fair The City of CS is broke, and couldn't afford it anyways!
LikeReply1 hr