Light Snow Fog/Mist and Windy, 32.0°
Log in ·
Thank-you, Commissioner Herbert, for providing the suggestion for public inclusivity on this advisory board.
I am struck by the board president's reluctance to open the board's membership to the public, essentially because he believes this public is too ignorant to participate.
I am also *very* concerned by his comments that the dynamics of this exclusive cadre of members are driven by their "knowledge of the industry."
Mr. Sturtevant, this board is 'inbred' and clearly unable to accommodate, let alone actively explore *it's own agenda* due to the multiple and continuous conflicts of interest. Huh-looooooh in there!
Since it is crystal clear that the board chair's attitude (along with other vested interests on this board) ain't gonna change, then a vetting committee will more effectively address the "industry" boards' agenda, thus allowing for a genuine array of suggestions for the city commission to follow.
Posted 22 January 2018, 7:58 a.m.
...busting out loud laughter is the best tonic for a tired old woman who's busted her butt getting the house ready for a visit from her daughter... and her 3-year-old granddaughter.
I am *so* happy after reading these posts... Thank-you very much gentlemen (all) for making me smile... that and waking up to a little white snow..
Posted 24 December 2017, 8:27 a.m.
Which is why we are watching small and modest housing being marketed and sold to non-resident investors in University Place, Centennial and Schwegler Neighborhoods right now as whole-house STR's(short-term rentals).
And guess what! The city just made affordable housing that much harder to find in those areas. Oh, and the *only* way there is monitoring of those properties ... is by complaint only.
Not only that, as far as I can tell, there is no registration, no rules, no lists and no fees or penalties for opening up, in essence, a motel in your neighborhood, or if there is, it's not on any agenda for public discussion... this process was decided, in large part, by an online survey completed by less than 20 participants. The entire open-and-shut comment period was conducted in less than two months with Halloween and Thanksgiving holidays included.
Insofar as I can tell the Lawrence Association of Neighborhoods unilaterally voiced support for this zone change without giving all neighborhood associations *any* time to canvass or discuss the ramifications with residents.
Compare such behavior with the last time there was such a fundamental zone change for single family neighborhoods back in the mid-1990's reducing the number of unrelated renters in Lawrence. That project took nearly A YEAR to settle!
And the *best* part of this debacle!? There are any number of cities across the country which have dealt with the out-of-control conversions, and set *severe* restrictions on this kind of land-use that Lawrence could have examined, instead of deciding at the outset of research that *this is a good thing* based on the outright lies promoted by these companies! There are also a growing number of long-term studies on each coast and by non-partison economic and civic management agencies that prove the loss of modest housing, affordable housing, and drain on city resources STR's cause!
Posted 21 December 2017, 12:28 p.m.
Thank-you, Mr. Bruyere, and two other points to make:
1. Anything having as deleterious an effect on our single-family residential neighborhoods and their zoning bears a great deal of examination and discussion, which was *not the case* in changing that land-use to include "short-term rentals."
2. If there's that much potential to make money as a hotelier, then there is *no need* for the city to give away taxable income off that development, particularly since the new federal tax plan generously benefits those businesses!
Posted 21 December 2017, 11:51 a.m.
Alexander Fraser Tytler said it better than I: "...democracy always collapses under loose fiscal policy..."
Please adjust your mill levy to reflect the more accurate fiscal figures your administration claimed it had *at the time* you put to ballot the "yes or no" vote for the higher mill levy. Your city manager has already stated for the record that the mill levy ballot *would have been less* had those collections been made properly, and in a timely manner.
Quite simply, the current mill levy was based on erroneous numbers, and is therefore incorrect. While such mistakes are not illegal in and of themselves, not. taking. remedies, and claiming the mill levy still valid... IS.
Posted 20 December 2017, 10:59 a.m.
Mr. Schmitz, while I agree with your premise, I have a much harder time paying for someone from *Iowa* to benefit from what you are lobbying for from *Douglas County* taxpayers.
Surely you would understand (and accept) a caveat that only Douglas County residents (defined as such after one year of residency) would have priority and primary use of such facilities?
Posted 18 December 2017, 7:46 a.m.
All righty... I lost my temper, and I apologize for my angry responses to Mr. Holroyd's provocation against Ms. Hoyt-Reed.
Posted 17 December 2017, 9:22 a.m.
Oops...misspelled your name, Holrude.
Posted 17 December 2017, 8:33 a.m.
Back OFF, Holdroyd. Nobody, especially YOU, gets to bully or put down community activists and longtime residents like her. Unlike *yeeou,* Hoyt-Reed is NOT out-of-touch, and there are, IN FACT, a solid portion of students showing up at Just Food, as well as grocery trash-diving, and walking long distances to get from one place to another.
I've seen it, bucko, and fed and driven them at times as well. WATCH your tone of voice when addressing her, or her posts.
Posted 17 December 2017, 8:29 a.m.
Thank-you, Commissioners Larsen and Herbert, and most especially Mr. McCullough. I may not agree with city officials when it comes to tax "stimulus" provided to (mostly) local developers, but am heartened that The City will guide downtown development, instead of Developers. 😃
Posted 17 December 2017, 8:07 a.m.
Full LJWorld.com site
© 2018 LJWorld.com