Print this story | E-mail story | This story has 17 comments Add your own | iPod friendly
City isn’t playing fair with county
Published Sunday, September 2, 2007
Last week as county voters were worrying over county elections, Natchez Mayor Phillip West pulled a rather ugly rabbit out of his hat.
West produced the furry little animal that was dressed as a $15 million recreation project, seemingly out of the blue.
No sooner than the furry friend appeared, a few of the aldermen took the little rabbit and shoved its rear end into the faces of members of the Adams County Board of Supervisors.
Supervisors likely were not amused.
If you missed West’s magic show, let’s recap a bit.
On the day of a large county runoff election West, who apparently didn’t want to be overshadowed by the Binkey Vines’ show, decided it was time to announce a sweeping $15 million recreation facility.
But a few problems were apparent in the plan however: what and where to build and who will pay for it.
The first parts are easy, West and a majority of the aldermen said: We’ll just hire a consultant to tell us what we need to build. The consultant should only cost approximately $100,000, give or take a few pieces of lettuce.
Thank God for consultants. How else could we manage to get anything done in this town without them?
Consultants and grants are the politicians’ friends. Consultants allow you freedom from ever having to take the blame for anything.
Seriously, Mr. Mayor and the aldermen, let’s not waste $100,000 — or even $10 — on a consultant.
Taxpayers already shelled out their hard-earned lettuce a few years ago for a recreation study that looked at locating a state-of-the-art facility near Natchez High School at the site affectionately known as the “bean field.”
Fortunately, Alderman Jake Middleton — perhaps the only one on the board using his noggin on this issue — remembers the “bean field study” and wants the city to review it before hiring an outside consultant.
Gee, that makes sense to me, doesn’t it?
Please, let’s nix the consultant idea outright.
It’s ridiculous.
The second problem the city faces is how to pay for the $15 million facility.
Easy, West and Alderman David Massey decided at the meeting — make the county pay their fair share.
Now logically this makes a lot of sense. County residents currently use city facilities and city residents pay county taxes, so both usage and taxes intertwine on this deal.
But politically, the city’s move is disrespectful.
Perhaps few people realized this, but supervisors say they didn’t know a thing about the plan until they read it in the newspaper.
That’s disrespectful and, frankly a bit rude, too.
The city has publicly thrown down the gauntlet to the county supervisors. With no involvement up until this point, the county is supposed to come up with $4 to $7.5 million for its share.
If they do that, they’re allowing the city leaders to push them around politically.
If they refuse, they can be easy targets as being “against recreation.”
Beyond the city’s plan to have the county fund up to half of the plan, the city’s plan calls for an as-yet-unsigned casino deal to foot the bill for the remainder.
For years and years, we’ve talked about recreation, and we’ve done absolutely nothing.
Perhaps we haven’t done anything because we’re intent on building the Taj Mahal of recreation.
All we need at this point is a start. We can grow it as the economy improves.
We need recreation facilities and we need nice ones. But what we need more than anything is to work together like adults and get something reasonable done.
A consultant and another study aren’t going to get us any closer to a quality recreation project. We’d be better off buying a rabbit’s foot and hoping for a miracle.
Kevin Cooper is publisher of The Natchez Democrat. He can be reached at 601-445-3539 or kevin.cooper@natchezdemocrat.com.
Comments
Posted by SayItRight (anonymous) on September 2, 2007 at 8:05 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The City & the County needs to concentrate on getting more productive citizens aka taxpayers to help pay for recreation rather than hosting services for people who will trash everything once you build it.
Posted by roberth33 (anonymous) on September 2, 2007 at 8:58 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Clearly the logical long-term solution is to do away with separate city and county governments. There is a lot of redundancy that can be eliminated by combining the two entities, not the least of which is the plethora of elected do-nothing officials.
Posted by gemccull (Gary McCullars) on September 2, 2007 at 11:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Kevin, it is called one "upmanship". However, some moves are so damn dumb that the term does not apply.
Stupidity and arrogance go hand in hand.
Posted by lambchop (anonymous) on September 2, 2007 at 12:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Well, unfortunately we can only expect out of those elected officials the competency of their being. How many times do we elect someone simply to go against another person running and dare we ask for the principles of character in any elected official. This resolution from West is typical of our elected officials. One upmanship may be a good term and also the "stupidity and arrogance" go hand in hand. Wake up Natchez officials, county and city, taxpayers are beginning to get the idea we must step in and listen and speak up about these ideas and ways of handling the business of Natchez.
Thanks Democrat for providing us a means of expressing ourselves, even if not always in perfect grammar. At least we say what we feel. Try to positive people, it runs better than negativity. I am addressing myself too!
Posted by destiny (anonymous) on September 2, 2007 at 2:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)
you addressed the bean field problem before, remember when we were told there was something there that detered considering the space? We never were told what that something was? Are they now, again considering the spot?
Just like the recreation fund and committee, whats going on. Thanks for staying on top of all this. You are the voice for the people and we hear you loud and clear. Thanks.
Posted by gemccull (Gary McCullars) on September 2, 2007 at 5:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The Democrat has some historical articles about the efforts to get a sports complex on-line.
Go to Quick Search at NatchezDemocrat.Com and type in some keywords like: sports, complex, recreation, etc. Hit search. After the list of articles appears, click on "order by date". Articles will be listed from the latest to oldest.
Interesting reading.
Posted by traceb (anonymous) on September 2, 2007 at 7:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Thank you Mr. Cooper! Well said. I believe I may start buying the Democrat again.
Posted by ddsmith (anonymous) on September 2, 2007 at 8:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)
What has the mayor done to increase jobs in the city? It seems not a whole lot other than getting rid of good people and hiring unqualified family member to run the city. Why don't Natchez pretend we didn't have the old homes then what?
I would love to move me and my new family back to Natchez were we both have family, but I can't b/c their are no jobs and the crime and crooked cops. Natchez is not what it used to be when I grew up their which was in the 90's.
So I challenge the mayor to do something other than bring casinos in that put the town into even more poverty and bring more industries to create jobs. Lets utilized the colleges their to help prepare for the work force instead sitting on your butts and collecting checks each month. Its sad to see people who can work just becomes lazy.
I guess thats why I live in a bigger town with more opportunities b/c they know what they are doing instead of deciding trying to put some kind of recreation crap.
Hire a consultant.........I'll tell you what to do for 100K, (its called common sense). Why hire someone to tell you what to do with the city????
Posted by NtzMom55 (anonymous) on September 3, 2007 at 1:48 a.m. (Suggest removal)
To spend 100K for a consultant on recreation is stupid, stupid, stupid. Let the people decide what we want and need in our community and put the 100K back into more recreation. Get ideas from kids under 18, get ideas from the twenty somethings, get ideas from people between 30 and 50, get ideas from 50 to 60 and ideas from the 60+ group. We should all have an input into what we want and need as recreation. Things like hiking trails, biking trails, rock climbing walls, basketball goals, tennis courts, indoor facilities for indoor activities like dances, special interest group meetings, workshops, indoor games, exercise equipment, concessions, large sand boxes, indoor swimming and outdoor swimming, a park setting for sitting in shade to spend time talking with others, a tubing/canoeing lazy river, etc. Plus all phases of government should be equally well informed and not surprised like the Mayor's stunt recently pulled. How selfish and rude!!
Posted by seeemeeego (anonymous) on September 3, 2007 at 8:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Building recreation areas is the new tactic for diverting attention from the real needs of cities and counties, jobs and education. Look to your west to the city of McComb. Their city council has sunk dollar after dollar and had fight after fight over funding a recreation complex. This has gone on for several years, and they are no further ahead with the project than they were when they started.
What's wrong with the recreation opportunities we had as kids when I was growing up in the 60s? It was called playing with other kids in the neighborhood. It was riding bikes and skateboards. It was our parents putting up a basketball goal in our yard, buying us a basketball, and our friends coming over and dribbling and shooting that ball. It was getting a group of neighborhood friends together for a game of touch football in somebody's front yard.
The "facilities" we had back then are still around today: public baseball/softball fields and public tennis courts. We played football and basketball on school teams, the same ones kids are playing on today. We ran track at school, played golf on the school golf team, and played school baseball and softball, too. Recreation is a big part of the school experience.
When we were in elementary school, we played at the YMCA. Oh wait, that organization pulled out of Natchez quite a few years ago, didn't it? Well, how about using that $100,000 consultant fee money on providing a place for the Y to lease so they could return to the city? Let recreation professionals like the YMCA handle the recreation and let the city be the facilitator. Between the Y and the schools there should be quite enough recreation in the area.
Posted by easterner (anonymous) on September 3, 2007 at 11:11 a.m. (Suggest removal)
As Seeemeeego says above, just look at McComb. Oh yes, we are further along. Four and a half million dollars spent so far on a facility which still doesn't have a completed softball field. Built in a part of the city which is going downhill fast. Vandalism already started and facility not even close to being open. Recreation has become a political catchphrase which sounds good when it is thrown out to the masses. Putting it into action is another thing. It is one thing that I believe Government should stay out of. Leave it to the schools, church's, civic clubs, etc. to provide recreation opertunities. They are much better suited than local governments.
Posted by callitasitis (anonymous) on September 3, 2007 at 12:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I also remember when the "Bean Field" was being considered for a recreation complex. My thoughts then and now are in the areas of security. Yes, we'll have a nice facility and there will be well-raised children and young adults to use the facility. Who will protect these individuals using the facility? There are playgrounds such as the one on Madison St. that Joyce Arceneaux instrumented. When have you ever seen young children playing there? I bet your answer is seldom to never. Tax dollars used to fund playground facilities that go unused because of the areas where they are built. These small recreation areas are popping up everywhere. There's no assurance of safety for these children. We first need to consider how to protect individuals before we worry about entertaining them. I know what I have said seems like I'm looking on the down side, maybe I am. But, it seems that in Natchez one has to wait for something bad to happen to get something done. Preventive Maintenence was always a favorite term for me. Please, before you consider such a fine complex, get Mike Mullins involved, if you can find him, and see what he has to offer in the areas of security. That may be an area where you might want to hire a consultant.
Posted by stateofnatchez (anonymous) on September 4, 2007 at 12:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Until anyone sees any tangible evidence of progress on this issue, I'd say it is far beyond "beating a dead horse".
As far as West's comments, intentions or plans for a rec center, I'd sooner watch paint dry than to put any faith in what he says or does.
Posted by ilovenatchez (anonymous) on September 4, 2007 at 3:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Ditto on everything said here. I would like to "Suggest removal" of Mayor West from office. He is an embarassment and road block to this town.
Posted by guy2co (anonymous) on September 4, 2007 at 5:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Has anyone thought about private recreation. It can provide jobs and recreation.How many of us have traveled out of town to go to a zoo,aquarium,water slide,or putt putt golf? If you go to Gulf Shores, Alabama kids are lined up to ride the go carts and play putt putt golf.Why can't we give a tax incentive for recreation? If we advertised tax breaks for recreation maybe we could save some of our taxes from consultants.The tax break could come from the $100,000 the consultant would charge.I would like us to take the money and offer a $100,000 reward for some one who has common sense in city hall!
Posted by ddsmith (anonymous) on September 4, 2007 at 8:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)
With me living in Hattiesburg, which is a growing city I can see alot of recreations that can be adopted by Natchez. Like someone said the YMCA is a great place to have in a town. What ever happen to Duncan Park playground? If you drive over to Petal, which is about 5 min out of H'burg we have an awesome playground with a walking track. Sad thing is that Petal is smaller than Natchez, but has way more to offer for families. I used to play at Duncan Park all the time, but when me and my family came to visit our parents, its sad to see the very same equipment that was their over 20yrs ago. What does the Mayor do for the city other than show his face and smile and take the picture with the baby???? He needs to listen to the people and ask what they want, not what he wants. If you say Mayor West has done great, then ask yourself this....Why is everyone moving out of Natchez and whats going to happen when all these people with old money die away and kids/grandkids move to another city?
Posted by bonniej (anonymous) on September 11, 2007 at 3:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Have you ridden around Natchez lately and noticed how bad the streets are??? Maybe the City officials should be more concerned about infrastructure rather than wanting to spend big bucks for a recreational center. First things first.
In fact, Federal, State and Local governments should be very concerned about infrastructure......Roads, bridges, etc.
Post a comment (Terms of Use Policy)
(Requires free registration.)