Print this story |
E-mail story |
This story has 28 comments Add your own |
iPod friendly | Bookmark this
What is this?
Leaders are seeking our input on recreation
Published Saturday, October 24, 2009
Despite what you may think, your vote is not necessary for our elected leaders to pursue a proposed recreation complex.
Nope. They don’t need your approval, at least not until they seek re-election in a couple of years.
The fact is the county could easily issue a bond to pay for a huge recreation complex — or practically any other large infrastructure project — and there’s not much you can do about it.
That’s one of the many powers we place in the hands of elected officials.
Their occasional child-like antics — from bickering to building up speed bumps in front of their house on a whim — may frustrate the heck out of us, but they hold only the power that the majority of voters gave them.
But the fact that city, county and school board leaders are, in fact, seeking your input on the Nov. 3 ballot is important.
The non-binding referendum on the ballot is either the ultimate political “cop out” or the ultimate in democratic direction depending upon which angle you take on it.
The referendum — which simply asks voters if they’d support the idea of pursuing a countywide recreation program — is an opinion poll of voters.
Having the results will give politicians the ability to say, “You see, we’re just doing what voters want us to do” — or vice versa.
It’s a bit of a cop out since elected officials are elected to make decisions based on what’s best for the community.
On the flip side, however, what a better way to truly engage in democratic (that’s with a small “d”) governing than to get direct feedback from the voters?
Obviously, that’s impractical for most day-to-day items, but perhaps recreation is a big enough topic to merit the ballot issue.
But the real question is this: If the elected officials don’t need my vote to make something happen on recreation, why should you vote for it?
You should vote for the recreation issue because it’s simply the stamp of approval to pursue moving ahead with the issue.
Voters should have plenty of opportunity to voice opinions on the specifics of a recreation plan if the ballot measure is approved.
For now, if you even think our community should consider focusing on recreation, please vote “yes” on the ballot referendum. It’s likely the only way we’ll ever seen much done on recreation in the next several years.
Many voters are concerned about the “unknowns” behind the complex.
Included among those:
4 Exactly what will the complex include?
4How much will construction cost?
4Who will pay for the maintenance?
4If a goal is to have the complex attract outside tournaments, who will be responsible for “selling it?”
As I understand it, many of those can — and should — be discussed and worked out after the vote of support on Nov. 3. Until we as a community decide that “yes” we’d like to pursue a new recreation complex, worrying over all the details is putting the cart ahead of the horse.
While some politicians are good at doing that, I think our voters are smarter than that.
Let’s take this thing one step at a time.
First, let’s vote for recreation on Nov. 3, then, if it passes, let’s get involved in the meetings and decisions that need to be made.
Many other communities have led the way and provided good examples to follow. All we have to do is look to their examples and work together.
No, the elected leaders may not need our vote, but they’ve asked for it and exercising that vote is a good way for the community to show good civic leadership.
Kevin Cooper is publisher of The Natchez Democrat. He can be reached at 601-445-3539 or kevin.cooper@natchezdemocrat.com.
Comments
Posted by sobeit (anonymous) on October 25, 2009 at 12:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Sounds alot like obamacare. Just vote yes and then we will work it out later. Not a good way to do business.
Posted by OldGrandDad (anonymous) on October 25, 2009 at 1:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Kevin, I'm real suspicious of anyone (that includes yourself) who wants to spend more public money on extra golf holes. I think that it is downright wrong to use public funds in order for some folks to play their favorite games. And I disagree with your cart before the horse analogy. It would be much easier for me to make a decision if a plan (or plans) were available. As it is we are being asked to vote on thin air and then allow others to later fill in the blanks. We've all been burned in the past with numerous examples posted in the last few days.
That said, I'm still considering my vote because I have seen good facilities in other places and our town is sorely lacking in much. I'm also keenly interested in having out-of-towners walking our downtown streets and spending money. I do believe that a good well-rounded recreation facility would be a benefit. Perhaps my biggest concern is the same as what I hear so many others expressing - That they do not have confidence in our current crop of what you most graciously call "leaders".
Posted by grungebob (anonymous) on October 25, 2009 at 4:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)
OGD, knowing how you long for an IHop here, how to vote on this must be a real poser for you.
Our community is fortunate it can support a Shoney's. To attract other chains we need more people, either moving here or as visitors. I think we all agree luring more visitors is the more viable, short term solution; the question is what bait to use.
I maintain we must use the resources we have and that means tourism, already in place but grossly under utilized and marketed. A rec facility will cost money to build we do not have, with recurring costs for maintenance that the facilty must raise. The key - and the key question - is marketing. I share your concerns over the ability of our leaders to successfully market something we know nothing about when we can't sell what we already have.
Posted by jlmorris (anonymous) on October 25, 2009 at 4:36 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Grungebob, after the meeting the other night at the convention center, forget about the term "maintenance costs" and ask about the "operating costs" of the facility.
Our mayor explained that the facility would be state-of-the-art and would not require much maintenance. So if he wants to split hairs on terminology, let's try the term "operating costs". It AINT gonna be FREE!
Don't you just love it when politicians...........
Posted by southernbelle (anonymous) on October 25, 2009 at 6:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)
We can't afford to take care of what is already here. Unless its a sure thing, don't gamble with money you don't have.
Posted by beammeupscotty (anonymous) on October 25, 2009 at 6:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)
This reminds me of when my kids were little. I would ask them if they wanted to do this or if they wanted to do that. It didn't matter what their answer was I had already decided what we were going to do and now all I had to do was trick them into thinking they got to make the decision.
Posted by OldGrandDad (anonymous) on October 25, 2009 at 9:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)
grungebob, you got the wrong fella. I ain't the one wanting IHOP. But I'd be happy with a Hobby Lobby or a Bass Pro.
:)
Also, I'd be extra real enough happy if our "leaders" would do some basics to get tourists to stop and shop (signs, parking, public restrooms, etc.). Simple stuff like that, left undone for so many years, makes me worry about trusting them for the more difficult stuff like baseball and soccer.
Posted by EnKiKur (Marty Ellerbe) on October 25, 2009 at 11:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)
In Vidalia our city and parish government arranged financing for our new state of the art recreation complex with no visible pain to the taxpayer, funding the initial outlay with resourceful use of capital.
There are a couple of attractive new subdivisions in Vidalia where lots are available and we have a great school system. Those of you who want a recreation complex should move over here, you will get it sooner and our streets aren't as bumpy and our gas taxes are lower. Plus we have a unified city government. We will leave the lights on, come when you get ready and make yourself at home.
Posted by EnKiKur (Marty Ellerbe) on October 26, 2009 at 5:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)
"Despite what you may think, your vote is not necessary for our elected leaders to pursue a proposed recreation complex."
I love this part, conflating elected representation with autocracy. It sounds almost threatening, and probably would be if it were not for the fact the local autocrats probably sense the unrest among the natives. Natchez already spends more per year on culture and recreation than it does on public safety, just get a copy of the annual report from Donnie Holloway.
With all the earlier talk about regionalism I don't see why the Natchez City government doesn't make some kind of deal with Vidalia on the recreation complex. The two towns combined could make one stupendous complex- as JP Morgan liked to say, competition is sin and I'm pretty sure the Vidalia government is about as competitive as a town government can be. Far better for Natchez to join forces with us as a 49% partner than compete with us.
Posted by 2008 (anonymous) on October 26, 2009 at 7:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Out of curiosity where did the funding originate for the Vidalia complex?
Posted by EnKiKur (Marty Ellerbe) on October 26, 2009 at 7:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)
From a riverfront lease deal. Pretty smart huh?
Posted by grungebob (anonymous) on October 26, 2009 at 7:44 a.m. (Suggest removal)
ODG,
My apologies. I was looking forward to treating you to pumpernickel waffles with muscadine persimmon syrup and garlic butter topped with pineapple.
But I would rather go fishing, anyway.
Posted by Yeahuhuh (anonymous) on October 26, 2009 at 11:05 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I think that treating the Vidalia rec complex as though it were something that was the end all and be all of recreation complexes is a bit daft.
I think that if we did a duplicate of that, then we would both have basic facilities that were made for the use of locals.
Natchez has a certain draw, coming from historical resources that Vidalia simply does not have. The high ground concept is significant and there are reasons it has always been appealing to folks.
Seems to me like smart thinking would seek to move us into recreation consideration as something decidedly different. Natchez could be an ecotourism center if people thought fast enough to do something different.
The local convenience lobby will be a major force in deciding if our dollars are spent so that people have a ball field at the end of their street or if the money is for something grander and more useful.
Posted by EnKiKur (Marty Ellerbe) on October 26, 2009 at 11:16 a.m. (Suggest removal)
YH, Vidalia was created at roughly the same time as Natchez and has just as long and rich a history as Natchez does. It was the exploitation of the land in Concordia Parish that gave Natchez much of its "high ground" mentality that has led to it lagging behind the progressive and decisive Vidalia City government. We may be common 'po folks but we aren't afraid to do what needs to be done to care for each other, our town, and our children.
Posted by EnKiKur (Marty Ellerbe) on October 26, 2009 at 11:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)
PS YH- I refer you to the excellent series of historical articles written by Stanley Nelson and published in the Concordia Sentinel. Stanley is by far the most experienced and knowledgeable journalist in the area and tells the story of Concordia Parish in riveting detail- the Sentinel doesn't spend all its time and ink promoting causes like some other papers in the area do, the Sentinel is a real, honest to goodness newspaper.
Posted by Krogers (anonymous) on October 26, 2009 at 11:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Kevin you forgot a couple of things:
`1) HOW WILL WE PAY FOR IT!!!!
2) HOW WILL WE PAY FOR IT!!!
3) HOW WILL WE PAY FOR IT!!!
yes a fancy rec complex would be nice.....
and NO, we can't issue a bond at the drop of a hat, there are certain guidelines a community must adhere to in regards to bond capacity, I don't know all the details, but I have heard that until a couple of current bonds are retired, we are at maximum bond capacity ......
I really don't think a few ball tournaments a year will make any difference in our economy..
Yes we jam our little town with a lot of baseball nuts for a couple of weekends...
I'm not looking forward to that.....
But I would be looking forward to getting all the baseball idiots OUT of Duncan Park, if I vote YES it will be only for that one point......
It would be great to play tennis in the summer and not have all those baseball freaks packed in Duncan Park....
I'm getting rather bored and tired of this rec complex being the headlines of EVERY issue of the Natchez Democrat.......talk about beating a dead horse......
and speaking of a democratic vote and the responsibility of elected leaders---in a republic (that's the type government we have you know) elected officials are given the duty of making GOOD and REASONABLE decisions for the good of the community. It is not up to every voter to make an unbiased decision for the community. Your average voted CANNOT and WILL NOT make an unbiased and good decision on projects and spending. ALL people make biased decisions based on what they like or dislike as an individual, however our elected officials are supposed to be ABOVE that and think of the common good, with fiscal responsibility being the HIGHEST PRIORITY......
it is nothing but foolish to leave important decisions up to the voters who care NOT about the common good but ONLY what they will get, individuals, the common voter, will always vote without regard to what is good for the community as a whole.
To me this vote coming up regarding the rec complex is a hoax to allow our leaders to dismiss their sworn duties to manage our revenues and expenditures in a responsible manner.
Your average voter CARES NOTHING about fiscal responsibility, and cares nothing about taxes, as most people pay very little. The brunt of this rec complex will fall on the shoulders of those of us that do pay taxes......
I love Duncan Park and Duncan Park meant a lot to me growing up here in Natchez, so I understand the value of good recreational facilities...
but CAN WE PAY FOR IT??? Just answer that question and I will vote YES if its shown plain to me that we have the resources to pay for the rec complex without going in debt and raising taxes, PLEASE, just communicate the plan for financing......
Posted by EnKiKur (Marty Ellerbe) on October 26, 2009 at 11:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Maybe Natchez could get a low interest loan from Vidalia- taxes would still go up but not as much. Jake should give Hiram a call and let Hiram run Natchez' credit and see what we can do. We're not anything if we're not good neighbors- perhaps Natchez could come under Vidalia's wing through an annex or perhaps Vidalia could lease Natchez on a 99 year lease, that might be the easiest way to do it. There must be a solution to the problems Natchez faces and Vidalia is all about solutions.
Posted by EnKiKur (Marty Ellerbe) on October 26, 2009 at 12:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)
If you go back and read through all the Democrat stories about the complex Krogers you will see that the way they plan to finance it is through a 9-15 million dollar bond issue, a figure 2 to 3 times larger than the 5 million dollar amount on the ballot. Mind you, Adams County residents are sitting under the Damoclean sword of a 16 million dollar bond issue the residents are guaranteeing if NRMC does eventually fail to be able to make the payments on it.
Posted by EnKiKur (Marty Ellerbe) on October 26, 2009 at 12:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Mind you, as well, that all three of the entities, the county, city, and schoolboard that have joined into this alliance are bodies with taxing powers. They have a three level backup if things go south- that's the only logical reason for the schoolboard being involved, that and Mr. Morris being on the Board of Directors of the Natchez Chamber of Commerce along with Mr. Cooper, when Mr. Morris is not even a businessman in the private sense. In the public sense he has been operating NASD at a 12% profit for the past few years and the profit has been invested in areas outside of Adams County. Just sayin'!
Posted by Krogers (anonymous) on October 26, 2009 at 3:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I just had the distinct honor of a visit with my County Supervisor- Mr. Mike Lazarus came to my business and laid out the financial considerations for the future of Adams Co in regards to financing the recreational complex in question------bonds are being retired, debts are being paid, one-time large acquisitions of equipment are done which leaves revenue uncommitted for future purchases....
To make a long story short-- the county will have the money from bonds and current tax revenue ( our millage rates are going down on car tags!!!!) to construct the rec complex. Plus, once a certain amount of funds are committed, matching grant money can then be pursued . I can see, from what Mr. Lazarus showed me, that the county may actually have about $3 million IN CASH when the time comes. Then come up with the $2.5 million remaining, in municipal grant monies, or bond issue, whichever, preferably grants.....so that's good!!! NO< THAT's FANTASTIC!!!!
The city and school district will hopefully have the resources to maintain the facilities. Placing all the ball fields in one site will eliminate hauling of large equipment which is costly and hazardous. The swimming pool is planned to be installed on the ACHS campus which makes use of campus security, ACHS will have additional PE classes- swimming, high school swim tournaments, etc.
Tennis will be concentrated at Duncan Park, so instead of tournament players having to run all over town to play (Trinity, Duncan Park, Vidalia, private courts ) they can all remain at once central location, with an improved club house -- SWEET!!!
The complex will also likely make money if managed properly.....leasing the fields during tournaments, concessions, and gate fees...
There is always a certain amount of risk involved in any endeavor, however I see the risks involved as being minimal, as many folks of Natchez/Adams Co will have special interest in seeing this complex being successful.....and the city jobs of concessions/gate-keeping, etc will create revenue and jobs for kids ......
And just for the record Mr. Lazarus does not have children of the age that would be playing ball/soccer/swimming etc-- so he doesn't have a personal agenda going on here....-
This is why I voted for Mike Lazarus as County Supervisor--- he took out time to visit with me and explain the situation. He went through the list/schedule of bond retirements, the county is paying off debt, and looked me in the eye - I know he was telling me the truth about the county's finances..He sincerely believes this is a good thing for the county- which I have always agreed with, but I never knew the details of the county finances. But, like everybody else in Natchez, I knew the city financial situation is NOT GOOD...so I've been skeptical, until now...
Thank you Mr. Lazarus for doing such a good job for the county.
I will vote YES for more planning and moving ahead with acquiring additional financing for the rec complex.
Posted by EnKiKur (Marty Ellerbe) on October 26, 2009 at 4:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)
NASD has 28 million dollars, 11 million more than they are required to hold as 16th funds. The School District could fund the whole thing if it is really a good investment. Instead, where is that money invested now? And how was so much excess accumulated? That money came in as tax revenue and should have been either returned to the tax payers or invested locally.
Posted by steve_o (anonymous) on October 26, 2009 at 7:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"bonds are being retired, debts are being paid, one-time large acquisitions of equipment are done which leaves revenue uncommitted for future purchases...."
Where does "revenue uncommitted" come from? Were these tax increases passed onto the public for probably worthwhile causes in the name of bonds to run forever?
Already got the streets taken offline: "http://www.natchezdemocrat.com/news/2009/aug/12/county-road-repairs-taken-table/"
Anybody remember this?
http://www.natchezdemocrat.com/news/2009...
Posted by happyreader (anonymous) on October 26, 2009 at 7:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Mmmm.... IHOP.
Posted by OldGrandDad (anonymous) on October 26, 2009 at 7:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Krogers, your supervisor seems to have much more information about this proposed project than what I have read in the paper. I hope that you informed him that it would be in his favor to distribute this information to all of us, in whatever means necessary, prior to the day of the vote.
Posted by niderbip (anonymous) on October 26, 2009 at 8:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"The city and school district will hopefully have the resources to maintain the facilities. "........
Why would anyone ever think that? They admit they don't have the $ to cut the grass at EXISTING facilities.
Are you blowing off contributions to your IRA, as HOPEFULLY, you'll pick next week's winning lottery ticket.
Ask yourself why the BOE is even involved in this (other than to TAX)? This isn't a school project.
Posted by Intrepid (anonymous) on October 27, 2009 at 6:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I don't care about a recreational facility. I could care less about any of these figures, bonds and or how we'll maintain the facility. I CARE that our elderly are getting beaten to death in the street! I CARE that our high school drop out rate is getting greater and greater which can only mean we're sending more and more ignorant people out here to run this place some day. I CARE that the only tourism we have to draw people here are the old homes and a pageant that doesn't fill up HALF of the city auditorium on any given night and the only people who go to it are elderly.
Young couples with children don't vacation here because there's nothing for the kids to do. They don't wanna be dragged from antebellum home to antebellum home and listen to the same history that they hear is school, *yawn*.
If ya'll can find millions to build some baseball fields ya'll can find the funds to fix some of the rest of our NUMEROUS problems! This is like saying "I know my altenator is about to go out and needs replacing but think I'll buy some spinner rims instead". GET REAL!!!
Posted by Krogers (anonymous) on October 27, 2009 at 10 a.m. (Suggest removal)
OldGrandDad- you are correct, yes he does have more info than the ND has been able to accurately report over the last few weeks/months. No fault of theirs it's just a lot to explain, .......
yes I agree with that, and that is why I asked over and over for info on WHERE IS THE MONEY....
and that is why Mike Lazarus called me and came to visit
Give him a call at Lazarus Arts-445-4576, I know he doesn't mind me putting this on this site, 'cause he told me he is ready to share the financial info, official reports, bond retirement schedules, etc, with anybody that is interested...
Posted by OldGrandDad (anonymous) on October 27, 2009 at 10:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Krogers, ok. Thanks. I'd be more interested in the long range plans of what the complex would consist of and what would happen to certain facilities already at Duncan Park. Kevin's article made it sound like there are no such plans yet, but your conversation with Lazarus makes it sound like there are more plans than we have been told.
Thanks.
:)
Post a comment (Terms of Use Policy)
(Requires free registration.)