Comment 69169

By mystoneycreek (registered) - website | Posted September 07, 2011 at 11:49:14 in reply to Comment 69167

It is best that we all deal with the facts!

You're right.

And while I appreciate what you've offered, the 'fact' is that there's a ton of ambiguity attached to the entire proposal, as witnessed at the GIC meeting last week.

-There is not yet a Board of Governors to oversee the PanAm Legacy fund...so there's no way to say for certain how much money will be available to the city for the facility on a 'revenue shortfall' finding basis.

-We have no idea about the 'Land Acquisition (Lease)' costs for the relocated parking lot on Fennell.

-And we really have no firm idea about community access or specifics about potential breakdown of use.

I know I'm probably in the minority here, but to me, if everything is hinging on this community access, then we have our priorities upside down.

(BTW, I'm curious about #3; you're sure this will apply to only the second UCI-sanctioned facility in North American? And if you are, based on what?)

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds