news-record.com

Skip to the site menu
Skip to search

OPINION

The new City Council creates unwelcome waves

Monday, December 7, 2009
(Updated 3:35 am)
The new City Council’s vote Dec. 1 to pull back on the Greensboro Aquatic Center process was disappointing, to say the least.
 
The strategy used by the new members was even a greater disappointment. It was clear that the strategy was motivated from a lack of due diligence by new council members prior to taking their oath. Not completing the project, which has been painfully and steadfastly scrutinized and planned by the city staff, consultants, citizen volunteers and the previous City Council, would actually be counterproductive to the fiscal agenda of new council members. Not completing the aquatic center as designed and reducing its function and potential would actually increase government layers, increase construction inefficiencies, create higher inefficiency in operating costs, and reduce its economic generating leverage to less than adequate for our city’s economic growth needs.
 
Additionally, backing down on the project would result in a significant reduction in services that can be offered to all of the residents of Greensboro. One can only trust that the new council would not be remembered in city history as one that voted to reduce jobs, inhibit the economy and reduce referendum-approved services by short-circuiting this project.
 
Scott Lineberry
Greensboro

Comments

View Comments

This letter has been closed to new comments. Comments are accepted on select letters to the editor between the hours of 7 AM and 5 PM, EDT, Monday through Friday.

Inappropriate content? Please report abuse.

RealTruth

December 7, 2009 - 6:33 am EST

Could it be that Mr. Lineberry is one of Matt Brown's puppets? Isn't Mr. Lineberry on the Coliseum Commission? What else could he say except to build whatever the Irving Park three tell him to say?

How would NOT building the aquatic center reduce services to the City of Greensboro? So now we have resulted to scare tactics? Just do what the citizens voted for (under the guise of Parks and Recreation) and if you can't build the pool(s) with the 12 million approved, then scrap the plan and fix the Auditorium!

Don't worry Greensboro, the new City Council does have consensus and it's Perkins, Matheny and Vaughan.

brian444

December 7, 2009 - 10:23 am EST

Probably not, but I'm guessing he is the father of a competitive swimmer or two. I've heard the name "Lineberry" at a lot of meets over the years. And he doesn't say that not building the pool would reduce services, but that it would reduce services that can be offered. Just like not offering free coffee and doughnuts to everyone.

The public voted for $12 mil, like it or not. After that, the city council has every right to make whatever decision they want. Grotesquely inflating the supposed benefits won't help the case for the pool.

Molly the Dog

December 7, 2009 - 8:32 pm EST

Attack the issue and not the person.

dcolin

December 8, 2009 - 1:40 pm EST

Unless it's dan

Pile on

danagain

December 7, 2009 - 7:58 am EST

"Not completing the project, which has been painfully and steadfastly scrutinized and planned by the city staff, consultants, citizen volunteers and the previous City Council, would actually be counterproductive to the fiscal agenda of new council members."

If it was so painfully scrutinized and planned then why is the cost all of a sudden $6 million more that what was approved?

rightwingnemesis

December 7, 2009 - 3:03 pm EST

Well, since I pay Greensboro taxes and Mr. danagain does not, I will go on record as supporting the aquatic center. If the rest who posted on this are also "non residents" then this has been an exercise in futility.

Panacea

December 7, 2009 - 5:08 pm EST

Not at all. If nothing else, the input of non-residents exposes issues of concern that swim boosters haven't thought of, and raises questions they haven't been able to adequately address. It's important that these issues get raised by someone.

I'm no longer a Greensboro resident; I moved last fall. I did vote for the P&R bond, being unaware that it included the swim center (otherwise I'd have voted no). However, my concern is this center will eventually drain county tax money. One of the proposed uses for this swim center is high school events. The schools are funded by the county. I don't want to see the money I pay for the schools squandered in this swim center. Fees for the high schools will go up and up because the swim boosters, Mike Barber, and Matt Brown ignored Mitch Johnson's warnings that the city can't afford to maintain it once built.

It's a money pit I don't want my county tax money falling into.

danagain

December 7, 2009 - 5:22 pm EST

Thank you for your wise words Panacea.

Mick

December 7, 2009 - 5:47 pm EST

Pan,

For the life of me I just dont see how someone didnt know about this pool. Particularly someone who visits this site or reads The N&R or Yes or Rhino or watches Channel 2 or 8. Try google for the proof you need.

Panacea

December 7, 2009 - 7:58 pm EST

My focus at that time was the school bond, to which I was opposed. I seldom watch TV news; I'm usually busy doing something else. I don't read the Rhino--poor yellow journalism at its worst. The N&R is no better or worse than many home town newspapers I've read around the country. I know (now) that the N&R editorialized against the swim center. I simply missed the issue with the swim center, and didn't see the line item on the bond when I voted for it. Same thing happened with a lot of people.

Believe it or not, there is no constitutional requirement to watch the news or read a newspaper. Many people vote without reading the item carefully. Mike Barber knew that when he inserted the pool into the P&R bond; he was counting on it. While I understand it is my responsibility as a voter to know what I am voting for, this does not excuse Barber's deliberately duplicitous behavior.

I own my failure in this: I should have read the bond before voting. What pisses me off is Barber won't own his behavior.

Molly the Dog

December 7, 2009 - 8:30 pm EST

So now we know you are against public schools and projects and moved outside the area to avoid such taxes but want to enjoy the benefits of city projects like Wendover Ave., parts, greenways, and yet try to have a voice on how the government should spend the tax payers money. Interesting! and we are not informed! again interesting.

Panacea

December 7, 2009 - 9:51 pm EST

Hmm. Is this the same person who at the top of these comments told RealTruth to attack the message, not the person? Why yes, I believe it is!

No, I am not against public schools. What I was (and still am) against is throwing money at a school system that consistently can't get its priorities right. I felt GCS needed to hear that from voters, loud and clear. If GCS were managing its funds appropriately, they wouldn't have been laying off teachers earlier this year.

I moved out of Greensboro because the house I wanted was in Jamestown. No other reason, though I have to admit, I am glad to be away from the 3 ringed circus that is Greensboro.

My tax money still benefits Greensboro through county, state, and federal taxes. My taxes support GSO schools. My taxes build GSO roads. That gives me the right to express my opinions, even though I can no longer vote in Greensboro elections.

Kelly Quillen

December 10, 2009 - 11:32 pm EST

Are we still talking about the proposed aquatic center?

dcolin

December 8, 2009 - 1:44 pm EST

"I don't read the Rhino--poor yellow journalism at its worst."

You should read it.
Good for a giggle

You think this blog attracts us wacko's.
Were tame

rightwingnemesis

December 7, 2009 - 8:10 pm EST

Mr. Panacea,
No reason for your money to ever go into it. It would be like one of the beloved stories called "The Little Red Hen" in that you did not help plant the corn, nor did you water it, nor hoe the weeds, nor harvest it.....so why would you ever be concerned with "using" it. I hope that only combined meets would ever feature county schools. While I appreciate your thoughtful words, I will point out that it was very plainly stated in the bond vote, that this was for a swimming facility. As to Mr. danagain, please praise him in some way so he can feel relevant.

Panacea

December 7, 2009 - 9:55 pm EST

Her. I am female.

If a GCS school participates in a meet at this swim center, then my tax money is going into it.

My taxes will support this center in one way or another. But since I'm no longer a Greensboro resident, I can no longer vote on the issue.

I can still express my views.

And I notice that neither you nor Molly are able to refute any of the points I've made. Instead, you attempt to distract from the issue with a non-issue.

danagain

December 7, 2009 - 10:25 pm EST

"Her. I am female."

Ooopsss, that Mr./Ms. bit can confuse even the elite.

"I can still express my views."

Only if you agree with rightwingers views, otherwise you are diminished.

"And I notice that neither you nor Molly are able to refute any of the points I've made. Instead, you attempt to distract from the issue with a non-issue."

Are you surprised?

Panacea

December 8, 2009 - 9:30 am EST

Guess I shouldn't be.

Molly the Dog

December 7, 2009 - 8:31 pm EST

Arrogance at its highest!

Molly the Dog

December 7, 2009 - 8:35 pm EST

in regards to Panacea comments and view. Arrogance! I am just plain stupid.

Panacea

December 7, 2009 - 9:52 pm EST

Molly said above, "I am just plain stupid."

You said it.

dcolin

December 8, 2009 - 1:38 pm EST

I live in Greensboro and I'm against it. I do pay taxes.

That said. Dan still sucks.
Dan thinks money makes people.
He believes that he is suppose to be the embodiment of the Horatio
Alger myth.

I made it all on my own, my way. I am a self made man.
Not a peddler/salesman. I’m a consultant. That’s important to him.
Everyone needs to be completely self sufficient and be a real man like me.
No nanny state. He forgets that he was born into opportunity.
Hell he attended college in France. Notre-Dame the Louvre, fine food, outstanding
philosophers, artists, writers, mathematicians etc. All wasted on him

He has no idea that the majority of us (including him) are simply journeyman.
No great achievements, not self made, did what we were able to do. Lots of help.
Dan simply can’t say I’m not sure. Like my," what gets the plane up". He can’t accept that he doesn’t know. If he did that he could learn. But it is simply not in his make up.
At this point, write him off. He is not likely to influence many people anyway.
He’s harmless."

I'll paste this around for a while.
It captures the essence of dan

Thanks for the spelling lesson
People correct me I listen and learn.
What gets the plane up Captain Midnight?

trabun

December 7, 2009 - 11:22 pm EST

I'm gone for a few months, come back, and what do I find? Dan still making sense and using facts and that sort of thing. C'mon, Dan, get with the program. Join the "in" crowd and spout slogans and use misleading statistics every once in a while like everyone else.

Panacea

December 7, 2009 - 8:37 am EST

It was scrutinized. City staff said we couldn't afford it. Mike Barber ignored information he didn't want to hear and pushed it into the P&R bond anyway, knowing full well it would fail on its own.

Mr. Lineberry, you are living in a dreamworld.

Tony Wilkins

December 7, 2009 - 10:49 am EST

Scott, you win the award for packing the most bs into three paragraphs as humanly possible.

Beachwalk

December 7, 2009 - 11:47 am EST

"unwelcomed waves"?
Who is Lineberry trying to fool. Most of Greensboro's citizens are glad the new council is seeking better and more truthful information. People are tried of the bait and switch tactics of politicians. Had the bond been truthful in stating the money was for a competitive swiming and diving complex, located at the Greensboro Coliseum and run by Matt Brown it never would have past to begin with.

Mick

December 7, 2009 - 5:44 pm EST

Where did you get your polling data on how most of Greensboro's citizens?

troubleshooter

December 7, 2009 - 2:02 pm EST

Just because the money is there doesn't mean it has to be spent. Some of the Council members are out of touch with ordinary citizens.

swerdna

December 7, 2009 - 10:22 pm EST

1) Voters had voted down this bond at least a couple of times, but certain city leaders wouldn't take "no" for an answer. The powers that be finally tacked it on to a parks and rec bond, and some voters who opposed it voted for it because they didn't do their homework (i.e. realize the swim center was included). Their fault, I know, but was inserting this facility into a parks and rec bond ethical?

2) The center is being built on speculation. Contractors build spec houses, taking a risk that they will make a profit. Sometimes they do. Sometimes they don't. The difference is, it's their OWN money being risked in the venture. The "parks and rec spec house" is risking OUR money and is being built on speculation that we will land big events that will bring money into the city. Sure, there's interest but as far as I know, there's not a single contract with a signature promising to move an event to this facility if it's built. Sorry, but in this economy, we don't need to be speculating.

3) The voters approved $12 million. Now that the bond is passed, it seems certain people think they can come back and tell us this won't be enough to build the facility they envision. I realize building costs have increased, but if estimating is done properly, such increases are predicted and included in the projected cost. To have the kind of increase we're being told will be needed is inexcusable! So, already, we've got poor planning. Now, I wonder how much MORE it will cost us before this center is completed?

Bottom line is: In this economy, this bond should NEVER have been put before the voters at this time. If the decision is made to move ahead with it, then the amount given for the facility by the voters should NOT exceed the bond amount approved. If the costs go over that, then let the people wanting this facility invest THEIR money, raise the money, or whatever to build it.

Molly the Dog

December 8, 2009 - 9:58 am EST

Swerdna, you need to keep up with the discussions and CVB proposal. The $12M will be used and the difference funded by the CBV, not the City of Greensboro. Nor will the CVB contribution have an effect on property taxes. As to claim is being built on speculation, there is no basis to this. Complete plans have been competed and a project bid process completed. It is not a cost plus or open end contract. Shelco is a very reputable contractor and is known for coming in on project bid cost.

eMail Updates

Learn More
Advertisement | Advertise with Us

Featured Ads

Search

Advertisement | Advertise with Us
Advertisement | Advertise with Us
Advertisement | Advertise with Us

News & Record Network Sites

User Tools

  • Social Networking
  • RSS
  • Share
  • Sign in to MyNR

Search