If you are unwilling to go to meetings, do not have cable, and are unwilling to check the DVD out of the library, then you can wait for the minutes to be posted.
I hope we will have the funds to proceed with webcasts, but do not know.
The website is being overhauled entirely.
Government on demand doesn't mean being given a bottle when you bawl. Send them an email. Their addresses are posted there now. You will get your answer.
commonsense posted in another thread, under the parking lot issue
"The Village was able to acquire a prime piece of property, perfect to accommodate our needs. Why go for short term, short sighted solution when the long term solution is right in front of you. "
For example, if we could find other solutions to our vast parking problem, would trading 61 & 63 for the Arcade be considered short or long term thinking?
I reflect on the loss of the Babson. There was an administration, many moons ago, that did not have a long term view. They took the easy way out. They did not reflect on it's potential. The tax dollars from the Baltis Built ranches was certainly a boon! Today the Babson would have been an extraordinary asset to this village. Think Peabody Estate in Oak Brook, Ravinia.
So back to 61 & 63, what is more important? A parking lot, or the Arcade?
Kim - Are you suggesting that we turn the Arcade into a parking lot?
The Village buying the Arcade is like our government telling us they can do a better job running our health system - This would create a mountain of debt that we can ill afford.
Tony,
I could not agree more. A village the size of RIverside would have absolutely no business taking on the ownership and maintainence of a building like the Arcade. Besides, don't we want it on the tax rolls--that is, privately owned?
On the other hand, a land swap with St. Mary's--the Burlington lots for Mary Park, might be worth pursuing. The Village gets a piece of well-maintained parkland, the Parish gets a buildable site for their purposes. I understand they might not want the Rectory there, but it could be useful for administrative offices or other functions, and free up the current rectory for a complete teardown and rebuild in its current space.
Good idea John. One of your best.
ANYONE could do a better job of running our health care system. Between the hospital, drug and insurance companies, and their offspring the HMOs, they are bankrupting the country. Dozens of countries operate better delivery systems, some with absolutely no private insurance in the mix. France, Canada, Scandanavian countries, Taiwan, etc.
Tony,
Are you being funny? Or do you really think I suggested turning the Arcade into a parking lot?
What I meant to say, if one could not understand it in the previous post, is that (to me) the Arcade is more important to Riverside, and to the future of Riverside than 61 & 63.
If the village could swap 61/63 with the Arcade, it could have ownership just long enough to sell it and have a stake in whom purchases it.
I agree with JohnM, the village as landlord is a terrible idea. After Kafka, the village is hardly a shining example of maintaining what they own. Look at the East Well House, Northgate, the Youth Center, 61 & 63.....
And Tony,
Even Bill O'Reilly thinks the Swiss have health care right. It is government run.
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200907160039
There's a little government program called Medicare that seems to do pretty well. Administrative costs 3% of budget, not 17% as in private sector. CEO paid less too. Doctors, hospitals, etc. used to be against it, now for it.
The village parking lot fund is going to have to borrow money to reimburse the two funds it borrowed from to buy this lot, unless the lots are sold. You pointed this out Tony so you know debt is in the picture now. I don't think that is a good idea.
The Arcade is by far more important to anchoring our business district - in its entirety, not just Burlington St. - than this potential lot, in my opinion. So the answer is the Arcade. If there could be a land swap or sale to subsidize the purchase of the Arcade in a public-private partnership, I would favor that. If part of the property can be put to no public use, then sell the interest later. The Arcade has the greatest ability to attract people of any commercial building in this town. Ask Grumpy's. A lot of people went there for the view and the setting. It would be critical to any effort to profit from historical and architectural tourism, which still remains an unexploited potentiality for us. If the Arcade goes, the uglification of our business district will be complete. As it was and could be, it can attract foot and other traffic for other businesses as well. We shouldn't let it go down like we did the Babson house.
You must log in to post.