Council revisionist History?
Huh... for.... sure...
1.) A presentation was made at a council meeting on February 2 explaining
the placement of $3,000,000 into a fund for the intended appropriation for a parking lot
and the clean up, drainage, plants, etc., at the soccer fields site.
2.) The newsandtribune reported the parking lot news.;
3.) A council person clearly stated that the $3,000,000 was for a parking lot
at the soccer fields at the February 2 meeting.,
4.) The presentation and assertions are on video tape.,
5.) A council person stated rather emphatically to the questioning rubes ..."I want".....several times
in reference to the usage of the planned INDOOR facility. Those assertions were made on
6.) The spending plan and transfer were passed on the first reading.,
7.) A council person clearly stated that in a subsequent morph that some of the $3,000,000
was to be applied to the INDOOR facility. The original story slickly changed
as the public began to be made aware of the secret plan.
of the clever actions.,
8.) So, is it now $3,000,000 for parking or does that include
the new indoor facility that is or is not to built.,
9.) A meeting is planned at a second, very expensive 200 acre site for Monday.,
Has the MSM media been made aware of that meeting?,
10.) The council has still not released to the public the details of the original plan.,
11.) The second site. if purchased, will not be able to be developed for industry
and the attendant jobs and taxes.,
12.) The second site will be very costly to purchase, development, and maintain.
13.) Glitzy is a word used by some.
Edited by Savile Row, 14 March 2015 - 01:59 PM.