(screenshot: KELO-TV)
It seems there has been a phone poll circulating that is quite lengthy, apparently the pollster has been asking questions about the proposed Walmarts, the performance of the mayor and city council.
Wondering if anybody has received this phone call also?
Also, the mayor seems to be in damage control mode with his latest Stormland TV interview, to which he says;
“What I was trying to explain to them that in this particular situation, I really am just a neutral party,†Huether said Monday afternoon.
Mike, Mike, Mike. C’mon. Not only did you hold a press conference in which you cock-blocked the council from coming to, taking all the credit for bringing the two Walmart’s to SF and all of these terrific, spectacular part-time jobs they provide, you are also the direct manager of Mike Cooper, Planning Director, you know, HIS BOSS. And if we really want to get down to the nitty-gritty, you are also required to break a tie-vote of the council. So saying you are ‘Neutral’ is stretching the truth a bit, no, wait, it is a flat out lie.
There has also been a rumor floating around that the Northside planned store is a red herring to leverage for a Southside store. I had a tip yesterday about the Northside University Center’s intended uses, I hope to have more about this soon.
Until then, make it a great day and make the best out of what gawd has given you!
As he was speaking on the interview, I noticed he did have some trouble getting the word “neutral” out……..
If I was the city council, I would plan a 4-4 vote so he has to break the tie.
One huge advantage Mike had in his last campaign for mayor was the fact that he had absolutely NO political history and NO voting record as part of the equation.
This will not be the case in his second run for Mayor.
Take a look at his voting record (Council tie-votes) over the past 3 1/2 years……
If the Council’s vote on Walmart is 4-4, it’s guaranteed he will vote YES!!!
We all know Mike would vote for the Walmart, because he may lose 50 votes from the Twin Eagle area, but he would gain about 10,000 from fans of Walmart.
Besides – if this Walmart comes down to a vote from the city council and Mayor, and if Walmart lost that vote… you can bet they would sue the city. There is no legal reason to NOT allow them to build in an area already zoned to allow for commercial building. They had every legal reason to build at 69th and Cliff, and they have every legal reason to build at 85th and Minnesota. I suspect the only reason they didn’t pursue legal action the first time was because even they admitted the site didn’t offer them the size of store they really wanted.
As to the North side store – Walmart wants that store very much and if you recall that was their original location for a third store long before the South side options were considered. I’m sure they will try to hold the city’s feet to the fire to get the South side store, but either way I fully expect the North side store to proceed. That is a very large concentrated market that has no alternatives right now, so it would be a huge profit engine for Wallyworld.
Our mayor, no plan yet all the power. Also, all the blame. There’s an underfunded EC with no parking or events. He bragged about a new hotel near Russell & I-29. Still no hotel but a good site for a private parking garage to handle airport & EC overflow. He’s broken apart streets causing major traffic problems. He refused federal help for the ice storm. He underdesigned airport work. The Washington Bazilion is again in trouble. Our leader has no political history or public empathy. City government functions for the benefit of Huether, Cooper, Smith’s, Entenman, & developers. Citizens are left out of the equation.
Walmart can build when, where, & how they please. With the present charter they can’t sue. However, city civil procedures are unconstitutional and not recognized by the courts. The city can’t sue either. Walmart is business in action. Huether promised to run the city like a business. It’s not smart to put Walmarts at the city limits where jobs will go to neighboring suburbs. Once stores are built, watch Walmart seek annexation into Harrisburg. Huether considers himself a business mogul but anybody can make money on credit cards with 30% interest.
I notice that he is having a press conference today about new amentities at the EC to divert negative press about Walmart. Like clockwork.
Neutral? According to AL, his quote when the Walmarts were announced was “Thank goodness I was elected mayor. North side, we are getting a grocery store. North side, we are getting retail.”
Telephone poll? If you still have a land line, you’re not the one to ask. Huether has become a scammer. News for the media but they’re restricted from negative reporting. We get citations. They have numbers tatooed on their arms and stars of David painted on their door.
The rhetorical MO of much od this site has taken a decidedly TEA party turn. Has Koch $$ been flowing in as advertising support? Just speculating.
Is that new scoreboard MMM bragging about today part of the now 117 million or does it add to the cost?
Nuetral? Ha! Visit the link below to see how “neutral” he was at the March press release. Be sure to check out the “neutral body language” at 3:38…ridiculous!
http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid948003011001?bckey=AQ~~%2CAAAACbv1vfE~%2C7AuDZwYVT9WQfEcq0xgThW12nxA_q9Yw&bctid=2219384900001
This EC thing was thrown at us for what was to be a 12000 seater for under a $100,000,000.00 . At that cost, a Yugo class facility at the least. Now it is 117 mill and on the rise no doubt. Still cheap seats when compared to the $11,000 per seat Lincoln Neb is spending. Gotta wonder how much leg and arm room the typical seat has. Not to worry tho, when 3 out of 4 seats will be empty Joe Sixpack can stretch out while the Ravens and argus leaders of the world schmooze and booze in the loge seating.
LED lighting eh? That’s gonna be real spendy. Ever wonder why Joe doesn’t have led lighting. Because they cost about $40 per 60 watts of equivilant incandescent lighting. Ahhhhh….. But nothing but the best for our packed loge seats and empty general seats.
Unfortunately – most people are so blinded by the “ooohs and ahhhhs,” that they do not think about that those “perks” come with a price tag. MMM does not give two licks about what this will cost in the end and the fact that it still sits in an area where no one but the DMV has invested (if you can even call it that), still remains. Sanford is doing a better job of developing a corn field where planes scrape the top of your head as they fly over then MMM and doofwad Darrin Smith are doing. Seriously – Darrin Smith’s job is community development. Well – Darrin – get developing because the area of town where the highest price tag in our city still sucks and outside of giving away some TIFS DT – you have sucked at your six figure job. Quit worrying about romancing the big wigs and get dirty.
Poly: “LED lighting eh? That’s gonna be real spendy. Ever wonder why Joe doesn’t have led lighting. Because they cost about $40 per 60 watts of equivilant incandescent lighting. “
A year to 18 months ago you would have been right. However you can run down to Menards right now and pick up a 3M LED full dimmable 13W (60W equivalent) bulb for $15.
So now run the numbers – the LED gets 25,000 hours of run time. The standard incandescent from a name brand manufacturer (Philips or GE for example) lasts 1,000 hours.
LED costs $15. Standard incandescent cost less than a buck most of the time, even good quality can be found for 50 cents (unless you try to find them at Ace hardware where a two pack costs $8… but don’t get me started).
So price alone, the standard bulb is ahead, because even if the LED lasts 25 times longer, it costs 30 times as much. However, the energy savings is where LED starts to pull ahead.
LED using 13W over 25,000 hours is 325,000W or 325KW.
Incandescent using 60W over 25,000 hours is 1,500,000W or 1500KW.
Lets use an average of 10 cents per KW. That means the LED will cost $32.50 over its lifespan to operate while the incandescent will cost $150. The incandescent will also need 24 more replacement bulbs which adds another $12 to the total.
So final tally – LED costs $47.50 for 25,000 hours of usage. Incandescent costs $162.50.
I won’t even discuss environmental impact related to energy production, production of all those incandescents that rest in landfills, or transportation costs etc. However I will mention that in a typical home we probably aren’t upset when we have to change a lightbulb as it takes us 30 seconds and we aren’t paying someone an hourly wage to do it for us. But think about a commercial structure where maintenance men need to run around swapping lightbulbs. In something like the Events Center, we are paying their wages to drag ladders around and screw in light bulbs – so obviously that adds to the costs as well.
Truthfully, I’m not convinced LEDs are at the pricepoint where the typical homeowner can justify them yet – because even though the numbers show the cost savings when you compare them to CFLs the savings really aren’t there yet. However when it comes to a building like an Events Center or any other public building…. I can’t see how they would use anything other than LEDs when you examine the total cost over the lifetime of the bulb.
I have enough CFLs to last me several years, but rest assured when I burn through those I will be converting over to LED. Yes the up front costs are high, but the long term cost savings are substantial.
Sorry to derail the thread with a discussion about lightbulbs… but it is a subject (energy conservation) I enjoy talking about, and I want to prevent people from focusing upon the up front costs while ignoring the long term (total) costs.
Craig…LED’s have not been on the market long enough to make the claims you post. Kinda like the gas mileage claims I see car manufactures making. Take all those claims with a huge grain of salt. When lamp producers make these kind of claims that take a unit of energy and proclaim dramatic energy savings???? Well something’s gotta give somewhere. In this case….the circuit board that takes the heat….
…The Lighting Science Group has recalled 554,000 LED lightbulbs sold under the brand names Definity, EcoSmart, Sylvania, and Westinghouse. Included in the incidents were eight that resulted in damage to light sockets, fixtures, rugs, carpet, floors, circuits or lamps. The Lighting Science Group is offering new bulbs to buyers.
HINT….stick with CFL’s….you’ll sleep easier at night.
You can complain about LED scoreboards, but I don’t think they make the ones that say “home” and “visitor” anymore.