Quote:
Originally Posted by powderjunkie
This take would've been better when this deal fell apart, but those meeting dates remind me now about the rushed vote before summer break in 2019. I remember saying it was a foolish for the city to rush ahead with the vote, as it was a golden opportunity to identify and establish clarity on some of the inevitable loose ends...which might include sidewalk/road requirements (I'm not saying those specific cost details would have emerged in the next 6 weeks, but the apparent fuzziness about exactly who was on the hook for those 'cost TBD items' could easily have been resolved then.
It's ultimately probably irrelevant as the pandemic/inflation were the real killers, but the city pissed away a good chance to get a few more 'wins' with a pending vote and mixed feelings among the populace. As we saw it play out, the next steps were still glacially slow and any supposed urgency to vote was false.
|
The fuzziest things in 2019 were how the real estate options were being captured. A couple council members specifically objected to them not being included in the valuation and voted against the deal as a result.