There was a little bit of drama and assuming going on when the City had to change the language regarding Proposition #3.

After doing some homework, let's be clear...

A baseball stadium is coming to El Paso. Done deal.

The bad thing is there is still a ton of confusion about this.

Proposition #3 is not about whether or not we are going to build a stadium. Again, a baseball stadium is coming to El Paso.

This really makes it important to get out and vote. A lot of people are voting against Proposition #3 because they are against the stadium. They don't realize they are essentially voting to pay for the stadium out of the general fund and from our property taxes.

If you support the stadium, get out and vote in favor of Proposition #3.

If you are against the stadium, get out and vote in favor of Proposition #3. At least 70% of the stadium will be paid by Hotel Occupancy Tax.

http://www.kfoxtv.com/news/news/hotel-oc...ans/nSnxN/

The mindset against progress is so strong in some people, their negativity will blind them into knee-jerk reactions.

(10-25-2012 08:02 PM)mistabinks Wrote:  There was a little bit of drama and assuming going on when the City had to change the language regarding Proposition #3.

After doing some homework, let's be clear...

A baseball stadium is coming to El Paso. Done deal.

The bad thing is there is still a ton of confusion about this.

Proposition #3 is not about whether or not we are going to build a stadium. Again, a baseball stadium is coming to El Paso.

This really makes it important to get out and vote. A lot of people are voting against Proposition #3 because they are against the stadium. They don't realize they are essentially voting to pay for the stadium out of the general fund and from our property taxes.

If you support the stadium, get out and vote in favor of Proposition #3.

If you are against the stadium, get out and vote in favor of Proposition #3. At least 70% of the stadium will be paid by Hotel Occupancy Tax.

http://www.kfoxtv.com/news/news/hotel-oc...ans/nSnxN/

I disagree with your assumption that people do not know what they are voting for.

What I believe is that people who are voting against proposition 3 are voting knowing full well what the implications are.

They are doing so in order to force the city of El Paso to find an alternative means to fund the stadium.

As you know, the city cannot raise property taxes to build the stadium. They will likely have to use the general fund, raise parking fees, or bridge fees.

I will be voting no in order to force the city to do this.


That said, I have seen people holding signs at some early voting places that say " Vote no on baseball stadium".

Here is another article confirming the stadium will be built regardless of the outcome of Prop #3.

http://www.elpasotimes.com/news/ci_21857...liant-bond

There is a scanned letter from an independent lawyer that the crabs and haters are clinging to. That letter is not from a judge or from anyone with authority. That single lawyer seems to think if Prop #3 fails, the City would be reduced to starting completely over.

Lawyer or not, he would be wrong in this case.

People voting against Prop #3 are voting against letting hotel guests pay for the stadium and for letting the local taxpayers pay for it.

Get out and vote!

Regardless if your heart is broken because City Hall is going to get demolished.
Regardless if you feel you should have had a say in the matter.

The stadium is coming. It is just a matter of who is going to pay for it.

(10-26-2012 10:33 AM)mistabinks Wrote:  Here is another article confirming the stadium will be built regardless of the outcome of Prop #3.

http://www.elpasotimes.com/news/ci_21857...liant-bond

There is a scanned letter from an independent lawyer that the crabs and haters are clinging to. That letter is not from a judge or from anyone with authority. That single lawyer seems to think if Prop #3 fails, the City would be reduced to starting completely over.

Lawyer or not, he would be wrong in this case.

People voting against Prop #3 are voting against letting hotel guests pay for the stadium and for letting the local taxpayers pay for it.

Get out and vote!

Regardless if your heart is broken because City Hall is going to get demolished.
Regardless if you feel you should have had a say in the matter.

The stadium is coming. It is just a matter of who is going to pay for it.

If the city had an alternative way of paying for the baseball stadium, they wouldn't be pushing so hard to get proposition 3 passed.

It is more likely, and Susie Byrd has confirmed this, that they don't know how they will fund this project if the proposition fails.

My prediction is that if the prop fails, the mayor and other city council members will change their mind about building the stadium.

F*ck 'em and Feed 'em fish... Vote however you wish, Fit. God Bless America!

(10-26-2012 12:19 PM)zyxwvutsru Wrote:  F*ck 'em and Feed 'em fish... Vote however you wish, Fit. God Bless America!

I'm glad someone understands.

(10-26-2012 10:38 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  If the city had an alternative way of paying for the baseball stadium, they wouldn't be pushing so hard to get proposition 3 passed.

So what is your point?

(10-26-2012 10:38 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  It is more likely, and Susie Byrd has confirmed this, that they don't know how they will fund this project if the proposition fails.

Hence the HOT tax. So far I don't see a problem.

(10-26-2012 10:38 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  My prediction is that if the prop fails, the mayor and other city council members will change their mind about building the stadium.

Wrong-O. The City is now contractually obligated to build the stadium. It's coming.

Mistabinks

My point is that the city has done a poor job of attempting to deal with this issue. If the city had done their homework, they would have an alternative plan to fund the stadium. Their lack of planning is proof that we rushed into this deal.

The HOT tax is likely to fail. Even if it does pass, it still does not pay for the entire stadium. At least 30% of the cost must come from somewhere else.

Contracts can be broken. The City will likely negotiate an alternative to building the stadium if the HOT tax fails. The likely alternative will be a renovation of Cohen Stadium for half the cost of a new stadium.

(10-30-2012 11:34 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Mistabinks

My point is that the city has done a poor job of attempting to deal with this issue. If the city had done their homework, they would have an alternative plan to fund the stadium. Their lack of planning is proof that we rushed into this deal.

The HOT tax is likely to fail. Even if it does pass, it still does not pay for the entire stadium. At least 30% of the cost must come from somewhere else.

Contracts can be broken. The City will likely negotiate an alternative to building the stadium if the HOT tax fails. The likely alternative will be a renovation of Cohen Stadium for half the cost of a new stadium.

Lets say that the HOT tax fails, the stadium will be built under the sales tax and current projects under sales tax will be moved to property tax, the stadium is being built no matter what you, and the rest of the non-progressive minority thinks. So go ahead and cut your nose to spite your face, I can afford an increase of $15/year on my property tax.

(10-30-2012 11:34 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Mistabinks

Fitbud

(10-30-2012 11:34 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  My point is that the city has done a poor job of attempting to deal with this issue. If the city had done their homework, they would have an alternative plan to fund the stadium. Their lack of planning is proof that we rushed into this deal.

I don't know what to tell you. Last time I checked, I don't have the ability to see into the future. Yet, somehow, I have been well informed and knowledgeable about this project for at least the last two years. I don't feel it was rushed. I want the people involved to have a solid plan. In my opinion, they do.

(10-30-2012 11:34 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  The HOT tax is likely to fail.

So you do have the ability to see into the future.

(10-30-2012 11:34 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Even if it does pass, it still does not pay for the entire stadium. At least 30% of the cost must come from somewhere else.

Agreed. 100% minus 70% is 30%. I'll put you down for a C.E.

(10-30-2012 11:34 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Contracts can be broken.

No, not really.

(10-30-2012 11:34 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  The City will likely negotiate an alternative to building the stadium if the HOT tax fails.

Strike two.

(10-30-2012 11:34 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  The likely alternative will be a renovation of Cohen Stadium for half the cost of a new stadium.

And the troll strikes out!

We'll see who is right in the end.

You must be new to this city.

Seeking the last word again.....

Not necessarily. I'm simply pointing out that you seem not to know how things work in this city. We are notorious screwing things up by not properly planning.

(10-31-2012 09:16 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Not necessarily. I'm simply pointing out that you seem not to know how things work in this city. We are notorious screwing things up by not properly planning.

Things get screwed up in this city because of people like you. Example, Ascarete pool. that was suppose to be where olympic trials would be held, but instead the naysayers ended up sticking us with a multimillion dollar hole in the ground. People like you fitbud, are what holds this city back.

(10-31-2012 10:11 AM)randaddyminer Wrote:  

(10-31-2012 09:16 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Not necessarily. I'm simply pointing out that you seem not to know how things work in this city. We are notorious screwing things up by not properly planning.

Things get screwed up in this city because of people like you. Example, Ascarete pool. that was suppose to be where olympic trials would be held, but instead the naysayers ended up sticking us with a multimillion dollar hole in the ground. People like you fitbud, are what holds this city back.

On the contrary. It's people such as yourself who actually believe in the " build it and they will come" montra that only happens in the movies.

Perhaps you should do some research and realize that just because you build a venue for a sporting event doesn't mean that you are going to miraculously going to get said sporting events.

(10-31-2012 09:16 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Not necessarily. I'm simply pointing out that you seem not to know how things work in this city. We are notorious screwing things up by not properly planning.

I've only worked for the city for 18 years. I have only sat at a bargaining table across from Joyce Wilson. I have only sat next to Mayor Cook at the football games for five years. But no, I don't know how this city works because I have a different viewpoint than fittroll.

(10-31-2012 10:49 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(10-31-2012 10:11 AM)randaddyminer Wrote:  

(10-31-2012 09:16 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Not necessarily. I'm simply pointing out that you seem not to know how things work in this city. We are notorious screwing things up by not properly planning.

Things get screwed up in this city because of people like you. Example, Ascarete pool. that was suppose to be where olympic trials would be held, but instead the naysayers ended up sticking us with a multimillion dollar hole in the ground. People like you fitbud, are what holds this city back.

On the contrary. It's people such as yourself who actually believe in the " build it and they will come" montra that only happens in the movies.

Perhaps you should do some research and realize that just because you build a venue for a sporting event doesn't mean that you are going to miraculously going to get said sporting events.

You should do the research, I see you haven't had a response to the questioning of the pamphlets you cited, probably because you haven't read them or maybe you have, but you just took their numbers as facts with out knowing how they arrived at those numbers. Kind of sad when you cite something, but in actuality, it defeats the purpose of your argument.

Anyone hearing the Q this morning? If that letter is legit, I think the haters might have some ammo in this mess.

Seems Cook is/was very much against the stadium.