From the CIP I’m going to use just 1 example to make a point. For over 2 years, a group has been working on 1 project missing from the CIP tonight. It has been totally removed from the CIP‘s top rankings which it held for many years but is now being replaced by 5 other projects.
How can this be when the 3 decade old project removed would keep people from spending their money elsewhere?
How can this be as we prepare for the 81/corridor growth to bring in people that will want this project that they have had prior to moving here?
How can this be when the missing project can show an economic and social savings impact? And mental and physical wellness, as well as cognitive impact on reading readiness? Oh and save lives?
How can this be that it’s replaced by others not having supportive outside funding and being a match for large state and federal grants and angel donors?
How can this be if it is a project that serves cradle to grave and has been replaced by 5 projects that only serves certain ages?
How would you act as the planning commission if you voted on a project tonight and put a resolution forward and it was removed from the supervisors agenda without explanation to you or the public and disappeared from the CIP?
Shouldn’t dismissing a project from the CIP be because the data shows why and supports it being dropped?
I speak for 4,321 names documented as of this morning who want and need that missing project to be put back on the CIP into the first ranking again. They will tell you the facts of why that missing project is wanted and needed more since prior years and because of the 81 corridor growth.
The point: When an internal process to get to a CIP list backed by data and what is really needed and wanted is not applied fairly then the taxpayers are not being served fairly.
Respectfully and Ty for your time and talents given to decide how our taxes are spent.
From the CIP I’m going to use just 1 example to make a point. For over 2 years, a group has been working on 1 project missing from the CIP tonight. It has been totally removed from the CIP‘s top rankings which it held for many years but is now being replaced by 5 other projects.
How can this be when the 3 decade old project removed would keep people from spending their money elsewhere?
How can this be as we prepare for the 81/corridor growth to bring in people that will want this project that they have had prior to moving here?
How can this be when the missing project can show an economic and social savings impact? And mental and physical wellness, as well as cognitive impact on reading readiness? Oh and save lives?
How can this be that it’s replaced by others not having supportive outside funding and being a match for large state and federal grants and angel donors?
How can this be if it is a project that serves cradle to grave and has been replaced by 5 projects that only serves certain ages?
How would you act as the planning commission if you voted on a project tonight and put a resolution forward and it was removed from the supervisors agenda without explanation to you or the public and disappeared from the CIP?
Shouldn’t dismissing a project from the CIP be because the data shows why and supports it being dropped?
I speak for 4,321 names documented as of this morning who want and need that missing project to be put back on the CIP into the first ranking again. They will tell you the facts of why that missing project is wanted and needed more since prior years and because of the 81 corridor growth.
The point: When an internal process to get to a CIP list backed by data and what is really needed and wanted is not applied fairly then the taxpayers are not being served fairly.
Respectfully and Ty for your time and talents given to decide how our taxes are spent.