DC-5 18-1149 Resolution to Approve the Explanatory Caption to the Ballot Question Concerning the Center of the City Charter Amendment and to Authorize Submission to the Governor and Attorney General for Approval for the November 6, 2018 Ballot
Provide voters with facts, context, consequences and transparency by adding this explanatory caption. We are not deficient in parks; we are deficient in affordable and workforce housing. Revenues are growing more slowly than expenses and buildings generate revenues, while parks do not. There is not enough money for existing park maintenance, so funds are not feasible to be shifted away from existing parks for a new one (Parks Commission recognized this). Given the very, very large of expense incurred to engineer the Library Lane Garage to support a multi-story building, one could argue that to not build a building would be shirking city's fiduciary responsibility. A person would not have to support the proposed building -- just some building -- to vote against only a park. Please be transparent and include the caption.
Unnecessary, as the petitioner's ballot language has already been approved. The question is quite clear, presenting 2 choices, and not in need of explanation. Should the city use the land for Park, Yes, or No?
Provide voters with facts, context, consequences and transparency by adding this explanatory caption. We are not deficient in parks; we are deficient in affordable and workforce housing. Revenues are growing more slowly than expenses and buildings generate revenues, while parks do not. There is not enough money for existing park maintenance, so funds are not feasible to be shifted away from existing parks for a new one (Parks Commission recognized this). Given the very, very large of expense incurred to engineer the Library Lane Garage to support a multi-story building, one could argue that to not build a building would be shirking city's fiduciary responsibility. A person would not have to support the proposed building -- just some building -- to vote against only a park. Please be transparent and include the caption.
Unnecessary, as the petitioner's ballot language has already been approved. The question is quite clear, presenting 2 choices, and not in need of explanation. Should the city use the land for Park, Yes, or No?