Comment 65850

By Actually... (anonymous) | Posted July 08, 2011 at 12:48:52 in reply to Comment 65838

Let's get the order of things straight - The School Board decided to leave the core and then proceeded along a process to that end. Their accommodations review process is a sham (just read about the other processes concerning school closures.) There were plenty of alternatives including long-term low-cost lease in some commercial space elsewhere in the downtown, but the people running the Board (e.g. staff) wanted to move to the mountain. They are on the record as not liking downtown ("It's unsafe, no parking") plus in the first round of building "education square" in which they were a tenant, they insisted on full parking for everyone on someone else's dime - that's what essentially killed the whole deal.

Robert - It is actually more expensive to go to the mountain than finding cheaper alternatives downtown (eg. leasing). The reality (as mentioned by board chair Bishop) is that they won't have the money to build new (mountain or elsewhere) unless they sell the land that the city gave them so it is going to be the City who is paying for them to move. I say that they either build new in the core or we don't give them money for the land that we actually gave them for free in the first place. If they don't want to do that, they should give the land back for free and let them decide what they are going to on their own dime. They are an elected body, just like city council so they are accountable for what they are doing.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools