Comments on: Councils okays $32 million in marina debt

By: piperdoesnthaveadegree

piperdoesnthaveadegree — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 05:14:08 +0000

I think this is a horrible idea. I enjoyed the “Bark Park” and everything else the Fairgrounds had to offer. I agree with the previous post about better allocation of tax dollars going to emergency preparedness. This city needs so much more than a 32 million dollar marina/water park (starting with a new mayor). “The illusion and suggestion of boat sales”? I’m confused. The paragraph started “In fact”, however “illusion” and “suggestion” are not exactly factual.

Terrible idea.

By: David Cutting

David Cutting — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 02:33:23 +0000

The water park and the marina are briliant ideas, but neither should be built at taxpayer expense. What taxpayer money must be used for is tornado sirens and sidewalks, and the mayor should be encouraging private investors to build a marina and a water park. Additionally, a water park would best be located near I-24 Exit 1, where we have available space, good traffic flow, and existing and adequate hotels and restaurants.

By: Blayne Clements

Blayne Clements — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 14:41:13 +0000

Kudos to Harris for continuing to show that he is looking out for the people by trying to let the new council have a say.I think Harris’ proposal should have been given serious consideration. At the very least, with the special session and avoiding having the new council having a say on the issue, it gives the appearance of being run through quickly.

I am curious what others opinion are about the project. I can see a need for a water park (however I question if it qualifies as a poublic works project), but the need for the marina seems questionable. However, my wife thinks the marina is a good idea, but not the waterpark.

On a side note, my wife hates water parks, and I love them, haha.

What are everyone’s else’s opinions?