7 thoughts on “City Sign Budget Limited”

  1. Waldo — Did you mean to say “isn’t going to pay” instead of “is”? Staff proposed $1,000,000 for signs over a 4-year period, Council approved $450,000. That’s still more than some would like, but it’s a 55% cut in what City staff and Downtown business leaders requested…

  2. Would it be wrong to point out that it depends on what the definition of “is” is?

  3. Ack! What a terrible mistake. (I fundamentally messed up the other blog entry that I posted last night, too.) That’s fixed now. I’m sorry about that.

  4. Any money spend on signage to direct tourist to downtown or elsewhere is wasted taxpayer money when there are so many other pressing needs. The money should have been spend on developing more and better parking for downtown patrons. This council finds it extremely easy to be generous with other peoples money.

  5. If they’re putting up new signs the first thing they need to do is pull down all the ones that reference the “Downtown Mall” as “historic”. With all of the demolition and re-construction that’s gone on it’s anything but.

  6. The City staff and downtown merchant welfare recipients are not entitled to anything to be cut. I Believe this $450,000 is in addition to the $200,000 that was put aside last year, but it doesn’t matter. If it is wise to arbitrarily cut an appropriation that neither the staff nor the downtown merchant welfare recipients have asked for, then it is wiser to cut out the entire expenditure. “Daddy, I want $1000 to throw to the wind.” “No, child, you can only have $450.” This is a fine example of how the city spends money… a little here, a little there, everybody rides and we buy votes (with other peoples’ money). The staff said it neeeded $1M; by what criteria did council determine that only $450,000 (or $650,000) was needed ? Which locations and what kinds of signs are needed? Don’t bother to answer. Just remeber people, that Cville Eye told you last year when council paid $200,000 that the staff would be back. Prediction, after the signs start getting installed, they’ll be back asking. Did anybody see the Buckingham Palace price tags on those signs. This is becoming quite funny. If people are stupid enough to allow themselves to be treated in such a manner, they are getting exactly what they want or deserve. At least Ambassador Norris had the honesty to not call it a budget cut and that Council is “saving” tax payers money or this expenditure is being “fiscally responsible.” It is interesting that Council’s position has been that there is a crisis in housing, yet reduced the new housing welfare program by $700,000 in favor of putting up better signs for the welfare mongers to find their way to Council chambers to demand for welfare subsidies for their rents and mortgages.

Comments are closed.