Wwwhhhaaatttt? Smoke and mirrors from CoCs???

Nooooooo….


"They might bring funding to the table"…


…they might not?

maroon barchetta said:

---

dubi said:

---

Quote:

---

She said attendance at the park was 97,000 in 2023 and increased 12% to 109,000 in 2024.

---

I assume this is free attendance that will diminish dramatically if folks have to actually buy tickets?

---

109,000 for three concerts? Or does that include other events as well?

---

I think that counts every event, every jogger/walker, the dogs being walked through the park, and people in the apartments nearby.

The listed capacity of the venue is 7,000.
So, quick math. You would have to have 15 to 16 events at maximum capacity for you to have reached 109,000 attendees.

I'm interested to hear how they came up with that number.

We went from:

"Here's what one private sector group wants to do, at no expense to the taxpayer. (See images) These would be leasehold improvements done at their expense and they would be responsible for booking talent during the leased nights. The taxpayers would receive lease payments and the community would benefit from overnight tourism, timed with other sports tourism events, and enhance entertainment options.


Thoughts? Respectfully,

Yancy '95"

To:

"Heiden said the plan is in its early stages but noted the city might receive help funding the work."

On the previous page I posted my opinion that his vacating this discussion was pathetic and a couple of you said that was not so and that pathetic was not a word you would use. The moment he would have to explain the article from The Eagle and the meeting is when he signed off. You still want to defend bait and switch? I'm sure is still reading this thread. Mr. Yancy do you care to re-engage?

Respectfully,
JaxDad '91

Quote:

---

The listed capacity of the venue is 7,000.

So, quick math. You would have to have 15 to 16 events at maximum capacity for you to have reached 109,000 attendees.

---

There are no tickets nor turnstiles at WPC, so I'm think they just make up numbers?

If I'm that business, I would reconsider any investment. Why would I pay for something the city will foot the bill for?

Serious question.

JaxDad said:

---

We went from:

"Here's what one private sector group wants to do, at no expense to the taxpayer. (See images) These would be leasehold improvements done at their expense and they would be responsible for booking talent during the leased nights. The taxpayers would receive lease payments and the community would benefit from overnight tourism, timed with other sports tourism events, and enhance entertainment options.


Thoughts? Respectfully,

Yancy '95"

To:

"Heiden said the plan is in its early stages but noted the city might receive help funding the work."

On the previous page I posted my opinion that his vacating this discussion was pathetic and a couple of you said that was not so and that pathetic was not a word you would use. The moment he would have to explain the article from The Eagle and the meeting is when he signed off. You still want to defend bait and switch? I'm sure is still reading this thread. Mr. Yancy do you care to re-engage?

Respectfully,
JaxDad '91

---

That's what they are proposing. That's what I, as one member of council, would like us to pursue- a private sector led enhancement to WPC with them booking high end talent and paying a lease and a per ticket gate charge.

Staff's recommendation included a splash pad. Knowing this group won't want to pay for that, and for other reasons, I expressed skepticism on that piece of the plan.

We don't know the estimated cost. We haven't gotten that far. I went back and re-read my initial comments kicking this off. Those comments are accurate. If the will of the council is something beyond what these guys are willing to do, there could be an investment in taxpayer dollars. And, routine maintenance of WPC will always be an expense to the city. Real assets always need corrective and preventive maintenance and occasionally, renovation. Letting WPC crumble to the ground in disrepair as a previous poster wrote is not going to happen.

It'll come before us in the next a couple of months and you and everyone will have an opportunity to weigh in. I encourage you to do so.

Gotta run. Constituent meetings start soon. Have a great week everyone.

Respectfully,

Yancy '95

It seems to be a similar playbook as the ballpark for the Bombers. City builds/buys a multimillion dollar white elephant that is going to cost a significant but undetermined amount to maintain. But what to use it for? Council didn't think about that. Oh how silly to build/buy and commit to maintaining a Macy's building, ballpark, or outdoor music venue without figuring that out first. What a predicament.

Maybe a politically connected local businessman that can't profitably build and maintain his own facilities would like to use it?

Then once the city has built and committed to maintain the white elephant with no reasonable city use, best option is to lease the facilities for a song. If anyone bothered to calculate it, taxpayers are going to be out a fortune for those capital and maintenance costs. It's a wealth transfer.

The idea is to pre-commit to the costs. Treat "investment" and maintenance costs as a done deal. Pretending "this is a $40 million dollar facility and we have to throw money into the Creek otherwise the money that previous councils threw into the Creek will be wasted." is a ruse to justify more bad decisions. Obviously right now is the decision point. The Creek is what it is. Does the city throw good money into the Creek? But if discernment can be avoided and the money is locked-in, then it's over before voters/taxpayers realize they got hosed.

But be sure. The decision point where money is spent to build/design/study/purchase the boondoggle is where the taxpayers are getting suckered. When we see a sale for a loss, lease for a song, or when the facility goes into disrepair because it isn't worth maintaining, it is already too late. The mistake has already been made at that point. There is nothing anyone on council can do to make the Creek, Macy's, or spending $1.5 million on designing the ballpark a good idea. Those mistakes have already been made.

But my hope is that we don't let them run the same playbook here (and with the ballpark construction and convention center). I hope there is an expectation that there needs to be a little discernment before resources are committed to a project. That would help avoid future mistakes like the ones we complain about here (Macy's, Chimney Hill, original Creek construction, etc.).

Also the idea that entrepreneurs should be bringing their ideas to council in order to be allowed through the city's red tape or to receive taxpayer funding like some sort of socialist shark tank is awful. I pray that isn't the kind of capitalism that people want in this town.

Seems like this thread is less a discussion and more an advertisement for what the council will be doing regardless of public input. Much like the article in the Eagle, they are advertisements and not actual representation of the entire discussion.

May I firmly say that a splash pad has nothing to do with the concert venue in the slightest. It is these type of needless "pet projects" that live in the mind of the same folks who gave us Macy's and the baseball field. I don't blame them, there is no punishment for their dereliction. Silly additional expenditures like a splash pad will do little to seek to provide a decent concert venue and reek of ridiculous expenditure without care or worry to those money you choose to spend.

Who proposed a splash pad? What purpose would that serve to creating a concert venue? It's simply ridiculous to assume that folks who would tack on such unnecessary expenditures such as that would be able to navigate dealing with private entities to bring about a singular focus toward the stated goal. This thread turned from my respect to the council's outreach to the community and has soured to a mocking of the engagement.

"Incentivize" is a term used by the High Priests Of Economic Development. It means using other people's money on projects for which there is no penalty for failure; the only meaningful return on which is measured in the awards for "planning" they exchange back and forth at Economic Development Conferences.

Yeah, the economic development lady who put together the Macy's deal did so well, she retired.

Now Ms. Ruiz is trying to sell high rises in Northgate.

…to the city…

I guess I'm in the wrong business….

Yes, and the city manager is still..the city manager. The lack of accountability to obvious mistakes or even acceptance or admittance of mistakes is why few trust future plans. Surely the council can see that, right? Bob, who was the person who proposed the splash pad? Was it any of the unelected officials in the city manager's office? Since this is a upfront discussion, surely these questions can be answered, correct?

Further, has anyone been fired or held to account for these past mistakes? Other than electing new council members, what recourse do the taxpayers have to the unelected members in the city manager's office?

Are you also at the mercy of their whims? What is the dynamic between the mayor, the council and the city manager's office? Is it cordial or is it similar to the adversarial relationship between the city and A&M?

Richleau12 said:

---

Yes, and the city manager is still..the city manager. The lack of accountability to obvious mistakes or even acceptance or admittance of mistakes is why few trust future plans. Surely the council can see that, right? Bob, who was the person who proposed the splash pad? Was it any of the unelected officials in the city manager's office? Since this is a upfront discussion, surely these questions can be answered, correct?

Further, has anyone been fired or held to account for these past mistakes? Other than electing new council members, what recourse do the taxpayers have to the unelected members in the city manager's office?

Are you also at the mercy of their whims? What is the dynamic between the mayor, the council and the city manager's office? Is it cordial or is it similar to the adversarial relationship between the city and A&M?

---

I'm only at the whims of God, my wife, my grandsons and the law.

Respectfully

Yancy '95

Bob Yancy said:

---

Richleau12 said:

---

Yes, and the city manager is still..the city manager. The lack of accountability to obvious mistakes or even acceptance or admittance of mistakes is why few trust future plans. Surely the council can see that, right? Bob, who was the person who proposed the splash pad? Was it any of the unelected officials in the city manager's office? Since this is a upfront discussion, surely these questions can be answered, correct?

Further, has anyone been fired or held to account for these past mistakes? Other than electing new council members, what recourse do the taxpayers have to the unelected members in the city manager's office?

Are you also at the mercy of their whims? What is the dynamic between the mayor, the council and the city manager's office? Is it cordial or is it similar to the adversarial relationship between the city and A&M?

---

I'm only at the whims of God, my wife, my grandsons and the law.

Respectfully

Yancy '95

---

So no answer to the numerous questions posed? You are only proving my theory correct. This thread is an advertisement. What of the very detailed response by Tim Weaver? Will any of his ideas be implemented? Again, why do you refuse to say anything about the city manager's office? They are clearly the bad actor here and have been for years. I've been to a meeting before and the tension between the two sides was palpable. The council asked them to do some small task and the city manager's office said "we will take that under advisement" or something of the sort. Basically telling you guys to piss off. It was quite jarring to see the lack of cooperation between the two bodies of government.

To be totally honest I was shocked to hear that Yancy had asked repeatedly for supporting documents from staff on the Macy's debacle and was not given them, and then, only by an ORR were they made available.

I think decision makers must have all of the latest and greatest info to make good decisions, and furthermore shouldn't have to beg staff for that info. Again I was floored to hear there was a disconnect. Sounds to me like staff has been running the show for years and isn't interested in moving over to the passenger seat. I hope I'm wrong.

That's the impression I get as well. So again, what recourse do the taxpayers have against the unelected? Notice how even the elected have little control over the city manager's office. Oddly, the council will not speak out again the city manager's office. You'd think after the obfuscation of records the city council was met via the Macy's debacle, that would give them all the necessary fuel to look for potential replacements. It seems that not even something like that could even move them to hold even one person accountable. It's as if the city manager's office feel as if they are playing a solo game of SimCity 2000 in sandbox mode. I don't blame them. The city council are feckless and toothless so why listen to them at all!

What PAC do you mean? Who are the folks behind the PAC?

The problem is that one PAC picks the elected. The staff and elected just fall in line. That's the impression I get.

What I've seen over and over with various regimes of city mgmt and economic development is that their actions seem to be driven by a "resume building" mentality. Build the next latest and greatest thing or knock that one big action out of the park so it will go on their resume as a gateway to a bigger job in a bigger city. I don't have to explain how problematic that is if true. Staff will bend the ear of certain more impressionable or naive council members to forward their resume building agenda.

If my assertion is true it would be a terrible way to decide what's best for a city as it's infused to its core with personal interest.

The other thing Ive noticed is smug condescension from certain city mgmt regimes and their select disciples on council towards local businesses. I've seen them pontificate downward to these citizens, who risked so much, as if they know what's best and those folks should just hurry along so the grownups can talk.

I went to the comments section on the council website and was not taking requests.

https://forms.cstx.gov/Forms/CSCouncil

I also went to an update website for WPC

https://www.scribd.com/document/881221931/Wolf-Pen-Creek-Park-Update#from_embed

On this page it shows a few pictures of the amphitheater flooded. What kind of fool wants to put stadium seats in there knowing they will need constant maintenance or replacement after every hard rain. I also only saw three events listed. They want to play the "if you build it, they will come" game with our tax dollars.

I'm sure the council is well aware of message boards like this but just don't really care about our peon citizen opinions. I will remember next election.

Richleau12 said:

---

That's the impression I get as well. So again, what recourse do the taxpayers have against the unelected? Notice how even the elected have little control over the city manager's office. Oddly, the council will not speak out again the city manager's office. You'd think after the obfuscation of records the city council was met via the Macy's debacle, that would give them all the necessary fuel to look for potential replacements. It seems that not even something like that could even move them to hold even one person accountable. It's as if the city manager's office feel as if they are playing a solo game of SimCity 2000 in sandbox mode. I don't blame them. The city council are feckless and toothless so why listen to them at all!

What PAC do you mean? Who are the folks behind the PAC?

---

I named the PAC. Staff took it down.

Not catching a ban for ya, rookie.

Hornbeck said:

---

Richleau12 said:

---

That's the impression I get as well. So again, what recourse do the taxpayers have against the unelected? Notice how even the elected have little control over the city manager's office. Oddly, the council will not speak out again the city manager's office. You'd think after the obfuscation of records the city council was met via the Macy's debacle, that would give them all the necessary fuel to look for potential replacements. It seems that not even something like that could even move them to hold even one person accountable. It's as if the city manager's office feel as if they are playing a solo game of SimCity 2000 in sandbox mode. I don't blame them. The city council are feckless and toothless so why listen to them at all!

What PAC do you mean? Who are the folks behind the PAC?

---

I named the PAC. Staff took it down.

Nit catching a ban for ya, rookie.

---

We live in a great city. Quality of life is high and tax rates are relatively (relatively) low and likely to go lower. The trains run on time. Police are policing. Fire protects lives and property every day. Public works is high quality and reliable. Utilities are award winning. Water pressure and quality, electric reliability are all there. Parks are plentiful.

We need to do a better job of embracing and partnering with the private sector on housing, economic development and tourism. We need to be more careful around discretionary decision-making. What we invest in and where we put things has been less than optimal. That's just a fact. In some instances, not good at all. That doesn't negate the fact that we do indeed live in a great city.

Sometimes our staid approach to governing isn't as responsive to citizen concerns as it should be. Full stop. We can do better.

For all that- I wouldn't want to live anywhere else. Most of you probably wouldn't either.

Stay engaged. Exercise what the Army calls the "soldier's right to *****." Be heard. But, drive through any other city our size and tell me we aren't ahead of the game.

Respectfully yours- I Love Aggieland

Yancy '95

[This is a long thread and there has not been a lot of moderation because posters are being respectful with their opinions and there have not been a lot of derails. We ask that all posters be respectful when giving their opinions and not use words or phrases that are considered disrespectful or combative. Thank you. -Staff]

[Any question about moderation can be directed to the contact option at the bottom of the page and any questions about moderation posted on the thread will be removed. -Thank you. -Staff]

Richleau12 said:

---

Anyone have any pictures of this packed house?

---