10/25/12
The Center budget discussion got really interesting Monday night. So interesting that it consumed about half of the one hour work session. See: http://lmcc.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?publish_id=737 and the work session link at the end of the list for the video.
Suddenly Zerby has gotten interested in the financial debacle that's happening. So interested that he suggested re-looking at the budget killing contract he and the other friends of Lizee awarded to Center Director Anderson at the beginning of this year. Near the end of the discussion he even suggested asking for proposals from others who might be interested in running the center. Maybe there's some hope of sanity yet.
Meanwhile, Mayor Lizee talked about a group (no specifics as to who) at the Center which is interested in developing a strategic plan for the Center and involving the other cities that own a piece of it in the plan. Could this have legs? Maybe. Lizee also mentioned, yet again, her desire to bury the center's financials in the City's parks budgets. Great idea if the objective is to stick one's head in the sand and avoid scrutiny. Fortunately, no other council members seemed to agree.
The budgeting isn't over. The next work session should be on November 13th. Stay tuned.
Happy Raeding!
The Insider
I think we should leave it until after the election and let Zerby wade through it when he takes office. Anything done now in desperation is face-saving for the current mayor and destined to fail. I do respect his suggestion that we revisit the director's contract.
ReplyDeleteI have no faith in any inside "group" - from the center, no less - that thinks they can make this work. There have been several groups from there that have had no success. Its the same old thing every time. Some business models just cannot be sustained.
It needs complete rethinking and radical change or this is going to go on forever.
I believe the first thing Council needs to address is the director's contract before they send it out for proposals. Second, Council should meet with the other cities to find out if they want to be partners in sustaining it, or only consider it an asset as long as they aren't contributing. There are some expensive building maintenance items on the horizon that really should be shared by all owners of the building.
ReplyDeleteI have no idea why a group from the Center, or anywhere else, would start working on this now. How can you come up with a vision and business plan when you don't have a base to start from? A simple on-line survey could be done to determine what age groups actually use the Center and for what. Hard to come up with a vision and marketing plan when you don't know who the audience is.
Why do our "leaders" not want to engage the public in a candid conversation about the future of this unsustainable model? And why is it so difficult for them to take even the most logical steps to deal with it?
ReplyDeleteCould it be because they used it as an emotionally charged, stretch-the-facts basis for taking over the council at the last election?
How is it being stuck in in that box, folks?
What other facilities are competion for this center? What do they have that it does not? And what does it have that they don't. Mmmm.
ReplyDeleteThis was a flawed, unsustainable, short-sited plan from the start. Even the original "partners" see the writing on the wall.
ReplyDeleteShorewood should disconnect it from the park, allow for more parking, rezone if necessary and sell it on the open market. Period.