New mayor, new hope? (Colorado Springs, Manitou Springs: houses, buy, live)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What will the "strong," mayor bring to Colorado Springs? Leadership, for a change? It seems to me, that our fair city has been just coasting along with the wind.
New ideas, new people. Jobs, transit, street lights, all parks open for people of all ages; just to name a few of my favorite things. A dream or will it happen?
Pardon my ignorance, but what do you mean re: parks for all ages? I wasn't aware that there are any parks that discriminate for age... maybe I'm just not thinking of some obvious places.
There's a reason that developers heavily funded the strong mayor initiative last Nov--it gives them a single critical point for them to focus their campaign donations and other corrupting influences to get the governmental decisions they need to enable continued unfettered growth done in the way that benefits the developers most.
So no, I don't think this represents much hope for improvement.
Agree with Bob. The developers will always have access to the mayor's office and city council to seek their zoning approvals, etc, but we don't have to put a developer into the mayor's CHAIR itself. IMO that's a conflict of interest and a case of putting the fox in charge of the hen house. The "strong mayor" will have a lot of power and authority to single-handedly approve things, and with this being the city's first experience with such a mayor, we need to elect someone fairly benign to see how it goes.
I don't care if growth occurs. I don't care if a lot of development happens. I do care that it's done with a strong emphasis on what is smart for our city, makes efficient use of our resources and infrastructure, but does it without unfairly burdening taxpayers. I know, easier said than done.
__________________
- Please follow our TOS.
- Any Questions about City-Data? See the FAQ list.
- Want some detailed instructions on using the site? See The Guide for plain english explanation.
- Realtors are welcome here but do see our Realtor Advice to avoid infractions.
- Thank you and enjoy City-Data.
Agree with Bob. The developers will always have access to the mayor's office and city council to seek their zoning approvals, etc, but we don't have to put a developer into the mayor's CHAIR itself. IMO that's a conflict of interest and a case of putting the fox in charge of the hen house. The "strong mayor" will have a lot of power and authority to single-handedly approve things, and with this being the city's first experience with such a mayor, we need to elect someone fairly benign to see how it goes.
I don't care if growth occurs. I don't care if a lot of development happens. I do care that it's done with a strong emphasis on what is smart for our city, makes efficient use of our resources and infrastructure, but does it without unfairly burdening taxpayers. I know, easier said than done.
I think we know which candidate fits your description best.
Pardon my ignorance, but what do you mean re: parks for all ages? I wasn't aware that there are any parks that discriminate for age... maybe I'm just not thinking of some obvious places.
There were so many parks last summer, that the restrooms were closed and there were no trash cans. Hard for kids of all ages to play games and sports without the use of restrooms. I guess it was not age discrimination; just all around bad news for all.
Agree with Bob. The developers will always have access to the mayor's office and city council to seek their zoning approvals, etc, but we don't have to put a developer into the mayor's CHAIR itself. IMO that's a conflict of interest and a case of putting the fox in charge of the hen house. The "strong mayor" will have a lot of power and authority to single-handedly approve things, and with this being the city's first experience with such a mayor, we need to elect someone fairly benign to see how it goes.
I don't care if growth occurs. I don't care if a lot of development happens. I do care that it's done with a strong emphasis on what is smart for our city, makes efficient use of our resources and infrastructure, but does it without unfairly burdening taxpayers. I know, easier said than done.
I'll be watching how this all unfolds... From 1000 miles away..... Colorado Springs is my home town. I was born there, raised there, and lived there more than 30 years of my life, so I still have some interest in what develops politically.
I too have no objection to growth and development in general as I believe they are necessary, but I'm most interested in seeing the type of growth that will bring the most benefit to the citizens of COS.....
The build up and expansion of the city in the last 20-25 years totally changed the character of the place. It's not the town I grew up in anymore.....
Agree with Bob. The developers will always have access to the mayor's office and city council to seek their zoning approvals, etc, but we don't have to put a developer into the mayor's CHAIR itself. IMO that's a conflict of interest and a case of putting the fox in charge of the hen house. The "strong mayor" will have a lot of power and authority to single-handedly approve things, and with this being the city's first experience with such a mayor, we need to elect someone fairly benign to see how it goes.
I don't care if growth occurs. I don't care if a lot of development happens. I do care that it's done with a strong emphasis on what is smart for our city, makes efficient use of our resources and infrastructure, but does it without unfairly burdening taxpayers. I know, easier said than done.
In general, I agree with you. Growth is going to happen. Period. It's how it happens that concerns me.
I was impressed by the ad that Skorman had the other day -- not because it was a Skorman ad -- but because it showed that terrible scar in the mountain in front of Pikes Peak where development is literally eating up the mountainside. That's the kind of thing we need to be against. Look at the scar that will never heal on the red rocks section near Manitou Springs/Colorado City. We can grow without being that careless and thoughtless.
In general, I agree with you. Growth is going to happen. Period. It's how it happens that concerns me.
I was impressed by the ad that Skorman had the other day -- not because it was a Skorman ad -- but because it showed that terrible scar in the mountain in front of Pikes Peak where development is literally eating up the mountainside. That's the kind of thing we need to be against. Look at the scar that will never heal on the red rocks section near Manitou Springs/Colorado City. We can grow without being that careless and thoughtless.
Given that the Pikesview Mine was opened in the early 1900s, long before there was much of anything in what is now Colorado Springs, I think it'd be fair for the miners to look out at the city today and label people that build or buy houses in full view of their mine--and then whine and moan about it--as "careless and thoughtless." Sorta like people that build a house next to an air force base that's been operating for 50+ years and then complain about jet noise.
Technology and public sentiment have changed just a little bit in the last 100 years, so clearly a permit for a mine so close to and in view of the city would not be issued today. But for Skorman to suggest that his opponent, or guys like him, are somehow responsible for a century-old mine that predates most of the city, is political subterfuge. That doesn't impress me at all.
Given that the Pikesview Mine was opened in the early 1900s, long before there was much of anything in what is now Colorado Springs, I think it'd be fair for the miners to look out at the city today and label people that build or buy houses in full view of their mine--and then whine and moan about it--as "careless and thoughtless." Sorta like people that build a house next to an air force base that's been operating for 50+ years and then complain about jet noise.
Technology and public sentiment have changed just a little bit in the last 100 years, so clearly a permit for a mine so close to and in view of the city would not be issued today. But for Skorman to suggest that his opponent, or guys like him, are somehow responsible for a century-old mine that predates most of the city, is political subterfuge. That doesn't impress me at all.
At first I didn't think we were talking about the same scar, but we are. Keep in mind that mining does continue, so at least part of what I'm talking about is not from the early 1900s. And, you forgot to mention that the company has been fined for multiple violations, including being cited for mining too far into the mountainside, as well as for creating conditions that have resulted in multiple major rockslides.
Last edited by phetaroi; 05-04-2011 at 05:46 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $53,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
..... Colorado Springs is my home town. I was born there, raised there, and lived there more than 30 years of my life, so I still have some interest in what develops politically.
