I am beginning to really wonder if anything is possible on that riverfront. Although the plans to create development this time around looked really good, it appears that the development has reached a stalemate due to lack of interest with tenants.
The developer is making the right choice not to break ground. It is much better to put off developing a site than spending millions of dollars just to find that there is really not enough interest in the area. Look at 100 Main Street. Ganther and his partners invested a great deal of money (with help from the city and taxpayers) on that building which is now bankrupt and in a state of disrepair. These are the types of things that will make you wonder what the Redevelpment Authority is really doing. Are they simply being too optimistic about development? They support just about every crazy idea that is presented to them (unless it involves renovation of a current facility that they want to tear down) and so far I haven't seen any real results. It is costing the taxpayers millions and we continue to let it happen.
How long can Oshkosh afford to let Jackson Kinney run that department? Is he really the best person for the job? On paper, the redevelopment of downtown and south shore looks really good. But how realistic is it? What does Oshkosh need with more condos or apartments? And what will be the cost to the taxpayer to aquire all of this property? I would encourage anyone to take a look a the plan and give an opinion on it's feasability especially given the fact that Oshkosh cannot seem to get the Riverfront project off the ground.
Our river is one of the best features of the city. What does it tell us when we cannot seem to get anything done on it? How much of the riverfront is actually owned by the City? Is this really the right direction or should we look at other alternatives? I don't think we should abandon the current plan, maybe a modification is needed to better suit the area. An office complex is a stretch during a tight economy.
Friday, March 14, 2008
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Consequences
With every plan there comes consequences. A prime example was presented to the OASD Board by Tim Hess tonight. He stated that some of his students have developed a website that you can type in your address and see how much your property value would decrease if this 10 year plan includes all of the closures and K-3 4-8 restructuring.
Feel free to visit the site and see how far your value will plummet when the plan is put in place.
He also stated and I believe that it should be highlighted, that the area west of Oakwood, north of 20th Street and south of 9th Ave. will lose approximately $7million in property value. I will repeat... $7MILLION!!!
Translated-- increased property taxes to compensate the drop in value. And as the property rebounds (which it eventually will) taxes will reach an unbelievable high.
Just food for thought. (as a side note, my property will only decrease about $1700 since only the elementary school will change.)
UPDATE: Since I have received some comments regarding "disclaimers", I will add that I didn't feel the need to put one on my site because it is plain enough on the site I linked. Next, it was said that property value is based on assessed value. Although this is true, you need to realize that part of the assessment value is derived from the market value and appraisal data. This is what is effected by the CLOSURE of schools. My value change is minimal because K-3 is moving to Oakwood from Traeger. The true value will be effected in the neighborhoods that lose schools to closure.
This is a tool to get an idea of the effects of massive changes made in a school district. Another effect on value will be the state of the economy. If you think that these changes are what is best for the district, then all of us that think the referendum is too much will be in the minority and it will pass. If not, we will have wasted a ton of time with this process without a contingency plan for nothing.
While I am at it, the site in question was developed based on a "study" of property sales and research done by students of Dr. Hess. It is amazing that a "study" is good enough to support SAGE and reconfiguration but it is not good enough for this purpose.
Your thoughts?
Feel free to visit the site and see how far your value will plummet when the plan is put in place.
He also stated and I believe that it should be highlighted, that the area west of Oakwood, north of 20th Street and south of 9th Ave. will lose approximately $7million in property value. I will repeat... $7MILLION!!!
Translated-- increased property taxes to compensate the drop in value. And as the property rebounds (which it eventually will) taxes will reach an unbelievable high.
Just food for thought. (as a side note, my property will only decrease about $1700 since only the elementary school will change.)
UPDATE: Since I have received some comments regarding "disclaimers", I will add that I didn't feel the need to put one on my site because it is plain enough on the site I linked. Next, it was said that property value is based on assessed value. Although this is true, you need to realize that part of the assessment value is derived from the market value and appraisal data. This is what is effected by the CLOSURE of schools. My value change is minimal because K-3 is moving to Oakwood from Traeger. The true value will be effected in the neighborhoods that lose schools to closure.
This is a tool to get an idea of the effects of massive changes made in a school district. Another effect on value will be the state of the economy. If you think that these changes are what is best for the district, then all of us that think the referendum is too much will be in the minority and it will pass. If not, we will have wasted a ton of time with this process without a contingency plan for nothing.
While I am at it, the site in question was developed based on a "study" of property sales and research done by students of Dr. Hess. It is amazing that a "study" is good enough to support SAGE and reconfiguration but it is not good enough for this purpose.
Your thoughts?
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
The State of Oshkosh
Just a short post to give some a chance to give some opinions on the current events happening in Oshkosh. I know, the title is tacky but I couldn't resist.
1. Floating docks. Looks like we are getting them, like it or not. The DNR is also getting their way by making the section of the river between Main Street and the Railroad Bridge "no wake" and no anchor. Sorry boaters that wanted to anchor for Waterfest.
2. Snow removal. How are your streets? Have the plows been keeping up? I did note that after the first significant snowfall, there were a few streets that had leaves churned up by the plows. That will be a mess in the spring.
3. Convention Center. Do we really need $307k worth of sign and blinds? I don't see the reasoning behind either. The sign is something that a business would use to attract customers. A convention center is not a business. It is not a building that needs a special sign out front to attract customers.
4. Sawdust Days. Approved without a hitch. Should it have been delayed? Should the public been given the chance speak about it? Would anyone have objected? Guess we won't know this year.
5. Kudos to Akcess Group. Perhaps we will finally see some progress on that empty lot on the river. Lord knows this city needs it.
6. And of course I will throw out there an opportunity to complain or praise the School District on their progress (or lack thereof) with the "plan".
As for the Eye on Oshkosh crap... leave it alone. I don't want to discuss it and I really don't want to read anymore about it. It is over and anyone who has been paying attention for the past year knows, it is not worth rehashing. She has already accused me of libel. Too bad she can't support it and I refuse to give it to her.
One request... please use the corresponding number when you are posting. It will make things easier to read. Thanks.
1. Floating docks. Looks like we are getting them, like it or not. The DNR is also getting their way by making the section of the river between Main Street and the Railroad Bridge "no wake" and no anchor. Sorry boaters that wanted to anchor for Waterfest.
2. Snow removal. How are your streets? Have the plows been keeping up? I did note that after the first significant snowfall, there were a few streets that had leaves churned up by the plows. That will be a mess in the spring.
3. Convention Center. Do we really need $307k worth of sign and blinds? I don't see the reasoning behind either. The sign is something that a business would use to attract customers. A convention center is not a business. It is not a building that needs a special sign out front to attract customers.
4. Sawdust Days. Approved without a hitch. Should it have been delayed? Should the public been given the chance speak about it? Would anyone have objected? Guess we won't know this year.
5. Kudos to Akcess Group. Perhaps we will finally see some progress on that empty lot on the river. Lord knows this city needs it.
6. And of course I will throw out there an opportunity to complain or praise the School District on their progress (or lack thereof) with the "plan".
As for the Eye on Oshkosh crap... leave it alone. I don't want to discuss it and I really don't want to read anymore about it. It is over and anyone who has been paying attention for the past year knows, it is not worth rehashing. She has already accused me of libel. Too bad she can't support it and I refuse to give it to her.
One request... please use the corresponding number when you are posting. It will make things easier to read. Thanks.
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Will $60 Million be enough?
I have to wonder... What is next? I know I don't deal with OASD issues real often (and I am sure that someone will tell me that I don't know what I am talking about because of it) but there is quite a price tag that the district has put on this "restructuring" of the schools and I think that it should be addressed by the taxpayers too.
Now I don't know if the $60 million price tag is official or not. It is what the ONW reported along with building a new school on the north side. I would hope that the reporter that wrote the story had verified both statements with a district source. I am not inclined to verify it. It is what it is.
I will say that it is too much. That is way too much money to spend on a plan that in my eyes does not serve the purpose of which it was intended when they started.
Wasn't the original recommendation to close SIX schools? Now it is only 2 or 3 and one of them was slated to close even before this all started.
The plan now is to expand SAGE (my guess they are doing it to avoid laying off teachers and please the union), reconfigure several schools (one of which isn't even paid for from original construction), and bus kids from one side of town to the other.
My question is... WHY?
What would it take to just fix what we have and leave well enough alone? Stop deferring the maintenance and get the buildings up to snuff so that the district can actually do what they are supposed to be doing rather than focus on this "plan".
Just some thoughts on the issue. What are yours???
Now I don't know if the $60 million price tag is official or not. It is what the ONW reported along with building a new school on the north side. I would hope that the reporter that wrote the story had verified both statements with a district source. I am not inclined to verify it. It is what it is.
I will say that it is too much. That is way too much money to spend on a plan that in my eyes does not serve the purpose of which it was intended when they started.
Wasn't the original recommendation to close SIX schools? Now it is only 2 or 3 and one of them was slated to close even before this all started.
The plan now is to expand SAGE (my guess they are doing it to avoid laying off teachers and please the union), reconfigure several schools (one of which isn't even paid for from original construction), and bus kids from one side of town to the other.
My question is... WHY?
What would it take to just fix what we have and leave well enough alone? Stop deferring the maintenance and get the buildings up to snuff so that the district can actually do what they are supposed to be doing rather than focus on this "plan".
Just some thoughts on the issue. What are yours???
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
