When arriving at City Hall for the Budget Public Hearing last night I noticed, besides few cars, some little changes that indicated to me our city was indeed "going forward" under the John Marchione Administration.- City Hall outdoor art by Carpenter is now lit up by new overhead lights. (I don't understand why the Ives Administration never did this.) It's absolutely beautiful at night now. Without light, the crystals don't live. An arts commissioner at the meeting attributed the improvements to the Administration.
- FOCUS Magazine was reduced in size by 1/3. It's now more readable and costs taxpayers less. And I'm reading it more! Copies are at the front desk.
- Michele McGeghee - City Clerk, swore in two Design Review commissioners. The city attorney wasn't needed - saving taxpayer dollars.
- A well lit, well displayed art exhibit was positioned at the entrance to Chambers. View of the exhibit was well placed, convenient, accessible and attracted many visitors.
- Council may have enough funding to hire a receptionist for the City Hall front desk.
During the Public Hearing whining and complaining citizens were not to be heard! Compliments were frequent. Council and Mayor are not planning to raise business taxes. The President of the Chamber of Commerce sounded as if she received an Oscar - thanking everyone copiously - from the Mayor, to council, to multiple staff members. ARCH requested more funding for affordable housing. The Historical Society and Arts Commission spoke to thank and please the Council. A child abuse prevention non profit asked for support. The Washington School Foundation requested support.
I gave my blog a plug. Shoot! why didn't I request funding too!? Mr. Bailey, Fin
ance Director and Melissa Files, Finance Manager were thanked for their tremendous efforts the budget. Mr. Mayor made some great hiring decisions. Councilman Richard Cole is well deserving of recognition and appreciation for his leadership as Council Finance Chair. Richard introduced the "Budgeting by Priority" model to the Mayor and is running Council budget discussions with aplomb. Finally, I asked that the Final Budget be edited to include language requiring that the 6.4% CIP transfer (increased by 30%) remain temporary. Historically, the annual transfer has been 5% of the General Fund - several Millions less.
Attendance at the Hearing was low ~ 7 speakers. In times of economic strife, this says a lot about the confidence citizens have for the City in managing our money. Finally it speaks for Redmond's general affluence, Redmond $7 Billion economic engine (R. Odle) and our willingness to pay for a "Great Ctiy."
I'm confused--how is spending extra money to light art a budgetary "winner"?
ReplyDeleteThanks for your comment, Andy. I'll do my best to answer your challenging questionl.
ReplyDeleteThe lights add value to the art and the Hall. The lights also provides a better return on our investment.
Arts will draw paying tourists to our town and this particular exhibit is a much more valuable attraction when lit.
I'm sure others have their own opinion?
Bob I also liked the art , attended the Planning meeting for downtown with changes on the grid for Cleveland they handed out a page with all downtown projects with renderings of buildings neat!
ReplyDeleteDid you get that too?
Sigmunde
Hi Sigmunde - I found the renderings on the website but didn't make the meeting. Did they have a plan for the $27M Downtown Park? The first I heard of it was reading the Budget manuel. I hope that Bobcat keeps visiting your backyard! Bob
ReplyDeleteSince the art is there, I'm in favor of lighting it. It doesn't come alive without lighting. When properly lit, it's amazing and it does enhance the City campus.
ReplyDeleteWhen that sculpture was first installed, I (like several others folks whose opinions I heard) was puzzled--thought it looked like a bunch of pick-up-sticks plopped ends-up into a bowl of sand.
Then one fall day I came out of the library right about sunset--it was one of those cloudy glowing sunsets--and the glass columns were simply glorious. I couldn't believe the difference. The whole thing was suddenly alive.
As a proponent of beauty as a fundamental value for human life, I don't have an issue with spending tax money on this lighting. And maybe some year soon, there will be such a thing as LED outdoor lighting that would cost a lot less to power.
--Marion
Hi Marion -
ReplyDeleteI hope you send your comment to mayor@redmond.gov. There has to be a way to get around the safety/code issue of underwater lighting. When they put in the overhead lights I finally got the picture of the artist's intent. Incredible beauty and enhancement. With the progress technology brings, there's got to be "a way".
from an email, 11/24
ReplyDelete"Are we subsidizing businesses now?"
I was just reading a selection of your glowing posts for the mayor and I am just left with the impression that I am supporting their effort to make business owners more money while i am left paying for the infrastruture needs for the city as a whole.
I am a fan of business. I use them everyday. :O) But in the end they are making money off me. Pretty good money. And when the city reduces their burden to help the city grow I kinda scratch my head. Much of the improvements i am paying for is so they can grow larger - shouldn't they ante up?
Where is our help? I can tell you the more they tax me - the less money i am spending with these businesses.
-- a neighbor