Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Not sure if this topic is in another forum or it got added to the locked grateful for what we have one.

Lately the past few weeks the coverage on the news of the 23 parks in the st.louis area being closed to budget cuts

Some of those being,

Lone Elk

George Winter

Greensfelder

Suson Park

which a friend recently caught a 12lb rainbow out of.

They are thinking of possibly turning them over to the city in which each park resides in.

ashame to see this happen especially with the urban trout program. Not to mention a good boat launch and rec area. =(

  • Replies 29
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Posted

As of now, there are NO parks being closed. That option (saving money for the county government) was tabled before the board meeting started. One of the council members began the meeting by stating that the issue of closing parks was not up for discussion and was unanimously opposed. The county government is still strapped for cash, so cuts ("savings" in business speak) will have to be made elsewhere.

So, that brings up an excellent question, a "learning experience" as it were. There apparently was quite a negative reaction to the news that the county might be closing parks due to money shortages. As we all should know, there is no such thing as a free lunch. Therefore, the question is: As a user of governmental property, that is available to all, what are you(we) willing to pay to keep these parks open? Property tax? Sales tax? Liquor or cigarette tax? Government bond issue?

The bottom line is, we have to pay to play. If it is reasonable, then I'm OK with it. Parks, museums, open spaces. They are vital to the health and welfare of a community.

Posted

Its just a political manuever to give them an excuse to propose a tax increase instead of taking necessary belt tightening measures....Scale back the county governments employee benefits package to private sector levels, and you will probably have a surplus.

Posted

Yeah, a surplus of angry government employees.

Yer messin' with fire there Mr. Gavin.

I'm not saying your incorrect, necessarily, but...Whew.

Good luck with that SpongeBob.

PS: It is easy to spend other peoples money. Or tell them how to get along with less.

PSS; "Peoples?" Should there be an apostrophe after the "s"?

Posted

One word:

Waynestock.

I don't know much about the issue aside from what was on the St. Louis NPR station the other morning, but I guess I'd be more sympathetic to the county's budget woes if the county executive weren't being paid more than the governor of the state. Just sayin'

Posted

Cigarette tax...I'd be all for that. A huge cigarette tax. And I'm a smoker. Or cut back on CPA salaries by taxing the hell out of them. They don't have bills to pay.

  • Members
Posted

I'm with Gavin on this one. It doesn't seem that far fetched at all. I'm all for helping support the County Parks on two conditions:

1. I'd like to have an idea of how much they are really spending on parks as a percentage of total budget. I'd be shocked if it were anywhere close to significant.

2. Instead of a tax increase, I'd like to see them propose some sort of across the board cuts that would help balance the operating budget.

If people holding political office started operating their offices more like a business (specifically, an entrepreneur), we'd have few problems.

Lastly, (this'll fire up a few folks, I'm sure), I'd like to see some variety in party representation in City and County politics. I'm not a member of either party, but, seriously, when was the last time a Republican held the County Execs office or the St. Louis City Mayor's Office? When one party has their way in one place for too long, it's rarely a good thing.

Posted

As expected, judging by our small, but probably atypical, sample set, we (the public) would rather not pay for certain park services. Instead, let's punish those working for the county government. Obviously, county government workers are overcompensated in both salary and benefits, so, let's let them take the hit for budget shortfalls. It's only fair.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.