Monday, October 20, 2014

Early Voting Begins On Three Absurd Arena Ballot Propositions In Fort Worth

In my mailbox this morning, just in time for the start of early voting, I got a new version of a previous mailing about the Fort Worth Multipurpose Arena Election.

The previous mailer featured Fort Worth Mayor, Betsy Price. This time the mailer features Fort Worth businessman, Ed Bass, who shares with us his opinion that "This unique public-private partnership is an opportunity that will benefit Fort Worth for generations to come."

I am unclear as to what the public part of this partnership is. I believe the decision to build this new multipurpose arena was made privately. I do not recollect a public vote on this issue.

I really don't understand the point of the Three Ballot Propositions the public is being asked to vote on.

Three Ballot Propositions, all of which involve approving fees related to the new arena.

Fees, such as a user fee on tickets, a user fee of a dollar or two on livestock stalls and a user fee not to exceed $5 per vehicle for parking.


These type fees need to be voted on and somehow relate to approving of this new arena?

How come Fort Worth voters are not offput at being thrown this bone of voting on something like these Three Ballot Propositions under the guise that they are participating in some sort of decision regarding the building of the new arena?

Are Fort Worth voters actually debating the merits of whether or not to approve of a user fee of $1 to $2 per day on livestock pens?

That is just embarrassing.

If this Fort Worth Multipurpose Arena Election were actually an election where, unlike the Trinity River Vision Boondoggle, the public was actually allowed to vote on this new arena public works project, voting yes or no on a bond issue funding mechanism, such as that which takes place in Big Towns which wear their Big City Pants, I would be voting YES, because I can see clearly that Fort Worth could use a modern arena to replace that Will Rogers antique arena.


I will be voting NO on these Three Ballot Propositions.

Because, I really do not think it will make any difference on the final arena result whether these three absurd propositions get approved, or not....

1 comment:

Voting NO 2 said...

Egads, this stinks.
Why haven't they put the Trinity River Project on the ballot this way?
The public could vote on whether to have row boats or paddle boats on the new channel.
Are they thinking this passes as some kind of mandate for the project?

Voting no. I do not like to be patronized. Who thought up these silly ideas?