Powder Blue Report

News, finance, politics, sports, and fun from the west coast

Thursday, August 14, 2008

Cost Of Great Park Balloons(no pun intended) By $377 Million

An independent audit of the projected cost to build the (not so)Great Park has found that the city has underestimated the cost by over $377 million dollars! My first comment about this...is anyone really surprised by this? Here's the LA Times story from this morning. This council majority is hellbent on building this thing no matter what the cost is to the Irvine taxpayers. To say they have bitten off more than they can chew would be an understatement. It's funny to read quote's from our clueless Mayor Beth Krom say that
"We are talking about converting a military base into a great metropolitan park," she said. "That's an extraordinary restoration project, and the notion that there are any absolute numbers that would be unchangeable in the evolution of this project is sort of absurd."
She also said that this was "an internal document" and
"that bringing it before the Board for public discussion was “an insult to the process.”
Yeah, how insulting of us to talk about this majority's incompetence Madam Mayor and question your ridiculous policies. No wonder Larry is desperately trying to pass his Secrecy Ordinance...Measure "S"ecrecy. They might want to rename their slate this November from "Keep Irvine Great" to "Keep Irvine In A Sea Of Red Ink"


  • At 7:46 PM, Anonymous Dan Chmielewski said…

    Hardly a secrecy ordiance Allan; Measure S is intended to have the city uphold its privacy policy on the web which appears to be at odds with California law.

    For an incompentent council majority, Irvine is the safest city in the US for four yearsin a row and Money says its the 4thbest place to live in the US. That's incompetence?

  • At 7:57 PM, Blogger Allan Bartlett said…

    You're right Dan, we are a safe city as far as crime, but Irvine taxpayers are not safe from this majority as we are starting to learn.

    And remember...Measure S is for secrecy. You can try to spin it any way you want, but Larry wants to be able to determine what info is available to the public contrary to California Law.

  • At 3:59 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    "to have the city uphold its privacy policy on the web which appears to be at odds with California law."

    That may be the most truthful thing I ever saw posted by DC.

    1. The City Measure intends to create a policy at odds with California law.

    2. If challenged, Larry Agran has indicated an interest in defending the City's policy (spending Irvine taxpayer dollars to defend a policy admittedly at odds with State Law)- he wants to challenge the State Law.


Post a Comment

<< Home