Let's set the record straight on my stances for our golf course and parks. I love our parks. I love our trails and recreation. I love our golf courses. I have no plan to stop, close, sell, or change them. It's ridiculous that I have to clarify this; however, a few individuals are executing a misinformation campaign on specific candidates.
Maintaining transparency regarding my stance on the upcoming Parks and Recreation GO Bond proposal is crucial. I have raised financial questions about the upcoming bond, and these questions may have contributed to some misinformation circulating. What troubles me is that the opposition fabricates untruths regarding my overall views instead of directly addressing my genuine concerns.
I have concerns about the timing and cost of ANY bond (bonds are a tax). As for this current bond on the upcoming ballot, I am confident there are methods to save millions of taxpayer dollars and reduce financial burden. We can achieve this without giving up amenities such as parks (or golf courses). It might require some patience and an approach that involves paying as you go rather than instant gratification at the taxpayers' expense and WASTING $18 million in interest (as with the current GO Bond).
My apprehension regarding the financial obligations of the bond does not reflect my love for our city, parks, recreation, or golf courses. As a responsible citizen, speaking out against wasteful spending is crucial, especially concerning taxpayers' money. I love St George and will always voice my concerns to ensure our elected leaders are accountable for their actions.
I am fiscally conservative, constitutionally centered, and in total support of LIMITED government.
The city has taken on the role of running a business, which is not the proper role of government. We must focus on business management now that we own four municipal golf courses. The goal is to find solutions to improve our city's efficiency and financial stability. I'm prepared to seek out solutions, and I welcome public input.
Several options can be explored to minimize the losses on the golf courses. We could fundraise for clubhouse renovations, which could attract private-sector businesses to sponsor. Additionally, there can be more transparency in the decision-making process (and cost factors) regarding leasing golf carts instead of purchasing them. Bringing in more private sector areas, such as vending and staffing, can also reduce costs. I intend to actively involve public input while exploring viable options.
Understanding the underlying motives behind these groundless attacks on candidates and the determination of city leaders to secure certain candidates' victories is of concern. The substantial financial support provided by some candidates for a City Service position begs the question: What are their true intentions and motivations?
As responsible citizens, our attention should be directed toward the genuine purpose behind these actions and demand transparency from our elected officials. If elected, I pledge to uphold accountability and transparency within our city government. I will shed light on any areas lacking clarity and ensure the efficient and effective management of our city's resources.
Perhaps my motivation to shed light on the matter could inadvertently inspire fear and contribute to the spread of baseless rumors.
**UPDATES: To be clear, I would NOT have voted for the city to purchase or take over a golf course. While it is not my preference for the city to own them, I see the need to protect the homeowners living on or around the courses and the open space throughout the city. I would love to see them leased and run by the private sector with proper terms in place. Selling the golf courses now would be tricky, as they could evolve into vacation homes or condos (like the Bloomington driving range). Zoning and Deed Restrictions can be compromised in the future.
Here is a link for more information on the upcoming Parks and Recreations GO Bond