Narrow Search

  • Show Only

  • Category

  • Narrow by Date

    • All
    • Today
    • Last 7 Days
    • Last 30 Days
    • Select a Date Range

Comment Archives: Stories: Opinion: Viewpoint

Re: “Guns and Government

Krulick has always diodged real debate with him on his beliefs.

Posted by Filthy McNasty on 07/16/2017 at 9:05 PM

Re: “Poverty: A State of Mind?

Welcome to 1789 Chuck, O hope you and all you white bros will be very happy together.

2 likes, 2 dislikes
Posted by CL Mullins on 07/16/2017 at 4:23 PM

Re: “Poverty: A State of Mind?

Healthcare is not a function of the Federal and State Governments. In Art.1, Sec.8, under the category of General Welfare, we have a list of particular functions of the Federal Government, i.e. post office, roads, coin money, military and court systems and a few other duties. If it isn't mentioned there, then it is a jurisdiction of 'We the People' according to the Tenth Amendment. Health care nor any welfare program is listed there. The Conclusion is that health care is not the function of the Federal Government nor State Governments. This makes it theft of taxpayer funds for the Federal Government/State Governments to have jurisdiction over this area, and a violation against one's oath of office to uphold the tenets of the U.S. and State Constitution. There is no easy answer to this dilemma of the high cost of health care. It originates with medical device companies charging exorbitant rates, medical implants and suppliers charging a lot and high salaries due to malpractice insurance. Tons of government red-tape also cause the high cost. The best solution is the '3-C' system: C is for 'cash' for minor care, i.e. flu's, shots, etc. C is also for 'catastrophic insurance' for major surgeries or malignant diseases with high deductibles, and lastly, C is for 'charity, i.e. churches, families, charities in general.

2 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by Charles Gillihan on 07/16/2017 at 2:17 PM

Re: “Poverty: A State of Mind?

And as Williams doesn't state, it doesn't hurt to know which side of your bread the butter is on.

1 like, 2 dislikes
Posted by CL Mullins on 07/14/2017 at 4:02 PM

Re: “Poverty: A State of Mind?

The GOP, in its present iteration, is no salve or help to anyone who's not affluent. No matter what their ethnicity may be.

1 like, 3 dislikes
Posted by jrgolden on 07/14/2017 at 11:47 AM

Re: “A Compromised Greensward “Solution”

Fergus,
Thanks for the effort. While you say the extra spaces allow room for design improvement, your proposal leaves so leaves so much to be desired and ignores so many of the best practices necessary in creating such facilities that it runs the risk of muddying the waters with impractical or outright impossible design elements.

A few of the more obvious critiques:
Your design appears to focus almost entirely upon vehicles and pays minimal attention to what happens after a visitor exits their car. The design appears to almost completely ignore the need for internal vehicular circulation. God forbid the row you select is full because the next point at which you may have access to a parallel row could result in a mile drive (adding to vehicle emissions) or it appears you would be forced to exit the lot entirely and make the attempt again via the North Parkway entrance. Hopefully your plan includes a high degree of real-time automated wayfinding signage to direct drivers to available spaces.

The plan does little to improve upon existing pedestrian circulation as parents with children and strollers in tow will still be forced to walk as far as 300 feet (equivalent to a full block downtown) in the drive aisles to reach the nearest pedestrian cross-route in order to pass between cars. This would create a similar dangerous and congestion causing situation and distance as found in the existing main parking lot in front of the zoo.

The plan depicts a 100% hardscape parking lot leaving no space for the vast amount of stormwater such a lot would generateor worse yet, forcing the use of the Greensward as storage for said stormwater.

The plan also allows for zero landscape or buffering creating a parking lot that would be similar in character to the vast spartan parking lot to the south of and adjacent to Union Avenue (across from UT) except that at around 14 acres, your parking lot would be something like 3.5 times larger than that particular asphalt desert.

In effect, while it is great that people from all sorts of backgrounds and experience are thinking about this, there is very little the plan handsomely accomplishes. I can only hope that the selected firm is able to far exceed the plan shown in every possible way. I refer you to the study created last year for the Conservancy which demonstrated not only knowledge of parking demand and background traffic information, but the method by which over 460 parking spaces could be created without the need to pave so much as one additional square foot anywhere within Overton Park including the Zoo.

4 likes, 2 dislikes
Posted by barfolomew on 07/05/2017 at 3:29 PM

Re: “A Compromised Greensward “Solution”

Dennis Lynch and my proposed parking plan at fnolan.com/z/ shows that the Zoo parking needs can easily be met - and 1000 additional spaces besides, on the Zoo's footprint, without taking one square inch of Greensward. And throws in an improved traffic flow which eliminates traffic backups in the park and on N. McLean.

2 likes, 5 dislikes
Posted by Fergus Nolan on 07/04/2017 at 5:15 PM

Re: “Defending JLL Deal

Roberson neglects to state that "95 percent satisfaction" number comes from only 10 percent (or lower) of respondents to an online survey received after a request to fix a specific problem is filed with JLL. For more, read: http://www.nashvillepost.com/politics/article/20860732/despite-savings-forecast-more-outsourcing-questions

3 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by Cari Wade Gervin on 07/03/2017 at 11:29 AM

Re: “Defending JLL Deal

All spin Mr. Roberson.

I have been down the outsourced road before, it does not work for University's. JLL will find ways to take money's that would normally stay at a University and pocket it.

I know how they operate. It took us years to get rid of a large professional property management company. By the time we got rid of them and went back to in house management they had taken millions of dollars from us they scammed their way into.

Now, compare the tiny amount of work JLL is doing now for the state to what they are trying to bite off?? JLL has NO experience in large scale University building maintenance. NO experience in athletics, NO experience in research, NO experience in clinical care and NO experience in many other areas they say they have expertise. Mr. Robinson, tell us about JLL's successful experience managing large University's facility operations

As to your assessment that state facilities should be run by professionals, they are. Where I work, we employ, Architects, Engineers, Master Electricians, Master Plumbers, Master Carpenters, Cabinet Makers, Horticulturalists, LEED certified energy management personnel and many more. Perhaps you should have checked on the competency level on what great human resources the state presently has before you made this assumption.

In addition, That core competency argument you make is so wrong. Tell a Harvard or other Ivy league school that grounds keeping should not be one of their core competencies?? The condition of the grounds is one of the major reasons people get a good first impression of a school and end up enrolling there. Clearly your opinion is from a position of one who manages words, not buildings.

"The business case for this new procurement, posted on the CFG website for many months now, specifically cites the experience of Texas A&M University in contracting out its facilities management. The National Association of College and University Business Officers even held a conference on outsourcing in 2015. Saying that no state has done this before is not remotely accurate.:"

The statement above is misleading. Texas AM is the only large scale College in the country doing this and they are not a state.Texas is not doing this only A&M and JLL has nothing to do with this contract. As far as I know no STATE is doing this. (so the statement is more than remotely accurate,... right?...more spin...)

So tell me how JLL saves money? We have no figures from JLL yet so we dont know, but..... JLL says they will pay equal or more money to personnel with no reduction in force, ( this business is 90% labor), improve services, reduce cost, and make a profit. How do you accomplish this.... smoke and mirrors and poof...your money is gone.

7 likes, 2 dislikes
Posted by Whit Sutton on 06/29/2017 at 4:46 PM

Re: “A Compromised Greensward “Solution”

WOW, just WOW! Where has Mr. Smith been!?! To begin with, he's using old, non-approved maps, which says everything. When they agreed to make spaces smaller (latest development), it cut the footprint or land grab by a lot. Saying we're giving up 1/4 is fake news... ha! Messing with people, who worked their asses off, for the Greensward, is just plain wrong.

2 likes, 2 dislikes
Posted by pdp on 06/28/2017 at 9:59 PM

Re: “A Compromised Greensward “Solution”

The current parking delimmna is only a dirty fix attempting to address the lack of past planning requirements. What lies down the road? The Memphis Zoo's long term sustainability and growth plan should be made public. If there is any indication of future expansion of exhibition space or any indication of additional future patron parking requirements, then the zoo must begin relocation out of Overton Park. Enough is enough. Not one square inch.

10 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by Sidewinder on 06/28/2017 at 7:38 AM

Re: “A Compromised Greensward “Solution”

Kyle Veazey just made a monumental and idiotic mistake in his statement. Based on his own words, the conceptual footprint is not the governing document. That means that the footprint of the parking lot could in fact be MUCH LARGER than that shown in the public document. There is nothing in place preventing such a design from being proposed. We wont know what portion of the Greensward will be paved until a private design firm, entirely controlled and informed by the same city government that deemed it prudent to so readily relinquish so much of the Greensward to the Zoo at various points in this process, provides us the complete design. Perhaps it is no coincidence that the design firm was already heavily involved in numerous contracts with the Citys Engineering Department, the dog in your lap is worth 2 on the run.

Sounds like Veazey and Sean Spicer took the same online public communications class.

12 likes, 7 dislikes
Posted by barf on 06/23/2017 at 9:15 AM

Re: “A Compromised Greensward “Solution”

Mr. Veazey, conceptual in nature and telling of the mindset of those who care not about the green space the zoo is being allowed to steal.

8 likes, 3 dislikes
Posted by Clyde on 06/23/2017 at 8:47 AM

Re: “A Compromised Greensward “Solution”

I think we can all agree that the city gov. and the land grabbing zoo bullied and threatened the Greensward supporters to this ridiculous point. Mr. Veazey says the map that the city engineering dept. drew up last year was conceptual? I and many others call it what it is: one of many aggressive and bullying tactics used to display naked power. All aimed at intimidating enough citizens to get what they want. I wonder how much more money the OPC could raise if the plan was to build a garage for the use of all park users? Why isn't the design firm allowed to consider that option? I hope the city council and Mayor got a wake up call when they saw how much monetary support there is for saving the Greensward. Money seems to be all they listen to. Save the Greensward!

23 likes, 9 dislikes
Posted by Anna Hogan on 06/22/2017 at 10:25 PM

Re: “A Compromised Greensward “Solution”

Mr. Smith's analysis was based on the only public information available to the taxpayers who fund both the zoo and OPC.
The burning question for many of us is why OPC was made responsible for funding half of this project. They had to raise more money for this new parking lot than they even get from the city's annual budget. Can the mayor's office explain that logic?

27 likes, 4 dislikes
Posted by Christina Gann Holdford on 06/22/2017 at 8:40 PM

Re: “A Compromised Greensward “Solution”

Editor's note: Just received this from Kyle Veazey, Deputy Communications Director of the City of Memphis:
"Unfortunately, Mr. Smith's column bases its conclusion on a map and plan for parking that is simply not in force. There was a map created last summer by our Division of Engineering, but it was only conceptual in nature and is not the governing document. We've selected a design firm to create the parking plan/footprint, and that will be developed in the coming months. But it simply hasn't been determined yet."

17 likes, 8 dislikes
Posted by BruceVanWyngarden on 06/22/2017 at 7:16 PM

Re: “A Compromised Greensward “Solution”

Eric, I'm glad of that (the respecting each others opinions) part. Just so you know, I only piped up here today because your comment at 8:20 am was posted before I even got on my computer and you attacked a friend/mentor/hero of mine. A lot of folks undoubtedly disagreed with Mary's OpEd on June 19th, but I don't remember anyone calling her out about it...maybe out of respect for her opinion. Again, folks will disagree with this compromise for years to come but I'll always hold out that it was the biggest coerced fundraiser for the Zoo ever.

16 likes, 3 dislikes
Posted by Scott Banbury on 06/22/2017 at 3:58 PM

Re: “A Compromised Greensward “Solution”

Scott, I welcome and respect your opinion, even when we disagree, as appears to be the case here.

3 likes, 11 dislikes
Posted by Eric Gottlieb on 06/22/2017 at 3:22 PM

Re: “A Compromised Greensward “Solution”

Eric, I don't understand why other people aren't allowed to have their own opinions without you negating them.

13 likes, 3 dislikes
Posted by Scott Banbury on 06/22/2017 at 2:47 PM

Re: “A Compromised Greensward “Solution”

The Alliance did not appoint ourselves leader of anything. We're a coalition of the willing. We understand that CPOP and the Sierra Club prefer to do things their own way. That's fine with us, and we recognize your right to do that. I don't understand why you seem to think we are not entitled to the same freedoms as you.

As far as getting used goes, obviously we see things differently. Neither of us are political newcomers. Sometimes informed people reach different conclusions.

5 likes, 13 dislikes
Posted by Eric Gottlieb on 06/22/2017 at 2:28 PM

ADVERTISEMENT
© 1996-2017

Contemporary Media
460 Tennessee Street, 2nd Floor | Memphis, TN 38103
Visit our other sites: Memphis Magazine | Memphis Parent | Inside Memphis Business
Powered by Foundation