I am starting to become fond of the city council’s ‘Approval of Contracts’. It’s a shady little item that they can hide all of their ‘dark’ secret expenditures, in a tidy little PDF document: dumpycanoe

This weeks expenditures don’t disappoint;

landy

 

The canoe access speaks for itself. A canoe was made to slip into the water anywhere, a 100K access is really not needed. But 76K for a marketing campaign about the city dump?! We need to educate the public about what garbage is and where it belongs? For Christ’s Sakes!

8 Thoughts on “Does the city need to advertise the dump at a cost of 76K?

  1. rufusx on February 1, 2014 at 3:01 pm said:

    “Canoe Access” is probably akin to a “boat launch” on lakes – essentially a place to PARK YOUR CAR and trailer – that you hauled the canoe to the river on.

  2. uh, no it’s not. It is the river greenway access by Cherapa.

  3. 100k for access is not needed. Until you have to engineer it to comply with the ADA. And EPA erosion rules for riparian rivers. And EPA rules governing runoff for water clarity protection. And insurance safety requirements for lighting, width of walkways, slope and grade maximums. And FEMA rules for flood plain obstructions. And, and, and, and . . .

  4. mhs, f’ck!!!!! It’s just a canoe!

  5. Well, skunk creek was just another creek until FEMA made us spend $70 million f’in dollars on it, right?

  6. OldSlewFoot on February 2, 2014 at 10:00 am said:

    If this access is at Cherapa Place, it must be for kayaking over the Falls. That is only 2 blocks up river. So it is obviously not for canoe access, but something else. Smells like a scandal. Get on it DL.

  7. Testor15 on February 2, 2014 at 12:34 pm said:

    Could it be to take canoes out of the sludge before they go over the falls?

  8. Taxpayer-Voter on February 2, 2014 at 3:06 pm said:

    South Dacola,

    I am also fond of watching the City Council’s agenda item called ‘Approval of Contracts,’ better known as ‘where they juggle the money!’

Post Navigation