advertisement
On CBSSports.com: SEC title at stake- #2 FL vs. #1 AL
Find Articles in:
all
Business
Reference
Technology
News
Sports
Health
Autos
Arts
Home & Garden
advertisement
Most Popular White Papers
advertisement

Content provided in partnership with
ProQuest

Commentary: Why doesn't the Springs think big ... or even bigger?

Colorado Springs Business Journal,  Feb 1, 2008  by Lon Matejczyk

Last week's CSBJ opinion piece titled "Are we going to start breeding success or wallow in apathy?" really struck home for me.

Why is Denver able to create relationships between private and public organizations to really get things done? Why can they pass a half a billion dollars in bonds for infrastructure, arts and culture, parks and recreation, and health care, among other things?

Why does Pueblo have an economic development sales tax and we have none?

Could it be a lack of vision from our elected leaders on City Council or could it be they just don't have the time since they have to have some income other than the paltry $6,250 a year to serve on City Council?

Why did voters vote down an increase for our City Council? Could it be our large retired military community that feels entitled to low taxes having already served and perhaps having a natural mistrust of government?

I am not sure of the answers to these hypothetical questions, but there is one thing I am sure of -- we have to start having a bigger vision of where we are going.

Are we going to sit still while our neighbors to the north put together a public/private partnership to build a 1,000-acre site that could provide a facility for the U.S. Olympic Committee, a NASCAR race track and a site for the National Western Stock show?

As I was reviewing a November 2007 Denver Post story regarding the bond issues it was interesting to read the opponents' responses.

Question 1B

Health and human services

Amount: $48.6 million for expanding and upgrading various health care facilities including $18.2 million to replace the city's animal shelter.

Opponents say: No formal opposition

Question 1E

Parks and recreation centers

Amount: $93.4 million to update irrigation systems at parks, athletic fields, open spaces etc., also to raise $9.8 million to restore historic structures.

Opponents say: No formal opposition

I don't need to give you the complete discussion from the Post, you get the picture. Sure there were some dissenting views on some of these bonds, as well there should be, but in general Denver seems to be able to get things done and move the ball forward while we in the Springs can't see the forest through the proverbial trees.

In last weeks CSBJ view we said:

Success breeds success.

"Used to thinking big, making big plans and following through, Denver leaders are comfortable getting behind audacious schemes and transforming them into reality."

I can only hope that as a community, across private and public sectors, we are able to think audaciously ... and even more importantly, be able to execute the audacious thinking.

Copyright 2008 Dolan Media Newswires
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved.