DrivinTooFast
enthusiast
Posts: 1349
Reg: 02-20-08
|
05-10-10 06:57 AM - Post#110705
Frisco Place 2 city council ended with a runoff election, but the leading two candidates Jim Joyner and John Keating ended in a virtual tie. Mr Joyner is in favor of the CCA while Mr. Keating is against. The runff election will be in the next 30 days.
Also there is a petition that will most likely get enough signatures floating around Frisco to re-vote the CCA funding in the next election.
Storm clouds are brewing.
Edited by DrivinTooFast on 05-10-10 08:26 AM. Reason for edit: No reason given.
|
civicminded
Community Guide
Posts: 9254
Loc: Lone Star State
Reg: 04-24-02
|
05-10-10 08:24 AM - Post#110707
In response to DrivinTooFast
What is the ACC?
|
DrivinTooFast
enthusiast
Posts: 1349
Reg: 02-20-08
|
05-10-10 08:27 AM - Post#110709
In response to civicminded
Sorry I meant CCA.
|
sco
enthusiast
Posts: 2670
Loc: allen,TX USA
Reg: 10-26-02
|
05-10-10 08:45 AM - Post#110711
In response to DrivinTooFast
Now I'm confused. I think you were right the first time. Are you talking about the Arts of Collin County performance hall planned for 121 & custer? I don't understand how this whole thing works. There was a vote to authorize the bonds which passed. Can a petition really force a re-vote? The city council has to vote to actually sell the bonds and that appears to be the sticking point at the moment. Personally I'm starting to doubt if it is possible to get 3 cities to all agree on something at the same time in order to actually make it happen.
|
Allenite
enthusiast
Posts: 303
Loc: Allen, TX, USA
Reg: 06-18-01
|
05-10-10 09:06 AM - Post#110713
In response to DrivinTooFast
I'm assuming you meant the ACC (Arts of Collin County).
I'm wondering if they legally can vote themselves out of the agreement already in place. It'll be interesting. The 3 cities signed an interlocal agreement for maintenance costs, and future funding. The voters approved bond money for the construction.
Does this mean that voters can approve the construction of a library (for example) and then several years later, insist on re-voting to dis-allow those bonds from being spent? I would also think that this type of action could negatively affect a city's bond rating.
Guess this will all play out, and we'll see how Frisco handles it. I hope that common sense prevails, and that Frisco leadership decides to remain committed to the ACC.
|
vrs
enthusiast
Posts: 2632
Loc: Allen, Texas
Reg: 04-20-00
|
05-10-10 10:03 AM - Post#110716
In response to sco
I know - or think I know - that the shelf life of a bond authorization is 10 years.
Once the bond authorization is in place, the governing body is not obligated to issue them. In fact, on the school side for sure - municipalities may be different - unless the assessed value is there to support the debt within the allowable rate, the governing body is not allowed to issue the debt.
So, when was the ACC bond election originally held? We have to be pushing 10 years. If some of the Frisco Council folks don't like the ACC project, all they have to do is to stall until the bond authorization expires and you automatically have to go back for a revote - this is what I thought Frisco was doing - basically a form of a filibuster.
Yes, you can have an election to revoke an authorization. And, if they revote before 10 years are up, they would want to revoke the first authorization or both would show up on their debt sheet because bond authorizations, even though the bonds are not issued, count as debt capacity used.
Lastly, as to what relief there might be for Frisco failing to hold up their end of the bargain, I think you would have to start by looking within the four corners of the agreement itself. I would guess there is very little and I believe that's what a court would look at. Again, I am not a lawyer so what do I know.
| Blessed be the cracked, for they let in the light. |
|
sco
enthusiast
Posts: 2670
Loc: allen,TX USA
Reg: 10-26-02
|
05-10-10 10:14 AM - Post#110718
In response to vrs
I looked on the ACC website, the original bond election was held in 2002. So it appears that they could just stall and force a re-vote. I'm guessing that VRS is correct and there is little legal recourse for the cities of Plano and Allen. As a practical matter Frisco will have destroyed a lot of work and eliminated any level of trust gained between the cities. It's sort of like I tell my teenager, trust is earned and once it is lost it is really hard to earn it back.
Edited by sco on 05-10-10 10:57 AM. Reason for edit: corrected McKinney to Plano
|
DrivinTooFast
enthusiast
Posts: 1349
Reg: 02-20-08
|
05-10-10 10:37 AM - Post#110721
In response to sco
I agree, this comes down to trust. When is a handshake a handshake? - When the going gets tough.
If Frisco pulls out, it is a mjor break in trust. If you pledged money to the heart association, or the lukemia society or even to buy Girl Scout cookies and then back out?? NO! Of course not because that is dishonest.
I know many of the Frisco folks are claiming it was a 4 city deal and when McKinney's bonds failed then it should have been revoted. I actually agree with that IF it was 2002 or 2003. Waiting to 2010 to get your underwear in a bunch is disingenuous at best and fraudulent at worst. All of the communities - Allen, Plano and Frisco have spent money to keep this ship sailing on the basis it was going to happen. Who is on the hook now for all the expenses?
This egg is rotten.
|
readingu
enthusiast
Posts: 705
Reg: 02-08-04
|
05-10-10 10:38 AM - Post#110722
In response to sco
Mckinney? I think you meant Plano.
|
DrivinTooFast
enthusiast
Posts: 1349
Reg: 02-20-08
|
05-10-10 10:40 AM - Post#110723
In response to readingu
No Plano is in as long as Frisco is in. McKinney's bonds did not pass in 2002.
|
readingu
enthusiast
Posts: 705
Reg: 02-08-04
|
05-10-10 10:45 AM - Post#110724
In response to DrivinTooFast
I responded to SCO "there is little legal recourse for the cities of McKinney and Allen". Your first reply hadn't posted
|
DrivinTooFast
enthusiast
Posts: 1349
Reg: 02-20-08
|
05-10-10 10:47 AM - Post#110725
In response to readingu
Ah Sorry.
|
sco
enthusiast
Posts: 2670
Loc: allen,TX USA
Reg: 10-26-02
|
05-10-10 10:52 AM - Post#110728
In response to readingu
My apologies. You are correct. I meant to say Allen and Plano.
|
sco
enthusiast
Posts: 2670
Loc: allen,TX USA
Reg: 10-26-02
|
05-10-10 10:55 AM - Post#110731
In response to DrivinTooFast
If the project dies I wonder about many things. What happens to the land that was donated? What happens to all of the private donations? The city of Allen has already spent money on road improvements. We aren't going to get that money back. Obviously some Frisco residents and/or council members don't feel they have any need for regional cooperation.
|
vrs
enthusiast
Posts: 2632
Loc: Allen, Texas
Reg: 04-20-00
|
05-10-10 11:03 AM - Post#110733
In response to sco
Start by calling everyone you know in Frisco and get them to vote in the runoff....
| Blessed be the cracked, for they let in the light. |
|
Allenite
enthusiast
Posts: 303
Loc: Allen, TX, USA
Reg: 06-18-01
|
05-15-10 08:30 AM - Post#111101
In response to vrs
I've just learned that a petition was presented to the Frisco city to call for an election on the issue. They'll have to certify the signatures, but if there are enough signatures that qualify, the election will be held. Not sure of the election date, but rumor is that it'll be on the November ballot. If the bond election doesn't pass, I guess the ACC is dead. Plano & Allen could litigate to recover expended money.
VRS is right: contact anyone you know in Frisco to get this passed.
|
sco
enthusiast
Posts: 2670
Loc: allen,TX USA
Reg: 10-26-02
|
05-15-10 10:19 AM - Post#111103
In response to Allenite
Honestly I'm not sure how I feel about this issue. If Frisco isn't solidly behind the project then it might actually be best to just kill it now. If all they are going to do is continue dragging their feet and obstructing progress then Allen might be better off taking our $19 million and building something smaller. On the down side if they do kill the project then it will be a big legal mess and any hope of regional cooperation on anything else will be severely harmed.
|
Allenite
enthusiast
Posts: 303
Loc: Allen, TX, USA
Reg: 06-18-01
|
05-15-10 05:39 PM - Post#111121
In response to sco
Ditto.
|
DrivinTooFast
enthusiast
Posts: 1349
Reg: 02-20-08
|
05-17-10 06:58 AM - Post#111158
In response to Allenite
The petition still needs to clear a legal hurdle - which it won't. HOWEVER, that does not mean that the Arts center will move forward.
The petition has been sold like a wonder drug for Frisco's ills reducing taxes, providing more money for parks, ballfields, police fire and Frisco's railroad museum. You name your issue in Frisco and it was sold as solving it. Heck it probably was sold as solving world peace too. I felt like somebody should be throwing in some ShamWow towels. The petition has been spearheaded by the Tea party movement.
It ramains upto the Frisco city council to bring it back to the voters (which I disagree with after 8 years of sitting on their hands). If it was to be revoted, it should have been revoted after McKinney pulled out in 2003 not 2011 after cities have put a small boatload of money into the project.
If Frisco wants out (effectively killing the project) then it needs to sit down with all three cities NOT the ACC and work out a severance plan. Re-imbursing cities that have spent more than their share and everyone walks away from the deal together. You got into bed together, you get out of bed together.
|
asmile4u
enthusiast
Posts: 774
Loc: Allen
Reg: 04-20-08
|
06-14-10 01:13 PM - Post#113222
In response to DrivinTooFast
Keating won. Interesting now to see how things play out. Not looking good for the Arts Center.
|
