tamufan said:
From that KBTX article: "The City recognizes the property's critical importance and potential as a transformative catalyst for economic growth and revitalization in the surrounding area. We're committed to pursuing all viable opportunities while ensuring a process that maximizes the property's potential and aligns with the long-term vision for the community," the city said in its most recent remarks.
Critical importance. Transformative catalyst. Maximizing potential. Long term vision for the community....
Wow! I am so proud. I'd like to know who wrote this so I know who to credit when I see "The City".
I didn't write that, and I don't altogether disagree with it. However, the Macy's alone would be hard pressed to serve as a catalyst for transformative change for the surrounding area. That kind of transformation would require the unanimous agreement of all 5 owners of the mall.
The whole matter raises significant questions regarding the proper role of government, both in the decision to acquire the property without proper due diligence, the lack of transparency in what led up to the acquisition, and the amount of time it's now sat vacant.
Malls require foot traffic, and an empty anchor that once was the main entrance to the mall being shuttered hurts the businesses currently located there.
For all that, I'm extremely motivated to find an answer, have two potential solutions I'm formulating, and really want to artfully extract ourselves from it in a way that benefits the taxpayers.
Respectfully
Yancy '95
My opinions are mine and should not be construed as those of city council or staff. I welcome robust debate but will cease communication on any thread in which colleagues or staff are personally criticized. I must refrain from comment on posted agenda items until after meetings are concluded. Bob Yancy 95
