There's some transparent government.
I'm pretty sick of the smoke and mirrors from CoCS.
I'm pretty sick of the smoke and mirrors from CoCS.
Macy's Re-Purposing, Feedback Sought [Staff Edit 2/15/2025]
30,338 Views |
260 Replies |
Last: 13 days ago by happyinBCS
We're all sure what the deal is at this point, a cat covering tracks.Brian Alg said:
January 27 I did an ORR for:
"Documents related to the city's decision to purchase property at Post Oak Mall including correspondence with any outside consulting firms or Texas A&M or its affiliates. This may also include plans to use the property for a specific purpose. Documents relating to a city agreement with Texas A&M or its affiliates regarding an esports facility or other use by the University or its affiliates. These documents might be dated from January 1, 2020 to the present."
They responded with a request to the AG "to withhold a portion of the information pursuant to exceptions found in the Texas Government Code 552.101 to 552.158."
They didn't actually release anything. So I am not sure what they meant by "portion." And the sections of the code they vaguely cited are basically the whole exceptions list. I am not sure what the deal is. But they were required to turn docs over a couple of days ago.
Won't turn over requested documents.
Won't release body cam footage.
Didn't want to pay their maintenance fees to the mall.
They do not work for the public I guess? They need to have the purse strings cut if they don't want to serve the public.
Won't release body cam footage.
Didn't want to pay their maintenance fees to the mall.
They do not work for the public I guess? They need to have the purse strings cut if they don't want to serve the public.
Mr. Yancy
Please be bold in the council meeting tonight you are our only hope
Thank you
Please be bold in the council meeting tonight you are our only hope
Thank you
All information, excepting personel information or information on any security issues, should be immediately available to any citizen of the city on demand.EliteElectric said:We're all sure what the deal is at this point, a cat covering tracks.Brian Alg said:
January 27 I did an ORR for:
"Documents related to the city's decision to purchase property at Post Oak Mall including correspondence with any outside consulting firms or Texas A&M or its affiliates. This may also include plans to use the property for a specific purpose. Documents relating to a city agreement with Texas A&M or its affiliates regarding an esports facility or other use by the University or its affiliates. These documents might be dated from January 1, 2020 to the present."
They responded with a request to the AG "to withhold a portion of the information pursuant to exceptions found in the Texas Government Code 552.101 to 552.158."
They didn't actually release anything. So I am not sure what they meant by "portion." And the sections of the code they vaguely cited are basically the whole exceptions list. I am not sure what the deal is. But they were required to turn docs over a couple of days ago.
In fact, after negotiations on purchased are consumated, all information should be uploaded to a website.
City officials often forget that they work for the citizens of the city.
happyinBCS said:
Mr. Yancy
Please be bold in the council meeting tonight you are our only hope
Thank you
Is this being discussed tonight? You know y'all can go to the meeting and make comments as a visitor.
They make you sign up before 2pm
True, but they can sign up to speak at a future one.
Is it on agenda tonight? Will watch if it is.
Is it on agenda tonight? Will watch if it is.
So if the city of college station had a "deal" with Texas A&M they are expecting us to believe that Texas A&M wanted the city to pay way over asking price for a piece of property with ongoing expenses and then A&M would buy that from them or lease it from them at that way over valued price?
Why wouldn't Texas A&M buy it themselves? This scenario would mean a lot of entities are playing with other peoples money irrationally! And if one entity was left holding the bag wouldn't the lawsuit have already been filed?
Sell it at what ever cost you can and be done with it! It is already a loss and it can only get worse from here as it would take millions more to rehabilitate it and repurpose it into a money loser that would be a drain on the city for years to come.
Why wouldn't Texas A&M buy it themselves? This scenario would mean a lot of entities are playing with other peoples money irrationally! And if one entity was left holding the bag wouldn't the lawsuit have already been filed?
Sell it at what ever cost you can and be done with it! It is already a loss and it can only get worse from here as it would take millions more to rehabilitate it and repurpose it into a money loser that would be a drain on the city for years to come.
I collect ticket stubs! looking for a 1944 orange bowl and 1981 independence bowl ticket stub as well as Aggie vs tu stubs - 1926 and below, 1935-1937, 1939-1944, 1946-1948, 1950-1951, 1953, 1956-1957, 1959, 1960, 1963-1966, 1969-1970, 1972-1974, 1980, 1984, 1990, 2004, 2008, 2010
I got a set of docs from this request today. I will see if I can get them to post on Google Drive. There are a bunch of them. I haven't had a chance to look through the 480 pages. But it looks like it will be interesting stuff.
Edit: Here it is.
[There has been another thread started about the purchase of the property and we are asking that discussion about that subject stay on that thread. ]
The information that you provided needs to be on a different thread because it is going to be a very long discussion and thread and we believe that it should be a thread about that topic.]
[Please keep all discussion on this thread related to what should be done with the property in the future. Thank you. -Staff]
Link to the thread.
https://texags.com/forums/35/topics/3528026
Edit: Here it is.
[There has been another thread started about the purchase of the property and we are asking that discussion about that subject stay on that thread. ]
The information that you provided needs to be on a different thread because it is going to be a very long discussion and thread and we believe that it should be a thread about that topic.]
[Please keep all discussion on this thread related to what should be done with the property in the future. Thank you. -Staff]
Link to the thread.
https://texags.com/forums/35/topics/3528026
Thank you Councilman Yancy, for your tireless efforts, in making the B/CS Community, a better place for all of us! I've read every post on this thread, and have withheld comment on multiple occasions, for my own personal reasons. However, showing my/our appreciation for you, cannot be stated often enough!
WB '99
WB '99
99StationAG said:
Thank you Councilman Yancy, for your tireless efforts, in making the B/CS Community, a better place for all of us! I've ready every post on this thread, and have withheld comment on multiple occasions, for my own personal reasons. However, showing my/our appreciation for you, cannot be stated often enough!
WB '99
Hear Hear.
Sell it!
The city has proven over the years that they should not be involved in any property development.
The city has proven over the years that they should not be involved in any property development.
hopeandrealchange said:99StationAG said:
Thank you Councilman Yancy, for your tireless efforts, in making the B/CS Community, a better place for all of us! I've ready every post on this thread, and have withheld comment on multiple occasions, for my own personal reasons. However, showing my/our appreciation for you, cannot be stated often enough!
WB '99
Hear Hear.
Very nice of you both. Thank you.
Respectfully
Yancy
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
I think we should sell the property to Jim Lewis at a price of $2.5M, with a sincere apology from the City. Seriously.
Hornbeck said:
I think we should sell the property to Jim Lewis at a price of $2.5M, with a sincere apology from the City. Seriously.
This!
Spot on
The very least they should do
The very least they should do