A Discussion Site for Everything Omaha
https://eomahaforums.com/
I'm surprised she did not veto Festerson's 8 additional OPD personnel.KETV wrote:Stothert cited the need for saving, not spending, in a release issued Thursday morning.
The four items Stothert vetoed include: the $60,000 position of Complete Streets Active Living Manager in the Public Works Department; $40,0000 to fund exhibits at the Great Plains Black History Museum; $50,000 for sustainability consulting; and a $175,000 appropriation to the Omaha Public Library for materials.
Not likely. Fahey built the ballpark when the debt on the Qwest Center had pay down issues. Nothing happened to him.bigredmed wrote:Bringing up the bond rating saves millions of dollars that in other cities are part and parcel of their decline. Eventually you can do nothing but pay the interest on the bonds.
She should be impeached if she spent money on new stuff before beefing up the reserve fund.
I would think that people are mad because they disagree with what was vetoed not the idea of vetoing things. Therefore someone who for example believes we spend too much money on road widening and not enough money on "complete streets" would be happy with a veto to a road widening line item and upset with a veto to a coordinator position focused on improving our roads for non-car use. Not really amazing at all, pretty much common sense.bbinks wrote: Amazing that so many are mad at Stothert for vetoes but were not mad when the democratic mayors did the same. Working with the council and rubber stamping everything that gets plopped on your desktop art 2 different issues.
Coyote wrote:City Council over rode the Library Budget veto...
Are we getting rid of the Restaurant Tax?Jean Stothert wrote:After nine months, we now expect to end the year with a $9.5 million surplus. The third quarter financial report, released today shows expenses are under budget by $5.6 million dollars; revenue is up by nearly $4 million.
The City Charter will require the year end surplus to be carried over to 2016.
We are controlling expenses. Revenue can be unpredictable. That’s why we monitor expenses department by department constantly, always careful not to reduce the services taxpayers expect and deserve.
Highlights of the 3rd quarter report include:
The Police Department is estimated to be $3.05 million under budget due to savings in wages and benefits and health care costs.
Planning, Parks, Finance, Human Resources, Public Works and Library are also projected to be under the general fund budget.
The Omaha Fire Department remains slightly over budget; less than a half million dollars, ($0.34 million) attributed to wages and costs associated with injuries, resignations and the deaths of active duty firefighters.
Property tax and sales tax revenue is up, while restaurant tax revenue is under budget by $1 million.
The 2014 projected surplus has grown from $6.1 million at the end of the second quarter to $9.5 million.
For three consecutive quarters we have controlled spending and managed the budget. The projected surplus shows my commitment to spending the taxpayer’s money carefully.
iamjacobm wrote:Was the restaurant tax for general city funds or did it go to specific departments?
Maggie O'Brien WORLD-HERALD STAFF WRITER wrote:Dining out, registering a car and owning a home in Omaha would all cost more under Mayor Jim Suttle's 2011 budget proposal.
Stressing the need to "put the city's financial house in order," Suttle outlined two tax increases and a new restaurant tax that would generate a total of $44 million in new revenue. Suttle presented his plan to the City Council Tuesday.
The tax increases wouldn't put a dent in only Omahans' wallets. Anyone who eats at the city's restaurants, drinks at a bar or hires a caterer would pay more. So would motorists who live in Omaha or in most Douglas County subdivisions.
Suttle said the city needs new sources of revenue to climb out of a $33.5 million budget shortfall projected for next year.
The Urban Land Institute (ULI) announced today that the mayors of Boston, Omaha, Pittsburgh and Seattle have been selected to participate in the 2015 class of fellows for the Rose Center for Public Leadership. The mayor of each city will lead a team of three fellows and a coordinator, who together will select a local land use challenge for which they will receive technical assistance from faculty experts assembled by ULI and their peers from the other three fellowship cities.
The Daniel Rose Center Fellowship program is the flagship program of the Rose Center, established in 2008 with a grant from ULI Foundation Governor Daniel Rose to encourage and support excellence in land use decision making by local governments. The Rose Center seeks to foster creative, efficient, practical and sustainable land use policies by providing public officials with access to information, best practices, peer networks and other resources. The Fellowship's program of work includes a study tour of another U.S. or foreign city, a working retreat, and study visits to each of the four fellowship cities.
Earlier this year, ULI and the National League of Cities (NLC), which collectively represent the world's foremost real estate professionals and the nation's most distinguished municipal leaders, signed a partnership agreement to guide the oversight and operations of the Rose Center for Public Leadership. The agreement takes effect January 1, 2015. The new class of fellows and Rose Center Executive Director Jess Zimbabwe are attending the National League of Cities 2014 Congress of Cities and Exposition this week in Austin, Texas.
Looking at Land usage eh? Show them North Downtown and the L Street Marketplaceiamjacobm wrote:http://www.virtualpressoffice.com/publi ... Id=&sInfo=
The Urban Land Institute (ULI) announced today that the mayors of Boston, Omaha, Pittsburgh and Seattle have been selected to participate in the 2015 class of fellows for the Rose Center for Public Leadership. The mayor of each city will lead a team of three fellows and a coordinator, who together will select a local land use challenge for which they will receive technical assistance from faculty experts assembled by ULI and their peers from the other three fellowship cities.
The Daniel Rose Center Fellowship program is the flagship program of the Rose Center, established in 2008 with a grant from ULI Foundation Governor Daniel Rose to encourage and support excellence in land use decision making by local governments. The Rose Center seeks to foster creative, efficient, practical and sustainable land use policies by providing public officials with access to information, best practices, peer networks and other resources. The Fellowship's program of work includes a study tour of another U.S. or foreign city, a working retreat, and study visits to each of the four fellowship cities.
Earlier this year, ULI and the National League of Cities (NLC), which collectively represent the world's foremost real estate professionals and the nation's most distinguished municipal leaders, signed a partnership agreement to guide the oversight and operations of the Rose Center for Public Leadership. The agreement takes effect January 1, 2015. The new class of fellows and Rose Center Executive Director Jess Zimbabwe are attending the National League of Cities 2014 Congress of Cities and Exposition this week in Austin, Texas.
Possibly because those parents are lawyered up and are not stupid enough to speak in public.Brad wrote:Why is nobody actually focusing on the actual problem here? A parent knowingly let 70-100 kids come party in her house... Nobody is saying anything about that.
Because that is the direction society has evolved over the last 50 years or so. Nobody is responsible for anything. If I did something bad, I either had justification or it didn't matter what I did wrong because somebody was mean to me after the fact, and that issue, instead, needs dealt with.Brad wrote:Why is nobody actually focusing on the actual problem here? A parent knowingly let 70-100 kids come party in her house... Nobody is saying anything about that.
I'm assuming the responsible (irresponsible?) parties have been punished accordingly. There's been MIP parties before, there'll be MIP parties after. It just happened that ants must have devoured the part of this woman's brain responsible for judgement to the point she thought this was a good idea.Brad wrote:Why is nobody actually focusing on the actual problem here? A parent knowingly let 70-100 kids come party in her house... Nobody is saying anything about that.
rape? Seriously? We were all this age, at one time. I think rape accusations are getting out of hand, because I've never heard of that growing up. It was simply kids drinking alcohol making stupid decisions.RNcyanide wrote:My parents must be caught from a different cloth. If I had been at that party underage and got roughed up by the cops, or 'intimidated' or whatever, they would have probably told me to suck it up and not be an idiot. I just don't understand, I guess. I'm not saying the police do everything right and I am pretty critical of a lot of the things they do, but I don't think the cops were that happy to be dealing with drunk 15-18 year olds, especially considering things like alcohol poisoning, rape and violence could have all came out of this situation.
Regardless, there's a lot of danger and stupidity to deal with when busting a party full of drunk teens.S33 wrote:rape? Seriously? We were all this age, at one time. I think rape accusations are getting out of hand, because I've never heard of that growing up. It was simply kids drinking alcohol making stupid decisions.RNcyanide wrote:My parents must be caught from a different cloth. If I had been at that party underage and got roughed up by the cops, or 'intimidated' or whatever, they would have probably told me to suck it up and not be an idiot. I just don't understand, I guess. I'm not saying the police do everything right and I am pretty critical of a lot of the things they do, but I don't think the cops were that happy to be dealing with drunk 15-18 year olds, especially considering things like alcohol poisoning, rape and violence could have all came out of this situation.
The morning after, sure, probably regret from all angles, but regret and irresponsibility very rarely was maligned as rape.
So did you think they were going to rape the cops?RNcyanide wrote:Regardless, there's a lot of danger and stupidity to deal with when busting a party full of drunk teens.S33 wrote:rape? Seriously? We were all this age, at one time. I think rape accusations are getting out of hand, because I've never heard of that growing up. It was simply kids drinking alcohol making stupid decisions.RNcyanide wrote:My parents must be caught from a different cloth. If I had been at that party underage and got roughed up by the cops, or 'intimidated' or whatever, they would have probably told me to suck it up and not be an idiot. I just don't understand, I guess. I'm not saying the police do everything right and I am pretty critical of a lot of the things they do, but I don't think the cops were that happy to be dealing with drunk 15-18 year olds, especially considering things like alcohol poisoning, rape and violence could have all came out of this situation.
The morning after, sure, probably regret from all angles, but regret and irresponsibility very rarely was maligned as rape.
That's pretty much what I think happened, which is why I'm not too concerned about the kids or their parents here. They need to learn that if they're going to do something so stupid as a house party with 70 other people, they're going to get popped and pay for it.bigredmed wrote:Big danger is from the result of self defense.
Go to Ghettotown and break up a party, some idiot pulls a gun and the cops shoot him. The reaction is the usual 50 people at the party and yet no witnesses, except that all 75 saw the cop shoot first. This dies down and goes away.
Go to Beemertown and break up a party, some idiot takes a swing at a cop who ducks and his partner puts little Joshie-poo on the ground with left hook to the ear. The reaction is screaming mothers on KETV and complaints about police brutality and lawsuits because he can't study due to the PTSD from that horrible night and this will blow his shot to go to Harvard.
I think this is just another example of parents eroding kids respect for authority. I have family who have been school teachers, and too often, when they disciplined a student for breaking the rules, the parents would attack the teacher, often in front of their child. Starting things like that an an early age is a recipe for turning your kids into selfish narcissists. The scenario with this woman seems to be the same thing, only instead of a teacher at school, this time it was the police.RNcyanide wrote:My parents must be caught from a different cloth. If I had been at that party underage and got roughed up by the cops, or 'intimidated' or whatever, they would have probably told me to suck it up and not be an idiot.
+1Seth wrote:I think this is just another example of parents eroding kids respect for authority. I have family who have been school teachers, and too often, when they disciplined a student for breaking the rules, the parents would attack the teacher, often in front of their child. Starting things like that an an early age is a recipe for turning your kids into selfish narcissists. The scenario with this woman seems to be the same thing, only instead of a teacher at school, this time it was the police.RNcyanide wrote:My parents must be caught from a different cloth. If I had been at that party underage and got roughed up by the cops, or 'intimidated' or whatever, they would have probably told me to suck it up and not be an idiot.
I'm not even that old (30), but my parents handled those situations far differently. Even if they suspected unfairness on the teacher's (or other authority's) part, they would never directly undermine them in front of them. To have a functioning, civilized society, you have to have a foundational respect for authority. Authorities definitely have to be held accountable, which is why we have systems in place to do this, but when the first conclusion is that the authority is wrong, chaos is bound to ensue.
That cartoon is perfect. I'm bookmarking it.Uffda wrote:
Uffda wrote:
That's pretty shocking, the first one more so than the second one.iamjacobm wrote:Stothert has vocally supported the bill to grant Dreamers drivers liscenses and has vocally opposed a bill to limit TIF. I think she has shown to be far more moderate than the stance she ran on. I am a pretty big fan of much of the things she has done.