Oshkosh Common Councilor Bryan Bain tonight joined Paul Esslinger in voting against a resolution to modify the Five Rivers Resort term sheet that would have given the developer more time to get his financing in order. He said his enthusiasm for a project like Five Rivers was still high, but that sufficient concerns had been raised so that he could no longer support it. Councilors Bill Castle, Shirley Mattox, Frank Tower, and Burk Tower voted for the the term sheet modification. Meredith Scheuermann did not attend the meeting.
In my statement on the resolution I asked the Council, if they were going to vote in support, to at least indicate that they would oppose a "direct pay" option that would place the city at greater risk. Sadly, none of the yes votes even addressed the issue. This served to solidify the fears of many that when the Council went into closed session last month, they became convinced that direct pay would be a possibility if the Five Rivers developer met certain conditions.
Bryan's vote was crucial. If Esslinger and Burk Tower are re-elected and IF it turns out that Mrs. Scheuermann cannot vote on the Five Rivers due to conflicts related to her bank employment or other factors (remember, I said IF), that would mean that the Five Rivers project could be approved with a maximum of 4 votes. Depending on the results of the election, it is entirely possible that the Council could end up facing a 3-3 deadlock on Five Rivers.
The Final Thought: Bain's vote tonight represents a major step in possibly halting this project, perhaps even bigger than he thought when he cast it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Give Bain credit. I'm not sure of his motive because he is all over the place on many issues in the past but I'm pleased he had the courage to change his support on the Five Rivers project.
The lesson I guess is that you can't fool all the Common Counci members all the time!
I am shocked he has soured on the project. Does Bain have info we do not?
I am proud of Bryan for his stance and I hope that the rest of our councilors (sans Paul Esslinger since he has also voted against this extension) will keep true to their word and not give another extension on this project.
In the event the developer is able to get his financing lined up by the new deadline, I would further hope that this council watch out for our best interests and ONLY do the project as initially recommended - and that is on a "pay as you go" basis. So many signs point to financial strife with similar projects, so we need the most protection we can get. Pay as you go does that and this council should settle for nothing less.
Post a Comment