It's too bad Mr. Williams was not a part of the several study committees that thought this was such a great idea. I only find one statement in this article that I might take issue with, and that is regarding Savannah needing a new ARENA, and that it draws visitors. Savannah is now almost inundated with 'visitors' that we know as tourists. They come here because of Savannah being what it currently is, and for there to be a new arena, will not really increase those visitor numbers significantly. This also begs the question 'do we need more motels and restaurants' whose employees will for the most part never be able to own their own home?
Arena? Maybe it was a possibly good idea when it was first dreamed up, but today Savannah has issues that the ARENA will in no way solve. I would question the validity of all previous studies regarding this project, guessing that all participants were tasked with proving it a good idea, not actually questioning whether it was what Savannah needed and could benefit the most from. From recent reports it seems the whole project is doomed and at risk to be declared not feasible, which is a reason, under SPLOST regulations, the ARENA PROJECT can be scrapped and replaced with other infrastructure much more directly beneficial to our citizenry.
Public input regarding Arena features: is now 12:20 on Thursday, Aug 23, 2018, and I am just now learning of a meeting for Public Input at 9:30 this morning. How was this publicized, and how far in advance, and will there be subsequent meetings?
Having personally witnessed last week's City Council frakas, I was somewhat encouraged by Dr. Shabazz's willingness to admit to a prior error in pushing the DBE program to replace the MWBE. Rarely will the holder of a political office admit to a mistake, especially one of their own. In regard to the Arena, I continue to feel the entire project is a huge misdirection of taxpayer's monies. However, it appears it is going to happen, regardless of its inappropriateness in light of the issues facing Savannah. I had to google CMR, the term tossed around freely regarding the bid process, only to find it actually was CMAR(Construction Manager at Risk). In reading more about the CMAR process, it was interesting that it seems the usual process has the design process incorporated under the CMAR umbrella, meaning the CMAR picks the architect, etc. This is to hopefully avoid runaway costs when one party blames it on another. However, it appears the route we are taking is to have someone else design the project, then ask the CMAR to agree to build it for a fixed sum. How could the CMAR possibly agree to a price for a project that has not even been designed. That strikes me as problematic. However, is that not the way we are used to seeing things done by our elected officials?
Recent Comments