Wichita City Council members don’t support turning Century II into a casino. And the developer who proposed the idea announced last month that he was dropping it. Yet the No Casinos in Sedgwick County group keeps trying to scare voters into believing that something that was never going to happen still could. A recent mailing, under the heading "Destroying Century II," said: "They claim it’s off the table — but can we really trust them."
Voters may be asking whether they can trust the anti-gambling group when it resorts to such scare tactics.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
-
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in. -
Contact us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- lindainks55 on McCain’s surprise pick for veep
- Mr_Kia on McCain’s surprise pick for veep
- Regular on Democrats hit back on patriotism
- CF2K on Obama nomination transcends partisanship
- generaston on McCain’s surprise pick for veep
- Mr_Kia on McCain’s surprise pick for veep
- Rage on McCain’s surprise pick for veep
- SHADOW_KNOWS on Democrats hit back on patriotism
- KSGolfnut on McCain’s surprise pick for veep
- Monkeyhawk on McCain’s surprise pick for veep
74 Comments
Phillip Brownlee: Are you confused? The Wichita EAGLE editorial board of which you are a part recently wisely said you don’t feel gambling casinos would be a good choice for Sedgwick County. What’s that saying, “you can’t have it both ways.”
I think most people agree we don’t want gambling in downtown Wichita.
And I think most people agree we can’t trust our current elected officials to provide leadership for the whole population. They have proven this time and time again.
This whole gambling proposal … and the downtown arena … should have been studied by a large blue ribbon committee of the public to hammer out a policy that was acceptable to a large majority of the public longbefore a vote is held.
Now the public’s only voice will be at the voting place and its going to leave a lot of people on both sides dissatisfied with the results.
“Dropping” is the key statement.
Things dropped can eventually be picked up again after the vote.
Shouldn’t Century II future improvement be paid for by the NOVA group for wanting land behind the building?
Shouldn’t the Library be helped to move to a larger building, NOVA group pays for that.
NOVA group shouldn’t buy The Hyatt? They should!
Billionaire developers don’t walk away from projects like that. The years wanting the location.
The detailed plans for NOVA’s Casino haven’t come out. Who knows, public opinion may demand the City and County support that plan over others. That plan needs detailed discussion!
Some people will fear that Casino location for what reasons I don’t understand.
Mayor Brewer went to Reno, didn’t like a Casino there and bad neighborhood near it.
How would Century II, Hyatt or WaterWalk become worse off?
Arts and the Casino can be next door to each other. Century II is getting increased interior sound proofing.
Arts will enter on the front side like always. Casino is in the back!
NOVA group never said Century II and Expo Hall were going to be altered.
Brian Hamm thought he could purchase Century II. He can’t do that.
I’m sure all of this will become much clearer after August 7.
Depending on who the winners and losers are, we’ll hear extreme comments from both sides.
If you take the time to read the actual question on the ballot, you will reach the conclusion that all options are on the table. All we are voting on is whether the KS Lottery can establish a monopoly on gambling in the county.
It’s like voting for an arena without seeing the design, business prospects, or basic costs. You ‘authorize’ them to do one little thing and turns out that gave them the ability to do everything.
On their Radio ads they make the same claim. “Century II will be wiped away.”
Also KSN debunked all their Billboard claims too.
There’s just enough rope for them to hang themselves.
There’s just enough rope for them to hang themselves.
Posted by: Joe Williams | August 05, 2007 at 08:17 AM
From your lips to god’s ears Joe!
Confused farmgrrl!
What are you applying?
Heheheeh. I know you are confused Joe because I agree with you for a change.
I do hope the “no” folks have been given enough rope to hang themselves with. I dont give a rat’s ass about gambling.
But I am still HOWLING at the chamber, big biz leaders, terry, joe and fred, and the WE all being on the side of keeping legal business OUT of Wichita.
Like I said, only in the land of wingnuttia…
They are the ones running the “no” campaign. That is for sure. The people on top running the campaign are the same people who also ran the gay marriage ban campaign too. Exact same folks.
Agreed Joe. Like I said, this is a test of who owns Wichita. The terry, joe and freds of the world or regular working people.
The chamber? Or regular working people.
The WE? Or… never mind…..
VOTE for god’s sake. If you dont, terry, joe, fred and the WE win.
Wichita loses.
It’s your decision to make. And the rest of the state is watching….
You’re right! Sumner County (south of us Wellington) and Harvey County (north of us Netwon), is your typical heavily Republican counties, and Harvey has a huge population of Mennonites.
They both easily passed the Casino question. If Sedgwick County doesn’t pass the Casino question, look for the Phelps to find a new home in Sedgwick County. A place where he can be embolden and supported.
Make no mistake about it. The is much more than a “No Casino” issue. This is a power grab for the power hungry evangelicals. They lost a few of their members in 2006 and they want to regain their strength back.
Mark Khars who is the head leader of the “No” campaign also ran Bonnie Huy’s campaign. She lost in 2006. That pissed Khars off big time.
While the “No” campaign may legitimately don’t want a Casino here, because they think it will take money away from the churches, they are counting on this to be a victory for a whole slew of issues they wish to address. They just want another victory for their side. That is how they are looking at this.
The open letter from Carl Brewer:
“After reading various reports on the impact of casinos, after hearing from numerous citizens and after meeting with several developers, I remain committed to the position I’ve held since the beginning of this casino debate: A decision regarding casinos in Sedgwick County rests with the voters. Not a mayor, not the media, not a special-interest group, but, rather, the people will make this decision.
I have great faith in their collective wisdom, and I am committed to carrying out their electoral wishes.
Ever since Kansas voters changed the state constitution in 1986 to authorize a state lottery, an annual debate has ensued regarding expanded gaming, including slot machines and casinos.
Throughout that period of time, the City of Wichita and its elected leaders have had one, single consistent message to the Kansas Legislature: If you pass any additional gaming legislation, just make sure you give the citizens of Wichita and Sedgwick County the opportunity to vote on this important social and economic question.
That time has now arrived. Next Tuesday, the ballots will be counted to determine whether casino gambling will be authorized in Sedgwick County.
For the past several weeks, the debate has intensified. Experts, media pundits and community leaders have weighed in on this important question, and our mailboxes and television screens have been filled with urgent pleadings to vote “Yes, Yes” or “No, No.”
In recent days, media have challenged local officials to take a Yes or No position. Those who wish to do so have done so, as is their unqualified right.
Nothing has changed my position. The massive volume of information for and against this important issue only reinforces the absolute necessity of a public referendum. Some will see it as a black-and-white decision, either for or against. Others are torn by the conflicting studies, the competing claims, the campaign rhetoric. That situation is mirrored in my own household, as my wife, Cathy, and I pore over news reports, studies and opinions.”
Agreed Joe. And you know what happens with them. You give them an inch, they take a mile.
It would be nice if Wichita would give the taliban a nice clear message about your community. Unfortunately, I dont have a lot of confidence that will happen. These wingnuts locate in Wichita for a reason.
It is a community supportive, by and large, that supports this kind of religious bullying. But that is what I expect from your wingnut churches down there. I am STILL howling about the chamber and the WE though jumping into bed with the bigots.
Can you say “self interest”? hehehehhehehehehhe…..
the ‘yes’ side is getting so paranoid it’s almost hilarious!! Blaming terry, joe and fred….. HA!! Fred has his own casino problem, terry’s benefactors are bankrupt, and joe’s retired and moved to Florida!
At least MY arguments against the Casino have some substance. A downtown casino will hurt local business, it will hurt local charities, and it will compete directly for the same dollars as the new Arena. It is a BAD idea, and that’s no scare tactic!
Sorry kansassam! You’re wrong. All the experts and reports from the government say you’re wrong.
Go back and read all the articles the Wichita Eagle has done.
You have to admit! That you are voting no, because of religious moral reasons.
While I can respect that decision and there isn’t anything wrong with voting “no” based on that. At least admit it and not use “hurt local businesses and charities” as an excuse.
Because all the problems associated with gambling already exist in our community. If local businesses and charities will be hurt, then they’ve been already hurt, because gaming is already here.
Having one casino in town doesn’t accelerate it. All it does is help our economy more than it hurts.
The WE Editorial and other people who encourage no, is because of the perceived image a casino might bring to our community. Not because of hurting businesses and charities. I can respect the WE Editorial (by the way I’m assuming it wasn’t unanimous either), but I believe it won’t bring a negative image.
My wife and I are voting NO, NO. Not because of any overriding principles, because of out-of-town in laws.
Her in laws and mine have a little problem with spinning wheels, ringing bells and bright lights. Maybe a gambling problem or maybe just ADD. Whatever.
We don’t care if they go to Topeka or Oklahoma. We just want to minimize their visits here!
Now I’ll admit that I’m a little hypocritical. I’ll vote no and I don’t care to have casinos in Wichita but I’ll go and play a little Texas Hold’em now and again.
Hank
We don’t
No Joe.. I am voting “NO” because I know the people it is going to destroy, and it is going to personally cost be to help support them because of your selfish ambitions.
How can you think that the same entertainment dollars that would be spent at your precious Arena won’t have to be split with the “entertainment” at the casino? There aren’t enough dollars to support both.. I fear it is you that are wrong Joe. I don’t know what reports you are reading, but the one’s I have read AND my experience with the poor and homeless tell me I am right!! I do not need a churchy reason to vote NO.. I have enought economic reasons to do so!
Valid points Joe! I’d like to say a pox on both your houses to the campaigners on BOTH sides. A NO-YES vote does that. A de facto casino named New Frontier very close to Fox’s new location. But at the same time not buying that pig-in-a-poke ‘blue cloud’ siting process.
Just last night a casino supporter stated that the Canadian proposal is still alive but is being kept under wraps to keep from increasing opposition. The Canadians wanted C-II; for a while I considered that to be an intriguing proposition - until I looked at it more closely. That casino supporter seems to be saying that C-II can be put back into play.
Joe! Where would the casino be located? WE DON’T KNOW! That is what makes the Sedgwick County vote so different from other counties. My IDEAL site would be Britt Brown location. Unincorporated Sedgwick County which gives the revenues to the County. County spends money in Wichita (such as the Old Town Arena) so Wichita would indirectly get the revenues. Unfortunately that site is effectively precluded due to conditions placed on it by the County Commission.
There are other sites I like; we have discussed them. Your Coleman one sounds good. But there are also a lot of sites I do NOT like. And I would have ZERO say in the siting process; that would take place behind closed doors.
As Ruffin notes on page 7A of today’s paper “This (NO-YES) will put gaming in a place we’ve accepted and enjoyed for years.” I agree with him.
Ben, I agree. I hate what gambling does to people, but it would be far less detrimental to the people who can’t afford its negative affects if it were at the Dog Track. If we MUST have gambling, I hope it is there!
Ben: I agree with Kansassam … if we must have gambling, it should go in Ruffin’s dog track operation. But it would be hard to finesse an election campaign to do that.
All in all, ECONOMICS is the major reason I am opposed to allowing gambling in Sedgwick County. For every dollar put into slot machines, the non-gambler property owners must pay some proportional amount of added taxes for police, jails, judges, counselors, divorce proceedings, etc.
Its like for every cigarette smokers smoke, the public must pay for additional hospital space, additional doctors, medical services, counseling, etc.
That is absolutely revolting as far as I’m concerned.
So, I voted NO AND NO in early voting probably a week or so ago.
Come now, a casino would provide much ad revenue for the Eagle, Lord knows they need it.
Looking at sam’s perspective I think NO-YES makes the most sense. People with cars can go to Oklahoma, Wellington, Topeka, etc already. So, all these specific negatives are in place anyway.
A downtown location, however, has the opportunity to draw ‘walk-in’ gamblers. Hardly a destination for people in New York!
The track seems to meto be similar to Wellington in distance/accessability. The biggest difference then is revenues - the track would generate revenues for Sedgwick County. Sam - we should then work for a slice of those revenues to help ameliorate problems.
There is no need for it to be in the Wichita city limits. I have never met a Wichita resident who is not also a Sedgwick County resident. So, revenues to the County will benefit Wichita taxpayers just about as much as revenues directly to the City.
Actually, what we’re voting on is completely vague and open-ended.
For all we know, Century II could be converted into a casino.
We don’t know how many or where the casinos are going to go. We don’t know how much indirect local subsidies are going to be used to finance the casinos–as in use of eminent domain and building roads and parking lots.
Those people voting “yes” are voting for a pig in a poke.
Someone has to represent the voters who want to vote NO. It certainly isn’t coming from our “free” press.
AN Keny - what do you mean? The Wichita Eagle came out against the casino vote. What more do you want from the ‘free’ press?
I was planning on voting against the casino but since the “no-casino” crowd has used so many lies in their campaign I think I’ll switch my vote.
The only problem with the No, Yes vote, is that there is still going to be a Casino. It’s just going to be across the county line, 8 miles away from Wichita, 4 miles from Derby. Both easy access on the Turnpike and Highway 81 (Broadway).
The problem with that is that Sedgwick County would lose out a great deal and the city wouldn’t gain a dime.
If you are worried about a downtown Casino getting (walk-in) traffic, what is wrong with that? It’s like you guys want a Casino to be built but don’t want anybody to go in. That “walk-in” traffic would be a lot of out-of-town visitors. Who fills up those hotel rooms downtown? It sure isn’t local people. Those are the people who will be “walk-ins”.
Having a Casino in Harvey County actually would bring less visitors to the Casino. You may think that’s a good thing, but that means it would be overwhelming full of just Wichita area people. When I say visitors, I mean people who don’t live in or around the Wichita area.
If we must accept a Casino coming in our area, wouldn’t it be better if it attracted more visitors from outside of our area? Doesn’t that help to offset the negatives? A downtown Casino would bring those out-of-town visitors who are already here. People who are staying at the Hyatt, the Broadview, the Holiday Inn, Marriott and more that are coming downtown.
A Casino in Harvey County would be less successful. Because it’s out in the middle of a field away from any thing else. Sure there will be a hotel and resort, but it won’t be filled up like it would if there was one in Downtown Wichita. Just the Casino floor would be filled up with area patrons.
Why do you think the Indian Casino across the state line have no hotels? Because it’s people going down there for the day and coming back home. A Harvey County Casino out in the pasture somewhere would be the same thing.
At least one in Downtown Wichita would attract a lot of out-of-towners who are staying in Wichita for the night or longer on business or whatever, who are all ready staying here, but they spend more of their money.
Again! As somebody pointed out in the last thread about Casinos. The Bowling Congress has went to Reno 7 times and it will go again. When the Women’s bowlers came into town, they rented a tour bus to take them to Harrah’s. We lost all that money.
I think it’s important to read Councilwoman Sharon’s response about a casino:
“A “yes” vote allows the city and the county to work together in the process of formulating the best location and determining what we can demand from the developers for our city. Following Wyandotte County’s example, we can add requirements of the developers for dollars to be put into things such as museums, parks, libraries, arts and schools. A “no” vote takes this opportunity away.”
I understand that some of you don’t trust our local leaders in government and you want to PUNISH them. But just think about what you are doing. A Casino in Sumner would be a great loss in additional revenues for the local government for Wichita and Sedgwick county. If you think that is a good thing and they don’t deserve it, then that’s your opinion.
Sumner County doesn’t care. They still get a percentage either way, although they would rather have the Casino come to them so they can get most of all the money allocated to their local government. And the best thing is that they don’t have to suffer any of the so called arbitrary social cost.
All the “No” campaign people cry out about Crime skyrocketing, Families being destroyed, local businesses and charities suffering, and that local government would incur a huge loss. Well!!!! Although that isn’t really true, but lets say for the sake of argument that it is. Ummm… A casino is still coming to town folks. But instead the City of Wichita gets nothing. What sense does that make? Yet this so called huge loss to our community will still happen, but the City has no way to recoup any cost making it go further down the hole. This by the way is using the “No” statistics arguments. Do the “No” people honestly believe it will not happen if a Casino is just across the county line?
You know! I watched the KWCH debate on the Casino. The “No” side clearly stated that their is “no guarantee” that a Casino will be built in Sumner County. Basically they are hoping a Casino will not be built and that a No vote will make that happen.
What are they going to do? Petition and beg Sumner not to submit a Casino proposal to the State? You gotta be kidding me.
The “No” campaign organizers might think they have power and control over Wichita, but they sure don’t over Sumner County. Sumner County is Pumping, Pushing and Preparing for a Casino, not a single power broker from the “No” Campaign is going to stop them.
Just give it more thought. That’s all.
Joe! We fundamentally disagree on whether a downtown location of a freeway location will get more out-of-towners. I have wandered the parking lots at Old Town and almost all the tags are local Sedgwick County. I think the same thing will exist at a downtown location.
A freeway location, on the other hand, can snag travellers. And, if we want to go there no problem. For me slots at the track would be just as close as downtown. Remember, not all of us live downtown.
Joe! “Sumner County doesn’t care. They still get a percentage either way” The same is true with Sedgwick County - we get a cut from a Sumner casino. AND - we get a cut from a Racino.
The one thing that might prevent building a Sumner casino would be NO-YES. The reason: New Frontier might be big enough to ’suck up all the oxygen’ in the region. Or, if they do build, no problem. Remember Joe!, my issue is siting.
Others on this thread have also named siting as their problem. That will be the differential in the vote.
Feary made good points that you list above. Problem is; that is NOT on the ballot. A vague ’something’ is. Put the force of law behind those vague suppositions and I would vote YES. Unfortunately they are just that: vague suppositions.
Politics makes strange bedfellows. Who would ever have thought Joe! and ksfg would be on the same side. Or me and Hank Price. But, you will note that we have very different reasons. Oh yes, and I split with Hank with my YES to #2.
I also was planning to change my vote from ‘no’ to ‘yes’, because of all of the lies and smears. But I see the ‘yes’ people using the same tactics. Heck, right here in this little comment back section, someone said that if I don’t vote yes, then Fred and Terry were going to move in next door to me and eat my children. (or something like that) I have decided to just not vote. In fact, I encourage everybody to refrain from voting!
Old Town might be full of local patronage as far as people parking there, but it does have two hotels. The Hotel @ Oldtown and Marriott, both have been widely successful. These are hotels that pick up visitors from the Airport by the way of shuttle buses.
The Marriott, just recently been open has been so successful that they are going to be building a new one next to it. Did you know that? And of course Hamm’s plans on converting the old Spaghetti Works building into a hotel.
Again Ben! You are betting that they don’t build a casino in Sumner County. Because you think that the Dog Track is going to hold them back. Naa ahh! The Dogtrack (New Frontier) isn’t going to stop them. $413 million dollars in Bob Knight’s plan for just across the Sedgwick County’s border. Hell! The Sumner County location will be closer to most people in Wichita than the Dogtrack!
A chance to have a high rise hotel in Wichita can be a great added benefit. A flat ranch resort casino in Sumner with flashing lights shining CASINO, CASINO, CASINO. Or A high rise adding to our skyline in downtown Wichita promoted as a hotel and you would never know a Casino is inside, unless you stepped inside or asked about it.
Again! The Turnpike is not a good economic driver for the Casino. They are focusing on the Demographics of the people that live in the area (Sumner County’s plan) not travelers on the Turnpike, for which half are commercial trucks. What is Sumner County going to do? Make it a big truck stop?
The Racino will be local patronage. A downtown Casino will have a much higher percentage of out-of-town visitors than any casino location. And these out-of-town visitors aren’t the poor. They are people who can spend money and have a good time. Sure! Many local people will go there, but a Sumner location or just the Dog Track will be almost all local.
A downtown Casino will draw larger out-of-towner visitors percentage. That is a good thing. That is what we want.
“A downtown Casino will draw larger out-of-towner visitors percentage. That is a good thing. That is what we want.”
I would agree that would be a good thing IF TRUE. However, I think the opposite is true. I think a freeway location will draw more people from the freeway than a downtown location would.
Tony has suggested (I think) a site just south of the Arena. That would be interesting - visible from Kellogg. Unfortunately, THAT is also not on the ballot.
“Again Ben! You are betting that they don’t build a casino in Sumner County” I am betting no such thing. I am only speculating. I am fine with them building a casino on the Turnpike in Sumner. I have never said otherwise and you know that.
Joe! You raised an interesting site - Coleman. I added some thought north of Old Town. Unfortunately these are also not on the ballot. All this discussion of sites is too little too late. Especially when I see a casino backer suggest the Canadian plan is simply being held in abeyance until after the vote because they know it would increase the NO vote.
Site uncertainty, that is the killer.
In a couple of days … we will know.
jeff - Vote NO-YES and curse them both!
That is where we disagree with Ben. And that’s cool. You believe freeway traffic is good, I think a downtown location is good, because I believe it will bring more conventions to Wichita, which means a lot of out-of-towners. A whole lot more than travelers trying to get home on the Turnpike. But you think the opposite. That’s cool.
Most of all conventioneers are going to go downtown. I’m pretty sure the hotels can accommodate them to shuttle them to the Casino in Sumner County, but wouldn’t it be better just to have it downtown? Let them walk or even stay there at the Casino hotel. It actually would help the environment by being more green.
People will choose the Casino over the Racino. Yeah! People will go to the Dogtrack to watch the dog races and play slots, but a lot of people play card games, like Hold-em, Poker and Blackjack. That won’t be at the Dog track. So visitors will go to the Casino. Local people will be the only ones going to the dog track.
If you want to minimize local patronage impact, the correct way to vote, would be Yes, No. Not the other way around.
It’s cool dude. I haven’t voted yet. I always vote on election day. Never know how I will go come Tuesday morning.
We shall see. And my published prediction stands.
If you’re published prediction is wrong. You buying breakfast?
Sure, why not. The Beacon.
Question: to what do you ascribe Sharon Feary’s opposition to a downtown location? If it would be good for downtown wouldn’t she be the biggest cheerleader?
She seems to be opposed to a downtown location. It’s her district actually. I’m assuming she is against it being by Century II or on Douglas Street, like Ruffin’s original plan was Douglas and Broadway.
Ruffin though scrapped it and is going towards his Delano plan, which isn’t in Fearey’s district and really isn’t considered downtown per say, because it is not in the Central Business District zoning. I don’t know how she will feel about an Old Town location.
Same with Mayor Brewers response that Century II or WaterWalk is out of the question.
I think they will support Ruffin’s plan though.
After the pig in a poke they pulled with the arena, I aint about to trust them not to give Century II AND the library to the casino bunch. My vote is no. My prediction is the vote is no and no.
Ben —
The idea of forcing you to buy us all breakfast is actually a big motivator against voting your way! Ever think of that?
Actually, I think the WEblog has done a very good job of fleshing out the issues on this vote.
I have to agree that “politics makes strange bedfellows” — the alliances on this vote, both for and against, are NOT typical at all.
Econ - hey, I ain’t saying everyone!
;^)
But, wouldn’t mind seeing you again - been a long time!
Hey,
Can an anti gambling person bet on the outcome of the casino vote?
Gambling, here? I’m going to have to close this place down. OK, everyone out!
Uhhh, here’s your winnings sir.
Whispers: Thank you (pockets the money.)
My nine part series on Gambling at my blog site. Read if you’re really bored or need a reason to justify a NO vote on the issues at hand.
http://republikan.typepad.com/republikansan/
It matters not the spin you put on the casino issue repuke. I have already voted YES, YES! My entire family voted the same way.
You nay-sayers are only making asses out of yourselves.
Hey I could vote yes. Just to stick something in the fundies eyes. But people including one poster to this forum have advocated giving the library over to a casino. I just can’t get myself used to the concept of raising my kid in a community where you gut the library for a casino. Hell we should be building MORE libraries.
I think that people that are going to vote have already made up their mind on the issue. So now it’s all about turnout for both sides.
The good thing is that they expect at least a 50% turnout. I wish it can be more. Because there can’t be any bitchin or re-vote agendas afterwards.
We will know in about 48 hours. The cool thing about this vote is that the Casino question seems to be a close one. Making it actually pretty exciting.
On that we agree …
The downtown library is no place for kids.
Too many homeless.
The furniture smells.
The restrooms are a mess.
Even so, the Casino, if built, will not be in CII or the Library!
Sadly, I tend to agree Econ … (this is scary!)
Ben and Econ 101: A separate thread regarding the Downtown Library and the homeless people who hang out there is needed on the WE Blog. Hope Kansassam participates.
Phillip Brownlee, if you are listening, could one of your opinion editors set this up?
Lots of points:
When I worked downtown near the Library for Feist Company, it was nice to walk to the downtown library during the lunch hour.
However, the homeless are destroying the library and its collections but nothing can be done about it.
Currently some social service agencies actually bus the homeless to the library during the day.
Everyone knows mixing the homeless with teenagers is a bad deal but what can be done?
Where should a new library be built? But if agencies continue to bus homeless there, a new location would soon have the problems of the present one.
New libraries across the U.S. offer a lot of activities not even thought of in our present libraries. For one COFFEE for the patrons.
Would be interesting to discuss these things. As an avid Shawnee Indian historian, I used to use the downtown library’s Indian collection a lot.
I would think a new Library would be good in the area of the Cowtown area. It’s quiet on that road, plenty of space and too far for the transients to walk.
Here is an idea:
Make any casino sign a contract that they will have an attached building that will offer free showers (with soap) for the homeless, along with chairs to sit on, or sleep on, during the day.
They won’t use it Econ101. I’ve seen facilities available in big cities (Chicago/NYC) for the homeless. They still urinate on the sidewalks in front of the facilities and defecate in the alley ways behind them.
and they will offer a free hamburger to anyone that will accept a free ride from the library
“Currently some social service agencies actually bus the homeless to the library during the day.”
Never heard of that JWink. Got any back-up? kansassam?
In an interest of understanding what we are going to be asked to vote on, we went to Missouri this weekend and visited their casino’s.
After fighting my way through the smoke filled corridors, we found many people spending money at the establishment. I was somewhat amazed by the many, many senior citizens “enjoying” some gambling. I saw them “enjoying” it from after breakfast, to after dinner - the same people dropping money into the machines.
I was surprised at the seniors in wheelchairs.
I was surprised at the people with oxygen bottles dropping quarters. I was even more surprised at the people smoking with those bottles.
I am sure casino’s are a big plus for our city, county, and state as far as MONEY is concerned.
I am not so sure we are doing the right thing for the society our children will inherit.
God forgive us all.
Ben: I have heard from library staff and others that some social service agencies actually bus homeless people to the library in the morning from their sleeping quarters to be able to clean up their facilities. If true, this means that moving the central library some distance away won’t change anything.
The library will continue to be used for a day room by the homeless.
As a periodic library collections user and member of several “library friends” groups in various towns … I am concerned about wear and tear on our library collections. However, I also understand the need for places for the homeless to hang out during the day.
That’s why Wichita probably needs a 24/7 alternate location for the homeless to congregate, especially in the winter other than under the bridges. Don’t know what incentives could be given to get them to go there rather than the library to panhandle from ordinary citizens.
Its a difficult problem.
True statement Ben. The Union Rescue Mission kicks everyone out at 7am in the mornings. The bus takes many of these guys to the Library because they have nowhere else to go.
This is why a 24/7 shelter is needed so badly. Even a day facility would help. The drop-in center is overwhelmed, and there needs to be more places to get in out of the heat with showers and restroom facilities. We have entertained the idea, but we just don’t have the funds to pull it off. Seeing how Wichita’s 10 year plan includes $0 for the homeless, it will probably take private enterprise to provide these services.
Kansassam: Lets see. You say the City’s 10 year plan provides ZERO dollars for any kind of facility for the homeless.
But, but the County’s budget provides $200,000,000.41 PLUS for the downtown arena AND the City’s budget anticipates providing an additional $100,000,000.13 for infrastructure improvements for the proposed arena.
And all this to build a garrish steel and glass white elephant downtown arena building that NO ONE wants and has NO valid purpose that would even approach paying for the cost, or even the operational expenses or even the monthly phone bill. What a boondogle and scam.
But not even a red cent to helpthe poorest of the poor.
So perhaps a section of the arena … for example the VIP boxes … should be set aside during the day to provide a place for the homeless. Also some crums and drink left over from the previous evenings activities could be left for the pitiful homeless families and individuals that might unavoidably pass through there.
Might even be some overlap with VIPs who would see a need to get involved … a win-win situation.
Maybe we can bus the homeless to another town, like Pratt!
JWink..
Well, the 10 year plan DOES include $16 million for a dog shelter. At least we know where our priorities lie.
Joe..
Your compassion is underwhelming.
When Pratt political leaders vote to build a useless $300,000,000.19 white elephant downtown arena … it would provide a good destination for homeless and others who are down and out.
But Wichita is the city building a boondogle downtown arena to “improve” its downtown business district and has the homeless population that needs a place to spend the day.
I still think the front entrance to the downtown arena would be a good location for the heroic sized glowing orange plastic statue of Wichita’s favorite son, two time candidate for President of the United States in 1936 and 1940 … EARL W. BROWDER, candidate of the American Communist Party. He lost!
Inscribed below the statue: “From the toil strained backs of the many according to their god given abilities — to the few according to their personal needs whether or not they contribute anything of value to the people who pay.”
Or might place it on the top of any convenient peerless tower.
Actually I’m being quite compassionate. People have been leaving Pratt in droves and there are so many empty houses there. We can allow the homeless to squat and that way they no longer will be homeless. Then they can have a fresh start.
We can provide a work program to help them get back on their feet. A small dying town like Pratt actually serves a perfect solution to this. Because the urban outdoorspeople are kind of left out to the side in a place like Wichita and other large cities.
But a small dying town like Pratt, the people there would look after them much more and care for them and monitor their progress. It’s a good solution. The homeless tend not to get better in big cities, but they can in small towns.
sam - thanks. that fits with the AECH issues then. I know they were kicked out or URM but didn’t know the ‘rest of the story’
Hopefully a comprehensive way can be found to address the issue.
Joe..
Having a good neighbor always helps! That’s what smaller towns are all about..
If you can figure out a way to get them the services they can only get in downtown Wichita, you might have a good idea there!
But Joe is just jealous of small Kansas towns because they don’t share his socialistic ideas.
Pratt is fortunate its political leaders didn’t see fit to spend $300,000,000.47 for a white elephant downtown arena. And its 8.000 residents recognize that.
Last summer I stood on the top of the hill of the Pratt County Fair building visiting with Mr. Bill Kurtis, national TV commentator and Kansas raised, before he was scheduled to speak to the Pratt Chamber dinner. He marveled at the strong economic condition of Pratt’s downtown business district with virtually every store occupied. He marveled at the condition of the infrastructure, the brick streets, the “hot” and “cold” water towers. He even noticed the quantity of water running through the Ninnescah River at the south edge of town.
He noticed the golden fields of wheat, the working oil pumps, the historic Fish Hatchery Museum out east of town.
I think most of all he noticed the pride of Pratt’s citizens in answering his questions about the city.
Rather than the Wichita Chamber of Commerce sending delegations to Atlanta and to Richmond … delegations should be sent to Pratt to see how they do it.
I’ve got to go to work.
Actually Pratt County has one of the worse soil conditions for growing crops in Kansas. That is why it’s mostly ranch land.
JWilliams et al: Actually Pratt County is about 75% traditional wheat country. Of course, whether or not farmers grow wheat depends on price, weather, available labor and other factors.
Pratt has always had an important oil producing industry. This is generally located in the south eastern and north eastern quadrants of the county.
Geographically, Pratt County has some mysterious sand hill country in its northwestern quadrants which offers few roads and great bird hunting. The pristine swiftly running Ninnescah River running eastward the county in half. The south portions of Pratt County begin to drop off along Elm and Turkey Creeks draining southerly down towards the picturesque Medicine River valley of Barber County.
As a teenager growing up in Pratt County, I wanted to explore the mesas and canyons along the back roads of Barber County but still haven’t taken time to do enough of that. I still want to walk that last mile or so into the rough “Hell’s Half Acre.” Could there be a big foot there?
Speaking of Kansas ranches, actually the remaining big (10,000 acres or more) cattle ranches are generally located in the Gypsum or Red Hills of southern Kansas and the Flint Hills of Chase County and north/south thereof. These are located respectively about 75 miles southwest and northeast and east of Wichita. Take your cameras, photos are free.
Western and central Kansas have been fortunate so far of having a considerable ancient, relatively pure water supply in gravel stratas known as the Hi-Plains or Ogallala aquifer. This is located well below the surface but reachable by pumping.
Unfortunately, Governor Sebelius and her co-conspirators are attacking the Ogallala aquifer with a vengence on the theory that … “this free water is there so lets grab it quick before the people of Kansas catch on to what’s going on.” But some people are catching on.
Of course, this legal water grab is a threat to the clean underground drinking water sources of Wichita, Hutchinson and all the municipalities of central and western Kansas. Before long, Kansas citizens will be relegated to drinking recycled, mechanically treated sewage effluent from our surface rivers, if any left. Water scientists say the Arkansas River also carries large quantities of sodium chloride leaching up from the salt deposits under central Kansas.
Kansas’ relatively pure underground water supply could be used for a very profitable bottled water business, headquarted for example in Greensburg, Kansas. But the water is being taken for free in the millions of gallons by the new ethanol plants that are rushing into Kansas to use this “free” natural resource with the aquiesence of our Governor and some of our state and national politicians.
It needs to be stopped quick.
if the downtown area is so wonderful, why did most people move out to the ‘burbs?
these are the people who want to “save downtown.”save it from what has never been answered.
a 185 acres casino isn’t going to fit dt anyway.
JWink - Greensburg would make an interesting bottled water location playing off the hand-dug well. However, better watch out for nitrate.
Ben: This thread is now aging so you might not see it. But I’m wondering if your comment about “nitrites” in the underground water refers to leaching of fertilizers downward?
As you well know, the Ogallala aquifer should be deep enough to be free of this. However, I have been told the Ogallala has been penetrated by some 50,000 pipes for draining its water for municipal water supplies, irrigation, ethanol manufacturing, power plant cooling water, etc. So I suspect various chemicals from the surface do get down there.
Still the Ogallala’s volume of water was once compared to Lake Superior of the Great Lakes.
I hope the Ogallala isn’t compromised because it is probably one of the cleanest sources of fresh water in the world.
It really irritates me that our governor and politicians are allowing ethanol industrialists to go after this wonderful natural resource which theoretically belongs to Kansas citizens.
Our site is cool, but also yours is very nice too
I just surfed in and found your site, I really enjoyed the visit and hope to come back soon. nice Site!
I love this site, there is so much information to be found. Thank you.