The Last Stand
Comments by Dave Moloney
Page 1 of 2 | Next
On Vandals target campaign ads
October 21, 2008 at 10:36 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Two wrongs don't make a right.
On Veteran Realtor views market in contrast to crises of the ’70s, ’80s
September 29, 2008 at 7:46 p.m.
› Suggest removal
“He wrote five offers, all at between 10 to 15 percent of the list price,” Downs said. “
I'm guessing what Steve said is 10 to 15 “off” not “of” the list price.
On Spicing up western Steamboat
May 21, 2008 at 3:10 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Awesome, a chance to try some new food in Steamboat.
On The Record for May 17
May 19, 2008 at 10:01 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Hadleyberg - Well said.
On Dennis O’Connor: Local landmarks?
April 23, 2008 at 2:01 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Right on Dennis. If the preservations of these assets is a priority to the community, then we should be willing to pay fair market value for them. If we aren't willing to pay, why should the person who has forked out their cold hard cash to own the property be willing to let the city tell them what they can do with their property.
The emminent domain scenario would still result in the property owner being compensated at fair market value.
On Dream comes true for Hanley
April 16, 2008 at 8:44 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Way to go Jay! I'm sure that with some of those big farm boys blocking for you, you'll have great success. Go get em.
On Council sets priorities
December 5, 2007 at 2:59 p.m.
› Suggest removal
sbvor - How am i wrong. i state that I started in a crappy little trailer and worked,saved,moved up. I am one of the local wage earners that has worked his way up the housing ladder. Are you disagreeing with some other point?
Onthebusgus - I made less than $10K the first year I lived here. That was a big pay cut over what I was making at the time I took Warren Miller's advise and quit my city job and moved to ski town so I wouldn't be a year older when I finally did it. Yes, things were cheaper, but it was also much more difficult to find any kind of a decent paying job. I can't overstate that I was willing to live in a “CRAPPY” trailer for some number of years in an effort to try and move up. If it was today, and I wanted to be in a ski town bad enough, I'd drive from Oak Creek, Hayden or Craig, buy a place there, and do the same thing. It's a heck of a lot better than having a 45 minute commute from some suburb into downtown Houston, Chicago, Miami, etc.
On Council sets priorities
December 4, 2007 at 9:26 p.m.
› Suggest removal
rodcarew - Please reread my original post. I am not advocating for the government to be involved in the housing sector but rather being a realist stating that “If you insist on spending our money, stop throwing it away on new government jobs, studies and consultants and buy some land.” I further stated “I'm sure there is someone out there that would love to be able to develop their land this way. They just need to get the right signals from the powers that be.” In other words, let the free market handle it.
As far as the annexation of Steamboat 700 it hasn't happened yet and again I am advocating that this is the type of thing the city should be doing not wasting our money trying to override free market forces. (Assuming Steve Lewis is correct that 55% of the sales tax comes from visitors, by my calculation that means 45% is still coming from us.”). Zoning a portion of the property for extremely high density might allow for a large(100+) apartment complex. Go anywhere else in this country and you will find these types of properties. I don't know of anything bigger than maybe 20-30 units anywhere in Steamboat. I'm sure there are many developers that would be willing to invest their hard earned money to build a large complex such as this that they could rent for reasonable rates and still make a fair return for the risk that they have taken.
The free market always finds a way to solve these kinds of problems if given the opportunity to do so. For example, if an employer can't find employees because they all say they can't afford to live here. The employer will start paying them more, buy some housing to rent to his employees, etc. He then passes the cost along to his consumer, thereby moving the costs to the people who benefit from it. This is as opposed to the scenario where the government tries to force their view of the solution down our throats, and we all end up paying for it, regardless of wether we receive a direct benefit.
Lastly, a little background on my perspective. I've lived in Steamboat for nearly 20 years. In the early years I struggled to make ends meet and worked multiple jobs like many people. I wanted to stay, so I did what I had to do. For me that ment living in the cheapest crappiest trailer I could afford, saving a little, buying a slightly less crappy trailer, saving a little, condo, save, townhouse, save, house. Many others I know have paid their dues and not had the benefit of a handout to get it done.
On Council sets priorities
December 3, 2007 at 9:33 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Just what we need. Another middle management position to “coordinate” the city's affordable housing issues. After all someone will have to look after the Iron Horse boondoggle. In order to insure their job security they will push for more city funded programs.. Then of course, they'll need an assistant, a company car, a bigger office, etc. This is classic big government thinking. Who do you think is going to pay for it? This type of stuff just drives up the cost of living here further. The city should let the private sector and the free market handle the affordable housing issue. The underlying issue in affordable housing is the cost of land. If you insist on spending our money, stop throwing it away on new government jobs, studies and consultants and buy some land. Use powers already vested in the government such as annexation and zoning to create a parcel suitable for dense development. A 40 acre tract zoned for small lots that a person could purchase and put a nice double wide manufactured home on might create something like 200 truly affordable units. I'm sure there is someone out there that would love to be able to develop their land this way. They just need to get the right signals from the powers that be.
Page 1 of 2 | Next
RSS
On Kat Kelly: Support Howelsen
October 29, 2008 at 8:50 a.m.
› Suggest removal
I'm in. It's been a few years since I've skied Howelson. If my memory serves me correctly they used to have some kind of deal where you could ski for a couple of hours and have lunch for a very reasonable price. Maybe they need to offer something like two hours and a tuna sandwich for ten bucks. Plus on a powder day you can have the mountain to yourself.