" People would think a referendum would be binding, as well I'm sure.

Until the contract is signed by both parties involved there is no binding contract. There are rules for pulling the plug on bid contracts, I don't think this mets those standards. Government sponsored projects get the rug pulled out from them all the time. Its always part of the risk of utilizing tax dollars for anything.

It is odd that signing a contract, funding has already been approved for would require a separate vote, but its far from the most questionable action this lot has taken in espewcially just the past year. This paper can't sit on its hands and be cheerleading spectators consistently, and suddenly have the credability to critique a group they have coddled for such a long time. "

" When a child sprays a building it,s called graffiti and You want to put him or her in jail.But you will pay a " artist " big money.for something that looks like crap. then call it art? "

" When this story 1st broke I thought they should have said NO but they said yes.
Then when it was reported that they now say NO I was happy and thought they did the right thing.
Now that you report that the city sent a contract to the people and it was SIGNED and returned I now say it was WRONG to vote no.
If a contract was sent to and signed by the people I would think that the city should be bound by it. As long as NOTHING in the contract has changed.
I do no believe that the other party {city} has to sign the contract to make it a legally binding contract. Now if the other party {painter} was sending their own contract to the city then YES the city would have to sign it.
If you send a proposal to a person in the form of a contract, That person accepts that proposal by signing contract. It is a DONE deal.
If you have a contractor come to your house to bid on work. You agree with his bid and he makes out a contract, YOU SIGN it NOT the contractor. As soon as you sign you are BOUND by that contract, as is the contractor who proposed it.
So in my opinion the city SHOULD pay it. I just still say they should NOT have agreed with it in the 1st place. It was a STUPID unneeded unwarranted WASTE of money. "

" I think that cart was placed before the horse on this one. The Mall is not even remodeled yet. How can a contract be signed when the space that the mural is to be placed on may change during construction. The City did the right thing, especially during these economic time. Money for beutification projects should wait in favor of ones that will generate jobs or more tax revenues. I am glad to see that the council did not jump off the cliff on this one.

The Lumpkin foundation wanted these paintings and it Lumpkins relative that is benefiting from the contracts. If the foundation wants murals all over town, then let them pay for it, and lets not use our tax or tiff dollars to do it. "

" The city took out a loan for 10 million dollars, last year. Its possible, they have already racked up 200k in interest, or soon will. This loan was to be used for the mall, TIF area sidewalks, a skate park, ditch and pond for south east drainage, and other pet projects. It is to be repaid with a 1 percent additional mall area shopping toll. This district alone has to cover 400k a year in interest. That means they have to do 40 million in sales annually, before they begin to touch knocking down any principal.

This paper is pushing a L machine pet issue over 25k, when the entire mess was done with them prominently represented and their unquestioning reporting. Which council vote did they not advocate, leading up to now?

Our continual jaded view has often glad handed, placated, and blindly backed many questionable calls. The romper room you sat back and observed, never said no taksie backsies. They have done questionable stuff for years. Hardly raising a reproters eyebrow. Why did it take 3 votes on 50k a pop for the family farmer meats plumbing? I57 E TIF attempt 3, is no better than 1 or 2. For years sides have been taken, blatant issues and abuses ignored, rather than unbiased news reporting, because this paper has absolutely no line between its editorials and its news. Too often local decisions only coverage is the press release provided by the leaders. No follow up, no fact checking, no honest insights. Paste and print, news coverage is not journalism. Grade school kids are held to higher standards, than much of this papers reporting is. It seems the paper feels the entire questionable 10 million dollar loan is destined for use in the mall district, because of the way it was planned to be repaid. Where were the questions when this PP plan was discussed and voted on. This paper can't even go to its own archives and see what they reported the facts to be previously. How shortsighted and naieve, can a group of editors continually be? "

" I can see it now, people driving by on the Interstate, hey, lets stop at Mattoon's mall, I hear they have murals on the wall there.

Now ther's a big tourism point for Mattoon. "

" It's not the taxpayers' responsibility to provide artwork for private businesses. Crawl out of the Chamber of Commerce's pocket and join us here in the real world. "

" Mike P You said it very well in you book. LOL just playing with you. VERY WELL SAID "

" waste of money in the current times. get over it already. "

" With the decisions that have been made, many things will be adversly affected. Shopping tolls for small towns, that aren't already big tourist attractions, limit growth and much more. We are on the way to having a tax labrinth to negotiate through. With the kicker tax, shopping tolls, TIF costs, etc. It might save locals 2, 3, or more percent to shop somewhere else, or detour the spending tiger traps. People do what it takes to save 3 cents a gallon a Murphys. Word of mouth travels fast, and many folks notice their recipts.

Its time the base kicker tax got voted back out. They raided it for overpriced magic farm land. There were one or two things they didn't have money to do basic responsibilities, and one or two things that required emergency money. They bought a million dollars of land. They want to sell land they already have, because they can't afford to mow around and take care of a pond, but they want to build a new magic one.

This is becoming a very familure theme. They can't fix sidewalks, but want to build new ones to the interstate. Can't properly maintain things or services, but buy new toys we may never use or need. They can't afford to maintain the old sewer systems, but want to hook into it and run it out 33rd, down 1000N to the new interchange. They bought tub grinders, leaf vacs, and a minagerie of things to do city leaf collection, since burning is ordinanced illegal. Now they sold much of that stuff off, and want citizens to buy special bags or take care of them themselves.

Which issue was a tough decision that was responsible, even if it was unpopular? They have set on betting tax dollars they have yet to conceive collecting, in every likely area for development. Overuse or misuse of TIF, is what makes it a huge risk of shackling growth rather than fostering it. Broadway is now even less likely to recover than it was before it, because of the way the rest of it has been used.

This paper has been backing most every nag these leaders drag to the track to bet tax dollars on. They sided with them on the selling points of nearly every decision, all along. From 500k in the old sheraton by the trailer park, behind the lumber yard, to the only if we don't have to pay all our taxes out convention center, and many other smaller questions of who actually stands to gain what, decisions. It probably won't be until things begin to show up in the loss column, and are properly openly attributed to their cause or source, that those that feel here and there looking better and a new wings joint is worth what they gave up to get, begin to change their mind. Some never might. 30 years of finely crafted selling points of TIF, are very well specificly designed to be persuasive.

When will this paper stop being the biased side of things news coverer, and begin to look at the cons of decisions and openly print them? When will it start giving more than 24hrs notice of pending issues, and confront them from all sides ahead of a discussion and voting session?

This view is telling, in many ways. The L machine is more important to openly represent, than its readers or local taxpyers. What are they going to do, pull advertizing for their monopolies, from the paper that has a monopoly on area coverage? Stop taking out full or half page ads, they likely get a good discount on?

Your relavence in confronting local matters is completely your own doing. For years, you failed to be journalists/opinion writers, and settled for just providing opinionist news coverage. Stop riding on local leaders coat tails, plant your feet firmly, and walk completely on your own. If you actually stood for something that benefited everyone, like covering the news and printing the wole truth, not just provided portions and interpretations of it, you could have seen measurable growth. More people would take the paper than don't. If it had a constant theme of advocating people, rather than individuals, it would be as successful as is possible.

Its all a numbers game, because you say there are several hundred thousand page views a month, doesn't make it believable and sellable. A simple counter on the site and each page would give you advertizing number credability you don't currently posess. "

" The old Sheraton, what a joke. "

" At least when Charleston was putting up murals, it was during times of prosperity; I don't think our city's leaders would have considered it during these tough times. And they also used local artists to design and paint the murals rather than contracting out to some out-of-town company. "

" Charleston is far from above the fray.

They used some questionable means to fund and go about the Tajmahal city hall face lift. They pilfered the Squares TIF, thinking it was nearly set to expire. Then said oops we have a few years left, come get the rest of this money that is just going to waste. That money would have gone to be divided by tax bodies. Schools library, parks, public safety, all would have got some of the money they didn't get for 23 years, so the square could get breaks to be and look like it is today.

They are currently over developing apartments. Should college enrolement decline as it tends to do from time to time, count on some of them getting switched to low income housing. Danville doesn't particularly like being a DOC relocation point, if vacancies make a glut in housing in Charleston, there might be a shift further south down the interstate.

Slum lords who stacked houses 2 per room each with their own per semester lease, used to get 1200 to 1600 a month or more, for those big old houses. They didn't want anymore rules for their business. The city could have simply enforced existing federal and state renter and tennant laws, but failed to act, since rental units are such a big market in their fifedom. Since property owners got their way to continue unimpeded by following rules, others saw opportunity in building apartments. Few people liked being 6, 8, or 10 deep in a house, but it was usually cheaper than the dorms, and not as strictly structured.

Charleston is creating sprawl. It is also on the high end of its available water consumption. They are looking at increasing with their plant upgrades, but a drought before they are done, could see issues arise. A City development plan needs to leave opportunity for future needs. Not shoehorn as much as possible as quickly as possible, for any possible small gain. If it limits or prohibits future more substancial growth opportunity, it is not necessarily serving the best interest of the community.

Sure they may now not be the worst for median income. Many places had farther to fall to beat them and likely have. They were baffled when they heard it and moved on basicly ignoring it. Not being the worst now, doesn't mean they are any or much better than when they were reported to be. "

" Where are things on geting commercial property reassessed, which they are going on 3 years behind on? If it happens after tax bills are prepared, it could end up being at least 4 or 5 years worth of over or under payment, that isn't retro active to being recovered.

Its no wonder this city is awash in red ink. Basic fundamental responsibilities, are continually ignored, and many of the failures to execute directly translate to lost revene.

Not that any proprerty here could decline in value, we are immune to property value decline, as far as assements go. Too bad people can't take that to the bank and get a loan with it. To get less than 1 on the state multiplier, x number of property owners would need to dive into the abyss of contesting theirs, and win, from what I can find. It takes time and money to do it, and would likely take several years to recoup, if it navigated the created maze of red tape successfully, and got a favorable ruling, once it progressed to that stage. "

" The issue is not whether or not the city should help pay to beautify the interior of the mall.

But we are mindful of the fact the funds would come from the special 1 percent sales tax in the Broadway Avenue East business district. Those tax funds are to be spent within the business district, which includes the Cross County Mall.

Excuse me? The issue IS whether or not the city should help pay to beautify the interior of the mall. There should NEVER have been a tax to help a private business (The Mall) in the 1st place. "

" They want to sell land they already have, because they can't afford to mow around and take care of a pond, but they want to build a new magic one.

Not mowing around a City owned lake is what cost Kenneth Fryman his life, he was mowing it instead of the city. "

" They tookout a ten million dollar loan. Less than half of that is for the mall facelift, the rest is for various other pet projects. Sidewalks to stake and shake, the magic flood curing ditch and pond, a skate park, and a few other new responsibilities.

Just to cover the interest on this loan, this one district needs to manage 40 million in annual taxable sales.

They approved CVS relocating to another TIF, so their current base is going to shift from one to another, and CVS won't have the new 1 percent shopping toll it would have had. They never said what the current sales in this district are. One percent toll and other factors, will see other issues arise. That RV place, will find it even tougher to compete. If the convention center gets off the ground, the motels behind Codys will find it tougher to stay afloat. All the food places in that zone, will have another 1 percent hurdle to contend with in staying competitive.

Various decisions have far reaching impacts on squashing future development and maintining what we currently do have.

Prop up one development to see 4 close, is the climate they have created. Net loss is going to be the likely end result. If a non TIF business is forced out, the tax base shrinks. They have made every likely development area a TIF. Even went so far to annex a field so they could use tif on it. This is a prime example of how not to do things, and they are trudging ahead with their misguided plans. "

" Are the citizens of Mattoon ready for higher taxes? Well get ready because MFD wants to start an ambulance service with your money! Try 250k to 500k of your tax dollars!! Plus you will still have to pay for the services. Dont we already have two ambulance services in town that is not costing a dime in taxes?? In fact arent these business' adding to the total tax revenue for the city? Arent they employing citizens of Mattoon who are contributing to the local economy?? Be careful who you vote for in reference to the city council. Some are already primed to spend your money to start this ambulance service. "