|
Post by evaryman on Aug 3, 2014 10:08:05 GMT -6
Seems you & I agree on more than sports calls, thanks for this post, FOT.
|
|
|
Post by father of two on Aug 3, 2014 10:11:50 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Solitaire on Aug 3, 2014 11:50:16 GMT -6
I see they FINALLY broke ground for Taco Bell; had to see it to believe it!
|
|
|
Post by Kyle Mitchell on Aug 3, 2014 14:14:08 GMT -6
Obviously it was more than one business, he said that it happens everywhere. You may want to ask the local building owner if would still be open to your joint venture. Wrighton may be more acceptable and knowledgeable of such things. Why, has the Mayor changed his position on it? If he doesn't want the business to exist I doubt that a different City Manager will change anything. In this one it states that lavasa had a contract with the man and the contract expired. The man didn't like it and responded via twitter and other ways. Yes, like I said, they could say that the lease expired. I also read that he tried to get it extended. Wasn't Mr. Wrighton the one who phrased it that they shut the business down? It is obvious to me that they didn't want the business to exist anymore. Do they just not like business, or could there be some reason behind not renewing the lease? I read something else that indicated that it was not the first time that they had shut down the business. It seems that they had some problem with the business's Holiday Home promotion. Maybe they did have good reason to shut the business down, but the situation seems strange to me. I doubt that Lavasa would publish the real reason that they didn't want the business in their City. Maybe we should reach out to the business owner for his side of the story? Either way, I don't think that the negative business relationship does anything but hurt the perception of our City being uninviting to business.
|
|
|
Post by helencrump on Aug 3, 2014 14:43:42 GMT -6
Maybe there was caffeine induced brawling taking place...maybe the owners refused to not over serve, and tourists were in jeopardy. Maybe the caffeine buzzed full bladders couldn't stand in line waiting for the bathroom, and were taking to the alley ways, exposing themselves to families of tourists. Maybe their caffeine board would no longer stand for it.
After all...that's exactly what you have demanded. That liquor licenses be suspended, and you were against any change in the number of liquor licenses. Everytime a new establishment opens, that sells liquor, you get on your soapbox proclaiming there are already too many establishments that sell alcohol. You, with your vast experience at running successful eateries, tried advising the Bullpen that they could do just as well, if not better without serving alcohol. THAT DOESN'T SOUND VERY BUSINESS FRIENDLY TO ME!!
IN THE FUTURE, IF YOU WANT ME TO COMMENT, LEAVE MY POST ON THE THREAD IT WAS MADE.
|
|
|
Post by father of two on Aug 3, 2014 15:27:52 GMT -6
If a contract expires then the business is to be closed. Lavasa enforced the contract. No contract, no business. Why didn't the man negotiate to renew the contract? It was one business in India Kyle. Where does it say more than one? Would you prefer he had turned his head and let them operate without a contract? In my opinion, you don't care either way, you just want to criticize before the man gets here.
What will you do Kyle if Mr. Wrighton makes changes that are positive for Streator and its future? If violence, over serving, and all the other problems you see are fixed and yet business doesn't come here and population decreases and property values decline, what will be the problem then?
|
|
|
Post by Anonymous on Aug 4, 2014 6:15:11 GMT -6
Either way, I don't think that the negative business relationship does anything but hurt the perception of our City being uninviting to business. There is a lot wrong with that sentence. For starters, it should be "my perception" not "the perception".
|
|
|
Post by Kyle Mitchell on Aug 4, 2014 7:06:29 GMT -6
...that's exactly what you have demanded. That liquor licenses be suspended, and you were against any change in the number of liquor licenses. Everytime a new establishment opens, that sells liquor, you get on your soapbox proclaiming there are already too many establishments that sell alcohol. You, with your vast experience at running successful eateries, tried advising the Bullpen that they could do just as well, if not better without serving alcohol. Really helen, why are you so insistent on lying about what I have to say? If you really think that I said those things, why don't you provide some quotes? If you can post quotes from me to back up your version of what I said, I'll be happy to apologize, but please stop posting your lies. Please show where I demanded that anyone's license be suspended. Please show where I have spoken against a lowering of the number of licenses. You might be able to find where I criticized their increasing the number of licenses for bars without even addressing the terrible bar violence numbers printed in the paper that keep people away and hurt other businesses, but I think you would have a hard time pointing out where I said that I was outright against increasing the number. You will likely see looking through my posts that most of my opposition to the increase was that they crammed it down our throats, not even giving citizens a chance to comment on their plans before voting on it, particularly with the violence problems that the existing bars have created. Please show me where I have said that there are too many too many establishments when a place that sells liquor opens. I don't believe that I have ever met the owners of the Bullpen and didn't try advising them of anything, perhaps I gave my opinion that alcohol wouldn't be absolutely be required to open a business, but it was just my opinion. "THAT DOESN'T SOUND VERY BUSINESS FRIENDLY TO ME!! Perhaps my comments that bars shouldn't be able to create excessive, unenforced violence in our streets, is not very business friendly but what difference does that make? It's not like I'm getting paid almost 130,000 taxpayer dollars per year plus a lot of perks to run and represent our City, saying that businesses seek revenge against City managers who shut down businesses happens everywhere. I don't think that our City needs to have businesses shut down and having someone in that position saying that it is customary and acceptable is not good for Streator. That's just my insignificant opinion though. Maybe there was caffeine induced brawling taking place...maybe the owners refused to not over serve, and tourists were in jeopardy. Maybe the caffeine buzzed full bladders couldn't stand in line waiting for the bathroom, and were taking to the alley ways, exposing themselves to families of tourists. Maybe their caffeine board would no longer stand for it. Maybe, maybe, maybe he was raising flying pigs. Do you realize that the suppositions and questions that I posed were based on documents available on-line? [quote author=" helencrump" source="/post/595753/thread" timestamp="1407098622" IN THE FUTURE, IF YOU WANT ME TO COMMENT, LEAVE MY POST ON THE THREAD IT WAS MADE. [/quote] Actually, I didn't want your lie filled response at all. Didn't you already say that you were done talking about the issues that I discuss here?
|
|
|
Post by Kyle Mitchell on Aug 4, 2014 7:06:49 GMT -6
If a contract expires then the business is to be closed. Lavasa enforced the contract. No contract, no business. Why didn't the man negotiate to renew the contract? It was one business in India Kyle. Where does it say more than one? Would you prefer he had turned his head and let them operate without a contract? In my opinion, you don't care either way, you just want to criticize before the man gets here. I did read where he did try to get it extended. Did you read where it appears to not be the first time that the business was shut down? It seems that they had other problems with the business. Mr. Wrighton is the one who says that they shut it down and that it happens everywhere, as if it is customary and acceptable. What will you do Kyle if Mr. Wrighton makes changes that are positive for Streator and its future? If violence, over serving, and all the other problems you see are fixed and yet business doesn't come here and population decreases and property values decline, what will be the problem then? What if, what if, what if pigs were to start flying? You sure do like what if's. If the violence, over-serving and other problems were corrected, would our community really be any worse off than it is now? What is the down side of addressing these problems, more people becoming comfortable coming here? public safety? Do you think that I am asking for bad things for our community?
|
|
|
Post by Kyle Mitchell on Aug 4, 2014 7:08:36 GMT -6
Either way, I don't think that the negative business relationship does anything but hurt the perception of our City being uninviting to business. There is a lot wrong with that sentence. For starters, it should be "my perception" not "the perception". In the article in The Times, where the Mayor lies about the critics not going to City Hall to find out what is required, I believe it talks about "the" perception, not "Kyle's" peception.
|
|
|
Post by Anonymous on Aug 4, 2014 9:03:00 GMT -6
Hey Streatoronline Posters who have sense and can carry on a conversation that isn't full of double talk and craziness ad nauseam, are we finished with this thread yet? I am.
|
|
|
Post by Kyle Mitchell on Aug 4, 2014 10:25:24 GMT -6
Hey Streatoronline Posters who have sense and can carry on a conversation that isn't full of double talk and craziness ad nauseam, are we finished with this thread yet? I am. What's the matter, you couldn't get away with trying to make people think that it was just "my" perception, because the newspaper recognized "the" perception, so now you don't want anyone to talk about these issues? Actually I think it is more than just a perception though. The restrictive sign ordinance is a reality not a perception. Sidewalk sales and displaying some mums outside being illegal without a Special Use Permit is reality not a perception. Publicly declaring business owners illegal residents when they are not is reality not just a perception. The Mayor's requirement for Aquaponics that does not follow our laws is reality not a perception. Yes, I am sure that the City's uninviting attitude is more than just a perception.
|
|
|
Post by 007 on Aug 4, 2014 14:00:56 GMT -6
b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b bb b b b b b b b bb b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b
|
|
|
Post by 007 on Aug 4, 2014 14:01:29 GMT -6
b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b bb b b b b b b b bb b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b
|
|
|
Post by 007 on Aug 4, 2014 14:03:23 GMT -6
b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b bb b b b b b b b bb b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b
|
|