Tom Kester is a Gardner resident. GardnerEDGE readers will see editorial cartoons from Mr. Kester from time to time. Click on the cartoon for a larger version.
I'm not saying the Edge has an agenda here, but this cartoon is still listed as a "Feature Article" on your home page and it's from September.
KLwrote on 1/7/2010 12:22 pm
What's the matter Observer? A little too much like reality to be a cartoon?
Observerwrote on 1/4/2010 2:23 pm
As dumb as ALL of his cartoons
jdelphikiwrote on 9/22/2009 12:07 pm
Judith said: "I have never told a lie about anyone to my knowledge and you would be wise not to be saying that. "
Including calling me a "wife beater"? Nah. Couldn't be that. Maybe you mean you weren't lying every time you repeatedly insinuated corruption by people on the city council without any more proof than your say-so.
Or perhaps we could look at all the half-truths that you use to smear people with: digging around for something unrelated that you feel looks gaudy or shocking or dirty, then throwing that out there in hopes that it will stick on those against whom you want vengeance? Not an out-and-out lie, but clearly an intentional misuse and abuse of the truth.
So now you imply a threat for anyone daring to suggest that you play loose and easy with the truth? What else is new? I'm entitled to my opinion and I think the logs of your posts ought to be enough to back that opinion up.
What's amazing is that, after all the bile you've spewed all over this site, you have such a thin skin for a legitimate complaint against your own, well-documented behavior.
.wrote on 9/22/2009 9:40 am
I have never told a lie about anyone to my knowledge and you would be wise not to be saying that.
jdelphikiwrote on 9/22/2009 7:27 am
There's a difference, Judith, between making your judgements for yourself about how you feel about people, and going out of your way to try to destroy them.
As far as vendettas go, your denial isn't terribly credible. Mention Dave Drovetta and you're off, ready to grab the pitchforks and torches. You started telling lies about Tom Mertz and when he contradicted you with the truth, you tried to smear him in the worst possible way: all because of a past argument that you had with him.
We all know that you'll convince yourself that vendettas and hatred are something else but your actions speak louder than your words.
Look At It Againwrote on 9/22/2009 12:36 am
NOBODY invited BNSF to set up the intermodal in this town. PERIOD. Anybody who is saying past government position holders brought the intermodal to our town is lying. PERIOD.
If you're unsure about this, read for yourself.
.wrote on 9/21/2009 8:41 pm
Every person makes judgements every day. Do you not make a judgement of a person when you decide who to vote for in the voting booth? Did you not make a judgement of a person when you decided to marry a certain person? Do you not make a judgement as to whether a business has good customer service or not? Do you not make a judgment of a person when you decide whether you want that person for a close friend? Do you not judge whether certain kids are appropriate friends for your kids or did you let your kids run with criminals, drug dealers, prostitutes, etc.?
I am no more on a personal vendatta than a man in the moon but I do make judgements on people when they have an affect on me, my loved ones and my fellow man and especially children and I do determine to the best of my ability of whether they make the cut or not and that judgement is based on that particular person's words, actions and inaction.
I will speak of a person's words, actions and inaction but whether these are good or bad is for the person making their own judgement to decide and each person is entitled to make that judgement and that is what you have a terrible time realizing or accepting because it always has to be your way or the highway, JDel and I am here to let you know that you will be disappointed in that expectation and you can go on with your blithering but be sure to take your high blood pressure pill.
jdelphikiwrote on 9/21/2009 7:41 pm
Who assigned you, Judith, to decide whether or not people needed to be fired or have their lives destroyed?
That's precisely my point. You end up using your own measure of who you like or dislike, but you follow scorched-earth tactics that go beyond simple disagreement to hurting people and wrecking lives. You talk about the bad things these people are supposed to have done, then try your best to do even worse and tell yourself that it's justified. When you take the active role of judge, jury, and executioner, you go beyond realm of honest disagreement into avenues of personal destruction. How does THAT make anything better, other than to serve your own personal vendettas?
.wrote on 9/21/2009 6:51 pm
People get fired or destroyed by their own actions but those people are always more than ready to blame their problems on others - perfect examples of people not wanting to be held responsible for their actions.
.wrote on 9/21/2009 6:47 pm
(smile)
jdelphikiwrote on 9/21/2009 6:25 pm
I think I'm being pretty clear. And I think your actions belie your disclaimers.
So you tell us that you don't hate the people that you're trying to slander, slur, or destroy using whatever devious, underhanded way you can think of? Whatever lets you sleep at night...
To the rest of us, it doesn't seem like there's much difference between flat-out hatred, and your utter contempt for everybody who disagrees with you. You tell us you don't hate the people, but they're who you focus your attacks on, usually to the exclusion of discussing ANY of the issues you claim to care about. There are very few of us out here who would even DARE imagine trying to get someone fired from his job or to destroy a successful area businessman, all because you can't win an argument with them.
If you don't want to call THAT hate, spin it to yourself however you want. It's a free country. Just don't expect anyone who's had to deal with your bile to believe you.
.wrote on 9/21/2009 5:06 pm
JDel: You twist words like you would twine. I do not hate people - I hate and have contempt for the actions, words and inaction of people that will cause great suffering. You got that, JDel - if you don't, then make an appointment to see your primary care doctor.
P.S. You can think whatever you want to think about me as a person just as I think whatever I want about you or any other person.
jdelphikiwrote on 9/21/2009 4:45 pm
So Judith, now you justify your contempt by saying it's okay because you perceive the actions of those you hate as being somehow bad enough. But you still hate and attack the people, not their actions.
The problem with your stated attitude is that when you center your hatred around people, not actions or ideals, you end up inverting your justifications. Instead of addressing the problem actions or ideals, you attack the people, making up justifications that fit your "criteria" for treating them with contempt.
Ultimately, it doesn't REALLY matter what the people do, as long as you can connect the dots for yourself so that you have the self-justification for treating them as bad as you want.
The local businessman that you tried to slander by association with a sex offender is not on the City Council (Gardner OR Edgerton)and is not an employee of BNSF or TAG. You just decided that you hated him and in doing so, it didn't matter that you tried to destroy his life or that you improperly misused information you lifted from the sexual offender registry.
It's not, as you claim, that the ends justify the means: that as long as you can justify it to yourself, it doesn't matter how badly you treat others.
You're the perfect example of WHY your methods of hatred and contempt ARE wrong because, as you show us, the threshhold you use to justify your treatment of others becomes a sliding scale. You called me a "wife beater" and "evil", having never met me (and we have never met), all because I dared to disagree with you and questioned your treatment of others. I have nothing, but my voice, to do with the Intermodal and, as I've said in the past, am not all that big on the notion of it being here. So I'm contemptably worthy of hatred, all because I counter you? Who's next? Everyone?
The scariest part of your ideas about contempt is how readily you dehumanize others. It's easy to destroy the lives of others when you don't see their faces. It becomes easier and easier to hate when you convince yourself, over and over, that others aren't worthy of basic civility or decency.
Despite our long correspondance out here, I do not and WILL not hate you. But I continue to be concerned about the damage you do with your attitude and, more importantly, your behavior.
.wrote on 9/21/2009 4:22 pm
KL: Many did nothing to mitigate the affects of this project but worked tirelessly to bring the project to this area. You sure didn't see the city of Gardner or the paid politicians going to Topeka to fight for the diesel emissions bill that was introduced to the legislature this year to protect the people. You had those same people working like crazy for BNSF and the Allen Group to get the intermodal funding bill thru so this project could come to fruition. And you saw those same people working like crazy at the state house for the previous two years. I could list action after action the city of Gardner and the politicians took or didn't take to get this project crammed down the throuts of the people. You see and talk only about what you want to see and talk about like so many others who were the enablers.
KLwrote on 9/21/2009 3:45 pm
Its perspective. I for one am glod they worked so hard to mitigate the impacts for a dvelopment that they had no choice in setting up next door. You might remember that this development was not in the city of Gardner until 2008.
If you wanted to stop it, you and your crew should have focused on the federal deleagation becuase that is the only way to manage the railroad.
But I guess then you wouldn't have anyone to blame.
.wrote on 9/21/2009 11:33 am
Gardner, Ks. is a perfect example of how economic development (as seen by some) can change a sleepy little town with farm roots into a location for one of the biggest projects to hit the state of Kansas for some time.
That project is one of the most highly political and debated issues and is the intermodal logistics park that has been brought to the doorstep of the Gardner citizens, mostly by the politicians and the economic development gurus.
BNSF railroad came to Gardner, Kansas in 2005 with this project which is basically a centralized midwest location where BNSF brings their trains with containers from the west coast California ports filled with consumer goods mostly from China. When those trains arrive here, the containers are transferred to trucks which take the goods to mostly warehouses where the shipments are unloaded, sorted, picked and then loaded onto other trucks which deliver the goods to retailers within a 500 mile radius of Gardner, Ks. You will also have trucks returning to the intermodal with empty containers to be shipped back to China. BNSF picked The Allen Group now out of Dallas, Texas as the developer of the warehouses that will be built adjacent to the railroad intermodal. This new type of logistics is sold by many by saying trucks are not having to travel across country to delever the goods, however, Gardner will suffer the consequences of having millions of trucks coming and going to their location with many adverse and costly affects.
The biggest selling point is, of course, jobs - they are saying approximately 13,000, however, again the politicians and economic development fail to mention that most of the jobs will only be paying $9 to $14 per hour and many with little or no fringe benefits. The project will truly be one of privatizing gains and socializing costs and losses since there will be billions of dollars for infrastructure costs that will never end and the taxpayers will be picking up the tab for these enormous costs. The pollution from the diesel emissions from millions of trucks in the Gardner community will definitely have adverse and deadly health affects to the people in the area as well as billions of dollars for medical costs and lost days of work. The costs for roads, interchanges, bridges, over and underpasses, road maintenance, widening of I-35 to 3 lanes, etc., etc. will be billions of dollars. There is a safety hazard also when you have such a high concentration of trucks. And last but hardly least, the loss of quality of life to the people will be enormous and something probably that can never be recaptured. There are many who question whether this is really economic development or the financial, health and lifestyle raping of the people.
On the other side of the coin, there are those who tout the taxes to be generated (such a fallacity to me since most of the taxes are diverted to the project costs and these taxes are never benefited by the people), accompanying business and development to come with this project and on and on we go until we reach the streets being paved in gold.
So you end up in modern day Gardner who finally in 2009 said NO to BNSF and The Allen Group, however, they just moved about 5 miles down the road to Edgerton, Kansas to sell their project and get their tax incentive and tax diversion of the tax dollars they pay in many ways back to themselves. Gardner will still have this highly debated project in their backyard and have to contend with all of the good and bad of it to come.
What would Gardner, Ks. founders say to this new, modern Gardner, Kansas? My personal opinion is that Gardner's welcome sign will say: Gardner, Kansas - City of Promise - Promise You Will Want To Leave.
This opinion is based on my thought that I don't think people really would enjoy living next to a railyard, warehouse city or contending with millions of trucks.
Oh, if we could just put on our visualization glasses and be able to see what is to come but alas those glasses aren't available yet and probably for good reason.
KLwrote on 9/19/2009 1:17 pm
You're right outside, the district will still benefit which is really the only benefit you would realize since I assume your are neither in Gardenr or Edgerton (outsidelookingin).
The travesty in all this is that this will directly impact Gardner but the three council members depicted in this bullseye of a cartoon elected to show the side they're showing in the cartoon to the citiznes of Gardner. How's that for representation?
OUTSIDELOOKINGINwrote on 9/19/2009 5:07 am
Yes the GE school district will get less. But will receive $1,100,000 dollars a year for the first 10 years without adding a single student.
A grand total of $237,000,000 over the projected 35 years of the projaect will be payed to the school district. If future employees reside in the district even greater funds will be realized.
I guess this is a "bad" deal for the district.
10% lesswrote on 9/18/2009 5:52 pm
"Lisa wrote on 9/16/2009 7:19 am
This is an accurate representation. Now Gardner is losing out to Edgerton on this venture Before long they will refer to the high school as Edgerton high school instead of Gardner-Edgerton."
Yes. Also, now the GE school district will actually get 10% LESS tax revenue (75% abatement vs. 65% abatement) with the Edgerton agreement than with the most recently rescinded Gardner agreement that was supposedly such a bad deal for Gardner & the school district. Certainly, this will be more $$$ than the district is receiving now and more than was offered in Gardner's original agreement (85% abatement), but the change was not in the district's favor.
Thanks, Mr. Kester, for the fun cartoon.
Blast from the past...wrote on 9/17/2009 8:20 am
I remember the goold old days:
"Judith Rogers wrote on 4/24/2009 12:02 pm
At least I sign my name to my comments and not hide behind a signon of "Headache". I will stand for what I believe in and not hide behind a fake name."
OUTSIDELOOKINGINwrote on 9/16/2009 3:58 pm
You can go to www.edgertonks.org...... Click on "BNSF Project Site" on the right.......Click on "Finance Plan Summary" in the center..... to see what Gardner actually gave up. I believe you will find it good reading. Maybe "Read it and weep".
RBwrote on 9/16/2009 9:48 am
Good imagination HAL. Shepherd and Co. continually have said people don't know the real facts, I've been waiting for them for a while. All we've seen is a vote against the majority of Gardner to de-annex the land, with no explanation as to why.
NOTHING! I believe it would go along way if the council put together a list of items they believe are problems with the agreements. Don't you think the people of Gardner are entitled to know why the people they voted in are doing what they are doing?
I'm sure you've asked the same thing of Drovetta over the years.
KLwrote on 9/16/2009 9:34 am
Wow Haldot you really had to reach for that one.
I think you are probably the only one who sees it that way, that is if you count all of your online personas as just one actual person.
The good news is that most of the residents of Gardner understand completely what a misguided decision the three ostrichs made and the long range impact it will have on our town.
HAL 9000wrote on 9/16/2009 9:06 am
What I see in this cartoon are 3 council members risking everything to dig for facts and uncover the truth while a profiteering symbol of consumerism run amuck is preparing to destroy nature.
The "artist" forgot to include images of Carol, Dave, Peter and Tom straddling the locomotive yelling "yeeehaaa!"
Look at it one way, and in the background you see mountains of white lies. From another perspective, it looks like plumes of black soot from the diesel exhaust of trains and trucks.
I guess it is an accurate depiction of Gardner's past, present and future.
Lisawrote on 9/16/2009 6:19 am
This is an accurate representation. Now Gardner is losing out to Edgerton on this venture Before long they will refer to the high school as Edgerton high school instead of Gardner-Edgerton.
Klwrote on 9/15/2009 8:51 pm
Perfect! What's the old saying about a picture and a thousand words?
E-mail >>>
Printable Page >>>
RSS >>>
Comments
Add Comment | Report inappropriate comments.Order By: Oldest First | Newest First
Don F. wrote on 1/15/2010 7:32 am
I'm not saying the Edge has an agenda here, but this cartoon is still listed as a "Feature Article" on your home page and it's from September.
KL wrote on 1/7/2010 12:22 pm
What's the matter Observer? A little too much like reality to be a cartoon?
Observer wrote on 1/4/2010 2:23 pm
As dumb as ALL of his cartoons
jdelphiki wrote on 9/22/2009 12:07 pm
Judith said: "I have never told a lie about anyone to my knowledge and you would be wise not to be saying that. "
Including calling me a "wife beater"? Nah. Couldn't be that. Maybe you mean you weren't lying every time you repeatedly insinuated corruption by people on the city council without any more proof than your say-so.
Or perhaps we could look at all the half-truths that you use to smear people with: digging around for something unrelated that you feel looks gaudy or shocking or dirty, then throwing that out there in hopes that it will stick on those against whom you want vengeance? Not an out-and-out lie, but clearly an intentional misuse and abuse of the truth.
So now you imply a threat for anyone daring to suggest that you play loose and easy with the truth? What else is new? I'm entitled to my opinion and I think the logs of your posts ought to be enough to back that opinion up.
What's amazing is that, after all the bile you've spewed all over this site, you have such a thin skin for a legitimate complaint against your own, well-documented behavior.
. wrote on 9/22/2009 9:40 am
I have never told a lie about anyone to my knowledge and you would be wise not to be saying that.
jdelphiki wrote on 9/22/2009 7:27 am
There's a difference, Judith, between making your judgements for yourself about how you feel about people, and going out of your way to try to destroy them.
As far as vendettas go, your denial isn't terribly credible. Mention Dave Drovetta and you're off, ready to grab the pitchforks and torches. You started telling lies about Tom Mertz and when he contradicted you with the truth, you tried to smear him in the worst possible way: all because of a past argument that you had with him.
We all know that you'll convince yourself that vendettas and hatred are something else but your actions speak louder than your words.
Look At It Again wrote on 9/22/2009 12:36 am
NOBODY invited BNSF to set up the intermodal in this town. PERIOD. Anybody who is saying past government position holders brought the intermodal to our town is lying. PERIOD.
If you're unsure about this, read for yourself.
. wrote on 9/21/2009 8:41 pm
Every person makes judgements every day. Do you not make a judgement of a person when you decide who to vote for in the voting booth? Did you not make a judgement of a person when you decided to marry a certain person? Do you not make a judgement as to whether a business has good customer service or not? Do you not make a judgment of a person when you decide whether you want that person for a close friend? Do you not judge whether certain kids are appropriate friends for your kids or did you let your kids run with criminals, drug dealers, prostitutes, etc.?
I am no more on a personal vendatta than a man in the moon but I do make judgements on people when they have an affect on me, my loved ones and my fellow man and especially children and I do determine to the best of my ability of whether they make the cut or not and that judgement is based on that particular person's words, actions and inaction.
I will speak of a person's words, actions and inaction but whether these are good or bad is for the person making their own judgement to decide and each person is entitled to make that judgement and that is what you have a terrible time realizing or accepting because it always has to be your way or the highway, JDel and I am here to let you know that you will be disappointed in that expectation and you can go on with your blithering but be sure to take your high blood pressure pill.
jdelphiki wrote on 9/21/2009 7:41 pm
Who assigned you, Judith, to decide whether or not people needed to be fired or have their lives destroyed?
That's precisely my point. You end up using your own measure of who you like or dislike, but you follow scorched-earth tactics that go beyond simple disagreement to hurting people and wrecking lives. You talk about the bad things these people are supposed to have done, then try your best to do even worse and tell yourself that it's justified. When you take the active role of judge, jury, and executioner, you go beyond realm of honest disagreement into avenues of personal destruction. How does THAT make anything better, other than to serve your own personal vendettas?
. wrote on 9/21/2009 6:51 pm
People get fired or destroyed by their own actions but those people are always more than ready to blame their problems on others - perfect examples of people not wanting to be held responsible for their actions.
. wrote on 9/21/2009 6:47 pm
(smile)
jdelphiki wrote on 9/21/2009 6:25 pm
I think I'm being pretty clear. And I think your actions belie your disclaimers.
So you tell us that you don't hate the people that you're trying to slander, slur, or destroy using whatever devious, underhanded way you can think of? Whatever lets you sleep at night...
To the rest of us, it doesn't seem like there's much difference between flat-out hatred, and your utter contempt for everybody who disagrees with you. You tell us you don't hate the people, but they're who you focus your attacks on, usually to the exclusion of discussing ANY of the issues you claim to care about. There are very few of us out here who would even DARE imagine trying to get someone fired from his job or to destroy a successful area businessman, all because you can't win an argument with them.
If you don't want to call THAT hate, spin it to yourself however you want. It's a free country. Just don't expect anyone who's had to deal with your bile to believe you.
. wrote on 9/21/2009 5:06 pm
JDel: You twist words like you would twine. I do not hate people - I hate and have contempt for the actions, words and inaction of people that will cause great suffering. You got that, JDel - if you don't, then make an appointment to see your primary care doctor.
P.S. You can think whatever you want to think about me as a person just as I think whatever I want about you or any other person.
jdelphiki wrote on 9/21/2009 4:45 pm
So Judith, now you justify your contempt by saying it's okay because you perceive the actions of those you hate as being somehow bad enough. But you still hate and attack the people, not their actions.
The problem with your stated attitude is that when you center your hatred around people, not actions or ideals, you end up inverting your justifications. Instead of addressing the problem actions or ideals, you attack the people, making up justifications that fit your "criteria" for treating them with contempt.
Ultimately, it doesn't REALLY matter what the people do, as long as you can connect the dots for yourself so that you have the self-justification for treating them as bad as you want.
The local businessman that you tried to slander by association with a sex offender is not on the City Council (Gardner OR Edgerton)and is not an employee of BNSF or TAG. You just decided that you hated him and in doing so, it didn't matter that you tried to destroy his life or that you improperly misused information you lifted from the sexual offender registry.
It's not, as you claim, that the ends justify the means: that as long as you can justify it to yourself, it doesn't matter how badly you treat others.
You're the perfect example of WHY your methods of hatred and contempt ARE wrong because, as you show us, the threshhold you use to justify your treatment of others becomes a sliding scale. You called me a "wife beater" and "evil", having never met me (and we have never met), all because I dared to disagree with you and questioned your treatment of others. I have nothing, but my voice, to do with the Intermodal and, as I've said in the past, am not all that big on the notion of it being here. So I'm contemptably worthy of hatred, all because I counter you? Who's next? Everyone?
The scariest part of your ideas about contempt is how readily you dehumanize others. It's easy to destroy the lives of others when you don't see their faces. It becomes easier and easier to hate when you convince yourself, over and over, that others aren't worthy of basic civility or decency.
Despite our long correspondance out here, I do not and WILL not hate you. But I continue to be concerned about the damage you do with your attitude and, more importantly, your behavior.
. wrote on 9/21/2009 4:22 pm
KL: Many did nothing to mitigate the affects of this project but worked tirelessly to bring the project to this area. You sure didn't see the city of Gardner or the paid politicians going to Topeka to fight for the diesel emissions bill that was introduced to the legislature this year to protect the people. You had those same people working like crazy for BNSF and the Allen Group to get the intermodal funding bill thru so this project could come to fruition. And you saw those same people working like crazy at the state house for the previous two years. I could list action after action the city of Gardner and the politicians took or didn't take to get this project crammed down the throuts of the people. You see and talk only about what you want to see and talk about like so many others who were the enablers.
KL wrote on 9/21/2009 3:45 pm
Its perspective. I for one am glod they worked so hard to mitigate the impacts for a dvelopment that they had no choice in setting up next door. You might remember that this development was not in the city of Gardner until 2008.
If you wanted to stop it, you and your crew should have focused on the federal deleagation becuase that is the only way to manage the railroad.
But I guess then you wouldn't have anyone to blame.
. wrote on 9/21/2009 11:33 am
Gardner, Ks. is a perfect example of how economic development (as seen by some) can change a sleepy little town with farm roots into a location for one of the biggest projects to hit the state of Kansas for some time.
That project is one of the most highly political and debated issues and is the intermodal logistics park that has been brought to the doorstep of the Gardner citizens, mostly by the politicians and the economic development gurus.
BNSF railroad came to Gardner, Kansas in 2005 with this project which is basically a centralized midwest location where BNSF brings their trains with containers from the west coast California ports filled with consumer goods mostly from China. When those trains arrive here, the containers are transferred to trucks which take the goods to mostly warehouses where the shipments are unloaded, sorted, picked and then loaded onto other trucks which deliver the goods to retailers within a 500 mile radius of Gardner, Ks. You will also have trucks returning to the intermodal with empty containers to be shipped back to China. BNSF picked The Allen Group now out of Dallas, Texas as the developer of the warehouses that will be built adjacent to the railroad intermodal. This new type of logistics is sold by many by saying trucks are not having to travel across country to delever the goods, however, Gardner will suffer the consequences of having millions of trucks coming and going to their location with many adverse and costly affects.
The biggest selling point is, of course, jobs - they are saying approximately 13,000, however, again the politicians and economic development fail to mention that most of the jobs will only be paying $9 to $14 per hour and many with little or no fringe benefits. The project will truly be one of privatizing gains and socializing costs and losses since there will be billions of dollars for infrastructure costs that will never end and the taxpayers will be picking up the tab for these enormous costs. The pollution from the diesel emissions from millions of trucks in the Gardner community will definitely have adverse and deadly health affects to the people in the area as well as billions of dollars for medical costs and lost days of work. The costs for roads, interchanges, bridges, over and underpasses, road maintenance, widening of I-35 to 3 lanes, etc., etc. will be billions of dollars. There is a safety hazard also when you have such a high concentration of trucks. And last but hardly least, the loss of quality of life to the people will be enormous and something probably that can never be recaptured. There are many who question whether this is really economic development or the financial, health and lifestyle raping of the people.
On the other side of the coin, there are those who tout the taxes to be generated (such a fallacity to me since most of the taxes are diverted to the project costs and these taxes are never benefited by the people), accompanying business and development to come with this project and on and on we go until we reach the streets being paved in gold.
So you end up in modern day Gardner who finally in 2009 said NO to BNSF and The Allen Group, however, they just moved about 5 miles down the road to Edgerton, Kansas to sell their project and get their tax incentive and tax diversion of the tax dollars they pay in many ways back to themselves. Gardner will still have this highly debated project in their backyard and have to contend with all of the good and bad of it to come.
What would Gardner, Ks. founders say to this new, modern Gardner, Kansas? My personal opinion is that Gardner's welcome sign will say: Gardner, Kansas - City of Promise - Promise You Will Want To Leave.
This opinion is based on my thought that I don't think people really would enjoy living next to a railyard, warehouse city or contending with millions of trucks.
Oh, if we could just put on our visualization glasses and be able to see what is to come but alas those glasses aren't available yet and probably for good reason.
KL wrote on 9/19/2009 1:17 pm
You're right outside, the district will still benefit which is really the only benefit you would realize since I assume your are neither in Gardenr or Edgerton (outsidelookingin).
The travesty in all this is that this will directly impact Gardner but the three council members depicted in this bullseye of a cartoon elected to show the side they're showing in the cartoon to the citiznes of Gardner. How's that for representation?
OUTSIDELOOKINGIN wrote on 9/19/2009 5:07 am
Yes the GE school district will get less. But will receive $1,100,000 dollars a year for the first 10 years without adding a single student.
A grand total of $237,000,000 over the projected 35 years of the projaect will be payed to the school district. If future employees reside in the district even greater funds will be realized.
I guess this is a "bad" deal for the district.
10% less wrote on 9/18/2009 5:52 pm
"Lisa wrote on 9/16/2009 7:19 am
This is an accurate representation. Now Gardner is losing out to Edgerton on this venture Before long they will refer to the high school as Edgerton high school instead of Gardner-Edgerton."
Yes. Also, now the GE school district will actually get 10% LESS tax revenue (75% abatement vs. 65% abatement) with the Edgerton agreement than with the most recently rescinded Gardner agreement that was supposedly such a bad deal for Gardner & the school district. Certainly, this will be more $$$ than the district is receiving now and more than was offered in Gardner's original agreement (85% abatement), but the change was not in the district's favor.
Thanks, Mr. Kester, for the fun cartoon.
Blast from the past... wrote on 9/17/2009 8:20 am
I remember the goold old days:
"Judith Rogers wrote on 4/24/2009 12:02 pm
At least I sign my name to my comments and not hide behind a signon of "Headache". I will stand for what I believe in and not hide behind a fake name."
OUTSIDELOOKINGIN wrote on 9/16/2009 3:58 pm
You can go to www.edgertonks.org...... Click on "BNSF Project Site" on the right.......Click on "Finance Plan Summary" in the center..... to see what Gardner actually gave up. I believe you will find it good reading. Maybe "Read it and weep".
RB wrote on 9/16/2009 9:48 am
Good imagination HAL. Shepherd and Co. continually have said people don't know the real facts, I've been waiting for them for a while. All we've seen is a vote against the majority of Gardner to de-annex the land, with no explanation as to why.
NOTHING! I believe it would go along way if the council put together a list of items they believe are problems with the agreements. Don't you think the people of Gardner are entitled to know why the people they voted in are doing what they are doing?
I'm sure you've asked the same thing of Drovetta over the years.
KL wrote on 9/16/2009 9:34 am
Wow Haldot you really had to reach for that one.
I think you are probably the only one who sees it that way, that is if you count all of your online personas as just one actual person.
The good news is that most of the residents of Gardner understand completely what a misguided decision the three ostrichs made and the long range impact it will have on our town.
HAL 9000 wrote on 9/16/2009 9:06 am
What I see in this cartoon are 3 council members risking everything to dig for facts and uncover the truth while a profiteering symbol of consumerism run amuck is preparing to destroy nature.
The "artist" forgot to include images of Carol, Dave, Peter and Tom straddling the locomotive yelling "yeeehaaa!"
Look at it one way, and in the background you see mountains of white lies. From another perspective, it looks like plumes of black soot from the diesel exhaust of trains and trucks.
I guess it is an accurate depiction of Gardner's past, present and future.
Lisa wrote on 9/16/2009 6:19 am
This is an accurate representation. Now Gardner is losing out to Edgerton on this venture Before long they will refer to the high school as Edgerton high school instead of Gardner-Edgerton.
Kl wrote on 9/15/2009 8:51 pm
Perfect! What's the old saying about a picture and a thousand words?
Two thumbs up Mr. Kester!
Report inappropriate comments.