Finally a good point.

Only problem is that by the time they actually get the money and make plans, prices will probably have gone up again. We can hope anyway.

I agree buy low sell high, but if one isn't in position to buy then one isn't in a position to buy. That goes for governements, too.  I base my decision on my situation now , I won't play "what if" down the road. The past is the past. It can't be undone. I won't complain if the doesn't act sooner. If the city needs to borrow to make this happen, I don't believe it's in the position to act. Who's to say land won't be priced lower still when the City IS in a better position?

I believe the City would be better off to GET into a position of strength rather than hoping things work.

You people are right.  Let's spend money we don't have.  I am sure everything will work out well.  What could possibly go wrong?

LeanPotter & RichTig

Did you pay for your car 100% on the spot? Your house?

Are you totally debt free?


No? Neither is any city in America that I am aware of.

No, I didn't pay for my vehicles or home 100%.  I came close to buying a home all cash. I did buy a piece of land cash. That was sweet. I sold it and used that to put down 37% on this house(I didn't want to buy when we did.) My home was 245k in 2005. I owe 128k now.

  I hold title on all my vehicles. I never went the full term on any of them. I don't plan on buying another vehicle(ever). If it happens, it will be cash. My next home purchase,unless it's a blazing hot deal that screams to me because I'm ALREADY in position take advantage of it, will be cash.

 I see how much I have overpaid in not doing that way. I have seen others make grander moves from a worse situation and are in dire straights now.  I have learned my lesson.  I can't go back and undo all that occured. All I can do is learn from it.

I see the value of being debt free and buying with cash that is mine. I wouldn't want to continue compounding my errors by continually do the same thing. I wouldn't want the City to do so either. This is my home.

We already have a huge park (Pacana Park). 

Why don't we build:

An Aquarium?

A Planetarium?

An Art Museum?

A Canal System?

An Airport?

A 2000' high Observation Tower?

The World's Largest BMX/Skate Park?

A Space Port?  (we can market to the aliens that Maricopa is nicer than Roswell)

Wow- good for you. But your response kind of supports the bond.  You were not able to reach your current situation immediately. It took time.

The same goes for a city- especially one that is only 5 years old. It takes time to build wealth and sometimes it means having some debt in the beginning. I am not advocating free spending but a park like Pecos Park with an aquatic center- skate park- splash pad- dog park- lighted fields- and a facility with a library extension- classrooms- and computer lab would be a great piece for this city right now as well as in the future.

I do agree that MUSD and the city need to come to an agreement on using fields and gyms but that will not solve all of the current needs.

The bond will help PRL be proactive rather than reactive in building facilities to meet current and future needs.

If you have gone to the city events like the Salsa Festival and 4th of July you would know that the city has already outgrown Pacana Park.

An Aquarium?

A Planetarium?

An Art Museum?

These are great ideas but we don't even have a downtown area yet. The cost of these facilities is far more than libraries and parks and the city is currently not large enough to support any of these if they are built to a size that would make them an attraction to visitors. A Planetarium in  the Sierra Estralles could be a great thing in the future though.

No, it doesn't support the bond. I agree it takes time, however the debt  make it take longer because of the obligation it imposes. All those things I have accomplished, I could have accomplished sooner without debt.

If I had the patience to endure, the time would have still passed, but the money in interest/more obligation could have been saved to work in MY favor instead of the favor of the lender. The wealth would be growing without the drag and the(thereby unnecessary) risk of the debt.

It's the same idea with the City. It will still take time for the City to improve its situation. If it uses its resources as continues to grow, it(resource) will work  harder  for the City instead of the lender(bondholders).The City will be in a better position sooner rather than later.

It would have the benefit of OWNING outright what it seeks for all its residents. If anything goes south(it will), it won't jeopardize  what the City already has because it would truly belong to City and not the lender(bondholders).

I believe a common mistake(my words) is that people have the assumption that if something isn't achieved now, it will never happen(fear). So the only way it is accomplished now is thru debt.  This debt puts more burden on the City. This burden "requires more income(usually in the form of more debt)to finance its  expanding operations. This cycle has continued in our society; individuals and governments. Usually, it goes on until disaster happens.

But truly it isn't achieved now because the true owner is the lender until the debt is repaid with interest. If the cycle is broken true ownership/wealth will be created sooner. When the "disaster strikes" it is a mere blip because the entity was already in position to ride it out and take advantage of opportunites that were created. The idea is to get  be in a position for THIS cycle to continue.

That requires patience and the ability to say no to debt.

That's the problem with you people nowadays.  You all want everything NOW.  it doesn't matter that there isn't any money for it now.  You just want to put everything on credit and hope that you can pay for it when the bills come due.

That's very poor fiscal planning.

The buy now - pay later idea has not worked out well for the federal government. Just look at how much of the national budget is spent on interest on the debt.

Then we can agree to disagree. 

I believe that the city should be built on a solid fiscal foundation and you-people believe that the city should be built on debt.