After much information has been learned about the astonishing cost of the Minvilla project, unanswered questions still remain; the main ones are:
1. Given that the estimated cost of VMC's Minvilla project is now "north of $6,000,000" (according to 6/20 quote from the Ten Year Plan's Housing Coordinator) and has been rising at ~$100k per month, why are not the many and much less expensive alternatives being pursued?
2. How does it make sense to house fragile and recently homeless individuals immediatly adjacent to those who could easily re-enable the activities which may have caused their homelessness in the first place.
According to the same quote from the Ten Year Plan's Housing Coordinator ((link...)), the cost "is...kind of a moving target" so we don't actually know what the final cost will be; however, we do know that many more and less expensive options are available now. ((link...))
Much has been made of my ~$200/sq ft calculation of this $6+mm and ~30,000 sq foot project but rather than argue the math...real questions need answering. Why not help more people with more efficient use of funds? Why not help them sooner by using readily available properties? Why not locate them in an area where they are less likely to be tempted or preyed upon?
- school board meeting underway (39 replies)
- Rail incident, evacuations ongoing in Blount Co. (13 replies)
- Haslam snubs Obama, again (11 replies)
- Blurring the Racial Lines (53 replies)
- Supreme Court rules against EPA on regulating mercury emissions (30 replies)
- Sheriff's office stonewalling jail beating victim's lawyers? (7 replies)
- New revelations in deadly school bus crash (96 replies)
- McIntyre's week in review (4 replies)
- TNGOP wants a special session on the gay crisis (3 replies)
- Couldn't happen to a nicer guy (2 replies)
- Today's school board work session (23 replies)
- Dog jumping in water (5 replies)