This post was contributed by a community member. The views expressed here are the author's own.

Neighbor News

Herschlag: The King Has Spoken

Former Concord city councilor: What Took So Long?

Concord City Manager Tom Aspell (file photo)
Concord City Manager Tom Aspell (file photo) (Tony Schinella/Patch)

CONCORD, NH — At Thursday’s budget hearing, our city manager extolled his latest plan for the replacement of the clubhouse at the golf course.

Not only did he praise his plan as the only viable option, but he strongly stated that there was absolutely no need for further public discussion or input. Of course, one could understand that there is no need of further public input, because the city has a record of never making a misstep when moving forward with studies and projects that spend your money.

Well, except recently, when they spent $200,000 to update our zoning ordinances, only to throw it in the trash and erase any mention of it from the city’s website.

Find out what's happening in Concordfor free with the latest updates from Patch.

Or perhaps the $200,000 consultants' report for a bridge park over the Merrimack River that will never move forward because of the astronomical cost. A cost and a project that anyone with a drop of common sense would have never considered. But for those spending your money, $200,000 is like a drop of rainwater in Long Pond. Who’s going to notice?

Or the $16 million +/- we spent on Main Street. Now I agree the project has had a transformative impact on our downtown, but I also remember that the initial estimate was less than half that cost. And I remember members of the public expressing concern about future maintenance costs for some of the design elements. And once again, the crosswalks will need to be repaired. The last time the crosswalks were repaired, it cost $100,000 - half a drop of rainwater in our reservoir. But what do we know?

Find out what's happening in Concordfor free with the latest updates from Patch.

How much money has been spent on the various designs for the clubhouse? And if this is such a great proposal, why wasn’t it included with the original proposals? What took so long to come up with a plan that actually has a chance to garner significant public support and to be paid for with tax dollars that have already been set aside for exactly this type of expenditure?

Oh, and have I mentioned that the proposed number of parking spaces for the golf course have been reduced because costs — once again — have come in significantly higher than anticipated? Something about a slight oversight for a needed state permit ... oops.

But the king has spoken and you don’t need to. Long live the king.

The views expressed in this post are the author's own. Want to post on Patch?