Comments on: Residents lobby to preserve the flood damaged Sutliff bridge

By: concastay

concastay — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 18:26:37 +0000

Do your research NomerBull…many of the questions you're asking can be answered with minimal research into the topic. The SBA were the original group that reached out to FEMA to receive funds SPECIFICALLY ALLOCATED TO THIS TYPE OF EVENT. They have raised funds for a couple of decades to keep the bridge open and viable and raised more funds for the restoration. They're not asking for a special handout. It's kind of like school money allocation. If schools have half a million in their silo fund…they can't reallocate it to their general fund to help offset the state cuts there. Silo funds are designated for facilities, buses etc. Specific types of money have to be used for specific types of projects. This started off being in the same boat and the supervisors took the bridge from the SBA to help secure the funds from FEMA. FEMA designated the funds but now a couple of supervisors have personal pet projects they'd like to see done so they're back peddling. Is it anymore right to appease 100 people for a new bike trail?

By: concastay

concastay — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 18:17:46 +0000

I can't disagree that 1.7m is a lot of money to pay to fix this bridge. What concerns me more is that Johnson County supervisors reached out to FEMA who has funds allotted for this specific purpose and received the funds to pay for this project. Now, due to some ridiculous rules in government, they realize they can backout on the original reason the funds were requested and granted and spend the money elsewhere. I don't agree with this approach at all. If they aren't going to use the money for the reason it was granted, then give it back and let it be used for other FEMA paid events. A bike trail from Hill isn't necessary. To let this part of history be removed would inexcusable. We each have something near and dear to us that, if taken away when it could be preserved, would make us want to fight. This is one of those times for many that have grown up and lived by this bridge for their entire lives.

By: NomerBull

NomerBull — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 20:33:06 +0000

What for?
"Because it's special" is a logical fallacy called "appeal to emotion".
"Because FEMA allocated money" is a logical fallacy called "appeal to authority".

If the bridge should be rebuilt because people just like it, then it should be funded by those folks, not by people who don't want it or even know where it is.

My grandparents' house is historic and I have many fond childhood memories there. They are gone now and the house has fallen into disrepair. Should taxpayers pay to have it restored to its former condition?

By: Trailbandit

Trailbandit — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 18:15:49 +0000

For the past few decades, the Sutliffe Authority has had the benefit of non-profit status, meaning that taxpayers have already been subsidizing this bridge. Then, after the flood, the county assumed ownership of it in order to procure federal taxpayer funds.

At the very least, donations made to it over the years should be made taxable now.

It's kind of like going out and buying car insurance only after you got in an accident. Or like buying health insurance after being diagnosed with cancer. It's fraudulent.

But FEMA thinks that taxpayers should pay for a tavern's private porch? C'mon. If you want it fixed, then turn it back into a nonprofit, raise funds, and rebuild your private dock. Return my tax dollars to me as soon as possible.

By: accordionlinda

accordionlinda — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 17:23:02 +0000

Sutliff will always be Sutliff with or without the Bridge. The store will be there also. FEMA has money for the restoration so use it for what it was allocated for. Wasn't the Paramount Theatre restored? How about Czech Village? All those places needed to be restored. The Bridge is just as important and the Bridge is known all over the world!!!! Just google Sutliff Bridge and see what you find.

By: NomerBull

NomerBull — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 16:49:06 +0000

Naturally, Baxa's Sutliffe Store & Tavern wants the bridge rebuilt – their business is located feet from the wrecked half of it. But is it a wise use of taxpayer money to spend 1.4 million dollars to keep them open at that location?

Other than the nostalgia or sentimentalism of the handful of people who even know where this is/was, why does it need to be rebuilt? Moreover, why does it need to be rebuilt with TAXPAYER money? Why can't it be rebuilt with the money of the people who WANT it?

Is the Sutliff Bridge Authority a government, private, or non-profit entity? Let's deed what's left to them and they can take ownership as a non-profit or private organization. Then they can decide with their own money whether the bridge should be rebuilt or recycled.

It just seems tragic for a handful of people to say they want this old bridge rebuilt, but they want "someone else" to pay for it.

By: snapin2slimjim

snapin2slimjim — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 15:28:43 +0000

I loved that bridge as much as the next person, but really, $1.7M? How about they peel all those bills off the ceiling of the bar and use that money instead? Was FEMA told that bridge was passable?

By: accordionlinda

accordionlinda — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 13:41:50 +0000

SAVE THE SUTLIFF BRIDGE
It is a SPECIAL place in Iowa. Sure it is a lot of money. Yes it probably could be spent elsewhere. Ah, but where???? Again, the Sutliff Bridge is a SPECIAL PLACE. It is historic. FEMA allocated money for the Bridge. Use it for the Bridge.

By: Mookah

Mookah — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 13:21:33 +0000

Your partisan rancor serves no purpose here.

By: Marionite

Marionite — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 13:10:51 +0000

That is a lot of money to spend. There are many competing projects. But it would be a greater travesty to allow this piece of Iowa history to be washed away completely by the floods. Too many historical structures have been lost to time. And clearly not every one of them can be saved. But this one can be. And should be.

By: Scott100

Scott100 — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 12:57:13 +0000

$1.7 million for a true "Bridge to Nowhere". Good use of tax money.

By: lvtycoon

lvtycoon — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 03:01:37 +0000

out with the old in with the new after all you all probably voted for the new OBAMA CHANGE …..isnt it great