Comment history

Glenwood Estates residents must pay full connection fee

Dennis - can you point out on this website where the announcement was that Glenwood sewer rates would be discussed at the Jan 17 meeting? Maybe I'm just missing it, but I'm usually pretty good with searches...

The only January article I could locate was good news.
http://www.basehorinfo.com/news/2010/... - see bottom of article.

Are we non-residents expected to show up in force at EVERY meeting, even when NOT on the agenda?

February 23, 2011 at 12:59 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Bridge repairs close 142nd Street until fall

Who cares about 142nd street? At least you can get around that on paved roads.

They closed 158th street at the same time, which sees MUCH higher traffic volumes. Your only choices there involve either gravel roads or a LONG detour.

February 17, 2011 at 7:15 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Glenwood Estates residents must pay full connection fee

Almost forgot Mr. Moyer... I would have expected a little more sympathy from you, as we're practically neighbors. You've been thru this with Cedar Lakes. How much was the connection fee YOU paid? Why is my connection any different than yours?

January 20, 2011 at 1:54 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Glenwood Estates residents must pay full connection fee

"“It's making us look like we are the bad people in this situation, and we are not,” Dysart said. “It's Leavenworth County.”" - Yes, Ms. Dysart, Leavenworth County has bungled this. YOU, however, are in a position to do something positive about it, and chose to continue the path of abusing the homeowners, who have done nothing wrong. A quick search of the Sentinel's archives found at least 6 different times where the city committed to help contain the costs to the homeowners. Now, you've let 3 people decide to make liars of the city. So much for "goodwill".

"Mayor Terry Hill said the city would probably annex Glenwood Estates during the next several years, and the idea behind the addendum was to allow residents to connect at an in-city rate because they would be in the city soon." - So, can the residents expect a refund of all overcharges and premiums paid when this annexation occurs? You're writing a big check here. You guys have been talking about annexation for 10+ years. Why not just do it - Kansas law provides 2 easy paths for this - between Basehor & the county commission, it could easily happen.

"Washington, though, said that the issue had already been settled in 2010 when the council offered annexation to Glenwood Estates residents in return for a lower fee, but few residents responded. " - Really, Jim, you want to continue to stick with that? An "annexation offer" that was prepared, but NEVER sent to the homeowners, with no terms specified... Would YOU sign a blank check for ME? And, please, don't try to blame the Glenwood HOA, as they have NO authority to act in anyone's behalf in matters regarding annexation or sewer districts. Besides, many of the SD3 homeowners are not even members of the HOA.

Councilmen Breuer & Mertz - thank you for YOUR efforts. You guys actually worked with the homeowners as much as you could. If I DO get annexed, you'll be the 2 that I vote to keep.

Finally, citizen Bundy. The city is not "giving away" $100k. They are charging us $100k EXTRA, on top of the $350,000 that they are already receiving. PLUS, they are gaining an extra $6000 per month, every month, on top of existing revenue for treatment. Sewer systems operate on economy of scale - the more you treat, the LOWER the cost per unit becomes, especially since you are charging the "new connections" a 50% premium. That extra $72,000 in income will probably cost less than $20k additional to treat.

“Did you even think about the impact on the people of Basehor?” Bundy said. “People are losing their jobs. Companies are cutting back on hours. My job got cut back to 30 hours a week.” - As are the residents of Glenwood. We're people too, living in the same economy as you. We are now looking at OUR per household budgets being strained by an ADDITIONAL $200.00 per month, by the time we pay monthly fees with a 50% surcharge, construction costs, and an inflated connection fee.
Thanks for adding a little more straw to THIS camel's back....

January 20, 2011 at 1:49 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Officials pushing for lower speed limit on Highway 24/40

The way I see things --- cars (and loaded school buses!) crossing all lanes of 24/40 at 158th during rush hour is a disaster waiting to happen. Parents and school officials need to STRONGLY encourage use of the frontage road and stoplight at 155th instead of "short-cutting" across at 158th. Not much better when they jump onto State, then try to accomplish 3 lane changes in 1/4 mile. Nothing more frightening that watching new teen drivers and buses crossing 4 lanes of 65 mph traffic, plus turn lanes, just to save a minute...

I'm not sure simply reducing the speed limit will solve the issue. If you drop to 55mph, traffic will still do 65(+). Just look at the speeds after the drop to 50mph 2 miles east... Of course people will whine when the reduced speed gets enforced too... A stoplight at 158th doesn't make things safer if the speeds don't drop. I'd think that allowing right turns ONLY from 158th street (both directions) would be a good start - eliminate left turns and crossovers, as they're available at 155th. I'm sure THAT won't be a popular suggestion to those trying to save that extra minute though.

September 23, 2010 at 7:56 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Leavenworth County couple indicted for bank fraud

"Leavenworth County BROTHERS indicted for bank fraud"???
Gary & ARLIE are husband / wife...

June 19, 2010 at 8:20 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Residents question city's sewer intentions

Numbers, numbers, numbers! When are we going to see cost figures for the sewer project both with and without annexation? Until those numbers are known, how can anyone make an informed decision about whether they wish to be voluntarily annexed? The whole annexation discussion is premature until you give us numbers with true,accurate costs of both construction (county) and the total costs of annexed vs. non-annexed (city) - connection fees, property tax differences, monthly treatment/solid waste charges, etc.
The Glenwood HOA has zero authority to act on anyone's behalf. Not all SD #3 homeowners are members, and their bylaws do not give them ANY authority to act in matters regarding annexation, benefit districts, mail distribution, etc. Stop trying to place this on the HOA; Basehor dropped the ball by not distributing these correctly....... IF I HAD receive the agreement and signed it, is it OK for me to return it to the city dogcatcher when I see him drive down the street? NO..... Well, that's basically how Basehor distributed the agreement, and now they want to blame the "dogcatcher" because the agreements did not get into the correct hands in a timely fashion.
I really felt that progress had been made at the October meeting - communication between all entities was happening. Since then, everyone went back to doing their own thing, passing resolutions, and the only communication the residents have received from anyone is what we read in the paper.

April 1, 2010 at 8:45 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Sewer district 3 residents to pay full connection fees

Dennis – I’m well aware that the city does not control construction of the sewer interceptor. The city does need to better work with the residents and county instead of going rogue with unrealistic “100% compliance or nothing” resolutions.

You were at the October meeting. I met you, and you seem like a nice, reasonable guy. In that meeting, residents were told that numbers would be compiled so that we could get a reasonable idea of what our costs per household would be both with and without annexation. Of course, we were also told that we would receive that information right after the first of the year… Wouldn’t you AT LEAST want to know those numbers before you personally would consider signing such an agreement?

As has been mentioned, distribution of the agreement was a joke. At the VERY least, they should have been mailed. Instead, we are expected to look for newspaper articles and neighborhood word-of-mouth to find information? If you have business with me that requires a legal agreement, you need to at least do your part in getting that agreement in my hands for consideration. Simply handing 97 legal documents to one individual (who has zero authority to act on anyone’s behalf) does not constitute distribution.

Finally, have you read the annexation agreement? It was drafted by your attorney to be 100% to Basehor’s benefit. For the residents of SD #3, it’s simply the legal equivalent of a blank check – “I agree to be annexed”. Is that today, tomorrow, 50 years from now, or maybe the day after we hook on to the sewer and pay the non-resident hookup fee? See the problem? I keep hearing about a reduced connection fee in exchange for voluntary annexation - the agreement does NOT contain any such language. You gain voluntary annexation while promising nothing with this agreement. I want written agreements the spell out the obligations and benefits of both parties, not blank, undated legal agreements and verbal statements. That’s just the right way to do business.

I’m not opposed the being annexed – it’s going to happen sooner or later; same with the sewer system. I think many others feel the same way. But, let’s not get the cart before the horse here... Basehor and the county need to get numbers together and present them to the homeowners, prepare a plan, and actually meet commitments instead of giving lip service, passing unreasonable resolutions and threatening people’s finances. Realize that you will NEVER come up with a 100% plan, but instead work for a 75% plan, and let’s go from there.

March 24, 2010 at 2:59 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

City clerk let go after 25 years

A sad day in Basehor city history. Mary Ann was the glue who held city hall together the past 25 years. Some other city will be very lucky to get a new city clerk with her level of experience.

March 16, 2010 at 4:07 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Sewer district 3 residents to pay full connection fees

Wow, only 7 of 97 returned??? MAYBE you should try actually MAILING the letters to the homeowners next time? I'm a Glenwood resident, and you NEVER sent me a letter.
I spoke to 3 other neighbors who never received one either. I finally found someone who received a copy from another homeowner - the "letter" was actually a one-paragraph form that says "I agree to be annexed", with NO other info - construction costs, tax increase info, project and annexation timeframes, etc. Essentially Basehor asked anyone who "received" this "letter" to sign a BLANK check.
Not well communicated at all.....

March 16, 2010 at 4:05 p.m. ( | suggest removal )