The commissioners officially pulled the plan to move the annex and will be staying on the westside campus instead. I honestly never imagined we would get this outcome, and it is entirely because you all refused to let this go unnoticed. Let's keep a close eye on the renovation process …
We, the undersigned, do not agree with Clay County Commissioners Gene Owen and Luann Ridgeway who would like to spend $20M to build a new county annex in Gladstone or along HWY 152 in Kansas City.
Instead, we support rehabbing the existing westside annex or if a new annex building is needed, building on the existing 5.5 acre annex campus.
I started this because I was worried our community was being overlooked but I never imagined so many people felt the same way. This momentum belongs entirely to you and your willingness to speak up for our neighborhood. It is clear now that the future of the annex is something we are all going to decide together.
Reached 100 supporters
July 17, 2019
July 17, 2019
I am honestly overwhelmed by how many of you have stepped up to support this location. We are nearing five hundred signatures and I would be incredibly grateful if you could each send this link to a neighbor to help us keep this momentum moving.
241 Comments
J
James Scarrow
7 years ago
Featured
I could maybe swallow it if the commissioners would have true transparency, but in lieu of transparency, this voter says a strong no on the new and to rehab the existing annex.
P
Pat Enomoto
7 years ago
Featured
There has to be a back story. Someone is profiting on the backs of the Clay County taxpayers and I am glad someone is speaking out. I have never had any problem with excessive waits to accomplish County business. I see no need for a new $20 million dollar building. If we have $20 million dollars to waste, lets save it for the inevitable rainy day!
T
Todd Harvey
7 years ago
Featured
The current location is ideal for residents in the Southern part of the county. Let's look at fixing what is wrong with the current building. Clay County does not need to spend money on a new building at a new location.
L
Louie DiMiceli
7 years ago
Featured
The fiscally responsible approach is to make the necessary upgrades to the existing facility at a small fraction of the cost of replacement. Even if repairs estimates are off, at $2 to $3 million, they can be off by a factor of 6 before they approach the the $20 million to replace the annex.
D
Dexter Gatlin
7 years ago
Featured
A new one is not needed. Why hasn't the maintenance on the existing building been kept up. The footage of it I saw on a news station made it seem as if no regular repairs were being done?
S
Scott E
7 years ago
Featured
Keep this Annex - upgrade the windows and entry, repair the roof (and the road while we're rehabbing...). Love the design or hate it, the place also has architectural significance!
The commissioners officially pulled the plan to move the annex and will be staying on the westside campus instead. I honestly never imagined we would get this outcome, and it is entirely because you all refused to let this go unnoticed. Let's keep a close eye on the renovation process …
We, the undersigned, do not agree with Clay County Commissioners Gene Owen and Luann Ridgeway who would like to spend $20M to build a new county annex in Gladstone or along HWY 152 in Kansas City.
Instead, we support rehabbing the existing westside annex or if a new annex building is needed, building on the existing 5.5 acre annex campus.
I started this because I was worried our community was being overlooked but I never imagined so many people felt the same way. This momentum belongs entirely to you and your willingness to speak up for our neighborhood. It is clear now that the future of the annex is something we are all going to decide together.
Reached 100 supporters
July 17, 2019
July 17, 2019
I am honestly overwhelmed by how many of you have stepped up to support this location. We are nearing five hundred signatures and I would be incredibly grateful if you could each send this link to a neighbor to help us keep this momentum moving.
241 Comments
J
James Scarrow
7 years ago
Featured
I could maybe swallow it if the commissioners would have true transparency, but in lieu of transparency, this voter says a strong no on the new and to rehab the existing annex.
P
Pat Enomoto
7 years ago
Featured
There has to be a back story. Someone is profiting on the backs of the Clay County taxpayers and I am glad someone is speaking out. I have never had any problem with excessive waits to accomplish County business. I see no need for a new $20 million dollar building. If we have $20 million dollars to waste, lets save it for the inevitable rainy day!
T
Todd Harvey
7 years ago
Featured
The current location is ideal for residents in the Southern part of the county. Let's look at fixing what is wrong with the current building. Clay County does not need to spend money on a new building at a new location.
L
Louie DiMiceli
7 years ago
Featured
The fiscally responsible approach is to make the necessary upgrades to the existing facility at a small fraction of the cost of replacement. Even if repairs estimates are off, at $2 to $3 million, they can be off by a factor of 6 before they approach the the $20 million to replace the annex.
D
Dexter Gatlin
7 years ago
Featured
A new one is not needed. Why hasn't the maintenance on the existing building been kept up. The footage of it I saw on a news station made it seem as if no regular repairs were being done?
S
Scott E
7 years ago
Featured
Keep this Annex - upgrade the windows and entry, repair the roof (and the road while we're rehabbing...). Love the design or hate it, the place also has architectural significance!
I could maybe swallow it if the commissioners would have true transparency, but in lieu of transparency, this voter says a strong no on the new and to rehab the existing annex.