Circuit of the Americas Development Updates - Page 17

BevoLJ · #**321** Posted **Jun 15, 2011, 4:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by hookem

Have you seen the name of the business school at UT?

I was about to say that I got my MBA from the school built and named after the guy building this F1 track. I really don't think UT will get in his way.

Spaceman · #**322** Posted **Jun 15, 2011, 6:48 PM**

OK , then UT should make a statement supporting the track...An entity the size of UT can't stay indifferent on a project this size...Especially when part of the circuit is designated as a reseach facility.

BevoLJ · #**323** Posted **Jun 15, 2011, 6:51 PM**

They did put out a statement a while back saying if the race fell on a day they were planning on having a home game they would move their home game to another date.

http://www.statesman.com/sports/long...printArticle=y

Edit: I'm talking Football. I doubt they care if it fell on a home game for any other sport.

Spaceman · #**324** Posted **Jun 15, 2011, 8:56 PM**

That's all UT said? WOOPEE S--t!!!

electricron · #**325** Posted **Jun 15, 2011, 10:25 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spaceman

That's all UT said? WOOPEE S--t!!!

UT is an University partially supported with taxes from Texas citizens. It would be completely improper for any State agency (including UT) to comment on any political issue not directly involving them. If the UT Regents wish to comment politically on this issue, it's okay with me as long as they return every State penny back to the State coffers.

I can't believe you actually think this would be proper for them to do. Weren't you raised with any morals?

wwmiv · #**326** Posted **Jun 15, 2011, 10:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by electricron

UT is an University partially supported with taxes from Texas citizens. It would be completely improper for any State agency (including UT) to comment on any political issue not directly involving them. If the UT Regents wish to comment politically on this issue, it's okay with me as long as they return every State penny back to the State coffers.

I can't believe you actually think this would be proper for them to do. Weren't you raised with any morals?

Oh give me a break. The fact that they commented on this has nothing to do with politics what-so-ever. They simply said that they would move the game out of town if it were on the same weekend. It makes sense. If the traffic issues for each event alone are awful (ofcourse, I'm making an assumption about how bad the traffic will be for F1), then how bad do you think it'll be if they are combined?!

As for whether or not a public university should comment on political things in any capacity, do you believe that political scientists should keep their mouths shut? In your world, Larry Sabato wouldn't be publishing his Crystal Ball, Charlie Cook would not have developed the CPVI and discussed its implications on policy and elections, and the UTSA Political Science Dean, Mansour El-Kikhia, could not have gone on Stewart to discuss the U.S. reaction to Libya. Your position is ridiculous.

electricron · #**327** Posted **Jun 16, 2011, 1:21 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by wwmiv

Oh give me a break.
As for whether or not a public university should comment on political things in any capacity, do you believe that political scientists should keep their mouths shut? In your world, Larry Sabato wouldn't be publishing his Crystal Ball, Charlie Cook would not have developed the CPVI and discussed its implications on policy and elections, and the UTSA Political Science Dean, Mansour El-Kikhia, could not have gone on Stewart to discuss the U.S. reaction to Libya. Your position is ridiculous.

No, it's not ridiculous. A better example, it would be improper for UT to comment on Austin's urban rail if it ever came to a public vote. It's one thing to argue with the City publicly and privately over where and how a train runs through their campus, it's entirely different to state whether they favor a train or not. Likewise, it would be improper for them to state whether they favor giving Texas funds to a racetrack, Formula 1 or NASCAR. It's none of their business........

wwmiv · #**328** Posted **Jun 16, 2011, 1:28 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by electricron

Likewise, it would be improper for them to state whether they favor giving Texas funds to a racetrack, Formula 1 or NASCAR. It's none of their business........

They never said such things... They said that they'd move a game if it conflicted with F1.

electricron · #**329** Posted **Jun 16, 2011, 1:35 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by wwmiv

They never said such things... They said that they'd move a game if it conflicted with F1.

I never stated it was wrong for UT to state they would reschedule a game, after all - when and where their football game occurs is their business. I'm stating that it would be wrong for UT to state publicly whether they favor granting State or City funds to the racetrack or not - because it isn't their business.

I can't believe the intent of my earlier responses was so impossible to understand. Sometimes I think some just want to be argumental, just because they can.

wwmiv · #**330** Posted **Jun 16, 2011, 1:49 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by electricron

I never stated it was wrong for UT to state they would reschedule a game, after all - when and where their football game occurs is their business. I'm stating that it would be wrong for UT to state publicly whether they favor granting State or City funds to the racetrack or not - because it isn't their business.

I can't believe the intent of my earlier responses was so impossible to understand. Sometimes I think some just want to be argumental, just because they can.

Although we disagree on that, I don't understand why you bothered to comment. You said it as if they had done exactly that, even though they obviously hadn't.

BevoLJ · #**331** Posted **Jun 16, 2011, 5:35 PM**

• Video Link

electricron · #**332** Posted **Jun 16, 2011, 8:00 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by wwmiv

Although we disagree on that, I don't understand why you bothered to comment. You said it as if they had done exactly that, even though they obviously hadn't.

I was replying specifically to Spaceman who suggested they should - AND was disappointed that UT didn't state more. Didn't my first reply included a Spaceman quote???????

Not that difficult to figure out, or is it?

wwmiv · #**333** Posted **Jun 16, 2011, 8:09 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by electricron

I was replying specifically to Spaceman who suggested they should - AND was disappointed that UT didn't state more. Didn't my first reply included a Spaceman quote???????

Not that difficult to figure out, or is it?

The Spaceman quote was irrelevant. He could have meant many, many things by it.

Spaceman · #**334** Posted **Jun 16, 2011, 8:50 PM**

I hope I'm not irrelevant....Wealthy people rarely are...My world is completely different than yours..
Let's please keep this board dedicated to discussions about COTA...
I just saw the new add for the track while watching the US Open..Very well done..

wwmiv · #**335** Posted **Jun 16, 2011, 9:00 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spaceman

I hope I'm not irrelevant....Wealthy people rarely are...My world is completely different than yours..
Let's please keep this board dedicated to discussions about COTA...
I just saw the new add for the track while watching the US Open..Very well done..

I don't think you are irrelevant. I just think that the quote was irrelevant to his comment.

Spaceman · #**336** Posted **Jun 16, 2011, 9:29 PM**

I'm confused about something..Not the first time, not the last..Every F1 site, domestic or world wide, are all touting next year's race in Austin...Even today's Statesman talked about the race as though it's a given. Construction is ongoing at a rapid pace.The race date on the F1 calendar. My question is, is the council's vote a real yea or nea for this race? There is a disconnect on this .

hookem · #**337** Posted **Jun 16, 2011, 10:26 PM**

Formula 1 promoters are offering a new deal -- they are now willing to cover the $4M match for the city of Austin for ALL 10 years. That's even better than what Sheryl Cole had asked them for (to cover the $4M for 6 years).

http://www.statesman.com/blogs/conte...s_between.html

This and the new ad campaign shows they are pretty darn serious, IMO.

KevinFromTexas · #**338** Posted **Jun 17, 2011, 6:26 AM**

http://www.statesman.com/news/local/...r-1544880.html

Quote:

New deal for Austin's Formula One calls for no contribution of city funds
Proposed arrangement lets taxpayers off the hook for races, city officials say.

By Eric Dexheimer and Sarah Coppola
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Published: 9:44 p.m. Thursday, June 16, 2011

City of Austin officials say they are nearing completion of a contract with organizers of the Formula One race scheduled to begin in Austin next summer that would eliminate nearly all local taxpayer support for the event.

The city's new arrangement would not affect the estimated $25 million annual subsidy state officials have committed to providing to support the internationally popular race. But it could deflate concerns of local critics who objected to using city taxpayer money to support the race.

Final details of the arrangement were pending Thursday, City Council Member Bill Spelman said.

Spaceman · #**339** Posted **Jun 17, 2011, 2:58 PM**

This is very good news but still doesn't assure an OK...Spelman and Cole appears to be ready to go but Morrison would never vote for it, no matter what..She is a crazy woman..If the council decides to delay the vote until tovo gets into office then things could get tight...

BevoLJ · #**340** Posted **Jun 17, 2011, 3:43 PM**

Wow that is great news!