Middletown Forum : projects

projects : sj, 100% of residents can't...

Mon, 06 Apr 2015 20:29:43 +0000

Author: acclaro
Subject: 6070
Posted: Apr 06 2015 at 8:29pm

sj, 100% of residents can't keep track what cash-flow moves in and out of the General Fund. You think city council is going to provide an open book on due diligence insight on those hot investors downtown, you are a far more optimistic man than most.

projects : The city tells MMF the details....

Mon, 06 Apr 2015 14:55:01 +0000

Author: Dean
Subject: 6070
Posted: Apr 06 2015 at 2:55pm

The city tells MMF the details. City council runs the city and put in place what they want to accomplish. Transparency is only relevant to MMF and the city leaders. No responsibility to anyone else, and really----no one less cares.

projects : Thanx for the repliesWe agree...

Mon, 06 Apr 2015 12:25:07 +0000

Author: spiderjohn
Subject: 6070
Posted: Apr 06 2015 at 12:25pm

Thanx for the replies

We agree fact guy, that the city has taken on far too much responsibility towards making these now private ventures successful at best, and fulfilling promises/obligations at a minimum. Shouldn't be the case, however we gave the farm away(and the taxpayer $$) without imo the proper, normal pre-conditions.
So thanx to past/current Councils and admin, we are in the current position with not enough happening. Hopefully warmer weather will lead to positive activity. Still--this ain't no way to run a business and protect the citizens' investment.

Full disclosure of expenditures/obligations to whomever, and documenting work accomplished/results might go a long way towards moving things forward, or at least asking some hard ?s.
I think that the taxpayer/caring citizens are due that at a minimum, regardless of whom it might make uncomfortable.
Tough love and reality are often necessary to mend fences and move forward.

projects : Factguy wrote:Fair enough and...

Mon, 06 Apr 2015 11:07:06 +0000

Author: VietVet
Subject: 6070
Posted: Apr 06 2015 at 11:07am

Factguy wrote:

Fair enough and deserving of straight talk.

City is having to do all the heavy lifting on all these projects, just like Cincinnati State. Hopefully worth it if it goes through, but city has far more lifting responsibility than any single owner.

"but city has far more lifting responsibility than any single owner."

Who says it has to be this way? Let the private sector get interested in the downtown. Let the private sector take out the loans, make the upgrades, buy and sell the buildings downtown. The city has said for years that they should be out of the real estate business, yet, time and time again, we read where they have used city money to purchase another property that should be purchased by private investors. The Thatcher buildings are the latest round of city purchases. Why does the city have to be the initiating catalyst of private development in this town? It is not that way in other city's is it?

projects : squeemy wrote:"<span...

Mon, 06 Apr 2015 10:59:57 +0000

Author: VietVet
Subject: 6070
Posted: Apr 06 2015 at 10:59am

squeemy wrote:

"Many cities have vibrant self contained suburbs while the inner city is left behind."

care to elaborate? can you list any from Ohio?

In my observation.....

Real interest in living in downtown Dayton, Columbus, Cincinnati and other cities around here has not always attracted a sizable number until the last few decades. To a few, living downtown is now an option. To most, the suburbs are the answer.

The downtown living experience, in most cities in Ohio, seems to have picked up in the last decade. The desire to live downtown is a new concept compared to the movement to the suburbs which happened decades ago. A mega city like New York has always offered enough interest to live in the downtown area. Not so much around here IMO.

To clarify, most cities have vibrant suburbs, some affluent, some not so much, but they all have grocery stores, malls, etc that, IMO, make them self sufficient, relegating the downtown to an afterthought for most people.

It just seems to me that any Ohio city of size would offer more outside the downtown area with the activity having migrated outward long ago. Of course, a "one traffic light" town is a different situation were the downtown is the only option.

projects : Fair enough and deserving of...

Mon, 06 Apr 2015 10:48:15 +0000

Author: Factguy
Subject: 6070
Posted: Apr 06 2015 at 10:48am

Fair enough and deserving of straight talk.

projects : hey vet and factguy--thanx 4 the...

Mon, 06 Apr 2015 10:27:58 +0000

Author: spiderjohn
Subject: 6070
Posted: Apr 06 2015 at 10:27am

hey vet and factguy--thanx 4 the replies.

Makes me wonder is our city leaders have picked the wrong area to try to re-create a vibrant city center. The last 10-20 years of private ownership + Admin effort and taxpayer-funded expenditures seem to indicate such to be the case. Restaurants, bars, nightclubs and art galleries have come and gone at an alarming pace. Outside of the beautiful Beau Verre building, most else has disappeared quietly and quickly, even when partially funded by tax dollars. Even the talented Beau Verre crew seems challenged and taken out of their level of expertise by being landlords, retail, restaurant and bar operators.

Maybe the east end and areas between offer more hope, success and easier options to create activity? Lord knows that they have been ignored for a long while in deference to the sacred ground around Broad and Central. Give those long-time business operators equal access to façade grants, employee incentive expansions and infrastructure repairs similar to those given elsewhere.

The one statement that troubles me is, "City making investment in others whom tell us they are committed to the properties. Worth every dime to lay the foundation for the future."

Citizens(taxpayers) have become "venture capitalists" in these property giveay + $$ funding projects. Venture capitalists need more assurances and details than "telling us they are committed to the properties."

We need to see plans, calendars/schedules, funding deposits and past histories of timely, successful projects by these individuals. Doesn't seem that we have had any of this in the past, and little to none currently. Is this REALLY a successful way to operate and protect the use of taxpayer $$??. I don't think so.

Could we see listings of money laid out(to whom/and for what), permanent jobs created, documents showing how these projects benefitted the community and property values? = pretty much the rate of success for the tens of millions that we have spent in that area?

just wondering....

projects : "Many cities have vibrant...

Mon, 06 Apr 2015 10:02:32 +0000

Author: squeemy
Subject: 6070
Posted: Apr 06 2015 at 10:02am

"Many cities have vibrant self contained suburbs while the inner city is left behind."

care to elaborate? can you list any from Ohio?

projects : Factguy wrote:Been proven many,...

Mon, 06 Apr 2015 06:18:51 +0000

Author: VietVet
Subject: 6070
Posted: Apr 06 2015 at 6:18am

Factguy wrote:

Been proven many, many times, and shown in many studies, a vibrant city must have a vibrant downtown. City making investment in others whom tell us they are committed to the properties. Worth every dime to lay the foundation for the future.

Nonsense. Many cities have vibrant self contained suburbs while the inner city is left behind. Your statement is only due to your support of the downtown and has no meaning to Middletown's situation as the downtown has been flooded with taxpayer money and has yielding little to nothing as to ROI for the people. It has only enhanced the few who still think it is worth reviving using the current theme of arts and fru fru. I'm telling you, it will never work in this town. Here's a news flash for you......THE MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE AREN'T INTERESTED IN WHAT IS BEING OFFERED DOWNTOWN. Why don't you people understand that?

Reword this....

"City making investment in others whom tell us they are committed to the properties"

to read....

City making investments in others who have never shown they are committed nor prepared to financially take over any properties. Need examples? Rose building.....the Sonshine building and the Manchester (unless we see some kind of progress in the near future) The old Journal building, the old Senior Center, most all of the city purchases from the Thatcher estate including the bank buildings.......all taken over by private development with initial purchase by the city, with the city giving the Manchester away for a buck, placing 350 grand into the Rose building debacle, selling the Barnitz Bank building to Walden who can't afford to fix it up, the old Journal building showing no signs of life after a year or two of "plans" for apartments. NOTHING has come to fruition on any of this talk. The $350,000 taxpayer funded PAC is on and off life support and is unstable at best.

Factguy, based on the historical lack of development on these so-called plans and dreams by private individuals, your stance is mute. What "they tell you as to commitment" has yet to be realized as to outcome. All talk.

Tell us all about how wonderful the downtown is when the dream becomes reality.

projects : Been proven many, many times,...

Sun, 05 Apr 2015 22:45:38 +0000

Author: Factguy
Subject: 6070
Posted: Apr 05 2015 at 10:45pm

Been proven many, many times, and shown in many studies, a vibrant city must have a vibrant downtown. City making investment in others whom tell us they are committed to the properties. Worth every dime to lay the foundation for the future.