The next big thing!

This may be scuttlebutt, as I heard it at one of the local watering holes. But it came from a usually knowledgeable source, who didn’t realize that I was sitting in the next booth.

There was a good bit of noise, and as many of you know, my hearing is not “20/20”. Also, I was NOT trying to eavesdrop. However, here is what I am sure that I overheard:

The City plans to “give” (context?) the former Senior Citizen’s building, as well as other downtown property, to Cincinnati State Technical and Community College, for purposes in addition to the “culinary school“.

Other downtown structures were mentioned during the conversation, but I am not certain of the context. These may or may not have been in conjunction with Cincinnati State, but the entire part of the conversation that I overheard seemed to be about that subject, so I tend to think they were somehow connected.

There was a price paid for my clandestine activity. Since I was not giving full attention to the conversation at OUR table, I must have uttered one too many absent-minded “uh-huh” and somehow agreed to pick up the tab!!! 

Now some of you may think that this will be a good thing (I’m talking about Cinci State, not my picking up the tab--me picking up the tab is always a good thing!!! ) others may not be so sure, but if I’m not mistaken didn’t the Middletown Art Center (MAC) have their eye on that former Senior Center building??? Bad luck for them!!! Oh well, we have Pendelton. We don’t need MAC so much anymore, do we???

Well, I have thought about it, and this city’s idea of a “forgivable loan” is in no way a better position for the city to be in than the deal offered to Armco.

In the case of Armco, if Armco failed to live up to their end of the bargain, the city was in a position to seize all assets, sue their pants off, and at least attempt to recoup their investment.

In the case of PAC, the “forgivable loan” is a “loan” in name only. There are no terms or requirements for “repaying” the loan EVER, under ANY circumstances!!! (Yes, I have read the contract documents included in the workbook and made part of the legislation.) The “loan” is $200,000 that Verdin gets to use, in addition to the money already spent by the city, to upgrade, remodel and outfit the property as he sees fit. All PAC has to do is to “remain in operation” for ten years and not only is the “loan” forgiven, but also Verdin gets free, clear title to 7 N. Broad St. There is no definition of “remain in operation”. If PAC “ceases operation” during the ten years, the property reverts to the City, after Verdin has 30 days to clear out everything of value and “vacate the premises”!!! There are absolutely NO TERMS for payments of ANY KIND under ANY CIRCUMSTANCES!!!

Referring to this arrangement as a “loan” is akin to referring to the Grand Canyon as a “ditch”!!!

Verdin either sticks around and ends up owning the property, including the taxpayer-financed improvements, or he washes his hands and walks away whenever he feels like it.

PAC can “remain in operation” without ever having even ONE employee, or the city seeing even one red cent of tax revenue!!! All he need do is lease out a few “studios” to “artists” who can then choose to sell their wares (or not) WHEREVER they care to sell them.

As far as the “proven track record of success”, I believe that I wrote about the differences between Rising Sun (a rural location with two casinos that bring in thousands of visitors EVERY DAY with HUNDREDS of THOUSANDS of dollars of disposable income) and the PAC Cincinnati location (an area which also has THOUSANDS of visitors, commuters, shoppers, lawyers, etc. EVERY DAY and is within a short distance of DOZENS of other art galleries, art schools, and the like, etc.) before, so I won't bore the regulars by repeating. Comparing these two locations with Middletown is simply NOT apples-to-apples.

The most apropos comparison is Ashland, KY. Do you know anyone who has actually BEEN to PAC, Ashland??? I have…about two years ago…and I just did NOT see all of the development that others speak of, and goodness knows that, after PAC closed on that Friday evening, my wife and I desperately looked for somewhere to dine and perhaps have a few drinks. We gave up, settled for fast food, and went back to our motel. I might note that we had no trouble finding a park within fifty feet of PAC’s front door that Friday evening, and I didn’t even take the “handicapped” spot, though I am able to legally use one.

Voice of Reason wrote: Mike, I will grant your points about the suspect nature of the loan. But it's $200K--I would ague that it's not that bad a deal for the city. And if we elect leaders who are smart enough to hold PAC's feet to the fire about remaining in operation then I think it's worth a shot to bring them to town. We will better know if it was worth it in about 5-10 years.

First, let’s be real and stop throwing around the word “loan”!!! This is NOT a “loan” by any stretch of the imagination. There are no terms for city leaders, smart or stupid, to hold Pac’s “feet to the fire” over. They either stick around and keep a few studios rented, or they pick the place clean an walk away whenever they so desire. In NO EVENT are they EVER required by ANY terms to repay anything. And it is NOT just the $200,000. There has also been an unreported amount spent before that just preparing for the remodeling (cleaning, mold remediation, etc., which I have heard totaled a 6-figure number, but cannot verify.) There is also a matter of nearly $200,000 in back property taxes that must be paid before the city can provide clear title.

Voice of Reason wrote: But back to my next question--what are your thoughts on Cincy State? Is this fundamentally different than PAC? If so, why? If not, why oppose PAC but not Cincy State?

However, this IS “fundamentally different than PAC”!!! CSTCC is a public college under the authority of the Ohio Board of Regents. Pendleton Art Center is a private company. If I have to explain this fundamental difference (and the use of public funds in the support of the two) to you, there is no use continuing. Was this intended as a “trick question”???

Voice of Reason wrote: I am beginning to think that you avoid answering the difficult questions, questions which challenge your reasoning and assumptions...a shame that would be if someone as clearly passionate as you are won't reply to questions that aren't easy to answer.

YOU, for example, chose NOT to consider the subject of recall until you know who will be running for the recalled seat. Others think that the decision “to recall or not to recall” is the first step. I, personally, do not think that waiting for a little more information on the Cincy State matter is ducking the question by any stretch of the imagination. Heck, I may end up being completely against it, or I may end up donating to the cause. It may depend upon how badly City Hall screws up a good thing. Will they insist on putting some of their “FOCs” (Friends Of City hall) in a position to profit??? Who knows???

From a Middletown Journal story updated 11:48 PM Friday, October 29, 2010:

“City Council will consider legislation to purchase two of those properties — the city already owns the senior center — as well as the Sonshine Products, former First National Bank and Bank One buildings and the lot at 105 Main St.”

So the question remains: How much will it cost the cash-strapped citizens of Middletown to acquire these properties and prepare them for Cincy State???

Of course I agree with the general idea of another institution of higher learning in our city, but we have not heard any details.

Criticize me and call me a “naysayer” if you’d like, but “cheerleading” for this venture while having no idea of the price tag is a questionable stance at best.