Comments on: Cleveland’s convention kabuki

By: John Polk

John Polk — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 02:59:55 +0000

I have no doubt the psychodrama isn’t over till the holes are dug…and this being Cleveland, probably not then…But at least things are moving…

Now I read that the MMPI deal may provide the company with an opt-out in the event that, come August, they think it can’t practically be done…Apparently the company had the radical notion to gauge the market need for a medical mart-type facility…which if you’re a smart company (and on the hook for over-runs)it’d sort of be nice to know…and given the credibility issues which may arise regarding existing research, they’d probably want to do the analysis themselves…

By: George Nemeth

George Nemeth — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 16:31:55 +0000

If Sam Miller isn’t happy, someone’s campaign won’t get funded.

By: anastasia

anastasia — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 16:03:46 +0000

So if Sam Miller’s NOT happy, then what does that mean, George? I still can’t shake the feeling that this sudden announcement is another move in a game whose rules we’re not privy to, even though we will be paying for it forever.

By: George Nemeth

George Nemeth — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:45:43 +0000

I had breakfast with a colleague Friday, whose question was “Is Sam Miller happy with the job the commissioners have been doing?” Nobody’s asked them that I know of.

By: J Anderle

J Anderle — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:27:45 +0000

Just curious. I don’t normally participate but this Medical Mart process is really stunning…Is there a running tab somewhere on the amount of money spent on consultants, etc. to figure out where to put this thing. It would be interesting, but probably depressing, to graph the last 20 years of high level consulting and spending.

By: Ed Morrison

Ed Morrison — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 13:54:43 +0000

John, George, Jill:

If history is any guide, this deal is not done…yet. Hagan seems to have all the elements in place: a project with a budget of about $400 million; a developer, tax revenue to fund the project; and one additional vote on the Commission.

In the past, though, when faced with the game going against them, Sam and Albert simply threw the game board in the air and yelled “Do over!”. These folks, sadly, demonstrate a meanness close to madness. I expect some more moves.

By: Jill

Jill — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 03:43:39 +0000

For me, the most infuriating part of all this is how most if not all of us commenting and writing and trying to keep track of the process, such as it is, did or could have told others, back in July 2007, that this is PRECISELY how it would go down as far as who is zooming who. That lack of surprise for this relationship/communication silliness is what really, really angers me.

And the fact that it so does not have to be this way! Just does not.

By: John Polk

John Polk — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 01:25:36 +0000

At least no one can say any longer that the siting decision hasn’t been made. The Commissioners should be commended for taking action to get the project moving. They made their decision in the face of enormous pressure, and if the economics of the MMPI study hold water (bet they do), supported by a compelling economic advantage of one site over another. Smart people can (and will) remain intensely skeptical about both the project and the process, and there’s plenty of soap opera ahead. But the easy (and politically expedient) thing to do would have been to continue to dither, but the Commissioners chose to DO something.

By: George Nemeth

George Nemeth — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 18:30:41 +0000

It’s utterly embarrassing that the decision to go with the existing site took as long as it did. Instead of spending all that time jacking around in front of each other and the media, someone should have rolled up their sleeves and went to work. The thing would have been half way done by now.

By: Ed Morrison

Ed Morrison — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 13:43:42 +0000

lmcshane: Ed, did you mean that “you COULDN’T find public process with a two-ton magnet?”

Thanks! Corrected.

This latest move leaves me scratching my head. How did Forest City suddenly find itself flung outside the inner circle when, just earlier this week, project mouthpiece the Plain Dealer was lining up a flack like Bruce Harris to spout the party line that the project absolutely, positively must be built at Tower City?

You can analyze this decision from a number of different perspectives. Perhaps the one most valuable is ethnicity. These factors have driven urban politics since the rise of urban machines starting in the 1870s.

A lot of this has to do with who controls the neighborhood. On one side you have Irish Catholics. On the other side, Russian Jews. The two groups don’t mix very well. MMPI, I think, just decided they did not want to do business with Forest City. Or, you can see this on a personal level as Tim Hagan turning his back on Sam and Albert. In some ways, it’s as simple as that.

I don’t feel like any groundwork has been done on whether there is even a place for such a project anymore, let alone a cost-benefit study or a site selection study.

This is the core problem. A solid civic process needs to be built on facts. There is no solid basis of fact underlying this project.

The network approach to economic development — Open Source Economic Development — includes physical development as one dimension of investment. (In this model there are five dimensions on which to focus.)

Read more about Open Source Economic Development: http://snurl.com/aozqh

Carole Cohen:

Maybe they think transparency is a buzz word.

If they do, they’re toast.