Tuesday, September 15, 2009

I LOVE NEW ALBANY PART II

The City Plan Commission held their regular meeting tonight. It was a full house in the third floor assembly room.

The atmosphere was cheerful and hopeful, personally I can't quit smiling. The subject of my glee is Docket A-02-09. Basically "Scribner Place II: Path to Progress".

Mr. Tipperman, an Architect, used two full color illustrations on large boards to show developers and the public what could happen in this area just west of Scribner Place to East 6th St. There are different proposals for each block and this is an example, and it is very interesting and exciting.
  • Just west of the "Y" will be a recreation area, possibly a water park.
  • East of the "Y" a developer is interested in a two block area for a parking garage, plaza and high rise condos.
  • In the area of East Third and Bank another developer is interested in mixed use development including retail space and condos.
  • Another developer is interested in installing a light rail system connecting New Albany to Clarksville, Jeffersonville, and even Louisville.
Another speaker, Mr. Putney (sp) is working with Jack Bobo on a three level parking garage, which will be mostly underground. On top will be a plaza containing office space and resturaunts of all types and menus. The prices will vary from the simple fast food to elegent dining. Or people could just walk around all of the levels and terraces and not spend a dime.

The residential area will have units ranging in size from approx. 600 sf to 5,000 sf. Each unit will have a patio or a deck. The total residential area will be from 160,000 sf to over 200,000 sf. with the commercial property consisting of around 120,000 sf. The first and possibly second levels will be office space and the upper levels will be residential.

Developer Mike Kopp spoke of how New Albany is flourishing, even in these tough times. He noted that 50 businesses have opened in the last 21 months bring in $7,000,000 in purchase money and $3,000,000 in renovations. He went on to say that people want to live here, and invest here.

Gina Coyle expressed concern over enviromental issues and the cost of cleaning the brownfield, and the sewer and sanitaion concerns. Scott Wood said that all of these concerns are being taken care of and keeping the area "green" is a top priority and every effort is being taken to save the enviroment.

This will take a large investment from the city, ie. the taxpayers. Our part will be $12,000,000 for the parking garage and part of the plaza. But private investors have already pledged $70,000,000 to this project. These people are serious.

Mr. Carl Malysz asked me if I was excited and happy. My first reaction was that we need to put Louisville to shame. Let's really make New Albany what is was always meant to be, the REAL sunny side of the river.

82 comments:

The New Albanian said...

Bravo. Well said.

RememberCharlemagne said...

Is there any guarantees that the developers will invest said amount?

If not what would happen if New Albany bonds out 12 million and only a fraction of the private money is invested?

Would it ruin N. A.?

shirley baird said...

Dear remembercharlemangne,

Of course nothing is guaranteed. I don't know Jack Bobo, who pledged $30,000,000 but I have met Carl Holliday and Steve Goodman on several occasions and I believe they are sincere. They have invested a lot into New Albany and they have pledged another $40,000,000.

These are local people so I don't think they will be going anywhere anytime soon.

The New Albanian said...

"Would it ruin N. A.?"

No more so than the previous 30 years of Blue Dog-motivated, not exactly "benign" neglect.

dan chandler said...

They way these things usually are done is that no one breaks ground until everyone is committed.

If you use TIF from the stuff on top of the garage to finance the garage, you naturally want to make sure the stuff on top of the garage is completed in a timely manner.

Construction would not begin on the garage until all contractors had put in their bids, the contractors had been bonded, and the lender had signed an irrevocable agreement to lend the money to the developers, and the developers had signed a construction agreement to build the thing. obviously it takes a while for all that to be put in place but it can be done in a way that ensures the city will not be left holding the bag.

$70M development, assuming half taxed at 1% and half taxed at 3%, would generate additional tax revenue of $1.4M/year, enough to service debt on say a $12 TIF bond, without assuming fee revenue from parking.

Iamhoosier said...

Shrirley,
One of the things that I have always admired about you, is your attitude. We may not always agree on details but your "can do" attitude is what seperates you from the pack. It's not that fake kind of "can do" either. You realize problems exist but you don't sit around moaning, "Oh, woe is me".

To paraphrase a quote that has been recently been repeated, you see things as they could be and ask why not.

Thanks for the excellent report.

Mark

RememberCharlemagne said...

“There are areas such as the use of local labor, prevailing wage and a threshold of commitment by the developers of this project,” says Majority Leader Rick Blackwell (D-12).

Metro Council Center City Project
Thursday October 9, 2008

I think the Council’s decision for a commitment by Cordish was reasonable before they made a public investment to buy property for the expansion of 4th Street Live.

Cordish had a proven track record of development and when asked for a contractual commitment they baulked.

The council protected taxpayers by demanding a guarantee from the developers. It would be wise if New Albany did the same.

My concern is that New Albany will be left holding the bag when everyone else doesn’t live up to their end of the deal.

I don’t care if the development will be floating in air above the garage but what if a fraction of the 70 million is invested then New Albany would be in trouble. Birmingham AL experienced this when it over leveraged itself. New Albany can’t afford to make the same mistake.

This is not the same as neglect. This bond issue comes with repercussions. The city may fall apart from neglect but it will not owe anyone money making it even harder to progress.

Iamhoosier said...

You know, caution is a good thing. I'm all for it and I would think that most people are. I tend to be somwhat fiscally conservative myself.

However, expecting "guarantees" at this stage of the plan(s) is paranoia. I'll join the naysayers if something isn't a little firmer when it comes to time sign on the dotted line.

RememberCharlemagne said...

I agree

shirley baird said...

Mark,

Thank you for your kind words. People may think that I want this project to be done because I have nothing to lose. (Except a few tax dollars I guess).

That is true but if I had the money to invest I certainly would.

Shirley

Christopher D said...

This sounds wonderful! Thanks for this write up

The New Albanian said...

Shirley

You're taking a sensible position of leadership on this matter, and that, not money, constitutes your investment.

R

dan chandler said...

I don't think anyone's planning a "if you build it, they will come" type gamble that would risk putting the taxpayer on the hook for the whole deal.

Let's keep in mind that so far no one has asked for a financial commitment from the city. When a proposal is made, there will be time to evaluate it.

Iamhoosier said...

There is a "cost" to all of us if NA doesn't try some things(along with looking them over with a cautious eye).

If we follow those, whose only "plan" is to cut, there will be a definite cost. Sure, maybe we can save a little on taxes and fees in the short run but the true cost will be much higher in the end. Lower property values is a cost. Higher crime is a cost. More pot holes are even a cost(right, Shirley?) More business leaving or not coming at all due to lack of infrastructure is a cost.

We all risking something.

Iamhoosier said...

Please forgive my grammar and spelling. Leaving out words, adding words...

Anonymous said...

Shirley,
How much are you prepared to pay with YOUR increased property taxes?

Meatbe said...

Thanks, Shirley, for an excellent report. Your enthusiasm and optimism are fetching. These are exciting times in N.A.

dan chandler said...

How much are you prepared to pay with YOUR increased property taxes?

No property tax increase has been proposed. Also, no one has said that property taxes must be increased to fund this. Talking about tax increases is talking about something other than this development plan.

Anonymous said...

No property tax increase has been proposed.!

Shirley states our part will be $12,000,000 for the parking garage and part of the plaza.Will the city do a bond? Or will the city use TIF or edit money or will they refinance bonds or will they raise our property taxes? If any project of this magnitude is brought before our council it usually means it is going to cost us taxpayers. If the developers and the investors want a parking garage and a plaza they should use their own money not ours.

dan chandler said...

Again, a plan has not been proposed. However, I suspect that when a financing plan is unveiled, it will do nothing to take existing TIF funds from existing TIF projects. The $70M private investment brings in new taxpayers and new tax money. The difference between what is paid now on the land and what would be paid in taxes on the land plus the $70M investment (the “increment”) would be new TIF money to fund new TIF bonds. Nowhere is it written that a tax increase would necessarily result from this garage. It’s possible that the new tax revenue captured by the TIF would be more than enough to pay for the garage PLUS leaving a surplus for additional infrastructure improvements that would be otherwise been paid from the general fund. Again, that’s speculation, but it’s possible. Let’s wait and see what type of plan is proposed.

Iamhoosier said...

And some of us taxpayers actually can see farther than the tip of our own nose. Some of us taxpayers also understand the concept of investment.

Being a taxpayer does not admit you to an exclusive club.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Chandler, do you have a vested interest in this project?

If the next step coming before the council, then they are wanting monies appropriate. Am I understanding this correctly?

Anonymous said...

Mark maybe some of us look at a much bigger picture.

"Being a tax payer does not admit you to an exclusive club."

If EDIT and TIF Funds are used, I deserve the gold key to the exclusive club, just like every other citizen in New Albany..

The New Albanian said...

My tax monies have been used for years to help finance exurban sprawl, and I'm mad as hell. It needs to stop. I have no identity apart from that of paying taxes, and as such, I want to stop the use of my taxes for anything I'm opposed to, just because I can. Like my big ol' dog, Blue, who currently is being used by Steve "The Great Abstainer" Price to guard his rental couches.

Signed, a known entity

Iamhoosier said...

I pay taxes, too. It's not an exclusive club.

What big picture are you looking at? Not the same big picture that a lot of us taxpayers are looking at.

dan chandler said...

Mr. Chandler, do you have a vested interest in this project?

First, this is not a relevant question. Facts are facts; if no one is asking for money, then no one is asking for money irrespective of who has a financial interest. Vested interests don't change facts.

Second, right now, I have absolutely no financial interest in this project other than owning my primary residence several blocks further down Main St. Now if one of the developers wants to hire a good real estate attorney, I'll be happy to join the crew, but so far, no one has asked me to sign up.

Third, it doesn't matter whether or not I will benefit from this. Someone will financially benefit from this, I hope. No developer is going to build anything unless there's a financial gain to the developer. If you kill every project where someone benefits, then you kill every project. We shouldn't be asking whether a developer will make money; we definitely should be asking if this is good for the city. It is possible that this is good for BOTH the developer AND the city.

Anyone who says the financing required to impliment the garage element of the plan is bad for the city is speaking from ignorance because, if for no other reason, we don't yet know how the garage will be financed. There are very bad ways to finance this. There also are ways to finance this without taking money from other people or other funds.

Christopher D said...

This is an investment in our city.
This is an investment in securing a BETTER city for future generations.
For too long we have deferred responsibility to get things done to the next generations.
If we have to use bonds, EDIT, TIF, whatever to achieve this goal, then so be it.
The long term benefits outweigh the negative impacts if we, the citizenry, were to see a couple bucks a month increase.
Further investments by others to relocate, or start businesses downtown, people wanting to move into lofts downtown, all of this will increase property values, which will benefit everyone.
Look at Clarksville Veterans parkway, there were those who said it would be failure and an eyesore. Look at the economic growth there, the increased tax base, the jobs created!
Same can be said of Jeff's riverfront.
We need to be able to say the same for our riverfront area.

Everyone should get on board with this and support it, everyone stands to benefit from new jobs, new venues, more money being made and spent locally, increased business for the Main Street B&B's, and capturing some of those dollars that used to drive right through town and get dumped in a slot machine, paying for roads, schools, police, fire, etc. in Harrison County.



** as a side note, this weeks new patient count at the health center, an unprecedented 67. That amount unsually represents two or three weeks! In the last 30 business days we have "lost" a single patient to gaining insurance.

RememberCharlemagne said...

If the Land Use plan as presented last night is approved by the council can there be any major changes to it after the fact?

What if something unforeseen happens and a less ambitious development without city money is needed? Does passing the Land Use plan lock that location up from alternative plans?

Iamhoosier said...

Good question, Remcha. Why don't you ask Steve Price and get back to us?

dan chandler said...

Jeff, which has half our population, is shooting for $120M hotel/convention center. Newport, Kentucky, which is smaller than Jeff, did their aquarium in addition to being the smallest city in the nation to complete a HOPE VI project. Louisville’s Museum Plaza, if and when it takes off, will have $90M in public sector investment, including new roads, park and moving the flood wall.

To answer the question, yes, a comprehensive plan can be changed, as we’re seeing now. But I don’t think a parking garage is too high a target. I’m not interested in setting low goals.

Jeff Gillenwater said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

Shirley

In your posting you mention water park. Where, why and how much.

shirley baird said...

The water park was briefly mentioned as one of the options for the recreation area. This is next to the YMCA to the west.

There was no mention of cost or who would build on this area.

RememberCharlemagne said...

Newport, Kentucky, which is smaller than Jeff, did their aquarium in addition to being the smallest city in the nation to complete a HOPE VI project

If you want to compare New Port on the Levee with this development we should add that New Port received a tax break in July to allow 2.5-3.0 million to be reinvested because things where not going well. The Imax has closed and the talk of a hotel is not happening. New Port on the Levee was a 210 million dollar investment. New Albany is not directly North of Louisville the way New Port is South of Cincinnati. The March meeting was nice but New Albany has limited similarities to New Port. If you want to compare Jeff and New Port they are a little closer.
What were some of the similarities that Mr. Yoder gave?

You are right; we need to pursue a Hope IV “TYPE” redevelopment to help support any new or old business.

I am not trying to be pessimistic but New Albany does not have the greatest foundation to build off of and I am concerned if we start over reaching in the recession we will not be able to support such developments giving the impression that New Albany is a place you do not want to invest into.
Let us not compare Museum Plaza for posterity sake

To end positively the development would be great for New Albany and I support it.

dan chandler said...

To be clear, I was not speaking to the specific financing mechanisms used in Jeff, or Louisville, or Newport. Nor was a speaking to the types of projects they have done.

I mentioned Jeff, Louisville and Newport solely to discuss project scale.

Is this too big, too ambitious for little, old New Albany to pull off? Absolutely not!

dan chandler said...

I agree with Shirley's assessment of the water park reference.

Again, this is only a land use document. Under the proposed riverfront plan, about a block of land between the YMCA and I-65 would be designated to some day become a "recreational" use. There's no set project for what "recreational" might be. One idea mentioned last night by Timperman was a water park. I know the administration had discussed this site earlier for a new community swimming pool to replace what we have now. That's just one idea. While he did not elaborate, Mr. Timperman did say that he had drawings of several different recreational uses for that site, including several non-pool, non-water park uses.

RememberCharlemagne said...

Dan, you made mention of Bedford, IN buying property and rehabbing them what did you have in mind for New Albany?

dan chandler said...

I mentioned Bedford? Can you refresh my memory?

RememberCharlemagne said...

You didn't mention Bedford on this site. If my memory is correct you talked about Bedford's UEZ buying historic property and rehabbing it or them. You said it work good for Bedford etc. Then went on and said something about buying rental property on Main Street from a certain named landlord or company.

It has been awhile ago but no one fallowed up on your commment.

Anonymous said...

you attend last nights Council meeting, Shirley? Care to post the happenings.

shirley baird said...

I was not able to attend last night's council meeting. If anyone did attend, please comment on the happenings.

dan chandler said...

Ah yes.

Unfortunately, I don’t have too many details in Bedford’s transaction.

A few months ago, I took a tour of downtown Bedford. As with any small town, the boards of the economic development group, the historic preservation folks, and the downtown business boosters overlap. I’m not sure which of these groups sponsored this particular tour, but the tour guy was pretty much involved in everything.

I don’t know the age of the building restored by their UEA. It may or may not have met the tax code’s definition of historic (placed into service during 1936 or before). Also, I’m not sure how deep the building was but you could tell it was large, possible 10,000 square feet or more.

The point I took was this. This extremely visible building, on Bedford’s main square across the street from the courthouse, was an eyesore. At the time, it must not have been economical for a purely profit motivated investor to purchase, rehab and lease the building, else, presumably someone already would have purchased it. Bedford’s UEA took ownership of the building, restored it, and leased it out. I don’t know if the UEA still owns it today, however, the building looked great. If the many people flowing in and out of the building was any indication, there was no shortage of tenants in the building.

There are many good things UEAs can do. There is no requirement that a UEA restore a building such as this, but it clearly is within their mandate. Our UEA has done many good things but to date has not tackled a big, ambitious focus on one building like they did in Bedford.

Our UEZ has a few strategically located buildings that remain eyesores. While rising property values might cause the numbers to make sense to a private, profit motivated investor in the future, the fact that these eyesores sit there year after year is evidence that the numbers don’t make sense yet. Maybe that’s a place our UEA can help. It might not be through acquisition of the building. It might be through providing engineering studies, environmental analysis and surveys necessary to help prospective owners decide what it will take to place these buildings back into service.

I’ve let this be known before: I believe our UEA’s façade grant program can be improved. The $2500 match grants work as much to subsidize work that would otherwise occur than to spur work that would not otherwise occur. My suggestion to Mike Ladd and some of his board members, was to take half of the existing façade grant money, and instead of giving it out in say a dozen $2500 increments, drop $30,000 on one building. Make it a requirement that the grant be used on a historic building doing a “certified rehabilitation” eligible for the 20% federal tax credit. As long as the grant use restrictions are worded correctly, the work done with the $30,000 UEA money would qualify for the $20 federal historic tax credit. Therefore, the building owner would get $100,000 in improvements for a mere $50,000 investment ($50K cash + $30K UEA + $20K Credit). The Historic Preservation Commission would be glad to help review applications to see which would be eligible for the federal tax credits and which would best improve the appearance of the zone.

That helps our worse eyesores. That thinks big. That helps make deals happen that would not otherwise happen.

B.W. Smith said...

I am impressed with the sanity of this thread. Thanks for the relevant information and civil exchange.

New Albany does not have the greatest foundation to build off of

Rem - I read you to mean that the existing economic base in the city may not be large enough or of the right quality to self-support a project? I agree that's a valid concern to be addressed by the financing equation and scope of the project. I don't think you are saying it is an excuse to scrap the idea.

What you say underscores the need for the project itself to increase our curb appeal to individuals and businesses that improve the economic base. It should be well-designed, attractive, and add to the uniqueness of the city. I think the YMCA building does this well.

Anonymous said...

Being all for helping our illustrious city to succeed regarding new investments, you still may wish to do a background check on those involved promising certain $$$$. I am not being paranoid, but some of us know some things others may not.

And, no, I do not wish to do felony background checks for you as they have already been done. A good person and business owner has already been bitten by same.

These are not the Cordish people; we could only wish for that type of money.

But, it SOUNDS GOOD! Be careful, though.

I am not being a naysayer, or being paranoid. I wish for nothing but success for New Albany's endeavors. You may think you know someone and they seem nice but that doesn't necessarily mean they are.

A Friend To The Person Who Found Out The Hard Way.

Thank you, Shirley, for keeping us updated.

Anonymous said...

So true.

Iamhoosier said...

You know, I heard from someone, who heard it from the sister of his first cousin on her mother's side. They also said that he has been seen over there and around that place behind the place with the sign. He said to go up one block and turn left. Go one more block and turn left again. Another block and turn left. After another block, again turn left. It's over on the left. Or maybe it was on the right. Don't ask me to do it again, as I'm tired from running around in circles.

It's so true, it's sad.

RememberCharlemagne said...

Dan, what building did you have in mind on Main St? You made mention of rental property.

Could the $30,000 qualify to rehabbing an apartment back to single family use?

RememberCharlemagne said...

Brandon, I agree. I am always more critical of something that I support.

dan chandler said...

RemCha, currently the UEA is not giving facade grants, from what I hear. Please check with Mike Ladd for details. The facade grants they have given in the past had been $2500 reimbursement of $5000 put in by property owner.

If you use the 20% historic rehabilitation tax credit, there are hoops through which one must jump. First, the property must either be on the national register at time rehab completed OR a "contributing building" in a national historic district. That's the main advantage of New Albany's national district, it makes additional money available for big rehabs. Any non-contributing building built before 1936 will qualify for the 10% federal tax credit, except you cannot use the 10% on residential/rental property. You can use the 20% on residential/rental property, however, you must do a "certified rehabilitation" of the exterior, as approved by the state architect, per US department of the interior guidelines. The certification only applies to what is done on the outside, however, the 20% tax credit applies to all rehab work done, inside and out. Upgrading HVAC, electric, plumbing, roof, etc. all qualify. That turns a $100K job into a $80K job. Another hoop is that you cannot sell the property for five years after rehab is complete. It works for rentals, but not for flips.

dan chandler said...

Did I have a building in mind for the UEA? Well, not one building, but there are some candidates which, from an initial impression, seem worth exploration. Shrader Stables, Tabernacle, William Allen's three building...Coyle Dodge? There are legal issues that must be worked out on the tax side for government owned properties, but there are ways around most issues if the numbers make enough sense.

For grant money to qualify as the taxpayer's money for the 20% HTC, the taxpayer/owner must have sufficient control over the use of the funds. If the grant spells out where ever last drop of paint must go, leaving no discretion for the tax payer, those funds will not qualify for 20% credit. I suspect that if a UEA grant just said "fix up this building," then that taxpayer would exercise sufficient control over the money to have the credit match over the grant, thus bringing $30,000/0.8 to the table (sorry, no calculator handy...is that $37,500?). I think that would be sufficient control, but I'd want to do a little more research first to see what the threshold is as I'm not sure courts have really parsed that issue in depth. Would be easy enough to research if the UEA board were interested.

RememberCharlemagne said...

Thanks, I am aware of the hurdles one must go through for the 20% tax credit and I have come to understand that seeking Federal help comes with too many restrictions.
That is why I think what you are asking and getting at with the UEA is a good idea.
It can also be expanded to make a larger impact.

RememberCharlemagne said...

"What you say underscores the need for the project itself to increase our curb appeal to individuals and businesses that improve the economic base. It should be well-designed, attractive, and add to the uniqueness of the city. I think the YMCA building does this well."

I would like to expand what Brandon is saying.

This is where I begin to diverge from the main direction of redeveloping New Albany is at. There needs to be more of a two prong approach. Not a fifty-fifty but one that focuses a greater emphasis toward the "foundation” or the neighborhoods. I cannot see how developers will want to invest into areas of a city with a 45% poverty rate. I question the rationale of this promise of 70 million knowing that the current socio-economic base cannot support it. I can fathom that the 70 million might be enough change to support itself.

B.W. Smith said...

@remcha - I think you will find a lot of agreement about the need for socio-economic and cultural change in the city. I know a lot of people butted heads with you about the street conversion issue, but I think those same people and most of the people who care about the future of the city are roughly on the same page about the need to do whatever we can to increase our human capital and overall socio-economic level. It's sounds elitist (as someone else yelled at me about on another blog), but it doesn't have to be.

I also agree with the need to rethink our status as the public housing capital of the USA, but that's a bit more complex of an issue and I don't want to derail the thread.

Anonymous said...

One question everyone is missing or ignoring. How are we going to pay $12 million for a NEW parking garage?

Anonymous said...

"One question everyone is missing or ignoring. How are we going to pay $12 million for a NEW parking garage?"

This question was not ignored. A possible scenario for payment was given above.

Anonymous said...

Where? I did not see it.

Anonymous said...

September 16, 2009 8:41 AM

$70M development, assuming half taxed at 1% and half taxed at 3%, would generate additional tax revenue of $1.4M/year, enough to service debt on say a $12 TIF bond, without assuming fee revenue from parking.

Anonymous said...

Latest Slop from FPS:



DO YOU CITY TAX PAYERS MAKE THESE KIND OF SALARIES?

Thursday the council approved 8-1 on second reading a one-time bonus for non-bargaining city employees.

Why in the "HELL" did they vote...Yes?

The salary is listed bi-weekly. In order to see the weekly salary, divide the numbers list below by 2.

In order to see the annual salary, multiply the figures listed times 26.

Read what these non-union employees make, then tell us why they deserve this bonus:

Mayor's Office: Bi-Weekly
Secretary.....$1174.55
Controller's Office: Bi-Weekly
Controller/Human Resources....$1481.65
Deputy Controller....$1273.15
Data Entry (Payroll).....$1028.60

.....


Let's just take these first four. The highest is $1481.65 every two weeks. That is $38,522.90 per year. This is LESS than the mean income for the Louisville/Southern Indiana statistical area, which has a mean annual salary of $38,920.

YES, APPROXIMATELY HALF OF THE READERS DO MAKE THESE KINDS OF SALARIES. GET OVER IT, FOS. IF YOU WANT TO HIRE GOOD PEOPLE, YOU HAVE TO PAY THEM.

http://www.bls.gov/oes/2008/may/oes_31140.htm

FederalFarmer said...

Does anyone remember the scene in "Boyz'n the Hood" where Lawrence Fishburn's character talks to the young black youth standing on the street corner in regards as to how white people buy up poor black neighborhood homes, fix up the area, and then turn it into a white neighborhood?

Anonymous said...

5:18 you need to check your facts.

Anonymous said...

"5:18 you need to check your facts."

Which part is not a fact?

Someone said payment had not been discussed. It had.

Anonymous said...

"Does anyone remember the scene in "Boyz'n the Hood"...."

Are you worried about New Albany's black neighborhoods on the West End and Downtown?

Christopher D said...

to 1:51
These figures that FOS posted are about in line with salaries we pay for similar positions in a non-profit company, which pay and reimbursements are based loosely on government pay scales.

Would FOS be so quick to bash this if they still had a government position?

The New Albanian said...

probably none of this would be happening if Erika still had a government position.

But think of the inadvertent entertainment we'd all be missing.

B.W. Smith said...

Does anyone remember the scene in "Boyz'n the Hood" where Lawrence Fishburn's character talks to the young black youth standing on the street corner in regards as to how white people buy up poor black neighborhood homes, fix up the area, and then turn it into a white neighborhood?

Yes and point taken, but because of the diversity of our housing stock (mansions next to shotguns), I don't see any neighborhoods in the urban core becoming any more gentrified or lily white than they already are.

We are actually well positioned to have a stable mix of people. The key is stability...and you can't have that with massive poverty and slum lord rentals concentrated in a small area.

Anonymous said...

I think Coffey, Price and their landlord buddies want to keep home prices cheap as possible so they can buy as many slum rentals as possible. Prove me wrong, I dare you. Coffey and Price have an economic incentive to keep our hometown shitty. Once the tenants start to get the idea that not everything in New Albany has to be a shithole, they'll start demanding landlords to fix up their buildings. This is reflected in how Price and Coffey vote.

Anonymous said...

Would Erica be willing to share what her salary was when she had a government job? Did she do anything other than make illegal copies of files?

I suspect Erica volunteered her time when she worked in government. She's too good a person to take money for working 40 hours a week.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Christopher D said...

"I think Coffey, Price and their landlord buddies want to keep home prices cheap as possible so they can buy as many slum rentals as possible. Prove me wrong, I dare you. Coffey and Price have an economic incentive to keep our hometown shitty. Once the tenants start to get the idea that not everything in New Albany has to be a shithole, they'll start demanding landlords to fix up their buildings. This is reflected in how Price and Coffey vote."

Coffey and Price have a CIVIC DUTY to take it upon themselves as elected officials to see that this is done anyway.
Anything less than demanding minimun code standards are enforced is negligent.
From their own code of ordinances in the purpose the Building code:

"§ 150.003 PURPOSE.
The purpose of this subchapter is to provide minimum standards for the protection of life, limb, health, environment, public safety and welfare and for the conservation of energy in the design and construction of buildings and structures.

(Ord. G-69-351, passed - -1969; Ord. G-85-67, passed 6-3-1985)"

It falls on our city leaders to ENSURE that there are no "shitty" structures in this city. In this aspect they have collectively failed.
The ones who tried to make progress were shot down by Coffey.

Put that in your book FOS...

Anonymous said...

Coffey on the redevelopment commission also had a duty to, what else, cause redevelopment.

He whines about using $137,000 per year in EDIT funds (about $2 million total) to get the YMCA, which leveraged a total of about $28 million from Caesars, EPA grants, and a private donations.

If Coffey had a better idea for using $2 million in EDIT, I’d love to hear it. I thought $30 million total investment from $2 million from EDIT was a pretty darn good use of the money. I don’t recall Coffey saying he had a better idea for how the $2 million could be used to fulfill the redeveolopment commission’s goals.

Anonymous said...

"5:18 you need to check your facts."

We are still waiting. Let us which part is not, or could not be, fact.

(Maybe s/he cannot answer because she's too busy debating Roger on healthcare).

Still waiting.

RememberCharlemagne said...

I don't think the Boyz in the Hood analogy applies at all for New Albany.

Question

Dan or anyone, what other local grants are you aware of that could be pooled with a UEA grant?

Christopher D said...

There are hundreds of grants out there that could be had.
Federal, state, private.
Gonder has a good bill in looking for a full time grant writer.
Thats how the clinics operate, and there is untold millions out there just waiting for someone with the patients to sort through the red tape to get them.
It sucks, its hard, but it can be done.

FederalFarmer said...

I just asked if anyone had seen the movie. There are not too many parallels between south central Los Angles and New Albany. I was not implying that taking people out of New Albany is racially motivated.

Just wanted know if anyone had seen the movie.

Anonymous said...

Dunno about Coffey's rentals (if any), but do know Price's are in the correct rental price for the area of town they are in (all the CDBG monies spent in other locations). Simply ask the Rear Market area and Dewey Street.

Boy, it must be easy to pick on Steve Price...maybe because he won't pick a fight back with you?

Get a life.

Anonymous said...

Dewey could be nice but because of slumlords like Price in the area, it remains a depressed market.

Hey, I have an idea! Let's all aim for the lowest expectations, live in the cheapest housing, cater to the least educated and those who least care about betting themselves and their city, and then pat ourselves on the back for being open minded because you know, we're not distracted by all this B.S. of living in a nice city with healthy neighborhoods. We should just run this city in a way that makes live easiest for those who don't give a damn and who like sitting on the porch 24 hours a day, shirtless and with a beer in their hand.

All that CDBG money going to other parts of town? Are the off sewer near Dewey? Just a question. I'm sure you were referring to Silver Hills or Slate Run getting all the CDBG money, right?

Downtown is a public gathering place. It helps everyone, no matter which part of down you live in.

Anonymous said...

And yes Price does fight back. He keeps voting the way I don't want him to vote. He doesn't listen to reason and he tries to run my home into the ground.

Anonymous said...

Will Erika go on record saying that, if it does not cause an increase in taxes or fees, or if it does not reduce services elsewhere, she will support a new $12M parking garage by the flood wall downtown?

The New Albanian said...

You lost me here: "Will Erika go on record ... "

When has she ever? Does pretending to be male count for something?

Anonymous said...

I'd like FOS, Price and Coffey to go on record and say they would support a downtown parking garage if it didn't cause an increase in fees, taxes, etc.

If they do not, it is safe to assume they do not want private developers to be successful, they hate downtown, or have some other cultural aversion to the garage and what it represents, or at least, they dread the thought of something being accomplished on Mayor England's watch.

Anonymous said...

Which fact is not a fact?

We're still waiting.

dan chandler said...

RemCha asked:

Dan or anyone, what other local grants are you aware of that could be pooled with a UEA grant?

I'm not sure, especially if you mean for rehabbing a single building.

There are many, many state and federal grants out there for which New Albany never applies. While Louisville has a full time grant writer, we currently do not. Some of these grant dollars require matches. You'd have to check with Mike Ladd or a UEA board member to find out the extent to which they have investigated using their funds to leverage other state and federal funding sources. It's a good question.

RememberCharlemagne said...

Where does the UEA grant money come from and did you find out if the grant is still active?

Does DNA have granting power?