Hot News!
• Freestore Foodbank Battle of the Blogs!
• Cincinnati NAACP President shares update on Cincinnati Retirement Plan
Contact Us
v mail, fax: (214) 481-6464
e mail: click here
On today's date in The Beacon archives, we published:
•Dear H. Wilkinson: Did you report the facts? (2007)•Two Republican Views of War (2007)
•Commenting Rules for The Cincinnati Beacon (2007)
•Evidence of Injustice (2007)
•Open Letter to Henry Heimlich about SALF (2006)
•The Mayor’s Recommendations to the Proposed Budget (2006)
•Know Theatre of Cincinnati Offers Alternative Holiday Entertainment with Christmas Yet To Come (2006)
•Stop the Proclamations! (2006)
Events
 |
|
|
Wednesday, August 01, 2007
Private Profit, Public Space: Bench Billboards and the Fountain Square Restaurant
Posted by The Dean of Cincinnati
Photo courtesy of here.
Recently, Chris Bortz has pushed to enhance the City’s curb appeal by getting rid of bench billboards. Bortz has argued that government is under no obligation to allow private companies to use public space for private profit. But does anyone know how such a philosophy might get applied to the new Italian restaurant being built on Fountain Square? Who owns that restaurant? To whom does the rent money go? Is the City of Cincinnati now in the restaurant renting business? Or, did 3CDC build a space to rent on the top of Fountain Square? If one company cannot make profit off placing bench advertisements on public space, should another be allowed to build a whole restaurant on public space? What are the details about this restaurant?
There are, admittedly, many details that need to be acquired before further discussion can rightfully take place. That is why I’m sending the following messages both to Chris Bortz and Bill Donabedian. I will post their responses when (and if) I receive them. At that point, we will begin more investigation given the details revealed in their responses.
Dear Councilmember Bortz and Mr. Donabedian:
I would like to know some details concerning the physical building of the new restaurant on Fountain Square.
1. Who owns the building?
2. Who receives rent money?
-If the answer to any of these questions is “3CDC,” or one of its affiliated companies or corporations, please answer the following:
3. Why has a private corporation been allowed to build a private building in the middle of a public space?
Thank you, in advance, for your time. I am eager to study your responses.
Respectfully,
The Dean of Cincinnati
• Share This Article!
Listen to this article
|  |
Register
Anonymous comments are allowed, but you can create an account above to stamp your name and to avoid typing the anti-spam code.
If you are not familiar with our rules for leaving comments, click here! The Cincinnati Beacon is not responsible for the contents of any comments. Comments do not represent the views of the moderators of The Cincinnati Beacon.
01 Aug 2007 at 08:57 am | #
.
What are you trying to do, get whacked ?
Bortz is going to make you an offer you can’t refuse !
Forget-a-bout-it !
.
01 Aug 2007 at 03:49 pm | #
Can You Say RENTAMENT DOMAIN?
01 Aug 2007 at 04:39 pm | #
That is a good point and it is consistent with the way that the city does business. The restaurant is being built for Nicola’s on Sycamore.
This is not the first time the city has done this. Pizza Uno, which is defunct in this area now, got a lot of incentives to open along with the Nicholson bar, which is still there, in the same building on Walnut. Cincinnati can not attract good franchises with their management of the city so they have to pay for it. And they are extremely inconsistent. They thought nothing in turning their back on the Maisonette, which had five stars. And indicative of their expertize in the restaurant or entertainment industry, one has to look how the Main Street entertainment district had eroded so quickly. I wonder who is paying who in city hall.
It amazes me that these faceless bureaucrats have the gall to think that they can recognize what is chic and fashionable. They are nothing but a bunch of yokels with big egos. Is there anyone associated with city hall that has any charisma?
They put all of that money into the square and then they still have to pay? Cincinnati has to strap a pork chop around its neck to get the neighbors dog play with it.
And Bortz was one of the pussies that sat on Luken’s panel to evaluate the method for electing council and could muster up enough leadership or guts to make a decision. I don’t know which is worse; the people elected or the idiots who voted them in solely on name recognition. This restaurant is just another example of the short-sighted leadership. The greatest assets the city of Cincinnati had was that it has residual wealth and it is strategically located in the middle of area growth. City Hall thinks that the city of Cincinnati exists because of city hall rather than the other way around.
Why do we continue to tolerate what continues to keep happening at city hall?
01 Aug 2007 at 06:56 pm | #
The privatization of Fountain Square is a crime against the people. It is the theft of public property. They have stolen the Peoples Square and forty years of garage revenue (estimated +$110,000,000)This is all done with the complicity of our trusted public servants and covered-up by the paper of record, The Enquirer. Government was invented to benefit the common good and is acting counter to those that empower it. The money that flows during campaign season is like the river in spring. It floods out citizens, swamps democracy and leaves one hell of a mess for others to clean up. Bribery is in play here and public officials are on the teat. Time to end contributions to politicians by persons ineligible to to vote in those elections.
This betrayal of the public trust leads to no confidence in government and ultimately anarchy. Leaders better start listening because the sleeping awaken.
01 Aug 2007 at 10:27 pm | #
City Hall thinks that the city of Cincinnati exists because of city hall rather than the other way around.
ANON summed it All up!
01 Aug 2007 at 11:45 pm | #
Excellent observation.
What comes to my mind is the big water tower in Florence - memory has it that there was a federal lawsuit filed because a public property could not promote a private business so the Florence Mall was changed to Florence Y’all.
On the other hand, we have the stadiums, so…
One thing is certain, Bortz seems to want his cake and eat it too.
I appreciate the benches - I don’t get the problem, what does he want to do discourage bus riding or just make people miserable while they’re waiting? I think it’s a public service.
02 Aug 2007 at 09:46 am | #
He does not want to get rid of the benches. He wants to buy new ones.
Oh, and we can’t afford human service funding or health clinics.
02 Aug 2007 at 10:14 am | #
They are spending with our credit card and will continue until this great city lies in ruin, like Pittsburgh. We have all the financial geniuses downtown lining up to stick it to Joe Public. With teams of lawyers, lobbyists and leaches they have declared war on “We the People” and just like the carpetbaggars after the Civil War(oxymoron) will only leave if we drive them out.
We don’t see our circumstance because they are whittling away our future. Garage revenue-gone for forty years. Tax abatements-gone for fifteen years. TIF financing-gone. Loans from Fifth/Third-mounting. Deception-pervasive. How wonderful our city will be after the Castellini Banks Project. Do us all a favor BoB, go away and take your faux geniuses with you. The only Genius in Cincinnati stands in the middle of our Privatized public space.
02 Aug 2007 at 09:52 pm | #
I bet they use the money to pay for cleaning, maintenance, and upkeep of the Square, plus all the events they have. Keep in mind that 3CDC is a non-profit group.
I don’t know if they can use the money for other developments or not. That would be a good question to ask. Can the money they make down on the Square be used elsewhere like in OTR?
03 Aug 2007 at 12:47 am | #
Oh… excuse me - I obviously have my head up my butt - I thought he wanted to get rid of all the advertising benches altogether ....
03 Aug 2007 at 08:47 am | #
Ref: #9 above:
Keep in mind that 3CDC is a non-profit group.
What in the hell is that supposed to mean?
The government is supposed to be a non-profit group and yesterday it was announced that the entire delegation from Alaska might be indicted for theft in office (bribes). Look at the parking lots outside of some of the many non-profits in Hamilton county and note the new cars that the folks that they are supposed to be helping can only dream of until they are twenty years old.
That ex-mayor of Cincinnati, Qualls, was a house painter when elected and now she is a millionaire; it’s in the public records.
Non-profit is the biggest scam in this country. And churches are the most notorious scam or at least on the same level as politics. By the way, most of the legitimate non-profits don’t claim to be non-profit; they are the new business ventures risks that go belly up while paying taxes so the non-profit scammers can enjoy the fruits of our labors.
Dieter
03 Aug 2007 at 12:42 pm | #
Deiter,
perceptive of you, thanks. In the first Amendment to the Constitution it states:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. If this is true is not the exemption of religious organizations from taxation in violation of this clause? The Holy Roman Catholic Church is the largest landholder in the US and is exempt. This is merely an extension of the Roman Empire into modern times.
Another important part of the Bill of Rights is the preamble. Until recently I had no idea it even existed. It has been covered up by politicians, businesses and academics for decades. It says:
Congress of the United States begun and held at the City of New York, on Wednesday the 4th of March, 1789
The Conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution.
The Bill of Rights were declarations and restrictions placed on government by the people. They have been neglected and are close to meaningless. Awareness always comes first. Action comes next.
04 Aug 2007 at 01:59 am | #
I pretty much agree with dieter and anon’s comments about the importance of the Bill of Rights to the individual. We need to be much more diligent in safe-guarding them. My question is this: What and who determines the “for profit” or the “non-profit” status of an Institution or Corporation? Vera Z.
06 Aug 2007 at 09:20 pm | #
Why would Bortz or Donabedian waste their time answering your questions, and subject themselves to your silly little witch hunt?
Let’s pretend that that restaurant is very successful. Let’s then assume that it will bring a few thousand more people downtown over a years time than if it were not there. Here’s a question for the Dean. Is having more people downtown a bad thing? If so, how. Please explain. I can’t wait to study your response.