Thoughts on News Story?

Just wondering if anyone has any thoughts on this news story concerning the "negotiations" occurring between JCC and Wayside.

http://www.courier-journal.com/article/2009912040323

I've been trying all morning to figure out how all this can be blamed on the corporate welfare checks we gave to the Cordish Corporation....

Just wondering if anyone has any thoughts on this news story concerning the "negotiations" occurring between JCC and Wayside.

http://www.courier-journal.com/article/2009912040323

I've been trying all morning to figure out how all this can be blamed on the corporate welfare checks we gave to the Cordish Corporation....

Matthew,

As a relative newcomer to the area I'm not totally up to speed on all the government/corporate liaisons, so I'm curious...How does Cordish tie into this JCC/Wayside issue ?

And as a side note, can someone please explain to me exactly what form of "corporate welfare" was involved between Louisville and Cordish ? I know it has something to do with 4th Street Live but that's as far as my knowledge goes.

[Robin Garr]

Here are some thoughts to tinker with: The city has been trying since the '60s (when desegregated "open housing" combined with the growth of the suburbs to foster "white flight" and the decay of downtown) to bring downtown back. Every administration has had its strategy. Frankly, I think Dave Armstrong's short term did more to this end than Jerry's multiple terms, with its focus on market-rate housing, parks and services making downtown a place for people to "work, live and play." We've made progress, but much of it has been north of Muhammad Ali to the river. The blocks from Ali south to Broadway have been less successful, and there's been a persistent homeless presence around Broadway for decades. My guess is that The Powers That Be, typically, feel that having homeless people around is not good for downtown development, tourism or getting suburbanites to come in and spend their money, and the idea of having a large homeless shelter at Second and Broadway horrifies them. And, of course, Cordish, which does not want a downtown that scares people away.

I expect they'll find a home for Wayside, and I expect it won't be anywhere close to the urban core.

Just wondering if anyone has any thoughts on this news story concerning the "negotiations" occurring between JCC and Wayside.

http://www.courier-journal.com/article/2009912040323

I've been trying all morning to figure out how all this can be blamed on the corporate welfare checks we gave to the Cordish Corporation....

My guess is that The Powers That Be, typically, feel that having homeless people around is not good for downtown development, tourism or getting suburbanites to come in and spend their money, and the idea of having a large homeless shelter at Second and Broadway horrifies them. And, of course, Cordish, which does not want a downtown that scares people away.

I expect they'll find a home for Wayside, and I expect it won't be anywhere close to the urban core.

I suppose I don't spend enough time downtown to fully comprehend just how significant (or not) the "homeless" problem is. I imagine it's fairly typical of most large cities and I'm guessing your assessment of the community/corporate reaction is pretty spot on (and both typical and understandable from their perspective). It's a tough call...on one hand I think most of us feel some amount of heartfelt emotions for the plight of the homeless and on the other hand...<sigh>...a city does need a vibrant downtown.

Having spent 18 years in Minneapolis/StPaul, one of the more "progressive" urban areas, I was always relatively impressed by the level of responsibility the corporate community took in helping to address the issue of the homeless. I've not been here long enough to make any assessment on how deep rooted or significant that corporate (and community) mentality is here in The 'Ville.

I'll speculate that your prediction will come true and right, wrong or indifferent a new home for Wayside will be found "outside the urban core".

"Outside the urban core" and away from the services these folks need, clinics, bus service, meals programs. What the "Powers that be" refuse to acknowledge is this is a shelter for women and children, the men's is over on E. Jefferson and since it is "out of sight" no one really raised a fuss when they took over a previous nursing home (that was truely horrid!).

Steve - most of the corporate support here is lip service - "I gave, but don't make me look at them". Louisville actually has one of the best support system for the homeless, the alcoholic and transitional (working, but not enough to get decent housing), mostly due to hurculean efforts by a several agencies like Wayside, the Salvation Army, Volunteers of America and the Morgan Center. Several of the better programs to give folks a hand-up instead of a hand-out have ended up losing funding and shutting down.

From my previous work on the ambulance I have had an up-close-and-personal view of the homeless and contrary to what the NIMBYs chant - they are not all street drunks. They are folks who have lost their jobs, had the breadwinner leave or die, have been overwhelmed by a medical condition that keeps them from making a decent living, but cannot qualify for disability. Women, childen, senior citizens, college graduates, you name it. Many of them try to live with relatives, live in their car for as long as they can before they ask for help. I had a guy a worked with years ago turn up at Wayside - he had gone to another job, got injuried (off work) and the medical bills put him in such debt he lost everything. He was working for Wayside after they had helped him get on his feet. I live 4 blocks from a family shelter and except for the crowd at the bus stop in the morning, you would never know they are there. The NIMBY people will all swear they support the "poor folk", but only at a distance!! I hope Wayside stays there forever!! <jumping off soap box now>

Just wondering if anyone has any thoughts on this news story concerning the "negotiations" occurring between JCC and Wayside.

http://www.courier-journal.com/article/2009912040323

I've been trying all morning to figure out how all this can be blamed on the corporate welfare checks we gave to the Cordish Corporation....

Matthew,

As a relative newcomer to the area I'm not totally up to speed on all the government/corporate liaisons, so I'm curious...How does Cordish tie into this JCC/Wayside issue ?

And as a side note, can someone please explain to me exactly what form of "corporate welfare" was involved between Louisville and Cordish ? I know it has something to do with 4th Street Live but that's as far as my knowledge goes.

Steve,

I get through each and every day trying to find ways to blame Cordish for each and every problem in this city, so I should say up front that trying to find a connection between the JCC/Wayside situation and Cordish is just a reflection of my standard operating procedure.

The crux of the Cordish issue is that the city has been all too friendly with forgivable loans to the Cordish corporation operating through what seems like a "whatever you want you can have" mentality. Or, in political phrasing, a you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours mentality. In this case, King Jerry has turned over downtown revitalization to the Cordish corporation ("Yo make me look good!") and, in doing so, has been rather giving in terms of financial incentives. Problems arose in terms of 1) expenditures and 2) accounting. Questions were raised in regards to 1A) if the money was being spent how it was allotted and if all the money was being spent ("let's put a little bit in our pockets) and 2A) why there was no accounting for how the money was spent. In other words (and I'm sure someone will take issue with this narrative) the city handed over taxpayer money with no means in place to account for the spending of the money (soon there after, the national government followed suit). Cordish obviously has the upperhand in all of this because 1)they have a corporate monopoly on government-supported development downtown and 2) they had already signed an agreement with the local powers-that-be to expand the development with Center City, on ground the city bought for around 12 million dollars and is leasing to Cordish for $1 a year.

Center City will stretch from 2nd to 6th Street - unless the design has changed - which means it will be right in the neighborhood of the hotel being fought over. So, if I am reading this right, we have a homeless shelter (working with women and children) up against a state-supported university and a city-supported Coporate entertainment entity. The university wants to tear the building down to make a parking lot, which, 1) would really help the area in terms of asthetics once Center City is built and 2) could be used by Center City at night, since weekend night classes don't seem to be all that popular. Or, on the other hand, you could have a homeless shelter (where the disease-carrying druggies of the city would hang-out, don't you know) in the vicinity which would not be good for JCC, Cordish, or the city's image in general.

I understand all these tensions. What really gets me is that Wayside has been "you-know-what"-overed numerous times now. They were basically forced off of Market, but were given market price for the property. So, that deal, although totally a power play, did result in a mostly fair shake. Then, the Original Highlands Neighborhood Association got all up in arms about Wayside's interest in the old Mercy HS building. While their argument is economically sound (home prices, neighborhood image, etc.), the signs they campaigned with - something like "A shelter too big for anyone's good" - totally made it out like they knew what was best for those citizens in our community that are in the most need. I think we can all agree that any shelter is better than no shelter. And now, we've got Wayside under pressure from JCC (and state reps) and what I assume hidden pressure from the tag-team of Cordish and King Jerry. What really gets into my craw is that 1) Wayside bought the property fair-and-square and 2)then devised a ingenious business plan to address zoning complications (renting rooms for a penny a day) that any business scholar would applaud for how it used ingenuity to address issues that could derail the company's plan.

Wrapped up in all of this is the basic failure of the local government to support local initiatives in any way with the evidence being the struggles of the East Market district and the closing of City Block (directly attributable to their inability to get the same loans Cordish got).

While we can all agree that a vibrant downtown is desired and important, it's really a matter of who is going to get screwed over, who's going to get the breaks, and what's the end result going to look like. Right now it looks like the corporations are getting all the breaks and the locals (whether businesses or the homeless) are getting royally screwed. I can't wait until we have a cookie-cutter downtown that not only sucks but also has the overwhelming stench of people-done-wrong hanging over it. We will be able to enjoy overpriced run-of-the-mill food and ice-cold, tasteless beer all while holding our noses!

Well thought out and said sir!

I get through each and every day trying to find ways to blame Cordish for each and every problem in this city, so I should say up front that trying to find a connection between the JCC/Wayside situation and Cordish is just a reflection of my standard operating procedure.

The crux of the Cordish issue is that the city has been all too friendly with forgivable loans to the Cordish corporation operating through what seems like a "whatever you want you can have" mentality. Or, in political phrasing, a you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours mentality. In this case, King Jerry has turned over downtown revitalization to the Cordish corporation ("Yo make me look good!") and, in doing so, has been rather giving in terms of financial incentives. Problems arose in terms of 1) expenditures and 2) accounting. Questions were raised in regards to 1A) if the money was being spent how it was allotted and if all the money was being spent ("let's put a little bit in our pockets) and 2A) why there was no accounting for how the money was spent. In other words (and I'm sure someone will take issue with this narrative) the city handed over taxpayer money with no means in place to account for the spending of the money (soon there after, the national government followed suit). Cordish obviously has the upperhand in all of this because 1)they have a corporate monopoly on government-supported development downtown and 2) they had already signed an agreement with the local powers-that-be to expand the development with Center City, on ground the city bought for around 12 million dollars and is leasing to Cordish for $1 a year.

Center City will stretch from 2nd to 6th Street - unless the design has changed - which means it will be right in the neighborhood of the hotel being fought over. So, if I am reading this right, we have a homeless shelter (working with women and children) up against a state-supported university and a city-supported Coporate entertainment entity. The university wants to tear the building down to make a parking lot, which, 1) would really help the area in terms of asthetics once Center City is built and 2) could be used by Center City at night, since weekend night classes don't seem to be all that popular. Or, on the other hand, you could have a homeless shelter (where the disease-carrying druggies of the city would hang-out, don't you know) in the vicinity which would not be good for JCC, Cordish, or the city's image in general.

I understand all these tensions. What really gets me is that Wayside has been "you-know-what"-overed numerous times now. They were basically forced off of Market, but were given market price for the property. So, that deal, although totally a power play, did result in a mostly fair shake. Then, the Original Highlands Neighborhood Association got all up in arms about Wayside's interest in the old Mercy HS building. While their argument is economically sound (home prices, neighborhood image, etc.), the signs they campaigned with - something like "A shelter too big for anyone's good" - totally made it out like they knew what was best for those citizens in our community that are in the most need. I think we can all agree that any shelter is better than no shelter. And now, we've got Wayside under pressure from JCC (and state reps) and what I assume hidden pressure from the tag-team of Cordish and King Jerry. What really gets into my craw is that 1) Wayside bought the property fair-and-square and 2)then devised a ingenious business plan to address zoning complications (renting rooms for a penny a day) that any business scholar would applaud for how it used ingenuity to address issues that could derail the company's plan.

Wrapped up in all of this is the basic failure of the local government to support local initiatives in any way with the evidence being the struggles of the East Market district and the closing of City Block (directly attributable to their inability to get the same loans Cordish got).

While we can all agree that a vibrant downtown is desired and important, it's really a matter of who is going to get screwed over, who's going to get the breaks, and what's the end result going to look like. Right now it looks like the corporations are getting all the breaks and the locals (whether businesses or the homeless) are getting royally screwed. I can't wait until we have a cookie-cutter downtown that not only sucks but also has the overwhelming stench of people-done-wrong hanging over it. We will be able to enjoy overpriced run-of-the-mill food and ice-cold, tasteless beer all while holding our noses!

Matt if you are running, you have my vote !!

Just wondering if anyone has any thoughts on this news story concerning the "negotiations" occurring between JCC and Wayside.

http://www.courier-journal.com/article/2009912040323

I've been trying all morning to figure out how all this can be blamed on the corporate welfare checks we gave to the Cordish Corporation....

Matthew D,

Great reply...Thanks for giving me another perspective.

What Matt said.

No, really. In my initial press release regarding my mayoral candidacy, I called Cordish "Corporate Parasites." That statement raised some eyebrows. And drew much support. I stand by my words, and Matthew's words can go into the evidence column.

Disclaimer: I was hired as an adjunct to teach at JCC (I think it is JCTC technically), but I turned down the position after a misrepresentation of the pay rate brought it down near minimum wage. I calculated eight bucks an hour after time for grading papers. They're paying people with PhD's less than ten bucks an hour. Ridiculous. But I am a strong supporter of community colleges.

I figure if Wayside shelled out ten million dollars for a building, they should be allowed to stay there. The city didn't bid. The state didn't bid. I hear all of this "free market" propaganda, and then the same people spouting it want to toss out the people who abided by the free market. What gives?

Wayside has acted responsibly as good community citizens. If JCC (as most people call it) wants more space, there is plenty available all over the city. Plenty downtown in fact. Providing families a place to live is not one of our city's problems. It is one of the solutions!

I feel eminent domain laws should be used extremely sparingly and only if absolutely necessary. I would not support the taking of Wayside's property. Further, if the city wanted it, they should have bought it when it was on the market. They had their chance. (sorry, sounding Libertarian, which I'm really not).

Nimbus Couzin, for Mayor 2010....(Matthew D, adviser)

Alan,

Although I've spent some time studying state and local government and once had ambitions of going to law school (thank the gods that idea passed quickly), I'm currently keeping my hat out of the political ring. The skeletons in the closet don't help either.

My candidacy is totally unnecessary, as Nimbus is the flag-bearer of all causes good and ethical.

The skeletons in the closet don't help either.

I hear ya there bro...Any political ambitions I had were ruined years ago when those damn pictures resurfaced.

Me, too *sigh*...I wish I'd have known years ago that I'd be so interested in politics in my 40's!

Me, too *sigh*...I wish I'd have known years ago that I'd be so interested in politics in my 40's!

Yeah, in my case who woulda ever thought dancing naked around a campfire (ok, I had socks on) could have such a far reaching affect.

Me, too *sigh*...I wish I'd have known years ago that I'd be so interested in politics in my 40's!

Yeah, in my case who woulda ever thought dancing naked around a campfire (ok, I had socks on) could have such a far reaching affect.

Steve I might vote for you BECAUSE of that!