Chris Evans fro the PD did an editorial in Sundays paper on the cost of votes in local elections. I'm glad the PD is touching on the topic, but, as usual, they failed  in completing the most thorough research. I posted a comment to the editorial but have not received any responses. I'd like to know what others think.

 

Check out the article at the Plain Dealer website by searching for "What did a Vote Cost? Candidates put their money where their mouth is"

 

My thoughts:

 

Dear Mr. Evans:

 

Great article on “What did a vote cost” in yesterday’s paper.  Sadly, you omitted one of the greatest local disparity’s in a win vs. lose:  the Cuyahoga County Council  race between UCI President Chris Ronayne vs. Dan Brady in District 3.  Ronayne raised $98,053 compared to Brady’s $19,129, or five times as much money as Brady and still lost.

 

Of even more interest is the fact that Ronayne’ s second largest contributors were the Wymer/Zapis family who contributed $3,000 collectively to the campaign.  This is the same family/developer who was selected by UCI to build the controversial apartments on Hazel Drive.  This is the same developer/family who your editorial department praised as being a qualified developer with a good track record. Obviously, the Plain Dealer did not research their last two residential projects, both of which are struggling.

 

Circle 118 is a for sale townhome project in the heart of University Circle that is now advertising as rentals.

The Hamlets of Rocky River is another for sale townhome community that has also been forced to go to a rental project due to lack of sales.

 

Maybe your editorial board ought to do a little more research before knocking Councilman Johnson’s desire to make sure another one of Cleveland’s most valuable properties isn’t squandered again.  Cleveland’s long history of doing so is finally being questioned by an astute politician and the Plain Dealer doesn’t even bother to check the facts before coming out with an inflammatory cheap shot at the councilman.

 

Had other politicians shown equal courage perhaps the Stadium wouldn’t have been rebuilt on the Lake choking off all Lake access for 8 days a year;  perhaps, Eaton wouldn’t be leaving the City for Chagrin Highlands; Perhaps there wouldn’t be parking lots on Public Square where the Ameritrust Tower never went and the existing buildings would still be intact.  The list goes on and on. 

Interesting commentary, but what's your point?  The article was about the cost of votes to which you pointed out the Ronayne/Brady race.  You then went on to mention some struggling real estate developments, a corporate headquarters which left the city limits, the location of Browns stadium?  I'm missing the connection, especially when you mentioned Councilman Johnson and his desire to defend some valuable property from being squandered.

Seems like the problem with this developer's earlier projects is that they were built as high-end for-sale units in a market that needs new rentals instead.  But since this new project is rentals to begin with, I'd say the developer is now on the right track.  But I guess the main issue here is two competing developers who (maybe) have bought influence with two competing power brokers in University Circle.  Interesting, but I'm not sure what to do with it.  I still prefer Ronayne's vision over the councilman's... and if they've both been greased then maybe it cancels out...?  The councilman wants to put more for-sale housing on that site and I think he's flat out wrong.  And I don't think putting an apartment complex in UC (where they're needed) equals putting a stadium on the lakefront.

You don't really tie together your thoughts nor do you really provide any conclusions.

 

Regarding the Hazel development.. the project is supposed to be rentals, so why do you think it is such a poor idea? Given the success of other nearby rental projects, the XYZ project seems to be very sound. Regarding Ronayne's relationship to XYZ, the UCI Property Committee is a very strong and opinionated body made up of board members. They are the ones who made the decision to go with XYZ. I also question your facts on Circle118.  6 of the 12 units have sold and there is no mention on the website of any units being available for rentals. The elephant in the room is Johnson and his reasoning for opposing the project. Brickman got in his ear because he wants to do for-sale housing at the site (which you pointed out was a bad idea). Brickman is not well-regarded in the community. The Johnson-Brickman connection is relationship that ought to be scrutinized here.  It sounds like you have an axe to grind with Ronayne, but the facts that you lay out only serve to put Johnson's credibility in question.

 

Sorry, but I agree with the other posters. Your letter doesn't make the point you think it does. Johnson may well have good intentions, but his suggestion that for-sale housing is a better option is exactly what led to the widespread questioning of his motives, because it doesn't make any sense. And to be fair, it was the public that really exploded, not the PD. Their reporting on the matter was fairly bland and included Johnson's retort that he wasn't killing or stopping anything, just studying it. Not many people buy that. That's the story.

 

Developments don't suffer only because of the developers. If you read about the CLE housing/rental markets more, you'll see that rentals are booming while Condos/Townhomes are...not.