NAACP prez wants 'no' vote on Banks

BY HOWARD WILKINSON | [email protected]

E-mail    |    Print    |    digg us!    |    del.icio.us!

 

NAACP president Christopher Smitherman said today he will ask the membership of his organization tonight to instruct its two members of the Banks working group to vote “no” on a development deal because of a lack of minority inclusion on the project.

 

“My advice to our membership is that we don’t support the deal until there is inclusion,’’ Smitherman said at the noon hour today, in a speech at the Community Issues Forum at Christ Church downtown. “We do not want to stop the project. But we want to get that commitment in writing before May 15."

 

www.enquirer.com

Is it just me, or is the NAACP now able, due to a necessary unanimous vote, to hold this project hostage for whatever their definition of "inclusion" is?

Why does it have to be about black or white investors??????  Who cares.  Whoever comes forward and expresses interest in the project should be allowed to invest.  Race, sex, ethnicity.....it all should be excluded from EVERY government document, job applications, EVERYTHING really.  Then it wouldnt be an issue.

Why does it have to be about black or white investors??????   Who cares.  Whoever comes forward and expresses interest in the project should be allowed to invest.  Race, sex, ethnicity.....it all should be excluded from EVERY government document, job applications, EVERYTHING really.  Then it wouldnt be an issue.

 

Amen, brother ;)

Why does it have to be about black or white investors??????  Who cares.  Whoever comes forward and expresses interest in the project should be allowed to invest.  Race, sex, ethnicity.....it all should be excluded from EVERY government document, job applications, EVERYTHING really.  Then it wouldnt be an issue.

 

AGREED!!!!

 

To bad we have affirmative action.....

fuck them I wish just once the aclu would fight them for being racists and trying to support black supremacy. I mean whoever invested invested, and outside organizations should stay out of it. If the national association for the advancement of colored people thinks that having a hole in the ground is better for people or color than having something nice in the city they live in where everyone is welcomed to go then they're idiots. I don't understand people who keep that kind of crap going instead of getting along like most normal black and white people do nowadays.

Why does it have to be about black or white investors??????   Who cares.  Whoever comes forward and expresses interest in the project should be allowed to invest.  Race, sex, ethnicity.....it all should be excluded from EVERY government document, job applications, EVERYTHING really.  Then it wouldnt be an issue.

 

 

If this were true we wouldn't need affirmative action. I agree race shouldn't be an issue, unfortunately it is and people of all creeds and colors can be clickish for whatever the reason.

How many black owned companies and investors are even available? Probably not nearly as many as the white ones. I just don't like how they use rhetoric and act like they're intentionally going out of their way to be exclusionary and only hiring white people.

i will be very pissed if the banks get stalled any longer b/c of this.... the naacp will be hurting it self and the people it represents b/c of all of the available jobs it will present to minorities

i will be very pissed if the banks get stalled any longer b/c of this.... the naacp will be hurting it self and the people it represents b/c of all of the available jobs it will present to minorities

?

Including minority contractors shouldn't be a big deal.  The Feds do this all the time via various programs for their construction work..in fact it is pretty routine.

 

For a municiple redevelopement project, it is also possible to set up a minority set-aside program.  When they did the Galleria in Lousiville (developed by private developer,Oxford Development, working with thye city), they had minority participation as part of the deal.  The glazing in that big atrium over 4th Street was done by a minority contractor.

 

So, no problem with that.  The NAACP is making sure that this happens with this project, that this type of set-aside is built into the construction side of the deal. 

 

 

I agree with UncleRando about the street parking, at least on the interior streets.

well, these negotiations are going similar to the last negotiations...hopefully history doesn't repeat itself

  As I stated before, I was afraid that the two new members of the Banks Working Group would become puppets for Chris Smitherman's agitation purposes. And it's happening.

 

  My question is this.

  What if Black owned companies or investors have no interest in being a part of this project? Will the NAACP force them to invest even though they don't want to?

 

 

Including minority contractors shouldn't be a big deal.  The Feds do this all the time via various programs for their construction work..in fact it is pretty routine...

 

...The NAACP is making sure that this happens with this project, that this type of set-aside is built into the construction side of the deal. 

 

Two things: In my previous post, I said that they can hold this project up according to their definition of "inclusion."  They don't base it on population of the city or county according to race, or to the number of qualified investors/contractors.  Their definition has, in other projects, been a somewhat arbitrary number.

 

Second, this is not capitalism.  Capitalism says that you pay the person who bids the lowest, therefore reducing the cost of the project.  This is making decisions based on race, which the NAACP vision statement seeks plainly against.  It's double-speak.

 

The bigger issue here, however, is not the apprenticeships and minority contractors.  It's minority financing.  That is a very blurry issue that is tougher to resolve.  Goodbye, 2009.

AIG/Carter's plan one to bank on

April 27, 2007 | CINCINNATI BUSINESS COURIER

Opinion Piece

 

Spend any significant amount of time - as the Courier did this week - with prospective Banks developer Trent Germano, and you can understand why a chorus of public and private officials guiding contract negotiations are upbeat about construction starting this year and what the future of the project holds for Greater Cincinnati.

 

Germano was the keynote speaker for the Courier's sixth annual Commercial Real Estate Developers Power Breakfast on April 24, giving 1,000 attendees at the Duke Energy Center an inside glimpse of the developer's thinking. He later addressed the Courier's editorial board. (See interview, page 4) At the event, Hamilton County Commission President Todd Portune promised that construction would start by year's end.

Good job NAACP. You are ruining the definition of an open-market capitalist society by playing socialist roles.

 

I can't believe how picky and downright difficult some of you posters are. Given the fact that there is nothing but parking in the current spot right now, I think it is so exciting that such a plan has a good chance of commencing later this year. Some of you guys make it seem like they presented a plan with mudhuts.  I mean I've heard more complaints b/c the plans  appraentlyseems to be one small surface lot (it appears very small).  Geez obviously its not perfect but generally speaking, these plans are really really impressive.

^^what is the purpose of positing that map?

Is this park pork?

BY MALIA RULON | [email protected]

Comments    |    E-mail    |    Print    |    digg us!    |    del.icio.us!

 

WASHINGTON – Is $25 million for a new park pork?

 

Greater Cincinnati’s Republicans in the U.S. House split over $25 million slated for the Cincinnati’s new riverfront park slated to be built next to The Banks, the new mini-city planned along the Ohio River. The money was included in the $7.62 billion Water Resources Development Act, which passed the House April 19.

 

Rep. Jean Schmidt, a Miami Township Republican, voted in favor of the water resources bill, which authorizes spending on numerous Army Corps of Engineers river and harbor projects over the next five years. Her 2nd Congressional District includes part of the proposed Banks project. Rep. Geoff Davis, R-Hebron, also voted for it.

 

www.enquirer.com

African-Americans are a minority, yet we must include them (and other ethnicities) on _every_ project regardless of the demographic situation. Oh nos! There is not a 50/50 African-American/Caucasian partnership on this project, then we must turn key deciders on the project away for that sole reason alone. And etc. If we actually ran a true capitalist-system, we would be treating the demographic issue fairly -- on a 33 to 310 approach -- and including only 9% of African-Americans on a typical project.

^^Of course it is pork spending...it is the epitome of pork spending!  But, I think its about damn time that are region is getting some of this money.  At least this is going to a productive purpose...as opposed to much of the shenanigans that money is spent on in Alaska.

 

The $25 million was tucked away deep inside of another bill that gets approved almost every single year, this is one of those times that I will congratulate Jean Schmidt...well done!

Second, this is not capitalism.  Capitalism says that you pay the person who bids the lowest, therefore reducing the cost of the project.

 

There is nothing purely captalist about any of the riverfront efforts in Cincinnati, and there hasn't been since the Riverfront was first cleared under the auspices of Urban Renewl.  Capitalism wouldnt have required a county sales tax to subsidize stadium construction for the privatley owned sports teams.

 

That is "free enterprise" rationalization is a bullshit excuse for avoiding minority inclusion.  The idea is if there is public money or public authority of some sort involved a form of public policy purpose should be served as well.

 

If one wants to be truley market-based and capitalistic about real estate this property should be put up for sale, or auctioned to the highest bidder, and they can build whatever they want in whatever style they want, as long as building codes are met.

 

 

 

 

Pork spending? You bet :)

 

I'd rather have them spend it on a project that has a direct benefit on the city and will go towards sustainability, urbanized living -- and urban transit, etc. -- than wasteful highway projects that go to nowhere, tunnels to nowhere, bridges to nowhere, etc.

 

Let's have another... COOT-OFF!

That is "free enterprise" rationalization is a bullshit excuse for avoiding minority inclusion.

 

Again you've missed the point.  And there's the rub... if you say that you don't agree with the NAACP's definition of "minority inclusion," then you don't want minorities included.

 

What I don't want is inclusion for inclusion's sake, and at the expense of the project.  The NAACP ceased being a reasonable organization long ago, and they have been handed the reigns of this effort.

 

Government involvement and mandate does not discount the elements of capitalism that function within the process at hand.  And what is the public policy purpose that is being fulfilled here?  Giving bid-free contracts to minority-owned businesses because Chris Smitherman threatens you?  If anything, this concept takes credibility away from those minority-owned businesses who were entirely capable of getting it done without the help of the NAACP.

The way this appears to be structured is that they have a committee of stakeholders, where any one stakeholder can veto the proposal.  Now, why is that?  To ensure there is buy-in.  Apparenlty some players in the black community are not on board with this project and want to ensure there is an element of minority particpation.  And, as I pointed out before, it is not hard to ensure that this happens.

 

Do disagree in principle with affirmative action and minority set asides in public contracting?  Then there is nothing to discuss.  Or is it more with the local leadership of the NAACP, which is another issue.

 

 

I really think you are misreading the situation if you think that the NAACP has been handed the reins. It's more than a bit alarmist to say that the project won't happen on time or at all because of this issue. It's already been delayed, and there are any number of issues that can still delay it; this is just one of many.

 

The Banks is a big, important project. $600 mil is a lot of money to move through the economy, especially since the multiplier effect is high in construction. The public policy purpose is to target the impact of this money moving through the economy to areas where it is most needed: small business, minority and women owned firms. Don't worry, white dudes still get paid.

 

What are the inclusion goals for the project? I don't think anyone is saying 50-50.

 

I do agree with you on Smitherman's tactics. But the stadium construction fell well short of these goals, and Smitherman is trying to make a mark...

smitherman's goals are to zealously advocate for his constituency. 

I'm going to take a minute here to sound like a real prick.

 

Pork spending? You bet :)

 

I'd rather have them spend it on a project that has a direct benefit on the city and will go towards sustainability, urbanized living -- and urban transit, etc. -- than wasteful highway projects that go to nowhere, tunnels to nowhere, bridges to nowhere, etc.

 

African-Americans are a minority, yet we must include them (and other ethnicities) on _every_ project regardless of the demographic situation. Oh no! There is not a 50/50 African-American/Caucasian partnership on this project, then we must turn key deciders on the project away for that sole reason alone. And etc. If we actually ran a true capitalist-system, we would be treating the demographic issue fairly -- on a 33 to 310 approach -- and including only 9% of African-Americans on a typical project.

 

So you are for pork spending when it is for something you want, but you don't want an earmark for minority inclusion because it is "anti-capitalist?"  (By the way, the racial distribution for Cincinnati is around 50-50.  Why would we use a national percentage for a local project?)

 

Government involvement and mandate does not discount the elements of capitalism that function within the process at hand.  And what is the public policy purpose that is being fulfilled here?  Giving bid-free contracts to minority-owned businesses because Chris Smitherman threatens you?  If anything, this concept takes credibility away from those minority-owned businesses who were entirely capable of getting it done without the help of the NAACP.

 

News flash to everyone who is pro-business: we live in a capitalist system.  That doesn't mean that an investment is "capitalist" when the funds come solely from a private corporation or partnership.  Government debts, liabilities, expenditures and taxes are all an integral part of the capitalist system.  A government investment is just as much of a capitalist enterprise (notice how the plan expects future phases of the plan to be implemented from the proceeds of the investment, a dead giveaway) as a private investment, and generally government investment creates the structure that allows private investments to flourish.  The reason more people have more say in a government investment is because most Americans believe government is the common property of all, for the common benefit of all.  That's why we expect laws to enforced equally.  That is why the NAACP is advocating for minority inclusion in this project- so that they don't get cut out of the loop.  That's also why we have competitive bidding, so government contracts aren't rewarded to cronies of the politicians.  Competitive bidding isn't more capitalist than simply choosing a supplier/contractor/whatever.  Do private firms have the same competitive bidding processes for outsourcing and the like as governments do?  I doubt it.

 

 

^ You missed my sacastic :)

 

People whine and complain when we waste money that will undoubtedly benefit few. Like the Alaska Tunnel to Nowhere, or the Alaska Bridge to Nowhere -- two noteworthy examples that will be extremely expensive to construct and serve a select few.

 

The Banks, on the other hand, has the chance to impact thousands upon thousands every year. Not just those who move in, or shop, or dine -- but those who see a more progressive Cincinnati -- from the air, river or highway -- and move in. And those tax revenues...

NAACP tells city council it's watching Banks developments

Jobs, contracts sought for blacks

BY HOWARD WILKINSON & JANE PRENDERGAST | [email protected] & [email protected]

May 10, 2007

 

CINCINNATI - Members of Cincinnati's NAACP want to be included in development of The Banks, and they want city and county officials to know it. About 50 people filled Cincinnati City Council's chamber Wednesday. They want the project to bring black companies contracts and black people jobs. In one of the most striking statements during the 45 minutes of testimony, new NAACP President Christopher Smitherman likened the situation to when, in 1963, Alabama Gov. George Wallace stood in a doorway to block two black students from registering at the University of Alabama. Wallace stepped aside after President Kennedy sent National Guard troops to the school.

 

"The nation will be watching as you stand like George Wallace stood in the door," Smitherman said, "blocking our progress."

I still can't believe they added members to the Banks Working Group based on race.  A mixed-use development is not inherently good or bad for one racial group or another.  What the two black members want are job guarantees.  I can get behind the idea of setting up job training programs designed to prepare interested members of the black community to work in the trades, but I get the feeling they want more.  Namely, quotas.  In this country, entitlements should not be race-based.

 

And just because the original banks working group included no blacks doesn't mean the end result of the Banks project is going to be anti-black.  The paranoia of the black community in this city never ceases to amaze me.  Imagine if Cincinnati whites insisted on appointing shadows to Mayor Mallory and City Manager Dohoney to make sure their decisions were good for the white community.

IMO, the work should be given to companies based on where they are from.  Let's start with Hamilton County businesses and then work our way out regionally.  What  do they (NAACP) want to base this on?  If the owner of the company is African American or if the company employs Af. Am.'s.?????    We could go round and round on this for years!

 

I don't feel we need to go to Cleveland or Columbus to find a minority interest in this project.  African Americans are going to benefit with this project just as much as the next CINCINNATIAN.  Let's get on with the project and keep the businesses local.       

 

The NAACP has the potential to drag this project out longer than it already has and I don't think that is fair to any Cincinnatian---- black, white, red, yellow, fuchsia, mother of pearl,   you get the idea!

So should we abandon open-market principles by giving precedence to contractors based solely upon race? Neglecting the fact that they may not be the lowest bidder, or the highest-quality contractor.

 

Next thing the NAACP will request, is that a certain percentage of businesses and residential units be reserved for "blacks."

I still can't believe they added members to the Banks Working Group based on race.  A mixed-use development is not inherently good or bad for one racial group or another.  What the two black members want are job guarantees.  I can get behind the idea of setting up job training programs designed to prepare interested members of the black community to work in the trades, but I get the feeling they want more.  Namely, quotas.  In this country, entitlements should not be race-based.

 

And just because the original banks working group included no blacks doesn't mean the end result of the Banks project is going to be anti-black.  The paranoia of the black community in this city never ceases to amaze me.  Imagine if Cincinnati whites insisted on appointing shadows to Mayor Mallory and City Manager Dohoney to make sure their decisions were good for the white community.

 

I couldn't have said it better myself.

Will the Banks get started this year?

Tom Neyer Jr., Neyer Holdings Inc.

May 11, 2007 | CINCINNATI BUSINESS COURIER

 

Answer: Just as important as what was said during the latest flurry of Banks-related publicity is what was unsaid: that there were no deal specifics disclosed means that as yet there is no deal. However, I do detect a refreshed candor, realism and sense of partnership that I find encouraging.

 

The interview continues, but this is the only part relevant to The Banks discussion

email that I received earlier today

 

Dear Community Supporter:

We need your support to make sure The Banks Project is done right.

 

The Banks can do more than transform our riverfront. If done right, the Banks can also transform lives throughout Greater Cincinnati. The Citizens' Working Group--an alliance of community, faith and labor organizations--has come together to make sure the Banks benefits everyone in our community, and not just a select few.

 

We are pushing to ensure the Banks:

 

* Includes transparency and community oversight (we don't want another Paul

Brown stadium)

 

* Pays a decent, living wage to all people who work on the project

 

* Provides apprenticeship and job readiness programs to give people lasting skills

 

* Provides for broad inclusion of minorities and disadvantaged people in

  employment, contracting and ownership

 

With these priorities, the Banks can uplift families and communities--and have a lasting impact on the economic vitality of our entire region. But these priorities must be included in the Banks developer agreement. We know from experience that specific goals need to be included in the agreement or else oversight, workforce development and inclusion are swept aside.

 

As you read this email, the developer agreement is being negotiated--SO WE NEED YOUR HELP NOW!!

If you agree with our vision, please go to this website and sign-on as a supporter:

 

http://www.progressohio.org/page/petition/banksproject

 

Also, please forward this message to your contact list.

 

Thank you. Together, we can make sure the Banks benefits everyone in our region.

I dont care how it gets done and who builds it as long as it gets done in the most efficient, cost effective way possible. I dont care if the majority of people working on the project are illegals who are earning cheap wages if it gets done in a good workmanlike way and in the quickest way possible so that it may benefit the city.

People need to quit complaining and just get the thing built.

I know that is a hard thing to ask

^I would just say that anything worth doing is worth doing right.  I don't think it is neccessarily right to pay people less than living wages, or have the workers working in unsafe environments (without benefits and what not).  I am indifferent about whether or not minority contracts are granted (it would be ideal I guess), but the bottom line is that I like seeing projects done right...if that happens to be the quickest/cheapest way then so be it, but if not then so be it...do it the right way!

Randy speaks the realness... I'd rather it get delayed and delayed than to have a product people are just going to criticize forever.

right now everyone critizes all the delays.  We built two stadia and a one of a kind museum and no one acknowledges that as an accomplishment because the rest isn't done.

^ ^ re: David

 

You have two types of opposition groups, seeing this from the Pullman Square in Huntington, WVa perspective:

 

1. Ones who complain that because it has been delayed again and again, the city will never receive anything worthwhile, like a mall. These are the ones who typically advocate a mall or a suburban-style development, and ones who have seen development plans come and go -- much like Pullman Square's previous incarnations.

 

2. Ones who complain that the resulting development was not up to their "par". They whine and complain that the development doesn't have enough retail like a mall does. These are the ones who visit malls regularly, don't shop downtown, and want the convenience of parking.

 

There are a few that I personally know who are like this. Using Pullman Square as an excellent example, it was once planned to be an office complex and a mall later on. All plans fell through for various reasons and it remained a gigantic, three block parking lot for decades in the center of downtown! The Huntington Mall, during this time, was built in Barboursville - a suburb - in 1985. Downtown businesses moved out over time and the city center declined as a place to shop and live.

 

Then came Pullman Square. Some said it would never be built because the demand isn't there, because it wasn't being built as a mall, because it wasn't "large enough", because it was a waste of public money. In the latter example, federal money was used to construct two large parking garages as part of an "intermodal center" package. One has supports for an office tower, while the other hosts a movie theater on top.

 

But you know something, Pullman Square _was_ built, although tenants came quite slowly. It was still an untested market for the region, the downtown that was kind of in the puts. But one by one, tenants came in and proved that the market was there. Restaurants, desert shops, movie theaters, book stores, and retail shops were posting record profits for the entire chain or for their geographic region. Concerts, performances, events, etc. were held in the "square". You had a few pull out, such as the Bistro but that was due to Jack Whittaker (THAT idiot) failing to pay construction costs.

 

But those naysayers! They had to get their last word in, as always. "Where is the retail? Where are all the stores?" "See! The Bistro pulled out because Pullman Square is failing!"

 

And now we are getting a bank, and several new retail tenants in a new corner building being constructed (Phase II). Already, a few have complained: "What we need: another bank! We need more stores!"

 

In the end: ignore them. They live too far in the past, are the type who are suburbanites at the heart, and can't see anything positive for the future.

Banks panel to hold public meeting

BY JON NEWBERRY | [email protected]

May 14, 2007

 

DOWNTOWN - The Banks Working Group, a city-county panel charged with recommending a developer for Cincinnati’s central riverfront, has scheduled a public meeting for 3 p.m. Tuesday at the Duke Energy Center downtown. The group’s announcement today did not specify a purpose or agenda for the meeting.

 

Tuesday is its self-imposed deadline for reaching a proposed master development agreement with the Atlanta-based team of Carter Real Estate and AIG Global Real Estate Investment Corp.

So quick with the updates!  one of these days i'll beat you to it rando

Banks planners reach deadline

BY JON NEWBERRY | [email protected]

May 15, 2007

 

DOWNTOWN - Today is the day residents have been promised they will find out who the probable developers of Cincinnati's long-tortured Banks project will be. While that's possible, one local official with an interest in the project says he'd be shocked if that occurred, even though the Banks Working Group has scheduled a public meeting for 4 p.m. today at the Duke Energy Center downtown.

 

The group, a city-county panel charged with recommending a developer for Cincinnati's central riverfront, did not specify a purpose or an agenda, but today is its self-imposed deadline for reaching a proposed master agreement with the Atlanta-based team of Carter Real Estate and AIG Global Real Estate Investment Corp.

Lets just hope that by summers end we have plans in place to start the construction process for the banks.

30 day delay on Banks deal

 

BY JON NEWBERRY | [email protected]

 

The Banks Working Group today extended its self-imposed deadline another 30 days, giving the panel until mid-June to complete a master development agreement to recommend to the city of Cincinnati and Hamilton County.

 

“We are close to having an agreement in principle,” Castellini said during the panel’s public meeting this afternoon at the Duke Energy Center downtown.

 

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070515/BIZ01/305150067/1076

“If we can’t do a hand-off in 30 days, we’re all going to go jump in the river.”

 

They should really keep their word on that. It would be hilarious.

“If we can’t do a hand-off in 30 days, we’re all going to go jump in the river.”

 

They should really keep their word on that. It would be hilarious.

 

I agree.  If they did a stunt like that, everyone would probably let them have yet another 30 days without a lot of grumbling.

right now everyone critizes all the delays.  We built two stadia and a one of a kind museum and no one acknowledges that as an accomplishment because the rest isn't done.

 

Agreed.  but the museum is financially struggling because of a lack of ANYTHING around it.  The reds stadium is lacking attendance mostly because they stink, but some due to the fact that there are no restaurants, bars, or living space around it.  Imagine if we had our own wrigleyville there, the museum would be getting way more attendance as well as the reds EVERY DAY.  Bengals, of course, will sell out any day of the week.  "If you build it, they will come"  unfortunately we haven't gotten to the build part yet.  and yes, if its delayed again, castellini better jump into the water