After watching last nights council meeting (yes, I still watch from home) I was wondering about the approval of the DAG for the old Mercy Hospital building. While I agree that the building is an eyesore, I am not sure that I agree with the approval of another $2.7 million for it's renovation. My instinct would have been to lay it over for 2 weeks so that more of the questions could be answered. There was obvious confusion with the terms of the money and how it would be paid out. Those questions, I feel, were left unanswered. Today, I learned that the group that is taking over the property was part of the original group that was working with Ganther from the start of this project. This information was conveniently left out of the information that the council was using to approve the resolutions last night. Now, the questions are begging to be asked; Was this intentional by Jackson Kinney to not include the connection? Would this have changed the outcome of the vote? Would it have prompted the council to lay it over for more information to be presented? And now that this information is coming out, will it be brought back to reverse the decision? I guess we will wait and see. I would keep an eye on the ONW for additional information. They will probably run a story in the next couple of days. Update: The article can be found here.
I was also curious about the "no bid" for equipment again (survey department). This has started to be a pattern to buy equipment without taking bids. Granted, they were speaking the truth when they said that this company was the only supplier in this region. There are others, but Sheboygan is closest.
The rest of the meeting was quick and otherwise painless. I was intrigued by a post that I saw earlier today on the ONW Election thread. It was from a poster only known as "chzhead", he asked; "With the increased number of executive sessions that have focused on the performance of the City Manager, one could be led to assume that his performance is lacking.
Do you as a potential council member feel that the clause in his contract to terminate his employment should be exercised?
Why or why not?"
That is a good question. I only wished I had come up with it first. One reply has already been made by Mr. Bain and he has deferred the answer until the executive sessions are no longer a restriction. Good decision and answer. I would imagine Ms. Scheuermann will have a similar response but perhaps this will spark some debate with the challengers to see where they stand in regards to the city manager. Even more so since Mr. Kinney seems to have put the council in an uncomfortable position yet again.
What is your take? Sound off.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
Today, I learned that the group that is taking over the property was part of the original group that was working with Ganther from the start of this project. This information was conveniently left out of the information that the council was using to approve the resolutions last night. Now, the questions are begging to be asked; Was this intentional by Jackson Kinney to not include the connection? Would this have changed the outcome of the vote? Would it have prompted the council to lay it over for more information to be presented? And now that this information is coming out, will it be brought back to reverse the decision? I guess we will wait and see. I would keep an eye on the ONW for additional information. They will probably run a story in the next couple of days.
INTERESTING SCENCERIO
We shall await verification from the Northwestern?
Do we depend on honesty from the ONW?
The real question here is "Who Cares"? Anyone who paid attention at the meeting knows that the city has no financial risk in that project until the conditions of the development agreement (completion and success of the project) are met, and at that point, the risk is essentially nullified by the successful operation of the property. For the record, I firmly beleive that Mr. Ganther is a complete dummy and that his project track record is a bit dubious. I would imagine Mr. Anbar regrets his past partnership, which is why he isn't currently partnering with Mr. Ganther. That said, Ganther isn't involved with this portion of the project anymore except as a builder, so he has no say in the decision making or operation of the property for the long haul. Did the city make a mistake in not at least making it a footnote to the council? Absolutely. Lets not use this "new" information, however, to diminish the quality of this project, especially when we have the ideal scenario in place to bring about the renovation of a key property in town.
So if now of that matters to you-- does it matter to you that our own city staff was'nt open and honest with disclosures the past business involvements?
Has our city become so desperate that staff operates in secrecy and the Council goes along with the secrets?
This all goes to again illustrate how far from center our city administration has been allowed to stray.
At this time, I am putting the owness on all our elected council members to draw the line in the sand and have a very direct "Come To Jesus" meeting with the city manager.
Our elected council members must put an end to this cloke of deceit and cover-up that has invaded our city government.
To do nothing, is to condone the actions that have occurred!
Or are you just on a witch hunt, 552, looking for another reason to find something to complain about?
I am TOTALLY disappointed with how the council handled the complaints about Waterfest and the neighborhood concerns about the noise and traffic issues.
What is the purpose of an ordinance?
Do the citizens of Oshkosh have to abide by the ordinances set forth
by city ordinances?
Do we have the right to expect that all residents live by the same rules?
Do we have to abide by the noise ordinance or the ordinance that states city parks close at 11?
Even if it is just ONE citizen realizes an ordinance is being broken that citizen has the right to expect that police and city staff to enforce all ordinances.
All citizens have the right to expect enforcement of any and all ordinances.
BUT apparently if an organization states enough impact on local economy and has enough money to throw around and virtually buy the support of our city councilors.
We heard all the councilors’ state that Waterfest attendance would be hampered if activities would be curtailed.
We heard that the overwhelming majority do not want restrictions on Waterfest,
regardless of the fact they violate several ordinances.
So IF the overwhelming majority wants to we should be able to walk our dogs in the parks, set our own speed limits, be drunk in public, repair noisy motorcycles or car engines at least up to 11 nightly, ETC. After all we do pay our taxes and should have to same rights.
Apparently our city Council has set a precedent that ordinances are only made to be broken.
10:10 glad none of this means much to you...Looks like you should be in the Bush Administration huh!?!
;)
Hey 10:25 I AGREE
Just from viewing that 1 meeting:
I will NOT vote for ANYONE on the present council.
Sounds like Mr./ Mrs./ Ms. average citizen will have to continually remind the council they should be representing ALL citizens regardless of how loud "special interest" groups scream.
We should NOT have to BEG the council to have city ordinances obeyed!
From Horselover:
Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2007 2:05 pm Post subject: new information
I thought the connection between CRL and Ganther smelled a little fishy, so I did a little digging via Google and found several interesting facts about CRL, Arcom and Ganther. First, CRL and Arcom are not two different companies that “partner” as described by Ms Rupnick, spokesperson and employee of CRL. In fact, CRL is owned by Arcom, which is owned by a company called ANDEV.
From the Arcom website: (http://www.aboutarcom.com/pages/527023/index.htm) “Community Retirement Living (CRL) is a wholly owned subsidiary of ANDEV/ARCOM.”
Andev/Arcom is a large development company with “projects” in the US, Canada, Mexico and Israel. Their website lists 33 corporations, centers and institutes and academies owned and operated by the company.
From the Andev website (http://andevinc.com/AndevProfilePage.htm). “ANDEV Group, LLC (ANDEV) is a real estate and healthcare business development group based in Chicago, Illinois… ANDEV’s affiliates, ARCOM Management and CRL (Community Retirement Living).” The photo on the homepage of the (Chicago-based) ANDEV website is of none other than Dan Anbar himself.
From blbain’s post (3/15-5:41 PM), according to Rupnick, “In 2002, did Ganther and CRL work together on the first proposed Mercy project? No. Arcom, a development company had partnered with Gitchie-Gumee on the first proposed project. However, due to differing visions for the scheduling of the proposed project, dissolved the relationship in early February 2004, prior to the financing and permitting”
Rupnick’s answer doesn’t address the question. The question pertains to 2002, not what happened in 2004, when the “relationship” was dissolved. So for two years, Anbar/Arcom and Ganther WERE working together on the Mercy project. For Rupnick, a CRL employee to say “no,” is just a plain lie.
Again from the Arcom website, “Lakeshore Place is a joint venture between ANDEV/ARCOM and Ganther Construction. The partnership has acquired the vacant Mercy Hospital and Medical Center site on Lake Winnebago in Oshkosh, WI.”
And then from the Mon 10-June-2002, Oshkosh Northwestern, Developer switches gears on riverfront condo project, BY KARL EBERT, “Dan Anbar, his partner in a proposed redevelopment of the former Mercy Medical Center hospital, bought one-third of the project and brought with him expertise in developing housing for the elderly.”
So clearly, CRL (actually ARCDOM - ANDEV), did in fact “work together” on the first Mercy project. CRL’s parent company, as Andev, states the first Mercy project was a “joint venture between ANDEV/ARCOM and Ganther Construction.”
That joint venture was Gitchi-Gumee LLC, which after obtaining $800,000 in TIF from the city, was sold to Ganther for $1. Why did Anbar sell GG to Ganther for a buck after getting the 800K?
Rupnick’s attempts to paint the situation as Arcom, CRL and Ganther as separate, unassociated companies that coincidentally happen to be working together again is pure spin. It appears the partnerships between Ganther, Anbar, Andev, Arcom and CRL are older and deeper than we know.
The 2002 deal was between Ganther and Arcom. The new deal is between Ganther and CRL. But it is the exact same players and they now have pursuaded the city to give them $3.5 million dollars (counting both TIF deals, and TIFs ARE public money). If I were on the counsel, I would have liked to have been made aware of this fact. As the old adage goes, “fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.”
What was the quote from Mr Esslinger regarding noise in Oshkosh and moving?
If the neighbors surrounding the Leach don't like the noise vibrating for the facility they have a option to move?
As I understand it rather than require enforcement of the noise and nauisance ordinances in Oshkosh residents should move.
What happened to councilors representing ALL citizens not just "special interest groups"
A "novel" solution: Rather than find a solution to the real problem homeowners should move. Who would want to buy a home near this facility. The City has vitually cut the value these homes in half.
I think the council is catering to special interest gruops and fixing squeaky wheels. They are NOT representating the average home owner/taxpayer.
I was looking for more from a mayorial candidate.
First of all, the ordinance only covers the neighbors of the Leach AFTER 10pm. The noise level is allowed to be higher prior to that.
The council agreed that the venue does not run after 10pm more than once or twice each season and it is dependant on weather. On the nights it does run late, the people that are concerned about the noise can file a complaint with the OPD and they can measure the decibles in the effected area. If there indeed is a problem, it can be dealt with through normal channels. To this point, I don't believe there have been any formal complaints made and/or the venue did not exceed the ordinance levels.
Paul Esslinger should not be singled out. If you truly feel that you are slighted by his opinion, than you should also NOT vote for Bain or Scheuermann as they also voted for the 11pm curfew.
Exactly no one on the present council will get our vote!
If the music is allowed till 11 what time will be park close? The council approved the violation of (2)TWO city ordinances.
None of them can think for themselves or represent the neighborhoods of our city.
Post a Comment