In direct public monies, by The Stark County Political Report's (SCPR, The Report) calculation:
- which likely is only a guestimate in that getting accountability from various Ohio/Stark County political subdivision (OH-SPP) is "like pulling teeth,"
is that millions upon millions of Federal (through Ohio gov't), OH-SPP have made it into the coffers of the the private, non-profit Professional Football Hall of Fame (PFHOF).
The Report is in the process of developing a spreadsheet of direct/indirect monies that will show millions upon millions of taxpayer dollars being pumped into the HOF-VP with little if any accounting to the taxpayer on how the money is being spent.
The SCPR thinks that the likes of C. David Baker, Repository publisher Jim Porter and the Greater Canton Regional Chamber of Commerce president Denny Saunier thought they could get away with it, they would have no problem whatsoever in "laying that dime" on federal, state and local governments.
The SCPR is especially critical of Porter for his role as publisher in shaming anyone who questions what appears to be a Baker instigated "out-of-control" HOF village expansion project. Kind of a strange stance for a newspaper man not to honor Constitutionally protected Free Speech and its concomitant effect of facilitating "accountability."
The more one reads Porter's columns, the more we ought to believe he is a "wannabe bully" who is known to have told one Stark County elected official that The Rep at Porter's at his direction would seek to defeat that official for re-election for having had the audacity to refuse to do the will of HOF-VP officials which would in that official's view as advised by the Stark County prosecutor's office be illegal.
Of course, Porter knows that elected officials do not want to incur the ire of the only countywide newspaper.
Sounds like something that Donald Trump would do, no?
Many federal officials (especially Republicans) take all kinds of guff from Trump for fear of becoming the object of his Twitters.
By the way, does Porter have a Twitter account?
Again, if the money comes exclusively from the private sector, God bless them The Los Angeles Rams recently announced plans to build a $5 billion stadium totally with private sector money.
And, what's more, even for public monies invested, IF there was accountability for how the public money is been "specifically spent" and how it enhances the likelihood that the taxpayer will receive a "return on investment," then, perhaps, there would be no reason to object and might result in all-out support.
That the HOF-VP is so far unaccountable should be a red flag to the effect: what are they hiding?
Readers are reminded that Baker at one time (2015) was projecting the rehab of Fawcett Stadium (now Tom Benson Stadium) at $22 million. What does the HOF folks own up to these days? $139 million (Baker once put the amount in a public statement at $150 million, recently a Stark County elected official told a SCPR source that the cost is more like $161 million) for an incomplete stadium including no locker room facilities for Canton McKinley footballers.
Note: As far as the SCPR is concerned, Godspeed to HOF officials if they can attract private sector money which is exemplified in Tom Benson ($11 million), Johnson Controls ($100,000 million over over 18 years) and recently Constellation Energy (no amount announced, isn't that interesting? why?) and apparently more partnerships to come, privacy is perfectly acceptable in that these "investors" take a financial risk that the HOF-VP will not end up being what it has projected to be. But for public monies, lack of accountability to the taxpaying public is unacceptable.One talked about project: tunneling I-77 in the proximate vicinity would if taken seriously would have a price tag of $500 million.
The SCPR is especially critical of Porter for his role as publisher in shaming anyone who questions what appears to be a Baker instigated "out-of-control" HOF village expansion project. Kind of a strange stance for a newspaper man not to honor Constitutionally protected Free Speech and its concomitant effect of facilitating "accountability."
The more one reads Porter's columns, the more we ought to believe he is a "wannabe bully" who is known to have told one Stark County elected official that The Rep at Porter's at his direction would seek to defeat that official for re-election for having had the audacity to refuse to do the will of HOF-VP officials which would in that official's view as advised by the Stark County prosecutor's office be illegal.
Of course, Porter knows that elected officials do not want to incur the ire of the only countywide newspaper.
Sounds like something that Donald Trump would do, no?
Many federal officials (especially Republicans) take all kinds of guff from Trump for fear of becoming the object of his Twitters.
By the way, does Porter have a Twitter account?
Again, if the money comes exclusively from the private sector, God bless them The Los Angeles Rams recently announced plans to build a $5 billion stadium totally with private sector money.
And, what's more, even for public monies invested, IF there was accountability for how the public money is been "specifically spent" and how it enhances the likelihood that the taxpayer will receive a "return on investment," then, perhaps, there would be no reason to object and might result in all-out support.
That the HOF-VP is so far unaccountable should be a red flag to the effect: what are they hiding?
Readers are reminded that Baker at one time (2015) was projecting the rehab of Fawcett Stadium (now Tom Benson Stadium) at $22 million. What does the HOF folks own up to these days? $139 million (Baker once put the amount in a public statement at $150 million, recently a Stark County elected official told a SCPR source that the cost is more like $161 million) for an incomplete stadium including no locker room facilities for Canton McKinley footballers.
Beginning on Monday past, this blogger began a series on government monies put into the project in direct/indirect government contributions.
Today, we focus on some currently "unfunded" indirect costs as sketchy as they appear to be. Moreover, the SCPR thinks that despite the "fuzziness" of HOF-VP promoting elected, appointed and public figures (see "Strengthening Stark") of Stark County leadership, it appears likely that those folks will be advocating taxpayer participation to the tune of (the SCPR thinks of up to $100 million.
Starting with $199,936 in grants (federal $100,000; Ohio $100,000) to SCPR to fund a Hall of Fame Land Use & Transportation Study.
After the $199,936 for the study cost, the cost of implementation of study recommendations get real murkey.
Consultant Bryan Newell said on Monday that the Fulton Road Corridor recommendation would likely cost will be some $20 million to $30 million dollars with other target recommendations being project at considerably less.
To say the least, the lack of approximate numbers for the "other than the Fulton Road Corridor" improvement made the meeting significantly less informative than it should have been.
It is hard to believe that Newell and Nau couldn't provide guestiments of what each of the possible implementation projects might cost and for those project selected where the money (public or private) would come from.
At the January 24, 2019 SCPR-led public meeting (about 30 citizens attended) there was scant discussion of actual numbers of likely indirect government support for the HOF-VP in terms of supporting infrastructure expenditure.
Here is a link to the January 24th meeting slide presentation. In that link, see a video excerpt of meeting whereby the presenters are quizzed about the cost of recommended/targeted infrastructure improvements
The first SCPR meeting had about 100 attendees and the second about 40 according to SCPR executive director Bob Nau.
It appears to The Report that the effort to attract citizen participants to the meetings is underwhelming.
It upcoming blogs, the SCPR will endeavor to provide to the reading public numbers in the context of a gestalt that taxpayers have already "directly" sunk into the HOF-VP and likely will be asked to magnify many times in paying for "outside-the-HOF-site" infrastructure improvement.
The bottom line question that participating public entities (e.g. City of Canton, Stark County commissioners [the bed tax] and the Canton City Schools/Plain Local Schools ought to be asking is what the total cost (direct/indirect) to taxpayers for the entire HOF-VP project including off-site infrastructure improvements.
Readers can depend on the SCPR to continue digging until the overall cost to taxpayers of all aspects of taxpayer participation are identified in specificity so that we taxpayers know what we are paying for and what is a realistic expectation of the return on public investment.
With the ethically-conflicted Jim Porter at the helm of The Repository, the SCPR thinks it highly unlikely that capable reporters on The Rep's staff will be turned loose to do what unfettered reporters do.
It is hard to believe that Porter has gotten himself and his newspaper so invested in the HOF-VP that this blogger thinks that The Rep is not a reliable source for information and pressing for accountability for the taxpayer's participation in the HOF-VP!
Starting with $199,936 in grants (federal $100,000; Ohio $100,000) to SCPR to fund a Hall of Fame Land Use & Transportation Study.
After the $199,936 for the study cost, the cost of implementation of study recommendations get real murkey.
Consultant Bryan Newell said on Monday that the Fulton Road Corridor recommendation would likely cost will be some $20 million to $30 million dollars with other target recommendations being project at considerably less.
To say the least, the lack of approximate numbers for the "other than the Fulton Road Corridor" improvement made the meeting significantly less informative than it should have been.
It is hard to believe that Newell and Nau couldn't provide guestiments of what each of the possible implementation projects might cost and for those project selected where the money (public or private) would come from.
At the January 24, 2019 SCPR-led public meeting (about 30 citizens attended) there was scant discussion of actual numbers of likely indirect government support for the HOF-VP in terms of supporting infrastructure expenditure.
Here is a link to the January 24th meeting slide presentation. In that link, see a video excerpt of meeting whereby the presenters are quizzed about the cost of recommended/targeted infrastructure improvements
The first SCPR meeting had about 100 attendees and the second about 40 according to SCPR executive director Bob Nau.
It appears to The Report that the effort to attract citizen participants to the meetings is underwhelming.
It upcoming blogs, the SCPR will endeavor to provide to the reading public numbers in the context of a gestalt that taxpayers have already "directly" sunk into the HOF-VP and likely will be asked to magnify many times in paying for "outside-the-HOF-site" infrastructure improvement.
The bottom line question that participating public entities (e.g. City of Canton, Stark County commissioners [the bed tax] and the Canton City Schools/Plain Local Schools ought to be asking is what the total cost (direct/indirect) to taxpayers for the entire HOF-VP project including off-site infrastructure improvements.
Readers can depend on the SCPR to continue digging until the overall cost to taxpayers of all aspects of taxpayer participation are identified in specificity so that we taxpayers know what we are paying for and what is a realistic expectation of the return on public investment.
With the ethically-conflicted Jim Porter at the helm of The Repository, the SCPR thinks it highly unlikely that capable reporters on The Rep's staff will be turned loose to do what unfettered reporters do.
It is hard to believe that Porter has gotten himself and his newspaper so invested in the HOF-VP that this blogger thinks that The Rep is not a reliable source for information and pressing for accountability for the taxpayer's participation in the HOF-VP!
No comments:
Post a Comment