Jump to content
cincydave8

Cincinnati: West End: FC Cincinnati Stadium

Recommended Posts

MY VIEW: City needs development without displacement

 

When I saw the headline in the Cincinnati Business Courier, Lindner on FC Cincinnati stadium issues: ‘It’s extremely hurtful, disappointing,' I was heartened. I thought, finally he speaks and he feels the pain of the residents being displaced by his soccer team.

 

I figured his “extreme” disappoint was in his representatives, who told the community there would be “no displacement,” and that he, as the owner of a team that fired a coach for poor representation on the field, was releasing his spokespeople for misrepresentation off the field.

 

Boy, was I shocked to read the article. He had little to no concern for the displacement of the residents. His "extreme hurt” and “extreme embarrassment” and “extreme disappointment” are all focused on how he and the team have been treated.

 

Sometimes it’s just best to be quiet.

 

The city of Cincinnati needs an anti-displacement policy. Anyone running for elected office in the city or county must have an anti-displacement platform and initiative.

 

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2019/05/29/city-needs-development-without-displacement.html

  • Like 1

"You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the people are moving not being dragged thru the streets for flaying. they are in air conditioned apartments and will move to air conditioned apartments. And, their move will be paid for my FCC. Then there is the I 74 corridor thru Indian Hills. Never gonna happen never gonna happen. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As council vote looms, no deal yet between FCC-West End tenants

 

News1_0411_FCC.5b0ee06209979.jpg

 

A Cincinnati City Council committee sent needed zoning changes for FC Cincinnati’s West End stadium to the full council for a potential vote on Wednesday, but there is no agreement yet between the club and residents in two low-income housing buildings the team has acquired.

 

FC Cincinnati has been ensnared in a major controversy over the fate of up to seven West End residents at 421 Wade St. and 1550 Central Ave., properties FCC acquired earlier this year but has not yet outlined plans for.

 

Much public attention has been focused on 99-year-old Mary Page, who is a bedridden resident in the Wade Street building. Supporters of the residents have accused the club's president, Jeff Berding, of dishonesty because he said that the team would not displace residents prior to getting approval for the West End site. In response, Berding has said that promise applied only to the stadium itself.

 

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2019/05/29/as-council-vote-looms-no-deal-yet-between-fcc-west.html


"You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what happens if the 99 year old needs to be moved to intensive care or some such. Should the city keep her in the apartment because of her health? Up to 7 people need to be moved (please notice "up to" .... As I hear Moses took 2 million people out of Egypt. Of course anyone over 99 were given rainy day tickets for the next caravan to Saudi Arabia. But sadly, Moses didn't make it to the promised land. Such is life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, RJohnson said:

And, their move will be paid for my FCC

 

The problem isn't the moving expenses, it is that the wheels of section 8 move slowly and they can only afford monthly rent if it is section 8.  So either FCC pays their new rent until they can get a new section 8 apartment figured out in a year, or they put a bed-ridden 99 year old on the street.

 

I'll once again reiterate that this would have been painless if they took the Corporex spot.  All the money they are using on fighting the WE community could have gone to a better stadium with full features from the start.  I have no sympathy for Lindner, Berding and ownership, they brought this on themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lindner on FC Cincinnati stadium issues: ‘It’s extremely hurtful, disappointing

 

Some pretty nauseating quotes from Lindner in this article, but I think this one takes the cake

 

“I worry about Cincinnati getting the reputation New York City did for scooting out Amazon,” Lindner said. “I worry about our city from that perspective. If families like ours and the Farmers can’t get things done, what will people from outside the city who want to move their business here think? It’s not the kind of message you want to send.”

 

If even I, billionaire Lindner, have to play by the normal rules of governance, what message does that send? Give me a fu**ing break. You are 'getting things done', you just aren't being allowed to totally skirt the rules like you want to. The Lindner and Farmer families will still make plenty of money off this team and West End real estate development. The stadium will get built and the team is already in the MLS. Nothing better than billionaires playing the victim card while trying to evict a poor 99 year old from a neighborhood that's already been shredded to bits by elites for generations. Ew, it's just gross.

 

BTW, Carl, Amazon is now shopping for new office space in Midtown, so I guess New York's business reputation is still just fine. 

Edited by edale
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, edale said:

Lindner on FC Cincinnati stadium issues: ‘It’s extremely hurtful, disappointing

 

Some pretty nauseating quotes from Lindner in this article, but I think this one takes the cake

 

“I worry about Cincinnati getting the reputation New York City did for scooting out Amazon,” Lindner said. “I worry about our city from that perspective. If families like ours and the Farmers can’t get things done, what will people from outside the city who want to move their business here think? It’s not the kind of message you want to send.”

 

If even I, billionaire Lindner, have to play by the normal rules of governance, what message does that send? Give me a fu**ing break. You are 'getting things done', you just aren't being allowed to totally skirt the rules like you want to. The Lindner and Farmer families will still make plenty of money off this team and West End real estate development. The stadium will get built and the team is already in the MLS. Nothing better than billionaires playing the victim card while trying to evict a poor 99 year old from a neighborhood that's already been shredded to bits by elites for generations. Ew, it's just gross.

 

BTW, Carl, Amazon is now shopping for new office space in Midtown, so I guess New York's business reputation is still just fine. 

 

It really is one of the dumbest quotes I've ever heard. God forbid Cincinnati get a reputation among the business community as being similar to NYC, which is... **checks notes** ...the business capital of the freakin' world. NYC metro area has a GDP of $1.5 trillion--similar to some of the world's wealthiest countries. But they were mean to Amazon, or something. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“Sure, we’re concerned,” Lindner told me. “We’re under some tight time frames. We’re going to have to hustle.

 

The old fake crisis trick. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, DEPACincy said:

 

It really is one of the dumbest quotes I've ever heard. God forbid Cincinnati get a reputation among the business community as being similar to NYC, which is... **checks notes** ...the business capital of the freakin' world. NYC metro area has a GDP of $1.5 trillion--similar to some of the world's wealthiest countries. But they were mean to Amazon, or something. 

NYC can afford to run off business and be much more difficult because of their size and as you point out they are the business capital of the world. Not quite the same for Cincinnati which needs to roll out the red carpet to be business friendly. Dennard, Seelbach, Sittenfield and their ilk need to recognize this and work for the benefit of the city instead of their small interests groups. There is no reason why this should hold up ROW zoning or why all local groups should come asking for a hand out when there is a billion dollar development project on the table.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am fine with "rolling out the red carpet" if we're talking about attracting a major business that will bring a large number of new well-paying jobs to our region. Giving Amazon tax breaks to build a new HQ where they will employ thousands of people making six-figure salaries is not the same thing as giving FCC tax breaks to build a stadium that will mostly result in more low paying service jobs. Virtually everybody on this forum that supports this new stadium admits that Cincinnati is not going to see a huge increase in economic activity; the benefits are mostly intangible (boosting the national reputation of our city by adding another major league team, bringing more Cincinnatians to the core and exposing them to the revitalization that has been occurring, etc). So give me a break with the whole "business friendly climate" argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But it is not just FCC. It is the Children's hospital project and it has been projects that have gone back over 30 years. It was a similar story back in the 90s when projects such as Hofbrahaus and the Aquarium were lost to Newport. It goes back to the fact that Cincinnati was a difficult place for development. 30 years ago it was more along the lines that the red tape to build anything was burdensome. While they improved things there, you now have every social group to in an area that comes asking for a handout and many elected leaders all to eager to capitulate to them.

 

It does not have to be a big project or an Amazon. Much more can be done with a bunch of smaller more diverse companies over time, and that is far more realistic than snagging a huge fish like Amazon.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a "difficult" place because you have to donate to Cranley (or previously, Luken) to build something here.  The blue bloods control 3CDC, they control the Port Authority, and they have controled almost every seat in city and county government since the 1926 charter takeover.   They control 700WLW and they control The Enquirer. 

 

Mallory was endlessly harassed because he wasn't one of Them.  Neither was Qualls.  Neither was Simpson.  So they had to be destroyed. 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, jmecklenborg said:

It is a "difficult" place because you have to donate to Cranley (or previously, Luken) to build something here.  The blue bloods control 3CDC, they control the Port Authority, and they have controled almost every seat in city and county government since the 1926 charter takeover.   They control 700WLW and they control The Enquirer. 

 

Mallory was endlessly harassed because he wasn't one of Them.  Neither was Qualls.  Neither was Simpson.  So they had to be destroyed. 

 

 

Agree with you all the way on this one, but with one caveat:  Yvette Simpson torpedoed her mayoral aspirations in Cincinnati primarily  because of her stance against Children's Hospital.  There's no telling how many hundreds of votes this self-inflicted political blunder cost her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

It was a similar story back in the 90s when projects such as Hofbrahaus and the Aquarium were lost to Newport. It goes back to the fact that Cincinnati was a difficult place for development. 

 

I don’t want to single you out because this is such a pervasive opinion around here that I see all over social media but the whole “lost the Hofbrauhaus to Newport” thing really needs to be retired. There’s like, what, 30 craft breweries in the area now? Does Hofbrauhaus even crack the top ten of most impressive breweries in the area these days? 

Edited by thebillshark
  • Like 2

www.cincinnatiideas.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, thebillshark said:

 

I don’t want to single you out because this is such a pervasive opinion around here but the whole “lost the Hofbrauhaus to Newport” thing really needs to be retired. There’s like, what, 30 craft breweries in the area now? Does Hofbrauhaus even crack the top ten of most impressive breweries in the area these days? 

Completely agree.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, taestell said:

I am fine with "rolling out the red carpet" if we're talking about attracting a major business that will bring a large number of new well-paying jobs to our region. Giving Amazon tax breaks to build a new HQ where they will employ thousands of people making six-figure salaries is not the same thing as giving FCC tax breaks to build a stadium that will mostly result in more low paying service jobs. Virtually everybody on this forum that supports this new stadium admits that Cincinnati is not going to see a huge increase in economic activity; the benefits are mostly intangible (boosting the national reputation of our city by adding another major league team, bringing more Cincinnatians to the core and exposing them to the revitalization that has been occurring, etc). So give me a break with the whole "business friendly climate" argument.

You also forget that Lindner and the Farmer families have many business interests and holdings outside of AFG and Cintas that are not based in Cincinnati. There are many jobs that could be moved to Cincinnati from some of their other holdings if both families really wanted to push things. Right now it does not make business sense, but who is to say it would not in the future. Is it worth pissing off Lindner over the soccer stadium today, when it could lead to another 1000 jobs in the urban core and new 40 story tower in the future because the city wants to do business with him? To me this is cutting off your nose to spite your face.

 

the thing is if you look at these big job creators in the city, they are almost Never come from the likes of say a Toyota or Amazon HQ2 who moves their HQ here. They are coming from home grown companies and families who buy companies and move operations here. Look at the announcement yesterday about the company moving to the Sawyer Point Building from NH. They are coming here because they are owned by Axcess Financial. Ensemble Health Partners has 2000 jobs in the area because they are owned by Mercy Health. Western & Southern moved a few hundred jobs downtown from Louisville and Indiana here a couple years back. Kroger was the reason why 84.51 took off in town the way they did instead of locating in another major market.  This is why you do not want to upset these job creators. When Lindner says that Cincinnati does not want a reputation as a bad place to do business, this is what he means. Amazon really does not show up on the radar. Companies that consider this area have a connection here. International Paper almost moved here before choosing Richmond VA, because they have significant operations here and a history here. The people who bring the jobs here are already here and paying attention.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, thebillshark said:

 

I don’t want to single you out because this is such a pervasive opinion around here that I see all over social media but the whole “lost the Hofbrauhaus to Newport” thing really needs to be retired. There’s like, what, 30 craft breweries in the area now? Does Hofbrauhaus even crack the top ten of most impressive breweries in the area these days? 

It is not the fact that they lost Hofbrahaus. In reality, it was such a minor player and a blip. The bigger issue behind it was the fact that they spent significant time trying to make a project work on the Ohio side only to give up and go to Kentucky. This was a project that was being floated in the 90s but the city did not have its act together. Not saying this was a loss, and in reality, nobody really cares now, but it speaks more to the point that it is much more difficult to do business in the city no matter who you are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the problem.  Under your assumptions all major developments are a race to the bottom, where the employers hold all the cards and can dictate what a city does, at the expense of the taxpayers.  If that is the case (and it isn't right now, because companies are largely choosing to relocate to more expensive city centers to attract better talent), then I'd rather our city build up employment giants from the ground up.  Build a good start-up culture (which is happening here right now) and let them grow up in this city.  

 

I'm so sick and tired of states being held hostage "because jobs."   Mt Pleasant, WI is a case study in governments being held hostage because of alleged job promises.

Edited by 10albersa
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

NYC can afford to run off business and be much more difficult because of their size and as you point out they are the business capital of the world. Not quite the same for Cincinnati which needs to roll out the red carpet to be business friendly. Dennard, Seelbach, Sittenfield and their ilk need to recognize this and work for the benefit of the city instead of their small interests groups. There is no reason why this should hold up ROW zoning or why all local groups should come asking for a hand out when there is a billion dollar development project on the table.

 

And how did NYC become the business capital of the world and the most populous city in the US? It wasn't by giving handouts to Amazon or sports teams. It wasn't by rolling over for billionaires. It was by building infrastructure (canals, public transit) and investing in quality of life amenities (museums, parks, the arts). NYC has always had high taxes and lots of challenges to development, but people came anyway because they made it a city where people wanted to live and work. Amenities attract new residents and tourists, not tax breaks and zoning variances. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As someone who has worked at an economic development agency in the past, I learned that every place is "business-unfriendly" in some way. There are things you can point to everywhere in order to prove your point that the area you are shilling for is "better". The Dakotas are supposed to be The Place 2 B according to Right-Wing think tanks yet the money continues to flow to NYC, Silicon Valley, Seattle and L.A.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole "job creator" thing is something of a myth, not unlike trickle-down economics.  It's a bunch of supply-side fraud that the powers that be have been doubling down on for some 40 years now, and the only gains have been to those at the very top.  At a more local level, these so-called "business friendly" low-regulation cities/counties are just selling out their constituencies for some low-wage crap jobs subsidized by the taxpayers, and likely leaving them with some environmental mess to clean up later.  For the most part, jobs are created in response to a demand for goods and services, not the other way around.  Yes there is some feedback between supply and demand, but no company will add jobs/workers if they don't have the work to do.  Cities like New York, London, and San Francisco are evidence that a "business friendly" environment is not necessary for a strong economy, since those are all very high-cost and high-regulation locales.  West Virginia, Mississippi, and Alabama should be booming because of their low-reg policies, but they don't have the talent or the agglomeration or the markets to attract that business.  It's the bending over backwards to woo businesses with subsidies, concessions, and payola that is the race to the bottom.  If the only choice is "private profit public debt" then the smart move for the city is not to play that game at all. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NYC became that financial capital of the world not because they built parks and amenities, it is because they had the stock market and were able to develop a critical mass of businesses from financial, to creative, to retail, to shipping that fed off each other as its own eco system. To say city hall was chiefly responsible for this as some sort of master planner is pretty naïve.

 

People came to NY because of geography. It developed the critical mass and is a self sustaining infrastructure now. Tax breaks did not cause that to happen but neither did city planning.

 

The thing that separates successful towns vs towns that struggle that are not NYC (such as Indy, Minneapolis, Cincinnati, Columubus vs the Daytons, Toledo, Buffalo, Rochester of the world is that their economies are built around one or two industries and not overly diverse. Cleveland's key struggles were that they were so concentrated on heavy manufacturing and finance. When the manufacturing failed, the financial services had to seek other pastures to compete. Similar to Buffalo. Dayton, Toledo and Detroit were extremely heavy on the auto industry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, jjakucyk said:

The whole "job creator" thing is something of a myth, not unlike trickle-down economics.  It's a bunch of supply-side fraud that the powers that be have been doubling down on for some 40 years now, and the only gains have been to those at the very top.  At a more local level, these so-called "business friendly" low-regulation cities/counties are just selling out their constituencies for some low-wage crap jobs subsidized by the taxpayers, and likely leaving them with some environmental mess to clean up later.  For the most part, jobs are created in response to a demand for goods and services, not the other way around.  Yes there is some feedback between supply and demand, but no company will add jobs/workers if they don't have the work to do.  Cities like New York, London, and San Francisco are evidence that a "business friendly" environment is not necessary for a strong economy, since those are all very high-cost and high-regulation locales.  West Virginia, Mississippi, and Alabama should be booming because of their low-reg policies, but they don't have the talent or the agglomeration or the markets to attract that business.  It's the bending over backwards to woo businesses with subsidies, concessions, and payola that is the race to the bottom.  If the only choice is "private profit public debt" then the smart move for the city is not to play that game at all. 

On the macro level, yes.

 

On the micro level. I could put 500 jobs in the West End and help develop that area and make that a vibrant community or I could take those same jobs and go to Florence. Or especially given the remote nature of work today, we could take those 500 jobs to Indy instead. On the Macro level, there are still 500 jobs created but is it better they are in the West End and the city gets the benefit of the taxes or should they go to Florence or even Indy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, DEPACincy said:

 

And how did NYC become the business capital of the world and the most populous city in the US? It wasn't by giving handouts to Amazon or sports teams. It wasn't by rolling over for billionaires. It was by building infrastructure (canals, public transit) and investing in quality of life amenities (museums, parks, the arts). NYC has always had high taxes and lots of challenges to development, but people came anyway because they made it a city where people wanted to live and work. Amenities attract new residents and tourists, not tax breaks and zoning variances. 

 

One my argue NYC become what it is today because John D. Rockefeller moved the standard oil company from Cleveland to NYC. Could Cleveland have become a city that rivals NYC had the standard oil company remained in Cleveland? Probably...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

were able to develop a critical mass of businesses from financial, to creative, to retail, to shipping that fed off each other as its own eco system

 

There's no reason to think Cincinnati can't produce a culture of developing niches instead of relying on outside companies (or home-grown staples applying for corporate welfare while threatening to leave).  UC's Innovation Hub, their future Maker manufacturing hub, MORTAR, and the many other grassroots organizations can diversify our business portfolio.

 

You are parroting the same threats that big business use.  They hold cities against each other and see who can offer the best corporate welfare program.  I want companies that believe in this city and the talent that is here.  If they are just asking for breaks, there's no reason to think they won't ask for the moon again when the tax break expires.  If a company thinks they can attract enough talent to move to Florence, then fine... go for it.  they should choose us based on our city's features, not how much money we can hand out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those are certainly important assets, but they are small potatoes in the economic ecosystem. I don't mean to minimize their efforts, but the economic development is a mix of that plus established development. The fruits of the UC INnovation Hub and MORTAR and the likes will not truly be reaped for 30 years out. Those are very important to the region and to be honest, as a region, we let ourselves get behind the 8 ball 30 years ago on this which is why we were playing from behind. However, it is still important to seek the corporate relocations because despite the tax breaks, they offer so much more to the community in the forms of jobs, corporate philanthropy and other investments in emerging businesses. They help bring businesses to the market. Without the likes of Kroger and P&G in town, many of the businesses developing in the incubators in town could never come to fruition because the capital would not be there to sustain it.

 

It is those large companies like Kroger and P&G that attracts the innovators to town that allows the ecosystem to take shape. Point is, you need the large corporations in town to foster the smaller companies that supply them or innovate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let’s take a step back here. Every time FCC has gone before a board or council needing approval, they have received it. This is even after the location of the stadium was completely changed from Oakley to the West End. I don’t know how things could be moving any faster for them without having complete disregard for our city’s processes and people.

  • Like 3

www.cincinnatiideas.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah zoom back out again and this whole thing has both Turbo Boost and NOS -- not just for Cincinnati but as compared to anywhere.

Edited by GCrites80s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, jmblec2 said:

 

One my argue NYC become what it is today because John D. Rockefeller moved the standard oil company from Cleveland to NYC. Could Cleveland have become a city that rivals NYC had the standard oil company remained in Cleveland? Probably...

 

Eh, NYC's dominance goes back farther than that. The real reason was infrastructure. The subway system of course, but the big one was canals. Throughout the 18th Century Philadelphia was the second most important city in the British Empire. At the beginning of the 19th Century Philadelphia was still the bigger and more important city in the new US. But leaders in New York went all in on the Erie Canal and it worked. In 1790, Philadelphia, Southwark, and Northern Liberties (the constituent areas of what was essentially the City of Philadelphia at the time) had a population of 44,096. NYC had a population of 33,131. By 1830, NYC had a pop of 202,589 and Philly was at 129,915. And from there NYC's dominance only continued. 

 

In 1920, Cleveland reached its peak ranking as the 5th largest American city with a population of roughly 800,000. At that time NYC had 5.6 million. In the 1880 Census, prior to Standard Oil's move, Cleveland had 160,000 residents to NYC's 1.2 million. Certainly, keeping Standard Oil would've helped Cleveland's fortunes but NYC was already the primate city and that wasn't going to change no matter what by that time. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, DEPACincy said:

 

And how did NYC become the business capital of the world and the most populous city in the US? It wasn't by giving handouts to Amazon or sports teams. It wasn't by rolling over for billionaires. It was by building infrastructure (canals, public transit) and investing in quality of life amenities (museums, parks, the arts). NYC has always had high taxes and lots of challenges to development, but people came anyway because they made it a city where people wanted to live and work. Amenities attract new residents and tourists, not tax breaks and zoning variances. 

 

One thing that NYC does not permit is signs on its skyscrapers.  Yes, about a half dozen do exist because they are grandfathered, but very few corporate logos dot their gigantic skyline.  

 

Imagine if "clowsel" attempted to remove the Great American, et al, signs.  All the blue bloods would throw a tantrum!  

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, jmblec2 said:

 

One my argue NYC become what it is today because John D. Rockefeller moved the standard oil company from Cleveland to NYC. Could Cleveland have become a city that rivals NYC had the standard oil company remained in Cleveland? Probably...

 

All sorts of completely random things happen over the course of a city's history.  Microsoft moved to Seattle from Albuquerque because Bill Gates wanted to be closer to his mommy.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Business goes where the talent is and if the talent is white-collar then it is amenities and infrastructure. Big cities tend to attract talent because they have the infrastructure to support density and the amenities to keep things interesting for talent. After the "riots" in 2001, AG Laffley told the city to give them a city he can recruit to. This was after his predecessor threatened to move the HQ out of the city. If we want to be a vibrant place we have keep developing a city that can attract talent. Building a MLS stadium is a way to get there. IMO its not the best way, but whatever.

 

Back to the original topic about being overly regulatory and anti-growth. That has been a complaint for decades in this city and I have heard numerous developers and businesses owners vent about it. Most of them cite Columbus as a city that does it much better.

 

Some of the biggest reasons come down to zoning and policy specifics, or the lack thereof. There are a record number of PD's in the city because for the most part the existing zoning does a terrible job addressing mixed-use infill (outside of the UMX zoning and FBC). The city was working on a Land Development Code but that has been mostly shelved for the last 5 years. If it had been enacted it would have solved some of the anti-development stuff we have now.

 

Second is policy. City political leadership (Council and Mayor) seems to only be interested in scoring points with each other, so every big thing is held up, debated and dramatized. It doesn't have to be this way and yes, every city suffers from some form of this but Cincinnati has had a bad case of it for the last 6 years. The lack of clear policy goals, metrics, standards, etc. makes it hard to see what is worth it and what is not outside of rhetoric and opaque closed-door deal making.

 

If we want to be "business-friendly" it has less to do with tax breaks and more to do with building a city for the economy of the 21st century and creating a fair market environment, one that doesn't involve an entry fee to play in this city.

  • Like 2

“All truly great thoughts are conceived while walking.”
-Friedrich Nietzsche

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At least now Cincinnati has rail transit now, so that people from cities with rail transit don't have to hold their noses when they apply for positions in town -- unlike Columbus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, JYP said:

Business goes where the talent is and if the talent is white-collar then it is amenities and infrastructure. Big cities tend to attract talent because they have the infrastructure to support density and the amenities to keep things interesting for talent.

 

Right, this is why I groan every time I see an advertisement in an in-flight magazine targeting CEOs: "Move your company to [Alabama/North Dakota/Mississipi]! Low cost of living and low taxes!" They also usually say there's a "huge talent pool" available because of some state university, but conveniently leave out that the state has been slashing funding for the public university system, and most of the graduates want to GTFO as soon as possible after graduation.

 

Companies that want to attract top tier talent and pay them well are also willing to pay the price to be in more expensive, less "business friendly" cities. Because that is where most of their employees want to be.

 

3 hours ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

You also forget that Lindner and the Farmer families have many business interests and holdings outside of AFG and Cintas that are not based in Cincinnati. There are many jobs that could be moved to Cincinnati from some of their other holdings if both families really wanted to push things.

 

So we should bend over backwards to give them every single thing they ask for related to the new stadium, on the off chance that one of their companies decides to relocate more jobs to Greater Cincinnati in the distant future?

 

Our country's obsession with "job creators" and our desire to constantly pamper them makes me sick.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

You also forget that Lindner and the Farmer families have many business interests and holdings outside of AFG and Cintas that are not based in Cincinnati. There are many jobs that could be moved to Cincinnati from some of their other holdings if both families really wanted to push things. Right now it does not make business sense, but who is to say it would not in the future. Is it worth pissing off Lindner over the soccer stadium today, when it could lead to another 1000 jobs in the urban core and new 40 story tower in the future because the city wants to do business with him? To me this is cutting off your nose to spite your face.

 

I'm curious to know what business interests and holdings Lindner and the Farmers have outside of the core businesses in Cincinnati. Not necessarily doubting you, but honestly curious. IMO, the Lindners and Farmers and Co. are pretty much tied to Cincinnati, because their name carries weight there, and they are basically treated like royalty. That's the reason Lindner is so pissed and 'hurt' by the small road bumps he's experiencing with this MLS stadium. He's a Lindner, and therefore he should be given carte blanche to do whatever the hell he wants. If the Lindners moved to New York or LA they would be small potatoes, and their name wouldn't get them much of anything.

 

I went to school with multiple Lindner and Farmer kids, and I don't think these people are inherently bad or anything. They do invest in the community, and they have created many jobs in the region. I believe they want what is best for the region, and they want to see it succeed. But they need Cincinnati just as bad as Cincinnati needs them. P&G could basically pick and move to any number of cities in the world, and not really be affected. Not the case for the Lindner owned companies. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there was a time when the running story was, the streetcar will not help development in OTR. Now look. There was a time when no one played Soccer in this country. Now look. There are soccer moms that fill the highways and airways to attend, promote and back soccer. Bringing a MLS team to Cincy may just save this city.  There was a time when Detroit refused to see the tsunami coming. Look at Detroit and northern Ohio now. Cars are built below the Mason Dixon in a variety of rural areas. Change will happen. And if it comes down to moving a 99 year old from a to b and she is a renter then she loses. Sorry. She has to go. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, edale said:

 

I'm curious to know what business interests and holdings Lindner and the Farmers have outside of the core businesses in Cincinnati. Not necessarily doubting you, but honestly curious. IMO, the Lindners and Farmers and Co. are pretty much tied to Cincinnati, because their name carries weight there, and they are basically treated like royalty. That's the reason Lindner is so pissed and 'hurt' by the small road bumps he's experiencing with this MLS stadium. He's a Lindner, and therefore he should be given carte blanche to do whatever the hell he wants. If the Lindners moved to New York or LA they would be small potatoes, and their name wouldn't get them much of anything.

 

 

I don't understand why Carl Lindner, Jr. bought the Reds off of Marge Schott and then turned around and sold the team to Bob Castellini when the team was valued at $270 million, unless he needed the cash for his other ventures, i.e. Queen City Square.  If Carl Jr. hadn't sold in 2005, Carl Lindner III would own 51% of the Reds, who are now valued at over $1 billion.  

 

Instead he's throwing $250 million at this team, which is hardly generating any revenue, and nobody knows if MLS teams will become profitable or more valuable over time.  The bottom line is that they'd be WAY ahead if they had just held onto their majority stake in The Reds.  

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...