Awakening to inviting touts and suggestive tweets that implied earthshaking revelations in the Sunday edition of the Tribune, I turned eagerly to "Council to appeal DLGF ruling," expecting to learn how the city's controller, Kay Garry, has turned the tables on the state's mandated budget cuts.
Whoa ... talk about false advertising.
Conceding that his "attempts to reach Garry were unsuccessful Friday," Tribune reporter Daniel Suddeath instead treats us to the usual palaver from council president Dan Coffey, who is allowed to jockey for taking credit for whatever it was that Garry did to change the dynamics of the budget situation, which we still don't know because she didn't comment and Coffey wouldn't tell.
Like this:
"I talked with [Garry] at length and she has a good handle on the situation now, and that's helpful when you get a handle on it and know what the numbers are," Coffey said.
Note that she has a good handle now, as though she didn't before, and so we're ladled more passive-aggressive nonsense from the Wizard of Westside, as enabled by the Tribune. Here's a question for the editor/publisher:
Is there any chance that this story might have waited for publication until the woman herself was available to be interviewed?
If so, why run it now?
If not, does it really qualify as news?
The remainder of the article recounts the eagerness with which City Hall has removed any reference to the VFW from its downtown master plan document, and its many reassurances that just because the master plan is a blueprint, it "may or may not come to fruition, depending on several factors including financing and public input," which Coffey knew already from having served on planning and redevelopment, but which didn't stop him from using as a scare tactic to mobilize opinion against a plan that he detests because it would enrich his council district.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
69 comments:
...another dandy Non-News nugget courtesy of the Tribune: "In a news release Friday, England stated there are two Environmental Protection Agency grants worth a total of $600,000 the city should pursue." Emphasis on "should".
The "news" article goes on to detail England's sham "public information meeting regarding the proposals at 7 p.m. Wednesday at the Fairmont Neighborhood Center"
Remind me again - what proposal?
I believe my tweet said cuts MIGHT not be so bad thx to kay garry. Pretty sure that's what the story said too, and coffey was definitely not trying to take credit for her work. The peg is the special meeting and the appeal. Sorry I can't makeup characters and write them in a column fed by gut extending beer, maybe next week. I'm sorry ms. Coyle is so jaded, seems like the city trying to get a grant to cleanup stuff would appease her. Guess not. Oh well have a good day
Yes, I am jaded by access to real news. My comment was directed at the utter lack of "news" value of another of your "reports" Mr. S. The news story could be CCE's attempts to shift costs of pollution around. That's what I"m thinking. Simply transcribing press releases from your fax machine is simply not news.
I live across the street from the VFW post and can see the tank from my front doorstep. My property also is in the master plan's target area.
I'm not sure why council members are worked up over the VWF's concerns when no council member has contacted me or, to my knowledge, any of my neighbors. Unlike most VWF members, we ACTUALLY LIVE in this district instead of driving here for a few hours each week.
...and why does the city have to "bribe" VFW with an internet cafe? What's up with that? Like somebody at the VFW can't just spend a Sat morning setting up an internet connection? Pleasseee...I'm peeing laughing.
The Internet cafe bribe is the payback for Coffey's interference, which helped to provide Steve "Nazis and the video poker" Price with cover, with all of it being the cost of the city getting a new blueprint.
ms. Coyle I am sorry you feel that way. I received that press release with five minutes to go in my week and figured passing it along would be better than sitting on it. I don't hit a homerun with every byline, as I'm sure no one is perfect in their jobs, and I clearly indicated it was a news release. Your idea of the story is biased, and I just can't go down that road. But I am glad you want more from the paper, we all do and will keep on trying.
"I received that press release with five minutes to go in my week and figured passing it along would be better than sitting on it."
why is that?
well, like any hourly employee I am bounded by time. I covered a couple of other stories Friday and we got the release about 5. I don't think there was a plot, just happened to play out that way.
It's just when I find out about something I feel it my duty to pass along asap.
I can attest that I had kept Daniel on the phone for a time during that time frame as well.
And sitting down the street from CCE, I can ASSURE you the information regarding the meeting IS NEWS.
After nearly a decade of trying the residents around here are finally getting somewhere on this eyesore.
What may not seem like news on the 700 block of main, is thought of as news on the C-town road corridor.
I'm just glad things apparently worked out chris. Cheers to you for caring about more than your piece of new albany.
Btw, that's about a slumlord deal he lives close to. The pics were horrid, we take for granted what we are blessed with.
It's news on my block and all over town when shifty deals with polluters cost us money. England issuing a press release about things he could be doing as well as inviting residents to another "pretend to listen" session that just wastes time. Remember all those well attended neighborhood code enforcement chats? They don't exist to solve problems, but to create the appearance of solving problems.
I still don't see why you call what you do - news reporting. Your a bulletin board.
Remember all those well attended neighborhood code enforcement chats?
No. When did they happen?
Gina,
I would gladly take a dozen of the houses next door to you over 1 Eastridge and CCE, plain and simple.
As far as being a bulletin board, hardly.
There is no way that this meeting will be allowed to be a "listen only" situation.
The people out here are pissed about this whole deal.
And also, we care about ALL of New Albany, not just our street, Many of us were at the commission meeting to speak out against CCE moving to corydon pike and 111, in return for that speaking out, we get to keep them longer.
Had this just been a macro issue to any of us, we would have spoken FOR it to move, and been done with it in our neck of the woods.
Simple statement on code enforcement: It is better than it was. We were able to get a slumlord house shutdown in 48 hours, versus the usual years it took before. Its all in how you play the game my friend.
"...I know what you, Maurice and the other residents have gone through over the years with this property and CCE. Sounds like it is almost at an end."
Ann - just like non-enforcement of housing standards et al is almost at an end?
"I'll shoot an email to either Carl or the Mayor in support"
IN SUPPORT OF WHAT?
Talking about the problem? Or dealing with the problem?
Wait - what's the problem again? It's so easy to lose sight of with all this blather....
"I'm just glad things apparently worked out chris. "
What has worked out for Chris?
my point about news or non-news regarding this particular report wasn't about whether people would like to get to the bottom of the CCE controversy, duh, ... it's about the process of getting there.
Other than the city spending our money to buy out an illegal polluter for $600,000 without any idea of what the clean-up will cost and who or how it will be done, all those salaried folks downtown are utterly without a legitimate proposal to purchase the CCE site.
If CCE donated the site to an environmental non-profit community group who could then apply for grants to remediate it, maybe I'd listen. CCE used and abused the land and the community. It's their turn to tell the community what they will do for us.
Chris - I hope I can attend the meeting just so I can see you guys making CCE and the city "listen". But remember to demand a written pledge of doing while you're talking and listening.
"What has worked out for Chris?"
Once again in your haste to be angry about something, you have missed the point. That comment had nothing to do with CCE. It was in reference to a slum landlord that Chris pressed some city officials about and at least got some traction. If you had taken time to read the next post perhaps you would have drawn that conclusion. As I said in my original post, you are jaded and being rash, I hope you can find some peace that no news article will offer you.
Gina,
In regards to paying for the clean up of 2045 silver street:
The Government of the people by the people of the civil city of New Albany failed to enforce the laws that were written and approved by the duly elected governments of the city of New Albany, and the State of Indiana.
When attention was drawn to the plight of the propety on Silver Street, certain factions pulled that attention away to other more pressing issues, such as a house with crap stacked in the yards.
As such, it comes to us to pay for the mistakes of OUR government. Like it or not, thats just the way it has to be.
Or we could of course wait until we can get the money for free to do it, whilst the contamination gets worse, or we can swallow our collective pride and accept the fact to rid the city of this potentially VERY hazardous situation, we must pay for it.
Of course we can always hope that Eastridge accepts the offer for $600k for the property, and do nothing to clean it up in the hopes that the fiscal fairy will wave her magic wand and the money magically appear to clean it up, or gamble and hope the feds dont get involved and fine the living hell out of the city.
As far as Eastridge and CCE (now CBE, LLC) donating the land to a non-profit group, if the man and his company did not care what environmental and zoning laws he has broken at this site, at his previous 4th street site, and the local, state and FEDERAL laws he ahs all ready broken at the proposed site on 111, what actual sane, rational train of thought would make anyone think he would donate the land for anything or anyone?
This is an issue seated deeply in realistic expectations, and the only way to achieve a resolution that ensures the health, safety and well being of the public at large is to pay up.
It is a very ugly truth, but it is the only truth we have, unless a private investor is willing to pay full price for the property and the full price for the clean up.
"to be angry about something" = community activism
Congrats Chris on the neighbor code issue! I'm looking out on a weed-filled rat infested open garbage dump next door...but I'm only 3+ years into asking for help with that.
Daniel S., think what real news locally would do for everyone's anger management?
Post script;
Actually, the best resolution to this problem would be that CBE, inc. operated in accordance to the laws governing their operations, and the city ensured that was occurring.
This would retain 17 full time jobs in the city, and provide a much needed service for the environment.
Even if they restructured the company to give operational control and oversite to a board of directors made up of persons from different areas of expertise that relate to the business, as well as community leaders.
"what actual sane, rational train of thought would make anyone think he would donate the land for anything or anyone?"
A Judge.
"to be angry about something" = "to be angry about something"
To be angry for the sake of being angry isn't activism. I've tried to explain things to you but you just want to continually insult me, like you're some czar of what defines news when nothing could be further from the truth. You obviously just want to be fired up and insult people, so have at it. All I hear is white noise...have a nice day.
And I was looking at a rodent infested, black mold infested, collapsing, water damaged, gas leak having rental property being shelled out for $650 per month to poor families.
All it takes is playing the game right, with proper documentation, and jsut the right amount of pressure, and polite conversations with the proper people in government.
I feel for you and your 3 years, and I honestly mean that, but you have to remember I learned to play this game after nearly 10 years of it next door with a situation that actually extremely dangerous.
And what judge would legally and ethically force a business owner to willfuly donate a property worth $1.2m to a non-profit agancy, because I would love to find him and put my non-profit on the list of receiving businesses!
Chris - By your logic of - "we've already abused us, so let's suck it up and pay off our tormentors so they'll go torment someone else" - you sound like a battered person.
Should we also be paying market price to every slumlord in town for his degraded property?
Bring a lawsuit against CCE, they lose, they settle for damages which could be donating the property for non-profit clean-up. Wouldn't that set a fine example for anyone else lawlessly polluting. Buying him out seems to set an example of encouraging polluters.
Half of the land mass in town is empty. Assume most of it is polluted. Is there a (master) plan that takes this into account? I'd assume there are ecological remediations issues on every bit of land in the county, esp. the city with it's 200 year industrial history.
To put it bluntly, we are living on a giant flood plain packed with sewage and poisons whose natural respiration system (hardwood trees) is gone.
What's makes me angry (Mr S.) is the lack of consciousness amongst the valley people about the state of their once beautiful land. Green Valley Road hasn't been in a green valley since 1955.
If you step back and ask from a long-term perspective what I think the greatest challenge is to revitalization here, it would be ecologically damage.
If you study the ecology/geology of Floyd County you will see NA is screwed. We are the funnel tip for a huge 10 county drain slope. The knobs create a barrier on our east. Falling Run Creek alone should have banks at least 1/2 acre deep with native hardwood just to be stable and able to manage storm water.
Likewise, without the 100+ year plus hardwood roots aerating and respirating our soil which is extremely unstable shale, highly prone to erosion, and for 200 years compacted with buildings and asphalt, how in the hell do people think we can stop storm flooding?
And with it the movement of soil toxins? So where do we start?
ps. fans...my anger would probably lessen if the air had oxygen in it here.
"Chris - By your logic of - "we've already abused us, so let's suck it up and pay off our tormentors so they'll go torment someone else" - you sound like a battered person.
Should we also be paying market price to every slumlord in town for his degraded property?"
Gina,
In a nutshell, YES, I am battered. I am beat, I am tired.
I am tired of fighting the local government, I am tired of fighting fringe, all most cult like organizations that feel its our way or no way at all.
I am battered and beat down by once helpful, understanding "community advocates" that feel unless the change occurs on my block, then it is a useless waste of my tax dollars.
I am tired of people who feel that any ounce of progress in this city, unless it directly positively effects the view out their windows personally, is worthy of starting a battle over to ensure that change doesnt happen.
I am tired of members of this community attacking the leaders we have in our own ranks because they dont like the business that they run, or they dont like the fact they got their sidewalks fixed before "mine".
I am battered and tired by factions in this city refusing to wake up and realize that WE are responsible for the messes we are in because WE elected the officials who appointed the individuals who failed to do their duty.
So do I sound defeated, you bet your rear I am.
What should be cause for celebration that we have finally gotten the upper hand in taking on a crooked, law breaking, environment polluting leach on our community is met with this type of grandstanding, and by a person who has done nothing but basically beg for enforcement.
It costs money Gina. I personally have spent countless hours, untold amounts of money, thousands of photographs, endless meetings fighting to make CCE accountable for the damage they have done to not only my neighborhood, but OUR city, and OUR environment.
To be met with contention from a person who claims to want this city bettered, it in fact a very bitter pill to have to swallow.
Not intending to sound too much like a whiney baby, but you know what, have at it my friend. You can take on the slumlords, you can take on the environmentally damaging companies. But I am quite sure all anyone will hear about is the property next door to you, which I might add would have been taken care of long ago if you played your cards right.
I managed to do it 4 times now, on properties a hell of a lot worse than that next door to you, and owned by a hell of a lot more powerful people that that next door to you.
Take over Gina, because I am done.
I will worry about my clinics, my street.
"The best way to influence investment choices is not to get rid of problems but to identify what people want and provide it."
-David Boehlke
chris, like many of the poisoned valley people here, you have twisted my efforts at advocacy for community interests, in this case, my own efforts to out CCE, into some imagined assault on your efforts.
This is a sign of battering. I think most of this town is clinically battered. When people are battered they tend to attack each other, not the powers that cause the abuse. I see this every day here. I think I'll call it "battered town syndrome" and apply for lots of grants to study it further.
Be sure to let us know how the grant apps turn out.
Yes Gina, I am poisoned. But I have found the antidote to that poison.
And for the records, words can not truly be twisted, the manner in which they are chosen, and presented can do more to twist ones words than any other person could ever do.
By the way I help to pull in multi millions of dollars in federal, state and private grants every year, be happy to help as a grantwriter for the usual 5% fee.
DANIEL:
Any room in the tribune for a column about local happenings in nature, and birding? I am game (pun intended)
Chris,
I've read a lot about CCE but never been out to the property to see myself. Do you have CCE pictures for viewing online?
Chris,
Contact stevekozarovich@newsandtribune.com
He may just be interested, as long as it's not foul...haha
Both as a taxpayer and as a person concerned with enforcement of health and safety laws, I worry that buying out a rule breaker creates a “moral hazard” by failing to create economic disincentives to breaking the rules.
That being said, I feel comfortable with the assumption that NOT buying out CCE, and attempting to enforce the rules, will result in years of litigation and a few hundred thousand dollars in attorneys fees. Operations (and presumably pollution) would continue during those years. Presumably a new administration two years from now could drop that litigation and the status quo would return.
We have many problem rental properties while CCE’s specific facts are somewhat unique. That uniqueness makes be worry less about the moral hazard. Without more information, I’m giving the administration the benefit of the doubt that buying out CCE is the best thing for the city overall.
But as with many issues, I do wish the administration would more clearly articulate its case.
Dan, I just happen to know where there are pix online of the CCe site!
http://letterfromnewalbany.blogspot.com/
Sell out for half the appraised value or face further legal (zoning) action: that's about as advantageous a position as the city can muster if the desired outcome is environmental clean up and more neighborhood friendly development at the site.
Otherwise, we're largely dependent on state and federal environmental agencies who operate outside of local control. And, legally, those agencies face the dilemma of attributing responsibility to a property owner who, despite any current practices, can always point to decades of industrial use as a, if not the, source of contamination.
Even if CCE has contributed to the contamination, it would seem extremely difficult to prove sole responsibility.
A similar buy out vs. legal action strategy might actually work for residential property as well.
Half the appraised value sounds good but if the other half is cleanup, it's no particular bargain. And if the cleanup is more than that, it's no bargain at all.
Granted, that does not take into account the " green value" of a cleanup. Still, with the owner of a contaminated property facing court, I would think that said property could be bought for less than market value(real estate plus cleanup). Not only could be, but should be.
It depends, Mark, on what the owner would be facing in court. From the City, he'd only be facing the halting of outside storage and possibly fines, not full blown environmental remediation - that would be up to the aforementioned agencies which a) don't seem to be in any particular hurry to jump in and b) have been weakened over the past few years by their respective administrations.
Nobody from the EPA has responded to my questions about cleaning this property. They quickly responded about sewer overflows, but nothing on this.
Granted, but from a negotiating standpoint, the city has a stronger hand, IMO. The property owner faces possible fines and a reduction of efficiency in his operation. Hurts profitability.
If the properpty owner wants to sell it privately, he is still facing the same cleanup problem. Banks won't loan money until that stuff is cleaned up. So, market value is probably the absolute best that he can get. And that assumes that he can find a private buyer.
Darn, didn't I just read elsewhere that we "pergressives" always totally agree 110% of the time.
I understand where you're coming from, Mark, but City ownership is the only scenario that guarantees environmental remediation and site control.
If an EPA remediation grant becomes a reality (and we've been successful in the recent past), then your bargain scenario starts to tilt the other way.
Maybe we should offer more, then.
"City ownership is the only scenario that guarantees environmental remediation and site control."
Are you drunk?
There has to be limits, of course, Mark, and establishing them is certainly subjective. As usual, though, we have to decide what outcomes we're seeking.
If getting the site cleaned up is priority one, then it changes the approach and relative value of the purchase. For what it's worth, I realize you're arguing from a business standpoint more than an ideological one. With so many variables outside of local control, it's tough to know exactly how much to offer.
If you were going to go lower, how much lower?
Almost forgot...
Fuck off, Gina.
Damn, Jeff. You've convinced me. I agree totally with you.
Actually, Jeff, I'm not sure either. It just seems that "total market value" is the goal no matter the circumstances.
If I recall correctly, even the first mentioned "deal" for the Coyle property would have been real estate plus estimated clean up that came up to the appraised value. That has since changed and I know the two examples are not the same. However, surely the city's hand would be stronger than in the Coyle case. Coyle seems to be willing to give the city somewhat of an actual deal and there is no court case hanging over their head. Besides just the knowledge that Eastridge has thumbed his nose at regulations, even if he didn't cause all of the pollution at the site. It's not all business with me! (grin)
But, somewhere around 10-20% less than total market value.
I will say this, I think that if the two of us where in charge of this scenario, we could work it out. Our positions are not really far apart. We are just arriving at the position from different directions. As you alluded to. I think.
It's amazing what can happen when one factors out the lunatics and their innuendo. It's almost sort of peaceful.
'bluegill said...
Almost forgot...
Fuck off, Gina.
4:55 PM"
Is that at the request of NAConfidential, or you Jeff?
Roger's in charge of NAC. I'm in charge of me.
In case you're wondering, both "lunatic" and "innuendo" came directly from me as well.
Bluegill
Because Roger's silence, is well, very loud, let me point you to Roger's rules of his blog:
"Thanks for reading, and please consider becoming a part of the community here, one that is respectful of the prerequisites of civilized discourse, and that seeks to engage visitors in substantive dialogue."
I know the rules. If you ever start following them, I'll have to come up with another shtick.
If anybody should be kicked out it's Hoosier, what an idiot!
Roger just sat back down after a few hours devoted to non-computerized biking, walking, drinking and eating.
Roger's preference in this matter is that the principles involved find a way to co-exist here.
At the same time, I am aware that there is a history, some of it played out here. It is my view that precisely because they know each other and I know them, they are afforded more slack than should be given anonymous bile spewers.
Jeff clearly states that he speaks for himself, not the blog. The court of opinion in the form of the blog readership is free to draw its own conclusions.
We're adults. Carry on. If this becomes counter-productive, I might halt comments, but probably not.
We as a city could offer CCE the moon, and they would take it, and fill it with shredded tires and the illegally dumped remains of the houses torn down for the city at a super low bid.
Some of the ideas discussed here might hold one if only one thing was present; An ethical business owner who cared one ioda about anything other than his pocket book.
Sure the city could continue with the lawsuit, and even demand the prescribed fees for the daily violation of zoning ordinances.
However, as mentioned, the pollution would only get worse in the meantime, and give the operators plenty of time to amass a mess like the city has never seen before.
We would quickly realize that on top of the legal fees of the lawsuit, any amount that would be awarded and subsequently appealed for years on end, probably a doubling or more of the cost of an environmental clean up.
This man is one slick SOB. After over 8 years of dealing with him, and quite a bit of that as one on one trying to mediate between him and the nieghborhood, he is a master at manipulation, an artist at shifting blame, and almost with out peers when it comes to skirting moral and ethical responsibilities, and he can do so with a genuine smile on his face, leaving only the most dogged and dedicated opponents questioning if he really is that bad.
Thats the part that persons such as Ms. Coyle do not understand. Some people are such a pain in the ass that you have to pay to have them removed, and its worth every red taxpayer cent.
Walking through and taking a few pictures of the sit does not give the full picture.
By the way Roger, GEEESUS!! You guys serve up some mean assed calzones up on grantline! I dont think I will be able to eat again for a week!
Thanks, Chris. We still have camera business to discuss, now that (maybe) I have a spare moment.
Anytime, you have my number.
I should be at the Floyd Clinic Wednesday morning for a while.
A note to Gina,
I dont know who got you so riled up. However, I do really appreciate you quoting me as though you had interviewed me on your blog about CCE.
I really like how you edited what I posted in an attempt to make me seem like I was villifying the rest of city and its residents.
However, I will say this much, if you think you can get to me like you have others, or bother me like you have others, just give up now. It simply is not going to happen.
But if you think you can paint me in a bad light, misquote me, and structure those "quotes" to cast me in a negative way, I will take legal action.
I am tired of the games people like you are playing.
It's easier to just say it in two words, Chris, but I agree. That sort of nonsense is the problem, not the solution.
Thank all of you for your many words of encouragement. For more of my scorching commentaries (stand back from the fire boys) don't forget to pop over to:
http://letterfromnewalbany.blogspot.com/
for my latest feature:
"City Offers $600,000 to Shredder, says Scram!"
All I saw was a bunch of comments deleted, like it was a rap song or something. The post was confusing, a mix of satire and half comments. Maybe I missed something.
Yeah, I went over to look and everything has been deleted except Ms. Coyle's posts.
I admit, I copied and pasted the posts on here that led up to us all "attacking" Ms. Coyle, had my say, about it, and decided I am not playing the game, and removed them.
Just wanted to give her a subtle reminder that it was not a bunch of people who just started bashing her, but responding to her unhappy comments.
Sorry for any confusion. For the most part is was nothing but the same things that were posted here, with the exception of me asking Ms. Coyle to not try and villify me by choosing selective bits of what I posted in an attempt to make it look like I blame the rest of the city for the porblems with CCE.
Post a Comment