[htfdcolt]

Originally Posted by JayCT

This is very interesting and I would strongly suggest that the Mayor take this offer very seriously. Centerplan is a very reputable company who has brought a number of major developments to completion. They are not some fly-by-night operation who is obviously in the wrong here. There is plenty of blame on both sides and if this goes to court it is highly unlikely that the city will walk away free and clear. The Mayor needs to swallow his pride and do what is best for the city and that is getting the stadium completed and opened as soon as possible for no additional cost to the city. If one of the partners in Centerplan is saying it can be done, then I believe it can. This will truly test Mayor Bronin's abilities as a leader. If he does not take this seriously then I would relegate him to another in a long line of poor leaders the City of Hartford has had. JMHO, Jay

I heard this entire interview on WNPR "Where We Live" yesterday. The developers did sound reasonable, and it seems like they've built numerous other high value projects in New Haven. It was interesting to hear Bronin basically state that had he been in Segarra's spot, that he would not have supported or gone after a new stadium in the first place. They also played a sound bite from Segarra where he says he'd like to throw out the first pitch at the ballpark, after which Bronin said sardonically, "well, he has the time"!

[ryanthegoldengod]

Bronin just seems to be overplaying his hand as the sheriff who strolls into town and cleans everything up. He probably told himself all of Hartford's problems were the direct result of Pedro Segarra but things are rarely that simple.

[MikefromCT]

Originally Posted by ryanthegoldengod

Bronin just seems to be overplaying his hand as the sheriff who strolls into town and cleans everything up. He probably told himself all of Hartford's problems were the direct result of Pedro Segarra but things are rarely that simple.

I agree, but I also think he's probably the person best suited to be mayor right now. He's the closest thing to a fiscal conservative that Hartford has had in a long time, and that city desperately needs one now. From the word go, he seemed to understand that in order for the city to function they have to start living (and spending) within their means, and IMO he'll do a far more effective job of this than Segarra and especially Perez ever did. I only hope he has enough foresight to realize that the key to the city's growth lies in developments made with PRIVATE funds, not public. I know quite a few people are drooling over the new ballyard and how nice it is, and it should: the public footed the bill for this, and they will be paying for it for a long time.

[BPt111]

Hartford ballpark developers fire back at city | FOX 61

http://www.courant.com/community/har...706-story.html

[WeHa]

Originally Posted by MikefromCT

I only hope he has enough foresight to realize that the key to the city's growth lies in developments made with PRIVATE funds, not public.

Exactly! It's like when the XL remodel was presented but no one developer wanted to take that on so the state would have to fund. Thank God that didn't happen.

This might be oversimplified, but if you can't find a developer who would stand to make money, it's not profitable and that's why the city shouldn't fund it.

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by WeHa

Exactly! It's like when the XL remodel was presented but no one developer wanted to take that on so the state would have to fund. Thank God that didn't happen.

This might be oversimplified, but if you can't find a developer who would stand to make money, it's not profitable and that's why the city shouldn't fund it.

Not sure what you are talking about. The XL Center is owned and managed by the state. Why would a private company want to pay to remodel it? The state has a private company manage the facility which is common but any improvements must be done by the owner.

I also disagree with you on cities only doing projects that are profitable. If that was the case, NOTHING would ever be done. Development is a funny thing. It is all about perception. IF an area is perceived to have a lot of new development, more development will follow. Look at all the new apartments being built downtown. That all started with a few buildings years ago getting tax incentives from the city and state.

The ballpark is supposed to be the linchpin for redevelopment of NoDo which has sat empty for decades. It was doing that with the proposal for a Hard Rock Hotel and a brewery restaurant. Hopefully those won't die but it is not looking good since they were part of Centerplan's project. Jay

[beerbeer]

Originally Posted by WeHa

Exactly! It's like when the XL remodel was presented but no one developer wanted to take that on so the state would have to fund. Thank God that didn't happen.

This might be oversimplified, but if you can't find a developer who would stand to make money, it's not profitable and that's why the city shouldn't fund it.

If you take that philosophy too far, the city needs to sell Bushnell Park. It loses money every year.

Cities not only need to be wise financially, they need to understand quality of life issues. Not every project benefits every citizen of the city. Being a great place to work, live and play ultimately decides a city's future.

[JayCT]

I don't get this. This study ranks Hartford low for rental investment claiming that it is low on property appreciation and has a high availability of apartments. I can understand the appreciation part of this but from what I see, it is not easy to find good apartments in the area. Rentals downtown have been very good and we always see people moving here complaining that they are having trouble finding rentals. Not sure who to believe particularly when past studies ranked Hartford as one of the tightest rental markets in the country. Jay

Hartford ranks low for investment rental properties | HartfordBusiness.com

[MikefromCT]

Originally Posted by JayCT

Not sure what you are talking about. The XL Center is owned and managed by the state. Why would a private company want to pay to remodel it? The state has a private company manage the facility which is common but any improvements must be done by the owner.

And why should the public pick up the tab for this project? If it's a white elephant, then cut the chord and raze it. Professional sports won't be coming to Hartford anytime soon, so forget it. It's over.

Originally Posted by JayCT

I also disagree with you on cities only doing projects that are profitable. If that was the case, NOTHING would ever be done. Development is a funny thing. It is all about perception. IF an area is perceived to have a lot of new development, more development will follow.

It's not the public's responsibility to invest public dollars in PRIVATE projects. This is corporate welfare, and I don't care how often or where else it's happening, it's wrong. I thought our state was smarter than that, but apparently not. I'm confused, you're saying cities SHOULDN'T invest in projects that are profitable?

Originally Posted by JayCT

Look at all the new apartments being built downtown. That all started with a few buildings years ago getting tax incentives from the city and state.

But they SHOULDN'T have. Look at what's going on in the big town next door: Delamar is opening a new hotel. Sisters of Saint Joseph is being converted from a convent to market-rate apartments. New condominiums are being built on Farmington Avenue. The cost to taxpayers? Not a dime. I can't help but wonder if this is another reason people in this state prefer suburbs over cities: When they see what public dollars are being spent on, they feel it isn't the best use of money, and the fiscal health of the city suffers.

Originally Posted by JayCT

The ballpark is supposed to be the linchpin for redevelopment of NoDo which has sat empty for decades. It was doing that with the proposal for a Hard Rock Hotel and a brewery restaurant. Hopefully those won't die but it is not looking good since they were part of Centerplan's project. Jay

It takes more than transforming empty brownfields into entertainment centers to truly revitalize an area. Other cities tried this, and after the lights dim on the field, everyone retreats back to the suburbs. I'm not saying do nothing and don't build anything, but this is not the best use of funds or space. The needs of the residents whose homes abut this area are not being met, they still don't have a grocery store in their neighborhood. I encourage some of the people here to have a conversation with some of the actual residents of Hartford, and get THEIR $0.02 on what they feel their community needs. Chances are, it's not what's going up there now. This reminds of when Tiger Stadium was being replaced, all the politicians were saying the new baseball and NFL stadiums would generate revenue for the city, improve schools and policing and services. Maybe that's the case for areas that border downtown and are filled with hipsters, but a little further off the beaten path and you'll see there's been no "trickle down" of funds to these areas. There lies the future fate of Hartford, too.

[htfdcolt]

Originally Posted by MikefromCT

And why should the public pick up the tab for this project? If it's a white elephant, then cut the chord and raze it. Professional sports won't be coming to Hartford anytime soon, so forget it. It's over.




It's not the public's responsibility to invest public dollars in PRIVATE projects. This is corporate welfare, and I don't care how often or where else it's happening, it's wrong. I thought our state was smarter than that, but apparently not. I'm confused, you're saying cities SHOULDN'T invest in projects that are profitable?





But they SHOULDN'T have. Look at what's going on in the big town next door: Delamar is opening a new hotel. Sisters of Saint Joseph is being converted from a convent to market-rate apartments. New condominiums are being built on Farmington Avenue. The cost to taxpayers? Not a dime. I can't help but wonder if this is another reason people in this state prefer suburbs over cities: When they see what public dollars are being spent on, they feel it isn't the best use of money, and the fiscal health of the city suffers.




It takes more than transforming empty brownfields into entertainment centers to truly revitalize an area. Other cities tried this, and after the lights dim on the field, everyone retreats back to the suburbs. I'm not saying do nothing and don't build anything, but this is not the best use of funds or space. The needs of the residents whose homes abut this area are not being met, they still don't have a grocery store in their neighborhood. I encourage some of the people here to have a conversation with some of the actual residents of Hartford, and get THEIR $0.02 on what they feel their community needs. Chances are, it's not what's going up there now. This reminds of when Tiger Stadium was being replaced, all the politicians were saying the new baseball and NFL stadiums would generate revenue for the city, improve schools and policing and services. Maybe that's the case for areas that border downtown and are filled with hipsters, but a little further off the beaten path and you'll see there's been no "trickle down" of funds to these areas. There lies the future fate of Hartford, too.

Well said. I don't have a beef with spending public $, but it should be on projects that are truly proven, per citizens' input, to benefit the people living in the particular city. It's when a small group of leaders decides what to spend the $ on, with little to no public input (Exhibit A: the Yard Goats), that white elephants are created.

I would lump the busway into this category also. The state has to date not released statistics on how many cars were taken off the road as a result of the project...probably because the number is too insignificant to measure or report. Big waste of $500M IMHO, but that's another whole thread.