Comment 48188

By highwater (registered) | Posted September 24, 2010 at 16:22:14

I'm sorry mrjanitor, but you can't separate the funding issue that easily. You seem to be suggesting that this is a matter of blind support of arts vs. blind support of sports, and nothing could be further from the truth. The Ticats are asking for over $100m taxpayers' dollars while being unwilling to negotiate a location that will provide even a modicum of benefit to the people putting up 100% of the bill. This would be an unconscionable misuse of public funds.

The Pearl on the otherhand, is merely asking for the same kind of exemption from zoning laws that has been offered to others, so that they can continue to offer a benefit to the community that far outweighs any public investment that might be made in the form of waiving of onerous, and arguably unecessary, fees.

Nor is the seemingly blind support of the Pearl based on the fact that it is an arts organization. The outcry is due rather, to the fact that many other small, entrepreneurial businesses have faced the same obstacles in their efforts to adaptively reuse older buildings, and bring much needed jobs and economic investment to the depressed areas of our city. How many economic opportunities have been lost because other entrepreneurs faced the same sort of barriers as the Pearl? We may never know, all we know is that it has to stop.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds