Skip to main content

Lawsuit threat ends secrecy over medical mart

Popularity Report

Total Popularity Score: 0
Loading...
Loading...
Loading...
Loading...
Loading...
Loading...

Rank

URL Tag Cloud

Bookmark History

Saved by 7 people (0 private), first by anonymouse user on 2009-04-01


Public Comment

on 2009-04-09 by mmpiowner

The agreement Section 1.1 indicates that "the County has determined that the Developer and the Operator have the ability to perform or cause the performance of this Agreement..." How was this done?

on 2009-04-09 by mmpiowner

Section 1.2 Site Due Diligence says ...."The County shall pay, and may reimburse itself or the Developer from the Available Funds, for all costs reasonably incurred by it or the Developer in connection with the Phase I Survey, the Title Commitment, any Title ..." What the heck does it mean to "reimburse itself?" Where is this money coming from or going?

on 2009-04-09 by mmpiowner

Looks like Section 5.1: "the Developer and Operator shall maintain and operate the Facility, including without limitation by making all necessary capital repairs, at their sole cost and expense, as a first-class trade show and convention center facility and the Operator shall be entitled to all of the revenues (except for naming rights) from the Facility; (iv) during the term of the Lease and subject to the provisions of Section 5.2 hereof, the County will pay to the Developer, solely from Nontax Revenues and in the manner and at the times set forth in the Lease, monthly rental payments of Three Million Three Hundred Thirty-Three Thousand Three Hundred Thirty-Three and 34/100 Dollars ($3,333,333.34) (each a “Monthly Base Rental Payment”); Does this mean that MMPI gets all of the revenues plus $M 3.3 a month? Am I reading this right?

on 2009-04-10 by mmpiowner

Suggestion: we need to get a copy of the detailed specifications posted ASAP.

Public Sticky notes

Commissioners and their attorney have negotiated the deal in secrecy with a private partner for over a year, giving taxpayers almost no details about how the public's money will be spent or protected.

Highlighted by andrethegiant

Once the county releases the tentative agreement -- along with a stack of drafts that led to it -- The Plain Dealer intends to post the pact on cleveland.com. "We are eager to hear from people about what they think about this contract. Is it fair to the people here? Does it protect taxpayer dollars?

Highlighted by maggie_diigo

The medical mart project is a public/private project that commissioners hope will boost the region's ailing economy by drawing medical industry conventions. The Plain Dealer has been concerned about the project for three principal reasons

Highlighted by irisdd

on 2009-04-07 by irisdd

This is a public sticky note associated with this highlight

on 2009-04-07 by irisdd

Add a reply by clicking "Actions >> Add sticky note" - make sure to click "Submit"

on 2009-04-07 by irisdd

Add a reply by clicking "Actions >> Add sticky note". Make sure to click "Submit"

The medical mart project is a public/private project that commissioners hope will boost the region's ailing economy by drawing medical industry conventions. The Plain Dealer has been concerned about the project for three principal reasons:

Highlighted by maggie_diigo

Nevertheless, Hagan said he is fine with the decision to disclose the development agreement before it is voted on. Commissioners had intended to let the public review the agreement before the pact was voted on, he said.

Highlighted by jdubail

Ohio law also allows the county to lend taxpayers' money to a private company like MMPI for construction of an economic development project. The unusual arrangement provides for little oversight of public dollars for construction.

Highlighted by joel

on 2009-04-07 by joel

This is a public sticky note.

on 2009-04-07 by joel

You can add a reply by clicking the Action > Add sticky note.