Nobody moves into a neighborhood because of a flower
That is true, but considering it involved the Mayor it got more heated than that. Fox Toledo has the story, a short news clip video and a longer version of the video with more of the Mayor’s comments.
This has been a long stemming issue with the Mayor and some in the City, one example from the Blade from May of this year.
The mayor said flowers are one way metro-sized cities – such as Chicago – express pride.
“Chicago spends a million dollars a year on making their city a wonderfully inviting, beautiful city. We can’t employ any full-time employees on what we spent on flowers last year. I believe it was $29,000. We’re an All-America city,” he said.
Under the city’s complex funding procedures, the three workers tending flower beds and pots around the city are paid for out of assessed funds for maintenance of boulevards and triangles – not the general fund, which funds public safety, trash collection, or other essential city services, officials say.
It’s kind of interesting to look at how others view this issue – when you google the question, “Does urban beautification create jobs?” This link from GreenCityBlueLake, comes up where it’s written:
As we rebuild our cities, it’s important that we do it with style and beauty. Sometimes this starts with simple things like improved maintenance and flowers — things that bring color into the city and convey a sense of pride.
Sujay:
September 25th, 2009 at 10:02 pm
Carty’s right on this one. Urban beatification is relatively inexpensive. It provides aethetically pleasing downtown gateways for out of towners and adds to the quality of life for those who already do live here. Where would you rather live: a nicely landscaped Kenwood Blvd., or a drab Alexis Road between Jackman and I-75? How about that lengthy tract of sh*tscape better known as Reynolds Road between Bancroft and the Turnpike??
Carol:
September 25th, 2009 at 10:13 pm
Have to agree with you Sujay. I don’t think people realize how much their physical surroundings impact
their attitude and sense of well being. I live in Sylvania, so don’t get into Toledo all that much anymore, but when I do, I’m always struck by the bleak landscape, bad roads, etc. Yet, when I’m on any of the Toledo streets with flowers or good landscaping, I always feel better. Beauty does raise our spirits and beautiful flowers certainly improve quality of life in some parts of Toledo.
MICHAEL L. FRIEDMAN:
September 26th, 2009 at 2:06 am
I AGREE ON THIS ONE, PLUS WSPD IS W3AY OFF BASE ON MOST ISSUES… THEIR 12 TO 3 SLOT IS FILLED BY A BLOOMING IDIOT. FLOWERS ARE A GREAT WAY TO GREET PEOPLE
Jenny:
September 26th, 2009 at 6:41 am
“THEIR 12 TO 3 SLOT IS FILLED BY A BLOOMING IDIOT”
If this is true Michael, then why do you listen? If you don’t listen, then how do you know it’s true?
Jenny:
September 26th, 2009 at 6:45 am
“THEIR 12 TO 3 SLOT IS FILLED BY A BLOOMING IDIOT”
If this is true Michael, then why do you listen? If you don’t listen, then how do you know it’s true?
Like ones own home, planting flowers does make the property more appealing. However, if your roof has caved in and the windows are broken, flowers aren’t going to help one bit.
My objection to the flower planting is not the money spent, but the idea that planting flowers will some how help this City overcome its problems.
jonc:
September 26th, 2009 at 6:49 am
If you look at the importance of eye appeal the flowers look good. Just control your budget, and you can keep the flowers.
Sujay:
September 26th, 2009 at 12:44 pm
Speaking for Michael, all you need is one listen to SPD to comprehend that it is staffed be blooming idiots. One need not listen around the clock to arrive at that conclusion. Kind of like the Detroit Lions: watch one same, and you’ll get it: they suck. You need not watch ‘em go 0-16 on a season to get the point.
Jen: As for urban beautification, how would you rather welcome out of towners, by directing them through an inviting aesthetically pleasing River Road/Kenwood Blvd. or a bleak drab sh*tscape like Alexis or Reynolds Road that unfortunately is far too typical of Toledo?
MICHAEL L. FRIEDMAN:
September 26th, 2009 at 1:49 pm
SUJAY, GREAT POINT. AND SPEAKING OF THEIR BLOOMING IDIOT. WHEN ONE HOPES OUR NEW AND GREAT PRESIDENT FAILS, THEN HE IS MORE THAN AN IDIOT
bobthedad:
September 26th, 2009 at 5:41 pm
The home owners along a section of Cheltenham Rd. have planted uniform flower beds along the street for as long as I can remember. It helps make the neighborhood really stand out and to my knowledge not a single trash collector or cop has been laid off as a result. It just seems to me this would be an ideal project for community organizations and church groups.
Along the same line, how much is wasted on the hundreds of city owned properties they don’t maintain very well not to mention the exposure to liability? It just seems to me the city would be better off trying to minimize their involvement in the property management business.
Sujay:
September 26th, 2009 at 6:31 pm
Bob – Planting flowers is hardly “property management.” It’s more like landscaping. By your logic, ODOT is engaged in property management because they mow the grasses and sometimes plant wildflowers near freeways.
But even if, as you say, the City shouldn’t be actively involved in this stuff, then at least it should offer incentives (tax deductions, etc.) or requirements (stepped-up zoning standards) to require more greenery in business-zoned areas. Prosperous cities across the country do this – look only 50 miles north to Ann Arbor – and it doesn’t seem to have hurt their bottom line one iota.
toledojim:
September 26th, 2009 at 7:55 pm
Why do liberals always resort to name-calling to make their points? Tell me how many businesses would move to Toledo if the streets were lined with flowers!
LisaRenee:
September 26th, 2009 at 8:01 pm
Jim, I agree with you that name calling dilutes the validity of any point presented, but not all liberals do that nor is it just liberals that do.
If the streets were lined with flowers, businesses might come, especially if it were part of a community effort as opposed to just tax dollars being spent since urban beautification has been part of a success plan for other areas. Community and urban gardens have been demonstrated to reduce crime, in part because they create more of a community spirit, something that is lacking in many neighborhoods. When neighbors know each other they tend to look out more for each other and each others properties.
bobthedad:
September 26th, 2009 at 10:05 pm
Lisa, you brought up an excellent point. I don’t believe for a minute that flowers reduce crime, but I can see how taking pride in maintaining a neighborhood or business district can produce that result. Sujay, I have no problem with incentives for businesses and neighborhoods to encourage this type of community involvement, but ultimately the improved business climate, property values and sense of community should provide all the needed incentive.
LisaRenee:
September 26th, 2009 at 10:14 pm
I agree Bob, it’s the impact of the community gardens created by the community that nets the crime reduction. You can’t just plant flowers alone but the flowers and vegetable gardens can create a sense of pride/community. Most areas the city does start the projects but there are organizations that also become involved so that the governmental role is lessened. We do have that beginning here.
Not Again:
September 26th, 2009 at 11:38 pm
Number 8, I don’t think anyone, that is a true American, wants our president to fail, however, the proof is in the the pudding, as they say.
MICHAEL L. FRIEDMAN:
September 27th, 2009 at 12:24 am
RUSH DID WISH THAT PRESIDENT OBAMA SHOULD FAIL AND HOPED HE WOULD FAIL…RUSH LIMBAUGH IS NOT A BROADCAST NEWSMAN, HE IS AN ENTERTAINER, AND A BAD ONE AT THAT, JUST LOOK AT MSNBC, NOW THAT IS A GREAT RUN BROADCAST NETWORK, KEITH OBBERMAN RULES
Sujay:
September 27th, 2009 at 12:26 am
Bob (#13) said: “Sujay, I have no problem with incentives for businesses and neighborhoods to encourage this type of community involvement, but ultimately the improved business climate, property values and sense of community should provide all the needed incentive.”
Unfortunately, there are too many individuals and businesses (most owned by out of town interests with no concern for the surrounding community) don’t see the bigger picture and/or just don’t care. Look around. That gas station at Michigan and Monroe? A totally cinder block exterior. It looks like a jail. Those new condos with way-undersized windows south of the Warehouse District? Looks like a housing project. The new Westgate? Apart from the fact that they never shovel their sidewalks in the winter, it looks like the old Westgate, only with more big boxes, more chain establishments and more pavement. And to the right-wingers out there, local government is no different: Seen the new Court of Appeals building, with its cinder block exterior and tacky metal roof? Not exactly fitting for a hall of justice. In fact it could easily be confused for a Rite Aid. And the newer Sanger Library – supposedly a pedestrian-friendly, neighborhood institution, but you can’t even use its front door because it’s locked! So, no, the community spirit is lacking, and it’s time for some form of government action (incentives, stepped-up zoning, or the like). Well-to-so cities around the country have them and, as a result, don’t look the scenes from the New Jersey Turnpike on the opening credits of The Sopranos. And guess what? People move there because of it. In contrast, if anyone hasn’t noticed, people aren’t flocking to aesthetic eyesores like downriver Detroit or .. uh .. Toledo, Ohio.
Toledojim (#11): Liberals always calling people names? Guess you didn’t watch any of the extensive coverage of the teabag rallies.
Tim Higgins:
September 27th, 2009 at 4:47 am
I find that I am at crossed purposes on this subject. While I would agree that urban beautification does enhance neighborhood appeal, I believe that done at Southwyck may have been a mistake. I say this (perhaps mistakenly) because every plan that I saw regarding this project involved tearing up the work that the city had already done. At a time when every dollar is critical to the city’s budget, such an expenditure seem frivolous.
I likewise found the comments on WSPD’s 12-3 show interesting, as they discuss a nationally syndicated show that has nothing to do with Toledo’s problems. No one should insist however that their local shows be confined to support of policies that they disagree with. That’s still a 1st Amendment issue, and a problem that can be solved by those who disagree by changing the station.
Finally, I am all about the concept of enlightened discourse instead of acrimony. Its far too easy to lose sight of the issues when trying to write off those in opposition, or to lump all of them into a single point of view.
Not Again:
September 27th, 2009 at 10:17 am
Number 16, who is Keith Obberman? wasn’t he a first baseman for the mets a few years back? I thought msnbc was off the air now due to lack of viewers.
chad:
September 27th, 2009 at 10:54 am
I love how liberal try to portray Rush as an entertainer, but then they consistently attack him and smear him.
Rush is America’s Anchorman. He makes more money than those 3 who are on the networks at 6:30pm. And by this time probably has more viewers or listeners.
Yes Rush did hope that Obama fails. Just like the Democrats, i.e. Algore, Bill Clinton, Cynthia McKinney, etc, hoped that Pres. Bush failed. Just shows that some liberals can’t take what they start.
However, if obama does fail, then America wins. The Stimulus, Cap and Trade, Government run Health Care with death panels er, End of Life Counseling, ACORN, Sotomayor, are all bad for America. Plain and Simple.
Rockets Man:
September 27th, 2009 at 11:47 am
OK, this thread is getting way off topic. Ugh, I wish I could use “mute” button on some of these responders so I don’t have to read their response.
LisaRenee:
September 27th, 2009 at 11:55 am
Yes, it’s starting to go off topic, which I was afraid of since it involved WSPD – Not Again – Keith Olbermann – which should answer your question and hopefully we can now the topic though I realize Chad’s comment will be tempting for some of you.
Think of the flowers…
chad:
September 27th, 2009 at 11:57 am
I really don’t mind the flowers. I understand why the mayor wants to plant them and have them. But when there is a budget crisis, maybe the flowers can be put on hold for awhile.
bobthedad:
September 27th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
Sujay said “it’s time for some form of government action (incentives, stepped-up zoning, or the like).”
So the same government that created the cinder block Court of Appeals building with the tacky metal roof is going to “step up” the zoning to force Toledo to be more aesthetically pleasing because government cares more and has a better view of the “big picture”?
It always amazes me that so few in any level of government have ever had even a whiff of success at running a business, yet they always seem so certain they know how to run other peoples’ businesses better.
toledojim:
September 27th, 2009 at 12:17 pm
If flowers brought businesses to Toledo, we’d have only 5% unemployment. How about cutting red tape and taxes?
Sujay:
September 27th, 2009 at 12:53 pm
Bob and Jim (sounds like another Clear Channel crack morning team duo):
Anyway (#25), no one (expect you, jim) said that our unemployment rate would plummet, and no one – again except you – mentioned anything about 5%. What we did say is that for a very small cash outlay it can improve the quality of life around here and attract/keep people in the city. Again, the cities that put forth such efforts are also economically better off – in many cases far better off – than Toledo, because people want to live there. Compare Grant Park in Chicago (where the sales tax BTW approaches 10%) with Promanade Park in Toledo. There IS no comparison. Start citing facts for your “arguments,” rather than mischaracterizing our claims.
And Bob (#24), urban beatification has little to do with running a business. In any event, there is nothing contradictory in demanding the same government that built the tacky appeals court building to adopt stricter facade and building standards like those seen in other cities. Hate government so much? Then you should decline Social Security, Medicare, police/fire protection, electricity discounts through a government aggregation program or for that matter not drive on public roads.
LisaRenee:
September 27th, 2009 at 1:00 pm
Let’s watch the personal references, when possible…
Bob actually does have a point, that if Government is concerned with beautification, some examples you cited, Sujay, they could lead by example when it comes to government buildings. I think most of us agree that in other areas why this has worked is that the non-profit and private sector have stepped up because they also agree with the concept. While that has started here, ToledoGrows is a fantastic example, much more could be done.
bobthedad:
September 27th, 2009 at 2:18 pm
Who said anything about hating government? I just think that government should avoid getting into things that the private sector can do better. I would rather have the private sector decide how much of their limited resources they should invest in making their businesses look good enough to attract people to come there. I can drive past the gas station that looks like a prison if I prefer to buy gas at a place that looks nicer, but I’m not going to tell either station owner what his business has to look like. With your own words, you cited at least one example of the government’s lack of concern, expertise or both at creating something aesthetically pleasing yet you expect government to decide for businesses and neighborhoods what their buildings look like and how many trees and flowers they should plant?
As for declining Social Security, the government has been taking nearly 14% of my wages for my entire working life under the guise of looking out for my best interest. If there is anything left when I reach retirement age you bet I will accept the check.
I suppose you’ll expect royalties when the Bob and Jim right-wing hate monger show makes its debut on Clear Channel.
Mike:
September 27th, 2009 at 4:21 pm
Flowers or no flowers, Carty is a lunatic. He cannot leave office fast enough!
Pam:
September 28th, 2009 at 9:27 am
Look at Reynolds Road people. Look at the vacant lot that used to be Southwyck Mall. When I was a kid, Southwyck was an event, Old Towne was a kid’s dream. Now look at it. Look at the vacant hotels and restaurants. Looks really inviting doesn’t it! Flowers don’t bring in business. Low taxes, a city government that appreciates and works with business, a resident-friendly city brings in business. Besides, what will happen to all these flowers this winter. They will die just like the area that they were planted in.
If you want flowers, why not open that up to businesses and provide a tax incentive for them to provide and plant flowers and plants. A business can advertise where they planted the flowers, “This city beautification brought to you by (insert business name here)” this way business and the city work together. Or, have high school agriculture classes plant flowers and take care of the area for credit. There are ways other than wasting much needed tax dollars to beautify the city. The city just sees this as control.
Carty sounded like a ranting, raving loon. Why couldn’t he just answer the question? Instead he attacked the person asking him the question. Maybe someone should have checked him for a pocket edition of Saul Alinsky’s Rules For Radicals.
Chad Quigley:
September 28th, 2009 at 9:49 am
To me, it stands to reason that if the city provides real draw for business, once they are installed here, the financial status of the area on the whole improves. Jobs created, people become more secure, appeal begins, and over time, the city draws in enough money and assistence to make pretty a lot of the blight.
The key element Toledo has long been missing is the fair and reasonable business climate with enough perks to be a draw over other locations. The trick is electing leadership that can design and impliment quickly a “Toledo Recovery Act”. It’s gonna have to be drastic. Without profound change by both leadership and population, Toledo will continue down this path.
I have said for several years now, along with trying to do as I preach, in this climate, we the people need to step up, do our share of keeping our lil worlds clean and attractive, and the domino effect will be the city see’s positive change. If ya can mow/shovel your own lot, you can take turns with yer neighbor on the empty ones near you. Every little bit helps
jonc:
September 28th, 2009 at 1:05 pm
The over-planting of flowers in certain areas is just wasting money. The idea of focusing on beautificaton efforts vs say business growth is wrong. This would be similar to our president going to lobby for the Olympics vs shutting down Irans nuclear threats. Maybe the pres and Carty are on the same page.
MikeyA:
September 28th, 2009 at 1:48 pm
Flowers are important. When you’re being held down getting raped it’s nice to have something colorful to look at.
Keith Olberman. Wasn’t he fired from ESPN. Yeah I’m going to get my political news from Rich Eisen from now on.
Sujay:
September 28th, 2009 at 3:27 pm
Lisa Renee (#27): Yes, the people should demand better building standards all-around – this includes government buildings. I wasn’t as clear about this as I should have been.
Mike (#29): No argument there.
Jonc (#32): Trying to lure in the Olympics and dealing with Iraq’s nuke threat are not mutually exclusive. I remind you that we have a president for the first time in 8 years who can both walk and chew gum, at the same time, no less.
Bob (#2
: Boycotting a gas station will not improve its aesthetics. If your hyper free market approach worked, then we’d have no zoning or building standards at all. While you evidently would support that, most people wouldn’t. Here there’s nothing wrong with stepping up Toledo’s standards, via incentives or heightened restrictions. Many prosperous other cities more prosperous than Toledo have done so, with no effect on business.
Pam (#30): Mississippi has low taxes and ostensibly a business-friendly environment. We’ll let you move there. Many cities with higher taxes (and sensible zoning standards) are doing far better than we are, chiefly because they offer a better quality of life than we do (in many areas, not just aesthetics). Chicago, for example, has a nearly 10% sales tax. Not that I advocate that here (I don’t), but low taxes is not the end-all/be-all. If that were the case, then Selma, Alabama would have the largest concentration of Fortune 500 corporations, and Manhattan would be deserted. Improving zoning standards, either through tax breaks or hard and fast requirements, cost nearly nothing and make the community more inviting and liveable. Again, compare Main Street in Ann Arbor with Alexis Road between I-75 and Jackman.
There’s a good documentary series now running on PBS on the history of our national parks. If the majority of the participants in this string (Pam, MikeyA, Bob, toledojim), had their druthers at the turn of the 20th Century, we would have no national parks, Niagara Falls would be bastardized for hydro power and Old Faithful would be capped for its geothermal output.
Pam:
September 28th, 2009 at 3:45 pm
Sujay,
Did you even read what I wrote? READ IT AGAIN!!!!!
If you did read it, then how can you post that if it was up to me and others here that there would be no national parks or whatever the hell else you posted. The posters here are not the issue. Stick to the issue and not attacking other posters. Read the rules here.
STOP thinking everybody has to subsidize what you want. Where in the Constitution does it say that you have the right to flowers? No wonder this country is in the mess it’s in.
MikeyA:
September 28th, 2009 at 4:16 pm
I fail to see how my advocacy for more police means I am against National Parks.
I would try but your line of logic would cause me to get dyslexia.
MikeyA:
September 28th, 2009 at 4:18 pm
“Niagara Falls would be bastardized for hydro power and Old Faithful would be capped for its geothermal output.”
Sujay I thought you were FOR green jobs? Wow you flip faster than Ben Konop.
Sujay:
September 28th, 2009 at 4:52 pm
Pam (#35): I’ve read your post. It draws on the same themes today as it did last month as it did a month before that: government bad, corporations good, health care bad, Ayn Rand good, Ann Coulter good, taxes bad, zoning bad, social services bad, public schools bad, Medicare bad. But to answer your immediate question, this is not a constitutional issue. I have never said that the Constitution mandates urban beautification and heightened zoning restrictions. However, despite the rantings of property rights zealots, courts have consistently rejected the notion that the zoning restrictions (or tax incentives, which you haven’t bothered to address) constitute takings in violation of the US or Ohio constitutions.
In any event, once you’re done hyperventilating, give some thought to responding to my taxation comments that I directed your way in #34.
Mikey A (#37): Bastardizing Niagara falls is hardly green. I however could see how you’d think it was, given that President Reagan had you guys convinced that ketchup is a vegetable and Pres. Bush duped you into thinking that the Healthy Forests Initiative was actually healthy and that the Clear Skies Initiative actually cut down on air pollution.
bobthedad:
September 28th, 2009 at 4:59 pm
Sujay, I don’t believe I have put words in your mouth. Returning the favor would be a nice gesture. You are correct about one thing. Boycotting a gas station will not improve its aesthetics, but if enough people decide they would rather buy gas at a better looking station it will go out of business unless they get wise to their customers’ preferences. There is no shortgage of gas stations in this town. The one that looks like a prison does not have a corner on the market.
Sujay says: “there’s nothing wrong with stepping up Toledo’s standards, via incentives or heightened restrictions.” This is a true statement. The problem lies with who gets to decide those standards – a government that builds tacky court buildings, or the building owner that is investing his money in the project?
LisaRenee:
September 28th, 2009 at 5:02 pm
If we could try to keep to the topic as well as be factual that would be great. As an example, the whole ketchup controversy which I’m surprised is still being trotted out there, was not quite as simple as Regan tried to convince anyone ketchup was a vegetable. It is however a great example of how something can be used as a political theme and have years later people remember it as it was presented as opposed to what it really was.
Sujay:
September 28th, 2009 at 5:34 pm
Bob – There’s only one gas station in the immediate downtown area. Its exterior consists entirely of ugly cinder blocks. Some choice.
Governments in prosperous cities everywhere have heightened zoning and building standards. They are no worse off for it; in fact, as I have shown in example after example, they’re better off than is Toledo. So to answer your question, it is better for government to set these standards. That way, not only is the community ore inviting and aesthetically pleasing, but all businesses are on a level playing field. By your proposal (letting the business owner decide because its his money invested in the project), why then have any regulations, such as workplace safety rules, health code standards, electrical/HVAC standards, etc?
Lisa Renee (#40): Let’s assume that I was wrong about the ketchup stuff. You however have not countered my comments about Bush’s euphemisms. In any event, your criticism detracts from that broader point that I was trying to make with bob.
bobthedad:
September 28th, 2009 at 5:41 pm
Since we’re quoting Reagan, there you go again. Safety standards are one thing, aesthetics is another. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
I drive downtown all the time. I don’t recall ever being forced to buy gas there.
Sujay:
September 28th, 2009 at 6:28 pm
So it’s OK for government to impose safety standards (which right-wingers once opposed) but not to impose zoning standards (or tax incentives to effect the same goal)? Says who, Bob The Divine?
In any case, Ann Arbor is a vibrant town (albeit one with high taxes, especially property taxes), with a lot going for it, including stricter zoning and building standards. And guess what? Even in this economy, people want to live there. And guess what? A California-based high-tech startup seeking to expand and establish 1,100 jobs to the midwest just picked a site. Guess where? Here’s a hint. It’s a city with strict zoning and aesthetic standards and that doesn’t subscribe to the Mississippi-like lower-taxes-at-all costs orthodoxy:
http://www.annarbor.com/business-review/startup-tech-company-to-hire-1000-workers-in-ann-arbor-area-expansion/
MikeyA:
September 28th, 2009 at 6:38 pm
Ann Arbor is a nice town. With two things going for it. One it serves as home to one of the biggest colleges in the country. And two it’s also considered a “suburb” of Detroit. Don’t believe me? Look at the # of commuters who commute from Ann Arbor to the Big D.
Secondly because of the latter that it has some of the worst congestion in the midwest.
I would also bet that it was because of the former that that the “high tech startup” is relocating jobs there and not because of it’s asthetics.
P.S. I find it funny you thought to comment on my tongue-in-cheek reference to green jobs yet not to your logic giving me dyslexia. I will too utter bob’s comment to please not assume anything about me nor put words into my mouth.
LisaRenee:
September 28th, 2009 at 6:45 pm
Sujay, it was an example, if I were to fact check everything written, especially when off topic, it would degrade the discussion more than what has already occurred. I try to only interject into some of the “whoppers” from both sides when it comes to fact checking.
What is interesting is it seems that a good number of you agree that urban beautification can be a part of economic development and increasing the livability desire factor. Where the divide is, is who should pay for it and who should determine it needs to be done. This presents an almost what came first the chicken or the egg conundrum, should we wait for private industry and non-profits to meet this need or should government be the ones to start the “inspiration” with the goal of others taking this up voluntarily?
Sujay:
September 28th, 2009 at 6:55 pm
Sure, UM’s presence contributed to the firm’s expansion there. But Ann Arbor consistently ranks among the best places to live and relocate, and its aesthetics (streetscapes and parks/recreational opportunites) are consistently cites in these ratings. So, no, it’s not just UM’s presence that secures the city’s solid economic standing. Were the presence of a large university the sole factor, then the firms would have gone to Austin or Columbus, two cities that Ann Arbor specifically beat out in the competition. In any case, you’ll notice that Toledo wasn’t even mentioned in the article, and likely was not even a blip on the firm’s site-selection radar ….
Also, I’d readily comment on your other points (congestion, the “it’s a Detroit suburb” claim), but that’s probably best left for another string.
toledojim:
September 28th, 2009 at 7:40 pm
Those flowers are really helping redevelop Reynolds Road. Yes, they sure look great. Oh, I just looked at Southwyck Mall. Looking good!
MikeyA:
September 28th, 2009 at 11:26 pm
Sujay there are many factors. I seriously doubt the asthetics of Austin and Columbus weren’t outdone by asthetics as both are cities much larger than AA and the local competition in the immediate area for the graduates is greater. If you were looking for a comparable school in a comparable city you’d be better pressed to look at Charlottesville. But the asthetics of Ann Arbor do not compare to the asthetics of Charlottesville.
But I digress.
No business would be wise to relocate to a city with rising crime and a dwindling police force. Toledo should rename itself Flint, OH.
Sujay:
September 29th, 2009 at 9:36 pm
MikeyA – Gotta kinda agree with you on that one (#4
. But I think that there is something to this beautification thing, even when publicly financed, or else we wouldn’t see so many towns doing it. Even BG (hardly a Marxist stronghold) recently spent far more that 30K (the cost of Toledo’s flowers) to completely re-do all of their downtown sidewalks with new concrete, decorative crosswalks, trees and planters. It’s been a big hit.
chad:
September 30th, 2009 at 10:30 am
BG is in a little better financial shape than Toledo for the record.
Although they have experienced a budget deficit and need to fix it. I believe there is a possible tax increase or referendum on their ballot for November to close those holes.
In any case, BG had a master plan for their downtown and neighborhoods and they followed it over the years. Unlike Toledo that created their master plan in the 1970s and still have yet to achieve most of it.