This quote from the newspaper ther other day "Mr. McGourthy said the city spent no money on its deal with PharmaSphere. "
Maybe the City of Worcester did not "spend" any money, but there is no doubt we lost money. Is there a difference? Consider this you had an abutter, who bid $50,000. Lets assume that bidder pulled permits, built a building and paid property taxes the last couple of years. I calculate the City of Worcester lost $100,000. How much time did staff ffom the City of Worcester spent working on, for example, LDA's and HUD loans?
In retrospect, I can see how the City of Worcester was impressed by the potential of Pharmasphere versus the abutter's bid, but when they started negotiating the LDA and Pharmasphere started asking for two years without taking title to the property???? Right then and there, they should have pulled the plug not wasted three years on this.
Also maybe the South Worcester Industrial Park would have gotten some momentum and lead to other developments if we actually had gotten something built on this parcel over the past three years. No doubt in my mind the City of Worcester lost alot of money on its deal with Pharmasphere.
Same Time Next Year
-
It’s been nearly a year since I wrote about the problems that come from
having 11 bosses who are not on the same page about anything, as well as
suggestion...
4 months ago
2 comments:
Once again the city shows they treat a stranger better than someone they know....unless you are a CDC.if you are a outsider they roll out the red carpet...if you are here a long standing businessman....they don't care
If figure if Pharma was serious, we can expect legal action from them. Not sure they have a leg to stand on....or maybe they will just point to Mason St or City Sq as precedent for draggging their feet on Canterbury St
Wonder What would the city do if Pharma came to city hall with a $1.00 check in hand to buy the parcel and an surety that constr & employment would start by a date(s) certain.
iTS KINDA OF INTERESIng the longer the Pharma parcel sits empty, the more the city loses in real estate tax revenue. On the other hand, the longer Mason St sits empty the wealthier the city becomes....as the real estate taxes realized from any residential constr on Mason St. would come nowhere near the 13,000 per pupil it costs to educate the kids who would be living there....and could be 15-20,000 per student if we're talking the little Yellow school buses making daily pick ups & deliveries at 40 Mason St.
We all agree with you Signman, the longer you been around Worcester, the more the city puts the wood to ya. Pharma, a new comer to Worcester plows the city for 4 years...and then walks away unscathed.
IN most things in life, those with the seniority get the better gigs and better perks. In Worcester the reverse is true.
City should at least file suit for collateral/ consequential damages for Pharams failure to live up to the contract terms.........probably be drawing blood from a stone...........but for $195.00 filing fee it might be worth the ink and paperwork???????
City buildings dept out 24/7 scoping for snow overloaded, imploding structures and I am telling you some of their salt storage sheds have been imploded for at least 6 yrs that i know of and now they are loaded down with snow on the roofs to top it all off....and still DPW men and equipment are in huge danger working in and around these city structures and everyone at 25 Meade St Is asleep at the switch.
I am telling ya these structures could be Worc's next Cold Storage type incident and all a tort attorney would have to do is a littel Googling to realize the city knows these conditiosn exist
Post a Comment