Took this picture today next to a friend of mine, Bill LaHane, who watching the building getting torn down. He is now retired after working for the City of Worcester Parks but told me how his father, his sister, his brother-in-law and Uncle all worked for Crompton. In fact as a child his family rented an apartment from Crompton.
Remember 4 years ago when Paulie said to me "This could be huge Bill". Although I was listening, I almost found it hard to believe that a Jazz Festival in the dirt parking lot in front of his house could truly ever be "huge".
Despite the fact, I believe, we have gotten rain 4 straight years, Paulie has been proven right. Kudos to Paulie...
Not even going to bother posting a link. We all saw this was coming and the City of Worcester will lose. No way we should have even gone done this road. As Steve has already commented, how much money is this going to cost not to mention the anti-business message this sends.
This was so predictable. No way big tobacco will let any municipality ban the sale of any of their products. The thing that really amazes me is the banning of the sale on blunt wrap type products. Personally I do not smoke pot, but alot of people do.
When I was in high school, I remember the white EZ rider papers and how some of friends were great at rollimng joints. Over time people have found out that the paper from a cigar is better so they buy cigars, dump out the tobacoo, fill it with pot and smoke. The tobacco companies decided to make it more convenients and just sell the cigars without the tobacco and blunt wraps were born.
If the City of Worcester bans blunt wraps, people will just go back to buying the cigars and dumping out the tobacco or going to the next town to buy wraps. Complete waste of time.
Two more days until it kicks in.... Business idea. If you have one of those canteens that sell hot dogs, etc. Set up right on the Worcester/Auburn line and sell blunt wraps. Put up a sign last place to buy blunts heading into Worcester and then on the other side first place as you are leaving Worcester.
Being told?? Need to check this. Take a place like Price Chopper on Cambridge, they can no longer sell cigs because there is a pharmacy inside. Not only that but the employees can not smoke within 50 of either the front door or property??
First , I am not saying that this property is not a nuisance and that the City of Worcester should enforce any and all code ordinances.
Second, it appears to me that the owner of this property should maybe be given 90 days, or something like that, to straighten out these problems before be give a "death sentence". Revoking their lodging license is just that.
Lastly, I only wish that the property owners were held to the same standard.
Newspaper story the other day detailed how they were not going to renew their rooming house license. Admittedly I know there are problems there and I do not know all the facts, but I do know that the current owner has no even owned the building a year. Remember he bought it at a bank foreclosure auction not too long ago.
Guess my point is that I think that putting them on some type of probation or setting a drop dead date to have a list of concerns addressed and corrected or they lose their license may be the better route? Clee Blair is the type of person we actually want investing into the City of Worcester.
It just seems that there are two sets of rules. Some people are given years (Mason and Piedmont), while others are given not time.
Click here bankruptcy trustee for pace looking to go after Direct Air
Pace said Direct Air breached the contract by canceling the agreement. Pace told Direct Air on June 19, 2009, that it owed $1.46 million. Pace sent a second letter on July 23, 2009, demanding payment, which Direct Air has declined to make.
Letter to the editor, here is the link in the Telegram. I know the airport liaison and others will not like me saying this, but I am not surprised to read this. I have gotten many e-mails and calls saying the same thing. The other big complaint nobody ever answers their toll free customer service number.
I really expected other carriers to be here by now once MassPort took over. Very disappointed. July 1st marks one full year under their ownership and they have not brought in one commercial flight?
Keeping a property in the name of a non-profit to access Brownfields monies as a grant, versus a loan, is not limited to the Common Ground, for an the actual owner of the property--who is a for profit company that would have to pay back the EPA monies.
South Worcester Neighborhood Center did the same thing with Southgate Place bounded by Southgate-Grand-Armory.Once the EPA monies have been received, spent and signed off, South Worcester deeds the property back to the for profit entity City Builders LLC (3/17/10 bk 45569 pg 115).
This monies also should be paid back since this was merely a shell game to get tax-payer monies for free. Any other for profit developer would have to pay back these monies.
About a month or two ago people were enraged, rightfully so, when they heard the compensation amounts being paid to board members on non-profit HMO boards like Blue Cross.
Let me ask this. What is the difference between that and a non-profit entity manipulating there non-profit status to assist for profit developers to obtain EPA brownfields clean-up monies as a grant (that does not have to be paid back) versus a loan?
Let me ask this also. How can any for profit developer compete with another for profit developer when that developer has a non-profit entity in their back pocket that will help them access $300,000 of clean-up funds from the EPA as a grant?
November 2, 2005, City of Worcester sells 48 Mason Street to Mason Winfield (bk 37717/pg 51) for 66,853.
January 10, 2006, Mason Winfield deeds 48 Mason Street to minority partner, Common ground for $10 (bk 38185/pg 55),but the deed is dated November 5, 2005.
Why did they do this? Since Common Ground is a non-profit they do not have to pay back and of the clean-up grants from the EPA. Believe the grant was in the $300,000 range.
May 6, 2011. Common Ground deeds 48 Mason Street back to Mason Winfield for $10 (bk 47367/pg 3), but the deed is dated November 5, 2005.
Is it just me or does anyone else think this is wrong. On November 2, 2005, the two deeds are signed one from Mason Winfield to Common Ground for $10 and the other from Common Ground back to Mason Winfield for $10 to be recorded after the EPA signs off. This was clearly done to avoid having to pay the $300,000.
Hold the phone. This property was never really in Common Ground's name since both deeds are dated November 5, 2005. I believe (need to check with a lawyer) but the date on the deed is what counts not when they are recorded. This grant needs to be paid back since Mason Winfield has in fact been the owner the whole time.
I have one of those pots on the sidewalk in front of my office. Tried once before but whatever we tried died? Not much son or the fact people end up using it for a rubbish bucket. I will check with Sprout and give it another try.
Patient is on the death bed, can Sprout help?? Stay tuned....
If one person on a private street wants to convert it, they file a petition and everyone else can vote against it but the City Council will approve. All you need is one vote now on a private street to convert it to public.
The main problem is that the people who own property on these two streets voted and voted not to approve conversion. Despite their vote, the City Council is going to convert the street to be a public street at a cost of $150 per linear foot of frontage. Unless, your house is on a corner and our address is the other street, not Stark, then the cost is nothing.
Unless there is some over-riding public safety concern, I simply do not understand how the votes of the tax-payers is completely disregarded. Seriously why bother having a vote. Next time anyone files a petition on a private road to convert it to a public street, don't even have the people on that street even vote. Just approve it.
Evidently the new rule is that if anyone on the street files a petition, the road will be approved for conversion no matter how people vote. If the new policy in the City of Worcester is to make all private streets public because of their poor condition, which I do not disagree with.... Let me make some suggestions:
Forget about the petitions. Why bother? The votes do not matter
DPW review conditions of the private streets and pick out the worse ones. Let the people on these streets that they have 2, or 3 years, to fix the streets or they will be converted.
If the roads are fixed up, take them off the list and let them stay private
If they are not fixed up, then convert them
Bottom line the DPW knows what private streets are the worst ones, let them prioritize them, while at the same time giving the abutters and opportunity to rectify the situation themselves.
Great story on Stark Road and Pineland, click here.
The whole point of this story is that the votes of these people did not count! What the City of Worcester should do in cases like this is tell the people on these two streets that they have 2 or 3 years to get their private road in better conditions. If they don't do it, then make it public.
Let's say you have a corner lot on Stark road but your address happens to be on the other Street (Mower, Juniper, Fernside, Windemere). Since you have frontage on Stark Road you can vote on the conversion to a public street, but you do not have to pay....
Yes, you heard that right you can vote in the affirmative but it will not cost you anything. Who wouldn't vote then to approve the conversion if you had a corner lot. In the end it really does not make a difference since the outcome of the vote has no bearing anyhow.
I still can not get over this. The City only has a limited amount of money to do over streets. Why no do the streets where the people on the street want to have their streets done? And then the cost!!!!
Jahn, to you point it is 150 per linear foot. lets say you have 50 feet of frontage and your neighbor directly across the street has the same 50 feet. Both of you pay 150 per foot so the actual cost is really 300 per foot. One 50 foot section will cost $15,000.
Off the top of my head say Stark Road is 1500 feet long, the total cost to do the road will be $450,000 to the property owners.
Friend of mine lives on Swann Ave up in the woods between Mill Street and Main Street. It is a pretty amazing place--you have no idea how large the wooded area is. He told me yesterday that he heard that there is a group sponsoring a hike this Saturday departing from Heinrich Decal.
Does anyone know any further details. The names of the group, website, etc?