- No Nemeth Story on the airport
- According to Nick K in the newspaper the build-out of 11,300 square feet of space will cost 1.25 million. You can build a brand new building from the ground up of the same size for less then this? No way should the City of Worcester be doing this.
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...
6 months ago
6 comments:
Who benefits
Why does it need to be done?
What happens if the tenant leaves and the new tenant requires different upgrades? Is it in the tenant contract to reimburse the city?
Where is the $ eventually coming from if the city is already in deficit mode?
When does it become profitable for the city and it's taxpayers?
The 5 W's can apply to the airport situation as well
Journalism 101
The City of Worcester should not own an Airport or Union Station. Both of these should be privatized immediately
Any guesses why the cost is so high......????...........
I'll betcha the city has to use labor that requires paying the prevailing wage rate..........whereas if the tenants did the fit up themselves they can hire who they want to
And I just came in from walk over a street that is in absolutely atrocious condition......and it can be paved for a hell of lot less than 1.25M$............even in July the street looks carpet bombed..........
We can argue whether or not the City of Worcester should be in the train station or airport business. Nobody can convince me, however, that the City of Worcester should be in borrowing monies to build out office space.
Either 1) rent the space as is at a much reduced price with the tenant paying for the build-out or 2) RFP the parcel stating the City of Worcester will pay the build out and let anyone submit bids not just these two hand picked tenants.
ya suppose the city is shape enough to get any personal gaurantess from these new tenants?/
ANyone notice how the story said....$1.25M for the tenant fit up............and........."about $500,000 in lease revenues" and $750,000 from the city will be used to fund this foolishness.......interesting way to try and make the proletariat think it's only costing the city $750,000....I wonder if someone fed this line to Nick K?
I refuse to be treated like a mushroom............the cost to Taxpayers is $1.25M.......
Post a Comment