Rick Pender reports that CityBeat's Cincinnati Entertainment Awards for Theater will join forces with the Enquirer sponsored Acclaim Awards. The Acclaims will go forward with Pender and Jackie Demaline serving on the organization's Executive Committee. This year's CEAs will be the last. Next May's Acclaims will be changed to include public voting awards. More details on the merger likely will come out over time, but hopefully the Acclaims process will be updated overall.
I'm disappointed that we can't sustain both awards programs, but the decline in support for arts in the local (and national) media I believe has forced this move. The biggest theatre production that lose out will be the Cincinnati Fringe Festival, which this past year did not get any acclaim awards, so stand to not get any nominations next year. The Enquirer gave limited coverage of the event and it wasn't clear how many Acclaim representatives were at the festival in an official capacity. Hopefully, that can be remedied inside the organization. Having an alternative category is critical to preserving part of the CEA's superior structure.
I am going to be sure to head to this Sunday's last CEA event at the Know Theatre. I hope all Cincinnati Theatre fans come out and say farewell to this awards program which has provided strong support for local theatre.
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
Monday, August 23, 2010
Fun Campaign Event
As a criminal defense attorney, I get invited to judicial campaign events all the time. They're pretty standard fare: pay $150 for entrance to some restaurant or bar, have a couple beers, and eventually listen to a judge or judicial candidate say a few words thanking everyone in attendance.
Judge Nadine Allen, running to retain her seat on the Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas, does things a little bit differently.
On Sunday, August 29, beginning at 4:00 at the Evendale Amphitheater, her campaign will throw a concert. Those scheduled to perform include Eliot Sloan of the Blessid Union of Souls. Bootsy Collins will make a special appearance, and the judge herself will take the stage with the Supreme Courtettes. (Judge Allen and the Courtettes won the Cincinnati Bar Association's "Idol" competition late last year.)
Admission is twenty bucks and includes food and beverages.
MPMF it ain't. but it'll probably be the most interesting campaign event I've been to in a really long time.
Judge Nadine Allen, running to retain her seat on the Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas, does things a little bit differently.
On Sunday, August 29, beginning at 4:00 at the Evendale Amphitheater, her campaign will throw a concert. Those scheduled to perform include Eliot Sloan of the Blessid Union of Souls. Bootsy Collins will make a special appearance, and the judge herself will take the stage with the Supreme Courtettes. (Judge Allen and the Courtettes won the Cincinnati Bar Association's "Idol" competition late last year.)
Admission is twenty bucks and includes food and beverages.
MPMF it ain't. but it'll probably be the most interesting campaign event I've been to in a really long time.
Legal Question of the Day
This story raises the following important question:
What are the feds going to do with all that Jamaican gold?
And a tip: if you're going to ship pot through CVG, don't use a really cheesy-looking tombstone to do so.
What are the feds going to do with all that Jamaican gold?
And a tip: if you're going to ship pot through CVG, don't use a really cheesy-looking tombstone to do so.
Clifton Ave or Vine St? Which Shall It Be?
Cincinnati Officials face a tough choice on where to put the Northern leg of the Streetcar: up West Clifton Avenue or Vine Street. I don't envy City Manager Milton Dohoney on this decision. I see merits on both plans. I think the key factor must be expansion. If either of these plans would make expansion of the Streetcar further North cheaper or more efficient, then that should be a big consideration. I am slightly less concerned about who is more ready for development now. If there was a way to serve both Clifton Heights and Corryville, that would be the ideal.
Saturday, August 21, 2010
Metropole Lawsuit: Not So Fast, 3CDC
As the Enquirer reported earlier this week, the Metropole Tenants Association filed a lawsuit in federal court seeking to halt the efforts of 3CDC and others to turn the Metropole into a luxury hotel. The tenants are now represented by preeminent Cincinnati civil rights attorney Jennifer Kinsley, as well as Terence Brennan (formerly Lead Organizer with the AMOS Project). And they've filed a lawsuit that is compelling. I thought many of our readers would be interested in an explanation of the allegations in the lawsuit, and why it could be a major impediment to 3CDC's plans for the Metropole.
Last November, I expressed skepticism that the tenants had a viable legal claim. Back then, according to published reports, the tenants (then represented by Legal Aid) seemed to be arguing only that 3CDC was engaging in race (and perhaps disability) discrimination. At the time, I wrote:
I've reviewed the tenants' 50-page complaint, and there's more to the story than simply a landlord accepting rent subsidies. According to the complaint, back in 1988, the owner of the Metropole--609 Walnut Ltd. (which, in turn, is owned by Showe Builders Inc.)--executed a mortgage with the Department of Housing and Urban Development. A HUD mortgage--in this context--is a federally-insured loan that gives the building owner an extremely low (1%) interest rate in exchange for using the building subject to the mortgage for multi-unit, low-income housing.
While the lawsuit doesn't go into the history of Showe's acquisition of the Metropole, this decision from the Sixth Circuit does. Showe bought the property back in the late '80's when the previous owner, Mid-Towne Associates, was in bankruptcy. Showe paid $675,000 and assumed a $2.9 million HUD mortgage. I'm guessing that was quite a deal: according to the Auditor, Azeotropic (a creation of 3CDC) bought the building for $6.25 million last year.
When Showe took over the mortgage, it signed a "regulatory agreement" with HUD. According to the complaint, one of the provisions of this agreement was that Showe could not, without the prior approval of HUD, prepay the mortgage. Prepayment is a big deal. As long as the mortgage exists, the property must be used for low-income housing. If the note is paid off, though, the building owner is subject only to the ordinary requirements of Section 8, which means that the owner can cancel its participation in the federal rent subsidy program one year after giving notice to its tenants.
Congress hasn't given HUD unfettered discretion in deciding whether to approve prepayment of a mortgage. Instead, when a HUD mortgage prepayment is subject to HUD approval (not all HUD mortgages require such approval), acceptance of an offer to prepay may only be given where the HUD Secretary decided that the building no longer meets a need for rental housing for lower income families in the area; the Secretary agrees that the tenants have been notified of the request for approval of prepayment; and the Secretary ensures that a plan exists to provide relocation assistance to displaced tenants.
Back to the lawsuit: the tenants say that HUD didn't do its due diligence before approving the mortgage prepayment, and have challenged the decision under the Administrative Procedures Act. (In some respects, this case is analogous to those where an environmental group challenges an EPA decision permitting the construction of an allegedly polluting factory.) It's hard to see how one could conclude that the Metropole doesn't meet a need for rental housing for lower income families in the area. In fact, with the closure of the Metropole, no low-income housing will exist in the central business district. (And the only other low-income housing downtown I can think of is Page Tower--and that may technically be in the West End, since it's on the west side of Central.)
I'm no expert in HUD mortgage regulations. But on its face, the lawsuit raises serious, non-frivolous claims that will not go away quickly. Stay tuned, folks: this promises to be an interesting legal battle.
Last November, I expressed skepticism that the tenants had a viable legal claim. Back then, according to published reports, the tenants (then represented by Legal Aid) seemed to be arguing only that 3CDC was engaging in race (and perhaps disability) discrimination. At the time, I wrote:
Ultimately, the question comes down to this: once a landlord accepts federal housing money, does that act as some sort of covenant that runs forever against the building, regardless of ownership? Certainly, that cannot be the case. Property owners must be free, assuming they follow the law, to opt out of Section 8.
I've reviewed the tenants' 50-page complaint, and there's more to the story than simply a landlord accepting rent subsidies. According to the complaint, back in 1988, the owner of the Metropole--609 Walnut Ltd. (which, in turn, is owned by Showe Builders Inc.)--executed a mortgage with the Department of Housing and Urban Development. A HUD mortgage--in this context--is a federally-insured loan that gives the building owner an extremely low (1%) interest rate in exchange for using the building subject to the mortgage for multi-unit, low-income housing.
While the lawsuit doesn't go into the history of Showe's acquisition of the Metropole, this decision from the Sixth Circuit does. Showe bought the property back in the late '80's when the previous owner, Mid-Towne Associates, was in bankruptcy. Showe paid $675,000 and assumed a $2.9 million HUD mortgage. I'm guessing that was quite a deal: according to the Auditor, Azeotropic (a creation of 3CDC) bought the building for $6.25 million last year.
When Showe took over the mortgage, it signed a "regulatory agreement" with HUD. According to the complaint, one of the provisions of this agreement was that Showe could not, without the prior approval of HUD, prepay the mortgage. Prepayment is a big deal. As long as the mortgage exists, the property must be used for low-income housing. If the note is paid off, though, the building owner is subject only to the ordinary requirements of Section 8, which means that the owner can cancel its participation in the federal rent subsidy program one year after giving notice to its tenants.
Congress hasn't given HUD unfettered discretion in deciding whether to approve prepayment of a mortgage. Instead, when a HUD mortgage prepayment is subject to HUD approval (not all HUD mortgages require such approval), acceptance of an offer to prepay may only be given where the HUD Secretary decided that the building no longer meets a need for rental housing for lower income families in the area; the Secretary agrees that the tenants have been notified of the request for approval of prepayment; and the Secretary ensures that a plan exists to provide relocation assistance to displaced tenants.
Back to the lawsuit: the tenants say that HUD didn't do its due diligence before approving the mortgage prepayment, and have challenged the decision under the Administrative Procedures Act. (In some respects, this case is analogous to those where an environmental group challenges an EPA decision permitting the construction of an allegedly polluting factory.) It's hard to see how one could conclude that the Metropole doesn't meet a need for rental housing for lower income families in the area. In fact, with the closure of the Metropole, no low-income housing will exist in the central business district. (And the only other low-income housing downtown I can think of is Page Tower--and that may technically be in the West End, since it's on the west side of Central.)
I'm no expert in HUD mortgage regulations. But on its face, the lawsuit raises serious, non-frivolous claims that will not go away quickly. Stay tuned, folks: this promises to be an interesting legal battle.
T.O. vs. OchoNoShow
For the last few years, at the beginning of every season, Bengals fans wonder which wide receiver will take the field this year: Chad Johnson, or OchoNoShow. If the preseason is any indication (and I agree, you've got to take the preseason with a huge grain of salt), it looks like the latter will be wearing number 85 this year.
OchoNoShow may have the best hands of any wide receiver in the game. At least, that is, as long as no one is touching him. As a wide receiver gets older, he gets a bit slower. (Especially one like OchoNoShow, who by all accounts hasn't changed his diet or his workout routine to account for the fact that he's no longer 22.) So they have to run crisper routes and be better at catching the ball in traffic.
I went to last night's Bengals game. OchoNoShow's two most notable plays were two interceptions. The first was on a play that looked like Ocho ran the wrong route--or just failed to "come back to the ball." Palmer looked upset at the time; after the game, he took the blame (probably to avoid some inevitable OchoNoShow pouting).
The second interception was a ball thrown to Ocho over the middle, and Chad got hit. Hard. Replays showed that the ball had actually bounced away from him before he took the hit. (That hit, by the way, should have been penalized, as the defender launched himself at a defenseless Ocho. Look for a fine on that one.) And what did OchoNoShow do? Whine about the hit on Twitter from the bench:
Do the math on the time stamp. Yup, that was during last night's game. (Look for another fine next week.)
T.O. is a different story. From the first three games, it's clear he knows where he's going to make his living: over the middle. He hasn't whined about getting hit. And he's caught most of what's been thrown at him. He had a great, down-the-field catch late in the first half. But that was only after he'd run several short routes. He set up the deep route.
I think NFL fans will finally learn the difference between T.O. and OchoNoShow this season. T.O. can hang onto a ball in traffic. Ocho can't. Or at least, he won't.
OchoNoShow may have the best hands of any wide receiver in the game. At least, that is, as long as no one is touching him. As a wide receiver gets older, he gets a bit slower. (Especially one like OchoNoShow, who by all accounts hasn't changed his diet or his workout routine to account for the fact that he's no longer 22.) So they have to run crisper routes and be better at catching the ball in traffic.
I went to last night's Bengals game. OchoNoShow's two most notable plays were two interceptions. The first was on a play that looked like Ocho ran the wrong route--or just failed to "come back to the ball." Palmer looked upset at the time; after the game, he took the blame (probably to avoid some inevitable OchoNoShow pouting).
The second interception was a ball thrown to Ocho over the middle, and Chad got hit. Hard. Replays showed that the ball had actually bounced away from him before he took the hit. (That hit, by the way, should have been penalized, as the defender launched himself at a defenseless Ocho. Look for a fine on that one.) And what did OchoNoShow do? Whine about the hit on Twitter from the bench:
Man Im sick of getting hit like that , its the damn preseason shit! 1day I'm gone jump up and start throwing hay makers , #Tylenolplease
Do the math on the time stamp. Yup, that was during last night's game. (Look for another fine next week.)
T.O. is a different story. From the first three games, it's clear he knows where he's going to make his living: over the middle. He hasn't whined about getting hit. And he's caught most of what's been thrown at him. He had a great, down-the-field catch late in the first half. But that was only after he'd run several short routes. He set up the deep route.
I think NFL fans will finally learn the difference between T.O. and OchoNoShow this season. T.O. can hang onto a ball in traffic. Ocho can't. Or at least, he won't.
Friday, August 20, 2010
Nice Letter From Terrell Owens To Bengals Fans
New Cincinnati Bengal wide receiver Terrell Owens has written a very positive letter to Bengals fans. Yeah, it sounds like something a good PR person would write for him, but even so, I'm glad to see a professional athlete making a point to reach out to fans. Let's hope this attitude remains through the season, no matter how many wins the Bengals have.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)