Let's see: By the end of the story, we learn this loan is current (the business has "made all their loan payments," the story notes) and that a city lien against the business has been paid by the business and removed. Look hard for those facts, they are hidden amidst all the negative naysayer swill.
Jumping on the bash-Pawlowski bandwagon is council president Michael D'Amore, quoted in the article as saying the loan was "irresponsible" and "a negligent thing to do with the people's money."
Let's see: Isn't it the job of the city to encourage & support downtown business debvelopment? If the City adopts lending standards like a for-profit bank, then wouldn't we see the paralysis of investment/mortgage monies that is to blame for the sluggish national economy?
One last thing: Notice in the entire page-long story, not one comment in support of the loan or the mayor's business development efforts, or even an explanation of why this loan was done in the first place? (Jarrett says the business owners and mayor would not comment for the story, but who can blame them when the "newspaper" would only print half the facts?)
There must be someone in the city who can add a neutral or positive comment.
Hey Jarrett, how about waiting until the loan fails before you accuse anyone of negligence or irresponsibility? -Sun Jul 11, 07:52:00 AM 2010