SPAR's Main Street Property Enhancement Program

[CS Foltz]

Four months and still nothing to show for it...........makes me wonder just what happened to that $70K that SPAR supposedly acquired? I haven't seen much of any enhancements being completed other than the taxpayer funded Main Street Improvements..............heck ............trash cans still not emptied! Springfield.....you got lots of work infront, alley issue's, clean up and the like!

[strider]

We have heard that certain leaders over at SPAR Council have made calls to various people "suggesting" that they no longer post here on MetroJacksonville.  Besides being a huge political mistake, it also means legitimate questions go unanswered. Like this one about the commercial corridor facade program.  Heck, I even said that you could answer via PM.  I guess the new “SPAR Council” isn’t so new after all and is still thinking that they can control what goes on by not communicating.  Too bad really.  We have a huge opportunity to come together here and do some good.  All it takes is a willingness to do it and the ability to be honest and up-front in a public forum.

Here’s some advice for the leaders of SPAR Council.  Step up to the plate and admit that certain actions on the part of some of your executive board and membership was very inappropriate.  Admit that some of your recent policies were perhaps too exclusive and off base.  Then we can all meet and get some real communication going and stop the nonsense. 

Here is an easy way to start that process.  Answer the questions about the commercial façade program.   If it is struggling, say that.  If it has been delayed, say that.  If it is going to happen soon, say that.  If you need help with it, ask.  Be upfront about it right here and right now.  Show that you actually want to be a positive force in the community. 

[cindi]

who exactly are these "they" people?

[CityLife]

The Property Enhancement program is fine, just taking longer than anticipated as often happens. We should start seeing some work done in the near future. When there is news to report I'll be sure to report it.

There may also be products to still give out after the first wave of applicants are done with their projects. When the smoke clears, we will be sure to make that information available to all the potential applicants.

Thanks for your interest.

[ChriswUfGator]

Well if the new ED's backstabbing e-mail to COJ, wherein she sold out and undermined a SPAR block captain who was just trying to get some lighting installed in the alleyways, serves as any indication of the attitude of the "new" leadership of SPAR, then not much has changed has it?

I'll frankly be surprised if they can keep the lights on through the end of the year. The LISC grant ain't much. As for membership dues, $50 X 147 = $7,350.00. Not that I really believe they have 147 members anyway, but we'll take their number just for the sake of argument. I'm guesstimating SPAR's 2010 budget has a whopping top line of somewhere south of $100k. By the time you factor in the cost of utilities, phones, computer services, accounting, property taxes and maintenance on the SPAR building, etc., not to mention the cost of conducting meetings and their other activities, there isn't enough to go around.

Unless they have a cash pile saved up for a rainy day, it would seem they're going to come up short in the rather near future. And of course, they're planning to sue Metro Jacksonville (allegedly) for libel, since they had the gall to accurately report the chair-throwing, ball-punching, buffoonery they've engaged in. That is not going to be free, and nor will they ever recover anything from that one, since well, it's all true.

It will be interesting to see how things shake out. I suppose SPAR could borrow money to stay afloat until things turn around, but whatever happens, they surely are going to have to question the wisdom (and more importantly, the expense) of fighting all these petty battles.

[cindi]

We have heard that certain leaders over at SPAR Council have made calls to various people "suggesting" that they no longer post here on MetroJacksonville.

they are also making phone calls to people telling them that they need to avoid the Women's Club.

who are "they"

[thelakelander]

I don't have any problems with SPAR Council.  While I certainly don't agree with a lot of the things some members have done over the years, I also see areas in which the organization can and has been beneficial.  I hope that the group can get itself together and do great things for the neighborhood.  I think as time goes on, things will improve as the old is recycled with the new.  In the meantime, the key is not to let petty neighborhood politics and personal agendas get in the way of real issues facing the community as a whole.

However, if people don't want to post at MJ, that's their right and I have no problem with that and will not lose any sleep over it.  In fact, with the discussion that has been taken place, its sort of a relief.  Our mission and agenda at MJ is to promote and help create a better Jacksonville.  We value communities like Brooklyn, Durkeeville and Murray Hill just as much as we do Springfield, Riverside and San Marco.  That will continue to be our goal regardless of what position SPAR Council or any other local organization takes.

With that said, I'm still looking forward to seeing the property enhancement thing get underway.  I think it has the potential to be one the better things the organization has implemented in a very long time.

[ChriswUfGator]

The Property Enhancement program is fine, just taking longer than anticipated as often happens. We should start seeing some work done in the near future. When there is news to report I'll be sure to report it.

There may also be products to still give out after the first wave of applicants are done with their projects. When the smoke clears, we will be sure to make that information available to all the potential applicants.

Thanks for your interest.

Well, not to go off mentioning the 800lb gorilla in the room or anything, but I think interest in this program seemed to wane significantly when it came out that the "lucky" recipients would actually have to pay for the cost of their own improvements, and that the "program" really amounted to nothing more than a negotiated discount off retail.

That being the case, what exactly is the benefit? Nobody is paying retail prices for building trades in this economic environment anyway, I can probably walk in off the street and get as good a deal. And as long as they're paying for it anyway, doesn't it seem like if a business owner wanted an awning or a facade improvement, or whatever, they'd have already bought one?

How many people have actually signed up for this?

[ChriswUfGator]

Let me ask this;

What cost would the business owner bear vs. the total cost of the improvements?

It has been mentioned several times that all the potential "donors" had demanded to receive at least their cost outlays back for partipating in the program. So who determines a fair price? Specifically, who ensures that the contractor "donors" are really passing along only their cost? And why are they called donors, if they're being reimbursed for their costs, anyway? They aren't really donating anything if they're being paid for it, are they?

And what portion of the cost would business owners be responsible for? What portion is paid for by grants, and from where, etc.? Just wondering what the financial nuts & bolts are here?

[CityLife]

The Property Enhancement program is fine, just taking longer than anticipated as often happens. We should start seeing some work done in the near future. When there is news to report I'll be sure to report it.

There may also be products to still give out after the first wave of applicants are done with their projects. When the smoke clears, we will be sure to make that information available to all the potential applicants.

Thanks for your interest.

Well, not to go off mentioning the 800lb gorilla in the room or anything, but I think interest in this program seemed to wane significantly when it came out that the "lucky" recipients would actually have to pay for the cost of their own improvements, and that the "program" really amounted to nothing more than a negotiated discount off retail.

That being the case, what exactly is the benefit? Nobody is paying retail prices for building trades in this economic environment anyway, I can probably walk in off the street and get as good a deal. And as long as they're paying for it anyway, doesn't it seem like if a business owner wanted an awning or a facade improvement, or whatever, they'd have already bought one?

How many people have actually signed up for this?

Actually if you go back and look at the first post in this thread, you will see that it is made very clear that businesses will have to foot a portion of the costs. In every piece of material we sent out to prospective businesses that was made very clear as well.

If you are really so concerned with the management of the program come to the SPAR office or meet me somewhere to talk about it.

[ChriswUfGator]

The Property Enhancement program is fine, just taking longer than anticipated as often happens. We should start seeing some work done in the near future. When there is news to report I'll be sure to report it.

There may also be products to still give out after the first wave of applicants are done with their projects. When the smoke clears, we will be sure to make that information available to all the potential applicants.

Thanks for your interest.

Well, not to go off mentioning the 800lb gorilla in the room or anything, but I think interest in this program seemed to wane significantly when it came out that the "lucky" recipients would actually have to pay for the cost of their own improvements, and that the "program" really amounted to nothing more than a negotiated discount off retail.

That being the case, what exactly is the benefit? Nobody is paying retail prices for building trades in this economic environment anyway, I can probably walk in off the street and get as good a deal. And as long as they're paying for it anyway, doesn't it seem like if a business owner wanted an awning or a facade improvement, or whatever, they'd have already bought one?

How many people have actually signed up for this?

Actually if you go back and look at the first post in this thread, you will see that it is made very clear that businesses will have to foot a portion of the costs. In every piece of material we sent out to prospective businesses that was made very clear as well.

If you are really so concerned with the management of the program come to the SPAR office or meet me somewhere to talk about it.

Or drop by the MJ weekly meeting tonight, you can kill multiple birds with one stone. I'll happily attend and have any discussion you want to have. I don't own a business on Main Street, so I don't really have a dog in this fight.

I asked what I asked because it seems like the nature of this program has shifted quite a bit from what it was originally represented to be, and what it has become now. The extent of a business owners' financial contributions to the improvements were initially represented as being nominal, and that is no longer the case. Surely you won't argue that.

Originally, the improvements were to be heavily subsidized by donations from participating contractors, and then later that somehow turned into, well, now the business owner needs to pay the contractor for all of their costs and nothing was really being donated after all.

So my point was that the deal has clearly changed, and I personally suspect the program won't get that much interest (not enough to make a cohesive visual impact anyway), given that it has gone from a grant/donation type of program to one that really just amounts to some kind of pre-negotiated discount off retail price from certain SPAR-approved contractors.

Again, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but that really seems to be the case doesn't it?

[ChriswUfGator]

Additionally, I felt your reference to the first post in this thread was somewhat disingenuous, as what the first post represented as being the nuts & bolts of the program is in fact, not what ultimately occurred. So let’s recap;

Since a select few seem to think SPAR does nothing good for Springfield

Yup. Pretty much hit that nail on the head.

I thought I would clear the air by highlighting some of the good work going on by the organization. A few months back SPAR was able to secure $70,910 dollars worth of free products for businesses on Main Street.

The wording said “free” correct? Because “free” to most people means “no cost,” or in this case at least meant minimal cost. And yet, that somehow turned into the business owners having to pay the contractors for the full value of these allegedly “free” “donations,” while the contractor likely still gets a tax deduction. So are we just redefining the word “free” here, or what?

There is $25,000 worth of decorative fencing, $25,000 worth of new signage, $12,750 worth of paint, and $8,160 worth of new awnings. The products were able to be donated as the result of a state tax program that grants businesses tax credits for donations to distressed commercial corridors.

But unless I’m mistaken, this list of items either never materialized at all, or it turned into some offer for a discount off retail price, with the business owner at best still paying the contractor for the full value of whatever was “donated.” And I noticed that this post used the past-tense when referring to these “donations,” e.g., “SPAR was able to secure” and “The products were able to be donated” which clearly implies that this had all already occurred.

As we now know, it hadn’t occurred, and the products hadn’t yet been donated, and in fact they ultimately weren’t ever donated, as the program was somehow then converted into some kind of pre-negotiated SPAR discount off retail instead of being, as the first post which I am now quoting clearly states, a donation-based program, where the business owner should have received 90% of the improvement for free.

Get where I’m going with this?

So no, actually, since you brought up the first post in this thread, the nature of the costs the business owner has to bear was in fact not disclosed up front, and the entire nature of this program has somehow shifted from a free/donation-based setup into the business owner having to pay the contractor’s full costs, while the contractor gets to clear inventory at no loss (a good thing in this economy) and receives a tax credit to boot.

The program is a shared cost program where businesses have to spend some of their own money in order to receive a portion of the donated products. For overall projects with a total cost of under $3,000 businesses will receive 90% of the products for free while paying for 10% of the cost. For projects over $3,000 the business owner will receive 65% of the products for free while paying 35% of the cost. The maximum amount of free product that is eligible for each business is $10,000.

So how exactly did this turn into the business owner paying the contractor in full for the entire cost of the product? Unless I fell on my head last night and just don’t remember it, it appears that this thing went from 90% free, to 0% free.

[CityLife]

The Property Enhancement program is fine, just taking longer than anticipated as often happens. We should start seeing some work done in the near future. When there is news to report I'll be sure to report it.

There may also be products to still give out after the first wave of applicants are done with their projects. When the smoke clears, we will be sure to make that information available to all the potential applicants.

Thanks for your interest.

Well, not to go off mentioning the 800lb gorilla in the room or anything, but I think interest in this program seemed to wane significantly when it came out that the "lucky" recipients would actually have to pay for the cost of their own improvements, and that the "program" really amounted to nothing more than a negotiated discount off retail.

That being the case, what exactly is the benefit? Nobody is paying retail prices for building trades in this economic environment anyway, I can probably walk in off the street and get as good a deal. And as long as they're paying for it anyway, doesn't it seem like if a business owner wanted an awning or a facade improvement, or whatever, they'd have already bought one?

How many people have actually signed up for this?

Actually if you go back and look at the first post in this thread, you will see that it is made very clear that businesses will have to foot a portion of the costs. In every piece of material we sent out to prospective businesses that was made very clear as well.

If you are really so concerned with the management of the program come to the SPAR office or meet me somewhere to talk about it.

Or drop by the MJ weekly meeting tonight, you can kill multiple birds with one stone. I'll happily attend and have any discussion you want to have. I don't own a business on Main Street, so I don't really have a dog in this fight.

I asked what I asked because it seems like the nature of this program has shifted quite a bit from what it was originally represented to be, and what it has become now. The extent of a business owners' financial contributions to the improvements were initially represented as being nominal, and that is no longer the case. Surely you won't argue that.

Originally, the improvements were to be heavily subsidized by donations from participating contractors, and then later that somehow turned into, well, now the business owner needs to pay the contractor for all of their costs and nothing was really being donated after all.

So my point was that the deal has clearly changed, and I personally suspect the program won't get that much interest (not enough to make a cohesive visual impact anyway), given that it has gone from a grant/donation type of program to one that really just amounts to some kind of pre-negotiated discount off retail price from certain SPAR-approved contractors.

Again, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but that really seems to be the case doesn't it?

I've got a fairly busy night tonight and was actually going to go out of my way to stop by the MetroJacksonville meeting tonight to discuss this with you....Then I read the post below this one....

Frankly, you are way off base with your understanding of this program. Not sure where you got the info, but it surely was not correct. Contractors are not involved. The donor business are the ones doing their own design/build. For example, Joe's Detailing is getting new fencing and the property owner is paying the fencing company 35% of the cost of the design, custom build, and installation of the new fencing. While still getting 65% of those services for free. In another scenario, if a property owner wanted new signage and also something that the program doesn't offer like landscaping, they could use the money they spent on landscaping as their portion of the 35%. So $3500 on landscaping would equal $6500 of free signage. If they just wanted signage they would pay $3500 cash to the sign company and get $6500 worth of signage for free.

Hypothetically, the donated products could be given to Main Street businesses for free and it sounds great in theory. In reality they could use the $10,000 of free products for the building and then close business the next day and sell their building for $10k more. Tony at A-Z was initially interested in the program and we were willing to work with him to get new signage and paint, but he was going to have to replace his windows out of pocket and he didn't want to do that. Then a few weeks later he closed his business down. We could see that he already had one foot out the door and was being hurt by Uptown and CityKidz. If someone isn't willing to pay 35% to get 65% for free then they likely aren't in it for the long haul.

[CityLife]

Additionally, I felt your reference to the first post in this thread was somewhat disingenuous, as what the first post represented as being the nuts & bolts of the program is in fact, not what ultimately occurred. So let’s recap;

Since a select few seem to think SPAR does nothing good for Springfield

Yup. Pretty much hit that nail on the head.

I thought I would clear the air by highlighting some of the good work going on by the organization. A few months back SPAR was able to secure $70,910 dollars worth of free products for businesses on Main Street.

The wording said “free” correct? Because “free” to most people means “no cost,” or in this case at least meant minimal cost. And yet, that somehow turned into the business owners having to pay the contractors for the full value of these allegedly “free” “donations,” while the contractor likely still gets a tax deduction. So are we just redefining the word “free” here, or what?

There is $25,000 worth of decorative fencing, $25,000 worth of new signage, $12,750 worth of paint, and $8,160 worth of new awnings. The products were able to be donated as the result of a state tax program that grants businesses tax credits for donations to distressed commercial corridors.

But unless I’m mistaken, this list of items either never materialized at all, or it turned into some offer for a discount off retail price, with the business owner at best still paying the contractor for the full value of whatever was “donated.” And I noticed that this post used the past-tense when referring to these “donations,” e.g., “SPAR was able to secure” and “The products were able to be donated” which clearly implies that this had all already occurred.

As we now know, it hadn’t occurred, and the products hadn’t yet been donated, and in fact they ultimately weren’t ever donated, as the program was somehow then converted into some kind of pre-negotiated SPAR discount off retail instead of being, as the first post which I am now quoting clearly states, a donation-based program, where the business owner should have received 90% of the improvement for free.

Get where I’m going with this?

So no, actually, since you brought up the first post in this thread, the nature of the costs the business owner has to bear was in fact not disclosed up front, and the entire nature of this program has somehow shifted from a free/donation-based setup into the business owner having to pay the contractor’s full costs, while the contractor gets to clear inventory at no loss (a good thing in this economy) and receives a tax credit to boot.

The program is a shared cost program where businesses have to spend some of their own money in order to receive a portion of the donated products. For overall projects with a total cost of under $3,000 businesses will receive 90% of the products for free while paying for 10% of the cost. For projects over $3,000 the business owner will receive 65% of the products for free while paying 35% of the cost. The maximum amount of free product that is eligible for each business is $10,000.

So how exactly did this turn into the business owner paying the contractor in full for the entire cost of the product? Unless I fell on my head last night and just don’t remember it, it appears that this thing went from 90% free, to 0% free.

This whole post is built on inaccuracies, therefore I can't even respond to it.

Go outside and enjoy the beautiful spring day, the internet and message boards are no way to enjoy life...

[ChriswUfGator]

The Property Enhancement program is fine, just taking longer than anticipated as often happens. We should start seeing some work done in the near future. When there is news to report I'll be sure to report it.

There may also be products to still give out after the first wave of applicants are done with their projects. When the smoke clears, we will be sure to make that information available to all the potential applicants.

Thanks for your interest.

Well, not to go off mentioning the 800lb gorilla in the room or anything, but I think interest in this program seemed to wane significantly when it came out that the "lucky" recipients would actually have to pay for the cost of their own improvements, and that the "program" really amounted to nothing more than a negotiated discount off retail.

That being the case, what exactly is the benefit? Nobody is paying retail prices for building trades in this economic environment anyway, I can probably walk in off the street and get as good a deal. And as long as they're paying for it anyway, doesn't it seem like if a business owner wanted an awning or a facade improvement, or whatever, they'd have already bought one?

How many people have actually signed up for this?

Actually if you go back and look at the first post in this thread, you will see that it is made very clear that businesses will have to foot a portion of the costs. In every piece of material we sent out to prospective businesses that was made very clear as well.

If you are really so concerned with the management of the program come to the SPAR office or meet me somewhere to talk about it.

Or drop by the MJ weekly meeting tonight, you can kill multiple birds with one stone. I'll happily attend and have any discussion you want to have. I don't own a business on Main Street, so I don't really have a dog in this fight.

I asked what I asked because it seems like the nature of this program has shifted quite a bit from what it was originally represented to be, and what it has become now. The extent of a business owners' financial contributions to the improvements were initially represented as being nominal, and that is no longer the case. Surely you won't argue that.

Originally, the improvements were to be heavily subsidized by donations from participating contractors, and then later that somehow turned into, well, now the business owner needs to pay the contractor for all of their costs and nothing was really being donated after all.

So my point was that the deal has clearly changed, and I personally suspect the program won't get that much interest (not enough to make a cohesive visual impact anyway), given that it has gone from a grant/donation type of program to one that really just amounts to some kind of pre-negotiated discount off retail price from certain SPAR-approved contractors.

Again, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but that really seems to be the case doesn't it?

I've got a fairly busy night tonight and was actually going to go out of my way to stop by the MetroJacksonville meeting tonight to discuss this with you....Then I read the post below this one....

Frankly, you are way off base with your understanding of this program. Not sure where you got the info, but it surely was not correct. Contractors are not involved. The donor business are the ones doing their own design/build. For example, Joe's Detailing is getting new fencing and the property owner is paying the fencing company 35% of the cost of the design, custom build, and installation of the new fencing. While still getting 65% of those services for free. In another scenario, if a property owner wanted new signage and also something that the program doesn't offer like landscaping, they could use the money they spent on landscaping as their portion of the 35%. So $3500 on landscaping would equal $6500 of free signage. If they just wanted signage they would pay $3500 cash to the sign company and get $6500 worth of signage for free.

Hypothetically, the donated products could be given to Main Street businesses for free and it sounds great in theory. In reality they could use the $10,000 of free products for the building and then close business the next day and sell their building for $10k more. Tony at A-Z was initially interested in the program and we were willing to work with him to get new signage and paint, but he was going to have to replace his windows out of pocket and he didn't want to do that. Then a few weeks later he closed his business down. We could see that he already had one foot out the door and was being hurt by Uptown and CityKidz. If someone isn't willing to pay 35% to get 65% for free then they likely aren't in it for the long haul.

It seems as though you're throwing a lot of percentages around without saying exactly how they're calculated. So when you say "65%", for example, do you mean 65% of COST or 65% of RETAIL? Because, going back to my original point here, nobody's paying retail these days anyway.

And this is a "yes" or "no" question; Does the contractor get paid in full for the value of their "donation"?

To really assess this, what I want to know is, are any of these "donors" actually donating anything?