Okay, I have one important question to ask. WHO THE @#$%&^ DO THE CITYVEST ASSHATS THINK THEY ARE?
In the Times Leader article, "Battle over razing Hotel Sterling brews", They DEMAND that the city tear down the Sterling?!!!
“The Hotel Sterling needs to be razed and it needs to be razed immediately. Waiting thirty days for CityVest to do something which all parties know CityVest cannot do is imprudent and, quite frankly, constitutes a needless threat to public safety,”
Translation, We stole all we could from the $6 million LOAN, and you can kiss our asses if you think we're gonna pay to do it.
Am I wrong in thinking that Cityvest SHOULD have made the building stable before wasting our taxes on anything else?
I was at the Sterling when they condemned it way back when. Honestly, I've been VERY sceptical that it could have been saved, even without the flood.
The questions that really need to be asked are not being asked.
When are we going to get our $6 million back?
Why was the Sterling left to rot for a decade?
Why would the city be responsible for a privately owned building?
If the City has to tear it down, they should be able to put a lien on all the private holdings of the owners (or whatever the big wigs are called) of Cityvest, to recoup the loan and costs of demolition.
Dan Emplit WBFD