The Naperville City Council recently granted a $49,050 grant to fix up the Ogden Mall, at the northwest corner of Ogden Avenue and Naperville Wheaton Road, as part of the Ogden Avenue Site Reimbursement Grant Program.
The grant funds are being used to help reimburse property owners for qualifying sign, building facade and landscape improvements made to their sites.
According to the grant application, the landscape improvements will "enhance the landscaping at the three main parkway entrances to the mall as well as throughout the perimeter." The landscaping will include installing or replacing parkway and perimeter shade trees and the parking lot will be screened with shrubs and ornamental grasses.
Do you think this is a good use of tax money? Are there other areas along Ogden Avenue you'd like to see fixed up or otherwise improved?
Whenever I drive past Ogden Mall I will roll down my car window and spit at those socialized trees.
Seriously though, $49k doesn't buy much, don't be expecting any massive changes. That money would barely cover the cracks in the parking lot being filled in.
I don't think anything on Ogden Avenue compares to the slum to the immediate north of the Burger King on Washington Street in downtown Naperville. How is it that the city hasn't bulldozed that shanty yet? It's practically falling in on itself and it looks like no one has mowed the grass in years.
I think it is refreshing that the city is spending some money outside the downtown area to revitalize the older business areas of the city. I hope the city that the money is spent on local vendors to keep the money in the local economy. If they could only get the business across the street to improve its appearance! I know that the city has tried in the past. Maybe they could throw some of this money that way to make inroads into the problem.
During this period I am not happy with spending tax dollars on private property. But on the other hand, it is private and (hopefully) cities do not just "bulldoze" private property...
As I came here to remind bloggers to pay their taxes by midnight tonight to avoid being penalized I saw this article in the Naperville Sun.
Honestly, I was outraged.
Ogden Mall is a private enterprise owned and/or run by Mid-America and we as taxpayers are subsidizing its face lift.
Ogden Mall should take care of its own property or sell it to an owner who will take care of it. It is in awful state of disaray and neglected because it is mismanaged. It is always half empty or more.
Again, the drunken sailors in City Hall are giving away my and your tax money.
My total real estate taxes this year are $60,075.80 and I am just learning my entire taxes are going to Ogden Mall since another payment besides the one mentioned above is in the pipeline.
This is legalized robbery. The City of Naperville is robbing me a private business person to pay another business person off for improvements to his private property.
What is going on here? Did Ogden Mall contribute to the right politicians? Does a city council member sit on the Board of Directors at Mid-America? Is Ogden Mall giving the City of Naperville space for a satellite police station?
I hope you all now believe me that City Hall is run by a bunch of drunken sailors who squander your hard earned dollars.
They should be issuing citations and fines for these slum landlords on Ogden Ave. to force them to make the necessary improvements instead of promoting their slum behavior with grants from taxpayer hard earned dollars.
Common Taxpayers, wake up!
Common Naperville Sun, wake up!
This is inexcusable, intolerable and unconsionable.
I am about ready to rip my check in half before I take it to the bank for payment of my Real Estate Tax Bill. Let me see if I can find my shredder.....
Sure this is a nice way to spend our tax money confiscated from us. It will be nice to spruce the place up so in a year or so all the Government Motors, green, fuel efficient Volgas will have a nice place to park and of course look very smart indeed. Does the City get an ownership stake in the mall now??? I'd like to see the original Hearthside Home Furnishings building (where I once worked in the late 60's) spruced up. Maybe a modern paint job, some city paid for landscaping and perhaps an ornamental gate replacing the chaing across the entrance would be an upgrade, while it sits vacant for the NEXT 20 years.
I am spending almost eight thousands dollars out of my own pocket to improve the landscaping of my home this summer. The city isn't giving me (nor do I expect it to) one penny to "help" pay for any of my improvements.
I am all for the city spending money in the public way, parkways, trees, etc. I do not agree with providing "grants" of public money to be used to enhance privately owned property of any kind.... commercial or otherwise. Clearly some of these properties have been around for decades and the economics must be such that the property owners don't have enough profit to give themselves the face lift they so desperately need. Regardless, we do not have a socialist society and I am perplexed at how a so-called bunch of conservative Republican city council members could approve something like this?
As a comparison there are landscaping criteria for new properties when developed. What is doubly wrong with these "grants" is that there is a carrot and no stick. If "grant" money has to be used to get the old properties up to par with the newer landscaping criteria there should at least be a caveat in the grant that the property owner is now under the new criteria and any "grandfathering" goes away AND the property owner becomes obligated to maintain the property to the newer criteria. The way it is these thousands of dollars spent on landscaping could all be neglected, die, get mowed down by cars or trucks, etc. and the property owners have no further obligation to do anything. If the property owners do let it all go to waste are we going to give them more money in a few years? I hope not.
Giving Mid America money to landscape its own mall is utter stupidity.
Does any other city in America throw money to private mall owners?
If not, Mid America will use our money to beautify the Ogden Mall in Naperville while they use their own profits to beautify non-Naperville Malls.
I always felt some of our city officials had loose screws. This confirms it.
This is what happens when you let your city officials raise your taxes year after year without protesting.
Another waste of taxpayers dollars !! Our city officials are Nuts! It's time for a recall !! I am tired of my tax dollars being wasted in one way or another !!
Questions that come to mind
Does a multi-billion dollar company really need this money?
Why is this project more worthy than any other commercial property in Naperville?
How much will tax revenues increase as a result of this program?
How much will maintenance costs increase as a result of this program?
This mall has been slow for a long time now, is this simply diverting precious resources from healthy properties to well connected weak ones?
If the business model for this mall does not support its maintenance, should the mall find a new business model or be allowed to fail and become something else? (Yes its the bailout word, the park district bailed out a Wherli company last year by purchasing unbuildable land from them).
Why should everyone else pay more taxes to support this program?
Would the money be better spent putting up some food and lodging signs on I88 in an effort to increase business and tax revenues instead of wall papering struggling businesses with tax money?
Should the people on City Council claiming to have business experience apply it to the city and to this problem?
We need more revenue, more efficient government and less expenses, the basics of any business.
PS
As a side bar: a small restaurant that I frequent throws out thousands of aluminum cans and plastic bottles with their food waste; does the City's new contract require basic recycling like glass, paper, plastic and metal?
While the market for recycled materials is down today, this will change in the future. Given the insane spending, borrowing and deficits at the Federal level, it may be the distant future.
Tomorrow will be a brighter day.
OK -
It's a conspiracy to take your money and distribute it elsewhere. Must be, right?
On the other hand - if that property has a number of empty storefronts, as I seem to remember [I very rarely go by there these days] and the Council has determined that this grant will HELP [note that word, help, not pay for the entirety] the property owners modernize and spruce up the location - which will hopefully bring in more shoppers and perhaps even more stores. Oddly enough, if it works, that would have the effect of - wait for it - increasing tax revenue.
This can easily be seen as an investment in a problem piece of real estate that isn't going away. Sometimes, conspiracy theorists, the obvious can BE the answer.
Do I love this idea? No. Do I think it may pay dividends? It might, though that location has been horrible for years. Do I think that the council is trying to assist in fixing an ongoing problem? Yes, I do.
Last, but not least, am I truly and deeply delighted at the idea that "Taxes" is going to be paying for this out if his/her real estate tax?
Oh, yes, I am.
Taxes, Taxes and more Taxes said: " My total real estate taxes this year are $60,075.80". You must own some pretty spectacular real estate. Is this a single family residence? A business? A multi-family building?
By Anonymous on June 2, 2009 11:15 AM
Taxes, Taxes and more Taxes said: " My total real estate taxes this year are $60,075.80". You must own some pretty spectacular real estate. Is this a single family residence? A business? A multi-family building?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I own some real estate in town and live in town. Nothing spectacular. Just being taxed up the WAZOOOOO! Sorry, I can't give any details that may close in on my identity one day. As I have always said I am here to be permanently anonymous. I did fight my tax bill with some relative success last year. This year all the gains I made last year were taken away from me plus a lot more. So I am not sure it pays to appeal as the beneifits only last one year and then they screw you again....maybe if you are connected they don't screw you the next year.
Back on subject:
Mid-America is a very successful company. The city of Naperville should call them and demand they fix their parking lot which is in completle disaray and probably one of the reasons the plaza is half empty with musical chair tenants year after year.
And money towards landsscaping is insane when the parking lot is cracking, potholing, and alligatoring. Not that I am for supporting private business, but if we are going to be stupid enough to support private enterprises let us fix the parking lot before we plant roses that are only seasonal and gone forever. A good parking lot will last 10 years if sealed and striped every other year despite the vicious Chicago winters.
The Fed. Govt. is bailing out private business. I am against this to. But they can literally print money or borrow money from China and one day defualt on this money. Naperville can not print money or borrow money from China and is screwing the taxpayers day and night. If we have extra money why don't we save some for the future when we have our next $11.5 millon deficit. Imagine we lay 43 city employees so we can give Mid-America 49k with more in the pipleline. How can the city employees sit next to city officials and wonder how supporting private enterprise is more important then their jobs? It is only a matter of time before a city employee is going to wake up and punch a city official in the mouth for squandering so much money at his or her expense.
When the city is not pleased with the looks or upkeep of most real estate property in town, they usually send a threatening letter. In this letter they state if the improvements are not made by a certain date, they will issue a $500 fine. They even send threatening letters if there are to many papers on an apartment cmplex parking lot that should have been picked up.....always with that $500 fine that will come if action is not taken immediately and swiftly.
So I have to wonder why this property owner is being treated differently since he is very wealthy and successful and owns and manages shopping centers everywhere.
Personally, I feel Mid America gave up on Ogden Mall. I would have to. It was not built right and most tenants do not have any visibility from any street. Two of its 3 main anchors, that being Dominick's and Walgreen's left many years ago.
The original landlord must have been greedy and out of his mind to lay out such a configuation for his mall. He wanted to get the maximum amount of tenants in there regardless if they have street visibility or not. Many people and the original owner call it a mall. But it is not a MALL. It is a SHOPPING CENTER.
In a Mall tenants don't need street visibility. They depend on the 4-6 anchor department stores for a draw. In a shopping centers, tenants depend on street visibility, street signs and advertising.
In my opinion, Ogden Mall is not configured right and it will never succeed. When I called a few year ago it had the lowest rent per sq. ft. and the lowest real estate taxes per sq. ft. in Naperville....by far!!! I recall the real estate tax as being only a 1.16 per sq. ft. while most other plazas were at least twice as high. So it does not even contribute its fair share of real estate taxes. So why are we subsidizing it a second time since we already are subsidizing it with half price real estate taxes?
As the Naperville Sun does a good job digging and digging into the problems of this city, we are gradually learning why are taxes are so high and always increasing. This year our taxes for the city increased 11% despite laying off 43 employees or positions. Despite making cuts to eliminate an 11.5 million budget deficit.
Imagine where we would be if we voted Naperivlle non-home rule and limited it to the lower of 5% or the .01% increase in the CPI index. Our drunken sailor city officials would be taking 18% paycuts just as they do on California.
Anyway, I hope that day is near when our city officials take they 18% pay cuts for screwing this town and its taxpayers out of their hard earned money. I believe the day will come. The day is on the horizon.
A little more involvement from the Naperivlle Sun in exposing city corruption and the day of judgment for our City Officials will come much quicker.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PS. Our drunken sailor city officials have a great tax base in this town. They have thousands of McMansions in the tax base. A 3 million McMansion generates 60,000 in real estate taxes. So it is so shocking they can squander all these McMansion Taxes away so easily. Imagine if our city officials had to run a town where the average home was only 100k or even 150k. They would have a 115 million budget deficit instead of only an 11.5 million budget deficit.
Taxes,
Mid America may not be the owner of the Ogden Mall. They are really more of a property management company - the real owners may be a pension fund or some other holding company
Anonymous wrote:
Mid America may not be the owner of the Ogden Mall. They are really more of a property management company - the real owners may be a pension fund or some other holding company\
Aaaaaaggghhhh! You said pension!!!!!!
In reading the article about this in the Sun I understood this money to be part of the Ogden Avenue Site Reimbursement Grant Program. The article also indicated the following:
In addition to the Ogden Mall, a total of 18 applications, for a variety of improvements, were submitted to the city by the April 1 deadline. Every applicant received grant funds and four properties, including Ogden Mall, received bonus funds based on the size of their properties and the combination of proposed improvements and their expected impact. The money awarded will affect 10 businesses along the corridor. http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/napervillesun/news/1600568,council-funds-enhance-ogden-mall_na060109.article
----
Some of the comments on this post seem to imply that the city council, on their own, simply "decided" to "give" this money away. I have news for you folks, this money was already allocated as part of the Ogden Corridor improvement. What this owner did was simply apply for, and receive some of the money ALREADY allocated.
If you have a complaint take it up with the council because $49,000 is just the amount for this corner, not the total amount granted or available for this project. Perhaps Chris can shed light on the total amount available to Ogden Avenue businesses? The actual amount granted here($49,050)seems like an odd amount - is it part of some kind of formula, or percentage calculation - what's the extra $50 for?
It's not much of a stretch to believe the council wants Ogden avenue to thrive. Donating, or "granting" money to businesses for refurbishment makes sense if their belief is that it will come back over time through taxes. Too bad some enterprising person couldn't find a way to lease part of the parking lot and shuttle people to either the train or downtown area - or how about the Omnia people building their theatre here instead of downtown? I guess that would be another topic.
By Anonymous on June 2, 2009 2:33 PM
Taxes,
Mid America may not be the owner of the Ogden Mall. They are really more of a property management company - the real owners may be a pension fund or some other holding company
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That is very true. And that is why I initially chose my words very carefully and said and/or as to ownership or management.
Regardless of who owns it, the place is an eyesore.
The person or pension fund who/which owns the property is not taking care of it.
I considered the Walgreen's vacancy for a business location when it vacated it seems like years ago. The rent was only 6 bucks and I felt they would negotiate down to 4 bucks a square foot. Itwas about 8800 sq. ft. from memory. The RE TAX was only $1.16 per sq. ft. I forgot what CAM was but it was dirt cheap since they do not do any significant Common Area Maintenance. After driving around a few times, I decided I did not want to be a slum tenant for a slum landlord and never considered it again. In hindsight, I feel I made the right decision. I ended up paying 3 times as much in a plaza with ownership/ management that cares. A plaza with good street visibility and free standing signs and overhead signs that can be seen.
Since OM is over half empty, it appears I am not the only one who thinks it is a slum property owned by a slum landlord who shoud be on the south side of Chicago with all the other slum landlords who want to milk the last penny out of their property and than walk away from it leaving a massive unpaid real estate tax bill for the taxapayers to swallow. City of Naperville officials need to make sure this landlord is not trying to pull this stunt on them. He may have a huge mortgage and be upside down and ready to call it quits. Who would have ever thought the "very successful looking" Lifestyle Seven Bridges Center would be foreclosed on. Thankfully the bank which took over is continuing to do a nice job maintaining the property while they look for a new buyer. Maybe the City of Naperville should consider buying it for 20 cents on the dollar and when the economy rebounds the revenue from this huge development can reduce our taxes. One thing for sure if we are going to invest in private business like Omni, this has much more potential if we can pick it up for 20 cents on the dollar in a foreclosure sale. My understanding is Moser and Harris would not be allowed to buy it back in a county auction after they were foreclosed on. If I had the money I would buy it for up to 30 cents on the dollar as I see potential if someone can get his act together there and slow the building and development down until everything is fully occupied.
Anyway, for now City of Naperville needs to send the Ogden Mall its written notice to shape up threatening a 5000 dollar fine for each week it delays making the necessary improvements. You would be surprised how fast a slum landlord produces when the gun is pointed at his head.
By Taxes, Taxes and more Taxes on June 2, 2009 5:07 PM
Since OM is over half empty, it appears I am not the only one who thinks it is a slum property owned by a slum landlord
-------------------------
You got to watch this stuff. The words "slum landlord" and "slum property" have been found actionable defamation per se.
What code sections do you believe that the owner is in violation?
You don't have to be in technical violation of any code to be a slum landlord.
A slum landlord is one who does not maintain his property.
I saw his parking lot a few weeks ago and it was in very bad shape.
I almost lost a tire in one of his huge potholes.
I sure hope he put some sakrete in the potholes until he can get a professional to fix his parking lot.
I am sure if the city used all the growth era inspectors who were not laid off after the growth ended in Naperville to do a thorough inspection of that property they will find code violations.
When I drove by I saw pieces or slivers of bricks that had fallen off the building. Anyone can tell it is not maintained. Many old bricks need to be replaced.
And obviously he knows that and is asking the city for a hand-out to maintain his own property. If it was maintained properly, he would not be asking for a bail-out from citizens and taxpayers.
Taxes, Taxes and more Taxes:
Watch your language. I'm no more a fan of this action than you are -- although I think I understand what the city is trying to do -- but be careful when you throw around words like "slum" and "slum landlord." That's unnecessarily cruel and, to be honest, I hope that language is beneath you.
Yes, OM is a mess; yes, it's been difficult to attract tenants. But you have to remember that people have migrated to the southern part of town, and businesses are following. Let's be honest, all of Ogden is an eyesore.
If the city were to see some sort of profit from its investment, that would be one thing. But I really doubt that will happen. I just don't get how they decide to spend the city's money. They willingly throw cash to plant trees in a privately owned mall, but they were hesitant to build a sound wall around the Washington/75th intersection? Where are the Council's priorities?
By mark on June 2, 2009 10:44 PM
Taxes, Taxes and more Taxes:
Yes, OM is a mess; yes, it's been difficult to attract tenants. But you have to remember that people have migrated to the southern part of town, and businesses are following. Let's be honest, all of Ogden is an eyesore.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark,
People did not migrate to the southern part of town. To the best of my knowledge no homes were imploded in the northern part of town and they remain occupied. The popluation on the north side did not decrease. I believe it may have increased but admittedly insignifantly.
The southern part of town develped and new homes were built that attracted non-Napervillians from all over Illinois and the USA. Businesses also came to accomodate those residents on the Southern Side. Natural growth if you will of both residents and businesses.
Again there was no migration.
A well run business on Ogden Ave can be successful. Perfect example is Portillos. They maintain their property, provide excellent food, and decent service time. They are always busy.
So I would not make excuses for Ogden Mall and other Odgen tenants based on undocumented migration from the North Side to the South Side.
I do feel Ogden Mall needs to be blown up and rebuilt. The configuration is just not right. If there are much too many businesses on Ogden Ave, this may be a great parcel to develop for high rise apartments. It would have quick access to the Tollway System.
Or maybe a REAL MALL can be built. It would appear small for a real mall but I believe with underground parking or one huge parking deck you can fit a small mall there. May have to buy some adjoining property or build a 3 story mall instead of the typical 2 story. Naperville lost the Fox Valley Mall to Aurora. Maybe this would be a chance to redeem itself and generate a decent source of sales tax revenue which would/should reduce the tax burden on struggling Naperville homeowners.
Why not fix the mall next to Burger King first, that is looking shabby???
I heard that 400 malls are ghost towns nationally and in the foreclosure process.
Internet shopping is continuing to grow, savings are growing, credit cards that you never have to repay have disappeared, home equity shopping orgies are over, private sector unemployment is north of 15% nationally, layoffs continue, the dollar continues to devalue against other currencies meaning all the imported stuff costs more.
Naperville, the State and the FEDs all want more taxes from the thoroughly rung-out citizens. Blood from a stone.
This is a tough time for retail and just about everything else.
I don't know the strip mall business, but the question I have is where did the existing customers go and why?
Are the surrounding retail malls also struggling, if yes why, if no why?
Does anyone really believe more bushes on Ogden will boost sales at this or any other property?
It would probably cost more money, but my preference on Ogden would be to add islands in the middle with turning lanes for safety and appearance; and connect the driveways between the parking lots along Ogden so you could move within the block for shopping.
The interconnected parking lots did wonders in Las Vegas for speeding the flow of traffic on the main streets and from what I could tell helped shoppers too aka more business.
Given the proximity to the tollway I have often wondered if there is room for a discount mall at this location, again I'm not a retail guru; apparently neither are the mall owners, the city or the property managers.
Is there any place we can actually see the plans, what the improvements are supposed to be, etc. Is it more trees or larger landscaping areas or what? Does anyone know why the owners of the property aren't being forced to pay for the fixing of the Mall?
jack on June 3, 2009 12:31 PM
Does anyone know why the owners of the property aren't being forced to pay for the fixing of the Mall?
-------------
Jack, According to the article in the Sun the grant amount of $49,050 is going toward the total cost of improvements which are given as $80,201. Presumably the additional amounts are being paid by the owner. The article also explains that this is part of the Ogden Avenue refurbishment program. Other businesses have participated in the process as well, but the amounts they received are not given.
The Sun article stated the following: "The total cost of the improvements, based on the lowest estimate received, is $80,201."
Gee, Jack,
If you scroll all the way up to the top of this page, the answer is given for you: "According to the grant application, the landscape improvements will "enhance the landscaping at the three main parkway entrances to the mall as well as throughout the perimeter." The landscaping will include installing or replacing parkway and perimeter shade trees and the parking lot will be screened with shrubs and ornamental grasses."
The owners aren't being forced to pay for it because: it's a part of the Ogden Avenue Site Reimbursement Grant Program. Also, from the top of the page.
Wasn't Home Depot in discussions to redevelop Ogden Mall several years back? What happened to that? Would be nice to have a Lowes or Home Depot on the North side. That property has to attract somebody at some point in time...developed properly, its a gold mine of a location...
Anonymous,
You wrote: "You got to watch this stuff. The words "slum landlord" and "slum property" have been found actionable defamation per se."
This is a public forum not a court of law. We are entitled to our opinion and have certain right to freedom of speech. Regardless, A slum, as defined by the United Nations agency UN-HABITAT, is a run-down area of a city characterized by substandard housing and squalor and lacking in tenure security.
If the owners of OM want to try to prove defamation they first would have to prove that the property isn't a "run-down area of Naperville". From just the sample who have posted so far it doesn't seem like there would be much of a problem getting people to testify that they consider this area of the city to be run down. And a key point is that they can point to the general area of Ogden Avenue and not even single out OM.
We all have to face the fact and reality that the "Ogden corridor" is well past it's prime. It is ugly and without amenities. It is past it's prime. It is filled with vacancies. It is no longer a destination. Thousands of people pass thru this area every day with other destinations in mind. I can't even count how many businesses have come and gone along this stretch of road in the last 20 years. Rather than sink any more money into an area that never will be the commercial hub it once was we would be better served using the grant money to look at more viable options to redevelop all of this underutilized land.
Paying private property owners to fix up their signage is just plain stupid. There are dozens and dozens of sign code violations all along Ogden Avenue and the city blatantly ignores the violations and does absolutely nothing to enforce it's own ordinances. These property owners are already paying for the illegal signs out of their own pockets. Why in the world would we give them one dime to maintain the legal signage while illegal signage also exists? Can anyone remember the last time the city took action for a sign violation? Not hardly! Signage all along this stretch of road is simply out of control and the businesses are so desperate for customers that they erect all kinds of illegal signs because they know the city won't do a dog gone thing about it. The city in turn has sold out to the sales tax gods and turns a blind eye on all kinds of building, code, and zoning enforcement because they are terrified of loosing any more sales tax revenue.
By Anonymous on June 3, 2009 11:35 PM
Anonymous,
You wrote: "You got to watch this stuff. The words "slum landlord" and "slum property" have been found actionable defamation per se."
This is a public forum not a court of law. We are entitled to our opinion and have certain right to freedom of speech. Regardless, A slum, as defined by the United Nations agency UN-HABITAT, is a run-down area of a city characterized by substandard housing and squalor and lacking in tenure security.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Very well said Anonymous. There are people here who are constantly tyring to hamper public opinion by issuing threats and instilling fear. I have been blogging here for 2.5 years and expressed my opinon as freely as I want and no one has sued me yet. I doubt anyone ever will.
I agree with most of your post.
I can't believe we the taxpayers are subsidizing private enterprise.
Any other city would have demanded these businesses shape up or ship out. Any other city would have fined and penalized them.
The city of Naperville licenses many of these businesses annually. All they have to do is not renew their license until everything is up to par. That ALWAYS works unless they were going out of business anyway.
I bet many of these owners will sell their BMWs and Rolls Royces and attend to their property if the city put a gun to their heads. Most slum landlords drive very nice vehicles as they milk their property to get their vehicile of choice. Most slum landlords are dirty and filthy rich. Trust me on that one! I once watched a Phil Donhue Show about slum landords. Most lived in impeccable mansions.
If they want to keep their BMW and RR, they better tend to their property or they will have no money to buy gas for their vehicles as their businesses will be closed by the city...... not sure though, if we can count on Naperville to close any violators down.
More Taxes, Taxes nonsense:
"I can't believe we the taxpayers are subsidizing private enterprise.
Any other city would have demanded these businesses shape up or ship out. Any other city would have fined and penalized them."
You might wish to continue driving east on Ogden, across nearly all of Roosevelt Rd, large sections of North Av. and some of Butterfield Rd, just to stick with the fairly major E/W streets.
VERY large parts of these roads are as appalling or even worse that the section we're talking about here. If some of the towns that these streets traverse had a better tax base, and we DO, they would probably want to do this sort of thing as well.
Now then, Taxes, I know that you hate all forms of taxes, or at least that's the area you've chosen to rant about this month, but you do say the absolute silliest things, like the first sentence.
Of course tax payers support private enterprise. It happens literally every day. Too often for your taste, of course. Too often for my taste, too, but it is constant and never ending. To think or even suggest otherwise is ridiculous and disingenuous. Now that I think about, though, those are two of your better traits, aren't they?
It's a very small amount of money, and any of the merchants in the corridor could have applied for these sorts of funds. You may disagree with the grant idea, but perhaps it will make a difference.
Did the Naperville Sun contact the owner for a comment?
Who is the owner?
My private property could use a $49K fix-up... on the city's coffer of course. My home is just an eyesore - where do I sign up for the handout?