AntiRust

Cleveland: Hot, Wet Redevelopment Sex

The next time you head to Cleveland, you might want to take a look at their newest redevelopment efforts. And remember to bring a lot of one-dollar bills!

Because the redevelopment efforts will very likely be naked and sliding down greased poles while hair-band ballads scream in the background.

Yeah, that's right. The strippers are saving Cleveland. And if you hit the link, you will see that some irregular suspects are supporting the deal. It's complex stuff. What's happening is, a huge development project is going in. But there were some strip clubs in the way. So the city is relocating them to create an "adult entertainment district."

And all we get is a hockey arena? Don't get me wrong. Sid the Kid is a good player. But when was the last time tourists got to spend "Beaver Bucks" at a Pens game? Well, that's what they get to spend at Larry Flynt's Hustler Club, which will remain a mainstay on the Cleveland club scene due to this new deal. The link to Mr. Flynt's club, which is CLEARLY not work safe--nor wife safe, even on Father's Day--can be found here. Just in case you want to do some, er, research.

Sports Impact: Golf Versus Baseball

So last night I was watching KDKA's 11 o'clock news. Stephanie Watson did a report on the economic impact of the U.S. Open. I can't find the link at the moment, but I could have sworn she said that the golf tournament would pump something like $60 million into the economy. Which is a number I have seen.

But then she noted that this compared favorably to the $30 million we got from last summer's baseball All-Star game. Maybe I was distracted, but I swear she said $30 million. I think there was even a graphic.

That struck me as odd. Because last year, the economic prognosticators were promising something more like $50 million from the All-Star game. (Then I saw a report saying it might take "days or weeks" to measure the actual impact. Then, eight months later, someone else said that the city still hadn't calculated the actual numbers.)

But then this morning, I see a story in the Post-Gazette that alludes to the $50 million figure again. And a Paul Martino story on KDKA doing the same.

Did Watson get it wrong? Or did I perhaps hear her wrong? I admit, I might have been distracted by her ebullient charms. Or are there different ways to measure economic impact? Does anyone have any idea how much the All-Star game generated? If not, what are the odds we can do accurate predictions?

Just wondering.

UPDATE: This story concerning this year's All-Star tilt in San Fran repeats the $50 million claim for Pittsburgh. Has anyone ever confirmed these numbers?

Still More on Minor-League Arenas

When will it end? Seriously? When?

Here's yet another Baltimore columnist arguing that the city doesn't just need a new arena... it needs a really big new arena. Why? Emphasis added:

Moreover, to say the city will never have the opportunity to return to the NBA or join the NHL is an attitude that screams "minor league," and is reminiscent of those who insisted we would never have another NFL franchise after the Colts' departure.

Other reasons include the idea that an arena is necessary to help the convention center draw big events. You know. The convention center. Which was supposed to save the city. But didn't. So the city courted hotel developers to build a big hotel. They wouldn't. So the city decided to build one with $300 million in public money.

But don't worry. The columnist points to real success in developments like the Inner Harbor, Camden Yards and Ravens Stadium. Which of course failed to draw enough people to convince a hotel developer to build a hotel.

Sorry. I guess talking about reality is minor-league.

Women, Work and Culture: Another Drunk Bites the Dust

Hey, I'm all for equal rights. And women in the workplace. (My wife is at work right now, in fact. How else is a layabout supposed to get an MFA?) That being said, why does it seem like the ladies always have to be ruining a good binge? First Carrie Nation. Now these people in South Korea.

Can't a guy (or a nation of guys, in this case) get ripped, act like clowns and coarsen the culture in peace?   

Authentic Pittsburgh: Where is Our Fangbang Road?

Today's New York Times has a really... strange... photo essay from a guy in the paper's China bureau. He wanders around fast-growing Shanghai's neighborhoods in search of "authentic" China. Which to me seems oddly nostalgic--perhaps even a tad orientalist--for such a sophisticated newspaper. But it's well done, I think. And interesting. Here's a snippet of the "essay" part:

Standing in the middle of Shanxi Road along with its salt-of-the-earth traders in those early days couldn’t have been more of a revelation for me than if I had I stepped into a time machine and strapped myself in for a journey. Here was a slice of that increasingly rare thing in China, indeed anywhere — the authentic.

... None of the neighborhoods that I began to plunge into were truly hidden. Rather, they lived on in their quiet timeless way, wholly unsuspected from just a block or two away, obscured as it were by flashy new neighborhoods composed of jostling tall structures or roped off by looping expressways. I stumbled upon one after a stroll down Huai Hai Road, one of Shanghai’s great modern shopping boulevards. The telltale sign of traditional black Chinese-style roof tiles, just barely visible, lured me down a narrow, gently winding side street, which I followed for a short distance until it spilled onto a larger street, which took my breath away.

This street, Fangbang Road, in all of its slightly shabby glory, became one of the centers of my photographic world over the next two years, drawing me back again and again, as surely as I was pulled along that late afternoon that fall day by the swift current of foot traffic of people returning home in time for an early dinner.

Seriously: "salt-of-the-earth traders"?

But read the whole thing. They guy addresses a few obvious objections: Is he just glorifying poverty? Engaging in hopeless romanticism and nostalgia? Etc.

But if he can, so can we, right?

When I lived in Baltimore, there were still a few "authentic" places around my neighborhood. Even more out in Dundalk and Essex. Pigtown. Etc. In fact, quite a few young professionals had begun going on bar tours of these places. Some because they liked them. Others to make fun of people. I would like to avoid the latter. But I would also like to propose a question.

Where is Pittsburgh's Fangbang Road? Where is the "authentic" "place"?

I ask because I have been teaching at Pitt for a few years now. And we usually discuss vernacular. And the whole "Pittsburghese" thing inevitably comes up. And all the kids know about the "yinz" and the "gumbands." But only about three students so far could claim to actually know someone, personally, who spoke that way. And all agree that the phenomenon is based more in the Mon Valley and other outlying areas than in Pittsburgh itself.

So... I know this is an old and tired question. But if you are interested... Where is the epicenter of Pittsburgh-ness? Is it still centrally located? Was it ever? Is it inside city limits? Was it ever? Is it gone? Does it matter?

Pittsburgh Makes, the World Takes: Thoughts on Industry

Chris Briem offers good advice: Occasionally, it is a good thing to step away from the daily news and consider things like this narrated slide show of Centralia, PA.

I am not at all sure what Chris took from it, but it reminded me of this excellent (and recent) post from the Atlantic's James Fallows. It deals with manufacturing in China, and is sort of a teaser for a longer article in the magazine. I plan to get me a copy.

In short, the post is about how "China makes, the world takes." Which is a modern spin on Trenton, New Jersey's longstanding motto. Fallows has roots in Trenton, and offers a nice analysis of the way things are today, now that industry has left places like Trenton and gone to China. Where he lives now:

Other parts of the world are now in the booming, confident, “Makes - Takes” stage of development, most notably the Pearl River Delta region of southern China, which is the subject of my current article. The slogan on Trenton’s bridge can now be seen as campy, defiant, charming, retro, wistful — or as just about anything except “realistic” any more. Trenton, while not the richest city in America, is vastly richer than any place in China. Still, the slogan shows how important manufacturing is to an area’s, a nation’s, or a family’s sense of pride and purpose. Because the motto is so powerful, within my family, in evoking one industrial moment, I thought it particularly fitting for this new moment in China.

Vastly richer than any place in China. To the extent that is true (and I have no reason to think it's not) I think the same can probably be said of Pittsburgh.

I don't have anything to add, really. Except that I need to get a copy of the larger article.

Update: Speaking of narrated slide shows, check out this one, narrated by Fallows. Lots of great stuff about an "invented city." And even better, an answer to a great question: China ships all this stuff to the U.S. in giant containers. So what's in them on the way back? They aren't empty. Care to guess?

Lowest Ratings EVER: Hockey, Television and the Drive for Major-League Status

I submit these data without (too much) further comment. From a few days back:

The Stanley Cup finals lost nearly a quarter of what already was a small television audience. Anaheim's 1-0 victory over Ottawa in Game 2 on Wednesday night got a 0.6 cable rating on Versus and was watched in 446,000 homes in the United States.

Well, maybe that's because it was on Versus. Game 2 switched to NBC. Results? Emphasis added:

The Stanley Cup finals have brought record low ratings to NBC -- and not just for sports. Saturday night's Game 3 equaled NBC's lowest rating ever for a prime-time program.  Ottawa's 5-3 victory over Anaheim received a 1.1 national rating and a 2 share, the network said Tuesday. That matched a rerun of "The West Wing" on July 23, 2005, which also drew a 1.1 rating.

To be fair, there was a bit of a bounce for Game 4.

Hat tip.

Pittsburgh Non-Emergency: What's the 411 on 311?

Some jerkass keeps letting the air out my wife's tires. This weekend marked twice in a month. They don't slash them. They just use one of those doo-hickies to loosen the valve stems. So it could be worse. But both times, we were planning to go somewhere. And both times it was a big hassle. Calling and waiting for AAA. Switching two car seats. Daydreaming about ways to stake out the street and mercilessly torture the offenders. (My preferred method involves a lot of teeth breaking and nut twisting. In a perfect world, I would be wearing a shiny brown coat when dishing out the justice, a la Charles Bronson in Death Wish.)

I know it's a minor thing, but since it has happened more than once, we thought it was the kind of nuisance crime we ought to report to the kind of people who compile such information. We have no delusions about someone coming out and investigating, much less collaring the tire-hating goon squad. But like I said, if it's a trend or some such, we thought the local beat cops ought to know.

So the question was: How do we report such a thing? We certainly didn't want to tie up a 911 line. Then I remembered Mayor Luke Ravenstahl's Response Line. That is, Pittsburgh's new non-emergency 311 number. Seriously. Hit the link, man. You've seen the Mayor's grinning face. His arms crossed, resolutely. Yes. This was it. Because I had a non-emergency.

And the guy I talked to (it was not Mayor Luke Ravenstahl) was extremely polite. Only he said he was not the person to call. He gave me the number of my local police precinct. Which I called. Somewhat sheepishly. After all, I am sure they have other issues to worry about. But still...

Again, a nice person on the other side. But again, wrong number. She told us we had to call...

911.

Really? For flat tires? I was going to just give it up. But we were curious. So after a bit of debate, my wife actually called 911. (I apologize if your house was burning down and you couldn't get through.) And you know what? They said that was the number to call. They took our name and number and told us they would call back. And sure enough, someone did.

Is this standard operating procedure? I still feel like we did something wrong. Isn't 911 for really serious stuff?

Just wondering.

Thanks, Mr. Peduto: More on Abatements, Incentives, Condos, and Things I've Said

It seems that the Pittsburgh City Council has approved tax abatements for Downtown and 28 other neighborhoods. Which is interesting in and of itself. So check it out.

I am sure we will hear more about this. But in the meantime, here's one take: About a year ago, I was thinking about all the incentives the city and state were thinking about tossing at a few of the Downtown condo projects. And I said (among other things):

And again, where are all these people who are supposedly going to move downtown going to come from? If I were a property owner in Squirrel Hill or Shadyside I think I would be raising hell right about now.

It seemed unfair for a few developers downtown to be getting all that cash, particularly since the number of people in the city who can afford "high-end" is so low. And particularly since there were already certain property owners, downtown and elsewhere, catering to that limited crowd.

This provoked a ton of comments, on that post and a bunch of subsequent ones. Many of the comments argued that I was, ahem... misguided. One critique said that I was erroneously assuming that the new downtown housing would be a perfect substitute for existing residential offerings in Shadyside and other upscale city markets. Others said that I was wrong because the residents in the new downtown condos would be from outside the city, meaning that they would grow the pie and not harm the existing landlords in any way. Etc. Etc. Etc.

That's all water under the bridge. But it still seems pretty cool and refreshing, if you check out this snippet regarding the council's recent vote:

In the process, they held off adding another neighborhood, Fairywood, in the far western part of the city, to the plan. Fairywood residents made a pitch for inclusion today. Councilman Bill Peduto acknowledged afterwards that the residents had a legitimate argument. "When you choose 29 neighborhoods to be the winner, you're also choosing 60 neighborhoods to be the loser."

So when you do these kinds of plans, you have people called "winners." And the other people are... "losers." Which was what I was trying to say all along. (Yes. I know abatements are different than direct cash incentives. But I think the latter are even LESS fair. Because, as someone once pointed out, when you aim incentives at a neighborhood, which is the case with abatements, anyone building there can take advantage. Which is not the case when the government writes a check to Jack Piatt. That is, I believe that the critique Peduto mentions above applies even MORE in the case I made last year.)

Now let me be clear. I suspect that Peduto does not agree with me about much of anything. Particularly things I have said about housing incentives in the city. And I might also point out that Peduto is an interesting person to be making the critique mentioned above. Because if I am not mistaken, the abatement plan he originally put forward included even FEWER neighborhoods.

All I am saying now is that I think what Peduto says directly above makes a lot of sense. Although, again, I wonder about what he means. If this is about "winners" who get the abatements and "losers" who do not, how can he justify HIS plan, which seems to include a lot fewer neighborhoods--and, therefore, has a lot more losers?

And how, exactly, will the losers lose? I thought that the new housing in the area was going to draw people from outside the city. Right? And I thought they were all going to be tax-positive. Right? If so, the neighborhoods without abatements will not lose population to neighborhoods with the abatement. Right? Even better, the abatements will grow the population pie AND the tax pie. Meaning current residents benefit. Right? I think that, at first, Peduto critiqued the mayor's plan because it said these things about population shifts and tax-positiveness without any rigorous study to back them. And he said his more limited plan made more sense. Now he seems to be saying, at least in this one case, that Fairywood residents have a legitimate arguments. And that picking neighborhoods to get the abatement and leaving others out leads to winners and losers.

Either way, I think this is going to be a humdinger of a political battle. Because the more neighborhoods they favor with this plan, the angrier all the "losers" are going to be.

So is Peduto leaning towards a blanket abatement for the city?

A Young Mayor

Here's a story about a very young mayor. One who played college football just a few years back, but now runs a Rust Belt city struggling to revitalize. But it's not about our own Luke Ravenstahl. It's about Newark's Cory Booker.

Wow. Talk about a resume. He was a football standout at Standford. Then he became a Rhodes Scholar. Then he went on to graduate from Yale Law School. Then he moved into the worst ghetto in Newark. And later ran for city council--get this--as an outsider. Then he ran for mayor. And won.

Don't get me wrong. Newark is a disaster. And will likely remain a disaster for some time. And from what little I know about the mayor's policies, I see plenty I might quibble with. But geez. This guy is making a name for himself. He is openly battling one of the most bureaucratic, inept municipal governments in the country. And winning on occasion. Even in terms of entrenched realities like local patronage:

Booker also wants to slash the city’s workforce by 10 percent to 20 percent. He has already fired more than 60 people at city hall, many in patronage jobs, and cut 425 jobs in the Newark Housing Authority, after a federal investigation found that the agency, a longtime source of political cronyism, was padding the payrolls with money designated for capital projects. With refreshing candor, Booker’s housing chief defended the firings by noting that the housing authority wasn’t a jobs program.

Such efforts have sparked controversy, however, for most of those dismissed are African-American Newarkers, while new appointees have hailed from all walks of life and races. Booker discounts the critics, saying that he’s “tired of racial politics” and of “leaders wrapping themselves in kente cloth.” But in a city where race and political connections have often been the key factors in public-sector hiring, Booker knows that his outside appointees will face close scrutiny.

Our mayor is younger, though.