Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

therealDrA t1_jcc61mq wrote

Thank you for defining the acronym. I think it is really generalizing to say anyone who supported the project is a BEAN. I supported it and do not fall in that category by a long shot, but, as others mentioned, the financial viability of the developer was not widely discussed. Had that been brought up I probably would not have. It is unfortunate we no longer have journalism of any value in the state. For those that rely on journalists for comprehensive reporting on issues, we don't have it in the ProJo or Sinclair.

2

Beezlegrunk OP t1_jcdbt2y wrote

Fair enough, but it’s sort of like dismissing everyone who opposes a non-viable project as being a NIMBY. We need more housing in Providence, but not high-priced condos subsidized by the government — and not wildly out of proportion with the rest of the built environment as some sort of a vanity trophy building.

You’re right that the media did a poor job of covering the project, but residents could also look at the people involved, and what they said (and didn’t), and see that it was always more of “let’s see if we can wangle a deal for ourselves by making vague assertions” about jobs kind of thing.

I think if they’d lined up the financing to make it viable, they would have been more forthcoming about it as a solid public investment. Instead, the details were always coming later, once we’d committed to the deal. It shouldn’t take that kind of financial minuet to get a worthwhile deal completed — which indicated it never was a good deal.

0