Most grants for Oneonta make sense

July 18, 2008 07:15 am

—

The city of Oneonta was recently the recipient in more than $1 million in state funding for city-related projects.

The most prominent and promising news was the $1 million for construction work on or around the site of the former Bresee's Department Store, where the city and area organizations hope to restore the one-time centerpiece of downtown.

The city has been pursuing numerous sources of funding for this project, and with a City-to-City grant of the same amount already in place, $2 million is on hand without impact on local taxpayers.

With Otsego County Development Corp. President Doug Gulotty estimating a restoration and construction project could cost as much as $7.5 million, more money needs to be raised.

But the city is off to a good start, both in its efforts to seek funding, as well as its ability to persuade the state that downtown Oneonta is worth the investment.

With any large-scale project such as this, patience and preparation are keys.

Despite the time it took to force then-owner Maurice Ramos to do something with the decaying complex, the city has seemingly found success.

It has appeared to know what grants are out there, aggressively pursued them, and entered into a public dialogue in choosing a developer for the site.

That work needs to continue. Disclosure to the public of the ex-Bresee's process must be frequent and full, as downtown is a symbol not only of the city but of its residents.

And while the developer, Bloomfield/Schon, has discussed raising private funding, there are surely other public avenues available.

We say that because the city also received $350,000 for a walkway. Now, to be fair, the idea of a veterans memorial walkway in Neahwa Park is a nice one.

The trees, the lack of cars, the friendly strolls on summer evenings are images depicting the best of a community. And our veterans will be honored in a personal way and their memories kept alive.

But the city has spent $125,000 for this (through matching a different grant), a project that could have been a privately funded and led effort.

We acknowledge that the city's park system is a model for cities of its size and larger, and any ideas to enhance the park experience deserve strong consideration, and, in some cases, funding.

However, let's be honest: If some other park in a faraway city or town received $350,000 for a similar endeavor, we would call it pork-barrel spending. And there would be a reasonable argument to do so.

In this case, of course, the money has been allocated, and we can't justify the city refusing it.

But we wonder: What other issues could the city have addressed if it had fought for state funding over several years and parts of two mayoral administrations?