"Barden wants to drop funding for Hill," according to the latest Post-Gazette. Unfortunately, reading the article which Mark Belko scribed for us gives me no idea if this is justifiable or not.
I'm just confused. In 2006, Barden won the bid to build his casino here in Pittsburgh based partially on his commitment to spend $3 million over 3 years on the Hill District. This week, he's requesting to re-neg on that commitment. Of course, the casino is not in the Hill District. That is where the new Penguins arena is going to be. Of course, Barden, the developer of the casino, wanted to have his fingers in the arena pie, too, so in a completely unrelated twist he offered money to the Hill District in order to cement this desire?? Of course, the gaming council has full rights over whether to decline or accept this request? What reason would they have to accept his request? Who could deny funding to one of the most downtrodden areas of Pittsburgh and probably the state of Pennsylvania?? A disturbing hatred of the district? A substantial gift under the table from Mr Barden?
(reference: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08110/874794-336.stm)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment