facebooktwitterRSS
- Advertisement -
  • Most Commentedmost commented up
  • Most Emailedmost emailed up
  • Popularmost popular up
- Advertisement -
 

« News Home

Additional $3.5M loan eyed for Oakhill renovation



Published: Fri, July 1, 2011 @ 12:06 a.m.

By Peter H. Milliken

milliken@vindy.com

YOUNGSTOWN

Mahoning County’s chief deputy auditor is recommending the county borrow an extra $3.5 million this fall to pay for additional renovations and improvements at the county-owned Oakhill Renaissance Place.

Carol McFall told the county commissioners in a Thursday staff meeting that only $833,651 remains uncommitted from the $5 million the county initially borrowed in the bond market for renovations at Oakhill, which the county bought in 2006.

“It doesn’t take long for $833,000 to disappear,” McFall told the commissioners.

McFall also said only $68,106 remains uncommitted of the $2.9 million the county borrowed separately in a federal economic- recovery loan to install a new air-conditioning system in the former hospital. Oakhill is the former Forum Health Southside Medical Center.

The $5 million has paid for renovations to accommodate the county’s Department of Job and Family Services, Veterans’ Service Commission and recycling division, which already have moved to Oak-hill, and the county board of elections, which will move from the county’s South Side Annex to Oakhill later this summer.

Funds for roof repairs and smokestack demolition and payments on a $400,000 Ohio Department of Development loan to Oakhill’s bankrupt former owner, the Southside Community Development Corp., also have come from the initial $5 million, McFall said.

Tracie Kaglic, project manager with Olsavsky-Jaminet Architects, estimated an extra $4 million is needed for additional areas of roof replacement, fire-alarm upgrades, morgue- ventilation improvements for the county coroner’s office, additional rest-rooms in the south and east wings, and renovations to accommodate the county’s auto- title department and adult day-care center and the Mahoning Valley Law Enforcement Task Force.

The auto-title department, adult day-care center and task force still are at the South Side Annex on Market Street, which the county plans to close.

McFall said she hopes the FBI, which participates in the task force, can obtain federal funds to pay for the estimated $990,000 renovation costs for the task force.

Kaglic said her $4 million total does not include money for upgrades the county might make to Oakhill’s kitchen and cafeteria for re-establishment of a food-service operation there.


Comments

1author50(1121 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

$833,000 will disappear pretty fast in the hands of Mahoning County Government officials.

Suggest removal:

2TERRAPINST(302 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

Yeah let's move to that Oakhill Hospital to get back at the Cafaro's for supporting candidates that ran against us. Who cares how it affects the citizens of Mahoning County! Noone's gonna tell us what to do. Millions upon Millions upon Millions.........

Suggest removal:

3Stan(9923 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

Let's all go take a tour of the McGuffy Mall . Inovative ideas are needed to restore it to its former glory .

THE NEW McGUFFY MALL . . ..

http://www.cvillecondoexperts.com/ima...

Suggest removal:

4TERRAPINST(302 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

Here we go Stan, we agree that McGuffey was bad. Agreed, understand agreed. Let put an end to it, just acknowledge that Oakhill is a ridiculous drain on the people of Mahoning County as the NUMBERS SHOW. The decision to go there was based on political vendetta no matter how much it costs us. How much moe do we have to spend there for you to see how bad it is?

Suggest removal:

5mike10(84 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

Both need roofs which the county needed to pay for. It's a wash. Better to spend the money on your on stuff then a rental property.

Suggest removal:

6TERRAPINST(302 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

Noooooowaaaaaay a wash. Waste hill astronomically more expensive. Not even close.

Suggest removal:

7ipaidattention(68 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

Fact is, oakhill was the only option at the time to get out of the corrupt cafaro owned plaza, has no one noticed the federal indictments against all involved? These came from the FBI, not a local source that could be tampered with. It was an ethics decision to stop feeding them money made by politicians who could not be bribed by them. What's more, why can't Sciortino, the real county auditor do his job so he could be the one giving the facts in this article?

Suggest removal:

8TERRAPINST(302 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

It was not the only option. A brand new one stop facility would not have cost what Oakhill has. Why do we keep bringing up Cafaro and Garland when everyone agrees it was a bad investment? Agree that Sciortino and McNally should have the stones to cite how much this has cost us and that is why they opposed it in the first place, cowards. Dont think for a minute that this wasn't a political vendetta. What if the Judge rules to dismiss those indictments based on prosecutorial misconduct? You don't think that this whole thing was for the good of the taxpayers, its a political pissing match.

Suggest removal:

9city_resident(509 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

$5 + $2.9 + $3.5 = $11.4 million. That's nowhere near enough to build an equivalent facility. And, who would have had to pay for the demolition of the Oakhill building, if the county did build a new facility?

Suggest removal:

10DwightK(1247 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

Oak Hill is a deal because McGuffey wasn't being kept up by the landlord and building a brand new facility would have cost much more than has been spent so far.

Someone needs to teach me the crazy math that disputes those facts.

Suggest removal:

11TERRAPINST(302 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

City resident your missing sooo much. Utility bills on heat alone breached $70,000.00 in February. Not to mention the 1/2 million dollars in back taxes. There are forecasted issues of parking deck demolition and reconstruction as well as significant damage to the existing foundation which again are huge costs. Internally there are countless grievances being filed by employees based on unsafe work conditions such as damaged stairs and elevators. Did you know that due to a lack of air conditioning the oppressive summer heat has lead to the creation of cool down rooms where employees can go and catch their breath. Thats really good for productivity, huh? By the way incidental investigation on cost of a new building when this was being initially debated was around10 to12 million bucks. We are past that already, with loads more to come.

Suggest removal:

12TERRAPINST(302 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

Here's a fact: We at least know that the proponents of Oakhill were way off on its cost or simply lied. And it seems like those on this Board just dont care. As long as the "other side" is defeated it matters not what the cost.

Suggest removal:

13TERRAPINST(302 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

Here are some real numbers about the cost of Oakhill and I admit I was off about the cost of the building but Oakhill has still been more and thats if not one more dime is spent.
From Jessie David:

I am confused about "Why the Oakhill purchase?" Because it's not an easy access location, and also the costs to repair the old dilapidated place, really are over the top...

Considering the so/so location and outrageous costs to repair Oakhill Place, why not a new building in an easy access location like down town Youngstown?

So what about this side of the argument?...

http://www.wytv.com/mostpopular/story...

Some excerpts from that article...
[According to figures supplied by the county auditor's office, since buying Oakhill in 2006, more than $7 million from the general fund have been spent on utilities, maintenance and other expenses compared to just over $5 million in rent, reimbursements and other income.

Auditor Mike Sciortino claims in addition to "a $2 million operating loss in the general fund," the county "already floated a bond" for $5.3 million.]

And also this other side of the argument" article...
http://www.vindy.com/news/2010/may/26...

Some excerpts...
[In 2006, Reardon recalled he said a new $15 million county-owned-and-operated office building would have been much cheaper than acquiring, maintaining and renovating Oakhill.

Sciortino said the Oakhill purchase is the county’s equivalent of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.

“We are in our disaster right now. We are in a complete financial meltdown,” he said.]

Suggest removal:

14city_resident(509 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

"Utility bills on heat alone breached $70,000.00 in February."

The improvements that are being/will be made to the HVAC system will pay for themselves quickly, then.

"There are forecasted issues of parking deck demolition and reconstruction as well as significant damage to the existing foundation which again are huge costs."

Who forecasted these issues? Who told you the parking deck will need replaced? What foundation damage are you referring to?

"unsafe work conditions such as damaged stairs and elevators."

As far as I know, employees shouldn't even be allowed in areas that are dangerous.

"Did you know that due to a lack of air conditioning the oppressive summer heat has lead to the creation of cool down rooms where employees can go and catch their breath."

I did not know about that. Although, if true, that issue is now resolved.

"cost of a new building... was around10 to12 million bucks." (now $15 million per your last post)

But, wasn't that just for a new facility to house JFS? What about all the other tenants at Oakhill? What about all the money that will be saved by closing the South Side Annex?

Suggest removal:

15TERRAPINST(302 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

Every one of those statements is documented in fact, and I am also certainly not surprised you are unaware of them because you often see people popping off about what they do not know. All the other tenants represent a 2 million dollar shortfall in revenue versus cost. To make those repairs the county now has to float bonds, borrow against itself which is a desparation measure. You dont even dispute the statements listed above you just rationalize the outrageously STUPID idea it has been to move to Oakhill.. your "what if' and "well what about this" statements just dont erase the horrible cost associated with this purely political decision. And yes I did correct myself on new building cost, some of us like to be factual. And by the way withn regard to HVAC nothing has been resolved because the County has to rob Peter to pay Paul and float its own debts to pay for it, and they havent been able to come up with that kind of cash yet. Why doesnt this bother you?

Suggest removal:

16Fred(130 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

If the Cafaros have so much political power why aren't they still renting to the county?

Suggest removal:

17city_resident(509 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

"Every one of those statements is documented in fact"

Where? I'd like to read more about these problems. (I will admit that I'm skeptical, as this wouldn't be the first time that false claims about the building's condition have been made.)

"the county now has to float bonds, borrow against itself"

And the county would have had to borrow even more money, just to build a new building for JFS.

"And by the way withn regard to HVAC nothing has been resolved because the County has to rob Peter to pay Paul and float its own debts to pay for it, and they havent been able to come up with that kind of cash yet."

It says right in the article that most of a $2.9 million "federal economic- recovery loan" has been spent on a new air-conditioning system. The boilers are also being upgraded/replaced soon, and that is at least partially paid for with a stimulus grant from the federal govt.

All in all, Oakhill still seems like a better deal, to me, than building a new building.

I think it was probably a better deal than moving into another vacant building available at the time, too. But, I can't say for sure, as I don't know what appropriate buildings were for sale 5 years ago.

Suggest removal:

18mrblue(970 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

A total money pit and a waste of tax-payer dollars. Just an opinion.

Suggest removal:

19candystriper(575 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

Just sit right back and you'll hear a tale, a tale of a fateful trip.

lol

Suggest removal:


News
Opinion
Entertainment
Sports
Marketplace
Classifieds
Records
Discussions
Community
Help
Forms
Neighbors

HomeTerms of UsePrivacy StatementAdvertiseStaff DirectoryHelp
© 2014 Vindy.com. All rights reserved. A service of The Vindicator.
107 Vindicator Square. Youngstown, OH 44503

Phone Main: 330.747.1471 • Interactive Advertising: 330.740.2955 • Classified Advertising: 330.746.6565
Sponsored Links: Vindy Wheels | Vindy Jobs | Vindy Homes | Pittsburgh International Airport