John Marshall High School, Cleveland, Ohio - demolition discussion
Office of Citizen
Rest in Peace,
PLAIN DEALER IN BED WITH CITY HALL DELETES COMMENTS PERTAINING TO RIGGED VOTES TO DEMOLISH LANDMARKED JOHN MARSHALL HIGH SCHOOL
Submitted by Satinder P S Puri on Thu, 12/06/2012 - 04:31.
PLAIN DEALER IN BED WITH CITY HALL DELETES COMMENTS PERTAINING TO RIGGED VOTES TO DEMOLISH LANDMARKED 80-YEAR OLD JOHN MARSHALL HIGH SCHOOL IN CLEVELAND, OHIO.
TODAY (12-06-12) IS THE 17TH DAY OF THE INDEFINITE HUNGER STRIKE BY A 70-YEAR OLD SIKH-AMERICAN TO SAVE HISTORIC 80-YEAR OLD JOHN MARSHALL HIGH SCHOOL!
THE PLAIN DEALER WANTS PUBLIC OFFICIALS TO BE HONEST, TRUSTWORTHY, ACCOUNTABLE, CLEAR, AND TRANSPARENT!
SO WHY DID THE PLAIN DEALER DELETE COMMENTS POSTED BY DAVE McBEAN – A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AND A MEMBER OF THE SAVE JOHN MARSHALL HIGH SCHOOL ON FACEBOOK – WHO ATENDED THE SUBJECT MEETING – AND WHO WAS EXPLAINING THE VOTE RIGGING, ENGINEERED BY COUNCILMAN SWEEENEY, THAT TOOK PLACE AT THE
THE COMMENTS WERE POSTED ON THE CLEVELAND.COM WEBSITE ON 12-05-12 AND WERE FOUND DELETED LATER ON THE SAME DAY. THE COMMENTS WERE IN RESPONSE TO THE ARTICLE:
“A Cleveland man's hunger strike won't save John Marshall High School but it's worth noticing” by Mark Naymik, Plain Dealer Reporter, 12-02-12.
Here is the link:
IS THE PLAIN DEALER IN BED WITH CITY HALL?
So when I wrote on Cleveland.Com, with supporting facts, that Mayor Jackson and others were not honest and trustworthy on the $50 million JMHS Construction Project and thus could not be trusted for implementing the 15-mill levy, the PD not only deleted all my comments but also kicked me out – so now I cannot post anything on Cleveland.Com.
HERE ARE THE COMMENTS BY DAVE McBEAN THAT WERE DELETED BY THE PLAIN DEALER:
The demolition of John Marshall High School by the City and the School Board is just wrong.
The problem is the archaic funding formula of the Ohio School Facilities Commission, which favors new construction over renovating old buildings. The estimated cost of renovating the existing approx. 300k SF building is $2m more then the estimated cost of a new approx. 200k SF building (which will have no auditorium, swimming pool, or basement running track). The local share we are responsible for, however, is $12m more if we choose to renovate.
The following are my posts on Mr. Puri's Facebook group page "SAVE JOHN MARSHALL HIGH SCHOOL":
At a recent lecture at the local chapter of the US Green Building Council* the question was asked "are there any examples of retrofitting existing large commercial buildings [to German Passivhaus standards] (http://www.structuresdb.com/commercial/passivhaus.... )."
The answer was yes of course, since the country is largely built out it is commonly done.
So my point is twofold:
* "Commercial Passive House Lecture" by architect Adam Cohen, principal partner of Structures Design / Build LLC in Roanoke, Virginia.
In a recent letter to him I pointed out that his name on a plaque in a new high school will be probably be demolished with the new building before 50 years has passed; but a plaque in the restored John Marshall (a building built to last indefinitely) will likely be there in 120 years.
He and Mayor Jackson must be made to understand what the majority of their constituents want; and that it is reasonable and right.
January 18 (after the 1/12/12 Landmarks Commission hearing)
One of it's members spoke prior to the vote, she said “I like new things. I am not a preservationist. I am not against it. I look at it as a case by case basis”. This falls somewhat short of my definition of "preservation-minded".
Our mistake was to underestimate the influence (and intentions) of Councilman Martin Sweeney. I believe he orchestrated the Landmarks Commission's decision to approve the demolition of John Marshal High School. When he spoke at the 12/6/11 Neighborhood Education Committee meeting, in a moment of candor he said he is not a historic preservation minded individual. When he spoke at the Jan. 12th Landmarks Commission meeting his bias for new projects became clear when he proudly presented large photos of 3 brand new K-8 schools in his Ward 20 fiefdom (all on W 140th St., north or south of John Marshall). He stated he did not think he had ever used visual aids in this manner; he presented them like a proud father with pictures of his children.
Of the 5 votes for demolition 4 were cast by city employees (two are councilpersons, two others are the chief city planner and the chief city architect. Do we seriously think a fellow councilman is going to vote against something the Council President wants in his ward? And really; a professional planner and a professional architect (keep in mind the phrase "preservation-minded") voting to demolish a perfectly sound high school (a designated Cleveland Landmark) to build a new school. Come on! The 5th yea vote was cast by a general contractor who works in Cleveland. Think his business requires city building permits? Think he will vote against what the Council President wants?
The four votes against the demolition of this landmark were all professional people: a lawyer, an architect, a real estate professional; none of whom work directly for the city.
PLEASE SEE THE FOLLOWING PREVIOUS POSTS PERTAINING TO THE ISSUE OF VOTE RIGGING:
DAY 12 OF HUNGER STRIKE & UNANSWERED QUESTIONS ON RIGGED VOTES TO DEMOLISH LANDMARKED JOHN MARSHALL HIGH SCHOOLI
DAY 11 OF HUNGER STRIKE & WHY CHIEF ARCHITECT OF CLEVELAND VOTED TO DEMOLISH LANDMARKED 80-YEAR OLD JOHN MARSHALL HIGH SCHOOL?
FACEBOOK & YOUTUBE:
Also, see the following three YouTube clips: