Operation Face The Music Hall Scam: CAA = The Company

Edward G. Marks

Today's edition of the Cincinnati Enquirer contains a story titled "Who will blink first on Music Hall deal?" The story, written by Barry M. Horstman -- a decent journalist -- is a good read, but it lacks a number of key details.

From the story:

"Cincinnati Mayor Mark Mallory, frustrated by criticism of the city's stewardship of Music Hall, says the city has gone above and beyond over the years to aid a non-profit group responsible for maintaining the iconic Over-the-Rhine building"

The non-profit group responsible for maintaining Music Hall is the Cincinnati Arts Association (CAA). In our last blog on this subject, we introduced you to several of the key players in a 2-year-old group called Music Hall Redevelopment Company, Inc. ("The Company) -- the group that wants the City of Cincinnati to give it $10 Million and ownership of Music Hall. What Horstman and The Enquirer don't make clear is there is no difference between CAA and The Company.

We've told you that Edward G. Marks filed Articles of Incorporation for Music Hall Revitalization Company, LTD -- a Limited Liability Corporation -- on March 15, 2010.  That corporation was dissolved on June 11, 2010 and replaced with The Company.  Marks is an attorney with Barron Peck Bennie & Schlemmer, Co. LPA.  According to his biography on their website: "Since the early 1970s, he has served as Secretary of Cincinnati Arts Association and its predecessor, Cincinnati Music Hall Association.

Dudley Taft is chair of the CAA Board of Trustees.  The Company lists him as an officer, director, or trustee.

Richard Freshwater has served as chair of the CAA Board of Trustees.  The Company lists him as their Chief Financial Officer.

Otto M. Budig serves on CAA's board.  The Company lists him as their president.

CAA and The Company share the same address. They use the same website.  A man once famously said, "Steve Reece is Alicia Reece." CAA is The Company.  There is no difference.  In fact, in announcing the creation of The Company, CAA issues a press statement that reads, in part: "'The creation of this separate, focused entity will enable the project to move from the formative, conceptual stage into an implementation stage,' said Dudley Taft, chair of the Cincinnati Arts Association Board of Trustees. 'The Music Hall Revitalization Corporation will bring the project into action, representing the needs and concerns of all user groups, while ensuring and preserving the acoustic and historic integrity of the hall.'"  The Cincinnati Black Blog wants to know what the financial relationship is between CAA and The Company.  How much money, if any, did CAA contribute to The Company in 2010, 2011, and 2012?  Were it not for The Company being around, where would that money have gone to?

Back to the Enquirer story: 

"The planned renovation includes $40 million to $50 million in what project advocates describe as deferred maintenance costs. It's a detail often cited - typically by those favoring an ownership change - as evidence of the city being an inattentive owner.

But Mallory stressed that the Cincinnati Arts Association, not the city, is responsible for maintaining and operating Music Hall."

Now, if CAA is responsible for operating and maintaining Music Hall, and CAA has neglected to properly operate and maintain Music Hall despite receiving millions of dollars from the City to do so, and as a result of CAA not adequately maintaining Music Hall there is now an estimated $40 to $50 Million in deferred maintenance needed, why should the City take tax dollars and give it to CAA or The Company, which is the same thing!?


Every story written about The Company ought to stress that, by their own admission, The Company has taken out a loan from PNC Bank. They want to use the $10 Million to restructure the loan.  In other words, The Company wants City taxpayers to bail them out of their bad loan.  But, they don't want us to see the loan documents. They don't want us to know the terms of the loan.  The lazy, local press hasn't done 1000 stories asking about the financial stability of CAA or questioning the terms of the loan.  And, unfortunately, the members of City Council, many of whom received contributions from The Company, don't seem interested in asking questions about the loan.   

Where Is That Loudmouthed Punk Christopher Smitherman

Also in today's Enquirer, is another story on Liz Rogers and Mahogany's (link). Christopher Smitherman ("The Sillyman") went on a mission to defame Ms. Rogers' good name and ruin her reputation as a businesswoman.  The Sillyman was everywhere talking bad about Ms. Rogers and questioning City Manager Milton Dohoney's recommendation to extend Ms. Rogers a small loan and grant.  Some people say The Sillyman was just doing his job.  They say he is a financial planner and he should try to protect the City's money (money they take from taxpayers).  Other people said at the time that he has never gone after white people the way he did Rogers and he would never make such a stink if the people trying to get money from the City were white. So, we here at the Cincinnati Black Blog ask this simple question: why haven't we read any guest editorials from The Sillyman in the Enquirer, or heard him cutting up on 700WLW, or read one of his long NAACP press releases, or seen him in Council going after Marks, Taft, Budig, Freshwater, and the rest of the people trying to shake down the City?!


The Sillyman, Vice Mayor Roxanne Qualls, and Chris Seelbach all voted against the Mahogany's deal.  They all said Ms. Rogers' race had nothing to do with their decision and they would vote against any bad financial deal that came before them, even if the people pushing the deal were white. After the vote, Lucy May of the Cincinnati Business Courier talked to The Sillyman and asked him to explain himself (she didn't ask him why he ran all over town defaming Ms. Rogers and her business)(link). We will see.


The Cincinnati Black Blog is watching!