Another view on OCRA grant

To the editor:
I agree the grant process may be somewhat backward and OCRA may be looking at the Geesaman Industries grant failure as a cause to project a black cloud on future local grants.
Maybe OCRA has another observation, such as why are these people asking for another large grant when they continue having the same person or people employed that made the unforgivable Geesaman Industries brain failure flub?
If you were OCRA, would you make a similar decision if there was a remote possibility of dealing with the same person or people that committed such a failure?
I would hope not.
Only if they want to look as stupid as the person or people that had a major role in the high seven-figure loss by giving Geesaman Industries a grant without total execution.
You might think perhaps the Geesaman Industries people knew what they were doing and the development corporation people had no clue.
You definitely do not have a clue when you fail a simple Business 101 procedure such as getting a signed contract with full disclosure by and to everyone.
Before applying for another grant, a definite business plan on where and how the grant dollars will be used is necessary. Additionally, the city and development corporation should include the name of the replacement (or that a replacement is being sought) for the person responsible for the horrendous Geesaman Industries grant fiasco.
Realistically, the replacements should have been in place by now.
I cannot overlook that a few policy changes now will make a difference when actually this utterly ridiculous failure was committed by so-called professionals making an elementary simple business decision on a procedure that should have been a priority long before passing any funds.
Sincerely,
Jim Sanders
Portland[[In-content Ad]]