(10-09-2014 01:50 AM)ctipton Wrote:  Mahogany's owner to city: Reduce my loan
Sharon Coolidge, scoolidge@enquirer.com 6:05 p.m. EDT October 8, 2014

Mahogany's owner Liz Rogers got her meeting with Cincinnati City Manager Harry Black - a meeting at which she maintained city taxpayers should continue to help her.

Right now, Rogers is delinquent $41,015 on her $300,000 loan.

Black met with Rogers Oct. 2 and Wednesday briefed city council on what happened. It will be up to council what happens next.

In a memo, Black outlined Rogers' demands:

* Reduce the outstanding loan amount to $115,000, with no payments until 21 months after loan restructuring. The minimum monthly payment would be $800 a month for a term of 12 years beginning in July 2016.

* [b]Release the city's collateral on the loan, which is a lien on her Hamilton property.

* The city can keep its collateral on her life insurance policy in the amount of $115,000.

* That the city sell her the furniture from the restaurant for $800,000.[/b]

Cincinnati City Council asked Black to meet with Rogers after she was forced to close her restaurant at The Banks after she fell behind on her rent. The city has an interest in the restaurant because taxpayers loaned Rogers $300,000 and gave her a grant for $684,000 in an effort to lure a minority business owner to the riverfront development.

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/pol.../16929177/

I thought she said the furniture was worth 12k a few weeks ago. Where is Mallory and Dohoney when you need them?

It's $8000

Not according to the Enquirer.

The Enquirer is wrong. It's a typo.

The equipment and furnishings might be worth a bit more if they stay in the building for the next owner.

But once they are removed, the value plummets.

She only got a $300,000 loan and a $600,000 grant. The build out and the equipment came out of that amount. DO you really think that the used equipment is worth as much those two expenses?

(10-09-2014 01:16 PM)Bearcat Otto Wrote:  The Enquirer is wrong. It's a typo.

The equipment and furnishings might be worth a bit more if they stay in the building for the next owner.

But once they are removed, the value plummets.

She only got a $300,000 loan and a $600,000 grant. The build out and the equipment came out of that amount. DO you really think that the used equipment is worth as much those two expenses?

Otto, every one of us know this. I was pointing out, tongue-in-cheek I thought, what the Enquirer reported. But of course, you are the final authority.

Today on 700 they said $800,000 also.

(10-09-2014 09:36 PM)BeerCat Wrote:  Today on 700 they said $800,000 also.

Assuming someone in the WLW news studio can read and is actually located in Cincinnati, they no doubt use the Enquirer as a source for local news stories. Probably also have the local TV channel apps on their mobile phones.

Flynn: Declare Mahogany's in default on loan, grant
Sharon Coolidge, scoolidge@enquirer.com 5:09 p.m. EDT October 13, 2014

In the wake of Mahogany's owner Liz Rogers asking city officials to cut her a break on her loan, Councilman Kevin Flynn is taking a hard line.

In a motion released publicly Monday he's calling for the city to declare Rogers in default of her loan and grant - and initiate foreclosure on Rogers' Butler County restaurant, which is collateral on the city loan.

It's the first time a council member has publicly said what should happen with Rogers' $300,000 taxpayer loan.

"This doesn't ask for anything more than (Rogers) agreed to," Flynn said. "The city is out a million dollars; that's money we don't get back unless we take action."

Flynn's motion also calls for Mahogany's to turn its records over to the city for review. The point of that, Flynn said, is too see if there are any assets worth pursuing.

Flynn isn't stopping at Mahogany's. He's calling for all city loans to have a personal signature in an effort to keep people from walking away.

For the motion to go anywhere, Flynn needs the backing of four members of city council. If he gets it, that could mean Rogers would owe the city $950,000. It's unclear if he has that support.

The Banks was decades in the making, with the city and county focusing on the land that sits between the two stadiums. In recent months, a second apartment complex was announced and General Electric said it would build its new global operations center for 1,400 workers there.

In 2012, the city -- in an effort to lure a minority-owned business to the riverfront development as it was getting underway -- loaned Rogers $300,000 and gave her a $684,000 grant.

Rogers put her Hamilton restaurant up as collateral and personally guaranteed the loan.

The deal: Pay the loan back over 10 years; if she fell behind, she would repay the grant too.

The soul food restaurant opened to great fanfare in October 2012, but quickly floundered. Rogers previously told The Enquirer the city didn't live up to it's promise to put a hotel, a business and more residents in the development. She is currently seeking a new location in Over-the-Rhine.

Her first missed payment came in August of 2013. She fell behind on her rent and as of this month is $40,000 behind on loan payments. She owes the city $266,646.

Banks landlord NIC Riverfront One shuttered Mahogany's last month. Rogers then asked the city to forgive the entire loan, threatening to sue the city. She backed off that demand. When she couldn't get a sit down meeting with City Manager Harry Black council intervened, prompting an Oct. 2 meeting.

During that meeting, Black said Rogers asked:

* The city to reduce the outstanding loan amount to $115,000, with no payments until 21 months after loan restructuring. The minimum monthly payment would be $800 a month for a term of 12 years beginning in July 2016.

* Release the city's collateral on the loan, which is a lien on her Hamilton property.

* That the city sell her the restaurant's furnishings for for $8,000.

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/pol.../17185735/

Mahogany's-related ethics complaint tossed
Sharon Coolidge, scoolidge@enquirer.com 1:52 p.m. EDT October 31, 2014


Liz Rogers, owner of now-shuttered Mahogany's at The Banks.(Photo: The Enquirer/ Liz Dufour)

The Ohio Ethics Commission Thursday found a complaint that claimed Councilman Christopher Smitherman violated ethics rules for failing to recuse himself from votes concerning Mahogany's had no merit.

The complaint never even got a hearing.

Robert Croskery, the lawyer for Mahogany's owner Liz Rogers, alleged in the September complaint that Smitherman was angry his brother's company, Jostin Construction Company, was not hired to build-out Mahogany's interior.

"This was a strategic decision to smear me and there is no basis for the allegations," Smitherman said. "I'm hoping the lawyer and the owner approach the city in a more common sense and rational way."

The complaint was one small twist in the fight between the Mahogany's and the city, which helped Rogers move her soul food restaurant to The Banks in 2012 with $984,000 in city help. Smitherman was one of three members of council who voted against the loan and has always contended it was a bad deal for the city.

Of that, $300,000 was a loan, which Rogers has fallen behind on. Money woes extended to Rogers' rent, prompting her Banks landlord, NIC Riverbanks One to evict her.

Rogers is trying to move the restaurant to Over-the-Rhine. Councilman Kevin Flynn is calling for the city to default on Rogers' loan, but no decisions have been made.

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/201.../18243073/

Maybe they should give her another 8k if she'll move to Kentucky.

Liz Rogers rejects deal in police impersonation
Keith BieryGolick, kbierygolick@enquirer.com 3:21 p.m. EDT June 17, 2015


Mahogany's owner Liz Rogers has turned down a plea deal that would have dropped the impersonating a police officer charge she faces, her attorney told The Enquirer.

But the Butler County Prosecutor's Office contends although a deal was discussed, it was never presented.

Her criminal case has been scheduled for a jury trial July 30, according to court records.

"She wants to fight it," said Attorney Clyde Bennett II on Wednesday.

Bennett said the plea deal included a dismissal of the minor misdemeanor charge, but stipulated Rogers would have to enter a diversion program and take classes.

"She didn't want to do it," he said.

Jerome Cook, the Butler County Prosecutor's chief of staff, said he was not aware of any deal being presented.

"There were discussions, just like there always is," Cook said. "It's my understanding, and (Prosecutor) Mike (Gmoser) has said this before, that part of any plea deal is admitting the facts of the case and apparently she didn't want to do that."

Rogers is accused of telling a repo man she was a police officer and allegedly displayed a Cleveland police badge when the worker tried to repossess her vehicle in West Chester Township.

The incident occurred the same day in March the city of Cincinnati cut a deal with Rogers to forgive nearly two-thirds of her $300,000 loan from taxpayers and agreed not to seek repayment of a $684,000 grant.

That money was used to start Mahogany's at The Banks, which closed last September when Rogers fell behind on loan and rent payments.

If convicted, the Liberty Township resident could face a maximum of 30 days behind bars. On the day she was arrested, Rogers filed a police report alleging the repo man stole $800 from her.

Bennett previously said Rogers gave the worker her wallet, which had her ID in it, in an attempt to diffuse the situation. When the wallet was returned, the money was gone, Rogers said in the police report.

West Chester police spokeswoman Michelle Berling said recently the investigation into that claim is open, but inactive.

That means "we do not have any new information on the case and not enough information to prove or disprove the accusations," Berling said. "The case is inactive until new information comes available."

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/cri.../28863137/

She appears to be an undercover NARC Cop per the photo

To me, she appears to be a thug so used to getting her way while running over the Cincinnati city council, that she believes she can Bogart everybody.

(06-18-2015 07:32 AM)ctipton Wrote:  To me, she appears to be a thug so used to getting her way while running over the Cincinnati city council, that she believes she can Bogart everybody.

she doesn't, to me, leave a good impression of herself, but, face it, it doesn't take much to put one over on city council - what a bunch of dbags

Dear God when will this lady just go away? She's obviously a monumental failure at everything she does. Only Cincinnati would continue to cater to someone like this.

(06-18-2015 02:04 PM)Marcus Wrote:  Dear God when will this lady just go away? She's obviously a monumental failure at everything she does. Only Cincinnati would continue to cater to someone like this.

Unfortunately Marcus that makes her a perfect applicant for all kinds of government "investment" "loans" (shhh, its not a loan when no one expects you to pay it back) and grants.

If she gets a "green energy" idea she can likely hit the feds up for 10X as much as long as feasibility of her product and business plan has been rejected by every sane bank and private equity outfit.

Just like Solyndra and a massive laundry list of mega million dollar laughable scams. The lesson is a timeless one: Government "investing" really just means giving away "other peoples money" to people they know and like with no major repercussions for failure (other than some temporary embarassment I suppose).

Hasn't the loan program that Solyndra fell under been profitable for the US government?

Depends on whose creative accounting and issue advocacy you listen to.

Quote:by VERONIQUE DE RUGY November 19, 2014 2:18 PM

The Department of Energy, which gave us debacles like the Solyndra and Abound Solar bankruptcies, has put out a report claiming that its green-energy loan programs are turning a profit for taxpayers — a $5 billion profit, in fact. This claim was credulously reported by Bloomberg Businessweek, but don’t pop the Champagne yet: Former acting CBO director Donald Marron, now of the Tax Policy Center, takes apart this claim on the TPC’s blog. The government’s “profit” calculations don’t even take into account the major expenses: DOE’s report does not address this issue, except in a footnote in a table (cut and pasted above) revealing that its $810 million of “interest earned” was “calculated without respect to Treasury’s borrowing cost.” In other words, DOE reports gross interest received, not the net interest taxpayers have earned after subtracting Treasury borrowing costs. The incomplete figures in the table seem to suggest that DOE has eked out a $30 million profit on its lending ($810 million in interest less $780 million in loan losses). But when we account for Treasury borrowing costs, taxpayers are actually well behind. The report does not allow us to say just how far behind. We do know, however, that DOE loans are typically made at small, sometimes zero, spreads above Treasury rates. So a large portion of DOE’s “interest earned” must have been offset by borrowing costs. That puts taxpayer losses in the hundreds of millions of dollars. The same concern applies to DOE’s statement that interest payments on these loans will eventually top $5 billion. Taxpayers aren’t making money off these government loan guarantees, period.