Laserfiche WebLink
5. N <br />RELEASE (Cont'd <br />effective perhaps to bring about improvement and development when <br />aimed at a specific objective. The total commitment is to just <br />get behind the downtown redevelopment and get things moving. There <br />is no profit motive on the part of anybody. <br />discussion on this part of the session was lengthy. The questions <br />Ms. Jeanne Derbeck, South Bend Tribune Reporter, were directed to <br />Bloomquist for answers and are summarized for the record <br />Q. Statements made by Mr. Bloomquist here in the Commission <br />meetings and at the Chamber of Commerce Committee meetings <br />that when the First Bank had this, he said he would know <br />sometime this spring, between March and May, as to whether <br />the project for development was a 'go' or 'no go.' Since <br />First Bank is not in control any more, does that statement <br />now stand or not? <br />A. That answer would be whether First Bank was in control or <br />whoever was in control, because that timing is strictly <br />related to the decision - making timetable of the major re- <br />tailers. It is the position of South Bend 2000 that it is <br />not necessarily helpful to try and communicate probabilities <br />that we used to do, effectively or not, for specific time- <br />tables. It depends upon the decision- making timetables of <br />major retailers. Certainly there is a lot larger and more <br />interest in the information, plan variations and data <br />gathering than at any time in the past. <br />Q. Are you getting questions from the major retailers? <br />A. Related to the South Bend market -- absolutely. They are <br />getting a lot of questions from firms which are really <br />questions for the architects, additional data updates re- <br />lated to the present market. <br />Q. You said before, at the times I mentioned, that there was <br />an increase in interest and that interest was sparking up <br />among major retailers in general, and that was the reason, <br />and you are now repeating the same thing. You said at that <br />time that was the reason and you felt that you should know <br />by the end of spring whether that development was going to <br />go-- whether they would choose downtown South Bend or not. <br />That was why you would know pretty well whether it could <br />be 'go' or 'no go' by this spring, so why doesn't that <br />situation still hold? You had seemed to say, that if by <br />early spring there was not very much interest- -that if it <br />didn't look good - -that was probably going to be it. Is <br />this South Bend 2000 Corporation saying that? <br />A. South Bend 2000 is not indicating specific timetables. That <br />would be the only change. <br />- 4 - <br />