Tom Daykin has a column in the local daily about the future of the Pabst brewery site now that the city council has voted down the proposal to provide developers with a $41 million subsidy.

The options range from a scaled back version of the PabstCity project to selling the property to another developer. This passage in particular caught my eye:

"Any project at the Pabst site would require some level of city subsidies, industry professionals say.

PabstCity's request for $41 million included $16 million to create new streets, sidewalks, sewer lines, water mains and other public infrastructure; $14 million for environmental cleanup and demolition costs; $9 million for renovation of historic buildings; and $2 million for a job-training fund aimed at minority workers."

I've maintained that I don't have a problem with the city paying for infrastructure (roads, sidewalks, sewer and water, etc.) since that is the job of the city. The rest of the stuff should be the responsibility of the developers. They bought the land knowing they would need to improve and rehab the property itself, and they shouldn't have taken for granted that the city would step in and help pay for that.