Newspaper Page Text
Fuss; Spokesman
For Resident*
Mr. T. P. Fum, spokesman for
the group Mid, “The property own-
in have no desire to impede the
pogreas of the university, but feel
bet if the univeraity deeiree acqui-
ftion of thi* area it should negoti-
ge with the individual owners."
fuse further stated, “We would re-
(tactfully like to ask Council if
bey can justify condemning the
soperty of one private interest
I order to give this advantage sole-
f to another private interest.
The residents
gia Tech and Georgia State from
strangulation and assuring them of
strong futures. There is one hitch
in Mercer’s {dan: The city must
act as agent for an urban renewal
project. Mercer asked Macon to
do so. It promised to assume the
entire amount of the city’s share
of costa. Sounds like quite a bar
gain, yes?
Not to Maoon’s new hard-right
Mayor Ronnie Thompson
Imagine what Atlanta would be
like if urban renewal land had not
been re-sold to private businesses.
Where would be the office build
pointed out in
their petition
that most of the
residences in the
lector are not
Ribetandard.
Fuss said that
ks was certain
that the Georgia
Baptist Conven
tion is the act-
sal owner of the
University and
that his group
intends to pee
tent the same
propoaal to
them. (The peti
tion also said
that they do not,
the residents.
This shot is north along Ross Street.
Representative of the vast majority of the
area that is substandard. Only 17 homes in
the 11 block area are standard.
The problem of maintenance in this area, while not an
bsue in the university’s proposal, is one of the first things that
t visitor or critical observer will notice. The entire area, e*cep|
lor two of the last three blocks on College Street (Blocks H
•nd E), is in very poor repair. It would seem that maintenance
«f this area would be in the perview of the city.
irgue with the change of the
through route from College Street
•Mtward one block to College
Drive.)
The editors of The Macon Newt
March 29th state: “Macon can-
continue to grow unless Mercer
allowed to grow.” They point out
even if Mercer is forced to
the land from the indi
property owners that Mr.
is correct in stating that
Georgia State Law this new
possession would be
from ad valorem tax.
The editors also write that Col-
Street “is already badly con-
. . . will become worse . . .
situation will have to be con-
regardless of what hapi>eng
the present controversy.”
In The Atlanta Constitution Ma-
Alderman Ivey was quoted on
3 as Hying, “My personal ob-
to the Mercer proposal is
the college is not dealing di
ings, apartments, motels?
Thus does hard fighting dogma
threaten to choke one of Macon’s
biggest assets. Is the wave of the
future some Georgia Republicans
have been bragging about with their
recent mayoral victories?”
Closely following the second
Constitution editorial the trustees
of Mercer met last week on Thurs
day, April 18. When a resolution
was introduced from the chair, T.
Baldwin Martin, to advise the uni
versity officials to persuade the
City Council to accept the por
posals of urban renewal presented
just four weeks before on March 21,
Trustee Jimmy Waters (Pastor at
the Ebenezer Baptist Church) rose
to object on the grounds that their
proposal is a “moral issue" that
can be better guided by prayer
than force.
He went on to say that the Uni
versity must negotiate with the
individual property owners and not
•sctly with the people of the area
to get the area declared an urban
Nnewai area ... IF Mercer nego-
ttotee with them ... then, of course,
i is outside the realm af the urban
aoswal committee.” Ivey also
Hated that be was not against
kfercer gaining the property be
Musa of the resulting tax exemp
tion, but rather because of the fail
Ms to ~ it with the owners
In a powerful note of enooc rage-
tout to Mercer officials The At
kata Constitution editors two
toeks ago and again last week
kaavily criticised the “Town v.
Down” attitude in Macon. The
Cbwattordon editors wrote on April
I: “Urban renewal is saving Geor
(Continued top of neat column)
engender ill-will through the pro-
ceasee of eminent domain. Rev.
Waters as a point of interest cited
that in Ragsdale s History of the
Georgia Baptists in Volume II,
page 1, the source of Mercer s pro
perty is revealed to have been the
result of a city bond isue and that
—in fact—Macon's deed to tlie
property if Mercer should ever
leave is contained in the records
of the Recorder's Court. He con
cluded that T. Baldwin Martin
was incorect in his statement of
March 26 when he called the pre
sent front quadrangle and the cam
pus “an outright donation" from
Macon. Mr. Martin had used their
historical reference to illustrate
that the proposal of urban renew
. April 23. 1968 • THE MERCER CLUSTER • Page 6
Dirt Streets And
Substandard Homes
To the left and below are further
examples of the dwellings and
streets in this area. The great ma
jority of the streets are dirt with
little grass or trees along their
sides. Again while this is not an
issue in the university's proposal it
is further testament to the sub
standard conditions in moat a4 the
area north of Blocks I and J. The
blocks H and I contain several new
structures that enhance their value
and appearance but directly to the
east of Block H is dirt College
Drive which intersects with Prince
Street which becomes dirt as it goes
between Blocks I and F.
al is not in the pole of moral con
siderations, Another trustee rose
to state his intentions of also voting
against the resolution because of
its effect on a GBC, already troub
led by the trustees assertion of self-
determination’ in January and its
serious discussion of resolving to
pursue any forms of federal aid.
Judge C. Cloud Morgan voiced
his disapproval of the resolution
on the grounds that the University
should make h sincere effort to
deal with the individual owners.
Judge Morgan disagreed with Rev
Waters over the moral considera
tion ai>d stated further that al
though it is an issue of some deli
cacy its exterminating are in the
legal realm and not the moral. He
also emphasized that although he
and others were in favor of Mer
cer’s expansion that he would have
to vote “no” because of its pre
maturity. Judge Morgan empha
sized the importance of eminent
domain principles to progress be
cause it prevented an individual
from obstructing the entire com
munity — he said that without it
our modern world would come, to a
screeching halt
Dr. Lewis said that he felt that
the University should make very
public thicugh tlie press its in
tention to try to deni with the in
dividual owner — he said the pub
ic did not know this and Mr. Mar
tin should make this public state
ment to the press.
Judge Morgan moved to table
the motion until all other channels
had been exhausted. This was re
scinded and Rev. Jimmy Waters
moved to table the resolution which
was carried by all but one “no.”
The resolution will again be dis
cussed in October at the next regu
larly scheduled trustee meeting.
Today the University has invited
the owners of property in the pro
posed renewal area to discuss the
problems of individual purchasing.
This meeting has been planned
even before Waters and Morgan
requested a genuine effort on the
part of school officials. It was sup
posed that the meeting liad been
planned to fulfill Alderman Tom
Ivey's request that the school com
municate with the individual own
er.
Tabulated Cost Summary - Mercer U.
Project (Area East of Mercer)
Project Cost
Net land valuation
768,510
Adjustment for market
76,851
Market valuation
845,361
845,361
Estimated improvement costs
135,000
Estimated administration cost
(1% years 'S) 80,000 per year)
120,000
Gross Project Cost
$1,100,361
Disposition Cost
35.3 acres (a) 6,000 per acre
$ 211,800
Net Project Cost
Project Cost, less
1,100,361
Disposition cost
—211,800
- '
$ 388,661
Project Cost to Mercer
Disposition Cost
211,800
1 3 Net Project Cost
296,187
Estimated Cost of Project I to Mercer
University
$ 507,987
Physical Plant Needs To 1980
Priority Educational
Rank Facility
1 — Renovation of Biology Bldg.
to Music Facility*
1 — Renovation of Chemistry
Bldg, to Sociology and Psy
chology Dept*.*
1 — Renovation of Economics
Bldg, to Educational Dept.*
2 — School of Pharmacy
3 — Performing Arts Auditori
um
4 — New Gym Field House
5 — General Classroom and Fa
culty Office Bldgs
Priority Non Educational
Rank Buildings
1 — Infirmary
2 — Swimming Building
3 — New Women's Residence
Hall (120 rooms)
4 — New Men's Residence Hall
200 rooms)
5 — Renovation of Administra
tion Building
6 — Land Acquisition
7 — Married Students' Housing
Another example of the neighborhood conditions at one
of the intersections of Rom Street It was on streets of this
type that Macon nearly had her first riot last July.
8 —• Additional Food Services
Facility
* These three items have been
budgeted, and are scheduled for
completion during the summer of
1968.
Racial Occupancy
By Block
PROJECT I TOTALS
WHITE
91
NON WHITE
86
TOTAL
177
Existing Structural
Conditions
PROJECT I
74.5% SUBSTANDARD