Renaissance of RenSquare so screamed a headline in the Democrat and Chronicle yesterday. See, poor Maggie was considering pulling the plug on the entire project because…

…she was discouraged by faltering public opinion for the largest public works project in county history.

Even the D&C editorial board lent its voice of support yesterday saying:

Brooks’ realism about goals and costs — and accountability — should have come years ago. But there is time to right this $230 million ship, and if it’s done properly, the city and the community will benefit. The RenSquare critics have reason for their negativity, but now’s the opportunity, as this project is being reconsidered, to put workable ideas on the table.

Yeah - hey you critics out there - put your plans on the table. Sounds like there is an assumption that RenSquare MUST be built. Weren’t there alternative ideas that were shot down in favor of RenSquare?

But fast forward to yesterday. The D&C covered the public viewing of the design concepts. Click over and read the article then read this one at City News. As usual City News nails it:

The latest schematic designs for the Renaissance Square project are out, and the biggest change is in the amount of land used.

Got that? The land needed has been reduced. Remember, we are going through this new design discussion because the original RenSquare project was “too big”. It is to be scaled back so it can cost less, A smaller footprint should mean lower cost.

What does our County Executive have to say?

“Any one of these can be done for $230 million,” says project spokesman Mike Power. County Executive Maggie Brooks, the project’s prime proponent, has said that’s the absolute maximum that will be spent on the project.

Meaning we are going to spend up to $230 million on a project that is smaller in scope than the original. The concept is to spend less money on the project. But here are questions I have:

• Does this mean RenSquare won’t ultimately need the $18 million in Federal funds Senator Schumer is promising given the smaller footprint?
• Why were the original plans too expensive? The administration continually says - the original plans were too expensive. What sort of guidelines were given to the architect. Somehow - I don’t see a world class architect going off the reservation in terms of cost. And if he didn’t deliver what was expected - why did he get paid $3 million dollars?
• Finally, Is/was the original $230 million dollar price tag too low? Are we having a bait and switch going on here - how much less than $230 million will these new projects cost?

Look - this project has always been about process and accountability. A few public meetings so the LDC Main and Clinton can go behind closed doors and approve the “preferred plan” in June - does not pass for vigorous public involvement. A second chance with the same management team does not suddenly breath competence into the process.

I say the jury is still out.

Now it not the time for any RenSquare critic, editorial board, journalist, public official, or citizenry to lighten up on the scrutiny needed to ensure this project is more steak than sizzle.