Share This Page

Another Monsour mess

| Tuesday, Oct. 30, 2012, 8:56 p.m.

The Monsour family's abandonment of its crumbling Jeannette hospital building would be reprehensible enough as an isolated instance. But it's even more egregious because the family's equally reprehensible abandonment of a Florida luxury hotel makes the mess along Route 30 part of a pattern of mismanagement, irresponsibility and disregard for community concerns.

The Monsour Medical Center building stands — but for how long? — as a monument to its namesake brothers' failure to even fail properly. Jeannette has condemned the building, shuttered in 2006, but doesn't have the $250,000 to $1 million needed to tear it down.

Attracting vagrants and arsonists, it endangers public safety. And medical records scattered throughout are the subject of a federal probe into possible privacy-law violations.

Sarasota, Fla., no longer has the decrepit hulk of the Monsour family's Three Crowns Hotel to deal with. But the two structures' sagas otherwise are similar.

Sarasota officials say the beachfront hotel, part of a post-World War II building boom, fell into disrepair and foreclosure amid legal troubles, was sold to two other owners and stood empty for seven years before its 1995 demolition. And the Monsour family was just as irresponsible and unhelpful there as in Jeannette.

That only strengthens the case for forcing accountability for the Jeannette mess on those responsible, who must pay the full cost of cleaning it up.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.