01/28/2026
Part 2 of 4....
We ain't in Kansas anymore but Professor Marvel's crystal ball predicts astonishing feats of "legal" contortion and disappearing rules for the Chess ARPA application!
Editor's Note: In my experience, CFFF has two basic types of readers (some are a combo platter, lol): the ones who enjoy my snarky take on our corrupt city and those who are "just the facts ma'am." I juggle to keep everyone happy. With the ARPA grant shenanigans, this part will be my trademark acerbic "summary." Fact-based with wee a bit of satire. Parts 3 and 4 tomorrow will be all the letters/"receipts"/proof backing up my bad attitude. 😂 Here....we....go....
Let's review the ARPA grant "eligibility requirements" versus the City Attorney's magical analysis. Did he go to law school at Hogwart's?
Requirement #1: The business operates from a commercial location in the City of Fairborn, OH.
Abracadabra Analysis: The business need not have a commercial location in Fairborn. Thinking about having a business is good enough. Talking to realtors about possible locations is more than enough. In fact, if you once daydreamed about owning a bakery in the 7th grade, welcome to your ARPA grant.
Location is kinda subjective, don't ya think? You have a business in Texas? Perfect! Texas....Fairborn....what's the difference really? Location, like our grant requirements, are subject to magical interpretation!
Oh, you didn't actually have a business in Texas either? No problemo! Let's just pretend I never gave that as an excuse for how you'd qualify! Now watch while I gaslight everyone about my 2023 "legal opinion" with a whole paragraph about your Texas business! P**f! Like it never even happened.
Requirement #2: The business must have been in operation on January 1, 2020.
Abracadabra Analysis: You didn't have a registered business or a commercial location anywhere until July 1, 2020? Well, we're not quantum physicists, how can we really understand time?
And what do we mean by "in operation" anyway? After all, you had a sketch on a cocktail napkin in December of 2019! Where's the humanity? Doesn't that count for something?
3. The business must have been fully open and operating as of November 1, 2021.
Abracadabra Analysis: whew, you actually meet that requirement so now we will suddenly accept the traditional meaning of "open" and "operational." Our acceptance of language is fully conditional on our need to stretch it for you.
Requirement #4: The business is not a franchise.
Abracadabra Analysis: you actually meet that requirement too! Though I really can't understand why no one franchised a closed commercial building....seems like a goldmine!
Requirement #5: The business must be in good standing with City tax payments and regulations.
Abracadabra Analysis: Oh, you didn't even have some permits until some annoying page asked for them? Lift rug, sweep under. As for attaching tax returns, we were just kidding about all that!
Requirement #6: The business has experienced 25-80% loss in revenue between the end of calendar year 2020 and 2021. Tax returns MUST be submitted as documentation of revenue loss.
Abracadabra Analysis: Paperwork, schmakerwork. We don't have ANY tax returns to produce for your business nor ANY proof of losses? Can't you people take a joke? I mean "MUST" is such a neofascist word, isn't it?
Sure, the grants were intended to help those impacted by Covid, but you know what they say about good intentions....
Requirement #7: The business has gross receipts of no less than $50,000 and no more than $1 million.
Abracadabra Analysis: You can't report revenues from an imaginary business. And if you made nothing during Covid and lost nothing during Covid, what could you possibly report? Now give her the $10k!!
Requirement #8: The business has fewer than 200 employees.
We can give her that one. Owners aside, it had no employees to my knowledge.
By my count, Chess failed to meet FIVE of the EIGHT "eligibility requirements."
There is something quite, quite, WRONG with this, folks!
Finally, there was a requirement that if a grant recipient was employed by OR ELECTED to a city office during the grant period (which just ended on 12/31/25), the grant must be repaid. McNamee's reply: I'm not going to "claw it back."
How much special treatment can one person get while countless others suffered?