At picnics, at parties, at concerts over this summer, I've gotten an earful about Ren Square.

Much of the talk has been the usual stuff: speculation about whether it will be built. Speculation about why the Brooks administration wants it so badly. Complaints about the plan, the funding, the theater.

But at these social occasions, I've also talked with people who think Ren Square is a good idea. These are not people connected to the Brooks administration. In fact, some of them are strong Brooks critics. But they're convinced that Ren Square will be good for downtown Rochester.

Ren Square is located on one of the most important blocks of downtown Rochester, and much of that block has become pretty seedy. We can argue about whether the block's deterioration was caused, in part, by the slow pace of the Ren Square planning. In effect, Ren Square has held the block hostage. The fact is, though, something needs to happen on that block.

The supporters I've talked with think that Ren Square - even without a theater - would be an improvement over what's there.

One concern is the impact that block has on tourism and conventions. It doesn't make a good impression on visitors - day or night.

The Ren Square block also has a depressing effect on neighboring properties. Fix it up, the supporters say, and it will spur development nearby.

In fact, some of those supporters say, despite its problems, Ren Square has already had a positive impact. They're convinced that the promise of Ren Square helped generate interest in a downtown location for Paetec and ESL. And, those supporters say, Ren Square could magnify the impact of Paetec and ESL. Develop Ren Square, suggests one supporter, and the Sibley's Building becomes more attractive to developers.

Interest in downtown housing is already strong, and with Paetec and ESL bringing more than a thousand employees downtown, that demand likely will grow. And the high price of gas won't hurt. A college, a theater, and a bus station at Ren Square, the supporters say, could create interest in housing just north of the project.

And, one supporter suggests, with a successful Ren Square, the Clarion Hotel site would become enormously attractive - as a tear-down to make way for riverside housing.

Then there's the massive amount of federal money that's been promised for the project. If we don't build Ren Square, we won't get that money.

Momentum has begun to build downtown. But aside from housing, it's tenuous. Construction of the Paetec headquarters hinges on both the continued strength of that company, in this poor economy, and on state funding. Assurance that Ren Square will be built - bulldozers at work on that site - could ramp up interest in neighboring sites and keep the momentum going. That's exactly what happened when Paetec announced that it was building its headquarters on the Midtown site.

Far too many questions about Ren Square remain. What do we gain by moving MCC's downtown campus one block west? What do we gain by moving the Rochester Broadway Theater League out of the Auditorium Theatre? In both cases, we'll be removing major tenants from historic buildings.

Is a downtown bus station the biggest need of local bus riders? Is it the best use of the transit authority's - and the federal government's - money? Given the escalating cost of construction materials, can we get a decent complex for the $230 million cap that Ren Square officials have set?

And a big question, which, to my amazement, the Ren Square folks keep kicking off into the future: How much will it cost to operate this thing? Who will pay those costs?

All of those questions are important. And the push for Ren Square continues despite the lack of answers.

But for Ren Square critics like me, the project's supporters have their own question: If not Ren Square, what?