Category: All

A Transportation to Heaven Investment

  By ,

A Caesar Rendering Due

Originally posted on CityStink
Sunday, June 10, 2012
Augusta, GA
By Al Gray

The author, Al M. Gray, was President of Cost Recovery Works Inc., a provider of Cost Avoidance and Cost Recovery for America’s leading companies, businesses and governments desiring Superior Returns. Cost Recovery Works is no longer in business, as of December 31, 2020.

All Americans should acquaint themselves with Andrew Jackson’s Farewell Address. The unabridged version, distributed as a pamphlet, stands as a clear warning and prophesy. In it “Old Hickory” wrote:

You will yet find there is a constant effort to induce the General Government to go beyond the limits of its taxing power and to impose unnecessary burdens upon the people. Many powerful interests are continually at work to procure heavy duties on commerce and to swell the revenue beyond the real necessities of the public service… They succeeded in obtaining a tariff… extravagant schemes of internal improvement were got up in various quarters to squander the money…  But, rely upon it, the design to collect an extravagant revenue and to burden you with taxes beyond the economical wants of the Government is not yet abandoned… efforts will be made to seduce and mislead the citizens of the several States by holding out to them the deceitful prospect of benefits to be derived from a surplus revenue collected by the General Government and annually divided among the States… Do not allow yourselves, my fellow-citizens, to be misled on this subject… It is, moreover, a system of injustice, and if persisted in will inevitably lead to corruption, and must end in ruin.

Don’t these words paint a hauntingly familiar picture in this election season when we are asked to vote ourselves a new tax for transportation improvement? There is nothing new under the sun when it comes to predatory government, is there?

Christians live with a dilemma in evaluating such things, for in Matthew 22:15-22 we find the duties of paying taxes in the context of perplexing instructions:

Then the Pharisees went and plotted together how they might trap Him in what He said. 16 And they *sent their disciples to Him, along with the Herodians, saying, “Teacher, we know that You are truthful and teach the way of God in truth, and defer to no one; for You are not partial to any. 17 Tell us then, what do You think? Is it lawful to give a poll-tax to Caesar, or not?” 18 But Jesus perceived their malice, and said, “Why are you testing Me, you hypocrites?19 Show Me the coin used for the poll-tax.” And they brought Him a denarius. 20 And He *said to them, “Whose likeness and inscription is this?” 21 They *said to Him, “Caesar’s.” Then He *said to them, “ Then render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s; and to God the things that are God’s.” 22 And hearing this, they were amazed, and leaving Him, they went away.

What was ‘money’ then and now was whatever was branded as legal tender granted the privilege of being accepted in payment of the government’s taxes. The denarius coin was stamped with Caesar’s image, so Jesus responded simply, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s (legal tender money); and to God the things that are God’s (ourselves and wealth that stands beyond legal tender money).”

When government strains the limits of the consent of the governed and the sheer mathematics of debt, the things it demands as “money” become debased. Indeed, the fall of Rome came when the denarius became so debased by the government’s own abuse, that other “things” assumed one of the two essential attributes of money – that of a Store of Value.  When some other “things” become stores of value – be they gold, silver, produce, grain, oil, or fertilizer – then they command more and more of the government’s legal tender required as units of exchange.  At some point the valuables assume both store-of-value and unit-of-exchange functions because the government’s money has gone worthless. Then governments get very hostile to the people.

Indeed, at the time of the Fall of Rome, it was said that the Roman farmers were so infuriated by the government’s raids of the stored value represented by their granaries, that they invited and implored that the barbarians’ invade to relieve them of tyranny from Rome.

We are at the same point here in our “modernity.” Our money is debased, so government is increasing its demands upon us – now wanting to tax our previously taxed savings when we spend them – and will continue to do this until the people rise up and put a stop to it.

Giving the government its due has to be limited to what the government needs to serve us, as Andrew Jackson intoned. As it moves beyond that, it gets into the realm of what is ours and interferes with our ability to give the Lord that which is His – support of church, charities, and our fellow men, women and children in need. Worst of all, it grows its demands so as to enslave man and to deny him the time to devote to the Lord and to others.

Let’s spend no more time on that conundrum. Men halt the advancement of government power at some point, if there be patriots still drawing breath (there are). Let us turn to rendering to God that which is His.

What is His?

We are His along with everything that we have and are able to store value into. We are charged to tithe, so as to support the church in its service to the broader community and that must be a central aspect of Christian life and practice.

Matthew 10, Verse 28 makes it clear for us:

28 Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in [a] hell.

Pretty simple, isn’t it? We should be fearless toward government and fearful of God. We must love the Lord, not government. Government is just another Pharisee, trying to trip you up. Be not deceived. Look beyond their power to harm. Look to heaven. All else is false pretense.

Come thou Fount of Every Blessing and that isn’t the latest Caesar or his government.

AG

TEE Center Special Report: No Way to Treat a “Partner”

  By , ,
“Howdy, partner! Can you spare a few $million?”

Thursday, June 7, 2012
Augusta, GA
By Lori Davis

Our Augusta Today and CityStink.net group had limited representation at the January 30, 2012 meeting of the City of Augusta’s Finance Committee when several commissioners roasted the City’s outside lawyer, Jim Plunkett over the TEE Center parking deck agreements with manager Augusta Riverfront, LLC. However, one comment reported by WJBF’s George Eskola struck home. “We’re supposed to be in a partnership but I’ve never seen partners treated as we’ve been treated in these issues accusing people of doing things wrong we don’t operate like that,” said Paul Simon, whose company Augusta Riverfront, LLC owns the Marriott.

The comment sent me looking for the partnership agreement for the TEE Center that Mr. Simon was talking about.

Here is what was found. Better said, here is what I didn’t find.

The Augusta Commission has only approved one document that might be seen as a “partnership agreement” for the TEE Center in the form of the Management Agreement Term Sheet. It is UNSIGNED AND UNDATED, but was included in the package of documents when the TEE Center was approved by the Commission on August 21, 2007.

After the August 2007 meeting, the only later action was at the called meeting of the Board of Commissioners in early December 2009 where the Commissioners authorized the Mayor to execute the TEE Center Construction Operating and Reciprocal Easement (CORE) Agreement in anticipation of beginning construction.

Seeing that as being the partnership agreement I submitted a Georgia Open Records Request to the Augusta Law Department for the executed agreement. They didn’t have it.

Deke Copenhaver NEVER signed a CORE agreement. It doesn’t exist.

Yes, you read that correctly. The partnership for the $50 million TEE Center and Parking Deck complex does not exist! What does exist has some really shocking provisions that I think should have Augusta demanding big money from Mr. Simon’s LLC!

What does exist is the CORE agreement on the existing Conference Center dated June 21, 1999 recorded in the records of the Clerk of the Augusta Richmond County Superior Court in Deed Book 648 on page 45.

The existing CORE agreement was not canceled or superseded by a more recent partnership deal as far as we can tell. What does this signed and executed agreement say? Page 13 has a whole bunch of wording that makes Augusta Riverfront, LLC responsible for all manner of construction and maintenance cost throughout the term of the agreement.

Page 16 says this: “Developer (Augusta Riverfront, LLC) in operating the air conditioning and heating system for the Hotels and the Expanded Conference Center shall operate such systems in a manner which will not unduly drain heat, ventilation or air conditioning from the Improvements of any other party.”

Nowhere in the unsigned, undated Term Sheet is there change in duties as they relate to HVAC or the existing Conference Center. The Term Sheet even says, “Augusta’s capital funds shall specifically not be used for items related to any Convention Center and/or Hotel capital cost.”

The Augusta Chronicle reported about a controversial change order for an expensive HVAC (heating, ventilation, and air conditioning) upgrade requested by Augusta Riverfront, LLC, owners of the Marriott, writing, “The changes being requested include $399,083 for upgrades to the smoke exhaust system, increasing the number of air changes at the convention center from the Georgia minimum standard of about 2.5 per hour to eight per hour, as requested by Marriott.”

Questions

If the signed and executed CORE agreement for the Convention Center puts responsibility for HVAC operations within the hotel upon the hotel owners, and the 2007 Term Sheet does the same for Hotel capital costs, why hasn’t the Commission, Mayor and Fred Russell demanded that Augusta’s partners pay these costs? Where is our $399,083?

Where is the partnership agreement? Does Fred Russell mean to tell us that they built a $50 million complex using public funds with no partnership agreement?

How can it be legal to build a publicly funded project like this on unsigned, undated documents?

Shouldn’t all Augusta be channeling Mr. Simon’s objection -“I’ve never seen partners treated as we’ve been treated ” -right back at him?***

-Lori Davis


(*Below are pdfs of some of the public documents cited in this article)
2009 CORE GORA Request – Lori Davis
1999 Core – Radisson Hotel Conference Center (1)
1999 CORE – Radisson P. 13
1999 CORE – Radisson P. 16

ETCOD Center, The Land of Tomorrow Doomed by Its Own Flaws & The Rule of Law

  By , , ,

Monday, June 4, 2012
Evans, GA
By Al Gray

In last weekend’s article, Overlay Somebody Else: My Battle With Columbia County Over Property Rights, the birth pangs of the ill-fated Evans Town Center Ordinance and the Evans Town Center Overlay District (aka ETCOD) in 2000 were revisited. This week, let’s look at what happened two years later, after the ‘rules’ had been in place long enough to judge how well they were applied.

 

During the heated debate of 2000, the spirit of economist and philosopher Frederic Bastiat had to have been there. Among his relevant quotes were these:

 
It is impossible to introduce into society a greater change and a greater evil than this: the conversion of the law into an instrument of plunder… Sometimes the law defends plunder and participates in it. Thus the beneficiaries are spared the shame and danger that their acts would otherwise involve… But how is this legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them and gives it to the other persons to whom it doesn’t belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime…. Legal plunder can be committed in an infinite number of ways…

 

We can add to his list of legal plunder “town center ordinances” and “overlay zoning.”

Augusta attorney Gail Duffie Stebbins might not know Frederic Bastiat but she knew that the Evans Town Center was legal plunder. In 2002 Ms. Stebbins sued to have the Evans Town Center Overlay Zoning Ordinance set aside for failure to give her and other property owners sufficient, defensible notice. A Superior Court Judge agreed with her. Columbia County responded by curing the technical defects, then reintroducing the same ordinance.

The As the Columbia County News-Times reported about the November, 2002 meeting: “It wasn’t any more quiet the second time around,” an obvious reference to the near-riot that broke out in 2000 in a Planning Commission meeting at which the original ordinance was advanced to the Columbia County Commission.

 

Ms. Stebbins’ temporarily-successful law suit was easily sidestepped. The findings of the another speaker turned out to be fatal. The News Times report continued in its report: “The Evans Town Center is as dead as some misguided possum crossing I-20, run down by high-speed development,” said Al Gray, whose family owns land in the town center district.

Brash statements? Not really. You see, there are concepts as old as society itself that found themselves into the Constitution of the United States of America and the Bill of Rights. Citizens cannot be deprived of EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAW under the 5th Amendment and cannot be deprived of property without DUE PROCESS OF LAW under the 14th Amendment. By these standards the ETCOD ordinance was doomed, because there had been scores of noncomplying structures and developments built with county approval. The proof was demonstrated in this presentation, made to the county commission that night.

**(See the ETCOD Nonconformity presentation below. ETCOD Nonconformity (1)

 

The approach was this. First, the ETCOD ordinance was broken down into the component standards. Second, digital photos were taken of all structures, buildings, parking lots, and landscaping represented by approved and constructed projects since the Town Center was launched in 2000. Third, the noncomplying features were categorized under the pertinent design standard that was violated. Fourth, the fact that there were scores of noncomplying projects and only 5 variances requested and granted was documented. Fifth, it was pointed out that the near-universal approval of nonconforming structures would simply doom the ordinance in court. 

This is how one defeats an overly aggressive government. One can turn the planners own ordinances, actions, and lack of enforcement against them. A property owner cannot be singled out for not conforming when equal protection says he must be accorded the same leniency of those who came before. Yes, that night Columbia County fixed Ms. Stebbins’ objections, only to run into decisive defeat before the meeting concluded. 

The county never was able to subdue a patient determined landowner after that night, because they were armed with knowledge of their rights and how to successfully demand the same standards as those who came before them. Those standards had been gutted by the county’s own hand. “Columbia County does not have the resources to manage 5-square-miles with the ordinance as it is written,” said Richard Sorensen, a Northwoods subdivision resident. “What you are biting off is more than you can chew.”
Indeed.

After all, equal protection has its roots in the Bible admonition, “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” Even politicians find themselves nodding in agreement with that.

 

The Town Center plan ended up being a collection of upgraded architectural finishes and landscaping, but the unenforceable parts died that night.

 

Today, Columbia County’s Richard Harmon is putting the finishing touches on a comprehensive rewrite of the Evans Town Center ordinances, based upon these realities. Wise heads prevailed in the end. ***

AG
 
Related Stories:

Sunday Sermon: Grab an Oar and Give all You’ve Got

  By ,

 

A ‘Mitey’ Big Present

The Return of “Giving it Your All”

Originally posted on CityStink
Sunday, June 3, 2012
Augusta, GA
By Al Gray

The author, Al M. Gray, was President of Cost Recovery Works, Inc., a provider of Cost Avoidance and Cost Recovery for America’s leading companies, businesses and governments desiring Superior Returns. Cost Recovery Works is no longer in business, as of December 31, 2020.

This writer’s favorite painting is, “Washington Crossing the Delaware,” an 1851 work by Emanuel Gottlieb Leutze. Yes, historians and assorted wags sniff that it is not historically accurate, because the famous river crossing happened in the night, but the art of it is that it conveys the sheer power of pain and sacrifice that gave rise to our wonderful nation. It also sets one to pondering about the future and whether we the people of America in this year of 2012 remotely have the dedication to give it all to God or country.

Focus on the men manning the paddles and oars in the boat, not the general or the officers. These brave lads came from a populace divided on even whether the Revolution was a good idea, much as our folks are divided today on government. They were not likely to win fame or fortune, yet there they were, giving the liberty movement their very lives. That same winter it was said Washington’s army could be tracked by the bloody footprints these patriot warriors left in the snow. They gave it all.

Jesus gave it all. He expects us to do that too. He watches from Heaven in observation of our actions, much as he sat one day observing people paying the Treasury.

Our Bible story this week is found in Mark 12, Verses 41 – 44, of the New American Standard Bible.

41 And He sat down opposite the treasury, and began observing how the people were putting money into the treasury; and many rich people were putting in large sums. 42 A poor widow came and put in two small copper coins, which amount to a cent. 43 Calling His disciples to Him, He said to them,

 “Truly I say to you, this poor widow put in more than all the contributors to the treasury; 44 for they all put in out of their [e]surplus, but she, out of her poverty, put in all she owned, all she had to live on.”

The sequencing of this story is curious as it is immediately before an accounting of the last days found in Mark 13, especially verses 9 through 13.

9 “But be on your guard; for they will deliver you to the courts, and you will be flogged in the synagogues, and you will stand before governors and kings for My sake, as a testimony to them. 10 The gospel must first be preached to all the nations. 11 When they arrest you and hand you over, do not worry beforehand about what you are to say, but say whatever is given you in that hour; for it is not you who speak, but it is the Holy Spirit. 12 Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child; and children will rise up against parents and have them put to death. 13  You will be hated by all because of My name, but the one who endures to the end, he will be saved.

Religion and politics are the realms where men and women of faith in God and country have been making the ultimate sacrifice since the days of Genesis. The widow didn’t know where her next meal was coming from. She might have been facing starvation. She certainly increased her deprivation in contributing her last cent. The patriots in Washington’s boat suffered starvation, freezing temperatures, frostbite, and isolation from home and loved ones. They risked death in camp, in battle, and as traitors, had they lost.

Today in this America people are fat, contented, and lazy. Few are the patriots. Few are those who give up everything to follow Jesus. City and suburban life foists neighborhoods where no one knows their neighbors, because very few feel a sense of community or a compelling reason to be part of a community. This writer has had the good fortune to migrate to country life. Here things are much different. Folks in this relatively poor county pitch in to help their neighbors. It isn’t all that uncommon to get the feeling that they will give you the clothes off of their back. People still GIVE without any expectation of anything received in return. The contrast between living and working in Chicago, Winston-Salem, or Savannah is quite amazing. One sees HOPE in rural America that our people still have it within themselves to sacrifice for the greater good.

When times become tough, faith and the willingness to sacrifice it all may be all a man or woman has left. Everyone doing it will keep society from something very dark indeed. One day, in which we all will rejoice, I believe everybody in the land will see this as a necessity for life itself.

Try not to count on the end times or predict them. Practice sacrifice for others. It is a ‘mitey’ fine thing.

Remember Washington’s frozen troops. They were not standing tall in the boat. They were throwing body and soul into the oars. The widow gave her last mite. Will you do the same?***

AG

Can Augusta Media Mimic Copperfield and Make Parking Deck Vanish?

  By , ,

Friday, June 1, 2012

Augusta, GA
By Al Gray
Augusta’s $715,000 “Incidental” Gift1

David Copperfield’s illusion of making the Statue of Liberty disappear is listed by the Guinness Book of World Records as, “the largest disappearance ever performed by a magician.” In the closed-loop, incestuous world of Augusta media, similar miracles have been performed over the years, mostly by using the tactic of blowing up small incidents of monetary losses, – be they by graft, fraud, or plain stupidity – to divert attention from the elephants in the room. Grandma used to call this, “Straining gnats while swallowing camels.” The Reynolds Street Parking Deck doesn’t have tusks or a hump, but some folks who know better have camel hair on their bibs.

The bit players in the Augusta illusion are officials like Tax Commissioner Stephen Kendrick, who was still being hounded by the Augusta Chronicle a year later over a missing $25,000, and former city commissioner Betty  Beard’s $20,000 supposed misappropriation of funds.

What Fred Russell made go away looked like this:

What Fred reappeared wasn’t an elephant, it was much larger:

 

If you are Augusta Riverfront, LLC, Fred relieved you of an ugly, unattended surface lot. What he came back with appears to be an enclosed, lighted, secure, landscaped, and operated lot at no capital or operating cost.

Sweet. It must be nice to be a principal partner of Augusta Riverfront, LLC and the publisher of the only daily newspaper in the city, The Augusta Chronicle, where you can use your  influence in the media to create illusions through the art of distraction, just like David Copperfield.

Everyone should be so lucky as to negotiate a deal with Fred Russell like this.***

A.G.

1 Based upon the RSPD agreement submitted to the Board of Commissioners 1/30/2012

Related Stories:

TEE Parking Deck Exclusive: Augusta’s $714,357 “Incidental” Cost?

  By , ,


May 31, 2012
Augusta, GA
By Al Gray

  

The story Fred Wrestles, Augusta Gets Decked?, published on Tuesday, May 29, 2012, offered a detailed and documented exploration of a story of rejected parking management bids, a questionable management firm selection, and a detailed comparison of Augusta’s bid contract with the administrations proposed contract. The questions and issues documented required a lengthy recitation to convey the magnitude of the subject. It was an epistle for those liking details.

Today’s key word is “incidental.” What is “incidental” within the Reynolds Street Parking Deck (RSPD) agreement? Can “incidental” be measured? Is “incidental” subject to debate?

What brought this subject to the fore was how the RSPD agreement deals with costs relating to the ground floor of the parking deck structure owned by designated manager Augusta Riverfront, LLC, specifically Article 3, Section 3.1 which includes this:

“The parties acknowledge that certain property and services paid for by Owner (Augusta) (editor’s unitalicized text) and required for the operation of the RSPD will also benefit Manager’s (LLC’s) (editor’s unitalicized text) ground level parking facilities located underneath and adjacent to the RSPD. Such property and services include, but are not limited to (editor’s emphasis), traffic control gates and related equipment, lighting, and services of a toll booth operator (the “Incidental Services”). The Incidental Services would be required for the operation of the RSPD whether or not the Manager owned the ground level parking facilities, and allowing Manager to benefit from these Incidental Services does not materially increase the costs to Owner. Accordingly, in further consideration of granting air rights and easements to Owner for the construction and operation of the RSPD, Manager shall have the right to utilize the Incidental Services for Manager’s ground level parking facilities located underneath and adjacent to the RSPD, so long as such use does not materially increase the cost to Owner.”

 

Whoa!

 

This caused a scurry to do some math on the RSPD 2012 Budget dated 8/29/2011  (see last page of linked documents). The budget totals $206,370. The deck structure (ground floor and floors above) has 650 spaces, of which 150 are property of the LLC, for 23% of the total spaces in the deck structure. The LLC percentage of the total deck structure, 23% times the total budget, is $714,358!!!! This is “incidental?” Is it not material?

To be clear, the legalese also essentially defines the “RSPD” as the ground floor parcels that Augusta bought, plus the structure above the ground floor. We laymen think the entire building structure from the foundations up as the “parking deck.” However, the annual budget didn’t restrict the numbers to the Augusta-owned portion,did it? Doesn’t the language of the agreement allow the LLC to bill Augusta for its fee and costs of the entire structure, including the ground floor it owns? The language allows the LLC to bill Augusta for the toll booth operator, while labor costs are the bulk of the budget. Shouldn’t there be language clearly prorating the costs instead of provisions that costs “are not limited to” those cited, which seems to open Augusta up to a cornucopia of costs?

 

With labor costs that are the vast majority of the agreement, the probable allocation of shared employee costs from the LLC’s hotel operations, further allocations between the RSPD and Conference Center deck, and, finally, the need to further allocate labor costs between levels of the RSPD, and only an annual audit allowed to verify the costs, aren’t the phrases “incidental,” “not limited to,” and “materially increase” plain dangerous to the taxpayer? Did the length of the agreement get reduced to five years, as indicated to the Augusta Commission in February?

It is a $714,358 question and then some. “Incidental” can be costly.***

 

— Al Gray

 

Related Stories:

 
 

In Defense of Jim Plunkett

  By , ,
Augusta Attorney Jim Plunkett

May, 30, 2012

Augusta, GA

By Al Gray

Veteran Augusta attorney Jim Plunkett has found himself at the epicenter of the controversy over the City of Augusta’s TEE Center and Parking Deck contracts since January. Commissioners blasted him with suggestions that he be fired, questions about his ability and even hints that suspect his work. How did such a mild-mannered lawyer find himself in this mess? Does he deserve to be under fire? What caused the uproar?

There were so many questions the answers for which are not in the public domain and empathy from reading the morass of legal documents that existed before Mr. Plunkett was brought on board by Augusta as its outside counsel, that this writer decided to meet with him to explore these questions. Commissioner Wayne Guilfoyle graciously facilitated the meeting in mid-March, which occurred in the offices of the Shepard, Plunkett, Hamilton & Boudreaux, LLP firm to negotiate, draft, and have executed the documents for the new Trade Center and the associated parking decks.

The primary objective was to see where the City stands with regard to the unexecuted TEE Construction, Operating and Reciprocal Easement (CORE) agreement that the Augusta Commission authorized and directed Mayor Deke Copenhaver to execute in December 2009. The CORE agreement is a critical piece of the legal work, as it sets forth the basic terms of the partnership agreement between the City and TEE Center Manager, Augusta Riverfront, LLC. This CORE agreement is in the process of being finalized as the City elected to have as-built surveys done once construction is complete, rather than chance changes as the project was prosecuted. Mr. Plunkett explained that set-backs between the various parcels underlying the TEE center were a complication that he and the City sought to either avoid or handle in the final CORE agreement.

We discussed the challenges of having a smaller firm like Shepard Plunkett tasked with having to revise hundreds of pages of legalese on the various tracts under the TEE Center, parking deck, and particularly, the existing Conference Center. These legal agreements first arose with the initial conference center agreement in 1989 and were revised in 1998, with the expansion of the conference center at that time.

Whatever one’s position on the wisdom and viability of building the TEE Center, they should understand that Jim Plunkett was tasked with the unenviable tasks of cobbling together enforceable and defensible legal agreements in conformity with the myriad ownership arrangements, funding sources, and negotiations agreed to by the City Administrator. City counsel has little or no exposure to how existing agreements and construction contracts are being directed and coordinated while this legal work is being completed. Those things are the duties of the City Administrator and the city’s program manager, Heery International.

We activists at Augusta Today and CityStink.net appreciate the difficulty and complexity of the legal tasks. Too many harsh words and hinted accusations were made during the Reynolds Street Parking Deck controversy. There are plenty of valid criticisms of that project, but we hope to keep them focused on policy not personalities going forward.

Jim Plunkett has expressed the intention to work with the commissioners to draft as good of a document as possible for the City. As the TEE Center CORE, management, catering, and room block agreements move closer to commission consideration, we trust that getting access to the draft agreements with sufficient time to evaluate them will go far toward alleviating misunderstandings. Going forward it is our desire at Augusta Today and CityStink.net to provide helpful input into having effective operating controls implemented.

Thank you, Jim, for taking the time to meet and review many of the complications with the TEE Center project.***

Related Stories:
TEE Parking Deck Exclusive: Fred Wrestles, Augusta Gets Decked?

 

TEE Parking Deck Exclusive: Fred Wrestles, Augusta Gets Decked?

  By , ,
 
 

Augusta, GA

May 29, 2012

By Al Gray
 

Our team of community watchdogs at Augusta Today and CityStink.net have not let sleeping dogs lie with the TEE Center and Reynolds Street Parking deck deals that were conditionally approved by the Augusta Richmond County last February 7. Readers might recall that the Augusta Commission then approved a deal for Augusta Riverfront, LLC to manage the new Reynolds Street Parking Deck, contingent upon the land for the parking deck being deeded to the city land bank and being cleared of all liens. The decision was reached in a last-minute panic to get something passed to relieve the Commission of what was a very hot potato of an issue – how a $12 million parking deck got built on land the city didn’t own.

 

Has the land been deeded to the Land Bank and have the liens been released by Wells Fargo, the bank that holds the liens on the land under the Reynolds Street Parking Deck (RSPD)?

The answer is NO, according to review of the Augusta Richmond County Clerk of Court deeds of record for the property as reported on the Georgia Superior Court Clerk’s Cooperative Authority. The deeds on the GSCCA site are certified to be county-good through May 23, 2012.

Augusta Today and CityStink.net contributors, armed with documents secured via Georgia Open Records Act Requests, the city’s excellent on-line document archives, and the help of several officials inside Augusta government, have taken scrutiny of the proposed parking deck deals to unusual lengths to get the answers to more questions.

Were the contracts for management of the decks put out for bid? Yes.

The City Procurement Director issued Request for Proposals RFP Item #11-087, Managing Augusta Parking Facilities, in January 2011 with a due date for bids to be opened on Friday, February 18, 2011. That the RFP covers the RSPD and the Parking Deck at the Augusta Marriott is established in the Introduction Section I on page 10 of the RFP with, “The Procurement Department… is soliciting proposals to manage and operate the Augusta owned parking facilities located on Reynolds Street in Augusta to include the Parking Deck at the Augusta Marriott and the new Reynolds Street Parking Deck currently under construction.”

Was Augusta Riverfront, LLC the low-bidder? The LLC did not place a bid in response to RFP #11-087, covering the two Augusta owned parking decks between 9th and 10th streets in Augusta.

Augusta Riverfront did not appear as a party on the Pre-Proposal Conference Sign In Sheet of January 28, 2011. It does not appear on the Cumulative Evaluation Sheet. There is no indication that Augusta Riverfront, LLC submitted a bid of any type in response to RFP #11-08.

If another firm offered an acceptable bid, was it recommended and its proposal accepted? The bid of Ampco Parking Systems of Houston, Texas was recommended for acceptance, but all bids were rejected with the knowledge of the City Administrator. 

 

Mr. Richard Acree, Jr., Assistant Director of the Augusta Facilities Management Division wrote, “It is… my recommendation that we award the contract for Bid Item 11-087 to Ampco Parking Systems.” After an exchange of emails on August 5, 2011 between Augusta’s then Recreation Director Tom Beck, Procurement Specialist Nancy Williams, and Administrator Fred Russell, Mr. Beck wrote a letter to Ms. Williams on August 8 directing her to reject all bids associated with RFP #11-087.

 

Are there costly inconsistencies between the sample contract included in the RFP that Ampco Parking System accepted and the one with Augusta Riverfront, LLC that was recommended by the City Administrator for adoption by the City Commission? Apparently. They include:

1. Management Fee.

Ampco quoted a fee for the TWO Decks in the amount of $17,964.00. The fee in the management agreement in 3.1(see page 6) for the Reynolds Street Deck alone with the LLC is $25,000.00. After recovery of the $50,000 rental fee paid to Augusta under the Conference Center Deck agreement on page 3, the LLC gets another $25,000.00 fee.

There is a recommended contract in the RFP which appears to be largely based upon the previous conference center contract with Republic Parking. To be fair, the RFP agreement would have given the management company an incentive fee of 25% (up to 45% based upon increments of $100,000) of net revenues over $150,000 for both decks (page 33), while Augusta gets 100% of the RSPD net revenues, if there are any, with Augusta and the LLC management group sharing net revenues after the rental sum and $25,000.00 fee on the Conference Center Deck.

Why did the City Administrator agree to pay more fee on the RSPD than its recommended bidder quoted for TWO decks? 

2. Liability Insurance

The Deck RFP Addendum 1 stated, “Liability Insurance is to be paid out of the management fee.” However, the RSPD agreement in 9.4 on page 17 states, “Insurance premiums and any cost or expenses with respect to the insurance described in this Article shall be an Operating Expense of the RSPD.” Liability insurance is listed in the Article at 9.1.

Why did the conditionally awarded agreement with the LLC shift the liability insurance costs from the management firm to the city?

3. Operating Expense Limitations

The designated contract within Augusta’s RFP 11-087, page 32 of the RFP package, limits operating expenses to enumerated expenses and, “other expenses as authorized and included in an operating budget approved in advance by AUGUSTA.” This provision was accepted by Ampco. The agreement conditionally accepted by Augusta with the LLC contains no such requirement, broadly defining “operating expenses” outside of the Annual Plan to include, “any other expenses incurred in the operation of the RSPD that would be considered operating expenses under GAAP.” GAAP means Generally Accepted Accounting Principles.

Why doesn’t the agreement with the LLC limit what can be considered an operating expense to those expenses enumerated in the Annual Plan and authorized by Augusta?

4. Expenses Allowed Under the Annual Plan

Ampco submitted a bid compliant with Augusta requirements that included an annual budget. This budget shows expenses of $21,557. The management fee of $17,964.00 was added to this balance to arrive at total expenses of $39,521.00. Since the Ampco proposal covers both parking decks, adjusting the expenses to a factor of 0.54 (the ratio of RSPD parking spaces to total parking spaces in both decks) produces $21,341.43 in total non-labor operating expenses for the RSPD for the first year.

South Augusta community activist Juanita Burney submitted a Georgia Open Records Act Request to the city’s Law Department seeking the annual plan for the RSPD as submitted by selected management firm Augusta Riverfront, LLC. After some delay and a follow-up request, she received documents including undated cover letters from Augusta Riverfront, LLC, accompanying one 12 month budget for 2012 dated August 29, 2011 and an 11 month budget dated January 26, 2012.

The August 2011 budget was used for comparison purposes, as it covered 12 months and was closer in timing to the Ampco budget. The LLC budget for expenses totaled $83,818.00, but $29,505.00 related to Augusta-provided utility costs and credit card fees which were outside of those listed within the RFP. This brought the total costs down to $54,113.00, which were higher than the Ampco adjusted total by $32,771.66. Bear in mind that the Ampco agreement only limited the manager to the specific types of expenses listed, but not totals, so actual costs may have exceeded the budget for Ampco.

Did the Augusta Administrator consider the budgeted expense differential between the rejected, but deemed compliant Ampco proposal and the much higher Augusta Riverfront budget? If not, why not?

5. Labor Costs Under the Annual Budget

Ampco’s labor budget was $212,225.00, plus labor burden of $44,444.00 for a total of $256,669.00, with the RSPD portion (0.54) totaling $138,601.26. Augusta Riverfront LLC’s labor budget was $95,150.00, plus labor burden of $27,402.00, for a total of $122, 552.00, or $16,049.26 less. Most of the extra cost from Ampco was the inclusion of a Supervisor and from unusually high worker compensation costs.

As noted above, Ampco would seem to have been limited to the costs enumerated in its budget by the terms of the proposed agreement. The LLC can add costs that fall under GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles). Also, the language of 5.3 on page 8, of the RSPD Management Agreement states that the Manager determines the personnel necessary to operate the RSPD and in paragraph (f) on page 9 states that the Manager can assign, “shared employees.”

Are there sufficient contract controls over the assignment of additional staff and shared employees for Augusta when the Manager has this level of discretion? 

6. Operating Cost Advance 

The terms of the RFP, and accepted by Ampco, states in Article 3, paragraph 4, “The Operator shall be granted an operating fund advance equivalent to 2 months operating expenses, to be credited against the first two months of operation.” The terms of the LLC agreement on page 11, in 6.2, provides for an ongoing 90 day operation expense fund balance.

Is the fund balance sufficiently offset by the LLC’s funding of the other deck agreement? 

7. Capital Budget

 

The RFP and Ampco proposal contained no separate capital budget. The LLC budget included a schedule entitled, “Equipment – Startup Cost,” which included a Riding Sweeper at an estimated cost of $59,000. The schedule also included additional cost of Freight and Tax. The Conference Center Deck Agreement in Paragraph 4 (page 5) states, “With respect to any equipment owned by by Landlord but used for both the RSPD and the Demised Premises, Tenant shall pay a fair rental rate for the use of said equipment, as set forth in the Annual Plan in effect for the RSPD Management Agreement.” No credit was found in the proposed RSPD budget for that sweeper, so perhaps it will be used only in the RSPD.

If the capital equipment was purchased via an Augusta bank account with Augusta funds, wouldn’t the purchase be exempt from (sales) tax? Will the prorated fair rental costs for RSPD capital equipment be included in the Annual Plan?

8. Credit Card Fees 

The initial Annual Budget for 2012 proposed by the LLC includes an expense item for credit card fees. However, “Operating Revenues” includes discounts for credit card fees, which is consistent with the RFP sample contract.

 

**Could this give rise to double reimbursement of credit card fees?

 

Summary 
 

Augusta had a long running contract with Republic Parking that seems to have been the basis for its sample RFP contract. Ampco Parking did not find this contract objectionable and accepted large portions of it. In general, why are the agreements the City Administrator recommended so much more flexible in terms of internal controls? Will the relative infrequency of reporting and manager control over revenues and expenses provide Augusta with sufficient information to assure that potential conflicts of interest, alluded to in Article 5.1.b of the RSPD Management Agreement, have not arisen? Did the Administrator use the Ampco bid terms, conditions, and costs to negotiate the best deal possible for Augusta?

Questions abound with these deck arrangements. We could ask questions approaching the number of parking spaces in these parking decks. The Augusta Commission should have asked them before rushing to approve the parking deck agreements, too. ***

– Bradley Owens
 
*Contributing to this report were Cost Recovery Specialist Al Gray, with South Augusta Community activist Juanita Burney and Harrisburg Community activist Lori Davis.
 

Forward to Redemption in a Generational Crisis

  By ,

Horns of Despair to Horns of Jericho

Originally posted on CityStink
Wednesday May, 27 2012
Augusta, GA
By Al Gray

The author, Al M. Gray, was President of Cost Recovery Works, Inc., a provider of Cost Avoidance and Cost Recovery for America’s leading companies, businesses and governments desiring Superior Returns. Cost Recovery Works is no longer in business, as of December 31, 2020.

In 1997 William Strauss and Neil Howe authored a book entitled The Fourth Turning: An American Prophecy – What the Cycles of History Tell Us About America’s Next Rendezvous with Destiny.

This provocative book posits, “Just after the millennium, America will enter a new era that will culminate with a crisis comparable to the American Revolution, the Civil War, the Great Depression, and World War II. The survival of the nation will almost certainly be at stake.” Strauss and Howe base this vision on a provocative theory of American history as a series of recurring 80- to 100-year cycles. Each cycle has four “turnings”- a High, an Awakening, an Unraveling, and a Crisis. The authors located America in 1997 as, “midway through an Unraveling, roughly a decade away from the next Crisis (or Fourth Turning).” Since the growing, morphing financial, economic, political and moral crisis we are now in started in 2007, the authors look prophetic as to timing.

Others have cited that alternating generations go through enormous crises, because the generation that went through the last crisis must die out, erasing the memory of it, leaving the next generation to fall into the next crisis. The citation of 20 year turnings and being in the Crisis stage brought to mind our story of the day. It comes from the story of Moses’ spies found in Numbers 13 and 14.

13 Then the Lord spoke to Moses saying,

2 “ Send out for yourself men so that they may spy out the land of Canaan, which I am going to give to the sons of Israel; you shall send a man from each of their fathers’ tribes, every one a leader among them.”

3 So Moses sent them from the wilderness of Paran at the command of the Lord, all of them men who were heads of the sons of Israel….

25 When they returned from spying out the land, at the end of forty days, 26 they proceeded to come to Moses and Aaron and to all the congregation of the sons of Israel in the wilderness of Paran, at Kadesh; and they brought back word to them and to all the congregation and showed them the fruit of the land. 27 Thus they told him, and said,

“We went in to the land where you sent us; and it certainly does flow with milk and honey, and this is its fruit.28 Nevertheless, the people who live in the land are strong, and the cities are fortified and very large…”

14 Then all the congregation lifted up their voices and cried, and the people wept that night. 2All the sons of Israel grumbled against Moses and Aaron; and the whole congregation said to them:

“Would that we had died in the land of Egypt! Or would that we had died in this wilderness! 3 Why is the Lord bringing us into this land, to fall by the sword? Our wives and our little ones will become plunder; would it not be better for us to return to Egypt?” 

4 So they said to one another,

“Let us appoint a leader and return to Egypt……”

26 The Lord spoke to Moses and Aaron, saying,

27 “How long shall I bear with this evil congregation who are grumbling against Me? I have heard the complaints of the sons of Israel, which they are making against Me. 28 Say to them, ‘As I live,’ says the Lord, ‘just as you have spoken in My hearing, so I will surely do to you; 29  your corpses will fall in this wilderness, even all your numbered men, according to your complete number from twenty years old and upward, who have grumbled against Me. 30 Surely you shall not come into the land in which I swore to settle you, except Caleb the son of Jephunneh and Joshua the son of Nun. 31 Your children, however, whom you said would become a prey—I will bring them in, and they will know the land which you have rejected. 32 But as for you, your corpses will fall in this wilderness. 33 Your sons shall be shepherds for forty years in the wilderness, and they will suffer for your unfaithfulness, until your corpses lie in the wilderness. 34 According to the number of days which you spied out the land, forty days, for every day you shall bear your guilt a year, even forty years, and you will know My opposition. 35 I, the Lord, have spoken, surely this I will do to all this evil congregation who are gathered together against Me. In this wilderness they shall be destroyed, and there they will die.’”

36 As for the men whom Moses sent to spy out the land and who returned and made all the congregation grumble against him by bringing out a bad report concerning the land, 37even those men who brought out the very bad report of the land died by a plague before the Lord. 38 But Joshua the son of Nun and Caleb the son of Jephunneh remained alive out of those men who went to spy out the land.

The power of resistance to change that we visited in last week’s message was clearly at work with the Israelites. Like Simon Peter, they treated the miracles that the Lord had wrought for them and before them as yesterday’s news. They rushed to compare the relative security of lives in bondage in Egypt – even their lives wandering in wilderness – to the dangers of confrontation and war necessary to take the Promised Land. The promises of milk, honey, and bounteous harvests were a venture into the unknown setting off internal conflicts that were more easily resolved in seeking return to the past.

Relative to The Fourth Turning cycle theory, Moses’ people broke the bonds of slavery to leave Egypt at the middle of an Unraveling stage. Their memories of security, albeit security in bondage, conflicted with what should have been excitement over the future and taking ACTION to secure it. Strauss and Howe say, “Eventually, cynical alienation hardens into a brooding pessimism. During a High, obliging individuals serve a purposeful society, and even bad people get harnessed to socially constructive tasks; during an Unraveling, an obliging society serves purposeful individuals, and even good people find it hard to connect with their community. The approaching specter of public disaster ultimately elicits a mix of paralysis and apathy that would have been unthinkable half a saeculum earlier. People can now feel, but collectively can no longer do.”

By declaring that no one under the age of 20 would enter the Promised Land, the Lord was using the demographics of aging to eliminate the generation that fled Egypt with their sinful disdain of faith in Him wrapped fitfully in cognitive dissonance or resistance to change. This was the Crisis stage. The people were dependent upon the Lord and would do nothing to help themselves. Concurrently with killing off the generation of failures, the Lord used the forty years in the wilderness to allow the second half of the Crisis stage to prepare the people to work for their final deliverance into the Promised Land.

As the 4th Turning continues, “A CRISIS arises in response to sudden threats that previously would have been ignored or deferred, but which are now perceived as dire. Great worldly perils boil off the clutter and complexity of life, leaving behind one simple imperative: The society must prevail. This requires a solid public consensus, aggressive institutions, and personal sacrifice… Eventually, the mood transforms into one of exhaustion, relief, and optimism. Buoyed by a new-born faith in the group and in authority, leaders plan, people hope, and a society yearns for good and simple things.” At the end of the 40 years in the wilderness the Tribes of Israel were at the stage to embrace their free will, not to reject the Lord’s plans for them, but to embrace them.

This writer believes firmly that we are between the Unraveling and Crisis. The great Baby Boom generation knows only prosperity learned in its awakening and continued by self-deceptive, massive debt creation to maintain the unsustainable for the last 30 years, a period during which GDP growth only exceeded debt creation for about one quarter. We are probably 4 years into the Crisis state, so the next decade will see the denouement of the Boomer generation as leaders. The young folks will disavow the debt we have run up to maintain the delusion – that is a mathematical certainty. We went into 2007 and 2008 with average savings of $58,000 outside of our homes. Now many of our homes are underwater by that much. Predictably, most boomers will rage in denial, but they will not change. Look around. Observe. You won’t need to read the Bible or the Fourth Turning to see this if you truly open your eyes.

When one tries to warn Baby Boomers, the nonbelievers ignore him and the believers invariably say, “The Lord is returning soon. I will depend on that!” Yes, he will return as promised and it might be in this Crisis cycle, but isn’t it sinful and presumptuous to pretend to know His timing when He told us we cannot?

How many will be the Joshuas and Calebs of the Boomer generation and embrace what lies ahead, seize opportunity, and become beacons of knowledge and leadership of the young folks? This story, indeed all of human history, says that it will be a small minority. What awaits is a period on High, summarized this way: “A HIGH brings a renaissance to community life. With the new civic order in place, people want to put the Crisis behind them and feel content about what they have collectively achieved.” For the people of Israel, made strong by 40 years in the wilderness, the high meant crossing the Jordan and seizing their destiny. For Caleb and Joshua, it meant that their sacrifice and courage in standing with full faith in the Lord’s promises were rewarded. They prevailed until the walls of Jericho fell to the sound of their horns.

Lord, give us, the wayward Boomers, the strength and faith of Joshua and Caleb. We didn’t deserve the fake prosperity we laid claim to. It is time to make amends. It is time to lead, even though our weary minds and bodies will resist. Most of us won’t make it, but those who do won’t have to cross Jordan alone.

AG

Overlay Somebody Else: My Battle With Columbia County Over Property Rights

  By , , ,

Friday, May 25, 2012
Evans, GA
By Al Gray

New Year’s Day in the year 2000 did not find this writer worried about the world’s computer systems crashing because of the Y2K or much of anything else. Two new clients and two projects in Missouri – a state-of-the-art hot dog plant and a deli meat production facility beckoned. It was a very lucrative contract that took me away from the Augusta area, as nearly all of them have. A most successful bowhunting season had just been concluded. The parents were still able to take care of themselves. 1999 had been good, but 2000 would be even better. It did not start that way, January 1 pleasantries not withstanding.

Sometime in February, after trudging through 15 inches of snow in St. Joe, MO, I returned to my motel room just in time to catch a call from my parents. It seems that they had gotten an official notice about an ‘overlay’ zoning ordinance to cover something called the Evans Town Center Overlay District (ETCOD). It concerned them that the county was looking to pass some sort of control over their commercially zoned property on Washington Road. We were not totally surprised, having attended one of the planning meetings for the town center at Savannah Rapids Pavilion.

Actually seeing the map of ETCOD was an eye-opener. It was a gerrymandered map that looked like a headless woman in a dress stumbling like a zombie. Then there was the matter of the text of the proposed ordinance. It banned any store over 30,000 square feet, imposed expensive architectural upgrades, and made plans to completely rework the zoning map via overlay zoning to impose government land use planning instead of free market economics. It was aimed straight at our family, who had decades long plans for a major shopping center to the west of Ronald Reagan Drive. Worse, it would have ruined decades of planning along with previous county officials which included gifted water and sewer easements and providing for a road into a subdivision.

The night of the first Planning Commission meeting, the elite of the Augusta and Columbia County development sector was in attendance. Your scribe had never made a public speech before. Knees shaking from fear and voice quavering, my speech might have gotten off to a disastrous start, but the first order of business was to loosen things up by poking fun at the gerrymandered map. The room exploded with laughter. A key point was made that the map was discriminatory, lacking uniformity of application. The county attorney would later agree, forcing new notices to be sent to everyone in a 3500 acre circle. Up behind the lectern, a transformation took place. The meek accountants knees were still knocking, but the cause had turned from fear to RAGE!

Things have not been the same since.

When the county was forced to make ETCOD a uniform circle, the action resulted in our family gaining scores of new allies against ETCOD. Even one of the chief proponents realized our position because her family’s land was now in the overlay zone! She exclaimed in a meeting. “We don’t want those rules on OUR PROPERTY!” Neither did a lot of folks. When the planning commission decided to ram through ETCOD, two of the commissioners stayed home in fear. The 3 left decided to ram the vote for the ordinance through. The entire room, it seemed, leaped to their feet and shouted “NO!!!!!!” It was the closest thing to a riot that Columbia County has seen in a public meeting in modern times. The county commission appointed a citizen’s committee headed by contractor Ron Cross to work out a compromise. The Evans Town Center Ordinance was birthed eventually, but the baby was a lot trimmer and caused less labor pain.

There were other battles to come. They are best left to another day.

The salvation of our family came in the form of gifts from our founding fathers. The 5th and 14th amendments to the United States Constitution provide each of us, as citizens with guarantees of Equal Protection Under the Law and that we cannot be deprived of property without Due Process of Law. More recently Columbia County implemented Corridor Overlays, Lincoln County did the same, and last year Augusta attempted to enact a flawed Laney Walker Bethlehem Overlay District. In each instance it was a privilege to help fellow citizens being assailed with threats to their rights from overlay zoning.

Pertinent to today’s events, in which the diabolical Agenda 21 plan is infiltrating all levels of government, the Evans Town Center Plan developed by consultants Rosser- Lowe, was even then replete with references to “smart growth” and “sustainable development.” You have to remember that Columbia County is a solid Republican County, not a place one would suspect that a socialist agenda could take root in. We have to be constantly vigilant everywhere.

The Evans Town Center Plan was supposedly based upon town centers in Redmond, Washington; Reston, Virginia; and Smyrna, Georgia. A key component of largely defeating ETCOD was this analysis comparing those places with the Evans Town Center.

ETCOD BATTLE CHART

When one can dissect the planner’s plans and turn the evidence against them, he can win huge victories against the odds, for the truth overwhelms the planners and allies arrive in droves.

A County Commissioner and two Planning Commissioners said that the ETCOD was a “Done Deal.”

Well, it came UNDONE.

Thanks founders, for the Constitution. Agenda 21? That’s just another undone deal of our making.***

AG

Related Stories: