Tag: Augusta Politics

Deeds and Misdeeds: A “Chronicle” of Promises to Donate Land for TEE Center/Parking Deck

  By , ,

“Donate the land? We were only joking!”

Originally posted on CityStink
Monday, Jan. 30, 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.

As the Augusta Commission wrangles over terms for the management contract  with Augusta Riverfront, LLC over the new $12 million Reynolds Street Parking Deck and the TEE Center still under construction, we must be reminded that this is not the first time this massive project has hit roadblocks and been mired in controversy. In fact, this has been an ongoing saga for more than six years, since voters approved $20,000,000 in SPLOST funds for a Trade and Exhibit Center on the Fall General Election ballot in 2005.

Dirty Deeds Not Done Cheap: A Time Line

As we told you in our breaking news story last Thursday: TEE Center Parking Deck Air Rights Gone With The Wind, not only was the land under the parking deck never deeded over to the city by 933 Broad Investment, LLC (as commissioners were told it would be), but we also discovered liens on the property held by Wells Fargo Bank (formerly Wachovia) as collateral for a loan to Augusta Riverfront, LLC, totaling over $7,000,000! But we also found out that Augusta Riverfront, LLC also still retains ownership of a parcel under the TEE Center itself across the street that was supposed to be deeded to the city.

Since Augusta Riverfront, LLC  is ultimately headed by Augusta Chronicle publisher William (Billy) S. Morris III, it seems only fitting to turn to his paper to help fill in the paper trail on the true story behind the land deeds.

We found a Chronicle story from January 13, 2007 by staff writer Laura Youngs (Editor’s Note: the article is no longer available online.) At that time, a TEE Center task force had just finished negotiating a revised operating agreement with Augusta Riverfront, LLC for the TEE Center and recommended the facility be built on land adjacent to the Augusta Marriot Hotel and Suites owned by Augusta Riverfront, LLC. Under the agreement then, Augusta Riverfront, LLC had, “AGREED TO DEED THEIR LAND over to the city for the TEE Center.”

Deeding the land was viewed by some commissioners at the time as a quid pro quo for the generous operating agreement that had the city paying Augusta Riverfront, LLC $350,000 a year for operating expenses and capital improvement costs for running the center, in addition to it being connected to their hotel. The TEE Center was being built entirely with public money.

But commissioners continued to balk at the operating agreement as being too lopsided in favor of the interests of Augusta Riverfront, LLC, with taxpayers assuming most of the financial risk. So it stalled again.

Fast forward to July of that same year. Now we find  a July 8th, 2007 guest column in The Chronicle penned by Augusta Convention and Visitors Bureau (CVB) Barry White and CVB President and CEO Phil Wahl. They both sing the praises of Augusta Riverfront, LLC and their generous offer to donate their riverfront land for the facility, writing, “Not only does Augusta Riverfront, LLC bring proven expertise, it has offered to donate to the city downtown real estate valued at an estimated $1 million. The LLC also will pay annual center operating expenses over $250,000 and capital improvements over $100,000 a year.”

Donation of the land was one of the major selling points to commissioners for locating the TEE Center next to the Augusta Riverfront, LLC owned Augusta Marriot Hotel & Suites and awarding them the operations contract.

Now fast forward to 2009. The TEE Center project is still stalled because now it is learned that the facility will cost nearly double the $20,000,000 voters had approved in the 2005 SPLOST. That news had many people rethinking the whole deal altogether and even suggesting alternatives, such as renovating existing facilities to use  with the initial amount from the SPLOST. Former Augusta Mayor Bob Young penned a guest column that appeared in The Chronicle on September 27, 2009 (Editor’s Note: article is no longer available online) that suggested the James Brown Arena could be expanded and essentially function as a TEE Center at a significantly lower cost than building a new facility. Also, the city already had a management contract with Global Spectrum to operate the arena and this could cover the TEE functions as well, instead of entering into a separate contract with Augusta Riverfront, LLC for a new facility on the riverfront.

A rebuttal to the former Mayor’s column appeared a week later in The Chronicle from former Augusta CVB treasurer and chairman Abram Serotta, telling us that the “TEE project MUST be ok’d.“ Mr Serotta once again brings up the issue of land ownership at the Reynolds Street site, writing, “Land purchases have been negotiated and, in total, the city has invested more than half-a-million dollars in the project to date.”

Bad Investment

But some critics were trying to tell us that spending  money on a TEE Center was just simply a bad investment, period. Commissioner Betty Beard had made a motion in September 2009 to see what it would cost to bring Dr Heywood Sanders, a professor in the College of Public Policy at the University of Texas-San Antonio to Augusta to rebut claims being made by Barry White of The CVB and others that a TEE Center would be an economic boon. Dr. Sanders authored the 2005 Brookings Institution study: Space Available: The Realities of Convention Centers as Economic Development Strategy, which debunks many of the myths about convention centers being significant economic stimulators.

In a Sept. 16, 2009 Augusta Chronicle article by Johnny Edwards, it is stated that, “Dr. Sanders said cities throughout the country are losing money on trade centers and, desperate to book events, are offering discounts and incentives that make competition even stiffer.”

In the end, Dr. Sanders was never consulted by the Commission and the TEE Center and a new parking deck were approved on Dec. 9, 2009.

In a Dec. 10, 2011 Chronicle article by La Tina Emerson we learned that the CVB is having difficulties with booking conventions for the facility still under construction.

Commissioners Ask Questions About Land Ownership

Commissioners were told repeatedly by Fred Russell at that Dec. 9th 2009 commission meeting that land parcels for the parking deck and for the TEE Center itself owned by Augusta Riverfront, LLC would be donated to the city. Commissioner JR Hatney brought the issue up and asked for clarification from Fred Russell. Below are excerpts from the minutes of that meeting.

Hatney: “The other question I would ask to our Administrator I remember when we talked about the parking deck before. We were not so warm on that issue and the volume was $500,000 and you’ve come back and you said you were going come back with a lower scale because it would be more cost effective to go ahead and do that then to I believe pay a $1.1 million or something like that on I guess the lease or rent or whatever you do and still that eventually buy the property. You said this property’s going to be given? Talk to me.”

 

Russell: “I need the map. There we go.  If you look at the round area up there, there if you look at that brown area would be the area that we’re looking at for the building the parking deck. And then if you look at the two areas that are not being donated, one of which belongs to the radio station which is a, sorry about that. That’s where the hotdog stand is. That’s owned by a private individual. The other part of the place is owned by WAGT Television. The balance of that is owned by Riverfront Development and that’s the property that’s going to be donated.”

 

and later on in the minutes….

Hatney: “About donating the site, about donating? Did we check with them yet on the possibilities?”

 Russell:   “They’ve agreed to donate the property. ”

Commissioner Betty Beard had earlier raised questions about land ownership at a July 7th, 2009 commission meeting with Fred Russell.

At this meeting Fred Russell was referencing a map outlining the various land parcels that the city would need to acquire or would be donated for the parking deck and TEE Center:

Russell: “I haven’t finalized anything waiting for your approval but I’m getting very close to giving you the final documents on all three if not the schematic designs, the land acquisition and the operating agreements. Land acquisition, the green part is the park for the TEE Center. The area in black is owned by the Riverfront Development Corporation or some subsidy there is, there are. They will be donating that property towards the completion of the TEE Center. The other two pieces of property in negotiation are the Lock Shop and the warehouse building on the corner.”

The green part that Russell is referring to on the map is a parcel under where the TEE Center would be built that Augusta Riverfront, LLC had agreed to deed over to the city, as we told you earlier in the Chronicle paper trail. And as we told you last week, Augusta Riverfront, LLC still owns that parcel. It was never deeded to the city as promised.

Betty Beard asks for clarification about this parcel at the July 7, 2009 meeting:

Ms. Beard: — what are they donating again?

Mr. Russell: The area in the black is the property that they own.

Ms. Beard: In the black?

Mr. Russell: The little black square up there, green, I’m sorry.

Mr. Mayor: Outlined in black.

Ms. Beard: Oh across the street.

Mr. Russell: That’s the location of the TEE Center itself.

 

And later in the minutes Betty Beard had the foresight to bring up the issue of  the significance of Air Rights regarding the parking deck:

Ms. Beard: In one part of the information it said air rights would be donated.

Mr. Russell: I’d like to talk about that a little bit later. That gets into the parking issue and there’s a couple items we’ve got there that we need to talk about if you don’t mind.

Ms. Beard: Well, what about the Trade Center itself?

Mr. Russell: That’s the green property.

Ms. Beard: I mean the air rights.

Mr. Russell: We build a building there. The air rights would not be significant. It would be part of the building itself.

Ms. Beard: I don’t know why people say they are not significant. Okay. 

Betty Beard was right. The issue of air rights are extremely significant, as we now know  that is all the city ended up with for the parking deck as the land was never donated by Augusta Riverfront, LLC. And the green parcel across the street under the TEE Center that Beard references was also never deeded to the city. So what about the air rights over there for the TEE Center?

Today the Augusta Commission meets in committee to decide whether to approve a revised management contract with Augusta Riverfront, LLC for the parking deck and TEE Center. It would be wise for them to hold off on that until this matter can be investigated further. Rushing into things without having all of the pertinent information is what initially put them into this mess and rushing now into another bad contract is certainly not the way out of it. We will have an update on this story as it becomes available. Stay tuned.***

Fred Russell is Running Out of Excuses

  By , ,

Originally posted by CityStink
Friday, Jan. 27, 2012
Augusta, GA
Commentary
By The Outsider

Contributions were made to this article by Al M. Gray, 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.

Just how many more major screw-ups from Fred Russell will Augusta Commissioners tolerate?  Well it doesn’t get much bigger than the total clustermuck over the TEE Center Parking Deck. As we told you with our breaking news story yesterday: TEE Center Parking Deck Air Rights Gone With The Wind!, not only does the city not own the land under the deck, but that land has liens on it held by Wells Fargo Bank (formerly Wachovia) for use as collateral on a loan for over $ 7 million to Augusta Riverfront, LLC, the same entity seeking the management contract for the deck and the TEE Center. That not only puts the city at a huge disadvantage in the negotiations over the management contract, but it also appears to leave taxpayers at risk of losing their $12 million asset if Augusta Riverfront, LLC defaults on their loan. That’s a position the city should have never been put in.

But that’s exactly where we are. And what’s Fred’s response? Well this is what he told George Eskola of WJBF yesterday:

“We’ve got lawyers, we got bond attorneys, we’ve got everybody who’s charted around, thinking this is safely where we need to be. At the end of the day and people on the sidelines are having issues.”

Oh really? I suppose the, “people on the sidelines” Russell is referring to are the citizen activists like Lori Davis, members of Augusta Today and City Stink who exposed this new bombshell. And we have to wonder if this news would have ever come out if not for the tenacity of  these citizen activists. It appears that commissioners were completely surprised by these revelations. Mayor Pro-tem Joe Bowles said in George Eskola’s report:

“We didn’t know that, of course, and that’s something we just got information on. I’m waiting for clarification from our attorneys. If we built a building on property that, you know, secured debt for somebody, I do have a serious issue with that.”

We are glad that the Mayor Pro-tem is taking this issue seriously, but he and other commissioners and the Mayor should be more than just concerned, they should be downright outraged. It seems that the more layers of the TEE Center/Parking Deck onion you peel away the more rotten it gets. And it appears that commissioners have been left in the dark through the entire process. And who’s job is it to keep commissioners in the loop? City administrator Fred Russell.

Russell knew about the liens, but neglected to tell commissioners. But Russell also told commissioners the land would be donated for the deck, but neglected to inform them again when that changed to only “air rights.” How can commissioners continue to have confidence in a city administrator who consistently leaves them in the dark on some of the most important and expensive issues facing the city?

And it’s not like this is the first time. Russell cost the taxpayers hundreds of thousands more than it should have cost to terminate incompetent employees because he did not keep accurate records of their true job performance and then he negotiated their very generous golden parachutes. When commissioners gave Russell more authority over personnel matters, he took that as an opportunity to award generous raises to over 40 select employees, when commissioners were looking for more cuts to balance the budget. We could take up an entire column on previous Russell screw-ups, but we will leave that for another time.

Now Russell is saying that the issue of the bank liens on the property where the $12 million parking deck sits is just a matter of some “loose ends” that need to be tied up by “the lawyers.” Oh really? Well shouldn’t all of these “loose ends” had been taken care of before the city built a $12 million parking deck with taxpayer’s money on land it doesn’t even own that has liens against it? Who would build a house on someone else’s property that had bank liens against it? You don’t need a degree in finance to understand the stupidity of these actions. And Russell’s excuses just aren’t adding up.

And what about those lawyers? Russell is not the only one to blame here. Commissioners should also have some serious questions for attorney Jim Plunkett, who handled most of the legal transactions and bond financing for the city over the TEE Center, the parking deck, and the Laney-Walker/Bethlehem Redevelopment. Surely Plunkett knew about the liens, so why did he not take care of clearing up those “loose ends” before the city started up the bulldozers on the construction of the $12 million parking deck? Why were the bonds issued before the liens and other ownership issues were taken care of? And should we expect any similar surprises over the transactions involving the Laney-Walker/Bethlehem redevelopment with its bond financing inextricably tied to the TEE Center/parking deck?

Plunkett has a long relationship with the city in handling legal matters involving these public-private partnership real-estate ventures. Records show that the city paid the Sherman, Plunkett and Hamilton firm $577,538 for outside legal work last year. Susan McCord documented the particulars in a series of articles. She wrote, “Jim Plunkett specializes in economic development legal work, such as the public-private partnerships between Augusta and operators of the Trade, Exhibit and Event Center and the Laney-Walker and Bethlehem redevelopment project.” (Editor’s Note: January 8, 2012 article by Susan McCord no longer available online.)

But in this case it appears it was the private interests being protected and the public’s interest was being put at great financial risk. We have to wonder if this is the first time something like this has happened regarding one of these Public-Private Partnership real-estate developments, or is it just the first time it has been exposed? Perhaps that’s something for investigative journalists to look into.

But now the ball is in the commissioners’ court. How will they proceed  over the management agreement with Augusta Riverfront, LLC with these revelations? And how will they deal with this latest Fred Russell screw-up? And what about that forensic audit that commissioners approved back in December to look into irregularities over the land deals involved in the TEE Center Parking Deck? Should that not be expanded to included the entire TEE Center and the Laney-Walker redevelopment? And why would commissioners trust Fred Russell to help choose the auditing firm to essentially investigate him? And can commissioners now truly trust Russell to negotiate a deal over a proposed downtown ballpark with Ripken Baseball in the best interest of the taxpayers? Maybe it’s time for commissioners to rescind that vote on tasking Fred Russell to develop a creative financing package for that ballpark. Can they really trust Russell with handling another multi-million dollar development after this?

Ok, commissioners, it’s up to you now. It’s time to stop dragging your feet on the forensic audit. And it’s time for you to honestly reevaluate the confidence you have placed in city administrator Fred Russell. Oh, and we’re still waiting to see some leadership from Mayor Deke Copenhaver on this issue. Time is running out and the public is watching.***

Stay Tuned. More is to come on this issue.

Breaking News! TEE Center Parking Deck Air Rights Gone With The Wind!

  By , ,

!!CityStink Exclusive!!

No Police Protection, Just a Liened Deck?

Originally posted on CityStink
January 26, 2012
Posted at 1:37pm
Augusta, GA

By Lori Davis

Contributions were made to this article by Al M. Gray, 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.

Let me say right now I am not a real estate expert. I can only speak from years of owning, buying and selling homes. Every time I bought a house and financed it, there was a security deed recorded by the bank that had to be satisfied before I could sell it or at the time of the sale. My lawyers would get a cancellation of the security deed recorded so that the property liens would be ended. We all know and have been through this.I first raised my concerns about irregularities with the ownership of the land under the TEE Center and companion parking deck in an article that appeared in City Stink on January 11, 2012. See: TEE Center LLC Trap. At the time the local media paid little attention to my findings. Well, I think this new information may change that.

Why didn’t Augusta Richmond County worry about cancellation of a series of security deeds, security deed modifications, and financing statements filed against the land 933 Broad, LLC owns under the TEE Center deck? Why wasn’t this done before Augusta built a $12 million structure on top of this land it doesn’t own? (please see documents at the bottom of this story)

The very simple real estate indexes at the clerk of court’s office show no cancellation of these security deed filings. Where are the cancellations?

IF there were no cancellations, and all of this paperwork is still good, hasn’t our city-county government made one of the biggest errors any of us has ever seen? Whose parking deck is it now, anyway? If the TEE Center and deck management deal is for 15 years, is the deck that landowner’s at the end of just 15 years?

IF the landowner defaults on the loans, won’t Augusta lose its prized $12 million facility to the bank? There are no filings establishing any rights whatsoever of Augusta to this land, as far as I know and what previous media reports have told us.

IF the loans are still in place, how is the interest on the loans going to count against the Tee Center profit and losses that Augusta shares in?

IF the city had not established a value of more than $2.1 million an acre (based on land swap and hot dog operator buy-out costs) for Senator Jackson’s .07 acre corner, what would have claimed as the land value? The tax assessor’s value? If Augusta has to buy the land after the fact, what will it cost after this charade?

IF all the liens are there, why on earth would the commission want to rush approval of the TEE Center and deck deal before Bill Lockett and the 5 other commissioners’ forensic audit is done? Why the rush? I think we know now.

Can the other LLC, Augusta Riverfront, borrow against the parcel that it owns under the Tee Center itself? It doesn’t look like there are security deeds on it, but that side of the street is a huge complicated blizzard of paperwork. I get a headache looking at this stuff.

How did Fred Russell expect to get any rights at all without running into the deeds? I got it – we got air rights!

The people got air rights while somebody got a free $50 million facility? Over in Harrisburg bullets fill our air because Ronnie Strength’s budgets get slashed. If you think I am angry over this, you are right!

I am not a lawyer, but these are questions that demand answers and accountability.

Does anybody in Augusta’s administration have a clue? As of the writing of this story, City Administrator Fred Russell has confirmed that liens still do exist on the property where the deck is located. Wonder why he never informed the commissioners about this?

Fred has to go.***Stay Tuned to WJBF News 6 tonight for George Eskola’s report on this story

Below are some of the documents supporting this article (3 separate .pdfs total)
There are more documents that will be released in due time, so stay tuned.

933 Broad Plat

933 1st UCC

2010 933 UCC

Sen. Hardie Davis’ Tax-Free Energy Drink

  By , ,


Taste Grates, Less Filling

Orginally posted on CityStink
January 14, 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.

When Augusta Democrat Senator Hardie Davis heartily endorsed Nathan Deal’s latest financial brainstorm, the elimination of sales and USE tax on energy used in manufacturing, we were surprised for a host of reasons, the main one being that it will cost Augusta Richmond County $millions in lost tax revenue. In a time that the state and municipal governments are desperate for revenue, Davis wants to give away stable sources of sales taxes that cannot be replaced? He wants to shift the Georgia tax burden from corporations to constituents on fixed incomes, like social security recipients?

Then it hit us. Hardie Davis is switching to the Republican Party. Good for him. It will be a marriage made in heaven – the Gold Dome. It might be even smart politics. Everyone involved can guzzle tax free energy drinks courtesy of the Georgia Traditional Manufacturers Association (TIPAC). The legislators have a ken for fun drinks, but to constituents this one grates the tongue and doesn’t fill the revenue coffers with anything more than hot air.

If Hardie isn’t going GOP, he has sure failed us with a stellar imitation. Right about now, Hardie and every other GOP hawker of this money give-away are screaming about passing this exemption to become “competitive.” Change the word to “cannibalistic” and you about have it. What this give-away does is to strip Augusta Richmond County and the 13 county region of $11 million of sales tax revenues over 10 years, if you believe the projections underlying the huge new transportation tax increase. This writer knows the losses to be far worse. You can multiply that $11 million (see page 11) by 4 – the loss on the new 1% transportation tax, plus the existing 3% local, special, and educational taxes, for a stunning $44 million over ten years! If the legislators tinker with not having the exemptions apply to local sales, that subverts the simplicity always cited for a sales tax.

Just one Augusta manufacturer provided a written statement in 2010 to the Georgia Tax Reform Council that indicated that her plant pays $2 million a year in state sales taxes on electricity and a staggering $1.5 million a year in local Augusta Richmond County taxes. Right about now some of you readers are exclaiming, “The consumers of the plant’s products really pay those sales taxes!” Right. The problem is that the vast majority of consumers paying the embedded Georgia and Augusta tax of our manufacturers are in other states. Tax payments by consumers spread the revenues around so that they come to rest outside of Georgia. Does this still sound like a good idea?

The $1.5 million Augusta will lose from that plant on SALES taxes is probably dwarfed by USE taxes that are paid by every Augusta manufacturer that uses a heating process loop in any of their production and manufacturing utility systems. This new exemption also covers industrial fuels, such as coal, natural gas, or diesel fuel in addition to electricity. This revenue loss could easily be between another $2 million and $3.5 million of Augusta local taxes (without the new transportation tax). How will Augusta make up the loss of $3.5 to $5 million of local tax? Is it that easy? On the state tax side of the ledger, doesn’t Georgia need the corresponding $7 million or so to pay teachers?

We sympathize with Georgia companies who are hurting, but what about her people?

The Hardie Davis tax free energy drink won’t sustain financial life in a host of other Georgia municipalities with similar concentrations of manufacturing, such as Chatham, Glynn, and Daugherty counties. Even worse will be the unsuspecting smaller counties with an unknown large energy user. State sales tax reporting to counties doesn’t show the source of the revenues, so many really don’t know what is about to hit them. For example, even though the textile industry has moved largely offshore, electricity-guzzling yarn plants have remained in Georgia and the USA. Can little Rabun County afford the loss of $1 million in sales taxes? Heard? Mitchell? Putnam? Effingham? Bartow?

Proponents of the tax free energy treat cite competitiveness needs between the states. This has some validity, as other states have chosen to cannibalize tax revenues in a futile attempt to overcome the $30 an hour labor cost difference with China, just as Georgia has futilely spent as much as $168,000 per $40,000 auto plant job in the race for our politicians to claim some very strange bragging rights. This will be just throwing good money after bad.

Since the justification for this tax break is to attract new plants one compromise that could be made comes out of Georgia’s own manufacturing tax rules from the 1980’s. Back then, a new manufacturer or a major plant expansion qualified for new exemptions, while existing ones had to be content with the incentive packages that they received upon building in Georgia. This would satisfy the lack of competitiveness for new plants without destroying the fruits of the past and the revenues of many Georgia counties with them.

That we would welcome Hardily and Senator Davis could keep his Democratic Party bona fides. Who knows, Augusta even might get an energy drink bottler, with $168,000 per job incentives, of course. Better yet, let’s return good old fashioned mathematics to the legislature. Professor Davis can lead our way instead of drinking Gov. Nathan Deal’s Kool-aid.***

AG

CityStink Exclusive: The TEE Center LLC Trap

  By , ,

TEE Center under construction on Reynolds Street
**CityStink Exclusive!**

Originally posted on CityStink
Jan. 11, 2012
Augusta, GA
By Lori Davis

Al M. Gray, President of Cost Recovery Works, Inc., contributed multidisciplinary review techniques in support of this article. Cost Recovery Works is no longer in business, as of December 31, 2020.

On December 1, 2011, several weeks prior to the Augusta Commission’s vote to engage a forensic auditor to investigate the TEE Center Deck ownership fiasco, I submitted an Open Records request to the Augusta Law Department in an attempt to get to the bottom of  the confusing procession of statements coming from Administrator Fred Russell, Mayor Pro Tem Joe Bowles, and others. I received a response to this request from Staff Attorney Kenneth Bray on December 15, 2011.

Most of the information provided dealt with the Laney Walker Overlay. Most of the rest was missing any dates, including the negotiation term sheet and a schedule which was labeled as a modification. The total packet was about an inch and a half thick. After skimming the documents, I called upon Augusta Today and CityStink.net contributor and cost recovery analyst Al Gray to assist in completing my review.

What we found was stunning new information buried in the document pile. I will get to that later.

The first item requested was information relating to the land under the TEE Center Deck being security for any loans or bonds. Since the bonds were known to be general obligation bonds and were tied to the Laney Walker project funding, this was precautionary, with no documents necessarily expected to come back from the Law Department. They provided the bond package for the combined Laney Walker and TEE Center funding.

Emails and any other correspondence relating to the deck between any and all Augusta government parties were requested. None were returned. The Law Department cited pretty wide attorney-client privilege. I was very disappointed by that, given publicized remarks attributed to outside counsel Jim Plunkett about events surrounding the failure to have the various parcels under the parking deck donated by Augusta Riverfront, LLC. Much has been said of discussions of air rights. I hoped to get clarification of that. It looks like the forensic auditor might run into immediate stone walling, based upon the response to my inquiry.

Since Mayor Pro Tem Bowles has spoken on The Austin Rhodes Show and elsewhere of having saved the city $1.5 million due to the ownership and financing, I thought that the request would have at least produced the analysis upon which he was basing his claimed savings. I guessed wrong. Do you suppose the savings are the same place as Augusta taxpayers’ property rights with the deck, which is “up in the air?”

A really obscure document I requested was an insurance certificate from TEE Center and Deck contractor R.W. Allen to Augusta Riverfront, LLC, as an additional insured during construction. While this document is not one that Augusta would have in its possession, Augusta’s program manager Heery International probably should have it and it should have been accessible. Not having this insurance document suggests that R.W. Allen thought it was working on land owned by the Augusta government, not owned by Augusta Riverfront, LLC. It also suggests that program manager Heery was caught off guard, too.

I couldn’t form any conclusions as to whether the land under the decks owned by Augusta Riverfront, LLC was to be donated or not because the documents provided conflicted on this point and had no dates to tell me what the final word was. The dating is critical. There was an undated “modification” to the Augusta Riverfront Term Sheet in the package. It might have been created last week, for all the public knows.

The undated, unsigned “Management Agreement Term Sheet” between the City of Augusta and Augusta Riverfront, LLC in paragraph 6 states, “LLC will transfer to Augusta that portion of its property needed to develop the Trade Center and parking, adjacent to the Convention Center. This land transfer, which will not include air rights, will be at no cost to Augusta.” This term sheet seems to have been modified to reverse this part of the transaction. With no dates, it isn’t possible to tell the sequence of events.

What is clear is that Commissioner Johnny Hatney was told several times by Administrator Fred Russell that the land under the deck owned by the LLC was going to be donated at the December 7, 2009 meeting at which the TEE Center was approved by the Augusta Richmond County Commission. Russell did not clarify that only limited air rights were donated. I think most of the public thinks his talk of, “property that’s going to be donated,” means just that, not “air rights.” Besides, there are schedules that were presented to the commission that show the value of the “Donated Property,” $464,353, as being the assessed value, not plus or minus the “air rights.”

Amazingly, Parcel 037-3-047-00-0, land under the $38 million TEE Center itself, remains owned by Augusta Riverfront, LLC. There have been no recordings with the Clerk of Court Office documenting any changes in the ownership rights with this piece of land, including air rights. As precise as the legal documentation of land ownership and rights is, isn’t it wild that this could happen?

Augusta built $50 million of buildings, some costing nearly $200 per square foot, on land it only partially owns. The taxpayers might get the “air rights” to a parking deck they paid $12 million for. The LLC’s get guaranteed fees and to keep the property, which gives them dominance over the entire complex forever. (A)

“Donation” now means having your cake and getting paid to eat it, too.

Fred thinks this was a bargain.


A forensic audit cannot happen soon enough, and trust me, we will be watching every step of the way.

A. According to the detailed term sheet, the public was guaranteed not much more than that the LLC bears losses after the operations loses $250,000 of the public’s money, and that figure excludes depreciation and interest. The public would bear those in addition to the losses. According to the modification provided, this was changed to the LLC’s getting fees and the public taking the gains and losses from operations.

Augusta Tee Deck Open Record Request Response
Tee Land Acquisition Documents
TEE Center Term Sheet Document
Term Sheet Modifications Undated Current Tasks Including Deck Info

Al Gray: Fraudits with Less Than a Full Deck

  By , ,

Fraudits with Less Than a Full Deck

Originally posted on CityStink
December 23, 2011
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.

OK, “Fraudits” isn’t really a word, but it is what one gets if he starts out with Augusta City Administrator FRed (Russell) leading AUDITS  which might find FRAUDS in Augusta-Richmond County’s ill-fated TEE Center and, specifically, the $12 million parking deck built by that government on land it mostly doesn’t own. Dispensing for a moment with this non-word that, in this case, makes sense with nearly perfect symmetry, Augusta’s commissioners should focus on the one word that really matters – Independence.

This is written by an author from some knowledge on the subject, having served within the internal audit departments of two Fortune 500 companies for a decade. A significant number of our cost recovery consulting operations since those years have been responsive to initiatives by corporate directors of internal audit. An even more pertinent factor is that this writer once recused himself from an audit being performed by subordinates. Forensic audits are tasked with such weighty matters, including amassing evidence for criminal prosecution, that failure to achieve total independence taints and ruins the findings.

The 6-4 vote this past Tuesday by the Augusta Richmond County Commission, on a substitute motion brought by Commissioner Alvin Mason, to engage a forensic auditing firm to investigate and report on the progression of events leading to construction of the TEE center parking deck was commendable. After all, meeting minutes from December 9, 2009 show Commissioner Johnny Hatney was told very clearly by Mr. Russell that the land under the deck was to be donated to the city. Yes, there were minutes from an earlier meeting in which there was discussion of the city gaining “air rights” above the ground floor while 933 Broad Street, LLC, the land owner, retained ownership of the land under it. There might be justification for such hybrid ownership by bond financing requirements of a certain percentage of private partner ownership. It might have saved financing cost at the same time it obligated taxpayers. Much has been said in the media about these things, but most information is conflicting, changing, and biased as to sourcing.

Mr. Russell is at the epicenter of the confusion. Mr. Russell is tasked with selecting the forensic auditor to investigate the confusion. The process is circuitous – it leads nowhere and no one will believe the results if the investigation proceeds on this basis.

What has been revealed also points to issues within Augusta’s Law Department and special counsel it engaged for the TEE Center, associated deck construction, and financing. Answers from that quarter should have been immediately forthcoming, not three months of confused dawdling.

Forensic audits are serious business. When this writer worked for SLKP as its capital projects auditing manager within the internal audit department, our audit director and senior management without fail moved quickly to engage very tough outside forensics auditors and fraud examiners to achieve ultimate independence in every case where fraud appeared likely to have occurred. The forensics auditors quickly fire-walled off the investigations to the point that even we internal auditors who discovered the fraud were excluded. Why? Independence! This needs to be job #1 with the deck audit, as well.

One contractor payroll audit our capital projects audit unit performed at another company indicated a chance that the paymaster, a friend, had committed fraud in the form of forgery and issuing bogus paychecks. When this unhappy situation came to light, the staff auditor in charge was directed to exclude this writer who was his manager, and conduct the investigation directly with the contractor’s fraud investigators and the company Director of Internal Audit. Their investigation led to an admission of guilt, dismissal,  and full restitution of the funds stolen. In that instance those directing the investigation chose not to prosecute. In other cases involving commodity procurement, accounts payable, data processing, engineering, and construction fraud, the perpetrators were prosecuted, tried, and convicted. The bare-knuckles forensic auditors handled every one of those. What looked to be overkill never failed.

That parking deck fiasco on Reynolds Street is tremendously complicated. The Limited Liability Corporations owning land under the deck and in an ongoing joint venture with Augusta’s Convention and Visitor’s Bureau apparently enjoy common ownership with Augusta’s daily newspaper, which has understandably been almost totally silent on this matter. A state senator got caught up in this controversy inadvertently with a generous land swap. The TEE Center contract has the contractor working on cost-plus (albeit limited by a Guaranteed Maximum Price) basis on new construction, a historic building to be preserved, coordination with ongoing operations, a brown field site, and on land that the owner doesn’t own. A further complication is that the contractor’s CEO is running for Congress. A final consideration is that the Tee Center itself seems to have been sold on faulty premises on a foundation of years of controversial situations arising from the city’s public private partnership with the LLC’s, most of which were resolved at considerable expense to Augusta Richmond county taxpayers.

No forensics audit is going to clear the air from all these things. The smoke is welling up from too many places, some of them decades old.

What the immediate forensics audit can do is to report the sequence of events leading to the deck being built on mostly private land, whether that outcome was legitimately directed by financing requirements, and whether reports to the commissioners were consistent with the facts known by the city law department and the county administrator at the time of the reporting. The final product is more likely to deal with competence than fraud and whether answers to commissioners’ questions by the administration have credibility. If the forensics team finds evidence of fraud, they will pursue it.

Commissioner Grady Smith’s suggestion that an Augusta Richmond County grand jury investigate the situation before engaging a forensic auditor has no small degree of merit. A grand jury has subpoena power and if it strikes a brick wall of, say, the city attorneys and their outside counsel claiming attorney-client privilege with respect to the LLC’s what is the point of a forensics audit? A grand jury is a least independent of Fred Russell.

Furthermore, to this observer the forensics audit should definitely extend to the TEE Center planning, design, contracting, and change orders. Since this enormous project features the same project management, construction management, and administration as much of the city’s overall capital improvements program, issues that are identified, reported, and recommended upon will likely have precursors in prior projects and commonalities with current ones.

It is far from a stretch to assert, that this audit, properly done, should pay for itself.

This author has always been guided by the principle that once it is determined that someone is too crooked or too incompetent to be handling his money, it really matters not the intent, but the result. Then one removes the threat while recouping his money.

The people are watching this situation intensely as it calls into question not just governmental integrity, but that of the media, as well. Handle it will independence, diligence, and completeness Augusta Commissioners. You only have one shot at it. Don’t let it be deflected by Fred Russell. That is a habit that must end. You have to be INDEPENDENT, not purveyors of a smokescreen-spewing FRaudit.

Good luck.***

City Stink contributor Al Gray is President of Cost Recovery Works, a Lincoln County-based firm providing cost recovery and cost avoidance services focused on large construction projects, contracts administration, local taxation, land use planning, public policy, manufacturing plants and incentives. Cost Recovery Works was closed down in December, 202. Examples of his work are to be found at ConstructionAudits.com


ParkingGate: Lockett Denied Forensic Audit Again

  By , ,

Augusta Commissioner Bill Lockett

Originally posted by CityStink
Tuesday, Dec. 13, 2011
Augusta, GA
By Jill Peterson

Al M. Gray, President of Cost Recovery Works, Inc. contributed multidisciplinary review techniques in support of this article. Cost Recovery Works is no longer in business, as of December 31, 2020.

Commissioner Bill Lockett brought up again at Monday’s committee meetings his desire to have forensic audits conducted in the Augusta-Richmond County government. The wording on the agenda was as follows:

Task the Administrator with utilizing the procurement process to solicit the services of an outside forensic auditing firm to perform an audit of the city’s finances and contractual obligations. The audit must include but not be limited to the following: (a) TEE Center Parking Garage/ Land Acquisition/ Associated Leases/ Financing, (b) Utility Department Water Rates for Golf Courses/ Other Special Agreements, (c) Environmental Services  Division, (d) Augusta Transit Department Privatization, (e) Augusta Municipal Golf Course Privatization, (f) Retroactive Pay Increases, (g) SPLOST Fund Projects, and (h) Land Bank. 

In Lockett’s explanation of his request, he explains that he’s uncomfortable with the way the Commission was told land would be donated for the parking deck and how the contract for operating the deck is being awarded. The land in fact was not donated leaving the city’s deck to sit on land owned by a private entity headed by the same individual who heads the entity in line for a no-bid operating contract of the deck. He also mentions the strange deals in obtaining other bits of land to do with the deck which seem to have cost the city more than they should, especially strange in light of the fact that the city did not obtain the majority of the land.

Lockett: There are so many unanswered questions with the TEE Center parking deck that it  calls out for an investigation. I’m not suggesting that any illegal actions occurred, but I do  know for a fact that lots of citizens of Augusta-Richmond County to include others from  outside the county are concerned about what has gone on utilizing the taxpayers’ money. I’m concerned when we have outside attorneys doing real estate transactions and at the  same time representing parties from both sides. Now how can you get a good deal out of  that? It doesn’t make  sense. I’m not a lawyer, but I did teach business law. There are  just too many things. I’m concerned when this body is informed about the possible  transfer of property and given a reason that a resolution wasn’t necessary because the Attorney General or someone had indicated that there was a  new law that you didn’t have to do that, but nothing was provided to this body showing that that was indeed the case.

I’m also concerned when outside counsel representing this government was asked for a document and indicated he knew he had it but could not find it because it  was in a stack of papers. And I do believe this document does not exist.

This is part of what I feel that a forensic audit should do. Sure, we have internal audits  every year, but the internal audits don’t look for this sort of thing. We need to look and  see, and I would hope that if this body allows this government to employ a forensic auditing firm, I would hope that nothing is found, but I have seen so many things that I  feel that would not be the case.

The land bank I also questioned. We need information on the past five years. How much land has been purchased by the city and at what cost?  What is the process used by the city used to transfer land to the land bank and why? When city property is transferred to the land bank, is verification of sale required?

***
(He goes on with more questions about the land bank and with his questions for the other issues he wants looked into. Video of the entire speech will be available here in the next day or so.)

For this to get to the full Commission meeting, three of the four members of this, the Administrative Services Committee, would have to vote yes. Bill Lockett voted yes, Alvin Mason voted yes, Matt Aitken was absent (and has not returned our call as of this writing), and Jerry Brigham voted no.

Commissioner Jerry Brigham

City Stink called Jerry Brigham to ask him why he voted against this measure. Commissioner Brigham says a forensic audit would cost too much, it would be truth seeking and implies a criminal violation, and that the proper channel for Lockett to take would be to go to the District Attorney if he thinks there’s something criminal. He also said that, “In reality Lockett wants to put somebody in jail. I’m not paying someone to investigate me.”

Mayor Deke Copenhaver was quoted in the Urban Pro Weekly this week on the same topic and takes the same stance as Brigham. Copenhaver: “A forensic audit implies that there’s been a crime committed and it is something that would cost a tremendous amount of money and take a tremendous amount of time. I’m not in support of that.”

City Stink then called Commissioner Lockett for his response.  Lockett says that a forensic audit costs no more than an internal audit and that the D.A. or GBI would expect a forensic audit before getting involved. He also said someone going to jail is the last thing he wants; he wants a government that complies with the law.

So we seem to have differences of opinion as to whether looking for something criminal is desirable or not and how much a forensic audit would cost and whether or not it would be worth it. Calls to the accounting firm Cherry, Bekaert & Holland for cost comparisons between internal and forensic audits have not yet been returned, but price comparisons are definitely in order and will be followed up on by City Stink.

JP

Mislayed Overlay: The Video and Paper Trail on the Laney-Walker Overlay District

  By , ,

Originally posted on CityStink
Dec 8, 2011
Augusta, GA
By Al M.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.

Dee Mathis and this writer were placed on the agenda of the November 15, 2011 meeting of the Augusta Richmond County Commission to speak in opposition of the Laney Walker Overlay Zoning District. After our impassioned presentations, the motion to pass the overlay failed 4-6 and a motion to postpone to the January meeting carried 8-2.

Below are videos of Al Gray and Dee Mathis Speaking at the Nov 8th Commission meeting.

Earlier this week, a decision was reached by Augusta Richmond County to resubmit, re-notify, and re-hear the application for the much smaller W-4 Foundry Overlay, which the applicant for the overlay, APD Urban Planning and Management, LLC, asserts was the intent of the failed attempt to pass an overlay.

We applaud this decision.

This latest development came after a meeting that Ms. Mathis and I attended with ARC officials last Tuesday, November 29, 2011. APD, the Housing Department, and the Planning and Zoning Departments insisted that the people of the W4 Foundry Node were properly notified and that the application as approved by the Planning and Zoning Board only referenced permitted land uses for that node. Our position was that upon receiving her notice in early October, Dee Mathis called P&Z inquiring about getting a copy of the Application and in response got a 40 page package with the application and clear indications that the overlay district was the 100’s of acres, broader Laney Walker Overlay District instead of the small Foundry Node. *(please see the pdf files at the end of this article.)

We also cited a direct email response from Lois Schmidt (see at the end of this article) to Ms. Mathis’ inquiry after the application passed the Planning and Zoning Board on November 8. This response was labeled, “Information provided to Ms. Mathis 10.8.2011.” This also showed the larger Laney Walker map. Therefore it was our contention that the application was improperly changed inside of the 30 day notification period, which rendered the notification given invalid and incorrect.

Also, we noted to the city/county planning officialdom, that it was clear that the original application intended to address the wider Laney Walker Overlay district, because Augusta Today members had video from the October 18, 2011 informational meeting at the Tabernacle Baptist Church showing that the big Laney Walker overlay was widely discussed and presented, with APD’s Warren Campbell referencing rolling out the larger overlay while standing in front of a map showing the Laney Walker Zone with the smaller W4 District highlighted. (It is noted here for the sake of honestly reporting that he went on to say that the presentation was immediately focused on the W4 Foundry node.)

We noted that the only folks notified of the informational meetings were residents of one corner of the Laney Walker district, while city/county officials and APD were clearly discussing the whole Laney Walker District, in particular Pine Street which lies in the center of the Laney Walker District.

Not previously addressed to date is that the W4 Foundry node itself seems to have changed in configuration.

Yesterday, December 6, 2011, Ms. Mathis and I were subjected to a very one sided “report” in the Augusta Chronicle in which P&Z continues to insist that this application was handled correctly throughout, suggesting that Ms. Mathis and I are property rights zealots whose unreasonable demands must be mollified, lest ARC suffer costly litigation. Neither of us were interviewed for the story.

Summary

We believe that we fully documented that the Application was for the greater Laney Walker Overlay District and that the Application changed in midstream to the smaller W4 Foundry Node. We believe for the ARC Commission to have passed the “Laney Walker Overlay,” as it appeared on their agenda, instead of the “W4 Foundry Node Overlay”, would have been a grand mistake.

Wiser heads saw this evidence and prevailed, hence the decision to do the Foundry Node Overlay over and pass it in February. Now we have presented it to the public. We also hope Augusta and APD very quickly notify all of the Laney Walker residents and hold meetings with them, now that their future plans have been revealed.

Don’t try to set the Augusta Chronicle straight by posting this article. Links to the new kid CityStink.net are prohibited by the South’s Oldest News Paper.

We congratulate CityStink.net for providing an outlet that presents the whole story, complete with links to source documents. We congratulate Augusta Today’s team for videoing events that the rest of the Augusta media missed.

The Mislayed Overlay might just LAY the foundation for a new age of reporting in Augusta and the surrounding area. In the new media age, the people can see the evidence and judge for themselves.

Isn’t that wonderful?

The Paper Trail
Below is the email Dee Mathis received from Lois Schmidt from Planning and Zoning followed by the .pdf files referenced in the article revealing the wider Laney-Walker Overlay District:
PZEmailSenttoDeeMathis

Below are the .pdf’s of the documents Dee Mathis received by email:

Info Sent to Ms. Mathis 10.8

Overlay Packet

Dee Mathis Wins Battle Over Overlay Zone at The Marble Palace…For Now (Videos)

  By , ,

Dee Mathis Claims Victory at The Marble Palace

Originally posted by CityStink
November 16, 2011
Augusta, GA

Dee Mathis and her allies reigned victorious after the Nov 15th Augusta Commission meeting in halting approval of a proposed overlay zoning district for the Laney-Walker/Bethlehem neighborhood. You can read more about the background over this here: Commission Set to Vote Today on Overlay Zone.

Bringing a flock of supporters, Dee Mathis was joined by veteran property rights advocate, Al Gray, in making oral presentations before the commissioners as to why they should deny approving the application for the overlay zone as submitted by the developer.

In the end a majority of commissioners, in a 4-6 vote, sided with Ms Mathis and Mr Gray and denied the application. A second motion was approved that would have the commission revisit the overlay proposal at the first scheduled commission meeting in January 2012. You can watch videos of the proceedings at the commission meeting below.

Al Gray’s Presentation:

Dee Mathis’ Presentation:

Video courtesy of Kurt Huttar

Related Article:

Commissioners Set to Vote on Overlay Zoning District Today for Laney-Walker/Bethlehem

  By , ,


Will Dee Mathis and her allies be able to stop the Overlay Zoning District?

Originally posted by CityStink
November 15, 2011
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.

Today is the day when Augusta commissioners will vote to either approve or halt a controversial proposed Overlay Zoning District for the Laney-Walker/Bethlehem neighborhoods in inner city Augusta. CityStink.net was the first in the media to tell you about the concerns over the overlay zoning proposal on October 6th in Urban Redevelopment or Land Grab?

Laney-Walker homeowner Dee Mathis got wind that the Augusta Planning and Zoning Department was planning to quietly approve an Overlay Zoning District for her neighborhood on October 3rd. Neither Ms Mathis, nor any of her neighbors had previously heard about this proposal, and none of them were notified prior to the Oct 3rd meeting. Ms Mathis and property rights activist Mike Sheil, showed up at the meeting and challenged the legitimacy of the proposal moving forward because property owners had not been properly notified. Ms Mathis and many of her neighbors wanted more specifics about how the zoning changes would affect them and the use of their property. There were also concerns that the Overlay Zoning District would introduce commercial zoning into areas that are now zoned residential and impose architectural review guidelines on existing property owners. Because of the challenge by Ms Mathis and Mr Sheil, the vote by Planning and Zoning was postponed until November 7th.

Dee Mathis, Laney-Walker Homeowner

The Dog and Pony Shows

In the meantime, Planning and Zoning began to notify the affected property owners by mail and a series of informational seminars were scheduled to supposedly give residents more specifics. Dee Mathis kept requesting  all of the details of the proposal that would actually be voted on, but instead got mostly “vague” concepts and pretty water color sketches… but not a lot of specifics. As you are probably aware, when dealing with Augusta government it’s always important to get the specifics in writing.

The seminars were not much more informative. Critics referred to them as being more “Dog and Pony Shows” than being informative and offering specifics. It became obvious to homeowners like Dee Mathis that the seminars, conducted by the private developer requesting the overlay zone and The Augusta Housing Authority, were mostly propaganda sessions designed to mislead residents with pretty water color sketches that had little to do with what would actually be voted on in the application.

In fact, Dee Mathis and a group of allies found glaring inconsistencies, vague language, and an application that was essentially incomplete. How could an incomplete application be approved? Well, according to the law, it shouldn’t. But that didn’t stop the Planning and Zoning Department from giving their seal of approval to the Overlay Zoning District on November 7th, despite the objections raised by Ms Mathis and her allies. However, for the overlay zone to go into effect, it would need approval from Augusta commissioners. And that is where we are today.

What Will Commissioners Do?

Commissioners will take up the Overlay Zoning District at today’s 5pm BOC meeting at The Marble Palace. Inside sources are telling CityStink.net that Dist 1 Commissioner Matt Aitken (who represents the bulk of the proposed Overlay Zoning District) plans to vote in favor of the OZ. Commissioner Jerry Brigham (Dist 7) has  made public statements indicating that he would likely support it as well. So will this vote fall along mostly racial lines with white commissioners voting in favor of imposing  an Overlay Zoning District in a mostly poor, and black inner-city neighborhood at the behest of a private out-of town developer? What about the “cafeteria” sometimes-leaning-libertarian Mayor Pro-tem Joe Bowles? Will he side with the property rights activists and the rule of law? Or will he fall in line and side with the private developer and approve restricting property rights and approve an incomplete application with inconsistent and vague information that would likely not withstand a legal challenge? Where do minority Commissioners Mason, Lockett, Hatney, and Johnson all stand on the Overlay Zoning District?

The Dee and Al Show

Dee Mathis will be joined by ally and property rights advocate Al Gray at today’s commission meeting. Both are on the agenda to speak before the commissioners in opposing approval of the ordinance. Ms Mathis has also been organizing her neighbors and supporters on Facebook to pack the commission chambers today at 5pm to stop the overlay zone. Al Gray is scheduled to speak first.


Property Rights Advocate, Al Gray

Mr. Gray is no stranger to these sorts of battles. He successfully challenged a similar Overlay Zoning District in Columbia County for the Evans Town Center area. Though not a resident of Richmond County, Mr Gray is coming out to lend his support and knowledge to Ms Mathis and the residents of Laney-Walker/Bethlehem in fighting against this proposal. For Mr Gray it boils down to the simple issue of protecting individual property rights and following the rule of law.

CityStink.net received the following press release from Al Gray regarding today’s vote:

PRESS RELEASE!!!! PRESS RELEASE!!!!:

Property rights activist and Overlay Zoning District veteran Al Gray has the following comment on the overlay motion coming before the Augusta Richmond County Commission Tuesday night.

—————————–

The Augusta Richmond County government has been caught with its pants down so often Sheriff Strength could arrest them all for indecent exposure, yet it is poised to execute a plan initiated by a private entity that fails its own ordinance in uniformity, required notices, and completeness. This malignant plan as it is being executed is a dagger to the private property rights of every Richmond County landowner from McBean to Warren Road. Richmond County citizens are being told “trust us” yet again. They say this, “Trust our plan. We don’t know the details, but we MUST pass it to before you find out what is in it.”

When these overlays came to Columbia and Lincoln Counties, they were met with public hostility to the point that there was nearly a riot at the Columbia County Planning Commission in 2000. (Reporters at the Columbia News-Times of that day can attest to this as can Columbia County Commission Chairman Ron Cross who was seen on the front row waving his fist and being decidedly loud in defense of property rights.) The overlay ordinances had to be scaled back to meet public acceptance. The Evans Town Center Overlay was thrown out in Superior Court for lack of notification, yet many Laney Walker residents had not been notified as recently as October 25. In Lincoln County, negating a corridor overlay was a key campaign issue in Chairman Wade Johnson’s victory in 2008 and the proximate cause of the firing of his Planning and Zoning Director.

We trust that residents throughout Richmond County are acutely aware of the many recent failings of its government and have ample reason to be terrified at what lies in store for their most precious property rights at the hands of these failed “leaders.”

I suggest you all wake up. Now.

Al Gray
_________________________________________________________________

What Will Happen Next?

Inside sources are telling CityStink.net that the commission will likely approve the Overlay Zoning District proposal at today’s meeting. However, commissioners could be swayed by a large turnout of residents in opposition at today’s meeting. Dee Mathis has been making the rounds of local talk radio and has been busy getting the word out. Also, the property rights and rule of law arguments made by Mathis and Gray may also have an impact on some commissioners.

However even if the proposal does pass today, Al Gray doesn’t see it as a defeat but rather just the beginning, “The vote is (really) meaningless as the matter violates notification, common purpose, and completeness requirements of the application.”

Most opponents believe that the ordinance, if passed in its current form, could not pass a legal challenge in the courts.

What to Know if You Plan to Attend:
  • What: Augusta Commission Meeting
  • Where: Augusta-Richmond County Municipal Building, 530 Greene St, Room #803
  • When: Today (Tuesday Nov. 15th) at 5:00pm

**Advisory** You are encouraged to arrive early if you want a seat in the chambers. Protest signs are not permitted inside commission chambers. Opponents of the Overlay Zoning District proposal are planning to wear GREEN to show solidarity.

Related: