DGI...If i were in charge

If i were in charge, I would be significantly older, whiter and more entitled. 

If i were in charge,  I would look at the make up of our city and i would apply it to the make up of the board. 
I would eliminate all non profits from the board as they provide little value or perspective due to their own dependence on the public trough.

Second,  i would split the provenance of board members based upon the source of funds...if 50 % of the funds come fom the general funds, then 50% of board members should come fom outside the BID. 

Third,  i would apply the city' s demographic makeup to the composition of the board...
White members should not exceed 43%, Black members should equal  41% and Latinos should  represent at least 8%, Asian 5% etc...

Fourth,  age should matter! A Seventy year old angry antique dealer aspires to a very different Downtown than a 25 year old A&T graduate.  We have 38,000+ college students in our city, maybe we should have more than one on the board.

One final observation... Last year's implementation of term limits was long overdue. Bylaws should not be flexible when convenient...even if it is to keep a "friend of ours" on. 

Suggestion for Mike Barber's plan

Andy Scott was to retire last month but somehow did not...his latest council's appearance further reinforced his obsolescence...

Councilman Barber and council members, may I suggest the first one of your upcoming195... 
ANDREW SCOTT- Assistant City Manager Economic Devt? 

I promise you will not feel a thing, but our city will be better for it...and Mr Manager, "please take this very seriously"!

MWBE...BLAH BLAH...MWBE...BLAH BLAH...MWBE...MWBE?

Council spent much time on MWBE tonight with no plans, no solutions but much debate...
I gave them the solution last month... Am I not credible because i am white?  Can I please be invited to the upcoming work session or do I have to speak from the floor?

SC2 Challenge...is indeed challenged

Since I want to be just like my friend Roch, i had also submitted a SC2 proposal hoping to make my city a slightly better place and pocket a ton of money in the process...

My proposal dealt with our ongoing MWBE participation dilemma. The idea was a simple one...apply a proven business model to what seems to be traumatizing our council members week after week...

Here is a brief overview

"MOSAIK is all about doing the right thing.

As municipalities and other government entities strive to expand the opportunities for Minorities and Women owned businesses, we realized that some of the realities make it almost impossible for many to participate in the process.

The issues are many and range from lack of awareness to the lack of basic business infrastructure and associated bureaucratic requirements.

MOSAIK will offer strategic representation, management and building solutions to Minorities and Women owned construction professionals and to the building industry at large."

Individual development and construction companies have greatly benefited from large public contracts and funding, many competent minorities and women owned entrepreneurs were left out of the process due to lack of awareness, business acumen or proper licensing. A void was identified in the marketplace. The lack of representation made it difficult for business entities to connect with minorities and women owned building professionals. MOSAIK was created to be that conduit. "


Back in 2002 I co-created an agency representing the business interests of Fashion Designers which dealt with very similar issues... the agent takes care of all business needs including licensing, proposal submission, insurance etc and the talent focuses on getting the job done.

My submission has been rejected  for 2 reasons:

The second reason was that I did not include a budget as required  (I do not have a problem with that)... but the first reason is probably why we need to review the reviewer ...

The City of Greensboro wants to inform you that your submission to Phase One of the SC2 Challenge did not pass the administrative review process. Please see the specific reason(s) below:

•   The submission is not specific to the economic development of Greensboro. 
  

 Councilman Barber's may want to look at our economic development department as a start to his painless plan.

I find myself hoping that Roy Carroll does indeed take over the economic development reigns for our city. 

White Washing South Elm...

Interesting read about one of the sought-after financing method by The Bobs...

Bob Isner and Bob Chapman were pursuing TIF financing for part of the South Elm Redevelopment.

In a letter to ever deceitful Assistant City Manager Andy Scott, Bob Chapman (one of the Master Developer) wrote:

"4. The financial structure has changed dramatically with the advent of the Union

Square Campus, which we sought aggressively and about which we are most enthusiastic.

However by providing USC with free land and tax-exempt status, making TIF financing

of required parking decks impractical, if all goes well under the new scenario, we might

earn about $1.6 million over the 12 year term of the MDA, a $5.1 million reduction in our

potential incentive compensation. The attached charts provide details of the original and

revised forecasts."

I repeatedly opposed and expressed concerns about the negative, documented effects on existing neighborhoods associated with TIF financing...and yet...Bob Isner and Bob Chapman pursued what they knew would inevitably destroy one of the oldest neighborhood in our city by displacing its long time residents.

"...Because so many of the families displaced by urban renewal were black, James Baldwin 
dubbed it “Negro removal"..."


All the MWBE programs in the world are not enough to balance what TIF financing destroys. There are plenty of other financial tools available to professional developers... I would prefer they go back to one of their original option of selling green cards.

PS: It is well documented that one parking deck ( or $3,000,000)  was going to be provided by the city as an incentive in addition to some basic infrastructure...no TIF financing was ever necessary for a deck.

If at first you don't succeed... Call Andy Scott?

Greensboro City Council -March 19, 2013 Agenda Item # 29-

Full Adopted Master Development Agreement

1.7 Limitation of Agreement; No Public Funding. Developer acknowledges and agrees

that this Agreement does not obligate or commit any public funds of the Commission or the City. The

Agreement does contemplate one or more separate Agreement(s) will be entered into between the City, Developer, and Commission regarding the infrastructure development as set forth in Paragraph 3.5.1 but the inclusion or indication of the need for such agreement(s) in no manner shall be deemed to be, construed or interpreted as an obligation on the part of the Commission or the City to execute any such agreement merely by virtue of its mention as a condition within this Agreement.

The Bob's entitlement is not surprising considering this shameless and disgusting previous attempt at double dipping.

Wake up folks!!! Union Square will actually better our community, something The Bobs are clearly not interested in.

Don't worry Bobs...daddy Andy will make it all better...Andy Scott wrote me a letter once. 

I'll have what he is having!

March 11, 2014

Memorandum

From: Robert L. Chapman

To: Andy Scott

Re: South Elm Development Group (SEDG) Compensation Model

1. Under the June 12, 2013 Master Development Agreement (MDA) between the

Redevelopment Commission of Greensboro (RCG) and SEDG, SEDG’s only

compensation is whatever SEDG is paid by sub-developers for parcels within the seven

acre South Elm Redevelopment site, less a fixed payment to RCG of $428,694 per acre.

2. In its proposal to RCG, SEDG proposed to invest $1,362,160 in the project. This

includes the fair-market value of services.

3. SEDG originally projected that after its investment of time, effort, expertise and

planning services, it would be able to resell all of the parcels for approximately $11

million within a twelve year period and receive $6.7 million for its services.

4. The financial structure has changed dramatically with the advent of the Union

Square Campus, which we sought aggressively and about which we are most enthusiastic.

However by providing USC with free land and tax-exempt status, making TIF financing

of required parking decks impractical, if all goes well under the new scenario, we might

earn about $1.6 million over the 12 year term of the MDA, a $5.1 million reduction in our

potential incentive compensation. The attached charts provide details of the original and

revised forecasts.

5. We would like for the City and the RCG to restructure developer compensation

from re-sale margin to a percentage developer fee. We believe that a fee of 3% of total

project cost, while significantly below typical development fees, would be appropriate

So, the Master Developer who has yet to create anything already thinks he deserves more money.

If "The Bobs" (Chapman and Isner -Master Developer) had taken possession of the land, as originally agreed upon, the proceeds from the original six acres would have generated about $3,000,000. The city would then have been able to repay the Community Development Section 108 loan made to the city...approximately $3,000,000.  The city would also have received some additional property taxes.

Three years later, the land has yet to be sold but the loan must now be repaid...

According to the preceding email, the Master Developer was going to make $8,000,000 profit from the resell... 

Since the land is still ours, I think the city could use an additional $8,000,000...

Maybe "The Bobs" should have taken possession of the land after all !

The Union Square Campus, (and The Mill's on going evolution) is (are) probably the best thing that could have happened to our community. 

So, if land is to be given and if subsidies are to be granted, then, I contend that Union Square is a better investment. 

Full revised financials here.

Dangerous curves?

Mr. Brown, could you contact the stucco sub-contractor used for the Aquatic Center and ask him to please come back and fix the curves adorning the facade of your jewel.

Nothing smooth or sexy about these curves?

While some may accurately and appropriately think that we have more important issues than jagged curves on our landmarks, I believe their acceptance says something about our city...

We keep pretending to be something we are not... In our desire to belong, we pay for, we accept and we celebrate the mediocrity we are often provided with!

The truth is that we spend very large amounts of funds on projects that should really cost us a fraction of budgeted amounts...worst yet, the finished projects are too often anticlimactic.

The Greenway should never cost $26,000,000 or $52,000,000 for 4 miles of trails unless it was in Qatar and paved with gold..
A Gazebo should never cost $250,000 unless it was commissioned by "Action Dubai"...
The GPAC could be more elegant, tasteful and acoustically advanced for half the current price tag.

Just like our city's favorite developers, Greensboro's Nouveau Riche approach to urbanism lacks elegance, authenticity and creativity.

Greensboro Deserves Better!

Oooh, that Matt Brown sure is something!

Bless his little heart, he got us Sir Paul McCartney!  Ernie will sure be happy...

I am certain Missoula MT is also thrilled to host such an International Talent...They must also have a Matt Brown !

Come on Greensboro... fuuuuuuuuuuuuuck!

Let s raise the bar a little... Did we need such a Big Big Big build up?... Regardless, still a little more newsworthy than this.

We used to have Elvis in the house!






My point is that, considering the large amount of resources and monies funneled to Matt Brown and The Coliseum...Greensboro should have a Paul McCartney at least once a month, and our Greenway should not cost $52,000,000 for 4 miles.


 Greensboro deserves better!

Bizarro?

Milton Kern  former 13 years DGI board member said :

" Are you serious? You want people to go stand out in the parking lot at the Coliseum for the evening instead of shopping with downtown merchants? Who made this ill-conceived decision?"

Eric Robert (me ) , current DGI board member on one yr probation (partially responsible for Milton being voted off the DGI board) said:
” i have a very hard time believing DGI meant for it to be mutually exclusive"

Of course back in 2012 Milton Kern was quoted as saying..." If customers want to go to High Point Rd, they are free to go there"
http://triadwatch.blogspot.com/2012/02/ed-wolverton-and-milton-kern-on-safety.html

Milton Kern is also now actively working on defunding DGI and abolishing the BID (business improvement district) since he was voted off the board.  

The timing is interesting!  

I have often been described as " DGI s most vocal critic", and i can honestly tell you that DGI is genuinely trying..

.A few legacy fuckers still tried to get me voted off the board earlier this year, but i will get to them in December when i am officially done... 

In the interim,  i can assure you that Jason, Sam, Gary and most of the board are doing their best to move us forward in order to fulfill our new mandate and become the economic development  entity for Downtown Greensboro.

 In the event we cannot accomplish our new mission, then, we should grant Milton his last wish and DGI should  disappear... along with all the non value added local non profits and maybe even Milton himself...

Because Greensboro deserves better!

Hoffmann's Tangled web

Eric Ginsburg reported this today...

This is what Hoffmann had to say when caught during her facebook's pity party:

Selling your buildings is not exactly a temporary solution, now is it?
What say you douchebag Allen Johnson?

Another $26,000,000 for the Greenway? UPDATED WITH DOCUMENT

Are you fucking kidding me?

So far Action Greensboro attempted to build a 4 mile Greenway around downtown Greensboro at the cost of  $26,000,000...Yes it is over $6,000,000/mile...

Not finished but adorned with shitty art and bad landscaping,  the Greenway represents the provincial, Hobby Lobby taste level of its champions...Susan Schwartz and Dabney Sander ((among others)

Designed for the affluent urban dweller, the Greenway is now mostly frequented by the less fortunate Urban Ministry patrons.

A $250,000 + Gazebo , a crafty metal shirt with a tie in front of a Jeanswear company, a trash filled open book? On top of greek columns...

$26,000,000 is a lot of cash..we could have built the river we so envy Greenville for that...or paid our former Mayor's debt.

The truth is that there is no reason in the world why this little trail should cost us that much..not with all the other needs our community struggles to meet.

It is easy to piss away money when you don't spend your own... A little creativity would go a long , long , long way and provide us with the desired path for a fraction of the cost.

So while Susan Schwartz, Dabney Sanders and Cecelia Thompson are busy buying us "artwork" from the Stein Mart catalog, we have to keep on paying the bill while throwing up a little.

Yesterday city staff suggested an additional $26,000,000 be added to an upcoming bond for the Greenway....YES... it will need repaving and extensive maintenance. Of course, our community does not have any other need.

Come on man...have some pudeur show some decency...

Greensboro simply deserves better!

What Greensboro really needs...

Ambition, Audacity and Creativity...that is what Greensboro needs!... 

...and this ashtray, this paddle ball, this remote control, these matches, this lamp, this chair and this magazine...

We must be in good hands...right?

So the meeting which was supposed to take place in Ms Hoffmann's third floor apt was destined to impress and attract a company to invest $20,000,000 and create 328 jobs.

Instead of a third floor walk up without furniture or occupancy, our crack creative economic development team decided it would be a better idea to entertain the 10th largest craft brewer in the country ( from California) in the clubhouse of a generic apartment complex. 

"Cindy Dancy, the vice president of business development services for the Greensboro Partnership Economic Development said Friday that the city wants to show its personality to Stone Brewing"... N&R

A couple of attendees recalled the gathering as "sad" and borderline "embarrassing"... Our Governor was actually in town for a birthday party and received very little notice. 

It was also noted that most guests were older white folks wearing Greensboro' unofficial uniform, nostalgically styled with golf polo shirts and pleated khakis.


Until we change our ways, we have no choice but to pay people to like us, because being cool simply isn't in our thing. 

Who are these economic development visionaries? Who are these world champions?  

If we don't get this one, maybe we should rethink the way we do things and actually make the effort to understand our audience and our competition.  


Greensboro simply deserves better!

Public monies and public records

Ben Holder broke this today. 

This is what bothers me with the story...

At least one council member was not aware of this event even taking place, and yet, Action Greensboro was involved in every intimate detail of the deal... 

Cecelia Thompson of Action Greensboro contacted a caterer and a small business owner to arrange free food and free furniture to furnish Nancy Hoffmann's loft and feed our municipal guests. 

Why would this economic development party be a secret? 

Why is it appropriate to entertain a potential large employer in a council member's private apartment  still under construction?

Why would a publicly subsidized non profit arrange such event without staff's input?

Why would a private residence without  general assembly occupancy  be a good spot to entice a large potential employer ?

Each time Action Greensboro is involved we seem to get suckered into a bad deal... a few examples come to mind... 

- The $26,000,000/ 4 mile Greenway ... Yes, that is over $6,000,000/mile .
- The privately owned  Center City park we pay $250,000+/yr to maintain .
- The $16,000 + dog park 
- The young professionals for Nancy Hoffmann


Even DGI, under its new leadership has improved its policies in order to address transparency and accommodate most Public Information requests.  Go Jason!!!

I believe it is time to demand that any entity receiving public funds be subjected to public information record laws. 

Why would anyone have a problem with that? 
Really...I am asking...why?

A simple honest request...

A lot has happened and a lot is happening with some of our local non profits...Always guarded and often offended, a few local non profits have done a great job alienating the very people that support them financially.

The loss in public confidence will certainly no be regained with the current climate of secrecy and deception.

Is Grassroots a non profit? Why would the Community foundation received pledges on its behalf? How much does Mitch Sommers make as the head of the Community theater?How much does Walker Sanders make? how about his wife Dabney? How about handpicked DGI golden boy Jason Cannon?  How about Sam Funchess of the Nussbaum center? Does anybody know? Should DGI have a foundation? Should the ICRM have so many entities that only Colombo could see his way through? Should the Greenway really cost $6,500,000 per mile? Should the IRC receive more money (I think so...probably the best non profit we have)...

Bottom line is that WE are getting fucked!, not always and not by every nonprofit, but certainly by a few well versed ones...over and over and over!

If you are going to receive and take public monies then...

First ...  Recognize that the funds you receive are in fact not yours to distribute as you wish, but ours for you to steward.
Second... be appreciative, not arrogantly entitled,  and say THANK YOU! 

Then adhere to the following:

- All non profits benefitting from public funds must be comprised of one entity and one entity only.


-All non profits  benefitting from public monies must hold meetings that are open to the general public who helps fund them.

- All non profits benefitting from public funds must ensure that all communications adhere to Public record laws.

- All non profits benefitting from public monies must ensure that all executive committee meetings and regular board meetings are recorded with digital devices including video and sound.

- All non profits benefitting from public monies must not have their membership sign confidentiality agreements.

- All non profits benefitting from public monies must ensure that the diversity of their board is representative of the city overall demographics and should include diversity in gender, race, age, affluence and aspirations.

- All non profits benefitting from public monies must disclose the top three salaries within the organization.

As we are entering a new budget cycle, these few prerequisites must be mandated for any and all non profit entities benefitting from public funds during the upcoming fiscal year...PERIOD!

If you don't like it then don't take our money... 

Who on city council will introduce such resolution? better yet...why would any council member want to oppose this?

anyone has a digital recorder for next DGI meeting? REDACTED TO REMOVE PERSONAL ATTACKS ON THERESA YON (so I can stay on the DGI board)

and we have minutes... and as of tomorrow, a digital recorder!

"...

DOWNTOWN GREENSBORO INC. (DGI)  February 20, 2014  MINUTES  Members Attending: Brittany Atkinson, Mike Boston, Gary Brame, Dawn S. Chaney, Mark Hewett, Marty Lawing, Al Leonard, Simonne McClinton, Donald C. Moore, David Parrish (for Jim Westmoreland), Jeff Phillips, Nick Piornack, Mark Prince, Eric Robert, Tim Sexton, Sam Simpson, Nancy Vaughan, Jeff Yetter, Theresa Yon and Rob Youth (20)  Members Absent: Derek Ellington, Megan Millard, Thomas Philion and Dianne Ziegler (4)  Staff Attending: Jason Cannon, Steven Harrison, Sherrie Simpson, Debbie Curran, Vickie Hall and Larry Owens (6)  Guest Speaker(s): Joe Stewart, Executive Director NC FreeEnterprise Foundation and Fountainworks Partner  Julia Cox, Greensboro Downtown Residents’ Association..."

"... Mr. Robert said that he felt the organization needs to change its strategic thinking and inclusiveness in Downtown...."

Actually what I said was..."So much diversity...look around the table." 

Judge for yourself, look at the list above...mostly old white guys except for Brittany, Simonne and Ms Vaughan.

"...C. Event Sponsorship Approvals: The Executive Committee approved the following event sponsorships as unanimously recommended by the Marketing Committee: 

 John’s Run for $500. Funds will be used for marketing and logistics. This event is organized by Running with Horses, LLC and has an estimated attendance of 800 or more. 

 The City Market for $3,500. Funds will be used for marketing and logistics. This event is organized by Running with Horses, LLC and has an estimated attendance of 21,600. 

 Fun Fourth Festival for $5,000. Funds will be used to buy the souvenir item, pay stipends to music groups and help defray cost of sound equipment and technicians. This event is organized by Grassroots Productions Limited and has an estimated attendance of over 90,000. 

 Carolina Blues Festival for $500. Funds will be used to secure a national and/or regional artist for the festival line-up. This event is organized by the Piedmont Blues Preservation Society and has an estimated attendance of over 1,500. 

 BB&T Beach Music in the Park for $1,200. Funds will support the Children’s Home Society of NC, who is also organizing the event which has an estimated attendance of between 1,000 and 3,000 per event. The series will run for six weeks on Thursday from May 22nd to June 26th. 

 Additionally the Marketing Committee approved holding $500 in reserve for any additional events and $1,000 for a reusable banner. 

Ms. McClinton questioned if the board no longer votes on these. Mr. Cannon explained that the Executive Committee is charged with the day-to-day activities and reports its actions to the Board. The Board is tasked more with strategic planning and long-term visioning for the organization. Mr. Simpson added the funding was exhausted for the fiscal year for sponsorships and may not be a relevant issue for the Board in the future. 

Mr. Robert said he felt the City Market and other events are a great thing; however there are probably a lot of other events that we could sponsor and asked why we are spending Fun Fourth Festival dollars now for an event that will take place during the next fiscal year. He said that it doesn’t feel right to approve $5,000 for the event in this fiscal year and thought the dollars could help with at least 5 other different events. He questioned if we can do better and if can we do anything about it and revisit the $5,000 in the next fiscal year. 

Mr. Brame responded that event sponsorship applications are required at least 60 days prior to an event’s occurrence. He felt it’s logical to do 60 days in advance, otherwise there does not allow for a funding turnaround. He noted there’s $500 in reserve and that the Marketing Committee typically gets 10 to 15 sponsorship requests and some applications may not qualify/fit criteria due to being outside the BID or being political or religious, etc. He would like to see the event sponsorship application better defined but felt the Fun Fourth Festival application should be a done deal. Downtown Greensboro Inc. Board of Directors Meeting Page 5 February 20, 2014 

Mr. Robert questioned the Board for verification if the Fun Fourth Festival was a done deal. He said it’s a new era and given the new Board, we can come up with 5 to 10 things to do with $5,000 in funding. 

Mr. Brame noted the Fun Fourth Festival is one of the largest contributors to the vitality of Downtown and felt we owe whatever support we can provide and have committed to the funds already. He stated Grassroots Productions Limited has done a great job in the past and attracts over 90,000 people to this event. 

Mr. Robert asked again if this funding was a done deal or can we change and reallocate for other worthy causes. Mr. Simpson explained logistically, there needs to be a motion to pull this item off the approval list for reconsideration later. Mr. Robert then moved to remove the item. Ms. McClinton seconded the motion. 

Mr. Brame stated that he felt it’s a little late to change the rules. As we go forward into the next fiscal year, we could be more proactive; however he felt it would be improper to pull the sponsorship that had already been approved. The Marketing Committee and the DGI Executive Committee have unanimously approved and he felt that we are obligated; however beyond this point for the next fiscal year, he felt the idea was terrific to re-evaluate. 

Mr. Leonard then offered a substitute motion to keep the sponsorship in place. Mr. Moore seconded the motion. Mr. Simpson stated there was a substitute before the Board. Mr. Leonard then moved the previous question and that motion was approved. The Board then voted on Mr. Leonard’s substitute motion. It was noted by the Chair that the substitute motion replaced the original motion made by Mr. Robert. All were in favor with the exception of Mr. Robert, who voted in opposition. The substitute motion to keep the sponsorship in place was approved. 

Mr. Simpson reported that the Board members are not going to agree on all items and felt the discussion was a healthy debate. July 1st is the new budget cycle and hopes that DGI’s new focus is in place by then. ..."

Just to be very clear..."Mr. Brame stated that he felt it’s a little late to change the rules. As we go forward into the next fiscal year, we could be more proactive; however he felt it would be improper to pull the sponsorship that had already been approved...."

Actually Mr Brame stated that it would be "morally corrupt" not "improper"...

One more clarification..." The Board then voted on Mr. Leonard’s substitute motion. It was noted by the Chair that the substitute motion replaced the original motion made by Mr. Robert. All were in favor with the exception of Mr. Robert, who voted in opposition..."

In reality, most new members did not vote since they had no clue as to what the fuck was going on...

Ro-Bear's rules of order - 20 days later still no DGI board meeting minutes...

This is simply unacceptable!  

I called our President and CEO and he  "...is doing the best he can..."  Probably working on a confidentiality agreement!

This is certainly making the case for the proposed Ro-Bear' rules of order.

-All meetings including executive committee's should be open to the public and recorded with digital devices...minutes would then be available immediately.

If we take public monies, we should then be able to have an honest , recorded conversation, a passionate debate or a simple vote...

The cult of non profits - PART II

" ... If it's secret and elite, it can't be good..."   
           The Skulls.



"... CONTROL: 
Any questioning of authority is treated as rebellion.

ISOLATION: 
Information control is practiced where members of the group are not allowed or discouraged to communicate with outside entities...This is done to prevent information that may expose what is going on internally. 

AN "US AGAINST THEM" ATTITUDE: 
Anyone who challenges the cult's doctrine is automatically branded as an enemy.

RULES OF SILENCE:
If you speak about the problem to others, YOU HAVE JUST BECOME THE PROBLEM. You must become silent and just ignore it or will be asked to leave. 

TOTAL COMMITMENT: 
Expected of the followers to the leader[s]. Their commitment requires that property and money be given in the hands of the leader[s]. 

INDIVIDUALITY IS SACRIFICED FOR THE GROUP: The group's concerns supersede an individual's goals, needs, aspirations, conformity is the key..."
The previous  are excerpts from an article entitled "common characteristics of cults" Full text  here and here.

All DGI members will soon be required to sign a confidentiality and loyalty agreement... 
See "ISOLATION" above.

The cult of non profits - PART I

I have been on a Non Profit board for two months now, for a grand total of two meetings... There may not be a third after this post as they can actually vote me out and pull a Mujeeb on me (minus the severance).

Either way, I am on probation for a year, until I can demonstrate that I can behave, and then... maybe, I may get reappointed if I am a good boy... so this is me "behaving". 

I was asked to not take to my "little blog" any and all little DGI dysfunction. I was OK with that as I thought that I would not have to, since i could face the other board members as an equal, ask questions and hopefully shape civic, democratic decisions to benefit all.
Obviously, Al Leonard of the Carroll companies did not get the memo and was not having it !!! 

Here are a few thoughts...
First of all,  we are in 2014 so why can't we debate like adults, like reasonable human beings? 
Why can't I question funding allocation without it being called "morally corrupt"? 
Why are we subjected to 1876 parliamentary rules unknown to most commoners?  
Why don't we wear white powdered wigs with mouches.

Why is an executive committee of only 5 members authorized to decide on the allocation of large sums of monies to old board and current board members bypassing the approval of the larger 20 + member board? 

Isn't this exactly why DGI almost became extinct to begin with? and if so, why are the ex-officios in attendance allowing this to take place? 

The answer to at least one of my question became clear during my second meeting... Bottom line, If you dare to question motives, reasoning or secret deliberations, and if someone does not like your "insolence" in your questioning of their behavior,  they will invoke some obscure motion only known to the seasoned non-profit professional deceivers, and instantly shut you up...

So they shut you up but keep your money! 

Do you understerdandeth me? 
You better, because half the current board (including me) still does not know what the fuck happened, or even how they voted. I voted "Nay"... which means no... I think. 

I am righteous but i firmly believe that If you are going to take public funds, then, you must be accountable to the people you take money from...and that is us...all of us, Greensboro tax payers.

I therefore recommend the following 21th century honorable behavior and guidelines. You can call it my own righteous bylaws...

First ...  Recognize that the funds you receive are in fact not yours to distribute as you wish, and then, say Thank You ! 

Then observe the following:

- As it is 2014, all meetings should be recorded with digital devices  and not, "penned by quill? conveniently editable" minutes... You say it , you own it!

- All communications should adhere to Public record laws...You write it, you speak it,  you own it!

- One entity and one entity only, with no obscure foundation, refuge or shelter...You don't need it unless you intend to deceive and defraud! (and don't give me the tax deduction bullshit excuse...obviously not affecting Grassroots productions)

- Board Members are only special in their own minds... All meeting (including executive committee meetings) should be digitally recorded and open to the public... period!

- Do not hire consultants simply to cover your ass... Grow some balls and assume your leadership position and please, please, please, don't hire a consultant to hire a consultant ! You may end up looking stupid.

- Do not ask your new membership to perpetuate your culture of deception and secrecy... If the public can't know, then you should not be doing it, and you should certainly not take public monies!

- Do not include The Sanders, Alstons,  Carrolls or Carroll's employees in any of them...they will only use their extensive experience and access to further penetrate us serfs.

- You don't need a PR firm... Obviously did not work out so well for the International Civil rights Museum! Be honest and forthcoming. 

- You don't need ex officios...You want a meeting, then schedule an appointment ! 

- Finally the diversity of your board should be representative of the city overall demographics and should include diversity in gender, race, age, affluence and socio economics... A picture is worth a thousand word so be on the lookout for the upcoming DGI board photo.

Buy Local...

We've done it your way for the last two, so please, don't humor us with additional executive searches and other deceitful tactics destined only to appease.  

Being a good soul and being a good city attorney should not be mutually exclusive.

While exotic and somewhat rare, I believe that such individual is already working for the city, its leadership and its citizens. 

Tom Carruthers is his name. 

A good, honest man and a solid attorney with integrity. 

As a citizen of Greensboro, I would be proud to be represented by such a man.

Mujeeb, Mujeeb, Mujeeb...

His record speaks for itself... 

Witholds and delays public records requests, gives bad civic advice, rides the ethical / legal line, attempts to stop newspaper publication, allows for unconstitutional exemptions in various ordinances, enables obvious conflicts of interest, fucks up negotiations and now...unsigned contracts.

Careless, stupid and irresponsible... A true world champion!

PS: we just gave him a raise...

Now...how could that be?

Billy Jones questions the process for the RIDICULOUS downtown hotel giveaway... No study, no shame,  no problem, no consequences... for now!

The deal was brilliantly engineered...  

Kaplan and Ko. will simply be the landlords and will lease their buildings to the hotel developers... They will in exchange be the recipients of the city council awarded tax rebate, which will absorb the immediate projected increase in property taxes. 

In summary, the developer will build the hotel, Windham will operate it and Kaplan and Ko will receive a renovated building, lease payments and tax rebates.

Thank God for rich ex wife, smart partners and "flexible" economic development policies. 

Dan Lynch

So Dan Lynch has been on vacation six months a year for a while, producing very little... but it took  Rhino Roy to blast him to ignite the "Political Passion"... I guess Roy may be good for something after all... 

Civil servants?

South Elm St Masters

Over the next few months, I will be posting a few interesting points that i am uncovering while reading through the massive information dump provided to me by the city staff... 

For reasons unknown, I have been instructed to go through a PIRT process to obtain simple answers to a few, very simple questions. 
The lengthy unnecessary Public Information Request actually provided unflattering documents highlighting the unequalled incompetence with which The South Elm Street redevelopment was/is handled.

Dyan Arkin who is the lead person on this project also handles the Bessemer shopping center. Maybe time for the city's leadership to revisit the employee's performance evaluations. To be fair, she inherited the project from diabolical dick-head Dan Curry who worked for Andy Scott.

Here is a couple of answers...just for fun

Q: Please provide any and all amendments/changes made to the South Elm Street master development plan after the master developer was selected.
A: The Master Developer has not yet submitted a master development plan. 

Weird as a Master development plan was submitted to obtain funding, another one during the developer's selection process and a Master Development Agreement was voted on by council on March 19th 2013. 

Q: Did the city remove contamination from any other privately owned parcel?
A: No. The City removed an underground tank from the 725-727 S. Elm Street property owned by the ------ family. This activity was funded under the EPA assessment grant to determine if soil contamination has occurred.

Even stranger, as the tank was full, the tank was huge, truck loads of earth were removed and replaced but the answer remained No. The original assessment submitted to the EPA to receive funding also referred to specific contamination located on that specific site.

"...This activity was funded under the EPA assessment grant to determine if soil contamination has occurred...."   
The reason I asked the question to begin with was because, the city used my acreage to receive subsidies and funded the removal of this specific tank on the only other private property within the Redevelopment area, all while attempting to condemn and restrict my property. 
They then reported me to Guilford County Health and finally turned me in to the State Environmental Agency... 

We have now entered a new phase... Fortunately for us, Mr Ed Kitchen of the Bryan foundation came running and saved us from ourselves... he not only gave us a dog park, but also provided the concept for the Union Square University campus. 

The timing could not have been better, since, after years of civic masturbation, and blown timelines, the selected master developers were still exploring themselves.

On March 19th 2013, the "Master Development agreement was approved. Within it, it is stated that "...upon execution of this Agreement, Developer will within three months commence performance of any and all obligations under this agreement” ...   Performance ??? 

To date the "Master developers" including Bob Chapman and Bob Isner have yet to take possession of any parcel of land, as they appear to be adverse to paying associated property taxes. It will be interesting to see how the redevelopment land gets transferred to the Universities since, technically, the redevelopment Commission still owns the land... 

Vigilance is a must now that one of the Masters got a new job working for our ex-Mayor.

Article 9.15 of the Master Development Agreement
Conflict of interest. 
"The developer covenants that neither it nor any of its members, directors, officers, or employees has any interest, nor shall acquire any interest, directly or indirectly, which would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of the services herunder, including the causing of commission to suffer a conflict of interest prohibited by applicable laws, regulations or contract with funding entity. The developer further covenants that in the performance of this agreement, no person having such interest shall be employed by it or shall subcontract with it to perform duties under this agreement."