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."

"In business you don't get what you deserve, you get what you negotiate..."

Remember this line from the airline catalogs back in the 90's? 

Who negotiates these shitty deals on our behalf? 

Remember when George Carr wanted the city to donate the Bessemer center land only to lease it back to the city for the library use?

Remember when Kaplan, House and Kern wanted us to build them a parking garage and then lease it back from them at the tune of $8,000,000 +?

To date, the SEDG still has not taken  possession of the land they were supposed to buy 2 years ago. To date they have missed each and every milestone associated with the project.  

So...now what? how will the land be transferred to the university campus? will Isner of NAI  be the broker, the landlord, the builder and the master developer? Will he kiss us first?

Some items of interest from the South Elm  St's Master development agreement draft.

"Background 

In January of 2012, the Commission selected the South Elm Development Group (SEDG) to begin negotiations for a Master Development Agreement to develop the South Elm Street Redevelopment site. SEDG recommended a three-step contract process: a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) allowed SEDG exclusive rights to negotiate with the Commission; a Predevelopment Agreement (PDA) allows SEDG to continue exclusive negotiations as they prepare the groundwork for a binding Master Development Agreement, which will outline the scope and process for development of the site. "

From the PDA

"During the term of the PDA, the following activities shall be performed by the Developer and funded as noted under separate agreement with the City of Greensboro: 

- Up to $7000 for Soil and Groundwater Sample Maps, Findings Tables and Maps as required for Brownfields Agreement; 

- Up to $11,900 for Field Surveys; 

- Up to $15,000 for Engineering Activities related to Eligible Infrastructure Improvements; 

- Up to $9000 for Traffic Impact Study; 

-Up to $1400 for Legal Fees related to structuring Land Swap Agreements with adjoining land owners. "

From The MDA

"4. Identify and secure financing for development, including both public and private sources 

a. Funding and financing sources are being researched and discussed; the MDA will include anticipated sources for each phase, but each component will need to be evaluated as it becomes ready for development. 

b. Private funding could include developers’ equity, grants and low-interest loans through philanthropic organizations, and investor financing, among others. 

c. Public funding could include state Powell Bill funds, state Low-Income Housing Tax Credits, Tax Increment or Certificate of Participation Financing, EB-5 funds (Employment Based Immigration through the federal Immigration Department), among others. 

Summary of Developer’s Memo with Staff Comments 

2. Description of take-down mechanism for the land: 

a. RCG will sell parcels directly to component sub-developers; proceeds will be disbursed at a ratio of 60% to SEDG and 40% to RCG until RCG has received $3 million, then at 80% SEDG, 20% RCG for any additional revenue. 

South Elm St redevelopment 101

Twelve years in the making and after a 200% turnover in Redevelopment Commission Commissioners, and dedicated city staffers, the RDC finally got it together and sent out an RFP in Dec 2010

South Elm St RFP here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/198873231/SE-RFP-Amended-2-9-11

From the initial entries, three finalists were selected and additional questions were asked...

In the end, 2 firms were in the running...the Russell company out of Atlanta (a 100% Black owned firm) and the chosen group SEDG (a 100% white owned firm). 

During a poorly orchestrated politically correct maneuver designed to gain community support, Bob Chapman and Bob Isner soon hired  Yvonne Smith. It is worth noting that Yvonne Smith is NOT a partner but a consultant. A black consultant who was a PARTNER  in a competing development entity prior to its elimination.

The selected Group responded to additional questions here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/198873401/SEDG-Additional-Questions2-1-Reduced

Original Project Timeline

Projected Solicitation Schedule (subject to modification) 

December 15, 2010	Announcement of Solicitation
March 31, 2011	Proposals due
July 15, 2011	Notice of respondents selected for interview
August 1-15, 2011	Interviews
September 15, 2011	Development Team selection
September 15, 2011	Notice of successful respondent
September 20–30, 2011	Advertisement for upset bid
November 15, 2011	City Council Approval

Original Development Timeline 

Pre-development Timeline (from City Council approval of property sale) 

2 months Sales and Development Agreement 

6 months Final Development Plan/Design Approval 

8 months Secure Financing Commitments 

9 months Property Closing  

12 months Start Construction 

48 months Complete Construction  

From the RDC minute...here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/198877141/FINAL-RCG-4-26-11-A-M

WORK SESSION ON DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS FOR THE SOUTH ELM STREET REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT 

South Elm Development Group Presentation: 

Mr. Chapman described the process to do a residual value analysis to determine the cost of building improvements and their worth after being built. He walked the Commission through elements of the project based on parameters in the Request for Proposals (RFP) and made the following points: 

• 1.7 acres would be “for sale” residential with 26 units of stand-alone townhouses. 

• 3.4 acres of “for rent” residential. 

• 1.6 acres for retail. 

• .25 acre for offices. 

• The average rent for apartments would be $.93 per square foot per month. 

• The estimated rent for retail would be $16.00 per square foot per year, renter pays all costs. 

• The estimated office rent would be a full service rate. 

• The average footage for the 168 residential apartments is 635 square feet. 

• 95,000 square feet of retail space. 

• 15,000 square feet of office space. 

• The cost of building apartments is $89.00 per square foot not counting land cost or developer profit. 

• The cost of building offices is $110 per square foot, totally inclusive. 

• The total residual value for the land under the “for sale” residential is $515,000. 

• 390 units would be needed for a parking structure. 

• The cost to build parking structures would be $4.6 million. 

• The total residual value for the property is $5.4 million of which $3 million would be paid to the City for the land and $2.4 million would be the return on development contribution to profit and overhead. 

• The total project cost based on square footage prices is $37.7 million dollars for the program South Elm Development Group has in mind. 

• Sources of funds: $5.6 million coming from a 221(d)4 loan based on the assumption that the Market Study is acceptable to HUD; for the 25% of units set aside with income restriction, low income housing tax credits of $2 million; and the sale of tax exempt multifamily housing bonds of $1.8 million. 

• Residential sales projecting net of the land cost at $3.5 million; retail at $12.5 million. 

• South Elm Development Group would like to have an Identity of Interest with the City of Greensboro to allow payment of the buildings as they are built. 

• Developer’s fee is $2.4 million. 

• Developer’s equity is $1.4 million. 

• Developer is proposing a Certificate of Participation to fill the gap of $2.67 million dollars. 

Worth noting:

Tax Increment Financing or TIF has been identified as a potential financing source...TIF has many issues associated with its use, not least of which is the displacement of lower income residents as they can no longer afford to live in the home they grew up in due to massive increases in Property taxes.

Certificate of Participations also bypass the community altogether.

The deal is a different deal altogether now...A university campus changed the game. Robbie had a lot to do with Isner being selected as the master developer. Robbie, Isner and Co have identified proven ways to pillage the coffers even though the project is way way behind schedule and the selected development team has yet to do one thing it was hired to do. Pay attention council... I have been! 

Isner's new gig

Dang...

Am i the only one thinking that this is getting more and more inappropriate and indecent?

"...When asked if NAI would take the lead in brokering the redevelopment project, Isner said, “that’s to be determined, but that might be a good guess.”...


Isner is learning from his  good friend and new boss Robbie Perkins. Robbie paved the way for this precedent, and now wants to get his. 

The selected Master developers ( Bob Isner and Bob Chapman) refused to take ownership of the redevelopment land as it was originally intended, because they did not want to pay the associated property taxes. To date, they have contributed NOTHING to the deal...

As a matter of fact, the deal today looks nothing like the deal presented and reviewed during the developer 's selection process.  

7 + years in the making, the process has been plagued by incompetence and ineffectiveness.  Bob Isner and Co are now seeking massive incentives and municipal financing even though Bob Isner's group was selected mostly based upon its ability to provide financial backing to the project. 

I was part of the citizen advisory board for this project, and as such, I have attended each and every meeting during the selection process. 

Stay tuned...

Downtown PR

From today N&R...
“If you’re going to drive downtown, secure your valuables and don’t leave them in your car,” Cranford said. "

Thank You GPD ??? 

Certainly not due to lack of Police presence Downtown...

April Harris' new job...

Another non profit job for Ms Harris... rumors are that she will be replacing Margaret Arbukle as the executive Director for Guilford Education Alliance. 

I wonder how the Cecelia Thompson, Sam Funchess and April Harris of the world would fair in the real world where one has to compete for a job, manage budgets responsibly and be held accountable for his/her repeated failures.

Anyway, the Weaver foundations and another unnamed one have pulled out of Action Greensboro so the future is uncertain. 

The one thing that is almost a certainty is that neither Dabney Sanders, nor Cecelia Thompson will be getting a job in the for profit sector... 
WE, the taxpayers, are doomed to support both of them for a while.

Roch's got a point

Roch Smith Jr wrote an open letter to our new Mayor Ms Nancy Vaughan.
The letter is in Roch's unique style... Respectful, apropos and  well written...
It contains just enough unintentional condescendence that it could be considered patronizing but that is Roch 's way and should not overshadow his very valid points.

I look forward to Nancy Vaughan's leadership, and I agree that we have many economic development opportunities WITHIN our city limits and OUTSIDE of the hospitality industry.

Madame Mayor Elect must surround herself with pros. 
She needs a team that advocates and researches what Roch adequately suggests... 
She needs an aggressive and proactive team of economic development professionals... a team seeking appropriate employers domestically and internationally.
Our city needs individuals with the right education, professional background, integrity and balls...(and maybe a second language or two).

John Shoffner left because he was bypassed for a well deserved promotion. Politics dictated the hiring process and the city of Greensboro lost his most qualified economic development employee... he was honest, hard working and most of all competent.  

Bonne chance Madame Mayor or as Roch suggested 好运.

What's up with April Harris?...what's up with Action Greensboro/ UPDATED

UPDATE:
The details are still fuzzy but Jim Melvin apparently used his political influence to find April a new job. He will no longer have to pay her salary...WE will...
Welcome to the Guilford County Education System!

 April Harris...Fired? Not fired?... 
One thing is for sure, she will no longer head Action Greensboro.
Rumors are she will soon "pop up" elsewhere as she will be recycled in yet another non profit or government agency. 

Cecelia Thompson... Has been applying to many other non-profits in town...No success so far...Maybe Greensboro is evolving beyond tires full of grits. We'll see if her good friend Nancy Hoffmann helps out...a job at the city perhaps? 

All Dabney Sanders wants to know is "Who gets the Greenway?" 
That, is the $26,000,000 / 4 mile  question. 
Will Dabney remain in charge, or will it be absorbed by DGI? How will Walker react?
Isn't Dabney an independent contractor anyway?

Popped up

Merde Alors ! A Pop Up Poop update

I spent the past seven years renovating the century old Flour Mill on South Elm St... 

A whole lot of sweat, a whole lot of blood, a whole lot of cash and I must admit a few tears as well...because i am sensitive like that.

A few weeks ago Action Greensboro's Cecelia Thompson announced the future opening of a dog park on the land adjacent to my building... could have been a cool idea except for two things... 

1- I had already informed Dyan Arkin (city Staffer) months before of my intentions of opening a dog park with a beer garden on my property, and ,

2- Action Greensboro was put in charge of it ... so chances are it will cost a ton of money and will be mediocre at best... remember the pop up promenade ? the 4 mile Greenway @ $6,000,000/mile? Have you noticed the elegant zip ties and paper signs around our Downtown? 

The dog park puzzled me as city resources and funds were being allocated without city council vote or approval... I have asked a few council members and none of the five i spoke with, remembered being involved in the decision... probably because...

"The Redevelopment Commission of Greensboro and the 

South Elm Development Group has allocated land for the 

creation of a Pop Up Dog Park at South Elm and Lee Streets 

at the Redevelopment Commission site." 

So city trucks and heavy equipment came, Reggie Delahantie  (City of Greensboro's Economic development)  came and waved his arms around a lot,  a chain link fence was rented, a chain link fence was installed, a water line was pulled (with copper piping) a back flow preventer was installed and a replica of refugee camp finally emerged... (could be useful to contain 400 rioting teens)

Action Greensboro 's leadership having their photo taken in front of its latest creation...from left to right Cecelia Thompson, April Harris and Judy (who happens to be one of my favorite individual)

I had a lot of questions and I then came across this little piece...

"Pop Up Dog Park FAQ

• Dog(s)less than four (4) months of age

• Female dog(s) in heat

• Dogs with a known history of dangerous behavior

• Visitors who taunt, tease, molest, or abuse ANY dog in the off-leash area or Park  

• Dogs incapable of being controlled by their handler at all times while in the

• off-leash area, and while entering and exiting the area.

• Children eight(8) years of age and younger

• More than three dogs per visitor 

• Any animals other than dogs

• Keep dogs leashed when entering and before exiting the off-leash area.

• Remove choke, spike, pinch, prong, or collars that may injure other dogs BEFORE play is allowed.

• Have ready access to the dog(s) leash at all times.

• Remove animal from the off-leash area at the first sign of aggression.

Again, will there be an attendant?
How will the Dog Park be maintained?

Please leave the park in better condition and cleaner than you found it. Visitors should pick up after their own dogs, plus fill in any holes dug by their dog. (And encourage others to do so, too!)  Smoking, food, and glass containers are not permitted.
The City of Greensboro will provide trashcans, bags and weekly trash pickup."

OK, so will there be a permanent attendant to ensure compliance ... right?
What happens to large amounts of dog doodoo in the sun for a week? 
When Bob Chapman  (South Elm St Master Developer) once told me that he could bring the value of my property down...I laughed, as I was well aware of my surrounding at the time...I should have been aware of the Master Developer's secret ingredient... canine excrement!
Certainly could explain previous  projects...

All this time, the economic development incentive that was missing from my neighborhood was large amounts of dog shit to pile up for a week.

The missing ingredient to be worthy of the Baseball Stadium, the GPAC site, Kaplan's hotel or the higher education campus for sure!


When will the park be open?The Park will be open daily to the public from sunrise to sunset.

Will dogs be required to be vaccinated?All dogs must be legally vaccinated, wearing a visible dog vaccination tag.

Again, will there be an attendant?

Now for my favorite one...
"Visitors are responsible for any injury to animal or human caused by any dog toy, play object, or other item they have brought into the off leash area. No attendant will be on duty at the Dog Park. Users enter at their own risk."

 Someone surely will be responsible for any potential civil action resulting from injuries...Will it be Action Greensboro, The Bryan Foundation, the Redevelopment commission or us?

I am now seriously questioning Action Greensboro's reason for being and its unsupervised access to city staff...too often with unmemorable, unsatisfying and expensive results...

WHAT DO THEY DO AGAIN ???