How can Greensboro's City Council
vote to fund a $22.5 plus million project
if they don't know who the "undisclosed parties" are?
...the next step will be to seek funding from several other potential stakeholders, including the state of North Carolina, the city of Greensboro and foundations such as the Golden Leaf Foundation.
...David Powell, who has been working for years on megasite assembly efforts, said Monday that the next step is to seek additional partners to raise funds for land acquisitions at a site that could grow to as large as 2,000 acres.
The Piedmont Triad Partnership now has about 1,300 acres under control in Randolph County.
Powell said PTP will approach other stakeholders, including state and local governments and local foundations, to raise funds for additional land.
"We're going to go to all the usual suspects that you need to go to for an economic development project," said Powell, who is transitioning out of his role as president and CEO of PTP while also helping to create a new organizational structure for the megasite that would represent the interests and views of all partners seeking a stake in the project.
...Powell said he has been asked by the PTP board to complete land assembly for the megasite over the next six months and work with various stakeholders to "consider all options" for its future organizational structure.
"stakeholders", as in whom
other than Jim Melvin and the Bryan Foundation?
...it was never the intent for the PTP itself to own, manage and market the property, Powell said.
Some of the options under discussion include the possibility of an existing entity that could manage, market and ultimately convey the megasite land to a private user such as an auto manufacturer.
For a price,
around which "stakeholder" housing projects
would spring up like bluegrass.
...Of course, whatever structure manifests itself will not have any type of profit-motive.
Bullshit.
...So far, PTP has been the only entity that has controlled the real estate associated with the project, said Sam Simpson, a broker with Simpson Commercial who has been hired to assemble the megasite land on behalf of the PTP.
My understanding is the Bryan Foundation's Jim Melvin
put up the money for the PTP.
A separate organizational structure for the megasite would represent the interests and views of all partners seeking a stake in the project.
...He is completing his work for PTP and ultimately will leave the organization entirely. Powell said he plans on staying in the Triad to pursue the private commercial real estate business.
Who would have thought?
He is pursuing partnerships with Simpson, as well as developers who have nothing to do with the Randolph County megasite."
"I've been working on this since 2011," Powell said. "It was my idea. It was something that I put a lot of risk into. It's a great moment that the county stepped up. Now that they've stepped up, I think we are going to be able to entice other stakeholders to put money into it."
http://www.bizjournals.com/triad/blog/morning-edition/2015/02/county-approves-4-2m-megasite-land-purchase.html
http://www.bizjournals.com/triad/print-edition/2015/01/16/david-powell-looking-toward-life-after-ptp.html?page=all
http://www.bizjournals.com/triad/print-edition/2015/02/06/next-stage-will-be-a-different-conversation.html
.
.
"Mayor and Council:
...What must be considered is if a conflict of interest exists either under N.C.G.S. §§160A-75 or 14-234, or the City of Greensboro’s Charter, or the City’s Conflict of Interest Policy. ...Direct or indirect benefits are considered under the City’s conflict of interest policy and typically involve financial interests for the Councilmember, his or her immediate family, their partner, or an organization which employs or is about to employ the member, family member or partner...
Mujeeb
S. Mujeeb Shah-Khan
CITY ATTORNEY
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
.
.
"No member shall be excused from voting except upon matters involving the consideration of the member's own financial interest or official conduct or on matters on which the member is prohibited from voting...
In all other cases, a failure to vote by a member who is physically present in the council chamber, or who has withdrawn without being excused by a majority vote of the remaining members present, shall be recorded as an affirmative vote..."
§ 160A‑75. Voting.
.
.
"Any officer, department head or employee who has financial interest, direct or indirect, in any proposed contract with the city or in a proposed sale of any land, material, supplies, or services to the city or to a contractor supplying the city, shall make known that interest and shall refrain from voting upon or otherwise participating in the making of such contract or sale.
Any officer, department head, or employee who willfully conceals such a financial interest or willfully violates the requirements of this Section shall be guilty of malfeasance in office or position and shall forfeit his office or position.
Violation of this Section with the knowledge expressed or implied of the person or corporation contracting with or making a sale to the city shall render the contract void."
Sec. 4.131. - Conflict of interest: Greensboro Code of Ordinances, City Charter
.
.
the "Ethical Responsibilities of the Governing Body of the City of Greensboro", passed on February 19, 1993 states; "The Mayor or any member of the City Council who has a financial interest, direct or indirect, in any official act or action before the Council shall, …disclose such interest and all material facts with respect there to the City Manager and City Attorney. In addition, he/she shall publicly disclose on the record of the Council the nature and extent of such interest, including the full disclosure of all such material facts, and shall withdraw from any consideration of the matter pursuant to sec. 4.131 of the City Charter."
And as Sec. 4.131. - "Conflict of interest: Greensboro Code of Ordinances" states; "Any officer, department head or employee who has financial interest, direct or indirect, in any proposed contract with the city … shall make known that interest and shall refrain from voting upon or otherwise participating in the making of such contract…”,
...Violation of this Section with the knowledge expressed or implied of the person or corporation contracting with or making a sale to the city shall render the contract void."
Sec. 4.131. - Conflict of interest: Greensboro Code of Ordinances, City Charter
.
.
And as § 138A‑36 states; "Public servant participation in official actions ...no public servant...authorized to perform an official action requiring the exercise of discretion, shall participate in an official action by the employing entity if the public servant ...may incur a reasonably foreseeable financial benefit ...which financial benefit would impair the public servant's independence of judgment or from which it could reasonably be inferred that the financial benefit would influence the public servant's participation in the official action.
...A public servant shall take appropriate steps, ...to remove himself or herself to the extent necessary, to protect the public interest...from any proceeding in which the public servant's impartiality might reasonably be questioned due to the public servant's familial, personal, or financial relationship with a participant in the proceeding."
.
.
Greensboro’s Ethics Code says that if there is an actual or possible financial interest, a Council Member is supposed to publicly disclose on the record of council, and the remaining Council members are supposed to decide if a conflict of interest exists.
The Policy says City Council Members be honest, impartial, fair and responsible.
Shah-Khan had ruled that former Mayor Robbie Perkins could not vote on a pass through subsidy for Roy Carroll from Guilford County because Perkins owned property (of which he apparently was not paying the mortgage payment) in Carroll’s Centre Pointe building.
If Greensboro’s Ethics Code says that if there is an actual or possible financial interest, City Council members are supposed to publicly disclose on the record of council, and the remaining Council members are supposed to decide if a conflict of interest exists, how can be up to the city attorney to decide who has an interest or conflict?
If a Greensboro City Council Member has a financial interest if the individual has, directly or indirectly, any actual or potential ownership, investment, or compensation arrangement with The City of Greensboro or with any entity that conducts transactions with The City of Greensboro, do the above statutes apply?
What does "indirect" financial interest mean?
Where are the disclosures on the "nature and extent of such interests"?
Is Greensboro's City Council, not the city manager or city attorney, responsible for deciding whether or not a city council member has a excusable conflict?
Is Greensboro's City Council the only entity that can excuse or allow a vote when there may or may not be a conflict of interest?
