Thursday, August 13, 2015

The blatant hypocracy of Susan Ladd and Warren Buffett's News and Record

"Outrageous statements of the first presidental debate 

...Worst Payoff Ever Award goes to our man Trump again. He boasted of buying politicians for most of his business career, including Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

"When you give, they do what you want them to do," Trump said.

If a candidate is remotely conservative
and won't vote for give aways to Greensboro's biggest donors
the News and Record's Editorial board
will most likely not endorse him/her
and Susan Ladd will use the paper to rip said candidate apart like Trudy Wade
who has tried to reduce the News and Record's revenue
by taking away wasteful taxpayer funded legal notices
which the 'news' stories almost never mention via disclosure.

When pressed about what he got from Clinton, Trump could only come up with one thing: she came to his wedding.

That's buying friends, not political influence. And it's kind of pathetic."
The News and Record failed to report on Marty Kotis and Roy Carroll's water and sewer free handouts in exchange for campaign contributions.

The News and Record failed to report backdoor and illegally filed campaign finance reports by Jamal Fox, on a campaign event sponsored my Marty Kotis, whose advertisement says "paid for by friends of Jamal Fox, which is his political filing name.

The amended filings now show a white, wealthy Republican supporting a black, impoverished Democrat, which Jamal misled the Guilford County Board of Elections concerning, which the News and Record will most likely fail to report.

If a candidate doesn't agree with what the News and Record's
Allen Johnson and Doug Clark think they should think
on giving taxpayer monies to a select few who fund candidates,
they will likely endorse someone supported by the paid for chosen ones,
as they almost always have
even though they lambaste the same behavior at the national level.

Jamal fox voted to reimburse Kotis Holdings, LLC for inflation-adjusted reimbursement of $17,972.33 and an additional reimbursement of $30,000 for other site preparation costs, amended total not to exceed the amount of $359,833.33.

Kotis' Jeffrey Nimmer, explained on tape that the extra $30,000 was a result of annexation fees that the company was unaware of when they first applied for the grant; and expressed the company did not feel it should be charged an annexation fee for an economic development project.

Which would create low paying jobs
which will most likely qualify the workers
for public assistance, providing Kotis with higher profits
paid for with everyone else's taxes.

Interim City Attorney Carruthers interjected that the reimbursement would be an improper use of reimbursement funds which was not allowed under the law; spoke to what was allowed under the law; and emphasized that the award of incentives for City fees was not permissible.

Yvonne J. Johnson was called to speak how much are the annexation fees, ...spoke to what it would include the annexation fees are not part of the item or resolution, YJ - referenced the fees, asked how Council do that, with the directive that it not be used for reimbursement of City fees.

Councilmember Matheny clarified ...reiterated that the City could not reimburse the annexation fees but could reimburse for "site improvements".

Councilmember Fox inquired about the rationale...

George Hartzman, 2506 Baytree Drive, ...voiced concern with what would be built on the site; possible transfer of the property once the Urban Loop was completed; committing fraud; ...made reference to political meddling; and to campaign contributions by Kotis.

The item was moved by Mayor Pro-Tem Johnson who has benefited from Marty Kotis' largess and seconded by Councilmember Abuzuaiter who has done the same.

The motion carried on the following roll call vote: Ayes, Nancy Vaughan, who benefited from Marty Kotis campaign suppport, Yvonne J. Johnson, Marikay Abuzuaiter, Mike Barber, Jamal T. Fox, Sharon M. Hightower, Nancy Hoffmann, Zack Matheny and Tony Wilkins, who benefited from Marty Kotis campaign support.

No one voted against.

Someone down the street from this deal 
was harmed by this political nepotism.

Someone's dinner table has less on it because of this.

Quite a few may get minimum wage paying jobs at what may never be a strip mall by a highway that may never be built.

Some folks at the top get richer with the help of everyone else's money, and most on the bottom stay poor because of mis-allocated public money via purchased politicians.

City Council rolled Greensboro's taxpayers like a donut.

And then the low paying jobs can get more public assistance, so Marty can maximize profitability even more via everyone else's money

The News and Record has never asked
how much have the Vaughan's received
from Cone Mills/Wilbur Ross for free methane from the City of Greensboro
while Nancy served on Council and the Solid Waste Commission.
Greensboro's City Council should approve the following language to prohibit the appearance of unethical behavior, but they won't;

"Current Greensboro City Council Members and Candidates for local elected office are prohibited from accepting campaign contributions from board members of organizations, developers, contractors or their lawyers or agents who have or may receive taxpayer funded contracts or monies, for 12 months before and after doing business with Greensboro’s government."

Businesses looking to relocate or expand in Greensboro are not presented with an even playing field. Marty and Roy Carroll's deals are great examples, which handed out freebees and cash to those who funded and supported City Council campaigns.

A few Kotis campaign contributions from 2011;

ZACK MATHENY William Kotis Kotis Properties
ZACK MATHENY William Kotis Kotis Properties
JIM KEE William M Kotis III Kotis Developer
NANCY VAUGHAN William M. Kotis Kotis Properties
ROBBIE PERKINS William M. Kotis III Kotis Properties

"Pay to play

Pay to play is a phrase used for a variety of situations in which money is exchanged for services or the privilege to engage (play) in certain activities.

The common denominator of all forms of pay to play is that one must pay to "get in the game"...

In politics, pay to play refers to a system, by which one pays (or must pay) money to become a player.

Marty was the biggest campaign contributor 
in 2013's City Council races.

Typically, the payer (an individual, business, or organization) makes campaign contributions to public officials, ...and receives political or pecuniary benefit such as no-bid government contracts, influence over legislation, political appointments or nominations, [Jeff Nimmer] special access or other favors.

The phrase, almost always used in criticism, also refers to the increasing cost of elections and the "price of admission" to even run and the concern "that one candidate can far outspend his opponents, essentially buying the election."

While the direct exchange of campaign contributions for contracts is the most visible form of Pay to Play, the greater concern is the central role of money in politics, and its skewing both the composition and the policies of government.

Thus, those who can pay the price of admission, ...gain access to power and/or its spoils, to the exclusion of those who cannot or will not pay: "giving certain people advantages that other[s] don't have because they donated to your campaign."

Good-government advocates consider this an outrage because "political fundraising should have no relationship to policy recommendations." Citizens for Responsible Ethics in Washington called the "Pay-to-Play Congress" one of the top 10 scandals of 2008.

Incumbent candidates ...are typically the greatest beneficiaries of Pay-to-Play.

Many seeking to ban or restrict the practice characterize pay-to-play as legalized corruption."