Why Smart Contractors Steer Clear of The Political Fray: Updated

It was recently that Steve Wall of Tarheel Heating and Cooling posted the above to my Facebook wall. As 603 Elm Street could be North Elm or South Elm I had to do some searching to determine which address he was speaking of. The North Elm address is a church so I searched for the owner of the South Elm property and discovered it was none other that QUB Studios, a company owned by Eric Robert who sued Mayor Vaughan and the City of Greensboro not too long ago.

Seemed strange to me that the Mayor would be doing favors for Mr Robert after he sued her in what was a very public case that, among other things, exposed the fact that she billed over $8,000 in personal legal expenses to pay for her divorce from attorney Donald Vaughan, to the City of Greensboro.

The patio area Mr Wall is referencing was one of at least 2 complaints made by Milton Kern when Eric Robert was remodeling the building and as it turns out Mr Robert had something to say about one of those complaints back in 2016 when he penned, Milton Kern, why are you driving by my house real slow?

"That was until I received a call from the city's engineering and inspections department at 4:30  today, telling me that there was complaint filed regarding my ongoing renovations in downtown Greensboro...after a little righteous inquiry, i was told that Milton Kern, notified the city of my ongoing work and wanted to make sure that I had the proper permitting...after he was told that I did, in fact, have the proper permits, he decided that he wanted to review the plans my architect submitted.

Obviously, milton objected to an additonal emergency exit the city had me add as it opened onto the sidewalk ...the code requires an additional exit if the diagonal distance from the existing door is more than 75'...well, I had 72' but , safety first, so I spent more money and was only too happy to accomodate the city's penchant for safety.
But now, the city wants me to go to council to ask for a variance or spend more money and change the approved door in order to create yet another downtown recessed urinal...of course it is not enough that we already have to clean up weekly homeless defacation  on the property...or is it Milton's?"

Was Milton Kern behind Steve Wall's attempt to defame Eric Robert? And why do morons like Steve Wall think they can post anything they wish to my very public Facebook wall as if they were whispering between stalls in the john?

You see, people like Milton Kern have long used the Greensboro Buildings and Inspections Department to prey on lesser financed developers. The idea is to run up the cost of building until developers like Mr Robert are forced into bankruptcy. Then the Milton Kerns of Greensboro rush in and buy the buildings for pennies on the dollar.

Think I'm lying? Hold your breath until Uncle Milton sues me.

As it turns out, Steve Wall and Tarheel Heading and Cooling began the HVAC work on Mr Robert's building but never came back to fix the problems Eric had to hire another HVAC contractor to fix. So Eric simply ended the discussion and refused to pay Mr Wall any more money.

What really makes Hole In The Wall's claim hilarious is that Eric's project at 603 S Elm was ongoing during the time that Eric's lawsuit against Mayor Vaughan and the City of Greensboro was going on. Would the Mayor really pull strings to help a man who was suing her at the time? Seriously?

Is the Mayor somehow involved? Somehow I doubt it, Hole In The Wall just thought that would make me take the bait.

Some speculate that John Brown and Steve Wall are friends. If they were they are no more. John Brown's threats brought him more trouble than he ever imagined.

All I know is that Mr Robert has offered to produce any necessary documentation to prove he is telling the truth. Will Steve Wall of Tarheel Heating and Cooling do the same? Thus far he has yet to answer my questions on a topic Steve Wall posted to my Facebook wall.

I'm telling you, Folks, these clowns didn't become successful because of their hard work and intelligence. They got where they are by screwing and blowing.


Correction from Eric Robert:

Well that can't be good for business....

Update: Saturday, August 5, 2017: Mr Wall expresses a desire to talk, off the record, of course. As far as I'm concerned telephone calls are always off the record as I'm a poor typist and whatever I write is his word against mine. You'll notice Mr Robert put it in writing, Mr Wall should have calls enough to do the same.

Steve digs a hole:

Steve jumps in hole:

WILLIAM BAKER JONES v. THE CITY OF GREENSBORO, NANCY VAUGHAN and JIM WESTMORELAND

1. Pursuant to Rules 3, 7 and 8 of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure, complaining of the defendants, Plaintiff alleges and says; This is an action pursuant to the North Carolina Public Records Law, Chapter 132 of the General Statutes which seeks to compel the City of Greensboro to disclose public records under North Carolina Law.

...2.  Plaintiff William Baker Jones is the proprietor of EZGreensboro News and Record, an investigative local news and opinion outlet covering North Carolina, Guilford County and The City of Greensboro at EZGreensboro.com...

3.  In the course of gathering information about the policies and actions of Greensboro's government, Plaintiff and his staff regularly make use of and rely on North Carolina Public Records Law to gain access to government documents, records and information owned by the public.  Compliance with Public Records Laws on the part of the defendants and other public officials is critical to the Plaintiffs' work advocating for the best interests of our community, county and state.

...We have been thwarted in our aim to provide readers with accurate, timely and thorough information and comment concerning Defendant’s decisions, actions and policies.

Plaintiff's alternative online news outlet received over 242,630 page views between January 1, 2016 and July 31, 2016, which equates to 34,661 per month or about 1,155 per day at EZGreensboro.com.  Plaintiff's best guesstimate of actual readers, considering 8,087 page hits per week, is probably somewhere between 2,000 and 4,000 readers every seven days.  Considering 7,157 Greensboro residents voted in October 6, 2015's City Council primary, if there are only 1,500 local EZGreensboro News and Record readers per week, EZGreensboro.com appears to be in a position to reach and inform somewhere in the 20% range of the total 2015 primary voters within the City.

...10.  Since October 19, 2015, Mayor Vaughan and Manager Westmoreland, sometimes in league with former Greensboro Assistant City Manager Mary Vigue and former Greensboro Communications Director Donnie Turlington, violated Public Records Law repeatedly on multiples of instances in response to public information requests for the benefit of former City Assistant Manager Mary Vigue and former City of Greensboro Communications Director Donnie Turlingon, among others.

11.  These violations include, but are not limited to:

a.  failing or refusing to furnish requesters with copies of requested public records "as promptly as possible" on multiples of requests;

b.  failing or refusing to permit the inspection and examination of public records at reasonable times and under reasonable supervision;

c.  denying or concealing the existence of public records on multiples of items.

12.  The defendants' behaviors suggest, and therefore Plaintiff believes and alleges, that some or all of the violations described above are consequences of concerted policies and practices adopted and followed by the defendants for the purpose of avoiding or circumventing the Public Records Law and discouraging or intimidating public records requesters.

13.  These policies and practices include, but are not limited to:

...14.  PIRT #5180, submitted by EZGreensboro staff as directed by Plaintiff on October 19, 2015 stated “please provide all communications and documentation between city councilman Tony Wilkins and anyone else for the last 90 days.  Please look at both Mr. Wilkins' private and public email addresses”, has not been fulfilled.

Plaintiff has also requested the following from the City;

a.  Triad City Beat’s PIRT #5309, "Civil Emergency" by Eric Ginsburg, which has not been fulfilled since 12/4/2015.

b.  Downtown property owner Eric Robert's PIRT #5418, "dgi", which  has not been fulfilled since 1/24/2016.

c.  Yes Weekly’ PIRT #5754, "Zack Matheny" by Jeff Sykes, which has not been fulfilled since 5/18/2016.

d.  Jeff Sykes’ PIRT #5619, "Cascade Saloon", which has not been fulfilled since 4/5/2016.

e.  Plaintiff's PIRT #5782, "Marty Kotis", which has not been fulfilled since 5/27/2016.

f.  PIRT #5181, submitted by EZGreensboro staff as directed by Plaintiff on October 19, 2015 stated “please provide all communications between Zack Matheny and anyone at the city including city council members private email addresses for the last 90 days”, which has not been fulfilled.

g.  PIRT #5226, submitted by EZGreensboro staff as directed by Plaintiff on November 2, 2015 stated “Please provide any documents and/or communications between anyone in the City's executive office area and anyone from Say Yes to Education for the last 120 days”, which totaled 1,108 emails according to the City of Greensboro, which has not been fulfilled.

15.  To Plaintiff's knowledge, Plaintiff's review of Say Yes to Education's publicly available IRS form 990's indicates the 'non-profit's' investments are located in "CENTRAL AMERICA  AND THE CARIBBEAN", and invested in Say Yes to Education founder George Weiss' Weiss Multi-Strategy fund, from which Say Yes Guilford has been promised $15 million.  Plaintiff's review of Weiss' publicly available asset returns for Weiss' Multi-Strategy fund found investment returns which didn’t correspond to returns found within Yes to Education's non-profit IRS filings.  Plaintiff recently filed complaint #16SEC093 with North Carolina Secretary of State's Securities Division concerning Say Yes Guilford and Say Yes to Education.

16.  On October 26, 2015, Triad Business Journal's Katie Arcieri wrote "After a career with the city of Greensboro that began in 2006, Mary Vigue was recently tapped as the executive director of the local chapter of Say Yes to Education..."

17.  To Plaintiff's knowledge, Say Yes to Education and Greensboro City Manager Jim Westmoreland, who along with Nancy Vaughan and City Council, coordinated low cost publicly funded office space for Say Yes Guilford, whose staff includes former City Assistant Manager Mary Vigue and former City of Greensboro Communications Director Donnie Turlingon, who have declined to provide EZGreensboro News and Record with 2014's Say Yes to Education's 990 tax return after being asked for the document in writing on October, 20, 2015 and again on July 19, 2016.  Say Yes Guilford was also asked for the 2014 990 and its conflict of interest policy and ethics code on October 20, 2015, which has not been provided with Westmoreland and Vaughan's knowledge.

18.  On Wednesday, May 18, 2016 at 11:12 AM, Plaintiff received an email from City of Greensboro Public Records Administrator Katherine Carter, stating "Dear Mr. Jones, Thank you for your public records request.  Per your request, I have made a note in our system to send you a copy of the response to PIRT 5180, 5181, 5226... upon their completion. I will be in touch with you once these requests have been finished", which have not been concluded in a reasonable amount of time, on top of unreasonable terms beforehand on multiples of requests.

19.  To Plaintiff's knowledge, part time City of Greensboro Public Records Administrator Katherine Carter was Say Yes Guilford's Director of Communications Donnie Turlington's former employee directly before and/or after Turlington was City of Greensboro's Communications and Marketing Director in a similar time frame as former City of Greensboro Assistant Manager Mary Vigue was identified as a member of the Say Yes to Education Planning Group for Greensboro before resigning her City post to become Say Yes Guilford's Executive Director for Say Yes to Education.

...these instances disclose patterns and practices of delay, obfuscation, non-responsiveness, foot-dragging and stonewalling on the part of Vaughan, Westmoreland, Vigue and Turlington concerning former employees Vigue and Turlington and a select few City Council campaign contributors who are now personally profiting from their former and current positions which effectively defeats and defies the public policy of transparent and open government underlying Public Records Law.

21.  Based on the patterns and practices described above, Plaintiff believes and alleges the defendants' concerted and repeated violations of the Public Records Law constitute willful and contumacious failures by the defendants to carry out the mandatory and prescribed duties of their respective...

WHEREFORE, the plaintiffs respectfully pray that the court:

23.  Set the matter down for an immediate hearing pursuant to G.S. § 132-9(a);

24.  Enter an order in the nature of a writ of mandamus to inferior government officials ordering the government officials to properly fulfill their official duties or correct an abuse of discretion requiring the defendants and all persons acting at their direction or in concert with them to comply with North Carolina Public Records Law, including G.S. § 132-6(a), (See, e.g. Cheney v. United States Dist. Court For D.C. (03-475) 542 U.S. 367 (2004) 334 F.3d 1096.);

25.  Enter an order pursuant to G.S. § 132-9(a) compelling the defendants to make available any and all public records requested by Plaintiff and others that are determined by the court to be within the City's custody or control, and that have not been previously made available in compliance with G.S. § 132-6;

26.  Enter an order declaring that certain policies and practices adopted and followed by the defendants are in violation of the Public Records Law;

Plaintiff further prays the court provide him with such further and additional relief as the court shall deem to be just, proper and authorized by law, and that the costs of this action be taxed against defendants Westmoreland and Vaughan.

Signed this the 16th day of August, 2016;

William Baker Jones
Pro Se

Update: Scanned images of the 3 envelopes showing the lawsuit was sent by Certified Mail.

Court documents as filed with Guilford County Superior Court.

As expected, Margaret Moffitt spins Nancy Vaughan's legal bill story for Greensboro's rulers

This is sickening;

Bill details attorneys' work for Vaughan over deposition in city lawsuit
"...The work, which cost city taxpayers about $8,500, included meetings with Carole Albright, an attorney at the firm who specializes in domestic law. ...she doesn’t remember the nature of her conversations with Vaughan during those October meetings.  ...Albright said Friday that her practice isn’t limited to domestic law, and that she doesn’t remember the nature of her conversations with Vaughan during those October meetings
...Vaughan was deposed because Robert said he had private conversations with her that contradict statements by the city. ...Vaughan denied that...
...Albright, like Rossabi, was a member of Vaughan’s personal team. The bill shows charges for six instances when Albright worked on the case between Oct. 6 and Oct. 29.
...Vaughan didn’t respond Friday to the News & Record’s requests to discuss the matter.  She said in October that she would use her own money to pay Rossabi.

Margaret Moffitt doesn't bother telling her readers Greensboro's mayor lied to the public before an election, and when the billing came to light, everybody who had something to lose got together and 'fixed it' for Nancy.

As for what other kinds of law Albright practices, there are none listed;

http://www.lawfirmrbs.com/attorney_profiles_details.cfm?aid=3

The lies keep piling up. Carole doesn't remember a thing after six contacts and Vaughan won't comment. That's what's called a cover up.

"Practiced family law in Greensboro, NC, 1995-1999" and "Returned to practice family law in December 2006" and "Guilford College Paralegal Program, Adjunct Family Law Professor, 2011-present" and "Legal Elite, Family Law, Business North Carolina Magazine, 2015" and "Greensboro Bar Association, Chair: Family Law Section 2011-2012" and "North Carolina Board Certified Specialist in Family Law" and "Family Life Council, Board of Directors (2005-2009), Secretary (2006-2009)" and finally, "Greensboro Day School, Field Hockey Coach (2000-2006, 2010-present), Lacrosse Coach (2002-2004)"

Nancy was "Member Board of Trustees, Greensboro Day School, 2009 – December 2013 (4 years)"

Carole doesn't remember a thing.

Greensboro's News and Record's Margaret Moffett misleads readers for Mike Barber and Nancy Vaughan

Whether the council’s actions were legal

depends on whether a majority of members continued to discuss the contract issue privately...

...They didn’t, reported the News & Record’s Margaret Moffett.

Doug Clark and Allen Johnson

John Hammer; "Speaker Drives Council into Kitchen

As a result of deliberations at what was clearly an illegal private meeting, the Greensboro City Council postponed action on awarding the contract to allocate the downtown Business Improvement District (BID) funds at its regular meeting on Tuesday, May 17, in the Council Chambers.

The problem is that the deliberations on how to handle the contract were not done in the Council Chambers with the public present and in front of the television cameras, or even with the city clerk taking minutes.  It was done in the backroom with only councilmembers and two reporters present.

The fact that the reporters were welcomed into the meeting doesn’t meet the definition of a public meeting according to the North Carolina open meetings law.  The meeting in the hallway outside the council offices and in the small kitchen area was clearly held to make a decision in private rather than in public, as is required by law.  It’s not enough to simply allow two reporters to attend the meeting; the public has to be invited and have access, and they did not.

Whether the council’s actions were legal

depends on whether a majority of members continued to discuss the contract issue privately...

...They didn’t, reported the News & Record’s Margaret Moffett.

Doug Clark and Allen Johnson

The public, the city clerk, the city attorney and Councilmember Tony Wilkins were all left in the Council Chambers when seven councilmembers (Councilmember Yvonne Johnson was absent) and two reporters went in the backroom to make a decision.

...Robert said that he had been told about an hour before the meeting that Downtown Greensboro Inc. (DGI) was allowed to revise its proposal five days after the deadline.

Zack Matheny cheated with David Parish's help

DGI used David Parish as a reference in the proposal

...Once they got back to the council offices, Barber said in response to a question from Banks about what was going on, “Based on the history of litigation, I think we need to postpone this for two weeks.”

Mike Barber violated North Carolina open meeting laws

by discussing the issue

...the other councilmembers did discuss the matter among themselves.

Margaret Moffett lied

It was certainly not a formal meeting in any fashion since most of the deliberation appeared to take place in the small kitchen where there were chicken wings and pizza, so there was a crush around the food, but in that crush the councilmembers were discussing what to do about the contract to award the downtown BID money.

Right after Barber made his statement, Councilmember Sharon Hightower asked if there were a time element involved in awarding the contract.

Margaret Moffett lied to News and Record readers

Mayor Nancy Vaughan said that DGI was funded through the end of the fiscal year, June 30, so delaying the contract for two weeks shouldn’t be a problem.

Nancy Vaughan discussed and deliberated illegally

Then councilmembers discussed rebidding the contract, since questions had been raised about the bid process.  But the decision made in the backroom was to have the staff go over the proposals and make certain that everything was in order and then award the contract at the next meeting, scheduled for June 7, the date of the congressional and state Supreme Court primaries in North Carolina.

City Attorney Tom Carruthers was late arriving at the backroom meeting and warned that no deliberations should be taking place.

Doug Clark and Allen Johnson misled News and Record readers

The councilmembers who were in the midst of deliberating said none were, but were still discussing whether to rebid the contract or not while they ate pizza and chicken wings..."

http://www.rhinotimes.com/Content/Default/One-Click-Reading/Article/Speaker-Drives-Council-into-Kitchen/-3/6/1222

.
.
Allen Johnson and Doug Clark; "Whether the council’s actions were legal depends on whether a majority of members continued to discuss the contract issue privately, Jonathan Jones of the N.C. Open Government Coalition said in an email to blogger Roch Smith Jr. that was copied to media and council members. (They didn’t, reported the News & Record’s Margaret Moffett.)

...It gives the appearance of backroom discussion even if there was no violation of the open meetings law or if there was perhaps a relatively minor violation.

Doug Clark and Allen Johnson misled News and Record readers

...The question of DGI is especially sensitive. Its CEO, Zack Matheny, is a former council member. What’s more, before Matheny got the job in 2015, a DGI administrator alleged that a councilman — Barber — had pressed the nonprofit’s board to hire Matheny or risk losing city funding.

...Appearances do matter. And right now, our City Council isn’t looking so good."

http://www.greensboro.com/opinion/n_and_r_editorials/our-opinion-a-pregnant-pause/article_f086e976-4e4b-5904-8549-efe352a8d512.html
.
.
Margaret Moffett; "Council halts discussion on downtown contract amid allegation

In previous years, the council didn’t have to let other groups compete with DGI to get that contract. But a vote by the General Assembly changed that last September...

Councilman Mike Barber then asked for a recess. Council members left the chamber and walked back to the common area outside of their offices. John Hammer, editor of the Rhino Times, and I accompanied them.

Barber told council members they needed to stop the discussion until the city’s legal staff could investigate the matter.

“Based on the history of litigation, 

I think we need to postpone this for two weeks.”

Mike Barber

The council returned to open session a few minutes later, then voted to postpone its decision on who should get the contract.

Barber said afterward that he stopped the meeting after “hearing an allegation from one of the legal bidders that completely put the process in another context.”

The move was necessary, Barber said...

...Mayor Nancy Vaughan said the council needed to stop the meeting to make sure there is no hint of controversy when the council finally does vote on awarding the contract.

Mayor Nancy Vaughan said that DGI was funded through the end of the fiscal year, June 30, 

so delaying the contract for two weeks shouldn’t be a problem.

John Hammer

When someone with a history of litigation against the city makes an allegation, “you want to make sure you get it right,” she said."

http://www.greensboro.com/news/council-halts-discussion-on-downtown-contract-amid-allegation/article_b0dc63cc-a825-5901-8437-f9ed5e561e33.html

Margaret Moffitt lied for Nancy Vaughan, Mike Barber and the rest of council

Margaret should be removed from her position covering Greensboro's City Council
.
.

News and Record's Margaret Moffett; "Council halts discussion on downtown contract amid allegation"

http://greensboroperformingarts.blogspot.com/2016/05/news-and-records-margaret-moffett.html

On DGI at this evening's Greensboro City Council Meeting; This is what non-transparency looks like

http://greensboroperformingarts.blogspot.com/2016/05/on-dgi-at-this-evenings-greensboro-city.html

The City of Greensboro shafted their own employees; "401(k) Fees, Already Low, Are Heading Lower"

http://greensboroperformingarts.blogspot.com/2016/05/the-city-of-greensboro-shafted-their.html

DGI At Any Price? Or Blackmail?

When your car breaks down do you call your accountant and ask him to fix your car?

If the roof on your house were leaking would you call a plumber? What if the plumber was willing to hire a roofer, get your roof repaired and mark up the bill by 50%-- would you call your plumber then?

If you needed surgery would you ask a first year med school student to cut you open and offer to pay him 50% more than an experienced and successful surgeon was willing to do the job for?

So why is the Greensboro City Council, who budgeted $600,000 for marketing downtown Greensboro, willing to pay Downtown Greensboro Inc. and Zack Matheny $900,000 to do the job?

Eric Robert, who submitted a competing bid, had the following to say. Click on any image to view full size.

So why should the City Council pick Eric Robert over Zack Matheny and Downtown Greensboro Inc? I mean, besides the fact that Eric didn't exceed the budget and Zack exceeded budget by 50%.

Well for starters, Eric is experienced in marketing running his own marketing and design firm called QUB. Zack has zero marketing experience and plans to hire a 3rd party company to do the marketing for him. Besides having previously created DGI's most successful marketing campaign in its history, Eric is also among the creators of the wildly popular Project Runway television show originally on Bravo and now on the Lifetime network. Eric has worked in marketing and design for years. Look at some of the photos of what he has done with the Old Mill.

Zach promoted a DGI online selfie campaign that went nowhere. Eric is still drawing royalty checks from Project Runway, Zack is only drawing taxpayer dollars.

Eric Robert, whose last name is pronounced Row Bear, was born in France, grew up in Africa and educated at UNCG and Elon. He speaks about 6, maybe 9 languages fluently and is very proud of the fact that he is an American Citizen. So much so that one of the rooms at the Old Mill has become his Flag Room. The picture really doesn't do justice to his creative work.

You can check out The Mill's Facebook Page for lots more stunning photos of Eric's creative work there.

Eric managed to bring Duck Head and Prospect Brands to downtown Greensboro, even opening there flagship store there,  after Zack Matheny and the Greensboro City Council failed to do so. And while Zack and company were offering taxpayer funded incentive packages, Eric brought them here using nothing more than good old fashioned honest business sense and modern creativity to fill their needs. At no cost to the taxpayers.

So what has Zack done? Well if you ask Zack he'll no doubt name a long list but all of Zack's accomplishments all involveing spending taxpayer dollars in one form or another. And when it comes to creativity the best Zack has done to date is a Twitter selfie promotion and a few months without yet another DWI.

But the Greensboro City Council will vote to renew the contract with Zack Matheny and DGI anyway.

Despite years of complaints from council members including Mayor Vaughan herself that DGI has failed to do its job.

Despite years of overwhelming complaints from downtown business owners that DGI has repeatedly failed to do its job.

Despite the fact that the last time DGI's contract came up for renewal, Mayor Vaughan promised to cut funding to DGI but increased funding instead.

Despite the fact that Zack Matheny illegally funneled the falsified personnel records of previous DGI president Jason Cannon to this writer as part of Zack's efforts to steal Jason's job.

Despite the fact that just a few months ago Zack Matheny was found drunk, passed out in his car, in the early morning hours in the parking lot of a methadone clinic near the corner of North Church St and Cone Blvd.

And to prove the methadone clinic is where I said it is, I give you  from Google maps Crossroads Treatment Center, 2706 N Church St, the very parking lot identified in the media reports with the abandoned grocery story right behind. There's no denying this one, People, this is where Zack was found in the parking lot.

And despite all that the Greensboro City Council will again contract with Zack Matheny and Downtown Greensboro Inc paying $300,000 over budget instead of hiring Eric Robert. Why? To finance Zack's drug habits? How are the merchants of downtown Greensboro, taxpayers and even the casual observer to believe this is anything more than payoff for blackmail to Zack Matheny and other connected individuals who know the secrets our leaders most fear the world learn?

Something is very wrong with Zack Matheny's DGI proposal, which just won approval by the City of Greensboro

On May 4, 2016, the City of Greensboro approved the selection of DGI's proposal as "the sole Vendor of Choice" to manage downtown with City of Greensboro taxpayer monies;

. .
From the Request for Proposals;

Says the budget is to be $600,000, and "Activities proposed in excess of the program budget will not be accepted;

The budget is $600,000;

If 80% of the total budget is supposed to go to "program expenditures", only 20% is supposed to go to "Administrative and Maintenance Operations"; 

From Zack Matheny's DGI proposal submitted to the City, which David Parrish is said to be directly involved in the selection process.  Note Nick Piornack, who was in on Revolution Mill's incentive take and the South Elm parking lot loss etc...;

Zack's references, which includes David Parrish, the Greensboro Assistant City Manager involved in the selection process for the RFP = Conflict of Interest;

Zack's proposed budget is more than $600,000;

$81,157 + $84,805 = $165,962 for Admin and Maintenance, is supposed to cover all the employees salaries and rent etc...?

David Parrish and Jim Westmoreland have some questions which need answering.

Why was the proposal accepted if it was more than $600,000?

How is DGI going to be able to pay all it's ongoing overhead with $165,962?

Competition For Downtown Greensboro Inc

After having first broke the story that changes in North Carolina law would allow competition to Downtown Greensboro Inc. EzGreensboro.com is happy to report that Downtown Alliance Greensboro has submitted a proposal to the City of Greensboro to manage the downtown central business district as was announced on their Facebook page earlier today.

We hope the Greensboro City Council will end their long standing favoritism and give Downtown Alliance Greensboro and Eric Robert a fair shot at doing what DGI has never proven successful at doing.

Who Got The South Elm Street Redevelopment Money: Part 8

Since beginning my series Who Got The South Elm Street Redevelopment Money: Part 1 on Thursday, March 10, 2016 I've been hoping to get replies from the Mayor, City Council, City Attorney or City Staff that might explain the anomalies I've discovered.

It's been 13 days and nary a word. It's as if none of them knows how to use e-mail, proven not to be the case in Tom Carruthers Learns How To E-mail.

At question is what happened to the $8,171,830.oo budget that was designated for the redevelopment of South Elm Street. You see, all the money was gone before the 1.1 acre Union Square Project was started leaving over 9 empty acres and no money to work with.

In Who Got The South Elm Street Redevelopment Money: Part 4  I pointed out that a total of  $2,375,854.04 had been paid to The Firm At Fisher Park. According to my contacts at The Firm At Fisher Park the vast majority of that money was not used for legal services but was placed into escrow accounts to be held until such time as the City of Greensboro okays its release for the purchase of properties included in the South Elm Redevelopment Project and nothing else.

Now considering that the entire budget set aside to buy the properties commonly called the South Elm Redevelopment Project was only $1.6 Million Dollars that figure leaves some 'splainin' to do.

And today I'm going to explain it as best as I can. If you want something more in depth you'll have to ask the Greensboro City Council and City Staff.

In Who Got The South Elm Street Redevelopment Money: Part 6 I made mention of the fact that the City of Greensboro BEDI Grant Proposal  was funding for Downtown Greensboro Inc. projects. Today I'll tell you what those projects were or at least what they were supposed to be.

In Nancy Vaughan's November 19, 2015 Deposition, the one not available anywhere else, Mayor Vaughan is asked if she knows what a B.E.D.I. Grant and a Section 108 Loan is. Here you can see her answers from pages 43 and 44 of the deposition:

So apparently Mayor Vaughan is clueless. Well just so we don't have to remain clueless in Who Got The South Elm Street Redevelopment Money: Part 4 I introduced the July 16, 2003 City of Greensboro BEDI Grant Proposal as submitted to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development by the City of Greensboro and look what I found on page 23 of 68:

DGI, a master developer? I bet that was news to a lot of people but it's not like it was DGI's cherry. Oh no, look what I found in the same report, page 48 of 68:

So it's true, DGI is Milton Kern's piggy bank. For those not up on who owns what, Milton Kern is one of the "investors" in Elm Street Center.


And just in case you have any doubts that the City of Greensboro used Eric Robert's old mill property with intentions of getting Federal loans and grants. From page 38 of 68:

This was a 5 year plan that was supposed to be completed by Downtown Greensboro Inc. It has now taken 13 years and not 1 acre of 10 acres is completed, the money is spent, the City was supposed to realize a return of $1 Million in property sales, the loans were due 3 years ago and no one is talking-- why?

Could it be because the repayment of the loans had to come from somewhere else in the City budget?

Obviously real estate development as economic development isn't working for Greensboro.

Please continue reading Who Got The South Elm Street Redevelopment Money: Part 9

Who Got The South Elm Street Redevelopment Money: Part 7

Yesterday, when I published City Continues Campaign Of Lies I told you of how the City of Greensboro was trying to hide Mayor Nancy Barakat Vaughan's deposition in the QUB Studios Llc, Eric Robert vs City of Greensboro Law Suit. Well don't be fooled into thinking this series, Who Got The South Elm Street Redevelopment Money will go on without it.

Today EzGreensboro.com, with help from one of our many friends who also want the truth to be made known, present to you Nancy Vaughan's November 19, 2015 Deposition, the one not yet made available anywhere else.

Now when reading it I hope you will take into account the July 16, 2003 City of Greensboro BEDI Grant Proposal which clearly outlines how the South Elm Street Redevelopment Project money was intended to be spent and the Transaction Report which, according to Greensboro City Attorney, Thomas Carruthers, tells us who got the money and how it was spent.

Compare all three and deside for yourself if Mayor Vaughan is hiding something or not as we continue next time with Who Got The South Elm Street Redevelopment Money: Part 8 and more surprises.

City Continues Campaign Of Lies

As the EzGreensboro.com team continues to investigate Who Got The South Elm Street Redevelopment Money we run into constant roadblocks thrown at us by the City of Greensboro. For example: when investigator Sal Leone submitted a public information request asking for Mayor Nancy Barakat Vaughan's deposition in the Eric Robert vs City of Greensboro trial he was refused citing NC state statute § 132-1.9. as seen in the e-mail from the City of Greensboro below:

Of course we were expecting such a response but this time it just didn't make sense. You see, that's the problem when you begin with the intention of telling lies, you can't always keep track of what you've already said and done and as it so happens Katherine Carter of the City of Greensboro Public Relations and Marketing Department had previously given us the court order to release Mayor Nancy Vaughan's Deposition.

And we'll be using it when the time comes. In the meantime we hope you'll share this news with everyone you know so that all may see the cover-up that is still going on. After all, there are still things going on in government other than the Presidential elections.

By the way, we recently learned that Nick Piornack who you might have recently heard has taken control of the City funded Revolution Mill Project is behind on his taxes at his company Momentum Development. To the tune of $23,000. Rumor has it that the parking lot he owns jointly with James Budd and City Councilwoman Nancy Hoffman is also in trouble and is up for sale.

And while the News & Fishwrap loves to tell you stories about the losses at the International Civil Rights Center & Museum they don't talk much about Nick, James and Nancy being hundreds of thousands of dollars in the red and their combined dozens of bankrupt business ventures all with no means of paying back the City of Greensboro or the taxes they are never going to pay.

Who Got The South Elm Street Redevelopment Money: Part 4

Well since beginning the series, Who Got The South Elm Street Redevelopment Money: Part 1
I have made some rather startling revelations. For instance: In Part 1 I made known the payouts to the Guilford County Health Department, Community Foundation of Greater Greensboro and even to the City of Greensboro from a fund that was designated to pay for the redevelopment of South Elm Street.

In Who Got The South Elm Street Redevelopment Money: Part 2 I exposed  the dozens upon dozens of payments to real-estate appraisers like Taylor Pope & Herring Inc,, Messick and Company, McNairy & Associates, Michael Watts MAI SRA, William L Herbert, and several more real estate appraisers... How many times is it necessary to appraise the same 13 pieces of property?

And then there was the supposed payment of $315,601.22 to The Firm At Fisher Park...

When I posted Who Got The South Elm Street Redevelopment Money: Part 3 you learned of  $542,284.28 paid to Triangle Paving and Grading for work that was never done. At least, not at the South Elm Street Redevelopment Project.

All of those things I learned from the Transaction Report as furnished to me by Greensboro City Attorney Thomas Carruthers.

I originally had asked for the receipts which would have provided more detailed information but according to the e-mail from Mr Carruthers I would have to pay the City of Greensboro $4,000 or more to get that information. $4,000 I simply do not have.

Today, before I share with you what else I've found in the Transaction Report I thought I'd also point out a blatant lie that was told by the City of Greensboro in the recent Robert vs City of Greensboro trial and echoed by the local media.

From the Carolina Journal: 

"However, Perkins, who was defeated by current Mayor Nancy Vaughan in the 2013 municipal election, was adamant that no promises were made to Robert.
“I can unequivocally say I made no claims on behalf the city or as mayor,” Perkins told CJ. “I don’t know where [Robert] is coming from.” 

When asked about the March 11, 2012 meeting with Robert and Roth, Perkins said, “I don’t remember that. I had hundreds of meetings as mayor.”

In a 2012 study analyzing brownfield grants from 2002-07, HUD stated Greensboro would use funds “to finance predevelopment costs” for the South Elm street project, which included “acquisition of real property, relocation payments, clearance, demolition and removal, infrastructure upgrades and site preparation.”

From  The Rhino:

"Robert is suing Greensboro because he claims the city used the property owned by his company, QUB Studios, in its application for federal redevelopment funds, but he never received any of the over $6.6 million in grants and loans that the city received.  The city did include Robert’s property in some of the application documents.  The Mill is currently just south of the redevelopment site, but the city claims it is under no obligation to share federal the money with Robert.

Last week the city received an 11-page affidavit with 192 pages of attachments from the Department of Housing and Urban Development, which provided the federal money stating in part, “Under the terms of the BEDI Grant Agreement and the Section 108 Contract, the City could not have used BEDI Grant Funds or Guaranteed Loan Funds site preparation, including remediation, on privately owned properties other than those owned by a subrecipient meeting the definition of subrecipient in the C.F.R. [code of federal regulations].”  QUB Studios is not a subrecipient according to the federal definition.

The affidavit also states, “HUD had no expectation that the City of Greensboro would use the funds from the BEDI grant or the Section 108 loan for remediation, demolition, clearance, or site preparation activities on property that was not acquired or previously owned by the City or the Subrecipient.”

But here in the July 16, 2003 City of Greensboro BEDI Grant Proposal as submitted to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development we can clearly see the City of Greensboro did submit their grant with intentions of getting money to clean up the old mill. As a matter of fact: The old mill was #1 on the City's list.

So while it might be true that HUD does not give money to individuals, as noted by the Carolina Journal and the July 16, 2003 City of Greensboro BEDI Grant Proposal the City of Greensboro did have intentions of using HUD money to clean up the Old Mill property and did promise Mr Robert they would reimburse him the cost of remediation:

"The suit also cites a March 11, 2012 meeting with Mayor Robbie Perkins and interim City Manager Denise Turner Roth in which they “represented to Mr. Robert that funds for the South Elm Street Redevelopment Project would be paid to QUB and Mr. Robert in late 2013.”

That meeting is referenced in a letter to Robert from Assistant City Manager Andy Scott, who wrote, “the city will suggest that certain improvements to the Old Mill be included in the next round of financing for the South Elm Street Redevelopment Project. It is anticipated the funds should be available in late 2013.”

And then there's the latest from the Transaction Report: According to the Transaction Report as provided to me by Greensboro City Attorney Thomas Carruthers, a total of $2,375,854.04 was paid to The Firm @ Fisher Park from the total $8,171,830.oo budget.

Now if you ask me The Firm @ Fisher Park never got this money. You see, it just doesn't make sense as the City of Greensboro BEDI Grant Proposal indicates there were only 15 properties in which a law firm's services would be needed, $2 Million was all the grant was for, and The Firm @ Fisher Park was one of several local law firms that were paid more than enough to do the entire job.

Of course, had the City of Greensboro not spent months delaying the release of any information and then only releasing incomplete information we might actually know the truth.

And folks, as you read through the 68 page Grant proposal you'll come to notice that what the Developers and City of Greensboro are building there are nothing like what the Grant and Federal Loan was supposed to pay for. It was supposed to solve our affordable housing crisis but that never happened.

Our past City Councils appear to have participated in the squandering of $8,171,830.oo of Federal, State, County and City taxpayer funding for the South Elm Street Redevelopment Project-- our Mayor, Nancy Barakat Vaughan and the current City Council appears to be participating in the cover-up.

But then maybe the following quote from attorney Scott Hale explains it all:

“It’s a shame that they think spending money on lawyers is economic development rather than spending money on the South Elm Street redevelopment project.”

Stay tuned for Who Got The South Elm Street Redevelopment Money: Part 5, but in the meantime tell everyone you know what we've learned thus far.

Who Got The South Elm Street Redevelopment Money: Part 1

 Yesterday, in Tom Carruthers Learns How To E-mail I shared a reply from Greensboro City Attorney Thomas Carruthurs to my long awaited public information request in which I was trying to learn who got the $8,171,830.oo that the City of Greensboro spent on the South Elm Street Redevelopment Project, now known as Union Square.

In my reply to Mr Carruthers I asked:

"Will Mr Carruthers tell us who is administering the project and why a 3rd party is necessary?"

While I'm waiting on a reply from Mr Carruthers I'll share an e-mail I sent to Greensboro City Councilwoman Marikay Abizuaiter, Guilford County Commissioner Raymond Trapp, State Representative Pricey Harrison and Earline Parmon who operates the Greensboro office for United States Congresswoman Alma Adams:

"I hope everyone receiving this e-mail will take the time to open the attachment titled Transaction Report Fund. If you have trouble opening it I also posted it to Google Docs here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9h2K8JxTQUjYkp0QWswVnZlR0VNcVVfZ0lTUmZ1SWx6WG1Z/view?usp=sharing

Now I'm no accountant but neither am I stupid.

What you are going to find there are hundreds of thousands of dollars if not millions of dollars in payments to companies like Chan Krieger & Associate, an  urban revitalization design firm located in Massachusetts.

And the landscape designer, Teska Associates in Chicago.

You'll also find web design firms dating back several years.

Lots of payouts to lawyers.

Lots of administration fees to an unknown entity.

And even a little bit of money that was paid to the few businesses that had to relocate.

But ask yourself this: If the City of Greensboro is paying for all the up front costs of marketing and design that are normally paid for by project developers and the City of Greensboro is paying for the property then reselling it to developers at a loss while the Federal government picks up the tab for the environmental clean-up then exactly what are the developers paying for? Or is over $8 Million Dollars in taxpayer monies being given away to people who just happen to be very close to City Council?

Please folks, work with me on this, what am I missing, what am I reading wrong, what am I right about?

And Marikay, as the only member of City Council to get this e-mail I'm sure everyone reading would love to hear back from you. For if I'm right this is your chance to make sure you never have to worry about getting reelected again.

And Councilman Trapp, Guilford County comes up a few times as well, just thought you'd want to be kept in the loop.

Representative Harrison, FYI, there are payments to the State of NC.

Ms Parmon, as the local person for US.Representative Alma Adams I thought you'd want the Congresswoman to know Federal Funds are involved as well.

More info here: http://greensboroperformingarts.blogspot.com/2016/03/as-you-know-from-my-stories-union-still.html

Thanks

-Billy"

Now to be fair, these are all busy people who most likely have not had the time to read my e-mail as yet but I wanted you dear readers to know that people beyond the City of Greensboro are being made aware of what I have found.

And ask yourself this: Why all the payouts to the Guilford County Health Department, Community Foundation of Greater Greensboro and even to the City of Greensboro from a fund that was designated to pay for the redevelopment of South Elm Street?

If any of you would like for me to forward you the actual file so that you can study it yourself, perhaps to help me in this investigation, perhaps to prove me wrong or simply because you want to see it for yourself then e-mail me at RecycleBill@gmail.com and I'll be happy to send it to you.

Or if you want to view it in Google Docs: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9h2K8JxTQUjYkp0QWswVnZlR0VNcVVfZ0lTUmZ1SWx6WG1Z/view?usp=sharing

If you click on the link above and start clicking on the totals at the bottom of the page you're going to start having lots of very interesting questions about how the City of Greensboro managed to spend well over $8 Million Dollars on the project before they sold an empty lot to developers at a loss. I know I sure do.

Stay tuned for Who Got The South Elm Street Redevelopment Money: Part 2 and maybe we'll have some replies by then.

 

Union Out Of Square And Out Of Plumb

I just opened the following e-mail from the City of Greensboro. You can click on the image to enlarge it:

My reply:

"Ms Carter,

It is not my place to tell you how to do your job, nor do I wish to seem pushy or rude but if I were you I would impress upon City Staff, Supervisors, City Council and Mayor Nancy Barakat Vaughan the following information lest you be blamed for what could happen because of how this public information has been handled thus far. After all, they are notorious and have a long and storied history of throwing people under the bus.

I will explain.

In October 2015 Attorneys for Mr Eric Robert requested this same said information be provided for a lawsuit in which the City of Greensboro was Plaintiff. The City of Greensboro refused to provide this information to the court.

Because this information is public information under State and Federal Statutes I decided to open an investigation on behalf of EzGreensboro.com, an independent, not for profit media outlet and government watchdog located here in Greensboro, North Carolina.

I first requested this information on December 30, 2015 as PIRT # 5359, titled, Union Out Of Square and documented my efforts to the public at the following web link on Thursday, January 28, 2016: http://greensboroperformingarts.blogspot.com/2016/01/so-whats-hold-up-grasshopper.html  Should you click on the link you will note that others besides myself were also noted as having asked for information concerning the same subject.

I still have the City of Greensboro confirmation e-mail automatically generated when I submitted PIRT # 5359.

On Monday, February 8, 2016 you replied to PIRT # 5359 with the wrong information. I immediately replied to your e-mail and asked that you reopen PIRT #5359 and documented doing so here: http://greensboroperformingarts.blogspot.com/2016/02/downsized-union-square.html You failed to reopen my PIRT as requested and ignored my e-mail altogether.

 On Tuesday, February 9, 2016 I e-mailed you, Ms Carter, Greensboro City Attorney Thomas Carruthers and Greensboro Mayor Nancy Barakat Vaughan documenting my e-mail publicly here: http://greensboroperformingarts.blogspot.com/2016/02/fwd-city-of-greensboro-public-records.html

All the while I patiently waited, and waited and waited, all the while, documenting and building a case against the City of Greensboro for deliberate and willful obstruction of public records requests.

Now Ms Carter, I realize that you are in-fact a low level employee of the City of Greensboro, doing what you are told to do, trying to keep your job, but please bear in mind that at some point, I'm not sure just when, Judges often look at just doing your job as aiding and abetting no matter what Tom Carruthers might tell you to the contrary. And please, I'm only telling you this for your own good and to document to the public that up until this point you have been stuck in the middle.

Then on Monday, February, 15, 2016 I submitted PIRT # 5489 Union Still Out Of Square. Using the autopost feature at EzGreensboro.com I wrote http://greensboroperformingarts.blogspot.com/2016/02/union-still-out-of-square.html just about the same time as I submitted the PIRT and set it to automatically post at 5:00 AM, Tuesday, February 16, 2016.

If you will compare PIRT 5489 to PIRT 5359 you will note that both public information requests are in-fact asking for the exact same information.

On Saturday, February 27, 2016 I made note of the fact that no less than 4 of my readers had forwarded me your e-mails indicating that they too had requested the same information that I am requesting: http://greensboroperformingarts.blogspot.com/2016/02/fec-checks-out.html

I still have in my possession every e-mail and every document and am just itching to give them to investigators from the SBI, FBI, a State or Federal grand jury or perhaps even the persons who will run against our Mayor and current City Council members come the next election.

So now, On March 4, 2016, going on 5 months after attorneys for Mr Robert first asked for this information and 3 months after I first asked for this information I get the following from the City of Greensboro-- a message I should have gotten 3 months ago if this is in-fact a problem:

"The request for all receipts payable and due for the South Elm Street Redevelopment Project requires the extensive use of information technology resources and extensive clerical assistance by personnel of the City of Greensboro.

Therefore, this request is going to require a substantial amount of time to process.

If there is anything you can do to narrow the scope of your request, it would be greatly appreciated."

Do you, Ms Carter, honestly believe, that considering the amount of time that has passed since October 2015 or even since December, 30, 2015 that anyone in their right mind will believe the City of Greensboro has in any way, shape or form even attempted to comply with the following North Carolina State Statute?

"§ 132-6.  Inspection and examination of records.

(a)        Every custodian of public records shall permit any record in the custodian's custody to be inspected and examined at reasonable times and under reasonable supervision by any person, and shall, as promptly as possible, furnish copies thereof upon payment of any fees as may be prescribed by law."

No? I didn't think so.

The City of Greensboro has already had no less than 5 months to get these records together-- 3 months since I first requested them, and now it very much looks as if you haven't even started. It looks as if the City of Greensboro is deliberately trying to hide something, perhaps hoping that I'll forget or just give up and go away.

Well I won't give up. Nor will I modify my request? It will take as long as it takes but the delays thus far do not fair well for the City of Greensboro in the eyes of the public. Nor should they. If City staff isn't hiding something then we are looking at some of the most inept employees a city could possibly hire. Imagine private sector employees putting something off for months and then using the excuse, well it's going to take a lot of time.

Heads would roll and rightfully so.

As a matter of fact I encourage my readers no matter where you might live to use the City of Greensboro's PIRT request system and ask for the following information then in a few days e-mail Ms Carter's reply to me at RecycleBill@gmail.com so I can keep a record of how many people are waiting for the same information. Ask for the following:

"All receipts, all receipts payable and all receipts due for the South Elm Street Redevelopment Project."

Here's the link:  http://www.greensboro-nc.gov/index.aspx?page=3765


Thank you Ms Carter, I hope you have a lovely week.


-Billy

Fwd: City of Greensboro: Public Records Request # 5359

As was pointed out by Roch in his article, Playing favorites, a few days ago the City of Greensboro has a problem responding to public information requests. But apparently it's not just about playing favorites, apparently, even though Eric Robert has dropped his lawsuit against the City of Greensboro Mayor Vaughan and the City are still hiding something as evidenced by their substitution of other information in response to my public information request for receipts, receipts payable and receipts due.

Now I understand a lot of people think what I do here is a complete waste of time, that nothing will change because of my efforts. And quite possibly you are right. But in making requests and putting these public records online I leave a trail for others with more means to follow up on.

And when the City of Greensboro deliberately refuses to fill my public information requests or sends me something other than what I asked for it becomes quite apparent there is something there they don't want you, Dear Readers, to know. After all, I'm only asking for items that are by law, deemed public records.

So in response to yesterday's failure by the City of Greensboro Communications and Public Relations Department, aka the City Propaganda Machine, I give you the e-mail I just sent to City Attorney Tom Carruthers, Mayor Vaughan and others:

"Tom,

Below you will find the e-mail I sent to Ms Carter yesterday. Should it be truncated by the e-mail server you can also find it online at

Downsized Union Square

In compiling PIRT # 5359 I was very careful to abide by City and State policy as posted to the City of Greensboro  website here: http://www.greensboro-nc.gov/index.aspx?page=3765

I didn't ask questions, ask for a public record to be created or ask that records be created that do not exist.

I asked specifically for existing public records including:
"All receipts
All receipts payable
All receipts due"
And specifically referenced to South Elm Redevelopment Street Project.

Now as City Attorney, would you, Mr Carruthers, like to explain to me why the City of Greensboro went through all the trouble of creating a document that contradicts with City Policy and NCGS 132-6.2 (e) in reply to my very simple public information request for City of Greensboro public records that already exist?

You can be sure the readers of http://www.EzGreensboro.com would like to know the answer as they will soon be reading this e-mail as well.

Thank you
-Billy Jones"

City staff went through a whole lot of trouble to gather all those documents in order to compile a document they weren't required to create in the first place. It would have been easier to give me what I asked for.

But they chose not to. Why?

Eric Robert has dropped his law suit but the City of Greensboro is still hiding something. What is it and who gained from it?