More Megasite Mega Lies: Updated With Even More Lies

First posted 9:49 AM on Wednesday, July 27, 2016

From the Greensboro News & Record Wednesday May 20, 2015, Greensboro council approves engineering study for megasite water and sewer by Richard Barron:

"Greensboro has now committed $2.3 million toward providing water and sewer service to the Greensboro-Randolph Megasite.

The City Council voted 7-2 Tuesday to approve a contract with HDR Engineering for design work and environmental studies to extend city water and sewer lines to the site in the northeastern corner of Randolph County.

Council members Tony Wilkins and Marikay Abuzuaiter voted “no.”

The City Council has not committed to the entire project, which would cost an estimated $22.5 million and include 16.6 miles of water lines, 8 miles of sewer line and a sewer lift station."

Key words:  "The City Council has not committed to the entire project,"

 But on Friday, July 22, 2016, Richard Barron writes in  City of Greensboro moving forward to supply utilities to megasite:

The city plans to start buying easements and rights of way next month for water and sewer routes that will run through southeastern Guilford County to the Greensboro-Randolph Megasite.

City Manager Jim Westmoreland said this week that the city has spent $2.47 million on engineering and design and permitting.

The lines would supply city water and sewer to a future industry that might locate at the 1,450-acre site in northeastern Randolph County.

He said city attorneys will begin buying the property in late August.

Westmoreland expects it will take months to negotiate with individual property owners, and will cost about $2 million — $800,000 for sewer and $1.2 million for water.

The City Council approved the work in 2015."

Key words: "The City Council approved the work in 2015."

Now which statement is true? "The City Council approved the work in 2015."  OR  "The City Council has not committed to the entire project,"

You see, since 2015 the Greensboro City Council has not publicly discussed the Greensboro-Randolph Megasite or the buying of easements and rights of ways for the project at what was then an estimated cost of $22.5 Million Dollars.

So how is it this money is being spent without City Council approval? Why the lies? Why did Richard Barron write,  "The City Council approved the work in 2015." when in fact he previously wrote, "The City Council has not committed to the entire project,"?

How is it that the City can spend up to $22.5 Million Dollars, perhaps more, without City Council approval?

And finally, will Councilman Tony Wilkins and Councilwoman Marikay Abuzuaiter speak out on this after having voted no before?

Update: July 28, 2016: Minutes after originally posting the article above at 9:49 Am on July 27, 2016 I e-mailed Councilman Tony Wilkins and Councilwoman Marikay Abuzuaiter via the City Council e-mail form to ask them to speak up on this issue as both were previously opposed. As of now neither have replied. I also posted the e-mail to the Facebook group, Greater Greensboro Politics:

 Later that same day I  followed up with an e-mail to City Manager Jim Hightower and City Attorney Thomas Carruthers, also posted to the same thread at Greater Greensboro Politics:

And folks, it's not like Tony Wilkins hasn't been on Facebook to see the message. At least twice since I tagged Tony in my post to Greater Greensboro Politics he has taken the time to discuss cucumber sandwiches but ignores his duty as a City Council member.

Will Greensboro's "leadership reply now or will they continue to ignore not only me but everyone who reads EzGreensboro.com, Greater Greensboro Politics, Greensboro and Guilford County Politics etc... Real Progress For Greensboro, Black Lives Matter Greensboro and the many other online forums and individual pages where Greensboro's elected leaders and appointed officials are kept tabs on.

You can no longer control the conversation. Eventually you must come clean.

When did the Greensboro City Council vote to approve spending on the Greensboro-Randolph Megasite for anything more than an engineering study and how can Jim Westmoreland justify spending $2 Million Dollars to buy easements without City Council approval?

Thousands of voters are awaiting an answer.

Update 2: Friday, July 29, 2016, 1:15 PM: As it has become apparent the Greensboro City Council has no intention of answering my questions I am submitting the following Public Information Request to the City of Greensboro via their online PIRT system:

"In 2014, Greensboro City Attorney  S Mujeeb  Shah Khan was discharged from his duties as City Attorney by Mayor Nancy Vaughan and the Greensboro City Council supposedly for issuing a $750,000 check without permission from the City Council.

Proving their own lack of common sense, the City Council passed a resolution banning the cutting of checks without signed contracts in an effort to absolve Shah-Khan of responsibility for having lost $750,000. Councilman Tony Wilkins was quoted as saying:

    "I think this is the first time on City Council that I have voted to legislated common sense."

But in the end Shah Khan was fired anyway as all payments above a maximum threshold require PREVIOUS approval from City Council.

This brings us to today's issue: One week ago today the Greensboro News & Record reported referring to City Manager Jim Westmoreland:

"The lines would supply city water and sewer to a future industry that might locate at the 1,450-acre site in northeastern Randolph County.

He said city attorneys will begin buying the property in late August.

Westmoreland expects it will take months to negotiate with individual property owners, and will cost about $2 million — $800,000 for sewer and $1.2 million for water."

Now I'm not great at math but isn't $2 Millon almost 3 times as much as $750,000? And wouldn't $2 Million also be over said spending threshold?

Of course, since City PIRT policy explicitly states, "Please be aware that the public records policy does not require the City to do research, analyze data, or answer written questions." I guess you are not allowed to answer said questions so please provide me with the following as a Public Information Request:

The minutes from the Greensboro City Council Meeting in which City Council authorized the purchase of rights of way and/or easements to provide water and sewer services to the Greensboro-Randolph Megasite located in Randolph County, North Carolina.

Thank you
-Billy Jones, Candidate for Mayor of Greensboro, 2017."

City Council can choose to ignore me but by law PIRT requests eventually must be answered.

Update 3: Monday, August 15, 2016 Well today I finally heard back from Katherine Carter of the City of Greensboro-- over 15 days to write me a lie on behalf of Mayor Vaughan and the Greensboro City Council:

"Dear Billy,

Thank you for your public records request (PIRT 5953) regarding meeting minutes pertaining to water and sewer services for the Greensboro-Randolph Megasite.

According to our Legislative department, the resolution approving the extension of Water and Sewer was adopted on March 3, 2015 and the Resolution authorizing the contract with HDR Engineering, Inc. to provide engineering and design was adopted on May 19, 2015.  Minutes from the City Council meetings can be found online and a word search used to find a particular item.

The City of Greensboro is using its normal procedures on the Greensboro-Randolph Megasite water and sewer extension project.  This process includes seeking Council approval/authorization to initiate the project and to develop engineering design and right of way plans and specifications.  Once complete, these plans are used by the City to work with individual property owners and businesses to negotiate property acquisition terms to acquire any needed project construction easements or rights of way.  Once the acquisition negotiations are complete, Council is provided with the terms and price of the negotiation and asked to authorize staff to proceed with the purchase.

I hope this information is of use to you.

Sincerely,

Katherine Carter, Public Records Administrator

Communications and Marketing Department - 336-373-3282

City of Greensboro

PO Box 3136, Greensboro, NC 27402-3136"

Ever heard of the Legislative Department of the City of Greensboro? Perhaps you know them by another name as I'll explain in my reply to Ms Carter:

"From the answer provided to me by Ms Carter:

"Once complete, these plans are used by the City to work with individual property owners and businesses to negotiate property acquisition terms to acquire any needed project construction easements or rights of way.  Once the acquisition negotiations are complete, Council is provided with the terms and price of the negotiation and asked to authorize staff to proceed with the purchase"

But what I asked for in PIRT 5953 was:

"The minutes from the Greensboro City Council Meeting in which City Council authorized the purchase of rights of way and/or easements to provide water and sewer services to the Greensboro-Randolph Megasite located in Randolph County, North Carolina."

PIRT 5953 can be viewed here: http://www.greensboro-nc.gov/index.aspx?page=3765

Again, when did City Council authorize the purchase of easements when in-fact it was explicitly stated in local media reports and at the City Council Meeting that Council was in-fact voting only to fund a $2 Engineering Study?

From the Greensboro News & Record Wednesday May 20, 2015, Greensboro council approves engineering study for megasite water and sewer by Richard Barron:

"Greensboro has now committed $2.3 million toward providing water and sewer service to the Greensboro-Randolph Megasite.
The City Council voted 7-2 Tuesday to approve a contract with HDR Engineering for design work and environmental studies to extend city water and sewer lines to the site in the northeastern corner of Randolph County.

Council members Tony Wilkins and Marikay Abuzuaiter voted “no.”

The City Council has not committed to the entire project, which would cost an estimated $22.5 million and include 16.6 miles of water lines, 8 miles of sewer line and a sewer lift station."

Key words:  "The City Council has not committed to the entire project,"

And who makes up this anonymous Legislative Department of the City of Greensboro if said department does exist? According to the City of Greensboro website that would be:

"The Legislative Department is made up the City's governing body, the City Clerk, Community Relations, and Elections.
Phone: 336-373-2397 Send an e-mail to the Department"

http://www.greensboro-nc.gov/index.aspx?page=762

So in other words, the Legislative Department is the same Fascist Government body including Mayor Vaughan, the Greensboro City Council, Propaganda Masters and others who are attempting to stonewall me now.

You still take me for stupid.

This is not an example of open and honest government.

I expect the truth... YESTERDAY!

I'll be adding these e-mails to my post here: http://greensboroperformingarts.blogspot.com/2016/07/more-megasite-mega-lies.html and referring to it a lot.

Thank you

-Billy Jones, Candidate for Mayor of Greensboro, 2017"

Lies to cover up lies only makes it harder for the liar to remember all the lies. If I were a member of the Greensboro City Council I would be very concerned and very publicly outspoken that my own personal integrity is being brought into question by the actions of City Staff and other members of City Council but as this has now been going on for about a month and not one member of City Council has raised his or her voices I think it is safe to assume they are all fine with what is going on and what is being done in their names.

As always, I save all e-mails and will forward originals to anyone who sends a request to RecycleBill@gmail.com

And folks, here's the part I didn't send back to the City of Greensboro as I await their next lie. Here is the March 3, 2015 Resolution as approved by the Greensboro City Council which tells a completely different story.

You can find this document and all of Mayor Nancy Vaughan's lies by watching the City Council Video here.

Adding To Roch's Pile: Part 2

On Wednesday I posted Adding To Roch's Pile: Part 1in which I told you of Roch Smith Jr's story, Greensboro’s new secrecy: Sinister and hostile, "a damming account of the activities of the public relations department of the City of Greensboro, Greensboro City Council, Greensboro Police Department, and high ranking City staff. It was indeed a scathing account in which Mr Smith pointed out a number of lies and deliberate attempts to mislead the public." and I promised to document many more such instances in which the City of Greensboro has openly and deliberately hidden public information from the public.

In Mr Smith's account her wrote:

"Attempting to keep secret a legal bill the mayor asked the city to pay for her; passing public records policy unannounced and without public comment; telling a citizen a map already on the city’s website was too secret for her to have; and an assertion that records hosted in the cloud are not public are just a few of the many examples that Greensboro’s city government has grown secretive and hostile to public transparency under the current mayor Nancy Vaughan and city council."

Today I'm going to tell you of my own experiences of trying to get public information on the very incident that led up to Mr Smith's alleging that the City of Greensboro attempted to keep secret legal bills that the City was paying on her behalf.

Some of you might remember last year's Eric Robert v City of Greensboro lawsuit in which attorneys for Mr Robert attempted to get Mayor Vaughan to testify in court. I had hoped to get to the bottom of that story and documented my entire effort to get records from the City of Greensboro from beginning to end.

On Wednesday, December 30, 2015 I submitted Greensboro Public Information Request #5339 asking for the following information:

"I would like copies of all the monies the City of Greensboro received or spent on the South Elm Street redevelopment project as mentioned in the following News & Record article: http://www.greensboro.com/news/robert-city-scheduled-for-february-trial-in-grant-suit/article_d8652016-3973-5d3b-a72a-7620f1e93cf1.html

All receipts
All receipts payable
All receipts due

And as you are already gathering this same said information I foresee no problem with your being able to produce said receipts and billing info on or before 10:00 AM Monday morning.

Thanks -Billy Jones"

 Of course, things didn't go as I planned.

Mr Robert dropped his trial on Feburary 2 so using the excuse that the City could not send me what they deemed to be evidence doesn't continue to hold up. But as I pointed out in my Tuesday, February 16, 2016 post, Union Still Out Of Square, "The following is not a receipt."

From my post:

"And yet that is what was provided to me by the City of Greensboro in response to public information request #5359 when I asked for  All receipts, All receipts payable and All receipts due for the South Elm Street redevelopment project.

And when I e-mailed Katherine Carter, City Attorney Tom Carruthers and Greensboro Mayor Nancy Barakat Vaughan to ask them to reopen my public information request they all ignored my e-mail, failed to reply for the last 7 days and never reopened my request.
So late last night I submitted the following public information request:

"Please send me All receipts, All receipts payable and All receipts due for the South Elm Street redevelopment project.
Thank you -Billy Jones"

Below is a screen shot of the automatically generated response I got from the City of Greensboro showing I did send a request.

This is now the 3rd time I have asked the City of Greensboro to fulfill the same public information request. What are they hiding."

On Friday, March 4, 2016 I posted, Union Out Of Square And Out Of Plum, in which I posted the following e-mail sent to me by the City of Greensboro:

Now please understand, this is the same information the City was supposed to have already gotten together for Robert v. City of Greensboro. They should have already had it.

Secondly, there has been no mention  of holding this information because of the trial thus far.

And thirdly, thus far, there has been no mention of any fees for gathering this information.

Finally, I have yet to hear from the City Attorney Thomas Carruthers or anyone in his office concerning this matter. Keep these things in mind.

The following was my reply to Ms Carter:

"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"

A few others did actually e-mail the City and ask for the same records I asked for but it was only a handful of people and on Wednesday, March 9, 2016 at least 2 of us got the following reply from the city attorney:

"Mr. Jones and Mr. Godwin:
I am writing to update you on the status of your PIRTs filed on February 15 and 16 respectively.  These are unusually large requests. 

This information is maintained in our Lawson software system. There is no global search function for this type of inquiry.  It will take an estimated 1000 individual queries to open and print your desired items. Only Lawson certified employees can conduct these queries. 

I understand that you have not yet agreed to limit the scope of your request or alter the request to allow us to produce the necessary information in a more efficient method. I would like to propose a solution.  Attached is a Lawson spreadsheet in electronic format that itemizes in excess of 8 million dollars in expenditures by the City of Greensboro. This allows you to review the itemized expenditures by account.  Please note that the “217” funds comprise the BEDI, Section 108, and EPA funds used by the City for acquisition and remediation at the South Elm Street Redevelopment Area (SESRA).  Section “212” funds are CDBG funds, some of which were used for the SESRA. The second attached spreadsheet, which we produced to you February 8th, is a summary of the funds only expended at the SESRA. This spreadsheet also contains the limited DOT and Powell Bill funds used at the SESRA. 

If you identify a reasonable subset of individual receipts, we should be able to produce these in a timely fashion. 

Your request at present is unmanageable under current City procedure. City Staff estimates that it will take a minimum of 100 hours of staff time at $40.00 per hour to produce these individual receipts. The City as a matter of procedure does not ordinarily charge for staff time to respond to requests which require an excessive amount of public time and expense. However, we are permitted to do so under State Public Records law and because of the magnitude of your request and the amount of staff time necessary to complete this request, we will have to exercise that option in this instance. Therefore, if you chose to go forward with your original request, please forward to us payment of $4000.00 and we will bill against this amount. We will refund any remaining unused money or will send additional bills if necessary to cover the additional staff time. This staff intensive inquiry will take an estimated 90 days to complete. 

Mr. Jones, I also understand you remain concerned that we waited to respond to your December 30th PIRT (5359) until February 8th.  As you are aware, at the time of your inquiry the City was involved in litigation regarding the use of these funds.  The City is not required to produce public records which are trial preparation materials.  The plaintiffs in this litigation dismissed their claims on February 2nd.  Thereafter, we timely responded. 

One final item.  I am not receiving your emails, only other’s responses to your emails to the City. It would be helpful for you to email directly to my address as well.
Thank you for your anticipated cooperation. 

Tom
Thomas D. Carruthers
City Attorney
Office of the City Attorney
300 West Washington Street
PO Box 3136
Greensboro, NC 27402-2320
Phone:    336-373-2320
Fax:        336-373-2078 thomas.carruthers@greensboro-nc.gov
==============================

=========================
Please note that email sent to and from this address is subject
to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties."

Transaction Report Fund 212 & 217 

PK SE Expenditure Summary  "

I found it interesting that in 2016, Mr Carruthers indicated that the City of Greensboro has not yet installed the Lawson Search Feature made available in 2009. When I'm elected Mayor of Greensboro in 2017 I'll make sure our IT staff has such tools available to them to significantly reduce the time and cost of fulfilling public information requests.

I didn't have $4,000 to pay for the records I asked for so I used the records linked to in Mr Carruthers' e-mail above. From the records I got it appears the City of Greensboro has lost, stolen or otherwise misappropriated approximately half of the original $8 Million Dollars given to them by the Federal Government for the South Elm Street Redevelopment Project. But no one will discuss it with me and I can't really be sure.

I still haven't given up. Elect me to the office of Mayor of Greensboro next year and those records will be made public if I have to search for them myself.

Stay tuned for Adding To Roch's Pile: Part 3

Margaret Moffett's answer to who owns the Civil Rights Museum property

"City attorney: City Council could use museum building as collateral on loan

The city could use the International Civil Rights Center & Museum building as collateral on money owed to local taxpayers, City Attorney Tom Carruthers said Thursday in a letter to museum officials.

...the city expects either cash or collateral for the remaining amount, he wrote.

...“We will, however, recommend to council that it accept an appropriate deed of trust against the museum building to secure our debt in lieu of our rights under our current agreement,” he continued.

...The City Council is poised to discuss the loan balance during a special meeting Monday. Museum officials said earlier this week that they won’t attend, hoping instead to work out these figures with city staffers.

But in his letter Carruthers urged them to reconsider.

“This meeting was specifically set for council to consider these items and discuss them with you,” he wrote...

How can the cash-strapped museum get the money to make those payments?

Carruthers’ letter points to a new solution, one that would give the city financial leverage but possibly ratchet up tensions between the two parties.
Using the old Woolworth’s building at 134 S. Elm St. as collateral.

The building sits in the very heart of downtown — the corner of South Elm Street and February One Place. Its tax value is about $3.8 million, according to the Guilford County Tax Department.

...such a move would put the city at the front of the line for payments if the nonprofit museum’s board were ever to sell the building.

It was unclear Friday how museum officials might receive the suggestion."

http://www.greensboro.com/news/city-attorney-city-council-could-use-museum-building-as-collateral/article_5d5e9928-329f-57d6-af41-ed704923fc2e.html

Bruce Wiley · The University of North Carolina at Greensboro - UNCG

Margaret, who owns the building? Names of people not corporations. Is the museum being run as a for profit entity? Do Skip and Earl have offices in the building and do they conduct business not related to the ICRM from those offices. Who pays for their cell phones? Are they subject to FOIA requests due to the use of taxpayer provided funds?

Like · Reply · Jul 30, 2016 10:55am
.
.
Margaret Moffett · Reporter at Greensboro News & Record

Bruce those are all very, very good questions. Who owns the building? When the museum entered into this complicated tax-credit system, it had to create 4 or 5 new for-profit entities to set up the system. One of those for-profits is called "Museum Landlord." It technically owns the building. It's directors are Earl Jones, Deena Hayes-Greene and Doug Harris.

What is Museum Landlord on the hook for?

Nothing

Can the owners take rent payments out of what could be a non-profit Museum?

Yes, which Margaret didn't report

Now, at some point in the next few months, when the tax-credit structure expires, the museum will revert back to a nonprofit. I have no idea whether they'll use the old nonprofit structure or create a new one. And that gets me to the answer to all of your other questions: I don't know.

Journalistic negligence

The museum isn't subject to any public records laws. Anything connected to the city (or the county or state) is public record by extension, and I make sure I always get those records. But their own records? No. I can't compel them to make them public. All I can do is explain that transparency is the absolute best answer to every question. I'm just as frustrated as you and other people are by the lack of information. As always, I appreciate your comments and that you continue to ask for answers.

Like · Reply · Jul 30, 2016 3:53pm

Bullshit

Look up the deed Margaret

Ask Len Lucas

Not knowing rigged 2013's Mayoral race

Now you don't want to admit it

From the Comments;

Not that it matters;

Does the Museum’s Landlord stand to earn income from the property under any scenario?

"Possibly, if their museum tour/ticket sales increase."

Thank you,

Public Information Desk
City of Greensboro
300 W. Washington Street
Greensboro, NC 27401
.
.
That means now that the City has forgiven some of the loan, Skip Alston and friends stand to financially benefit.
.
.
"...Some LLCs are responsible for the museum’s debt, others aren’t.

...Sit-In Movement Inc. is one of the five companies that make up the museum. The other four are Civil Rights Museum LLC, ICRCM LLC, Museum Tenant LLC and Museum Landlord LLC.

...Sit-In Movement Inc. does not own the building. According to Guilford County tax records, the building is owned by Museum Landlord LLC. The North Carolina secretary of state’s office lists former Guilford County Commissioner Skip Alston as its manager and agent of this for-profit corporation.

Alston has said the owners of Museum Landlord LLC are Alston, Greensboro attorney and Sit-in Movement LLC board member Doug Harris, retired Vice President of Community Relations for WFMY-TV Shirley Frye, Smith Moore Leatherwood attorney Carole Bruce and former President and current adviser to the Weaver Foundation Skip Moore.

Matheny, however, said that Frye, Bruce and Moore have withdrawn from the LLC, which leaves Alston and Harris.

Alston is also listed as the agent and manager for Museum Tenant LLC and Civil Rights Museum LLC, and the agent for Sit-In Movement LLC and ICRCM LLC.

Of the five LLC’s, only one lists more than one company official. ICRCM LLC lists five managers: Alston, former City Councilmember and state House Rep. Earl Jones, City Councilmember Yvonne Johnson, Robert Brown and Harris. Johnson said she has never been to company meeting.

Sit-in Movement LLC was incorporated in 1993 by Alston and Jones.

...Both Museum Landlord LLC and Museum Tenant LLC are controlled by their managing member, ICRCM LLC.

ICRCM LLC is the managing member and owns 80 percent of Museum Landlord LLC. Another 10 percent of Museum Landlord LLC is owned by Museum Tenant LLC. The remaining 10 percent ownership stake in Museum Landlord LLC is owned by Stonehenge Community Develop LLC, which manages the investments of investors who got new markets tax credits for investing in the museum.

ICRCM LLC is the managing member of Museum Tenant LLC, but only owns 0.01 percent of it. The other 99.99 percent of Museum Tenant LLC is owned by Community Historic Credit Fund LLC, which apparently represents investors who got historic tax credits for investing in the museum.

...Museum Landlord LLC subleases aspects of the museum to Museum Tenant LLC, Civil Rights Museum LLC and Sit-in Movement Inc., which rents the second floor of the building.

The LLCs also owe each other money."

John Hammer

The Contract Mayor Vaughan Didn't Want You To See: Part 2

Yesterday I posted The Contract Mayor Vaughan Didn't Want You To See.

That prompted an e-mail from several prominent local attorneys. Here's an e-mail from one from which I have excerpted parts:

"It only says Rossabi Black and Slaughter were being retained to represent the City in the "collection of delinquent tax assessments." The deposition isn't mentioned. Is there an amendment to that letter or contract that actually refers to representation in the deposition? I think a malpractice carrier wouldn't be happy if there's nothing showing what the firm represented the client on. And where is there something saying they're representing Nancy? "

Interestingly enough, we were inquiring about Robert v. City of Greensboro and neither asked about nor knew anything about delinquent taxes.

Also, Greensboro City Attorney Thomas Carruthers signed off on the PIRT request saying:

"The contract is a public record irrespective of the Robert case.  We will provide.

Tom"

Our lawyer friend replied back:

"Am surprised that City didn't amend the engagement letter or have a general one with RBS."

I replied to my lawyer friend:

"I'm not surprised, we're dealing with cocaine addicts, pill poppers, drunks and idiots. This is exactly how they get themselves into this shit to begin with."

We now have what appears to be fraud, misappropriation of funds, maleficence and an effort on behalf of the city legal department to conspire with Mayor Vaughan to commit these crimes.

Things are going to be hopping on the 2nd floor by the time I get there today to pick up my most recent PIRT request concerning Zack Methany.

And in case you missed it, Click here to view the letter.

My name is Billy Jones and I'm running for Mayor of Greensboro in 2017 and I have promised that if you elect me I will open a full investigation into the corruption of Mayor Vaughan and the entire Greensboro City Council.

Of course, if they keep this up they'll all be in jail before then.

Greensboro Fails ROI Police Spending

Perhaps you read Roch Smith jr's damming report of the Sickening Behavior of City Attorney Tom Carruthers and the Greensboro City Council as published this week in Yes-Weekly?

"What made Monday’s action particularly abhorrent was not just the unscrupulous treachery, but how much it marked a low-water mark for Mayor Nancy Vaughan who had campaigned against Perkins as a champion of transparency and is now abandoning those principals right before our eyes…"

Perhaps that lack of transparency is why Greensboro scored just 49th overall in return on investment on Police Spending according to a recent survey by WalletHub. And when you consider that Detroit, Michican, long known as a very dangerous place to live, is ranked 5th in police ROI, it is beginning to look as if those new body cameras everyone is fighting about were a complete waste of money.

And so it is, my first update to Billy's Big List Of Documented Reasons Why Greensboro Sucks. How many more will there before our leaders get themselves and our city under control?

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.

Who Got The South Elm Street Redevelopment Money: Part 2

On Thursday I posted Who Got The South Elm Street Redevelopment Money: Part 1 in which I asked,

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

when referring to Wednesday's post,  Tom Carruthers Learns How To E-mail. While I'm waiting to hear back from Mr Carruthers I thought I'd take the time to give you some background on what I've been learning about the South Elm Street Redevelopment Project and Union Square.

I used the Guilford County GIS System to construct this map of the area in question. The property numbered 18 is Union Square, where UNCG, NC A&T and Cone Hospital are currently constructing the new school of nursing. For reference, the street running east to west across the top of the map is Gate City Blvd, formerly Lee Street and the street running north to south between lots #13 and #14 Is South Elm Street.

 Correction, as explained to me by Roch Smith jr:

"UNCG, NC A&T and Cone Hospital are currently constructing the new school of nursing"

That's not right. UNCG and A&T have agreed to lease some classroom space there. They have their own schools of nursing. The word "school" in academic parlance refers to an area o study (school of economics, school of nursing, etc) but, even if referring to buildings, UNCG and A&T have their own buildings that house their nursing schools and UNCG will be building another for nursing should the upcoming state bond pass (which has me wondering what, really, is the need for Union Square). So, the universities are not constructing anything at Union Square and they are not housing nursing programs there. They have promised to have some classes there."

My thanks to Roch.

 Parcels 10,11,12, 13 and 14 along with the 3 unnumbered lots located between 14 and 12 all belong to the Redevelopment Commission of the City of Greensboro. One can only assume that since these properties have not yet been sold there are no plans to build anything there other than the Downtown Greenway as yet. You can verify what I'm telling you by using the Guilford County GIS System for yourself.

The 4 unnumbered lots directly below #13 and #18 are owned by the Redevelopment Commission of Greensboro. The one remaining lot is owned by a company called, Grays On The Greenway, Llc witch according to the NC Secretary of State was formed in July of 2013 by David and Sidney Gray, two very nice Greensboro natives who have been investing in Downtown for many years and constantly getting screwed by the City of Greensboro. Last I heard it was Councilwoman Nancy Hoffman building on one of the Gray's properties without permission or paying rent.

Lot #3 is owned by the City of Greensboro. The building and property just south of lot #3 is owned by Herman and Lorna Heyge and is the home of Musikgartenan early childhood development school that specializes in early music education. The remainder of that block is owned by New Zion Missionary Baptist Church.

Property #9 is owned by QUB Studios. All the properties directly to the east of QUB Studios are privately owned as well.

Now in going over the South Elm Redevelopment Transaction Report I've found a lot of interesting things I'll be looking into in more depth. For example, there were numerous payments to the real-estate company Foster Rich And Company but it's my understanding the City of Greensboro employs full time, fully licensed real-estate brokers of their own.

And then there were 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 few pieces of property?

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

Well it just so happens I know some of the nice folks at The Firm At Fisher Park so I showed them the Transaction Report and quite frankly they said they were shocked to see a figure that large for any of the work they have ever done for the City of Greensboro. They didn't remember any such billings. Of course they've not yet had time to go back through years of bookkeeping but you'd probably remember a payday like that. I mean, they're a law firm but their business is deed and title services. Most of their jobs run closer to $200 Dollars, maybe $300 sometimes, not THREE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS.

Maybe someone from the City of Greensboro will get in touch before I begin Who Got The South Elm Street Redevelopment Money: Part 3.

Tom Carruthers Learns How To E-mail

As you know from my stories Union Still Out Of Square,  Union Out Of Square And Out Of Plumb and It's Called Division... With Updates, I've been having a horrible time of late getting the City of Greensboro to abide by the law concerning the fulfilling of Public Information Requests.

Finally I got the following e-mail from City Attorney Thomas Carruthers today:

"Mr. Jones and Mr. Godwin:
I am writing to update you on the status of your PIRTs filed on February 15 and 16 respectively.  These are unusually large requests. 

This information is maintained in our Lawson software system. There is no global search function for this type of inquiry.  It will take an estimated 1000 individual queries to open and print your desired items. Only Lawson certified employees can conduct these queries. 

I understand that you have not yet agreed to limit the scope of your request or alter the request to allow us to produce the necessary information in a more efficient method. I would like to propose a solution.  Attached is a Lawson spreadsheet in electronic format that itemizes in excess of 8 million dollars in expenditures by the City of Greensboro. This allows you to review the itemized expenditures by account.  Please note that the “217” funds comprise the BEDI, Section 108, and EPA funds used by the City for acquisition and remediation at the South Elm Street Redevelopment Area (SESRA).  Section “212” funds are CDBG funds, some of which were used for the SESRA. The second attached spreadsheet, which we produced to you February 8th, is a summary of the funds only expended at the SESRA. This spreadsheet also contains the limited DOT and Powell Bill funds used at the SESRA. 

If you identify a reasonable subset of individual receipts, we should be able to produce these in a timely fashion. 

Your request at present is unmanageable under current City procedure. City Staff estimates that it will take a minimum of 100 hours of staff time at $40.00 per hour to produce these individual receipts. The City as a matter of procedure does not ordinarily charge for staff time to respond to requests which require an excessive amount of public time and expense. However, we are permitted to do so under State Public Records law and because of the magnitude of your request and the amount of staff time necessary to complete this request, we will have to exercise that option in this instance. Therefore, if you chose to go forward with your original request, please forward to us payment of $4000.00 and we will bill against this amount. We will refund any remaining unused money or will send additional bills if necessary to cover the additional staff time. This staff intensive inquiry will take an estimated 90 days to complete. 

Mr. Jones, I also understand you remain concerned that we waited to respond to your December 30th PIRT (5359) until February 8th.  As you are aware, at the time of your inquiry the City was involved in litigation regarding the use of these funds.  The City is not required to produce public records which are trial preparation materials.  The plaintiffs in this litigation dismissed their claims on February 2nd.  Thereafter, we timely responded. 

One final item.  I am not receiving your emails, only other’s responses to your emails to the City. It would be helpful for you to email directly to my address as well.
Thank you for your anticipated cooperation. 

Tom
Thomas D. Carruthers
City Attorney
Office of the City Attorney
300 West Washington Street
PO Box 3136
Greensboro, NC 27402-2320
Phone:    336-373-2320
Fax:        336-373-2078 thomas.carruthers@greensboro-nc.gov
==============================

=========================
Please note that email sent to and from this address is subject
to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties."

Transaction Report Fund 212 & 217 

PK SE Expenditure Summary  "

The PK SE Expenditure Summary doesn't tell you much of anything but if you click on the Transaction Report Fund 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 a project they haven't even broken ground on, most of the money going not to land purchases but to people most of you have never heard of. And remember: The City of Greensboro was reimbursed by the Federal Government for the environmental remediation costs.

Mr Carruthers mentions the trial involving Mr Robert. I really kinda expected to hear that excuse on say January 2 or so when it was still relevant, not weeks after the fact. I mean, seriously, that was the first excuse I expected to hear, not the last. Is Tom again taking up his same old habits that cost him his law firm?

My reply:

"Mr Carruthers,

Thank you for your reply.  I believe with what you have provided and possibly subsequent PIRT requests based on the information found within the Transaction Fund Reports I can learn what it is we need to know about the South Elm Redevelopment Project/Union Square. I can't speak for Mr Godwin and the others but I am happy to cancel my requests for receipts concerning this project.

It's strange that you are not receiving my e-mails. Perhaps you shouldn't have marked my e-mail address as spam just because you don't want to deal with the issues I point out. I recommend you contact the City of Greensboro IT department to fix the problem you've created. Mr Westmoreland and Christian Wilson will forward this to you to make sure you get it.

I do have one final question in that I noticed there have been thousands of dollars in administrative costs billed to the project. Is the City of Greensboro paying administrative costs to a 3rd party, who is that 3rd party and why is a 3rd party necessary when City Staff manages $Millions of Dollars every month?

Will I need to file yet another long awaited PIRT to find the answers or can I expect a quick reply directly from you Mr Carruthers?

Thank you

-Billy Jones"

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

And are some of you, after examining the Transaction Report Fund 212 & 217  beginning to believe we need to know more about where over $8 Million Dollars went?

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

Thomas Carruthers Attacked By Rabid Dogs, Part 7

We've all made mistakes. I know I've made more than my share.

When I was in my mid twenties I decided to try my hand at operating my own home repair and remodeling business. I managed to get a few jobs but things were slow at first so I decided some kind of advertising was in order.

I had a couple thousand fliers printed up and drug my then wife to what was then Carolina Circle Mall to place flyers under windshield wipers all over the mall parking lot until we'd covered the entire lot and about half of the flyers were gone. Then we jumped in my pick-up and headed to 4 Seasons Mall to repeat the process.

It was up in the afternoon when we got home to find a message from a Greensboro Police Office on the answering machine instructing me to call him ASAP. I did, having no idea what I had done. He explained to me that placing flyers on cars without permission from Mall management was illegal but that the kind folks at Carolina Circle had agreed that if I would return ASAP and remove the flyers they would not prosecute.

Back to the mall we went, my wife bitching the whole time.

When we got back from Carolina Circle Mall there was another message on the answering machine from yet another Greensboro Police Officer. I didn't need to call him to know what that was about but called anyway. Yep, same story at 4 Seasons Mall.

Back to the mall we went, my wife bitching the whole time.

That said, the effort wasn't a complete failure. About half of the cars left before we got back, meaning about half of their owners saw my flier and over the course of the next few weeks a number of calls came in leading to work.

Now I'm going to be completely honest. I wasn't a licensed contractor. I wasn't bonded or insured. I didn't have a business license nor did I have any of the other required permits necessary to operate a business. I was just a struggling young man trying to make an honest living and willing to put my name and reputation to my hard work in which I took great pride.

One of the people who found my flier was a nice black Catholic woman and her husband living in East Greensboro with their 13 children in a 2 bedroom house in dire need of a huge room addition. When she called I wasted no time coming over to see what it was she and her husband wanted.

I quickly got my bid together and submitted copies to her and the savings and loan company that held the mortgage on the house and was arranging the financing for the job. I was surprised at how quickly they approved me to take on the job but then contractors were in short supply back in those days.

The job was set up in 4 draws. The first draw got me materials to start working. At 25% completion I asked for the second draw but I already knew I was in trouble. When I took the 3rd draw I was nowhere near 75% complete but I had run out of materials and had to keep working. I had grossly underbid the job. I let my helper go and decided to work alone but even that wasn't going to make up the difference.

I took on a part time job working to buy materials to keep the job going but couldn't get in enough hours. Finally, I knew something had to be done.

My wife and several friends suggested I file bankruptcy and simply walk away from the job leaving it unfinished but to me my name was worth something more. You can find a lot of people who will tell you they dislike Billy Jones for any number of reasons but anyone who tells you Billy Jones is a thief is an out and out liar.

I found a full time job driving a truck and 3 licensed and bonded contractors willing to bid on the job then went to see the branch manager at the savings and loan. The conversation went something like this:

"How can I help you?" he asked.

"That job I've been doing," I said, "I bid it too low, I'm not going to be able to finish it."

"Well we can probably get you a little bit more money," he said.

"Not $10,000 more," I said.

"Oh no," he said, "the home owners can't afford that much. What do you plan to do?"

"I want you to loan me the money," I answered. "I've lined up contractors and already found myself a full time job so I can pay it off."

"Do you have any collateral?" he asked.

"Just my old pick-up and tools," I pointed out the window to the parking lot.

"That truck's ancient," he said, "there's no way there's $10,000 there. How do we know you won't skip town on us?"

"You don't," I said.

"So why would we loan you the money?" he asked.

"Well," I answered, "For starters, I came to you. Secondly your choices are one, file charges against me now and run up a bunch of legal bills that will force me to skip town because I can't pay them or loan me the money, hope I pay it back, then hire lawyers if I don't. Either way you take a chance that you don't get paid."

It took a few days but he savings and loan arranged a 5 year $10,000 loan which I paid off in 3 years by doing without a lot of things most people would have never done without. But unlike Thomas Carruthers I didn't file Chapter 7 bankruptcy while running out on my clients. I did what had to be done to keep my name whole. I kept up my end of the bargain and saw to it the job was done.

Now that's not to say I don't owe money. Like many in America today I have medical bills I haven't the means to pay. For years I avoided going to doctors for anything only making matters worse simply because I didn't want to run up bills I couldn't pay but I never intentionally ran out on anyone and as you know I've never accumulated any wealth. When I was audited by the IRS a couple of years ago the IRS gave me money back because I had overpaid my entire life.

So what would the late Senator Joseph T Carruthers, honored in a 2014 ceremony attended by Greensboro Mayor Nancy Barakat Vaughan, Greensboro Councilwoman Sharon Hightower, and Thomas Carruthers himself think of Thomas' actions?

What would Senator Gladys A. Robinson, N.C. Representative Jon Hardister, Deputy Secretary, N.C. Dept of Public Safety, Mr. Ellis Boyle, Maj. Gen. Greg Lusk, adjutant general of North Carolina, Brig. Gen. Kenneth Beard, and Col. David L. Jones 113th Sustainment Brigade Commander think of the man who received the award in the name of Joseph T Carruthers for which Greensboro's National Guard Armory is named?

My late uncle James Elmo Jones fought in North Africa, Italy and jumped in the first night jump over in the history of war over Normandy France as part of the US Army Pathfinders on June 5, 1944, the eve of the D-Day invasion, was awarded a Purple Heart. And my aunt Dorothy, Elmo's widow, paid Thomas Carruthers to represent her as her lawyer in a civil matter only to be let down and ripped off like all the others Thomas Carruthers never paid back while going on to continue to accumulate hundreds of thousands of dollars in wealth.


So the next time someone says something about Billy Jones not having anything, you can remind them that Billy Jones and his family, like most working class families, paid our due while Greensboro's politically connected continue to steal from the working class while using the law to allow them to do it.

Will there be a Thomas Carruthers Attacked By Rabid Dogs, Part 8? That depends on Thomas Carruthers, the media and you, Dear Readers.  Thomas.Carruthers@greensboro-nc.gov

Thomas Carruthers Attacked By Rabid Dogs, Part 6

You know what I love best about our readers here at EzGreensboro.com? They don't assume we are the final authority on anything we write. Take for instance my series Thomas Carruthers Attacked By Rabid Dogs.Since I started writing the series the tips just keep rolling in. My readers don't assume I have it all, they send it to RecycleBill@gmail.com 

In  Thomas Carruthers Attacked By Rabid Dogs, Part 5 I asked the question:

 "How do you buy a new home while still in a bankruptcy proceeding and still owing hundreds of thousands of dollars to innocent victims of your fraud? And how do you live with running out on all those people who counted on you?"

Well now the question gets even bigger. You see, thanks to an EzGreensboro reader we now know that Mr and Mrs Carruthers also bought a beach house on Oak Island in Brunswick County, North Carolina.

Now I could be wrong but it looks to me as if Tom and Elizabeth bought the land in 1998, before the bankruptcy, hid it from the 2005 bankruptcy court and built a new house there in 2013. If that's the case then we're looking at fraud. And if a licensed practicing attorney and member of the North Carolina Bar were to be convinced of fraud the NC Bar would have no choice but to remove that attorney's license to practice law. Being that Mr Carruthers has yet to contact me to explain all this perhaps he'd like to now? And a smart city council would immediately place Mr Carruthers on suspension pending an investigation. Especially after myself and others personally e-mailed city council to make them aware of the issue.

Amazingly our Mayor Vaughan and her Lawyer husband Donald Vaughan also own a beach house in Brunswick County. Birds of a feather?

Now I can't be sure but best I can gather, Tom's wife, Elizabeth Carruthers is a public school teacher at Erwin Montessori school on Bessemer Avenue, built upon the same plot of ground where Tom's father, the late Senator Joseph T Carruthers Jr graduated from Bessemer High School.

Perhaps Mr Carruthers will contact me to set the record straight before I go on to  Thomas Carruthers Attacked By Rabid Dogs, Part 7.