Melderec Forces Challenged by Conservative Wing of City Council at Greensboro Partnership Meeting

I am told that a dinner meeting of the Greensboro Partnership took place tonight.  Recall that this organization includes the Greensboro Chamber of Commerce as well as Action Greensboro.  The Partnership apparently uses these meetings periodically to communicate to city council members and county commissioners its expectations.  Jim Melvin and others were in attendance. 

The priorities the Partnership presented were, in order of stated importance, the downtown Greenway, the Nussbaum Center, the Urban Loop and the Natural Science Center.  My understanding is that conservative council members in attendance challenged the Partnership representatives on several of these.

The Melderec people are seeking $2.13 million to complete the next leg of the Greenway.  A visual presentation was provided that suggested that properties adjacent to the Greenway would increase 10-20x in value.  Council members were then apparently supposed to infer that tax revenues flowing into the city's coffers would increase dramatically because of these increased property values.  April Harris, the executive director of Action Greensboro, was challenged directly on this representation which did not seem at all credible. 

The Nussbaum Center, a business incubator for entrepreneurship, has previously been renting space at the Revolution Mills complex.  Now, it wants to own its own building, and is requesting $1.8 million from city taxpayers.  It was pointed out to the Greensboro Partnership representatives, however, that receiving a hand-out from taxpayers is inconsistent with the concept of entrepreneurship, which requires assuming risk and putting one's own resources and talents on the line.

The Urban Loop proposal involves a request for the city to advance $29 million so rights-of-way can be purchased along the next leg of the loop from Bryan Boulevard to Lawndale Drive.  The state would later reimburse the city for the monies advanced for this purpose.

The Partnership requested $10 million from council members for the Natural Science Center.  But it was pointed out that only within the last couple of weeks, one of the key leaders of the Natural Science Center had advised a council member that $5 million would be sufficient for now.  It was learned that a restaurant was being planned for the complex, which also was questioned.

The Melderec people apparently were quite unhappy that they were being challenged on these points, and glowered as these statements were made.  It was clear they were a bit furious over what was occurring.  They were apparently accustomed to getting their way without being questioned.

The message was sent to the Partnership that there would be some areas of cooperation, but that there would also be some areas of disagreement.  A general principle was shared that private businesses need to be able to provide for themselves.  It was clear that some advocating for the Partnership had never assumed risk and started a business themselves; and therefore could not understand that too much of a governmental role is inappropriate. 

Councilman Danny Thompson led on at least some of these points.  Mayor Bill Knight was in attendance, and was reportedly gracious toward the hosts, but did not make any firm commitments.  To the extent that conservative council members are not acting as the lapdogs of this organization, and are asking hard questions, that is a good thing for Greensboro taxpayers.

Those who have been reading this blog for quite some time will recall that this is the organization that gave an illegal $5,000 contribution to the Simkins PAC for the 2008 election season; and that reflexively supported Mitchell Johnson and the sitting city council during early 2006 in response to the GPD fiasco.

Comments

[triadwatch]

let's see if others on council will do the same and ask questions, Zack are you listening because we know you read all the blogs.

on a side bar did you see this part from the rhino this past week"One topic, Arnold said, was the possibility of using money from the Greensboro/Guilford County Joint Water and Sewer Trust Fund to get city water to more of the county. That fund has about $19 million that Arnold said "is just sitting there." He said some of the money should be put to use to help expand water and sewer lines in areas other than Greensboro."

How much more money is sitting around in some fund? 19 million is a lot of money just sitting around. Never knew it existed.

[Tony Wilkins]

"How much more money is sitting around in some fund?". Good question KB. $1.54M supposedly sitting in a "coliseum reserve".

"The Urban Loop proposal involves a request for the city to advance $29 million so rights-of-way can be purchased... The state would later reimburse the city for the monies advanced for this purpose.". Watch how Mary Rakestraw demands an answer on this actually happening in the last city council meeting.

Great post Joe, thanks. Anybody know if John Hammer was in attendance?

[Joe Guarino]

Keith, thanks. That is a great question about that $19 million. I think about the city's policies regarding annexation and the recent court case. Arnold is apparently fueling a situation in which the city would provide water and sewer to these unincorporated areas, and later thereby feel entitled to annex them.

Tony, my understanding is that this meeting was closed to the press. Apparently this is the modus operandi of the Melderec folks-- get the elected officials in a closed meeting, and intimidate them to acquiesce with their agenda. Of course, this is a huge problem, because the Greensboro Partnership is one of the main forces driving huge amounts of local governmental spending. One would not expect this of a chamber of commerce, which would traditionally be thought of as a conservative, business-oriented organization. But not in Greensboro.

And yes, if the city council proceeds with advancing money to the state for the Urban Loop, they need to secure an ironclad guarantee it will get the money back in a reasonably timely fashion.

[Ken Hill]

Still scratching my head over the idea that the Greenway would increase property value by the suggested magnitudes. I'm not convinced by any means. But even if true, property taxes are not actually paid by property values. Property taxes for business property are paid from revenues of the businesses occupying that property. It is preposterous to suggest that the Greenway will increase revenue 10 to 20 times for adjacent businesses.

[Joe Guarino]

Ken, I am told that there was a small disclaimer on the visual presentation that said, "for illustrative purposes only". But it is pretty clear that the intent was to mislead. And as you point out, it would not necessarily be good news for the property owners if it were true.

But these people are sufficiently equivocal with regard to ethics that they will make this type of representation to get their way.

[bubba]

"It is preposterous to suggest that the Greenway will increase revenue 10 to 20 times for adjacent businesses."

The entire premise, presentation, packaging, and promotion of the Greenway is an example of the corrupt way Business as Usual is conducted in this town. The reaction described above is all the confirmation we need of that.

I think we should call upon our elected officials to boycott all meetings of any of the Melderac con Simkins cabal, and tell them in no uncertain terms that the game is over. Any elected officials who particpate are to be singled out, identified, and shunned.

[Roch101]

Oooooh, I love a good shunning!

[Dr. Mary Johnson]

Yes, Roch. I know.

[Brian Penn]

I looked at the website for the Greenway and the stats they present show a 12%-22% premium tax value of those properties located near a greenway versus properties located further away. Additionally, they suggest a $10 return on each $1 invested in a greenway, but that number includes various sources, not limited to RE taxes. I wonder if there was a mistake in the presentation or a misunderstanding of the presentation, as the 10x to 20x increase in value is not what is presented on the Greenway website.

[Joe Guarino]

I suppose it could be, Brian, but I have some concerns in view of the fact that the representation was apparently made in the context of agenda items being presented to elected officials with an intent to secure their agreement.

[Brian Penn]

It would be nice to have a copy of the presentation to verify what was presented.

[Ken Hill]

I occasionally check the Roch blog. Some of his posts on his turf are perfectly sensible. But the one on this thread is nonsensical. Let's hope he just stays home.

[bubba]

"Oooooh, I love a good shunning!"

Unfortunately, that sort of thing has no effect on you because you're utterly devoid of any morals and ethics, save the ones which suit your delusions of the moment.

[mick]

Joe,

I agree the 10X-20X appreciation is preposterous. I hope it is a typo, Wow.

But you will have to explain to me why appreciation in one's property value is not neccessarily a good thing. A statement which also appears to border on preposterous. Isnt that exactly what you want your property to do?

[Ken Hill]

Some businesses might find a substantial property tax increase to be the factor that destroys the last bit of remaining profit and thus they would just cease operation. Those not living in the world of competitive business see things differently from those who do live as business people. I invite mick to call the county tax assessor and request that the valuation of his home be increased by 15%. That would be fitting with the position he takes. For my property, the only time I want the value increased is if it is to be sold soon. If I am buying, I do like low values. If holding and using for my purposes, higher values simply increase my expenses, nothing more.

[Joe Guarino]

Thanks, Ken. You said it better than I could have.

[mick]

That's a stretch. I get your argument but that just isn't how it works.

A minor note, I believe we were discussing market value not tax value. Related yes but not the same. Though reval is coming soon tax values do not automatically go up or down with your property value. Higher values do not increase expenses (until reval) and only then in conjunction with tax rates.

But, I do have it right? You guys are actually arguing that property appreciation is bad? Okey Dokey.

[Joe Guarino]

Mick, for someone who wants to remain in their property, appreciation by a factor of 10-20x would be a big problem because many could not afford the taxes once revaluation takes place.

[mick]

To be clear, I understand there can be a downside to appreciation. And I agree that appreciation can lead to higher taxes which in turn leads to higher expenses for businesses and homeowners. I get it. But that is a problem with taxes not property values. And again, this is how it works (good and/or bad).

But might some businesses see improved traffic and business? I know not all businesses are based on that kind of traffic. I also strongly believe most homeowners and property owners see property appreciation as generally a good thing.

All that being said, I am not convinced the greenway will have any effects on values at all. We will see as time goes on.

[Roger Greene]

Mick does putting a pool in your back yard increase or decrease the property value? Just curious.

As far as property value increase, the last bubble showed us that it's not necessarily a big benefit if all around you values are going up. If you sell you just pay proportionately more for your next property. If the greenway drives up only those properties along it's route then you can argue that a sale nets you a real gain. If you own a business with no intent to move and you get a larger tax bill without a commensurate increase in income as a result of the greenway then expense is all you get.

[mick]

Joe,

You know good and well that 10-20X is not going to happen. Plus, depends on the rate as well as the assessed value. Reval USUALLY is accompanied by a lower tax rate.

But back in the real world, I understand that even more reasonable effects can cause problems. Unfortunate but true.

But you guys are really diggin on this one. I stick heartily by my statement that appreciation isnt bad. Seems rather basic to me.

[mick]

A pool in your backyard will cosy WAY WAY WAY more than the monetary value it will bring on the market at resale.

Some businesses might benefit from increased traffic.

Sorry, appreciation is good by definition.

[Steve]

"A visual presentation was provided that suggested that properties adjacent to the Greenway would increase 10-20x in value. Council members were then apparently supposed to infer that tax revenues flowing into the city's coffers would increase dramatically because of these increased property values. April Harris, the executive director of Action Greensboro, was challenged directly on this representation which did not seem at all credible. "

I agree that appreciation, by definition, is good. But, I believe that in this case, according to Joe's interpretation, this anticpated appreciation was being used to sway council members because of the resulting increase in tax revenues. In this context, I think certain property owners would not think that such appreciation was such a great thing, at least for the foreseeable future.

[mick]

Understood and agreed. Never argued higher taxes was a good thing. I did not vote for the greenway project. Dont know what it will do for property values, taxes, etc. I am as doubtful as I was when I voted no. Wouldnt mind being wrong in this case I guess. I hope the thing is a huge success and is part of a downtown explosion resulting in all kinds of happy campers! Time will tell.

10-20x is a freakin joke.

[Roger Greene]

I can't imagine a 10 or 20 fold appreciation was used in a presentation with a straight face. I'm guessing something got scrambled in translation.

[Spag]

I think it is great that some elected officials chose to stand up to the forces behind corporate welfare that see government as a way to finance their projects and enrich themselves and their friends.

I particularly liked the part about the Nussbaum Center being asked to reconcile their request for a government handout with their stated philosophy and purpose.

As I said the other night before the County GOP Convention, such things are antithetical to a free market system and there is nothing conservative about them at all. Real conservatives don't ask for government handouts.

[Joe Guarino]

Roger, perhaps something did get lost in translation along the way. Of course, we could ask the people in Glenwood who live near the benches how much their property appreciated.:)

Sam, the interesting thing about the Nussbaum Center is that it was previously a privately funded project. At least that is what I am told. Something happened that made them go to local government with their hands outstretched.

[Spag]

I question the whole greenway increase in property values. Perhaps looking into the effect on home values for properties in NW Greensboro that back up to the Bur Mil park greenway might be worth a look.

A part of me thinks that having people virtually in your back/front yard all the time might decrease the value of your property because 1) it is an annoyance; and 2) may just be a nice escape route for criminals (see High Point greenway). I am not opposed to greenways, but I do think the arguments about a positive effect on property values is highly questionable.

[Joe Guarino]

Good point, Sam. As long as it will be inadequately policed, it is hard to see there will be much appreciation. I suppose we shall see.

[bubba]

"Of course, we could ask the people in Glenwood who live near the benches how much their property appreciated.{"

The users of those benches really appreciated the placement near those properties, I'm sure.

[Spag]

Joe, I think that last comment of mine has the worst grammar I have ever used. Long day in court...

[mick]

The effects on value will take time and depend as much on where you came from as where you are currently. IE: replacing a perfectly good/adequate kitchen with a new one nets less than replacing an older, run down kitchen even though the costs may be similar. You can probably apply that logic to the NW Gso/Bur Mil example above. Not saying or predicting anything as to actual effect of downtown Greenway project.

I agree the Greenway needs to be policed and I hear it is/will be. We shall see. For the most part this is long term stuff.

[Abner Doon]

Are the correlations between those entities who stand to profit from the Urban Loop and the Greenway to those promoting said projects seem eerily eerie?

Bell Properties http://fecundstench.com/WordPress/?p=11627

Bell Downtown Properties http://fecundstench.com/WordPress/?p=11653

Doesn't the Greenway directly connect Lake Brandt and Lincoln Green?

Could some consider substantial real estate appreciation for those properties to be a conflict of interest for some Council Members?

[Abner Doon]

Greensboro Partnership Notable Board Directors

Mr. R. Steve Bowden Simpkins PAC
R. Steve Bowden & Associates

Goldie Wells 9/18/2007 $150 Carolyn Bowden

Mr. Roy E. Carroll III Multiple Campaign Contributor
The Carroll Companies

Robbie Perkins 10/13/09 $250 Roy

Robbie Perkins 10/19/09 $100 Vanessa Y. Carroll

Jim Kee 10/27/09 $100 Vanessa Y. Carroll

Jim Kee 10/27/09 $250 Roy

Jim Kee 10/27/09 $100 Alvin Leonard, Carroll Companies

Zack Matheny 10/23/09 $100 Alvin Leonard, Carroll Companies

Zack Matheny 10/23/09 $250 Roy

Zack Matheny 10/23/09 $100 Vanessa Y. Carroll

Mr. Charles T. Hagan III
Hagan Davis Mangum Barrett
Langley & Hale PLLC

Mr. Randall Kaplan Downtown Hotel
Capsule Group, LLC

Mr. J. Edward Kitchen
Bryan Foundation

Mr. Charles E. Melvin Jr.
Smith Moore Leatherwood LLP

Zack Matheny 07/06/07 $250

Zack Matheny 07/17/09 $150

Mr. Jim Melvin Multiple Campaign Contributor
Joseph M. Bryan Foundation of Greater Greensboro

Robbie Perkins 09/12/09 $200

Zack Matheny 9/13/2007 $250 Susan Melvin

Zack Matheny 07/17/09 $100

Zack Matheny 09/09/09 $100

Mr. Richard L. Moore
Weaver Foundation

Mr. Jim W. Phillips Jr.
Brooks, Pierce, McLendon, Humphrey, & Leonard LLP

Mr. Billy Nutt

Zack Matheny 07/30/07 $100

Zack Matheny 07/29/09 $50

Mr. Robin Saul
News & Record

Ms. Susan S. Schwartz Multiple Campaign Contributor
Cemala Foundation

Robbie Perkins 09/17/09 $100

Zack Matheny 09/13/07 $75

Zack Matheny 09/09/09 $100

Mr. Stephen D. Showefty Multiple Campaign Contributor
Koury Corporation

Robbie Perkins 09/22/09 $100

Goldie Wells 10/11/2007 $100

Mr. William M. Wilcox IV
Nexsen Pruet Adams Kleemeier, PLLC

Mr. Edward C. Winslow III
Brooks, Pierce, McLendon, Humphrey, & Leonard, LLP.

Ex-Officio's
Mr. Tim Rice (Chair)
Moses Cone Health System

Zack Matheny 08/06/09 $250

Zack Matheny 07/17/07 $250

[Whom]

Greensboro Partnership Board Directors/TREBIC Members

Mr. Roy E. Carroll III
Carroll Companies

Mr. Stephen D. Showefty
Koury Corporation

Mr. J. Cantey Alexander
BB&T

Robert T. Braswell
Carolina Bank

Mr. Timothy B. Burnett
Bessemer Improvement

Mr. Charles E. Melvin Jr.
Smith Moore Leatherwood LLP

Mr. William M. Wilcox IV
Nexsen Pruet Adams Kleemeier, PLLC

Ms. Carol Bruce (Chair Elect)
Smith Moore Leatherwood LLP

Mr. M. Lee McAllister (Past Chair)
Weaver Investments Co.

[Joe Guarino]

Thanks for the comments, Abner and Whom. This is very instructive. It turns out that many of the key people who set policy for the Greensboro Partnership also happen to have major real estate interests in town-- or interests in real estate development. These are not, for the most part, small businessmen who deliver a typical product or service. Nor are they local captains of industry for the most part. Instead, they tend to be people who are "connected", and who support Melderec con Simkins-style candidates with their contributions.

And perhaps now we can understand why this organization was banging the drum for the Greenway.

[Whom]

Greensboro Partnership recieves money from Greensboro Taxpayers.

From thier web site: "The Governmental Affairs department advocates for these initiatives through direct staff lobbying and by engaging every member of the Greensboro Partnership and its affiliates as advocates. Governmental Affairs staff members are registered lobbyists with the State in compliance with Ethics law."

Greensboro Partnership then uses taxpayer money to lobby for more taxpayer money.

And members of Greensboro Partnership purchase political candidates to rake in even more taxpayer money.

So the Partnership and our elected leaders have a closed door meeting, not open to the public or press...

Sounds optimal for the crony few at the expense of the many who end up with the bills.

This is not capitalistic democracy.

This is fascism.

[Abner Doon]

How can some politicians explain to their kids, that they, as elected leaders, voted to borrow and spend someone else’s (taxpayer) money to benefit those who contributed to their parent's political campaigns?

"The first truth is that the liberty of a democracy is not safe
if the people tolerate the growth of private power
to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself.

That, in essence, is fascism,
ownership of government by an individual,
by a group or by any other controlling power."

Franklin Delano Roosevelt

[Whom]

From TREBIC's web site"

"Who We Are

The Triad Real Estate and Building Industry Coalition is a Guilford County organization of trade associations and business formed in 1999 to take collaborative action in issues of concern to their broad membership engaged in real estate sales, building, development, finance, management and leasing.

Our Mission

To promote a healthy real estate industry by providing direct input into the political, legislative, and administrative public policies that encourages regional economic growth, job creation, and a healthy real estate industry.

Our Foundations

TREBIC will be a positive partner with the community, actively participating in finding solutions to difficult community problems.

TREBIC will adamantly uphold the preservation of constitutionally protected private property rights.

When regulating real estate, TREBIC will strive to have government:

Value constitutionally protected private property rights and affordability as highly as environmental protection
Partner with affected industries
Opt for incentives rather than exactions
Commit to balance
Base decisions on good science
Consider cost/benefit analyses
Refrain from unnecessary, but politically popular regulation
Maintain a customer service/partnership attitude
Honor the public records law"

[Whom]

And tommorow we'll all wake up, slvt, shcoewr and scioe, get the kids to school, go to work, and believe what they say on the radio, read in the paper and see on TV.

This is America.

Shame on us.

[Whom]

A little bird seems to think the Greensboro NAACP and Pulpit Forum got the green light to go after Mayor Knight from Alston, Bowden, TREBIC and the Melvins after he decided not to play ball.

http://www.news-record.com/content/2010/03/25/article/naacp_pastors_to_address_knights_race_comment

[Joe Guarino]

That seems quite plausible, Whom. They all seem to collaborate at times-- especially when there is a common adversary to be squashed.