Who Owns The Speculation Buildings Pulaski, Industrial Development or Economic Development ??????
This topic was submitted by a reader and is posted as written except for the clarification on what EDC and IDB stand for. The person's name has been withheld because they did not specifically state that it was to be used.
"The speck building in Pulaski was built at a cost of approx $1.2 million it is worth today approx $7 to $800,000. Who pays the difference if we sell for less?
The problem with all of this is that EDC (Economic Development Committee) owns the building which is not legal! They are trying to move it over to the IDB (Industrial Development Board)as soon as possible!
Who arranged this deal and who signed the paperwork? This came up at the City Council work session on Monday.
Can you please put this on the blog?
"The speck building in Pulaski was built at a cost of approx $1.2 million it is worth today approx $7 to $800,000. Who pays the difference if we sell for less?
The problem with all of this is that EDC (Economic Development Committee) owns the building which is not legal! They are trying to move it over to the IDB (Industrial Development Board)as soon as possible!
Who arranged this deal and who signed the paperwork? This came up at the City Council work session on Monday.
Can you please put this on the blog?
posted by Allen Barrett | 10:50 AM
47 Comments:
If the Speck Building sells for less then we, the tax payers will eat the difference. I have to question why the building value has dropped by several thousands of dollars when, according to the Tax Assessor, property values in Giles county have risen. As to who 'arranged' the deal of ED 'owning' the building, surely that would have been Dan Speer?
Right on every point 6:06
Speer knows this building is a lemon so he will dump it at any price and leave us with a big big dept
Speer is a great sales man! He sells more of his wifes medical insurance company to new companies than anyone else!
This is a conflict of interest.
If Speer is such a great salesman he should be making more effort to sell Giles County and Pulaski to prospective businesses who might locate here.
Question: Why weren't the city aldermen, county commissioners, county executive, and Industrial Development Board members making sure this building was documented correctly and not violating any laws?
8:05; Because elected officials are not babysitters.
10:05 True. But they do have a responsibility to make sure everyting is done correctly, open and above board.
10:20; True. But I would suggest that neither the City Council, County Commission, County Executive, IDB & Others have any supervisory authority over the Economic Development Commission. The EDC has it's own board, who's responsibility it is to ensure that the actions of the EDC are done "open and above board." I expect that EDC will try and shift blame to all of those organizations that you mention (maybe others), so as to justify an attempt to shift any deficiency that occurs from the sale of the building to those organizations. I just hope that our elected officials have the wherewithal to refuse to allow this to happen.
10:37 Understand there is an Economic Development Commission, but are there not commissioners, county executive and at least one alderman on that ED board?
11:12; I do not dispute that all members of the economic development commission, including any county commissioners and city aldermen, are to blame.
11:33 Good. Then we agree. So my question was, why were they not doing their job?
Questions are in the process of being answered. Right now, it would appear that the economic development board is at fault. We will find out more in the near future.
And nothing will ever come of it, as usual.
Whatever?
The problem with Boards having responsibility for oversight of employees is that very often the employee is stronger and more powerful than the Board. Sometimes the Board has even been appointed by the employee thus making them obligated to the employee and not the people they are supposed to represent. While the County is authorized to have representation on most boards through the County Executive's office too often that representation has been anemic at best and totally incompetent and silent at worst.
Until the people finally have enough, get involved and demand more truthful and responsible representation there will be no changes.
WAB,what about the $16,000 plus that you have cost the county?Was that not a waste?You will never win a political race in Giles county,even trying to get in the back door with a stupid lawsuit.
Just look at the vote count.You are stil in last place no matter how you look it....JLS
9:04 old news. Maybe it made you feel better to bring it up again.
Old but poignant. And don't forget that the county will have to fork out the money to defend against him in his next lawsuit.
What do you mean old news?It was just in the paper this week.Did you already know the cost to the taxpayers? Since you are so smart,
how much more will we have to pay for this usless mess?He lost the election plain and simple.The people made a mistake on paper work and correted it. Enough said.
JLS
It wasn't Allen Barrett who caused this lawsuit it was the Elections Office for not doing their job properly. Besides, you can't 'make a mistake on paper and correct it' if people's lives are involved. The 'correction' wasn't made until after Allen Barrett filed. Whoever was originally response in the first place is the one to blame for the cost of county attorney fees.
If he filled the suit he is the cause of it.It is his fault,plain and simple.Just look at how much more he is going to cost the county again. You must be WAB or his wife the way you sound.Please don't think I'm putting her down,she is half of the two votes he would get if he ran again.
JLS
To Just Loads a S---.
If you had a clue of what you are talking about you would still be an idiot if you think violating election laws are not important and that allowing such violations to go unchallenged. The problem is in the election office. I was in the court room and have never heard an official who couldn't remember so much or a witness who had to be asked about her education level because her answers were so unintelligent.
HowarD,
What was the reasoning by the court that WAB didn't win the case?
DAW
To DAW
The suit was lost on the local level because Judge Jones stated before any testimony was ever given, before any evidence was presented, before even the opening arguments were made that he was not going to overturn an election regardless of whether a violation had occurred.
The case now rest with the appeals court in Nashville.
The question I have for you and some other questioners is should elections laws be allowed to be broken with no consequence? Understand that state, federal law and common sense dictates that a person should not experience gains from illegal activities. Basically should a bank robber be able to keep the money if he makes it out of the bank? Should a car thief be allowed to keep a stolen car because he has already driven it?
If you are not on the ballot legally and in fact committed a class D felony in the submission of qualifying paper work should you then be allowed to go ahead and receive votes? That's the situation.
Let me put it another way, if a convicted felon who was ineligible to vote somehow got on the ballot and received the most votes should they be allowed to serve in that elected office? If you don't meet the requirements to be on the ballot you don't meet the requirements to hold the office.
The elections officer did not intentionally break any law, and Judge Jones saw that. It's just sad that Allen Barrett can't seem to accept the fact that the voters in his district did not want his services. He came in last not once but twice.
I guess if you break the law unintentionally it's ok. I'll use that next time Rog Hayes tells me I owe a fine for doing 36 coming down the 31A hill into town.
WAB,
Did the Judge even listen to the case? How long did it last? When are you expecting to hear a verdict from the state?
DAW
7:26
The point you seem to miss is that the voters did not want Allen Barrett. No crime was committed by anyone (intentionally or unintentionally) so what's the problem? Smells like sour grapes to me.
6:11 Tell them about it enabler or Christian gentleman.
My opinion is that WAB shouldn't have gone to the Budget Meeting this morning and made a big deal about who the county hires as a lawyer to defend themselves against him on the state level. The cost of the county lawyer bacame an issue in which he brought up. That just doesn't seem right.
DAW
DAW
You are absolutely right, but wasn't it funny how they adjourned while he was still ranting? Having said that, I am sure his defnders will come to his rescue and call me names or suggest that I am trying to hide something. How lame is that?
To DAW
You have said that you run a 600 acre farm in Franklin. As manager of that farm would you pay a $16,000.00 that didn't even have a name on the bill?
Would you pay a bill that stated you owed $16,000.00 and not only did the bill not identify who the bill was from but didn't state what it was for?
I will be at the Budget Committee Meeting in the morning and will be glad to show you the bill, supposedly from Mrs Henson, the county paid. While it may be better than a note on the back of an envelop directing some $20,000.00 be paid to an insurance agent it's still far from what you would expect from someone doing business as a professional. I dare say that even the County Attorney would not pay such a bill sent to her office in this form.
The questions I tried to ask in the Budget Meeting was "who authorized payment of the bill" and who authorized hiring Mr Williams as a co-counsel for the appeal process".
After the meeting, that was disrupted by Commissioner Campbell not me, Mrs Garner stated that the payment had been approved in the Commission Meeting on 16 May. Several Commissioner stated that they were not aware of it even being on the agenda for the meeting.
Speaking with Mr. Manke from the "Pulaski Citizen" I learned he had been told by the County Attorney that the "Election Office" had authorized the hiring of Mr Williams which is rather amazing since they have absolutely no authority to hire an attorney to represent the county.
One thing is for certain the county paid more than twice the amount for their attorney while my attorney did twice the work. The other thing that is certain is the total charged by the Court Reporters was to be split in thirds. I paid my third so why has Mrs Henson billed the county for what appears to be 2/3's of the Court Reporters charges? On second thought maybe the reason for not putting her name on that bill is more clear than I realized.
WAB,
You don't need to justify it to me. More people read the paper than this blog. I don't think you should be making a bigger deal out of it. Most are going to say that you caused it to begin with. Right or wrong, you know the majority of the citizens will not see it favorably.
DAW
To DAW
I really have less concern with what others have to say or believe as long as I know what I have done is right and challenging the actions by the election office was right.
The statement was made by Mr. McGill that I "could stop the cost if I would stop suing the county" to which I replied "If they would stop breaking the law I wouldn't have to sue". I stand firmly by that statement.
The reason I focused my response to you was you stated, "WAB shouldn't have gone to the Budget Meeting this morning and made a big deal about who the county hires (the county did not hire Mr. Williams the Election Administrator did according to Mr. Manke) as a lawyer to defend themselves against him on the state level. The cost of the county lawyer bacame an issue in which he brought up. That just doesn't seem right."
Where would you suggest the matter be brought up if not in the budget committee that approves expenditures, or would you think it should just be paid without any questions. I believe this is a fraud against the county so to me it is a big deal just as it should be to every citizen.
The judgement from the appeal will be the determining factor for me to know what should or shouldn't have been done.
DAW
I've been out of town a few days so had a lot of reading to catch up and still feel I've missed something.
If the county feels their lawyer can't do the job and they have to hire another one, why keep a lawyer they feel that way about?
From what I understand, they didn't want to pay her for all of the road time and having to stay in Nashville. They also wanted someone familiar with the Nashville courts.
DAW
DAW Your kidding right? Didn't want to pay her for all the road time and having to stay in Nashville.
What's the difference in paying Williams to travel and stay in Nashville and paying Henson.
What I have been told is that Coleman didn't pay Williams and now Henson and Vanzant have worked out this deal so he could get paid.
Mr. Barnes,
Just what I heard. If what you say is true, that is bad. I will ask my grandfather about it.
DAW
Mr. Barrett
You are NOT going to get Mrs. Coleman's job. Besides, she beat you big time, and you should just accept that. Don't you find it a bit sobering that Judge Jones didn't find a problem with her election win...and with your defeat?
Yes I do find it more than sobering that the judge didn't find a problem with her election that's why we are at the appeal level and may go to the state supreme court before it's over.
Don't you find it a bit sobering that a judge would announce his decision prior to the start of the trial and before any evidence is presented.
I don't mind losing but I don't like loaded dice or a stacked deck. Maybe the law don't matter that much to you but it does to me. Does it bother you that she committed a felony in that election, I guess not because your hatred toward me seems to have blinded you to all else.
So is Pulaski absorbing the cost of the Economic Development Commissions mistake and who provides insurance for buildings the EDC owned?
To 10:42 If you look at the proposed budget for the county under Industrial Development line item 58120 599 titled Misc $83,650.00 is budgeted. What's if for, your guess is as good as mine when it comes to "Misc" line items.
Under Other Charges Line item 58400 502 Building and contents insurance $45,918.00 is budgeted from the $546,597.00 total.
As you read the cuts in county services in this week's paper, keep in mind the county could easily keep any position on the list had it not had to waste money proving Barrett wrong in a trial, at an appeal, or even before the supreme court.
To 8:26 If you were half as knowledgeable as you claim you would still know nothing. I guess you took the same attitude about the tens of thousands of dollars spent on the trial of the boys accused of murder in north Giles?
What price do you put on justice?
Big difference between murder and a lawsuit from a sore loser. Why don't you pitch that crap to the family of the victims?
7:03
Amen! Excellent post.
8:56. What a despicable post. Do you really believe the things you say on here?
Shameful.
Post a Comment
<< Home