City Audit Reveals $250,722.00 Payment To Unhook Industrial Development Commission From Empty Spec. Building
How much money has to be stolen before it’s considered stealing? I reported the thief by the County Executive, where she took tax money and paid Commissioner Coleman for attending a meeting that both knew she had not attended. Some said, “well, that ain’t very much”, so for them it appears stealing is OK depending on the amount being stolen. Of course I have to wonder if someone stole fifteen dollars from their billfold if they would have the same attitude.
I reported on the County Executive’s scheme that give more than thirty thousand dollars of tax money, “under the table”, to an attorney friend. Still nothing was done, apparently that wasn’t enough tax money to be bothered with either.
So today I report on a little item listed on page 19 of the Pulaski City Audit that ended on 30 June 2014. It’s bad enough that $403,258.00 was spent on something identified as “CONTRACTUAL SERVICES” that has absolutely no defining explanation for it and then there is the item of $250,722.00 that was paid on a Spec. Building for the Industrial Development Commission.
Let me repeat that, on page 19 of that audit finding the City of Pulaski paid $250,722.00 for a spec. building for the Industrial Development Commission. That building continues to sit empty.
On Page 28 of that audit is stated, “The Pulaski - Giles County Industrial Development Commission is responsible for long range planning for City of Pulaski, Giles County and other local city governments. The Commission derives its funding primarily from the City of Pulaski and Giles County. Its Board is composed of representatives from the City, County and others. The Commission is not deemed to be financially accountable to the City of Pulaski and accordingly is not reported as a component of the City".
In simple terms the Industrial Development Commission is not accountable to the city of Pulaski but the City is obligated to pay the IDC's debts without question.
Very close to that expenditure of $250,722.00, is listed the additional expenditure of $45,100.00 as the city’s share of the IDC’s regular funding.
Some questions that arise from this revelation.
1. With over $250,000 paid out for this building by the city where is it listed in the city’s assets?
2. Why is this expenditure not explained or listed anywhere else in the audit as an asset, a liability, or by any other identifying characteristic.
3. Was the county asked to pay a part of this $250,722.00 and if so did they?
4. When and where was this expenditure approved by the city council and in what minutes is the vote recorded?
5. With the city actually using tax money to pay this mortgage who now holds title to the building ?
6. With the president of the bank that holds the note on this building, being the same person serving as the chairman of the IDC was the city and tax payer money used to avoid a loss to the bank?
7. Will this be allowed to be swept under the rug like so much other questionable behaviors or will this involve enough money to finally “matter”?
posted by Allen Barrett | 4:03 PM
75 Comments:
Remember when there was a public meeting regarding PES and its management policies back when Holcolm was here? Isn't it time for another public meeting regarding all these questions WAB has published on this thread and to which the public is entitled to answers? There may be legitimate answers but unless this is addressed publicly we will never know and the public's concerns will be ignored.
The thread mentions on page 28 of the audit "the Industrial Development Commission is not considered a component of the City of Pulaski...", then is it considered a component of Giles County? It has often been said by members of the boards that neither the Economic Development Commission or the Industrial Development Board is answerable to the city or the county, but as long as they are funded by tax paper monies,they are indeed answerable to us. Maybe there should be an Attorney General opinion on this matter.We sure dont need both commissions and dont have to have both. Need to eliminate one of them.
Why is Barrett the one who keeps coming up with this crap? Ain't there no real officials out there doing their jobs. Why ain't nothing about this been on the radio or in the paper?
Gotta keep it quiet.
This seems to be a hell-of-a-lot more than $15 bucks, don't it y'all? Where are the posters who have been defending the local government now? We, as taxpayers, deserve some answers. That is our money in question.
Is this the building that was sold to fund the edc/idb lawsuit while we continued to pay the mortgage?
Some changes are going to happen! Yes the public has the right to know. The public has to speak and attend the meetings. The only way people can put pressure on others if the public attends. We can all gripe but if we just sit here and do nothing about it, it will always go on. Then the people keep electing the same ole people. The next elections will be different for sure! In all aspects of office.
I think the $200K+ from the City was the deductible on liability insurance. No one has said what the actual $2 million total was? I have asked with no answers but as I don't read the blog!!
10:57 Will it? I'm wondering if people really care.
6:20 I don't understand your comment. The line item on page 19 of that audit finding states the City of Pulaski paid $250,722.00 for a spec. building for the Industrial Development Commission. There is nothing about insurance or deductibles in that amount in the audit.
Are you suspecting that perhaps the $250,722.00 was the city's share of the deductible for the lawsuit they lost involving this building? If that is only their share then does that mean the county will be called on to match that amount. That is an interesting take on the matter and would possibly explain why the building isn't listed anywhere else as any type asset.
The Citizen newspaper quoted an Alderman asking how much was the total cost to the IDB she had heard it was 2 million.
Oh yes 7:23. Going to see some different ones stepping up!
The community leaders with the super big ego are the one's that are hurting this community by playing favorites and by making promises that they can not keep. Janet Vanzant, Dan Speer, David Rackley are at the top of the list. Pat Ford is well on his way.
He is already there!!
If the city and / or county lost a law suit surely there's a publicly accessible court record regarding who paid what ,when and where ?
Go to the courthouse and ASK
Are you kidding, those records are sealed tighter than obamas birth certificate and college transcript.
The $15 was a county issue. The$200,000 is a city issue. Not related. DO YOU ATTEND THE REGULAR MEETINGS WHERE THE DECISIONS ARE MADE? If not, dont complain. It is just here-say to you. Second hand information.
Might be a good time for the public to start attending the meetings. That is so true. You are right! More have to be involved and they will be and are in many more ways than some know.
It is common knowledge among us taxpayers that the City and County Officials could not tell you half the time the details of what they are voting on. If they would just take the time to get full blown information before voting then our governments wouldn't be in the financial situation they are in. I'll bet that when the budgets are voted on, our officials will never ask a question but just approve whatever Dan or David Rackley ask for. Sad! I believe Pat Ford is trying but the Aldermen need to step up and get tough.
Yes if people are working against one another, does not help the tax payers!
9:13 - That is just about funny! Pat Ford is trying. The Aldermen need to step up. Boy, are you ever mislead!
Yes I believe Mr. Ford is really trying to make the City of Pulaski accountable. Now as far as the City Council, well most of them are just pretty much status quo! They still listen to Dan and David.
I don't get it how does Barrett come up with so much stuff that the officials and the media either don't know, don't care about are don't want to know about. I asked a commissioner about the $15.00 dollars paid by Vanzant to Coleman and he said he knew about it but there was nothing that could be done. I asked about the 250,000 and he said he never heard anything about it.
I read on here about how Barrett is this thing and that thing but I never see where anyone proves he is wrong about the things he tells. I read about how he's going to be sued for this and that but nobody takes him to court. If Barrett is so bad why don't somebody stop him and if he is right why do people keep ignoring what he says. I would rather have a person with a bad personality and my best interest at heart than a likable person who keeps lying and stealing from us.
I know Mr. Barrett personally and he is a very likable person who happens to also have the best interests of Giles County citizens at heart. Thanks for your post 2:19.
I agree with 3:03 I don't know Mr. Barrett but have spoken with him many times and found him to be a very caring, knowledgable person who is very likable.
Totally agree also! In due time things happen!
Yep, you can see how well he is regarded in the city and county by the voting totals. Morons follow morons. That is one thing that will never change.
That's no way to talk about your elected officials and their supporters Johnny Reb. That is just terrible how you attacked the mental capacity of your elected officials and those who choose to support them. Shame on you.
So that's why they keep electing Vanzant and others. I didn't know why.
Why don't you people who are always BITCHING AND COMPLAINING about everything the City Council does attend all the meetings? You might have an idea what is actually happening in Pulaski. You wouldn't have to rely on Barrett who never attends the meetings but writes and comments as if he were there? I guess disgruntled people just look for anything to bitch about.
To 2:22 AM Sunday
While I agree fully that more people should be attending all the meetings the fact is that not everyone can attend and one person can't attend all the meetings. Because a person might not be at a meeting does not disqualify them from knowing what happened at that meeting. You probably don't attend all the Tennessee Legislative meetings and certainly not all the federal congressional meetings but no doubt you have an understanding of what happens there.
When I write about a topic it has been throughly researched or else I state that it was reported to me.
A person could have attended a hundred city council meetings and never heard a word about the $250,722.00 spend on behalf of the IDC. The topic was very stealthy dealt with and quietly showed up in the Audit of the City.
Very little information has been made public about the lawsuit involving that building and the manner in which it was taken from a thriving business that was paying the monthly mortgage and left to sit empty because of the arrogance of a little guy with a Napoleon complex. The EDB/IDC has cost this county/city millions of dollars while providing little in return. The city nor the county has any control or supervision over the Economic Development or Industrial Development director yet they are blindly required to pay all the expenses and salary.
.
The lawsuit was openly discussed at a meeting by the council. I was there. It was on wksr also. I did not know about it till i heard it at 3 different meetings. It was "old business" on the printed agenda. I dont think the council tries to hide anything as you state. Everything is out in the open when I attend meetings.
Finally someone comments that takes the time to understand what they are commenting on. Thank you 10:29.
The payment to the IDB for the spec buildingwas openly discussed. Negotiations were made by certain individuals. Promises were made. Promises were broken. This leads me to believe that our negotiators lack the power and/or credibility that they think they have.
All that being said, the city council, excluding mayor, can only move on the information that is presented. They really try to do the right thing. The citizens of Pulaski are well represented.
It's not that the topic was never discussed it is that the content did not include any information of any significance.
If 10:29 was there when it was "throughly discussed" then perhaps they would enlighten us on such simple things as to what was the total amount paid out and the total cost of legal fees? Was the county asked to pay a portion of the cost? Was the matter discussed with the county since they are partnered with the city? What budgetary line item was the money taken from? Was the money taken from the slush fund created by the increased sales tax rate that was supposed to pay off the Sam Davis Park loan?
Did this suit cause an increase in the city's insurance coverage that we will be paying years from now? Was there vital information about this matter withheld from the city council; Why was the lawsuit forced when it could have easily been avoided with a less hostile attitude by the IDC/EDB director; Why did Mr. Speer force the occupant, that was paying the monthly mortgage and employing people, out and break the contract with the occupant to begin with? Why has the building set empty for so long if Mr. Speer needed the building so urgently? The point is you can have a topic on the agenda and discuss it without really saying anything worthwhile about it. The answers to these questions certainly were never posted on WKSR or fully covered in the newspaper that I have found. So please 10:29 enlighten us about those meetings where this was openly discussed, a date would also be helpful if you would.
10:40,
Since every thing is always above board with our city council and edc/idb boards, and since you attended the meetings, and are informed, can you please tell us the dates of the meetings, that were open to the public, which informed the public how much the EDC/IDB lost in the court case to Stevens for the harassment and breach of contract? I do not believe it to be a part of the public record.
It was also my understanding , from the reports, that the spec building was sold to cover the EDC/IDB's portion of the legal costs, but instead of paying off the mortgage the taxpayers were forced to continue to pay a mortgage with no property attached. Was the property just transferred around, or was there some manipulation of taxpayer dollars used to complete this suspect action? Maybe because you are in the loop you can clear this up.
Mr Barrett is right about this not being discussed by the council. The only thing that has been said about it is that it's legal matter and they can't discuss it with the public.
So that probably makes the poster at 10:29 AM a member of the city council and what he heard was during an "attorney/client" meeting, and, therefore, not discussed in front of the public.
mr Barrett is there a maximum amount you can post on your site. I notice on the What happen to director blog it is adding amounts but not posting
To 7:17 I'm sorry that you're having difficulty getting all the posts. I believe the problem is that when 200 posts have been reached they go to another page. What this means is you just go to the comment section as usual then look for the term newest at the top of the page click on that and it should take you to the most recent post over 200. Thanks.
Thanks!
If the city and county and PES share equal in funding IDC did the county and PES pay 250,722 each or was that 250,722 the total and PES and the county will be asked to pay up later?
I think it's great WAB found this but wonder what the full story is and who authorized it be paid.
Mr. Barrett
I read your letter in this week's paper and was shocked at your comments in the third paragraph about our County Executive, I believe she has grounds to sue you, and she should. I have spoken my opinion. You truly are every bit the piece of crap I had heard you are.
5:17 So Barrett is a piece of crap and Vanzant is an angel that should sue Barrett. I guess it don't matter about what the facts are. I wonder now many more people don't care about the facts.
I was there when Vanzant ordered Coleman be paid for the meeting she didn't attend and I seen the list where she signed her in and wrote two pay so there ain't no question about Vanzant lying and stealing and defrauding the county on that one and if you will lie about a little thing you will lie about bigger things and stealing is stealing no matter how much is stolen.
Vanzant will not sure anyone.Too much will come out!
*sue anyone
I hope she does.
To the 18 Feb. 5:17
I am glad you found the statements shocking but disappointed that your shock was for the wrong reasons. It seems that as a responsible citizen your interest would first be stirred by the question of whether the statement is true or not. There is not a word that I wrote that I can not back up with documents such as the cancelled checks, signed approvals etc. I assure you that I have no great wish to be sued but would welcome the opportunity to question some folks under oath and that is the very reason I have no concern about being sued, the truth is not defeat-able. If you were as interested in that truth as you seem in accusing me of some terrible deed there would not be so much hidden truth in this county.
Well said Mr. Barrett. Too much would come out on others if they sued you. They know there is truth in what you state. In due time I always say. People in the county are fed up!
For those of you who want WAB sued by County officials; I hereby provide you with my total support. I would truly like to see WAB brought to trial, placed under oath and questioned.
Then ..... the County officials who are suing; would experience the same and would have to tell the truth or be charged with perjury .
So ... go for it!
I agree. A lot do not care for him because I am sure there is a lot more truth than some believe. So yes, Go for it!
WAB is irrelevant!
I only know WAB from reading this blog. Wouldn't know him if I met him in the middle of the road, but from reading a lot of these post sounds like he is stepping on someone toes, them, family members and close fiends just can't take it.
He doesn't have enough clout to step on anyone's toes!
Never met him either, but I think some will be surprised one day! Some of those toes are a little sore right now I bet. Some are a little nervous. Good! In due time. What goes around comes around. Always does.
If WAB had any credibility, he not only could have gotten things done, but he would have earned the trust of the voters of his district. You could combine all of the votes from all of his elections and he still wouldn't have enough to finish in the top three.
I'm not sure what you mean by what goes around, comes around, but I don't see it happening from him.
A lot of hate on this blog. Shame, shame.
Yes a lot of hate. It is a shame. Reality it is sad to say. I would not say what goes around comes around 8:15, but we all have to answer to one.
Well to be really real, it is sad for all of us because we are anonymous so whatever we say here really does not mean a thing to anyone. Sure WAB may not have voters etc, but at least he speaks his mind.
9:57 I agree, also we all will be answering to God one day.
As for what goes around comes around I've heard that all my life, enough to worry about what I put out.
And you think that speaking one's mind is a good thing?
7:46 Are you saying you never speak your mind about WAB?
8:52 you really think credibility is a result of people voting for you, that would make obama one of the most credible people ever.
I believe WAB didn't get elected because he does have credibility enough that the whole democrat party in Giles County worked to get him defeated. How do I know this I was in more than one meeting where he was discussed and money was collected to help a person running against him.
7:46 you don't think speaking ones mind is a good thing, Then you must be one who sits and watches as county and city officials commit all sorts of dirty deals. Maybe you are one of the ones fed up but to scared to say anything about it. To much cowardice in this county.
Amen 8:52!! What is going on with the school board right now whether one agrees or not but at.least people are speaking out!
8:52 - I'm pretty sure that the Republican's and Independents worked to get WAB defeated also. He is a trouble maker, plain and simple.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again, if he really wants to get his agenda accomplished, then he will have to find someone else to do the campaigning. No one listens to him.......well, almost no one!
Speaking out, and speaking one's mind are two different things. I am all for getting all of the facts on the table. I am not for berating and talking down to people.
CG
Whatever that means
3:04 I bet it means you are posting.
10:24 then how about speaking out about this $250,722.00 and the questions that WAB asks in this article.
I think you are just like obama just deny that there is a problem and maybe people will believe you at least until the golf vacation is over.
10:24 Are you sure Barrett don't have all the facts?
Barrett got beat after all that stolen band equipment was found at his house.
10:30 Didn't Barrett post the band equipment was at his house? Don't be so hateful. Your post reminds me of the one asking if the cow was named Janet. Both uncalled for.
Very very sad and an embarrassment how some people act in Giles County including some of the people in office. We all have to live with the consequences but so do they.
8:37, don't leave your heroes out.
Obama, both Bush's, Clinton...surely you get the point by now.
Both SPEER and VANZANT will lie even under oath. I have seen
both questioned by a Judge and lied as easy as blinking their eye.
The only way to tell if Vanzant is lieing is to see if her
lips are moving.
Post a Comment
<< Home