Source: Rhino Times Greensboro

Secret Memo Debunks Tale

by Scott D. Yost

January 28, 2010

On Thursday, Jan. 21, Guilford County Attorney Mark Payne emailed a memo labeled “Private and confidential” to the Guilford County commissioners that was meant to refute allegations that he and other staff had failed to fully inform the commissioners on the stimulus bonds they voted on last month.

At the commissioners Thursday, Dec. 10 meeting, the board voted to pass a resolution that allowed a list of eligible projects to move forward in an application process for bonds that have been made possible by the stimulus package.

In his memo, Payne said he wanted to dispel any suggestion that he’d failed to inform the commissioners fully on the projects they were voting on, the details of the resolution, and the fact that the list of projects was prioritized – that is, that the first project on the list would get considered for a stimulus package loan first, and the second project would get consideration next, and so on, until the program’s allocation of favorable loans ran out.

When The Rhino Times found out about the existence of the memo and requested a copy, Payne stated that the document was protected by attorney/ client privilege and therefore he could not release it. So The Rhino Times had to acquire it in some other fashion.

The memo states: “Questions have arisen concerning action taken by Guilford County Board of Commissioners on December 10, 2009 regarding the notice of intent for qualifying projects for Recovery Zone Facility Bonds. On January 19, 2010 the News and Record published an article stating that Greensboro City Council was unaware of the specific details of the action they passed in relation to the same matter. The question has been raised, implying that the Guilford County Board of Commissioners similarly passed their resolution unaware of the details of the action passed. This implication is simply wrong.”

Apparently the reason Payne sent his memo on Thursday afternoon was so that he could get out ahead of a News & Record story that would run the following morning.

The story, which ran on the front page of Friday’s News & Record, above the fold, was headlined, “More confusion over bond votes.” It was written by husband and wife team Joe Killian and Amanda Lehmert.

Payne was interviewed for the article, so he evidently could discern what the story was going to imply: That, in much the same way members of the Greensboro City Council had voted on a similar list of projects, having been misled about what they were voting on, the Guilford County commissioners also had not been informed about what they were voting on.

The Jan. 22 News & Record article quotes Commissioner Linda Shaw, who was interviewed by Killian.

“I was just laughing the other day that the Greensboro City Council could have approved something without realizing they’d done it,” Shaw was quoted in the article as saying. “But I guess here we are in the same boat. I guess you’d have to say shame on us.”

Shaw said that, after making that statement, she went back and watched the relevant part of the meeting – the part where Payne explains repeatedly and in detail to the board exactly what they’re voting on.

Shaw, with her memory refreshed, said she called Killian back and explained that, after watching the video, she didn’t think the commissioners were lacking any information regarding the bond projects or the fact that the projects they were voting on were prioritized.

Shaw said she was surprised and dismayed the next day to see her initial comment in the article, and she said she was especially angry over the fact that, on Saturday, Jan. 23, a portion of her quote was once again in the paper. This time her quote was in the section where notable quotes of the week are highlighted – though it was likely an editor, not Killian, who chose to run that quote Saturday.

Underneath her quote, which included “shame on us,” it said, “Linda Shaw, Guilford County commissioner learning that the board unwittingly gave priority approval to a proposed hotel project.”

Saturday morning when the paper came out and Shaw saw her statement in the paper once again, she had a one-word comment.

“Wow,” she said.

One commissioner who asked not to be identified said they thought the article was an attempt by the News & Record to make Chairman of the Board of Commissioners Skip Alston look bad. Alston is the broker for the proposed downtown luxury hotel project and, if that project made it to the top of the priority list in some nefarious backroom fashion, and the commissioners weren’t informed of the priority of projects, then that has the makings of a pretty good conspiracy theory.

The priority level of projects was established by a county board – one that doesn’t include any commissioners as members – which used job creation as the primary criteria, because the stimulus package loan program came with virtually no guidelines.

At the Dec. 10 meeting, when the commissioners voted on the prioritized list, Alston cited a possible conflict of interest and left the meeting for that portion of the discussion, and he did not vote on the list, which the rest of the board approved unanimously.

Shaw said there was nothing underhanded about it.

“Skip did what he was supposed to do,” she said. “He got up and left.”

The video is online at the Guilford County website for anyone to see, and it was certainly popular viewing after the News & Record story hit the streets. Commissioners, Payne and other county officials went back and watched the video in which Payne carefully explains to the commissioners that they are voting on two things: the acceptance of the list of projects and the priority ranking of them. In response to commissioners’ questions, Payne also made the same point about the ranking. The commissioners also had, not one, but two documents in front of them that explained that the projects were listed in order, and commissioners in the video can be seen referring to those documents.

As Payne states in his memo: “The action item, XI.C., in your package was revised and placed at your seats prior to the meeting (our usual practice). The resolution was even more specific as to all details including the recommendation that the projects be paid in the order presented. (See attached.) In addition, the discussion by the Board and the presentation by staff were explicit on the details. A question to the effect of ‘are we approving funding in the order as presented in resolution’ was asked by at least two different Commissioners (Davis, Cashion). The Board was informed at least three times that the resolution requested funding in the order ranked in the resolution.”

Commissioner Billy Yow was quoted in the News & Record article attacking Alston for not citing the specific nature of his conflict of interest when he left the meeting room – namely, that Alston was in negotiations to act as a broker for the hotel.

Yow said he was critical of Alston for not being more specific about the conflict.

As for the vote, Yow said he knew exactly what he was voting on.

“I was not confused,” Yow said.

Alston said it was no secret at the time that he was negotiating to be a broker on the hotel deal, and he said he did exactly what he was supposed to do at the meeting.

“I was under the assumption that I made myself very clear,” Alston said. “I had also talked with the county attorney and the county manager concerning this matter and told them that I was not going to participate in this vote because of that reason.”

Alston said it’s nothing new for Yow to attack him. “As you know, Billy will be Billy,” he said.

Commissioner Paul Gibson said that he in fact actually didn’t realize that the projects had been prioritized, but he said that, after reviewing what transpired at the Dec. 10 meeting, it was clearly his own fault. It certainly was not from a lack of Payne informing the board, he said. “I was asleep at the wheel,” Gibson said.

Alston said he was in no way confused about the prioritization of the list, but that he was very confused where all this smoke was coming from.

“No one has said anything about this matter until this week,” Alston said.

Commissioner Kirk Perkins said the reason some board members didn’t remember all the details very well was because it took place almost a month and a half earlier and the commissioners were simply voting on a resolution. The matter, Perkins said, involved no county funds and did not put any at risk, and the county commissioners’ role in the process was pro forma for the most part, he said.

The vote adopted a resolution that allowed the prioritized projects to move on to the next step of potential funding, at which point they must convince experts that they are viable projects.

Perkins said that given all that, it was bizarre to open up the News & Record on Jan. 22 and see that the lead story on A-1 was about a vote on a resolution that took place at a meeting over a month earlier.

“It kind of reminds me of Seinfeld,” Perkins said. “It’s a show about nothing.”