Plausible deniability should not be accepted with taxpayer assets
I received a interesting email last night from a friend. It was a written by a City Council member explaining why he would “probably” support selling the Candy Factory and 7 Victorian houses to Kinsey Probasco and Associates.
The City Council member wrote, “First, let me say that I am not 100% comfortable with the proposal that we will be voting on Tuesday night. I don’t like selling public assets and I think these assets truly were a value to the community. Second, let me say that the proposal probably will pass and I probably will support it. It is the only plan for doing anything with these assets. And I don’t think we can wait another year to figure out what else to do. I think they could remain city assets and become even more productive than they have been. But the city has ignored them for years and too many of the former occupants have moved out once word of the sale got out.”
Who in the City made the decision to ignore the maintenance of the Candy Factory and Victorian houses? At whose direction was this done?
On the Market Square project the City prepared a RFQ on a joint venture project of public and private investment. The same firm Kinsey Probasco and Associates won the contract. In the “negotiation period” many meetings where held. Yet the entire purpose for the contract was to issue a “Comprehensive Development Agreement” which would require the “Coordinating Developer” to recruit National Tenants and invest 22 million dollars of private money. The City never issued the “Comprehensive Development Agreement”.
I emailed members of City Council to ask the questions below and I also asked these questions of Bill Lyons on the k2k forum where Dr. Lyons frequently answers the questions of Knoxville residents. There was no response.
Who or what body decided that Kinsey Probasco and Associates would be released from the “Coordinating Developer” Role and that there would not be a “Comprehensive Development Agreement” that required the recruiting of national tenants for Market Square and the investment of 22 million dollars of private monies?
When did this happen?
Why did it happen?
The taxpayers should not allow plausible deniability to be an excuse. In the City’s dealings with Kinsey Probasco and Associates the taxpayers have no accountability on the mishandled Market Square contract. From some reason valued City buildings are not maintained so now they must be sold because of “back logged maintenance”.
Each time Kinsey Probasco and Associates makes substantial profits at the expense of the taxpayers. Why will the City not answer these questions? Why does City Council shield the non-elected City employees that made these decisions? Most importantly will the taxpayers allow this plausible deniability scheme to work?
August 17th, 2005 at 12:53 pm
Randy Vineyard, Randy Vineyard, Randy Vineyard.
August 17th, 2005 at 1:51 pm
Grayson Says:
August 17th, 2005 at 12:53 pm
Randy Vineyard, Randy Vineyard, Randy Vineyard.
Pretty desperate play; blame it on the prior administration. Sort of a “dog ate my homework” defense. Where have I seen that before?
I wonder if any of the local law enforcement types (TBI?) are looking at these transactions? Since Jon Kinsey’s father-in-law is Ward Crutchfield, would we have to come up with a catchy name like the “Tennessee Waltz”? Petula Clark had a hit named “Downtown”. Would that work?
http://www.twin-music.com/azlyrics/c_file/songs/clark/down.html
August 17th, 2005 at 2:23 pm
It’s a mess that’s for sure. I am not sure what the current admins game is, but I do think there is so merit in holding Ashe’s administration accounrable. How can you not when they ran this place for 16 years? Mr. Vineyard, as finance chref, didn’t exactly do too well in the last term.
I am still waiting for someone over there, Mr. Lyons or whomever to give some comment.
December 19th, 2005 at 2:29 pm
[…] Lyons then said, “Estimates from the PBA (Knoxville Public Building Authority) are that over ten years ten million dollars will be required to keep the Candy Factory open.” Lyons also said “no one in any of the City council workshops challenged these numbers.” Someone needs a new calculator. These figures should be challenged because they are not correct. Ten years of operating expense at $200,000 are 2 million dollars. You add that to the 4 million dollars for “alleged” repairs and you have six million dollars. Where is the missing 4 million dollars from the PBA estimate? More importantly why has the City or the PBA not made public what repairs are needed for the Candy Factory? Does a private citizen have to go to the PBA and request this information? It should have been disclosed in the workshops in City Council meetings. The Knoxville Convention Center, Women’s Basketball Hall of Fame, Universe Knoxville, and the Market Square re-development project all had this same kind of fudge factor mathematics. […]