Outrageous Land Deal Again On Commission Agenda
Visited 1462 times, 5 so far today Print This! | Twitter This!
This land deal stinks so badly that, when District Attorney Danny Porter read my article exposing it in June, he threatened the County Commission with a Grand Jury investigation. The Commission backed down temporarily, delaying the agenda item for two months.
Despite the DA’s threat and today’s AJC article exposing four similarly suspicious land deals, the Commission will again consider this outrageous purchase on Tuesday. And my sources say that Chairman Charles Bannister, D-1 Commissioner Shirley Lasseter and D-4 Commissioner Kevin Kenerly plan to approve this buy of unnecessary and overpriced land, despite multi-million dollar cuts in the budget including reductions in public safety forces.
They hope that you aren’t paying attention.
The Details
The land, owned by Ty Robinson and Old Peachtree Partners, LLC, lies in the path of the extension of McGinnis Ferry Road near Suwanee. While Lorraine Green was still the D-1 Commissioner, the county appraised, negotiated and agreed to buy approximately two acres, all that was needed for road right-of-way and a sewer force main.
Before the deal could be closed, the LLC partners backed out; a nearby tract had sold for a higher per acre value and they apparently decided that they could sell the entire 16 acres for a higher price.
The county sued to enforce the terms of the contract; in the alternative, it also proceeded with condemnation to gain clear title. The county reportedly offered Robinson and the other partners the original, contracted price in the condemnation proceedings.
I understand that the condemnation proceedings are completed. In other words, the county has all of the land that it needs to build the road. Inexplicably, however, Bannister continues to push a proposal to purchase the entire 16 acres for $5,265,975.00. Even worse, the purchase price that Bannister proposed is close to the seller’s asking price; approximately double the county’s own appraised value!
How the Commission Will Vote
Without your intervention, this deal will be approved. Bannister, Lasseter and Kenerly will vote for purchase; D-3’s Mike Beaudreau will oppose it and D-2 Commissioner Bert Nasuti will abstain. One of his partners, Pat O’Brien, is a co-owner of the subject property and it has been Nasuti’s practice to recuse himself on any votes involving his law firm.
Bannister’s boldness is mind-boggling and it is financially reckless. Under his leadership, the county failed to respond to early indicators of the economic slowdown. On one hand, he proposes a massive tax hike and then responds childishly when property owners revolt; on the other, he continues to reward campaign contributors and bail his developer buddies out of their bad decisions…. with your tax dollars. [Budget info]
Kenerly has emerged as the key to this vote. Shirley Lasseter, who took office this year as one of the most mentally deficient individuals to serve in recent memory, quickly assumed her role as Bannister’s “Mini Me,” his sure vote. Beaudreau is dead-set against it and Nasuti will not vote. Kenerly’s vote is crucial to the deal’s passage.
And Kenerly is up for reelection next year. Because of his support of recent questionable land deals, the Gwinnett minor league stadium, the now defunct trash plan and voters’ general outrage over property taxes, his return to office is in doubt. He plans to announce his intentions on September 15 but, if he has already decided not to seek reelection, his mental “lame duck” status could mean that he no longer cares about what you think.
You must act now. UPDATE! The Commission voted unanimously to deny this land deal. Go here for video; check back here at TalkGwinnett for details.
Dozens of you flooded the Commissioners’ inboxes with your objections when this deal was first proposed in June. An even stronger response is needed now. I plan to send the Commission the following message. You are invited to use my words, if you like… what matters is that Chairman Bannister, Lasseter and Kenerly hear from you and as many of your neighbors and friends as possible before Tuesday. Just copy (Ctrl + C) and paste (Ctrl + V) the following into the form at www.tinyurl.com/commishes :
Chairman Bannister, I demand that you abandon your effort to buy land from Old Peachtree Partners on Tuesday (2009-0646). With your recent attempt to raise our property taxes by 30% and now your cuts to public safety and other essential services, I consider it HIGHLY irresponsible for you and the Commission to purchase this land from your political buddies at an inflated price when it is not even needed.
You should ask yourself: How many public safety jobs would $5,265,975.00 save? How far would $5.2 million go toward building the fire stations that you propose to delay? I am considering these questions.
Further, I insist that you add to Tuesday’s agenda a proposal to impose a MORATORIUM on all purchases of land for public recreational use until public safety personnel and service levels– including the planned construction and staffing of fire stations and police precincts– are restored to pre-budget cut levels. I was appalled by news of recent overpriced land buys and want the practice to stop NOW.
I will encourage my friends and family to oppose the reelection of ANY Commissioner who supports this reckless spending of my tax dollars.
Respectfully,
Contact the Commission: http://www.tinyurl.com/commishes
2. You must encourage at least one other person to contact the Commission. Forward this article to your mailing list or get your homeowners association involved. A groundswell of opposition halted Bannister’s plan to hike taxes by 30%. A similar effort can derail his proposal to direct over four million dollars of your money to a political crony for no justifiable reason.
The Deal:
2009-0646 Approval/authorization for Chairman to execute Purchase and Sale Agreement between Gwinnett County, Georgia and Old Peachtree Partners, LLC approving the purchase of 16.203, more or less, acres of fee simple right of way, Parcel # 4 located in Land Lot 153 of the 7th District of Gwinnett County in the amount of $5,265,975.00. Authorization for Chairman to complete all necessary documents to complete closing, subject to approval by the Law Department. McGinnis Ferry Road Extension project (#F-0034), 2005 Sales Tax Program – Commission District 1/Lasseter [Agenda]
[...] Outrageous Land Deal Again On Commission Agenda | TalkGwinnett.com Tags: charles bannister, gwinnett county commission, higher taxes [...]
It has got to be about time to show Bannister what recall means. Teachers get furloughed while Bannister supporters get paid double value for land that the county does not need.
I have said all along that this is the crookedest bunch of commissioners since the Webb days! I would love to see a grand jury investigation of the whole bunch. You’re right – something stinks!
What? The Hill commission wasn’t crooked? We’re just back to those days. Bannister was supposed to be the anti-Hill. That gets less true every day.
As to the budget. Is the money being used for the land purchases even money taken from what could be used for operating expenses like salaries or from funds only to be used for capital expenses like the SPLOST funds? We should be questioning where the funds for the hospital system came from. We have been giving them $5 million a year for the last couple of years and for the next couple of years as they claimed to be short of funds yet they have spent money building the new patient tower and to solicit for the new open heart center which are intended to increase their profits. We can’t do anything about the stadium but I wonder if we could suspend the payments to the hospital system while we re-evaluate their need for taxpayer funds.
Whenever I have asked about the source of funding, I have always been told that these deals were done with SPLOST money. You know that sales tax dollars are not unlimited; you also know that they are supposed to be spent on specific projects identified by a citizen committee.
SPLOST dollars also free up tax dollars to be spent on other things. From a county publication: “Over the years, Gwinnett County’s capital and operating budgets have shown the dramatic impact of SPLOST programs. Especially in the area of transportation and parks, the additional SPLOST funds have allowed traditional tax revenues to expand other basic services and keep up with a rapidly growing population.”
SPLOST collections have fallen over the past few years, if I recall correctly. In other words, the dollars for capital projects including transportation and public safety are even tougher to scrounge up, potentially putting a greater demand on property tax revenue.
Contrary to what some Commissioners would like for you to believe, SPLOST is not a bottomless pit. When they spend sales tax money on projects (and land) for which county staff has not planned, other properly-identified projects must go unfunded.
Something else that just popped into my head…. every purchase of land that could be developed takes property off of the tax digest. (The county government doesn’t tax its own property….)
Having served on a SPLOST committee I know that they are only advisory. The commission is under no obligation to follow the recommendations of the committees or boards. As it is when it comes to parks money the county is buying land faster than it can be developed or is that the symptom. By continually buying land there is no money left over to actually build the park from the parks departments share of SPLOST funds. You are correct in that the SPLOST funds have allowed traditional tax revenues to be used to expand other services. At this point that is where we are. The budget as described in the newspapers of about $1.5 Billion is in actuality about half SPLOST funding and half from other revenues. Bottom line is the park land in question is being bought using SPLOST money and it is not taking away anything that could be used for paying operating costs such as public safety.
Now if we started collecting Impact Fees on top of the SPLOST we would have a new source of revenue to cover other capital costs thus freeing up additional monies for operating expenses such as public safety. Again we have a lack of leadership that kept ignoring this source of revenue.
You and I have always disagreed about the Commission’s obligation to honor the dictates of plans and committees (the county’s Land Use Plan comes to mind!). While the Commission may not be bound LEGALLY by the recommendations of the SPLOST committee, I believe that they have an obligation to the people of Gwinnett to follow the committee’s project list. After all, without the people’s support, the county has NO sales tax dollars to spend.
Likewise, the county has a plan that guides the provision of recreational services and facilities. Five million spent tomorrow out of SPLOST money (or the money spent unnecessarily on the Palm Creek tract) may mean that a park will not be built in an area that actually NEEDS recreational opportunities.
Whether planning and development, recreation or SPLOST, the county pays hundreds of thousands and devotes thousands of manhours to develop plans to guide future growth. Plans create an expectation… a certainty on which present and future residents should be able to rely.
When the Commission has a plan and doesn’t follow it… whatever it is… they have, in my opinion, failed in their duty to the people of Gwinnett. Period.
I acknowledge that SPLOST dollars cannot be spent DIRECTLY for operations. But it is undisputed that SPLOST gives the county greater latitude when spending property tax dollars.
Moreover, SPLOST money is spent to build public safety facilities. It could be said that the $5 million that Bannister proposes to spend tomorrow will mean that a fire station or even a library won’t be completed when planned, if at all… he won’t be spending just ‘park money.’
You cannot say that “it is not taking away anything….” Well, you could, but you’d be wrong.
Bob,
When you take anything out of context it could be construed to say anything such as you taking part of my comment “it is not taking away anything…” and coming to your conclusion of “You cannot say that “it is not taking away anything….” Well, you could, but you’d be wrong.”
You conveniently left out the point of the whole statement “it is not taking away anything that could be used for paying operating costs such as public safety.”
This is fact so it is not wrong as you claim. Monies for capital expenses can not be used for operating expenses is cold hard fact.
I am not supporting what appears to be a blatant waste of taxpayer money with the purchase of the extra land in question. Nor am I supporting the other questionable purchases at least at the price paid.
I agree that plans can create an expectation. Nonetheless they are not set in concrete. This is a reason I live in the part of my subdivision that I do. I chose not to buy a house that backed up on a farm that was zoned R-75 but abutted industrial and commercial property around the Gwinnett Place Mall area. I had an expectation that the farm would eventually be sold and rezoned to O/I or high density residential. It was almost sold for high density residential but becuase of financial reasons the heirs of the estate had to sell faster than the buyer could get financing and thus the county stepped in and bought the land for a park that was also not in the parks and rec plan. It is now a great park and buffer between my subdivision and the ofiice park and commercial properties around the mall. If I had known that this would happen I might have chosen a home backing up on a park. In essence stuff happens and plans change. I often use the quote from Steinbecks “Of Mice and Men” that says it all – ‘The best laid plans of mice and men oft’ go astray’. A plan is something drawn up based on the existing parameters. Often before the plan can be executed the parameters change. That is why I always say the Comprehensive Land Use plan the county creates every ten years is a compendium of guidelines not a blue print. The zoning map created at the same time is a proposal not the blue print based on current assumptions not reading tea leaves for the future.
There is a sentiment that is traveling throughout the county, vocalized in homes, businesses, educational institutes, and civil protection services: the Board of Commissioners has forgotten about the people of Gwinnett County. There is a compliant of our federal government flushing our tax dollars down the drain, but look what’s happening in our own back yard. When does it become so apparent that there is a lack of interest in the needs and concerns of the citizens of Gwinnett County by their elected officials? Just like the waste disposal public hearing, Gwinnett citizens will hear the same response from their chosen representatives: silence until the actual vote. Simply put, when is it that enough is enough?
Did the commissioners not learn from their attempted tax hike? Did they not take the calls, emails and mailings concerning their irrational spending patterns seriously? Did they not see that all groups, no matter race, creed, gender or affiliation, are ready for true leadership, and not individuals whom are continuously associated with suspicious and possibly unethical financial interactions? And most importantly, are they really conducting business in the best interest of the county? The answer to all of these questions is no, and the responsive objection by the populace will ring from Peachtree Industrial to Gravel Springs Road, from Lilburn to Sugar Hill, and from Buford Village to Technology Park.
We the people of Gwinnett County have seen time and again the misuse of the citizen’s tax dollar wasted for pet projects and owed favors. Where is the transparency? Where is our representation when the seller of a property is authorized to conduct a single appraisal, after which and without rational explanation, the cost of that land doubles? Where is our representation when votes can no longer be made on the basis of right versus wrong due to personal or business ties? Where is our representation when foreclosures rise, businesses leave, police, fire and emergency service departments sit empty or are reduced in size? Where is our representation when libraries close or sit unstaffed? Where are our leaders Gwinnett?
Now is the time for new and just leadership in Gwinnett County. We have a chosen group of individuals that have not met the goal and expectations of the positions they were elected to oversee. Worse, they are defiant of their actions and attempt to remain unshakeable to the will and voices of the people. To chastise their own constituents for speaking out against the frivolous waste of their already limited funds only brings to light just how unattached the Commissioners purposely remain. Our future is now Gwinnett, and four questionable land deals, a stadium that is not is not attracting the predicted funding, a waste disposal plan that takes the decision away from the people, $80 million dollars in lawsuits, and an overall disregard for the resolve of my fellow citizens will not see us through to a better and prosperous Gwinnett. Both our voices and our votes will be heard.
[...] that, District 1 Commissioner Shirley Lasseter took issue with my prediction that she would vote with Chairman Charles Bannister and Commissioner Kevin Kenerly to approve the [...]