One who intends to leave others better off for his having existed.

10/24/13

From a thread at Greater Greensboro Politics on Nancy Hoffman's Crony Capitalism and Self Dealing

GH: Nancy Hoffmann voted for DGI funding and signed for DGI paid for benefits that will increase the value of her property via a tenant who must have known she legislated the tax funds their way.

She was involved in the process by assenting to a deal which improves her property with everyone else's $.

She voted herself money through her tenant.

She signed for it.

She was involved in the process by consenting to a deal in which she profited.

Thank you for confirming the conversation david, and that she made a denial

I'm saying it's a violation of Greensboro' s charter ordinance.

Was it right or wrong for Nancy Hoffmann to vote herself money via her new tenant?

David [Craft], are you suggesting that if the business fails, Nancy will rip out all the electrical work, frame and sheet rock, plumbing and a retail sales counter?

By your logic, if she doesn't rip out all the plumbing etc... if the business fails, and it's all not torn out, Nancy voted herself money.

You might want to rethink the veracity of your statements.

Is this not the second time in as many days that Andrew Brod [Nancy Hoffmann contributor] has declined to answer an important question? Yesterday it was about whether or not council members should recuse themselves from enriching a campaign contributor with everyone else's money.

I asked Nancy if she or her tenant had applied. [which she denied]

It's a conflict of interest if 5 city council votes says so. One has to make a motion to discuss it, and another has to second the motion. Then a debate unfolds and a vote. The vote determines whether or not there is a conflict of interest. That's my understanding of how it works for the City of Greensboro. All the expert opinions are tertiary to a council vote.

My guess would be the motion fails, as we have one of the most corrupt councils in the state. I would like to see the debate take place, because it's in the best interests of city taxpayers to shed some sunlight on these back room deals involving public monies.

If we have the debate, this stuff is unlikely to take place as often going forward.

I would consider a council debate an achievement Andrew, as this debate has been. Sometimes losing is winning.

"Any officer, department head or employee who has financial interest, direct or indirect, in any proposed contract with the city or in a proposed sale of any land, material, supplies, or services to the city or to a contractor supplying the city, shall make known that interest and shall refrain from voting upon or otherwise participating in the making of such contract or sale.

Any officer, department head, or employee who willfully conceals such a financial interest or willfully violates the requirements of this Section shall be guilty of malfeasance in office or position and shall forfeit his office or position.

Violation of this Section with the knowledge expressed or implied of the person or corporation contracting with or making a sale to the city shall render the contract void."

Sec. 4.131. - Conflict of interest: Greensboro Code of Ordinances, City Charter
.
.
Nancy Hoffman recieved Campaign cash from Betty Cone, who profits from being on DGI's board.

Dawn Chaney, who will double her money on the property she owns across from where GPAC is going, and is DGI's Chair, who probably signed off on the grant, being on the executive committee.

The Samets, who she voted $600,000 for thier "shovel ready" project.

Saperstien, who Nancy voted for thier son to be Greensboro's lobbyist.

Isaacson's, who do most of the government zoning cases, and who represent Roy Carroll.

•Reid Phillips, GPAC Taskforce

Kathy Manning, GPAC Taskforce

I believe Nancy Hoffman is a crony of Greensboro's oligarchs, who profit from her votes.

http://www.co.guilford.nc.us/elections_cms/docs/2013/midyr/HOFFMANN_NANCY_midyr13-amended.pdf
.
.
George Hartzman Nancy Hoffman recieved Campaign cash from Andrew Brod.

You might have wanted to mention that during the debate Andrew.

John Kitchen of the Bryan Foundation, whose park DGI takes care of for $350,000 per year, of which Betty Cone profits from as she sits on DGI's board.

Susan Schwartz, Cemala Foundation which handles Cone money, who votes to give Betty Cone taxpayer money as a DGI board member and Action Greensboro Chair for Center City Park.

DGI's board has a cesspool of cronies who profit and/or allocate taxpayer money to thier friends.

http://www.co.guilford.nc.us/.../HOFFMANN_NANCY_35day13.pdf
.
.
Per DGI's Jason Cannon; City Councilwoman Nancy Hoffmann signs authorization for tenant to recieve taxpayer money she voted for

http://hartzman.blogspot.com/2013/10/per-dgis-jason-cannon-city-councilwoman.html
.
.
On Nancy Hoffmann's vote to fund DGI, after her "final subission" to be DGI's landlord

http://hartzman.blogspot.com/2013/06/will-nancy-hoffman-vote-to-fund-dgi.html
.
.
Eric Robert on Nancy Hoffmann

http://hartzman.blogspot.com/2013/10/eric-robert-on-nancy-hoffmann.html
.
.
Crony capitalism is a term describing an economy in which success in business depends on close relationships between business people and government officials. It may be exhibited by favoritism in the distribution of legal permits, government grants, special tax breaks, or other forms of dirigisme.[1] Crony capitalism is believed to arise when political cronyism spills over into the business world; self-serving friendships and family ties between businessmen and the government influence the economy and society to the extent that it corrupts public-serving economic and political ideals.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crony_capitalism