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


News and Record Editorial Board misleads readers on Greensboro's Civil Rights Museum questions and answers

From the News and Record Editorial Board, which consists of Allen Johnson and Doug Clark;

"Hayes-Greene responded to 15 questions submitted two weeks earlier. She outlined the functions of the entities behind the museum: Sit-In Movement Inc., Museum Landlord LLC and Museum Tenant LLC."
First some of the questions asked by the city in the first place;

Deena Hayes-Green's response to question 1;

In my view Deena didn't "outline the functions of the entities behind the museum." She says the work was done by qualified personnel, but provided no actual outline of what the LLC's do what for whom, other than what was already known, which isn't much.

No graphic was provided as asked for.

No answer for how monies are transferred between the entities.

Please object in the comments if you disagree, but what Allen and Doug are saying happened didn't.
Doug and Allen; "She explained the tax credit programs that provided most of the funding for the renovation of the old Woolworth building"

Deena Hayes-Green's response to question 2;

There is no explanation of the "implication" of the tax credits, other than what was unsaid with the Sit in Movement owning the property after the tax credits expire, which means Skip Alston and Earl Jones and friends end up owning the facility after the city bails them out with everyone else's money, after which they will be in a position to profit from the museum, which isn't spelled out and Doug and Allen won't admit, even though the city has already said so.

There is no list of requirements for the tax credits to expire provided for as asked.

"Essentially over" doesn't answer the question.

The city has not been provided actual proof other than letters written by museum related persons that the tax credit payments go away.

What Allen and Doug are saying isn't true.
Deena Hayes-Green's response to question 3;

My understanding is the museum still owes Carolina Bank about $1 million and US Bank millions after the tax credit debt is paid off.

Deena is saying there will be no debt "on the building".

So who will owe how much to whom after the tax credits burn off, of which the city has never received any documentation from the lenders concerning.

Deena didn't provide the "accounting work", and if she did, there is no verification from the lenders that the accounting is correct.
Deena Hayes-Green's response to question 4 on the implications of a default;

There is debt tied to the museum building.  There is debt tied to the Sit in Movement.  There is debt tied to the tax credits.  Debt on the building defaulting is different than debt tied to Earl and Skip.

If Greensboro's taxpayers pay off loans tied to bailing out Earl and Skip, that has nothing to do with saving the museum, as Allen and Doug seem to have no problem with by not saying so, either Allen and Doug don't know what they are talking about, or are purposefully not telling some truth to their readers.
The initial questions;
Deena's response;
The follow up questions, which include what wasn't initially answered;
Back to Doug and Allen;

"Westmoreland returned a letter pressing for more details about development fees, management fees, organizational structure, staffing and operational hours. He asked a critical question: Who owns the exhibits? That’s important to know in case of the worst-case scenario that the museum closes.

The reason for knowing who owns the exhibits
is to have something for the city to attach to for collateral.

As long as the answers are satisfactory, the balance of the city loan should be paid.

Ideally, the museum will be able to operate entirely with its own revenue and private support once it clears its immediate challenges."

How about realistically?

I believe Doug and Allen have done their readers a disservice by misinforming them as to the messedupness of the current situation.

The answers to the initial set of questions wasn't "satisfactory".

Skip and Earl need to step away from the project.

The sustainability plan is completely unrealistic and Doug and Allen won't say so.

This is an example of why Greensboro is such a mess.  Not only have some our leaders been corrupt, our news industry has less than informed their audiences of the situation, and the News and Record's Editorial Board has advanced the priorities of some whose intentions have been less than above board, and who have deceived the public on multiple occasions.

I believe Allen and Doug have done a disservice to our community with this propaganda.

On the March 6, 2014 News and Record Civil Rights Museum article

A Comparison of Hartzman's Yes Weekly Column on the Civil Rights Museum and the News and Record's

Yes Weekly Column; "ON GREENSBORO’S CIVIL RIGHTS MUSEUM", by George Hartzman

"...City Council needs to initiate a review of the tax credit structure, along with an accounting of how the monies acquired before the bailout were spent.

Only the obligations necessary to saving the museum should be paid for with tax dollars.

...I believe Skip Alston and Earl Jones among others need to legally step away from any interest in the museum, and a non-connected chairperson installed. 

...I believe Yvonne Johnson should immediately refrain from any involvement and/or votes concerning the museum or its future.

Greensboro’s City Council owes our community an apology."

Hello Mr. Hartzman: Below are some of the answers to the questions you have regarding the Civil Rights Museum.

Does the Museum’s Landlord stand to earn income from the property under any scenario?

"Possibly, if their museum tour/ticket sales increase."

What are the consequences of not assisting with the Carolina Bank Loan?

"The entity would be in default since the July payment was not made and we are now in September."

Civil Rights Museum / Simkins PAC related links


Anonymous said...

Evidently Doug and Allen are satisfied with the answers Deena gave and know how this works.

Let's get them to explain it to us.

W.E. Heasley said...


Agreed. The editorial by Mr. Johnson and Mr. Clark is semi-News and sort-of-the-Record. It is also an argument with no arguments.

Why bother asking the fifteen questions if any answer will do? A rather wasted exercise in Q&A.

Maybe Firesign Theater summed up the editorial nicely with: “How can you be in two places at once when you’re are not anywhere at all”.