NC Treasurer Janet Cowell Contributions; "Law Firms Seek Cut of State Pension Litigation" and Pay to Play

"...State pension funds are major targets for the high-flying litigation shops.

...State Treasurer Janet Cowell will choose about 10 to serve as a pool for lawsuits. Representatives from Cowell’s office and the office of Attorney General Roy Cooper are evaluating proposals from the firms.

...One of the firms targeting North Carolina is New York-based Bernstein Litowitz.

...Cowell has received more than $123,000 since 2007 in campaign contributions from employees and other people connected to the law firms that are trying to get the state’s business. The biggest contributors to Cowell were people connected to Bernstein Litowitz — which contributed at least $45,690, including in-kind contributions for catering and lodging.

Cooper received at least $76,825 in campaign contributions since 2007 from employees and others connected to the law firms seeking the state’s business. People connected to Bernstein Litowitz were also his biggest contributor, with $18,500 in contributions.

Tony Gelderman, who heads the Louisiana office of Bernstein Litowitz, contributed at least $8,000 to Cowell and provided lodging worth about $1,000. He contributed $5,500 to Cooper. Gelderman did not respond to a phone call and email seeking a comment for this story...

...James Cox, a professor at the School of Law at Duke University, said North Carolina shouldn’t be having people tied to elected state officers such as Cowell and Cooper choose the law firms.

“I think you should get it out of both those offices,” Cox said. “I think it should be in some more neutral body.”...

...large funds tend to negotiate lower fees, but that difference disappears once campaign contributions to state pension fund officials are accounted for.

“The political contributions are taking us back pretty much where we were before Congress adopted the law,”...

Bernstein Liebhard has hired two lobbyists in North Carolina, the only firm seeking North Carolina’s business that has done so, according to filings with the secretary of state. One of Bernstein Liebhard’s lobbyists is Jerry Meek, former chairman of the North Carolina Democratic Party...

A few North Carolina firms are seeking to represent the state, including Blue Stephens & Fellers in Raleigh, which has submitted a joint proposal with Hagen Berman Sobol Shapiro of Seattle. Managing partner Dan Blue, chairman of Duke University’s Board of Trustees and a Democratic state senator from Wake County, told Carolina Journal his firm has not been involved in securities litigation, so “we teamed up with the best firm in the country to do it.”

http://www.carolinajournal.com/exclusives/display_exclusive.html?id=6157
.
.
Bernstein, Litowitz et al CAMPAIGN FINANCE $2,719,500 GIVEN

federal data covers from 1989 roughly through q2 2014
state-level data is not available in bulk for 2014.

Top Recipients, includes contributions from the organization’s employees, their family members, and its political action committee.

Hillary Clinton (D) $86,500
Janet Cowell (D-NC) $67,750
Eliot L. Spitzer (D-NY) $53,000
Barack Obama (D) $45,550
Roy Cooper (D-NC) $43,500

http://influenceexplorer.com/organization/bernstein-litowitz-et-al/46fe810d60ef4c0585657f1f0280e40a
.
.
Bernstein Litowitz contributions to Janet Cowell;

http://civitasreview.com/budget-taxes/cowell-facebook-fiasco-more-questions-that-demand-answers/

"An examination of political contributions to Janet Cowell's campaign since 2008 courtesy of the NC State Board of Elections shows that employees of Bernstein have donated nearly $75,000 to Cowell in the last two elections cycles...

Interestingly, the donations include three in-kind donations for room/lodging in New Orleans. The contributor of this in-kind donation is Anthony Gelderman III, who is highlighted in this 2004 Forbes article as one who has "used political ties to turn Louisiana's pension funds into a profit center for his New York law firm, Bernstein Litowitz." Indeed, the article discusses a previous class action suit in which Bernstein tried to bill its clients (including major public pension funds) more than $10,000 per hour. The article also notes that Bernstein's business model seems to include cozying up to politicians and then leverage that relationship for lucrative class action suits:

Despite its New York roots, Bernstein Litowitz is especially influential in Louisiana. The state's public pension funds have retained the firm for at least 15 class actions. Bernstein Litowitz has contributed more than $90,000 to Louisiana politicians since 1996. It gave $38,000 last year, 83% of its contributions nationally.

Now it appears they are bringing that shady practice to North Carolina.

Every step in this story involves the politically-connected (Bowles/Morgan Stanley, Bernstein Litowitz) reaping major financial rewards, with taxpayers and perhaps NC state retirees on the hook. And Janet Cowell is squarely in the middle of it.

This whole Facebook fiasco begs a number of questions:

...What was Cowell doing in Louisiana multiple times in the last few years?

What is a New York based law firm with much of its business in Louisiana doing donating to the North Carolina State Treasurer, if not sniffing an opportunity to someday milk the pension fund for outlandish legal fees by representing the fund in a class action suit?

Will NC taxpayers be on the hook for $10,000 an hour legal fees?

Should retired teachers and state and local government employees be comfortable with how their pension is being managed?

Does anybody else see any conflict of interests in this whole ordeal?

State and local government retirees – and taxpayers –  deserve some answers."

http://civitasreview.com/budget-taxes/cowell-facebook-fiasco-more-questions-that-demand-answers/
.
.
"Pay to play, sometimes pay for play,
is a phrase used for a variety of situations
in which money is exchanged for services or the privilege to engage (play)
in certain activities.

The common denominator of all forms of pay to play
is that one must pay to "get in the game,"...

Typically, the payer (an individual, business, or organization) makes campaign contributions to public officials, party officials, or parties themselves, and receives political or pecuniary benefit such as no-bid government contracts, influence over legislation, political appointments or nominations, special access or other favors. The contributions, less frequently, may be to nonprofit or institutional entities, or may take the form of some benefit to a third party, such as a family member of a governmental official.

While the direct exchange of campaign contributions for contracts is the most visible form of Pay to Play, the greater concern is the central role of money in politics, and its skewing both the composition and the policies of government. Thus, those who can pay the price of admission, such as to a $1000/plate dinner or $25,000 "breakout session," gain access to power and/or its spoils, to the exclusion of those who cannot or will not pay: "giving certain people advantages that other[s] don't have because they donated to your campaign."

Incumbent candidates and their political organizations are typically the greatest beneficiaries of Pay-to-Play. Both the Democratic and Republican parties have been criticized for the practice. Many seeking to ban or restrict the practice characterize pay-to-play as legalized corruption."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pay_to_play
.
.
NC Treasurer Janet Cowell "Investors as contributors"

http://greensboroperformingarts.blogspot.com/2014/10/nc-treasurer-janet-cowell-investors-as.html
.
.
04/30/2014 Individual Contribution to NC Treasurer Janet Cowell

Stan Kelly
President, Wealth Management, Sr. Exec
Wells Fargo
932 Kenleigh Cir
Winston Salem, NC 27106-5605

http://app.ncsbe.gov/webapps/cf_rpt_search_org/cf_report_detail.aspx?RID=129749&TP=REC
.
.
12/18/2013 Individual Contribution to NC Treasurer Janet Cowell

Melinda L. Baran
Retired CFP
Wells Fargo Advisors
100 Mainsail Dr
Cary, NC 27511-7201

http://app.ncsbe.gov/webapps/cf_rpt_search_org/cf_report_detail.aspx?RID=125524&TP=REC

.

.

10/31/2012 Wells Fargo PAC

90 S 7th St

Minneapolis, MN 55402-3903

Other Political Committee Contribution

$2000.00

http://app.ncsbe.gov/webapps/cf_rpt_search_org/cf_report_detail.aspx?RID=118481&TP=REC
.
.
http://app.ncsbe.gov/webapps/cf_rpt_search_org/cf_report_comm_results.aspx?C=on&NM=janet

Company seeks $2,871 each for higher paying 31 jobs, after Marty Kotis recieved $44,559 per "speculative" low paying job from City Council

Jim Kee appointing Jeff Nimmer to the Board of Adjustments

Jeff Nimmer joined Kotis Properties in 1999.

As Leasing and Brokerage Manager for North Carolina, Jeff oversees the leasing of all company owned properties, as well as Tenant Representation activities in North Carolina.

He has also tried and won numerous successful re-zoning cases within Greensboro and Guilford County.

He currently serves as the District 3 representative on the Greensboro Minimum Housing Standards Commission, a Council Member of SynerG, ...and is on the Executive Board of the Westerwood Neighborhood Association.

The Triad Business Journal named him one of the Triad's 40 Leaders Under 40 in 2006

http://www.co.guilford.nc.us/elections_cms/docs/2009%20docs/preprim/KEE_JIM_preprim09.pdf

http://www.co.guilford.nc.us/elections_cms/docs/2011%20docs/preprim/kee-jim_preprim11.pdf

Jim Kee voted for a GPAC based on bogus numbers why?

http://www.co.guilford.nc.us/elections_cms/docs/2009%20docs/yrend/KEE_JIM_yrend09.pdf

http://www.co.guilford.nc.us/elections_cms/docs/2011%20docs/PreElect/KEE_JIM_PreElect11.pdf

"Greensboro Minimum Housing Commission

Vinson "Tim" Vincent, Chair - appointed Jeff Nimmer to fill in on Post RUCO Board.

Jeff Nimmer, Vice Chair - Kotis"
.
.
Marty Kotis, Nancy Hoffman and Item 27 on Tuesday's City Council Agenda

http://hartzman.blogspot.com/2013/08/marty-kotis-nancy-hoffman-and-item-27.html
.
.
"David Hoggard,

Did or did Robbie not screw poor renters state wide or not?"

George Hartzman
.
.
"Yes he did."

David Hoggard

September 29, 2011 at 09:15 PM
.
.
"Regulatory capture occurs when a...regulatory agency created to act in the public interest
instead acts in favor of the commercial or special interests that dominate in the industry
or sector it is charged with regulating.

Regulatory capture is a form of government failure,
as it can act as an encouragement for large firms to produce negative externalities.

...regulatory capture occurs because groups or individuals
with a high-stakes interest in the outcome of policy or regulatory decisions
can be expected to focus their resources and energies in attempting to gain the policy outcomes they prefer,
while members of the public, each with only a tiny individual stake in the outcome,
will ignore it altogether.

Regulatory capture refers to when this imbalance of focused resources
devoted to a particular policy outcome is successful at "capturing" influence
with the staff or commission members of the regulatory agency,
so that the preferred policy outcomes of the special interest are implemented.

...A captured regulatory agency that serves the interests of its invested patrons
with the power of the government behind it, is often worse than no regulation whatsoever."

Regulatory Capture
Wikipedia

Kathy Manning, Randall Kaplan's wife, lobbying for a GPAC and their new hotel, with some Nancy Hoffmann, Dawn Chaney and Nancy Vaughan

Developers Roy Caroll, Randall Kaplan Want To Build Hotels In Downtown Greensboro



Nancy Hoffman's perfectly legal contributions from GPAC task force members

http://www.co.guilford.nc.us/elections_cms/docs/2013/midyr/HOFFMANN_NANCY_midyr13.pdf

That Kathy did an in-kind contribution with Painted Plate Catering, whose Brad Semon is working with Randall at the Elm Street Center, the location for the new hotel, is an indication Kathy has been busy bundling donations for Nancy Hoffmann's campaign, with the goal of making millions from a taxpayer funded performing arts center.

http://votehoffmann.com/

Dawn Chaney gave $500 to Nancy Hoffman on 4/3/13

Dawn and Nancy like hanging out together

Here they are at a curfew meeting;

etc...

Here's Dawn Chaney's Nancy Vaughan contribution, who I hear may be in line to sell some of her property for the GPAC, and owns the property where the Flatiron sits.  She stands to make big money on the deal.  Dawn is also currently DGI Chair and Chair of the Redevelopment Commission;

DGI Chair Dawn Chaney gives to Nancy Vaughan, Liaison to DGI, who says what's still broken is now fixed

And that's how to make money off of everyone else's' in Greensboro, North Carolina

I believe money is fungible

Fungible means interchangeable.

The word comes into play
when (inter alia) earmarked funds end up in a general account.

These funds are then free to be used for purposes other than intended.

Example: You would like to go on a vacation but you have unpaid car repair bills.

A wealthy uncle hears that you are having financial trouble and sends money to help.

However, he would never have agree to pay for your vacation
–- he’s nice, but not that nice.

Once your uncle’s money is deposited into your checking account,
you are free to spend it as you please.

You then get to pay off your bills and go on vacation.

In essence, you paid your bills (a necessity) while your uncle funded your vacation.

http://blog.mises.org/archives/007321.asp#

Fungibility

Fungibility is the property of a good or a commodity

whose individual units are capable of mutual substitution.

Examples of highly fungible commodities [like oil] 

are ...currencies.

It refers only to the ease of exchanging one unit of a commodity

with another unit of the same commodity.

Wikipedia

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

Word for the day: Fungible

Yes Weekly: The Business of Elections in Greensboro

Yes Weekly: The Business of Elections in Greensboro

http://www.yesweekly.com/article-7396-cover-story.html

 

Municipal elections are a nearly half-million-dollar industry every odd year in Greensboro. In 2007, more than $450,000 washed through the election system, raised from homebuilders, lawyers and other citizens with a stake in city politics, funneled into the coffers of candidates’ campaign and then drained back out in expenditures for yard signs, newspaper ads, billboard displays, payments to poll workers and rental fees for banquet halls.

 

…The cost of Greensboro municipal elections has more than tripled since 2001, with the total spent by victorious candidates rising from $73,901 in 2001 to $282,623 in 2007.

 

…The three at-large seats range from $19,547 to $27,889 each. Some district seats go for more than others. The District 4 seat in the city’s affluent northwest quadrant averages $15,119, while District 3 runs $13,303.

 

…Our campaign finance shows that the average candidate usually gets about 10 percent of their funds from small donors — meaning people who gave less than $50.

 

“It’s much more efficient to raise your cash from the big donors,” [‘Josh Glasser of Common Cause of North Carolina told delegates at a Greensboro Neighborhood Congress meeting on Sept. 12, Glasser continued.’] “That means courting interests that often come before the city council and ask for favorable regulations and favorable rules. If you survey the sitting Greensboro City Council, every single member would have to admit that their largest or second largest donation came from someone connected to the real-estate industry or the developers industry.”

 

…District 3 candidate George Hartzman, who attended the meeting, argued that reform needs to be taken a step further.

 

“You have these people who are wanting to do business with the government, and they’re paying for their election. And then they get elected and they put a proposal in front of the people that they paid to get elected. And then the people who got elected vote for the thing that the person wants to have passed. It’s a conflict of interest…. Why aren’t we looking at not letting the people who are contributing to elections not being able to do business with the city for X amount of time before and after they give the money? Doesn’t that seem simple? It’s basic ethics.”

 

Zack Matheny, the incumbent in the District 3 race, was first elected in 2007 in a contest with four other opponents in which Matheny quickly emerged as the leading fundraiser. Matheny raised a total of $46,358 [while serving on Greensboro’s Zoning Commission] and secured 58.9 percent of the vote in the general election. His opponent, Joe Wilson, raised only $13,795.

 

…Newspapers are not far behind printers in a ranking of sectors that financially profit from campaigns. Victorious Greensboro city council candidates spent a total of $68,615 on printing in 2007, and $61,351 on newspaper advertising. One newspaper, the conservative-leaning Rhinoceros Times, dominates the trade, pulling in $26,030 in 2007, followed by the News & Record, with $17,558; the Carolina Peacemaker, with $8,928; The Greensboro Times, with $3,690; and YES! Weekly, with $3,300.

 

...Adams, Jones, Johnson and Wells are among the six black elected officials who hold voting privileges on the George C. Simkins Jr. Memorial Political Action Committee, commonly known as the Simkins PAC, or simply the PAC. The PAC sends out a mailing during every election to households in predominantly African-American areas of the city that lists its favored candidates.

 

A white politician who runs citywide, Groat contributed $1,500 to the Simkins PAC in 2007, on top of her payments to Adams and The Greensboro Times,…the newspaper owned by Rep. Earl Jones… Her total payments to the three entities come to $3,362. The PAC reasoned that “Sandra has completed her first term and will continue to be responsive and open-minded.”

 

Robbie Perkins, another white politician running citywide, also received the PAC’s endorsement. He paid at total of $1,700 to the PAC and related entities.

 

Three other white candidates received the PAC’s endorsement. Zack Matheny spent $450 with The Greensboro Times on advertising and contributed $200 to the Simkins PAC.

 

Candidate spending, 2007

 

1. Mayor Yvonne Johnson — $97,201

2. Mayor Pro Tem Sandra Anderson Groat — $46,414

3. District 3 Councilman Zack Matheny — $45,868

4. At-large Councilman Robbie Perkins — $38,968

5. District 5 Councilwoman Trudy Wade — $22,595 ($38,379) *

6. At-large Councilwoman Mary Rakestraw — $16,075

7. District 2 Councilwoman Goldie Wells — $7,520

8. District 4 Councilman Mike Barber — $4,982

9. District 1 Councilwoman Dianne Bellamy-Small — $1,300 (estimated)

 

* Wade paid Republican consultant Bill Burckley $13,784 in January 2008, two months after the election, for mailings. To cover the bill, she raised $11,575, mainly from individuals connected to the real estate, development and building industries, and loaned herself $2,500.

 

Most expensive races (avg. of victors’ expenditures, 2001-2007)

 

1. Mayor — $33,091

2. At-large — $19,547-$27,889

3. District 4 — $15,119

4. District 3 — $13,303

5. District 5 — $11,056

6. District 2 — $8,101

7. District 1 — $3,288

 

Fundraising, 2007 Greensboro municipal election

 

1. Amount raised Jan. 1-June 30: $10,845

2. Amount raised July 1-Aug. 28: $83,706

3. Amount raised Aug. 29-Sept. 30: $124,616

4. Amount raised Oct. 1-28: $160,194

5. Amount raised Oct. 29-Dec. 31: $84,710

 

Jordan Green

Yes Weekly, September 16, 2009

http://www.yesweekly.com/article-7396-cover-story.html

If Greenburgh, New York can pass “Pay to Play” Ethics Rules, so can Greensboro, North Carolina

Municipal Ethics: Town Approves Rules to Fight ‘Pay to Play’

In an effort to end the influence-buying practice known as pay to play, the Greenburgh Town Council has approved new regulations governing campaign donations…

.

The regulations…make it illegal for public officials to accept campaign contributions from developers, contractors or their lawyers or agents for a year before and a year after an application is reviewed by a town board, said John McLaughlin, a member of the town’s Board of Ethics.

.

In addition to the campaign finance ban, the new ethics code provides for the establishment of a registry of prohibited contributors.

.

…William Eichengrun, a developer from Peekskill, said he supported the changes. “A political contribution from a developer who has a project before the town is tantamount to a bribe, and in my opinion, you shouldn’t have to bribe anyone to get a good project passed,” he said.

.

Elsa Brenner

New York Times

I believe Greensboro's Political System is Broken.

The Price of Pay-to-Play

.

…Pay-to-play is a staple of bad government. Proving an actual quid pro quo that can be prosecuted can be difficult, especially under porous state laws. But appearances — the fawning recipient, the deep-pocketed donor — taint all politicians. And pleas of “I didn’t know,” or “everyone else does it” aren’t fit for middle-schoolers let alone elected leaders.

 

What’s needed is some courage in statehouses to fix the shoddy campaign-finance rules and laissez-faire lobbying privileges and impose bans on “fact-finding” junkets and other “honest graft” for legislators. Clear rules would remove any doubt, and any temptation.

  

New York Times

On Taxes, Crime, Municipal Economics, the Protest Petition, Mike Winstead and Zack Matheny.

“Greensboro has the highest tax rate of any of the cities in this state"

 

"Why is this so? It’s a question of allocation of resources.”

 

“We are in what I would say is the fourth inning of a pretty ugly scene, the worst that has occurred since the Great Depression. Crime, as unemployment benefits expire, is going to spike. We are going to have to deal with it together because the government isn’t necessarily going to have enough money to fund everything. On a community basis, we’re going to have to make some changes…”

 

“I saw when the protest petition was being debated," Hartzman said. "And it came about from a county commissioner, Mike Winstead – his company is Mega Builders – wanted to build this three-story condo development out on Friendly Avenue. Mr. Winstead gave $1,000, his partner gave $1,000, and my understanding is that his attorney also contributed to [Zack's] campaign. Less than six months later, the zoning commission came before city council. It was a split vote. Mike Barber recused himself from the vote because he had a financial [stake]. A lot of people said that Mr. Matheny should have recused himself from the vote because basically he had a financial interest…. If you consider [who was] funding his campaign, it doesn’t fly. It doesn’t make sense. The system is broken here. That is a conflict of interest. It is a serious problem.

 

George Hartzman

District 3, Greensboro City Council forum

Presbyterian Church of the Covenant

Hosted by the Fisher Park and College Hill neighborhood associations

Yes Weekly, September 28, 2009

On Taxes, Crime, Municipal Economics, the Protest Petition, Mike Winstead and Zack Matheny.

“Greensboro has the highest tax rate of any of the cities in this state"

 

"Why is this so? It’s a question of allocation of resources.”

 

“We are in what I would say is the fourth inning of a pretty ugly scene, the worst that has occurred since the Great Depression. Crime, as unemployment benefits expire, is going to spike. We are going to have to deal with it together because the government isn’t necessarily going to have enough money to fund everything. On a community basis, we’re going to have to make some changes…”

 

“I saw when the protest petition was being debated," Hartzman said. "And it came about from a county commissioner, Mike Winstead – his company is Mega Builders – wanted to build this three-story condo development out on Friendly Avenue. Mr. Winstead gave $1,000, his partner gave $1,000, and my understanding is that his attorney also contributed to [Zack's] campaign. Less than six months later, the zoning commission came before city council. It was a split vote. Mike Barber recused himself from the vote because he had a financial [stake]. A lot of people said that Mr. Matheny should have recused himself from the vote because basically he had a financial interest…. If you consider [who was] funding his campaign, it doesn’t fly. It doesn’t make sense. The system is broken here. That is a conflict of interest. It is a serious problem.

 

George Hartzman

District 3, Greensboro City Council forum

Presbyterian Church of the Covenant

Hosted by the Fisher Park and College Hill neighborhood associations

Yes Weekly, September 28, 2009

If Loudoun County, Virginia can pass "Pay to Play" Ethics Rules, so can Greensboro, North Carolina.

Loudoun supervisors OK transparency bill

 

Loudoun County supervisors Tuesday overwhelmingly approved legislation designed to increase the transparency of local government.

 

The provisions limit campaign contributions from groups involved in applications or appeals to the board and also require board meeting documents to be made readily available to the public.

 

Board members said that the first provision would help prevent conflicts of interest with respect to their responsibilities to their constituencies and their responsibilities to the county as a whole.

 

…Under the approved Prudence in Political Contributions policy, no board member can receive campaign contributions from any party with a standing application or appeal before the board from the time they submit the application until six months after the board comes to a final action on the matter.

 

…"This is about individuals writing land use applications at the same time they were writing checks," said Chairman Scott York, independent-at large. "We need to assure the public that we are doing the business we were sent here to do on the public’s behalf."

 

The second transparency provision stipulated that meeting documents be made public ­— both in paper form and online — no later than the day after board members receive them.

 

…The two items passed Tuesday are part of an ongoing "transparency in government" package initiated by Supervisor Jim Burton, independent-Blue Ridge, in January.

.

David Sherfinski, July 2, 2008

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/local/26618039.html

If Loudoun County, Virginia can pass "Pay to Play" Ethics Rules, so can Greensboro, North Carolina.

Loudoun supervisors OK transparency bill

 

Loudoun County supervisors Tuesday overwhelmingly approved legislation designed to increase the transparency of local government.

 

The provisions limit campaign contributions from groups involved in applications or appeals to the board and also require board meeting documents to be made readily available to the public.

 

Board members said that the first provision would help prevent conflicts of interest with respect to their responsibilities to their constituencies and their responsibilities to the county as a whole.

 

…Under the approved Prudence in Political Contributions policy, no board member can receive campaign contributions from any party with a standing application or appeal before the board from the time they submit the application until six months after the board comes to a final action on the matter.

 

…"This is about individuals writing land use applications at the same time they were writing checks," said Chairman Scott York, independent-at large. "We need to assure the public that we are doing the business we were sent here to do on the public’s behalf."

 

The second transparency provision stipulated that meeting documents be made public ­— both in paper form and online — no later than the day after board members receive them.

 

…The two items passed Tuesday are part of an ongoing "transparency in government" package initiated by Supervisor Jim Burton, independent-Blue Ridge, in January.

.

David Sherfinski, July 2, 2008

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/local/26618039.html

If Guilford County Commissioner Mike Winstead proposed giving his business taxpayer money, should he recuse himself from voting and/or accepting the incentives?

Commissioner Mike Winstead…lobbied to make mixed-use development eligible for incentives.

 

Under the current plan, only commercial and industrial developments could apply.  Apartment complexes and residential-commercial developments would be exempt.

 

“This is good for the real estate development,” said Winstead, co-owner of the Greensboro firm Mega Builders.  “And I think that people know that real estate housing is what needs help.”

 

Gerald Witt

Greensboro News and Record, September 17, 2009

 

 

Subsidizing multi-family housing construction?

 

I cannot believe that the Guilford County Board of Commissioners is considering offering the same tax rebate to developers of multi-family housing in Guilford County. Put on the table for consideration by multi-family housing developer/Commissioner Mike Winstead, this self-serving motion does little to serve the best interests of Guilford County. Houses aren’t selling, largely impacted by too much supply; apartment rentals are barely holding their own…and somehow with all that, it makes good sense in the minds of some to further glut the market by offering tax rebates to mulit-family developers to build more housing – driving up vacancy rates and therefore hurting the profitability and operability of existing properties.

 

…If the marketplace needs more multi-family housing, then builders will build it and the market will support it – without tax rebates.

 

Rob Bencini

September 17, 2009

 

 

OK...this is further evidence that your County Commissioners are NOT looking out for YOU, the taxpayer. Rather, this is blatant evidence that the Commissioners are looking out for their own selves!…Where are the folks who serve for the betterment of all and not just special interests?

 

StealYourFace

Greensboro News and Record Reader Comment, September 17, 2009

 

 

…that is downright hostile to existing property owners. It is, the way I see it and the way I hope other voters will as well, patronage to the development industry at the expense of the rest of us. There is enough pressure on real estate prices, our dumb county commissioners think economic development means incentivizing additional downward pressures.

 

…Let's see, Winstead builds mixed-use Winstead commons. The residential remains largely unsold two years later, now builder of vacant mixed use developments wants incentives for more mixed use development for a county anchored by the country's fourth most vacant city, which is shrinking in population.

 

This poorly considered tinkering could have serious long term negative consequences.

 

Roch101

Comments at EdCone.com, September 17, 2009

If Guilford County Commissioner Mike Winstead proposed giving his business taxpayer money, should he recuse himself from voting and/or accepting the incentives?

Commissioner Mike Winstead…lobbied to make mixed-use development eligible for incentives.

 

Under the current plan, only commercial and industrial developments could apply.  Apartment complexes and residential-commercial developments would be exempt.

 

“This is good for the real estate development,” said Winstead, co-owner of the Greensboro firm Mega Builders.  “And I think that people know that real estate housing is what needs help.”

 

Gerald Witt

Greensboro News and Record, September 17, 2009

 

 

Subsidizing multi-family housing construction?

 

I cannot believe that the Guilford County Board of Commissioners is considering offering the same tax rebate to developers of multi-family housing in Guilford County. Put on the table for consideration by multi-family housing developer/Commissioner Mike Winstead, this self-serving motion does little to serve the best interests of Guilford County. Houses aren’t selling, largely impacted by too much supply; apartment rentals are barely holding their own…and somehow with all that, it makes good sense in the minds of some to further glut the market by offering tax rebates to mulit-family developers to build more housing – driving up vacancy rates and therefore hurting the profitability and operability of existing properties.

 

…If the marketplace needs more multi-family housing, then builders will build it and the market will support it – without tax rebates.

 

Rob Bencini

September 17, 2009

 

 

OK...this is further evidence that your County Commissioners are NOT looking out for YOU, the taxpayer. Rather, this is blatant evidence that the Commissioners are looking out for their own selves!…Where are the folks who serve for the betterment of all and not just special interests?

 

StealYourFace

Greensboro News and Record Reader Comment, September 17, 2009

 

 

…that is downright hostile to existing property owners. It is, the way I see it and the way I hope other voters will as well, patronage to the development industry at the expense of the rest of us. There is enough pressure on real estate prices, our dumb county commissioners think economic development means incentivizing additional downward pressures.

 

…Let's see, Winstead builds mixed-use Winstead commons. The residential remains largely unsold two years later, now builder of vacant mixed use developments wants incentives for more mixed use development for a county anchored by the country's fourth most vacant city, which is shrinking in population.

 

This poorly considered tinkering could have serious long term negative consequences.

 

Roch101

Comments at EdCone.com, September 17, 2009

Attempted Special Interest and Lobbying Coup D'état Aborted in North Carolina

Perdue veto dead solid perfect

 

…The governor rightly vetoed the bill, [‘that would have called for more secrecy among state lawmakers’] which never should have made it to her desk in the first place.

 

"These are the people's documents," the governor said last week of the shameless attempt to keep the public's business away from public scrutiny.

 

The bill would have classified as confidential any new document an agency created in response to a legislator's request for information to help draft a bill. It also would have shielded from public view any constituent's request for a lawmaker to propose a bill. (GH: like special interest targeted campaign donations relative to proposed legislation)

 

In effect, the proposed law would have made it harder for the public to know who is requesting a bill, why and how he or she might gain from it.

 

…As if that weren't outrageous enough, the bill would have imposed criminal penalties on any executive branch employee who violated the bill's confidentiality requirements. Similar penalties for legislative employees were conspicuously absent.

 

Nor was this bill justified from the start. Given all of the recent skullduggery in Raleigh, lawmakers should have known better.

 

They ought to be shining more light, not adding shadows.

 

Greensboro News and Record Editorial Board

September 15, 2009

Attempted Special Interest and Lobbying Coup D'état Aborted in North Carolina

Perdue veto dead solid perfect

 

…The governor rightly vetoed the bill, [‘that would have called for more secrecy among state lawmakers’] which never should have made it to her desk in the first place.

 

"These are the people's documents," the governor said last week of the shameless attempt to keep the public's business away from public scrutiny.

 

The bill would have classified as confidential any new document an agency created in response to a legislator's request for information to help draft a bill. It also would have shielded from public view any constituent's request for a lawmaker to propose a bill. (GH: like special interest targeted campaign donations relative to proposed legislation)

 

In effect, the proposed law would have made it harder for the public to know who is requesting a bill, why and how he or she might gain from it.

 

…As if that weren't outrageous enough, the bill would have imposed criminal penalties on any executive branch employee who violated the bill's confidentiality requirements. Similar penalties for legislative employees were conspicuously absent.

 

Nor was this bill justified from the start. Given all of the recent skullduggery in Raleigh, lawmakers should have known better.

 

They ought to be shining more light, not adding shadows.

 

Greensboro News and Record Editorial Board

September 15, 2009