There’s a talking point being repeated by Fayetteville leaders who support paid parking downtown. It’s been parroted by Mayor Colvin and many on the city council. Former Mayor Tony Chavonne said it on a local radio show this morning, and it was applauded by the host as a “great argument.” It’s not, and here’s why:

---

“Free parking isn’t free” seems good at first because it tugs at your sense of fairness. The gist is this: The City (through taxpayers) spends money to service the free parking spaces and lots downtown. Not all Fayetteville taxpayers go downtown to park, and the City’s losing money. The people that actually use the parking spaces downtown should pay. Get some meters down there, stat!

Seems fair, right?

Here’s the glaring weakness: You can make the same argument about any public expenditure that ever happened!

Seriously, name any public project or amentity that you won’t personally use and shoot it down with the arrows of selfishness and thrift.

Try it for yourself:

“Free ____public amenity I haven’t used lately_____ isn’t free!!!”

It seems good at first, but you’ll quickly feel like a miser. Why? Because we don’t privatize everything in our society. If we did, we wouldn’t need government in the first place. There is such a thing as the “common good,” even when the entire common isn’t participating.

We’ll start with a basic example. “Free education isn’t free!!!” Did you hear that kids!? Now, hand over your lunch money!! We have to pay for a new parking lot for the buses that got you to school.

Too extreme? Say you’re a father of two. A new elementary school is being built in your neighborhood and will be finished the year your youngest begins middle school. Does the fact that you and yours won’t use the new school make it any less worthy? Should those kids and those parents have to pay to build the school that they will be using? No, of course not. Why? Long ago, we made a policy decision to provide free education for all our youth, emphasis on “our.”

What about the new senior center that’s being built, or the splash pads that went up across Fayetteville. Unless you have kids or you’re getting old, you probably won’t use these city amenities. Should we charge the people that do and ask for our tax dollars back? No, we value the quality of life of our children and our elderly. Again, emphasis on “our,” and please do not yell “Free splash pads aren’t free!!!” to kids at Honeycutt Park this summer.

Now, let’s get specific to transportation:

I’ll never use the brand new bus station downtown that was paid for with 12.6 million in state and federal funds. Should we require that 12.6 million back from the bus riders of Fayetteville in increased fees? No, that won’t happen. Why? We’ve made a policy decision to provide affordable transportation for members of our community that need it.

I’m done tugging at your conscience, so maybe the numbers will help persuade you:

Here’s the parking breakdown from the City’s 2018-2019 Budget:

You can see that in the past few years, we’re bringing in a quarter million dollars in parking fees and tickets, but we’re spending more than that, forcing “interfund transfers” of around $100,000 to fill the hole. In short, the city’s “losing” about $100,000 a year in parking.

I honestly thought it was more than that after listening to our City talking-heads. Maybe my numbers are wrong. Feel feel to correct me.

Is all of this debate over a meager $100,000 in a city budget with expenditures of $215,369,370. If so, our so-called “parking loss” is 0.046% of our budget. Is change really needed?

Downtown Priorities

Remember, the City is building a 14.7 million dollar (and rising) parking deck downtown that the public won’t get to use. The primary purpose of the deck is to “service the private development” around it:

The contract for the deck includes a development fee of $575,000 for Prince Charles Holdings, who will get to use 90% of the deck “at cost.” That’s enough money to keep free parking downtown and cover the entire budget shortfall for the next five years.

Instead, the City of Fayetteville is going to “leverage” a self-created parking shortage surrounding the stadium downtown. Get ready to pay when you go to a baseball game, try to grab a sandwich, or shop at a local boutique.

Free parking isn’t free? Neither is a City government that’s creating a false crisis in order to make money off its citizens.

Thanks for reading. Next time I’m charging you.

The News and Observer’s Dan Kane, an investigative journalist that gained notoriety with his coverage of the UNC-Football/Academic Scandal, has turned his compass South. He’s begun digging into Prince Charles Holdings, the “business partner” of the City of Fayetteville in its downtown development project. Read Kane’s full article with this link:

UNC audit revealed spending problems, but details remain secret

The focus of Kane’s piece is two former UNC School of Government employees, Michael Lemanski and Jordan Jones. Each worked at the school’s Development Finance Initiative (DFI) before leaving to make money in the world of private development.

Fayetteville has been on their radar for some time:

The most prominent example is Fayetteville, which in May 2014 paid DFI $50,000 to review three areas city officials sought to redevelop. One was a residential area, the second the dilapidated Prince Charles Hotel in downtown and the third a commercial area near the Airborne and Special Operations Museum. The city envisioned landing a minor league baseball park on the third site.

About a month after the contract’s completion date, Lemanski joined Prince Charles Holdings, a group redeveloping the vacant hotel into apartments. Jordan Jones, a DFI employee who had also worked on the Fayetteville project, is also working for the hotel group.

In 2016, the city shifted the proposed ballpark next to the hotel, as part of a much larger redevelopment that includes a parking deck and a new hotel. The redevelopment included the city purchasing for $2.5 million in 2017 a parcel from Prince Charles Holdings. The business had bought the parcel for $2.07 million two years earlier.

Apparently, the Fayetteville Observer investigated the potential conflict of interest but dropped the story when UNC would not provide requested documents:

In early 2018, Monica Vendituoli, then a reporter for The Fayetteville Observer, inquired about Lemanski and Jones’ work for DFI and the Prince Charles group. In an email to UNC, she raised concerns that their dual roles had created a conflict of interest and sought related records.

UNC did not provide her a copy of the audit. UNC gave her a statement that said some details regarding potential conflicts of interest were “confidential personnel file information” that couldn’t be disclosed.

What it means…

Readers of this site know I’ve been critical of the parking deck deal with Prince Charles Holdings for well over a year. I don’t believe it is a good allocation of tax payer resources, and it arguably violates the public purpose requirement of the North Carolina Constitution. In short, it’s an economic windfall for Prince Charles Holdings. But should we be surprised??? These guys literally wrote the book on how to do these deals. Of course they’re going to come out on top.

Today, the massive crane kept lifting steel in the air as construction continued downtown. The stadium should be done in a few months with the parking deck to follow. We seem to be stuck in this deal, despite the cost overruns. It’s going to happen.

In the last analysis, it’s a sad day for the City of Fayetteville when our downtown “business partners” are being exposed in “sunshine week” at the News and Observer.

Play Ball!!!

Yesterday, I posted a story detailing the two-year drama surrounding our public defender’s office in Cumberland County.

Today, Chief Resident Superior Court Judge, Jim Ammons, issued an Order installing Cynthia Black as “acting public defender” until a permanent choice can be made. You can read the full Order here:

According to Ammons, he doesn’t have a full list of names from which to make a permanent selection:

This is odd, because Bernie Condlin told the Fayetteville Observer a month ago that he was not withdrawing his name from consideration for another appointment:

Condlin said he has not withdrawn his name as a nominee for the job, and if Ammons were to choose him, he would have to consider then whether to accept.

Edit (3-7-19): I spoke with Condlin on March 7, the day after this post went live. Condlin again confirmed that he has not withdrawn his name from consideration.

---

More Gridlock Expected

Where do we go from here? Probably nowhere:

The current statute governing appointments applies:

The attorneys of Cumberland County voted in October of 2017, fulfilling the requirements of (b)(1). David Smith and Condlin were nominated, and Condlin says he hasn’t withdrawn his name from consideration despite resigning from his “holdover” position.

Ammons seems to disagree, saying in his order that “one nominee remains.” If Ammons gets his way, the local bar will need to vote again and make at least two new recommendations. If the local bar refuses to make new nominations, Ammons will likely stand his ground and refuse to make a permanent appointment.

In addition, the requirements of (b)(2) need to happen: The Administrative Officer of the Courts needs to give Ammons a name. Why this hasn’t happened by now is beyond me. Perhaps Ammons and the Administrative Officer can’t agree on who it should be?

Until this is sorted out, Cumberland County will continue to have a public defender that was not chosen under North Carolina law. This is unfair to the citizens of this county. It’s worse for the attorneys in the public defender’s office that provide the constitutionally-guaranteed right to counsel to those who can’t afford it. They deserve a leader.

---

Important Update

A few hours after this post went live, I was provided with a copy of this document:

The Director of the Administrative Office of the Courts nominated David Smith on February 14, fulfilling the statutory requirement. Note that this information is absent from Judge Ammons’ Order, filed today.

Judge Ammons has ignored the recommendation of both the Cumberland County Bar and the AOC Director. Instead, he appointed a placeholder and asked for new nominations. Whether the bar will give him what he wants is the story moving forward.

“If you don’t like how the table is set, turn over the table.”

– Frank Underwood

Cumberland County is currently without a Public Defender.  For reasons known only to him, Chief Resident Superior Court Judge, Jim Ammons has failed to exercise his right under North Carolina law to appoint a person to fill the position.

When we look back at how we got here, we’re faced with an intriguing story of courthouse power and politics:

Background

Judge Ammons appointed Bernie Condlin to the Public Defender position in January of 2014.    The length of Condlin’s term of office was four years.

In 2017, lawyers in Cumberland County gathered at the courthouse, took nominations, and voted on their recommendations for the upcoming term.  David Smith, an assistant Public Defender, beat Condlin by a razor-thin margin, but the Cumberland County Bar’s decision was not binding on Ammons. He had the right under North Carolina law to choose to appoint either of the top two vote-getters.

Ammons failed to appoint Smith or Condlin to the position. Instead, he left Condlin in place throughout 2018 in “holdover” status.  Smith continued his career as an assistant, working under Condlin.

Law Changes

To add to the confusion, the law governing appointments was changed in June of 2018, giving the Administrative Officer of the Courts (of North Carolina) the power to nominate a person to be considered for the position.  Here’s the session law.  The underlined portions were added and the crossed out portions were deleted from the books:

So it would seem that once the law went into effect in June, the Administrative Officer needed to “submit a name,” and then Ammons needed to choose from the “list” of:

1. Smith or Condlin; or
2. The AOC submission.

Neither happened, and the issue dragged into 2019.

Condlin Resigns in February, New Names “Floated”

Condlin, apparently fed up with being in professional limbo as a “holdover,” resigned in February, saying he would be going back into private practice:

“I don’t know if I’m out of job in a day, a month, or a year,” Condlin said.

For the past several weeks, Cumberland County has been without a public defender.  The rumor mill has started, as it tends to do at the courthouse, and other names have been floated for the position, including Gerald Beaver and former District Court Judge Tal Baggett.

The problem is that a “new” person would have to be “submitted” by the Officer of the Courts to enable an Ammons appointment. That hasn’t happened. Instead, when questioned by the Fayetteville Observer, the Chief Officer said he was “unaware” until contacted by the paper that Condlin was in “holdover status.” 

Failure to Act

Judge Ammons holds all the cards here, and he’s failed to play a hand. He had ample time to choose between Condlin and Smith prior to June 2018, but failed to do so. It makes no sense to guess his reasons, but it’s a safe assumption that he didn’t want either of them. In that case, a simple phone call to Raleigh, telling the Administrative Officer to submit another name (to his liking) could have been sufficient.

Instead, we’re left with a breakdown that is unacceptable under the plain language of the North Carolina Statutes. The law is clear that the Chief Resident “shall” make the appointment and that is “required.”

As it stands, 15 lawyers, six support staff and two investigators are without a boss, and another important office is void of a leader.