There are two data points today sent to me about the Hudson project. First, there is an email sent to the Board of Supervisors, titled “Concerned Citizens Request to the Board.” That was sent on July 10, by Susan Guest. Second, Jim Turner I (as opposed to Cabin Jim), has issued a Press Release, sent to WHSV and the Page News, and possibly others. He has asked, in formal written letters, for each candidate running for the Board of Supervisors to attend a meeting on Friday, July 17, at 6 p.m. at the Shenandoah Community Center, for the purpose of publicly showing whether they do or do not support the citizens’ petition regarding the Hudson Farm purchase. When I am elected as your representative in District 1, I will continue to make public all information regarding activities of the Board. I will also do everything I can to prevent closed sessions that are conducted inappropriately.
Letter from Susan Guest to the Board of Supervisors: (reprinted with permission)
Since no documentation supports the EDA’s ability to pay for the $11.8MM Hudson project other than the Board’s three page resolution supporting the project, how did the Board satisfy itself of the EDA’s ability to pay for this project absent any documentation, in order to unanimously sign this document? My request is that the Board sign nondisclosure agreements in order to review with the EDA all prospective tenants’ business plans, which (we’ve been told) cannot be disclosed without this nondisclosure agreement. My suggestion (read: dire warning) is that it is not adequate to say the words ‘all is well’ or ‘deals are imminent’ for too much longer. The first payment is due to Ms. Hudson in less than six months. And I have no idea regarding the terms of repayment of the presumed USDA loan…but it, too, must be repaid, and accounted for in somebody’s budget. Which I’m told does not exist.
My other request is that the Board request a formal update from Premier Technical Services including a review of their business plan and timeline for construction and staffing and revenue projections and where the money is expected to come from for their 15 acre, 96 job data center. Lenders will not lend absent a viable business plan which shows ability to repay. This is the document which presumably is being shopped on the street for funding, so it should be very well rehearsed and easy to present to the Board. I’m sure it’s just an oversight that it has not been done before. (And it may have been done but ‘behind closed doors’ so that citizens have no idea of what is transpiring.)
The Board has gone to extraordinary measures to ensure PTS’s success. Therefore, it is obligatory that the Board assure themselves of PTS’s success…especially since it seems that the success of Project Clover has been hung on PTS’s success, as well.
I am offering, too, to undergo nondisclosure in order to provide the Board my views of these plans and ability to repay. (Yes, it is my former profession.) Because if you can’t use taxpayer money for these ventures, don’t you want to know what you are supporting, and how? Let me rephrase: my understanding is that you have been told that the taxes/leases/sale of land to prospective tenants will cover the cost of this deal. Don’t you want to know how, from whom, over what time frame (in order to meet the repayment schedule that does not appear to exist in anyone’s budget per my FOIA request) so as to meet the ‘moral obligation’ you have made with the Citizens of Page County: that they are not responsible for funding this deal?”
submitted by Susan Guest
Alice’s Note: As Susan points out, FOIA requests asking for the backup that supported the ability of the EDA to repay this loan consisted of nothing EXCEPT a resolution by the Board of Supervisors that they would pay. Be clear on that. The only money the Board has to repay it with is your tax dollars. The EDA is announcing, by responding in this manner to a FOIA request, that they have no backup documentation to suggest that they can pay it any other way.
I also submitted a FOIA request in June, in which I asked for the backup documentation that supported the purchase price. Specifically, I asked for the appraisals to which Tom LaFrance referred in a public meeting. I received the following letter signed by Lowell Baughan on July 1, 2009:
“Dear Mrs. Richmond: In response to your FOIA request dated June 20, 2009, asking for all written documentation which was used to set the price for the Hudson farm project and the comparative appraisals: there is no documentation.”
So by their own admission, there is no backup for the price, no comparative appraisals, and no backup for the ability to repay.
As taxpayers, is this good enough for you?
I can absolutely commit that, as your District 1 Representative, it will not be good enough for me.
July 12, 2009 at 9:08 pm
Can someone please post something when the BoS does anything with this one so I can stop holding my breath.
Shoot, Ready, Aim…
July 13, 2009 at 2:44 am
Bernie, have you reviewed the documentation list posted at
http://www.PageCountyWatch.org ?
One of the requirements of the Performance Agreement for Premier’s Governor’s Opportunity Fund is a “progress report” that is due one year after they receive the check. I believe they received the check in August 2008. Now, the Board can find it sufficient to get a progress report that says “all is well.”
Unless the citizens get ahold of these elected representatives and tell them to wake up and smell the coffee, I suspect that is exactly what they will do. My fear is that the Board will proceed with this USDA loan before January, 2010. A USDA loan will turn this from a “moral obligation” into a legal obligation, and make it impossible for the newly elected Board members to straighten this out.
That is why I am so concerned with this issue. I do not want to be in the position of being on a Board which has committed legally to this loan. I have talked to the USDA about this loan, and they told me they would expect a commitment of the taxing authority of the county, in order to do it. My observation of the way the Board has been acting is this: nothing will be said about in open session, until one Friday there will be a notice of a closed session in their information packets, and then the following Tuesday they will go in and find out they have gotten the USDA loan, and all they have to do is commit tax dollars to pay off Mrs. Hudson. Four of them will come out of that meeting and vote yes to go ahead with the loan. A public hearing will be called. The citizens will not know what hit them. The citizens will pack the room. They will get up and say, “no, don’t do this”, and then the Board will go ahead and do it.
There is something very wrong with a Board that is behaving this way.
July 13, 2009 at 5:55 pm
Was the USDA able to tell you how long it would take to process a loan like this?
Were you able to find out which USDA office the county would have to start with?
Would they tell you if they had received a request for a loan? Could you find out by FOIA ?
If you could find out who at USDA was processing the loan I would like to call them up and voice my opinion/send emails/send copy of petition,newspaper articles etc.
Years ago when this deal was made, it probably made sense. At that time if I had told you GM and Chrysler were going to go broke you would have laughed. Times have changed. Unless there is truly a company waiting in the wings to build there (which I believe is highly unlikely) it’s time to stop the bleeding and pack up. Cut out the 30 some acres the county is due for the 1M down payment, let it go to foreclosure and move on.
I would like to think USDA would make sure there was a user lined up to take this property, but this day and age I doubt it.
I think it is imperative our local and state representatives get the word how the taxpayers of this county feel about this issue. Silence will get you nothing.
The trouble with Socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.
July 13, 2009 at 9:33 pm
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS:
1. Was the USDA able to tell you how long it would take to process a loan like this?
Yes, he said it would be late this summer, because it started in January, 2009.
2. Were you able to find out which USDA office the county would have to start with?
Yes, it is the Harrisonburg office.
Would they tell you if they had received a request for a loan? Could you find out by FOIA ?
Yes, they received a request. It was dated Jan 22, the day before Mrs. Hudson got her million dollar downpayment. Yes, I have a copy of the request from the county office, and I have submitted a request to the USDA to get their copy, too, to make sure the copy I got matches the copy they got. Just in case.
4. If you could find out who at USDA was processing the loan I would like to call them up and voice my opinion/send emails/send copy of petition,newspaper articles etc.
The name is Jim Allen in Harrisonburg. I don’t have my phone book with me, but I’ll post the number tomorrow.
5. I would like to think USDA would make sure there was a user lined up to take this property, but this day and age I doubt it.
No, they said the county Board could vote to use taxpayer dollars for it. This would require a public hearing, but as we all know, that’s a ho hum so what in Page County.
6. I think it is imperative our local and state representatives get the word how the taxpayers of this county feel about this issue. Silence will get you nothing.
I think public response would matter, too. But I’m not hearing any. Where is everybody? The public just rolling over and playing dead is what gets this county into these messes. We’ve developed a situation where the Board thinks it can just do whatever it wants, with no public interaction.
July 16, 2009 at 7:01 am
Alice, I thought folks were getting involved for example there’s a petition….what’s the status of that? Does Jim T. have enough signatures?
July 13, 2009 at 7:09 pm
Here is another idea… BoS needs to go ahead and go along with this. Put it all on the line. If this deal falls through or it turns out out be a bad deal for the county, then whoever is on the BoS can then disband the EDA, make them reimburse their pay and recruit new members. In the past when a deal went bad, we just elected new BoS. Unfortunally, we cannot with the EDA. Make put something up against this deal.
July 16, 2009 at 5:44 pm
Alice, you have done a great job of putting all this together. I am going to follow up with a letter to the USDA and our local representatives.
Sadly, I have a gut feeling this is all going to go through and those of us who pay taxes will be once again stuck with the bill. I hope I am wrong.
Has anyone else noticed the transfer stations where you may take your trash (I use the one at Springfield) are now shut down, totaly on Sundays and the rest of the week have been severely cut back. This outrages me. I only have a couple of windows of time each week to take mine up and now they are gone. I know the county pays the folks who work them hardly anything. Were these changes in the Paper? I didn’t see them. Millions for cowfields, and no trash service! All this will do is cause people to throw trash on the side of the road and in the woods. THANKS A LOT BOARD OF SUPERVISORS! I for one will be delighted when all of you are thrown out!
July 16, 2009 at 8:13 pm
Red, this was the cost cutting measure the Board did when they found out they had stupidly spent $1M of tax money and were short, by surprise. Rather than stop the $300K a year GIS system, which nobody would miss, the $500K a year EDA, which everyone would applaud if it were missing, and the excess employees who have nothing to do but harass small businesses, they shut down the landfill operations and furloughed all employees 12 days a year. It was a snipe action. Sort of a na-na-na-na- naaaa-na to the taxpayers.
I’ll be glad to see them gone, too.