Greensboro Councilman Zack Matheny Gets A Ruling from School of Government on Conflicts of Interest

In the past we have seen Greensboro Councilman Zack Matheny recuse himself from issues like the White Street Landfill because of a Conflict of Interest with his employer at the time was Bell Partners.

Now in 2012 and the councilman not with Bell Partners anymore,  we come to find out that Zack Matheny is a consultant with a solid waste company in the area. Below you will see some e mail exchanges in regards to this issue because of future solid waste operations for Greensboro.

___________________________________________________________________________________


Subject: FW: Potential Conflict of Interest with City Council Member on Solid Waste Operations Contract

Councilmember Matheny,

Please find below an email I received from Norma Reid Houston, Adjunct Professor of Law and Lecturer in Public Law and Government at the UNC-CH School of Government, opining that the allegations against you presented by Attorney Tom Terrell do not constitute a conflict of interest pursuant to applicable state law and city policy. Thus, none of these allegations would prohibit you from voting on the Municipal Solid Waste Operations contract. Her opinion is based on the email that I sent to her which is also included below. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely,

James A. Dickens, Associate General Counsel

Office of the City Attorney

City of Greensboro

Phone: 336-373-2320; Fax: 336-373-2078

P.O. Box 3136, Greensboro, North Carolina 27402-3136

www.greensboro-nc.gov

From: Houston, Norma Reid [mailto:nhouston@sog.unc.edu]
Sent: Friday, July 06, 2012 11:21 AM
To: Dickens, James
Cc: Leonard, Brian; Peterson-Buie, Becky; Houston, Norma Reid
Subject: RE: Potential Conflict of Interest with City Council Member on Solid Waste Operations Contract

Good morning James:

Thank you for your time this morning in clarifying the facts of the situation described below. As we discussed, in my opinion, this scenario does not give rise to a conflict of interest under G.S. 14-234, G.S. 14-234.1, or the City’s conflict of interest policy, nor does it constitute a “financial interest” for which Councilmember Matheny may seek to be excused from voting under G.S. 160A-75.

My conclusion stems from the fact that Councilmember Matheny’s employer, Green Day, is not a direct respondent or a listed subcontractor for any of the respondents to the City’s solid waste RFP, and therefore, the Councilmember has no financial interest in the award of the contract (and, for purposes of G.S. 14-234, I assume his spouse, if he has one, does not have a financial interest either).

G.S. 14-234 prohibits a public official or employee from being involved in making or administering a contract on behalf of the unit of government he or she serves if the official or the official’s spouse derives a direct benefit under that contract (a direct benefit being one of the following: having more than 10% ownership interest in the contracting entity, receiving income or commission directly under the contract, or acquiring property under the contract). In the present scenario, Councilmember Matheny does not derive a prohibited direct benefit under any of the potential contracts the City would award in response to the solid waste RFP. Thus, there is no conflict of interest under G.S. 14-234.

G.S. 14-234.1 prohibits a public official or employee from using non-public (confidential) information made known to him in his official capacity to acquire a pecuniary benefit for himself or anyone else. In the present scenario, there is no evidence that Councilmember Matheny is using non-public information in this manner (and, in fact, the public RFP process works against such an allegation), nor is Councilmember Matheny in a position to acquire a pecuniary benefit. Thus, there is no conflict of interest under G.S. 14-234.1

G.S. 160A‑75 requires city governing board members to vote on matters coming before the board unless the member has been excused from voting, and the member may only be excused from voting on a matter involving the member’s own financial interest or official conduct, or for which voting is statutorily prohibited under G.S. 14‑234, 160A‑381(d), or 160A‑388(e1). Since the award of the solid waste contract does not involve Councilmember Matheny’s own financial interest, I see no legal basis upon which Councilmember Matheny may be excused from voting on the contract award or other matters related to the City’s solid waste RFP.

Finally, the City’s Conflict of Interest Policy (again, my compliments to you for the quality of the policy) tracks the federal Grants Management Common Rule conflict of interest requirements, including prohibiting actual and apparent conflicts of interest, which are generally interpreted to mean financial interests. Given that Councilmember Matheny stands to gain no financial benefit under the city’s solid waste RFP and resulting contract award, I see no violation of the City’s Conflict of Interest policy (and, even if there were one, the only legal sanction for a governing board member for violating a local conflict of interest policy is a motion of censure by the governing board; no other sanctions are legally authorized absent a concurrent violation of state or federal law).

In conclusion, it is my opinion that Councilmember Matheny does not have a conflict of interest under G.S. 14-234, G.S. 14-234.1, or the City’s Conflict of Interest policy, nor does Councilmember Matheny have a financial interest for which he could be excused from voting on this matter under G.S. 160A-75.

If I can provide further assistance or you would like to discuss this matter further, please don’t hesitate to contact me.

Best wishes,

Norma

From: Dickens, James [mailto:james.dickens@greensboro-nc.gov]
Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2012 11:18 AM
To: Houston, Norma Reid
Cc: Leonard, Brian; Peterson-Buie, Becky
Subject: Potential Conflict of Interest with City Council Member on Solid Waste Operations Contract

Ms. Houston,

Below is a list of facts we received from an attorney that represents one of the Solid Waste Contractors who submitted a proposal in response to the City of Greensboro’s Request for Proposals for Municipal Solid Waste Management Services. This attorney claims that one of our council members has a conflict of interest by virtue of his employment with a company named, “Green Day”, company who provides commercial and industrial waste hauling services in Greensboro. Green Day is not a company who submitted a proposal in response to the Solid Waste Management Services RFP, and to our knowledge, Green Day is not a subcontractor of either Republic Services or Waste Connections, the two companies currently being considered by the City Council to award the contract. Based on the facts below, do you believe that the councilmember who represents Green Day has a conflict of interest pursuant to N.C.G.S. 160A-75, N.C.G.S. 14-234 or the City of Greensboro’s conflict of interest policy which is attached hereto. Thank you very much for your assistance in this matter.

Sincerely,

James A. Dickens, Associate General Counsel

Office of the City Attorney

City of Greensboro

Phone: 336-373-2320; Fax: 336-373-2078

P.O. Box 3136, Greensboro, North Carolina 27402-3136

www.greensboro-nc.gov

1) Both A-1 and Green Day provide commercial and industrial waste hauling and recycling in the Greensboro market.

2) A-1 directly competes with Green Day for a limited number of customers in the market.

3) Among the companies whose business they compete for are Samet, Lomax, and KV Homes.

4) A-1 has recently won bids over Green Day with AC Corp, Matrix Furniture, the new UNC-G development that crossed Lee Street, the nano-science building, JSNN and numerous Lomax jobs. A-1 reasonably believes there is a high degree of frustration on Green Day's part because A-1's ownership of its own disposal site makes it difficult for Green Day to submit competitive bids. A recent contract Green Day did land over A-1's bid was the new apartment complex at the former North State Chevrolet site.

5) Green Day does not compete with Hilco or Republic.

6) Councilman Matheny's job is to land these contracts for Green Day, and to do so he goes head to head with A-1.

7) It is customary for sales teams in this industry to be paid at least in part on a commission basis.

8) If Councilman Matheny is paid on a commission basis (in whole or part), or if his sales performance affects his income on an annual basis, then A-1's competition directly affects his income.

9) By using his public position in public meetings to describe A-1 as a company that is not good enough or inadequate to handle its part of this contract, then he has reasonably harmed A-1's reputation among their mutual potential clients, which indirectly could work to his company's and his personal financial benefit.

10) There is a vehemence and emotional undertone in Councilman Matheny's public comments that suggest his decision to go with the high bidder in this matter has a personal and undisclosed basis (or at least lends credibility to that conclusion).

Greensboro City Attorney Explains No Contact with Local Elected Officials , Councilman Zack Matheny Are You Listening!

The City of Greensboro weekly memo on 7-13-2012 from the new City Manager Denise Turner Roth has a interesting twist which the new City Attorney Mujeeb Shah-Khan wanted all the Greensboro City Council to understand.

Here is a link to the IFYI from the City Manager HAT TIP: EDCONE ON THE LINK

In the memo the Greensboro City Attorney on a update for the Request for Proposals (RFP) on waste recycling had this to say,

"City Attorney will be contacting representatives of the proposing companies to remind them to have NO CONTACT with elected or appointed officials as we continue this process to it's conclusion. The no contact provision is in Section 2.6 within the RFP document"

this is what 2.6 says in the rfp documents

2.6 VERBAL AGREEMENTS

No verbal agreement or conversation with any officer, agent, or employee of the City, either before or after execution of the Contract, shall affect or modify any of the terms or obligations contained in the Contract. Any such verbal agreement or conversation shall be considered as unofficial information and in no way binding upon the City or the Contractor. Proposers should have no contact with elected officials or appointed officials.

both proposals can be found here, RFP's

Why is this so important because this same verbal agreement was also in the rfp for the waste hauling as well, but as we have seen in the past month, Councilman Zack Matheny (who forgot to mention he suddenly works for a recycling company that uses trash hauling equipment) had a huge dust up with members of one of the companies bidding to haul off the trash from Greensboro in a meeting before these proposals were brought to the city and as we have seen from the above sections of the RFP the Greensboro Councilman Zack Matheny should not have met privately with one of the bidders. Here is what John Hammer from the Rhino Times said in a post titled "Zack's Verbal Attacks Becomes Memo War"

What started all of this was the June 19 City Council meeting, when the council discussed the two- to three-month contract to provide solid waste disposal service while the new consultant went over the proposals and made a recommendation for the multi-year contract. Waste Connections had the low bid by about $200,000 on that contract according to their own figures.

When Fadul was at the podium, Matheny said, "I've got a question for you, when you met with me in my office, did you tell me that you might need a 30 day extension of up to 45 days?"Fadul replied, "No sir, I did not."

Matheny said, "Tim, you're telling me right now, in front of this council, that's not what you told me?"

Fadul said, "I'm telling you that I did not say that and I'm telling you there was also a third person in that room when we were having that conversation."

Matheny interrupted but Fadul finished his statement, "You can ask him the same question."

After a couple other comments Matheny said, "I can't do business with somebody who lies."

Later Matheny went into another diatribe about Fadul when he said Fadul was misleading the council, and when Fadul stood up to go to the podium to respond, a red-faced Matheny pointed at Fadul and yelled, "Sit down."

What City Councilman Zack Matheny did was wrong and was the straw that broke the camels back in that now in regards to RFP's that there is a section 2.6 in both proposals where the companies who are bidding are not to contact city officials and vice a versa where city officials know better to be in contact with these companies. It is time for all local elected officials to understand their jobs and not meet with these companies because we might see another blow up where a sitting councilmember calls out one of  the companies for lying to him.

It is glad to see the new City Attorney say this in a memo but i hope it will also be in his own memo again to reiterate to the local elected officials to not meet with the bidding companies on a RFP at all.

Matt Brown's Fiefdom AKA Greensboro Coliseum Wants $24 Million Tax Dollars

HAT TIP FOX 8 WGHP

On the agenda for the Greensboro City Council for May 1, 2012 is this:

34. Resolution calling a public hearing concerning a Limited Obligation Bond to finance improvements to the Greensboro War Memorial Coliseum Complex.

(Council District: all) (roll call vote) (Attachment #34 to Councilmembers)

Then we have FOX 8 WGHP who did a report on this today here is that story

  This news comes on top of the news where the downtown folks want a performing arts center which has a price tag close to $60 million dollars , and do not forget the new sparkling Greensboro Aquatic Center which cost more than $18 million dollars. Between all of these projects it is going to cost taxpayers close to $100 million dollars just to keep up with the joneses as they say . That is a hell of a price tag for the citizens of Greensboro to pay and if you want a death wish for the downtown GPAC then approve these coliseum improvements. Here is a comment on facebook from Don Moore which is so true

"It is sheer madness for Greensboro (DMA # 46) to compete with Atanta (#8), New York (#1), Orlando (#19). It like trying to bring the Major League Baseball team to Kernersville all over again"

In the $24 million dollars is $1 million for them to widen the concourse to the Aquatic Center the place hasn't been open a year and they already want to spend over $1 million on probably a design flaw where someone screwed up that design and they also want to relocate restrooms at the aquatic center. Then they want to install not one but now a secondary video scoreboard at the Aquatic Center, then they also want to add decorative tile and stone to the diving well, AM sure it is fine as is and no need for some decorative tile and stone.

Can't wait to see this dog and pony show and to have the cheerleading squad consisting of Zack Matheny and Mayor Perkins leading the cheers for this, I could be wrong on this point but i think that there has been talk about the downtown venues wanting a share of the hotel/motel tax to help out downtown Greensboro and also wanting to use some of that money to help fund a downtown performing arts center. It seems like state law makes the hotel/motel tax be spent at the Greensboro Coliseum and if these projects get approved then you will see that tax money still flow to the Matt Brown Fiefdom called the Greensboro Coliseum for years to come and not a dime of that money be spent in downtown Greensboro where plenty of people visit while in town.  

Kieth Brown "Mayor Perkins Recusals Part #1 and Past Problems with the New GTCC Water and Sewer off of Highway 68"

"Greensboro City Council Meeting December 13, 2011

34. Resolution approving bid in the amount of $1,966,989.17 and authorizing Contract No. 2009-021 with J. R. Lynch & Sons, Inc. for the Greensboro Technical Community College (GTCC) General Water and Sewer Project. (Council District: n/a) (roll call vote) (Attachment #34 to Councilmembers)

Water & Sewer 

The property that Mayor Perkins owns in front of the new GTCC buildings off of Highway 68 North is titled leabourne 68 llc .

In the video above we have the mayor saying "I own property that could be effected by this item". 

Water & Sewer for Robbie's newly zoned property?

No Mayor Perkins you own property that is directly in front of the said property that is getting water and sewer so in reality your "could be" should have said "will be" effected and am sure that when you bought the property knowing full and well that this property was right in the way of providing water and sewer to the GTCC campus.

Here is what was written a few years ago about this same property and remember that Councilman Zack Matheny recused himself from this vote but at the December 13, 2011 vote on this item he did not recuse himself like he did in past on this issue.

Highway 68 North + Anonymous Investors + Plus Zack and Robbie= Ethical Problems

Also Jordan Green from Yes! Weekly also had a post titled Highway 68 Shopping Center Receives Approval

in this article Jordan writes this:

"commercial and residential future of the NC Highway 68 corridor

near the new GTCC aviation campus took shape on Sept. 10
when the Guilford Planning Board unanimously approved a request
by a group of anonymous investors.

The decision rezones 51 acres
from allow a shopping center and housing development
to be built on what is presently a combination of woodland and pasture.

The request was opposed by about a dozen neighboring residents
who lamented that the rural character of their community would be lost,
and that they were being out-maneuvered by powerful developers
with the deep pockets to secure expensive legal help.

“This feels a lot like land speculation,” said Mary Fabrizio, an opponent from nearby Colfax.

“It stinks because two of the investors are sitting on the Greensboro City Council.”

At-large Councilman Robbie Perkins and District 3 Councilman Zack Matheny
have abstained from a city council vote on the project
because of conflicts of interest.

Derek Allen, the lawyer with Brooks Pierce law firm
who argued the case before the planning board,
said that the two councilmen “had interest in groups that had interest in that property.”

The limited liability company interested in developing the property,
which is currently owned by WA Kennedy Jr.,
was organized in June by Jennifer C. Noble, a lawyer with Brooks Pierce.

The company’s registered agent is Stanhope Johnson,
a partner with NAI Piedmont Triad,
a commercial real estate company headed by Perkins."

It would be great for the citizens to know just who are these anonymous investors and to have Greensboro City Councilman Zack Matheny and Mayor Perkins come clean on this whole situation that he was a part of in regards to the land speculation game they both played off of Highway 68 .

Will we see any reporting from the local and weekly papers in regards to this situation or is it ok for sitting councilmembers to have anonymous investors for the public to not know about,  especially when we are talking about taxpayers monies going into building the infrastructure like water and sewer."

Keith Brown AKA Triad Watch 

W. E. Heasley on Roy Carroll, Robbie Perkins, Zack Matheny and Jonathan L. Sangster?

"Although politicos have the final say-so
on bestowing taxpayer dollars upon economic rent seekers
it's worth one’s attention to look at those that facilitate rent seekers.

Those persons and entities that act as the broker
between rent seekers and politicos.

Those that help spend your taxpayer dollars
under the heading “economic incentives”
and not so incidentally spend those dollars upon themselves."

W. E. Heasley

"Carroll seeks $4M from Greensboro for shovel-ready site"

Jonathan L. Sangster, who will present Tuesday at City Hall, on "Incentives"

Guess what the "Senior Managing Director with CBRE Consulting" specializes in

who is going to present to the "Economic Development Briefing",

Tuesday, March 28 at 8AM at City Hall.

Mayor Perkins Recusals Part #1 and Past Problems with the New GTCC Water and Sewer off of Highway 68

Greensboro City Council Meeting December 13, 2011

34. Resolution approving bid in the amount of $1,966,989.17 and authorizing Contract No. 2009-021 with J. R. Lynch & Sons, Inc. for the Greensboro Technical Community College (GTCC) General Water and Sewer Project. (Council District: n/a) (roll call vote) (Attachment #34 to Councilmembers)


The property that Mayor Perkins owns in front of the new GTCC buildings off of Highway 68 North is titled leabourne 68 llc . In the video above we have the mayor saying "I own property that could be effected by this item".  No Mayor Perkinsyou own property that is directly in front of the said property that is getting water and sewer so in reality your "could be" should have said" will be" effected and am sure that when you bought the property knowing full and well that this property was right in the way of providing water and sewer to the GTCC campus.

Here is what was written a few years ago about this same property and remember that Councilman Zack Matheny recused himself from this vote but at the December 13, 2011 vote on this item he did not recuse himself like he did in past on this issue.

Highway 68 North + Anonymous Investors + Plus Zack and Robbie= Ethical Problems

Also Jordan Green from Yes! Weekly also had a post titled Highway 68 Shopping Center Receives Approval

in this article Jordan writes this

"commercial and residential future of the NC Highway 68 corridor near the new GTCC aviation campus took shape on Sept. 10 when the Guilford Planning Board unanimously approved a request by a group of anonymous investors. The decision rezones 51 acres from allow a shopping center and housing development to be built on what is presently a combination of woodland and pasture.

The request was opposed by about a dozen neighboring residents who lamented that the rural character of their community would be lost, and that they were being out-maneuvered by powerful developers with the deep pockets to secure expensive legal help. “This feels a lot like land speculation,” said Mary Fabrizio, an opponent from nearby Colfax. “It stinks because two of the investors are sitting on the Greensboro City Council.”

At-large Councilman Robbie Perkins and District 3 Councilman Zack Matheny have abstained from a city council vote on the project because of conflicts of interest.

Derek Allen, the lawyer with Brooks Pierce law firm who argued the case before the planning board, said that the two councilmen “had interest in groups that had interest in that property.”

The limited liability company interested in developing the property, which is currently owned by WA Kennedy Jr., was organized in June by Jennifer C. Noble, a lawyer with Brooks Pierce. The company’s registered agent is Stanhope Johnson, a partner with NAI Piedmont Triad, a commercial real estate company headed by Perkins.   "   
It would be great for the citizens to know just who are these anonymous investors and to have Greensboro City Councilman Zack Matheny and Mayor Perkins come clean on this whole situation that he was a part of in regards to the land speculation game they both played off of Highway 68 .

Will we see any reporting from the local and weekly papers in regards to this situation or is it ok for sitting councilmembers to have anonymous investors for the public to not know about,  especially when we are talking about taxpayers monies going into building the infrastructure like water and sewer.

"BREAKING: Mayor-elect BREAKING says resolution BREAKING to seating dispute BREAKING is reached: BREAKING"

"BREAKING

Greensboro Mayor-elect Robbie Perkins
called to say a resolution has been reached
to what he called "seating-gate,"
a dispute between himself and District 5 City Councilwoman Trudy Wade.

BREAKING

"Matheny: Let's give more OT cash to cops" If keeping the White Street Landfill closed costs the City of Greensboro about $7 million per year...?

"Councilman Zack Matheny will ask his colleagues to support
an extra $100,000 for police department in December.

If $7 million divided by 12 months is $583,333,

where will the money come from

if City Council Members voted to fund a budget

by spending millions more than the city recieved

in tax revenues?

Highlights of a comment thread at Guarino's: Tony Wilkins, Abner Doon, Bubba, George Hartzman, Elizabeth, Roch, Ab, on Matheny, Ovittore and Greensboro's establishmentarianism

...it would need to be a very strong candidate to beat Matheny

with his incumbency, name recognition,

and his support from the Melderec con Simkins crowd.

Joe Guarino

A Greensboro Election Linkfest I Emailed to Several Members of North Carolina's Press: Perkins, Jordan Green, Matheny, Allen Johnson, TREBIC, Cardes Brown, John Hammer, Amanda Lehmert, Guarino and Bev Perdue

If Robbie Perkins supported RUCO,
why would he vote to eliminate sampling inspections
of multifamily properties?

Who did Greensboro’s Landlords Association PAC donate campaign cash to in 2009, and who did they want to castrate RUCO?

Nancy Vaughn

Robbie Perkins

If Robbie wanted to save and support RUCO,

why would the Landlords PAC give him money?

Zack Matheny

Zack Matheny in 2009: Did Zack Matheny lobby North Carolina's State Congress to eliminate RUCO and anything like it for his employers and campaign contributors?

"As it relates to RUCO, I believe Greensboro, North Carolina is above average
on what we’re doing throughout the state of North Carolina.

Matheny on misleading: Greensboro City Council Member Zack Matheny Still Won't Come Clean on His Anonymous Investors off of Highway 68

From: Marlene Sanford - TREBIC (E-mail) To: Knight, Bill; "Trudy Wade"; Mary Rakestraw; Danny Thompson; Kee, James; Zack Matheny: Did Sue Schwartz out Robbie Perkins and Bev Perdue?

From: Marlene Sanford - TREBIC (E-mail)

To: Knight, Bill; "Trudy Wade"; Mary Rakestraw; Danny Thompson; Kee, James; Zack Matheny
Cc: "Jon Lowder"

Subject: Council Agenda Item 44 - RUCO

Date: Monday, June 06, 2011 4:34:33 PM

Importance: High

Second Opinion from Law Firm in Regards to Conflict of Interest for Greensboro Councilman Perkins and Matheny

Where is the public disclosure "on the record of the Council"?

Why would the city attorney provide such a small snapshot
of the financial relationship between Perkins, Carrison and Griffin?


Doesn't it seem bizarre that the total benefit of all the potential and prior sales
isn't included?


Could Robbie "be personally at risk financially if his vote displeases his" employee
if Mr. Carrison has "multiple signs for D.H. Griffin"?


Is this why Rita Danish left?


If not, why?


How much could Mr. Carrison make on the listed properties?


Where are "all material facts"
disclosed by Robbie Perkins on the landfill contract?


How many properties does Mr. Carrison have listed for D.H. Griffin?


If Zack "might reasonably be concerned" about a vote against D.H. Griffin,
why wouldn't Robbie be concerned for the same reasons,
if Mr. Carrison could easily walk with all the D.H. Griffin listings?


Could Robbie "be personally at risk financially if his vote displeases his" employee
if Mr. Carrison has "multiple signs for D.H. Griffin"?


How much future income does Robbie stand to lose,
if Mr. Carrison were to become upset with Robbie's vote
and leave the company?

Opinion Letter on Greensboro Councilman Zack Matheny and Robbie Perkins


The above scribd document is the second opinion along with the one she received from the UNC School of Government in regards to the conflicts of interest for the white street landfill request for proposal to councilman Robbie Perkins and Zack Matheny. If this is the case and this second opinion is there for all to see then Councilman Zack Matheny needs to start voting on this issue and not play cards with Councilwomen Nancy Vaughan out in the lobby.

The City of Greensboro, City Council and Robbie Perkins'
very serious conflict of interest issue: Is this why Rita Danish left?

Fec - "some mind-warping logic" on Robbie Perkins and the White Street Landfill

Greensboro News & Record Editorial:
Going, going, gone: On firing city attorney Rita Danish

Rita Danish Linkfest

An unanswered Information Request
and the ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE GOVERNING BODY
OF THE CITY OF GREENSBORO

UNC School of Government Ruling on Greensboro City Council Members Perkins and Matheny

Opinion From the School of Government Concerning Conflict of Interest Question (1)


The above ruling from the UNC School of Government is right on Zack Matheny and completely wrong on Robbie Perkins.

Let's take a closer look at Greensboro City Council Member Robbie Perkins

"Council member Robbie Perkins is President and 50% part owner of Piedmont Triad Commercial Properties, Inc. Piedmont Triad Commercial Properties, Inc. has contracted with Henry Carrison. Mr. Carrison is a former employee of D.H. Griffin Companies and is currently an independent contractor for Mr. Perkins. Mr. Carrison performs property sales, leasing and management services for Piedmont Triad Commercial Properties, Inc. Mr. Carrison receives a commission for performing these services. Mr. Carrison performs these services for D.H. Griffin Companies among others. Piedmont Triad Commercial Properties, Inc. receives the remainder of the payments for work performed by Mr. Carrison.

In 2010, the total payments received by Piedmont Triad Commercial Properties, Inc. were less than $400.Neither Council member Perkins, his spouse, nor Piedmont Triad Commercial Properties, Inc. is an investor or does business with Gate City Waste Services, MRR Southern, LLC. There are currently multiple signs for D.H. Griffin properties listed by Piedmont Triad. Carrison anticipates an ongoing relationship with D. H. Griffin. Mr. Perkins when asked states that any financial interest that may exist is neither a detrimental or persuasive one."


From the above facts provided from the city attorney Mr. Perkins when asked states that any financial interest that may exist is neither a detrimental or persuasive one. To me and plenty of others this statement is proof that there is a financial interest and it doesn't matter if it is $400 or $1 it is still a financial interest. We also see that only looked at last year 2010 because i am sure there is plenty of other financial transactions in the past the need to be brought to the forefront. Then we see that  Henry Carrison worked for DH Griffin, oh how convenient.

This is a complete conflict of interest and the City Attorney needs to overrule the school of government because as we have seen in past in regards to  Greensboro politics , there was the infamous plane trip to Washington D.C that got cancelled.  Our local developer wanted to fly the mayor and chairman of county commissioners  on a plane ride to the nations capital. Then city attorney Terry Wood got a ruling from Fleming Bell at UNC School of Government and completely did not see the same  facts in the case and decided it was a conflict and the local elected officials did not fly to D.C.

Here is a link to that post from July 4, 2009 titled "Developer Roy Carroll's Plane will sit on tarmac while mayor and chairman ponder ethical standards" CLICKHERE


News and Record article:  "Perkins can vote Matheny should abstain" CLICKHERE  

City of Greensboro DOES NOT Waste $78,000 of Taxpayers Money on Federal Lobbyist

At the City of Greensboro's 3-1-2011 meeting agenda item #38 was this

Agenda item for March 1, 2011 for City of Greensboro



38. Resolution authorizing the City Manager to enter into a contract with Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP to represent the City of Greensboro priorities to Federal elected officials and agencies. (Council District: all) (roll call vote) (Attachment #38 to Councilmembers) COPY OF THE PROPOSAL ON FILE IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE FOR PUBLIC REVIEW.

If you would like to see what was written yesterday on this issue on TRIADWATCH CLICKHERE with a title "Greensboro N.C. Will Waste $78,000 of Taxpayers Money for a Federal Lobbyist if Approved Tuesday".

Now, we know that with a vote of 6-3 the Greensboro City Council voted DOWN the notion of wasting taxpayers money going after taxpayers money . Here are the council members who voted to NOT fund the federal lobbyist. Mayor Bill Knight, Mayor Pro Tem Nancy Vaughan, Dr. Trudy Wade, Danny Thompson, Mary Rakestraw, and last but not least Zack Matheny. These council members get the award from Triad Citizens Against Government Waste for not approving this item on the agenda.

Now, let's take a look at the usual suspects on who wanted to spend $78,000 of  taxpayers money to waste on a federal lobbyist and they are T Dianne Bellamy Small, Jim Kee , and last but not Robbie Perkins . They will be awarded

                                                           TRIADWATCH EDITION

Greensboro City Council Member Mary Rakestraw Email from Rhino Times for Free Skating and Concert Tickets

rhino e mail to greensboro city council member on free tickets to skating event

Here we go again where we have a email between Greensboro City Council member Mary Rakestraw and William Hammer from the weekly newspaper Rhino Times with him e mailing the sitting council member if she knew anyone who was interested in free tickets to the US Figure Skating Championship. Then at the end of the e mail embedded above you will also see William Hammer from the Rhino also ask if she wanted to holler back on tickets to see Sleeping Booty at Allure on friday night.

Let me try to explain to all local elected officials. You should not be taking free tickets to any event or concert, PERIOD. After seeing this email exchange between a local weekly newspaper and a local elected official it is time ask the question.

Did Greensboro City Council member Mary Rakestraw take free tickets from the Rhino Times and go to the US Figure Skating Championship this past weekend?

Did Greensboro City Council member Mary Rakestraw get free tickets to see Sleeping Booty at Allure on friday night?

This is on top of other issues of free tickets given out to sitting Greensboro City Council members with another post from January 7, 2011 titled "Greensboro City Council Member Zack Matheny Wants Citizens To Buy Tickets but His are Free. any Ethical ? CLICKHERE