September 2019

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30          

« Any names come to mind? | Main | Headline news »

Dec 21, 2006

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Bubba

"Meanwhile, has there been an official response to the Rhino's article on payments to RMA?"

Perhaps the Councilwoman is hoping that everyone will just forget about that little issue if she can get our attention diverted to another issue regarding our money and how it's spent.

David Hoggard

What an amazingly cynical response, Bubba.

Sandy Carmany is not the enemy here, nor is she the one dissiminating erroneous information.

Are you willing to just forgive and forget about the Rhino's discredited reporting?

meblogin

Ed,

What is your opinion or intent with this post?

Are you in agreement with Bubba on this one?

thanks

jc

Is the Rhino article wrong about overpaying for the RMA report?

I dont know but I but I would think Sandy would come out and be the first one to say so. Maybe her silence confirms what the Rhino says. Hopefully, she will give a full report and confirm or discredit the article.

Sandy Carmany

Bubba,

I did not mention the RMA overpayment in my post since that was not the topic I was addressing, but that information was the very first item the city manager addressed in his explanation --

http://greensboro.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=2&clip_id=197 (at the 2-hour 16-minute mark)

In a nutshell, RMA subcontracted a very specialized portion of their investigation with an expert in that field and passed along that expense to the city, not catching that the fee was higher than what our contract specified. RMA is rebating the total overcharge amount(($900+) to the city.

sean coon

the overcharge was $900? let's file this under "a lotta noise about nothing" and move on folks...

Fec Stench

Ed, I love you, but once again a thread more properly held at Mrs. Carmany's blog is happening here.

And thank you, Bubba, for derailing another one.

Sean, the amount in question is $35,006.

Ed Cone

Fec, you are confusing the two stories. The $35K was for the shopping center job, the $900 for the RMA work.

Also, not sure what you are saying about the "proper" place for this conversation -- I linked to Sandy's blog, she and others commented here. Should I not have linked to her site?

Fec Stench

Never mind. Sorry to all.

Roch101

"Fec, you are confusing the two stories." -- Ed

Fec was referring to the discrepancy reported in the original Rhino story and the one addressed in Carmany's blog post to which you refer.

Ed Cone

Right, as noted in my comment and acknowledged by Fec.

Roch101

But what you didn't "note" was that it wasn't Fec who confused the two issues.

Ed Cone

Sandy answered queries about the RMA overcharge of $900.

Sean commented on that.

Fec assumed Sean was commenting on the first story, not the RMA story.

meblogin

Ed,

What is your opinion or intent with this post?

Are you in agreement with Bubba on this one?

thanks

Ed Cone

My intent was to widen the distribution of Carmany's interesting post, and to use the opportunity to inquire about the related issue of the RMA billing story.

Obviously Bubba was incorrect that Sandy was trying to divert attention from the RMA story, as she quickly pointed to a public record of its rather authoritative dismissal.

jw

"Sandy Carmany is not the enemy here..."

David,

Far be it from me to attempt to explain what Bubba means, but in relation to the quote above, I THINK Bubba would say, "They're ALL the enemy!"

Right, Bubba?

Fec Stench

Thanks Roch, but I still want to know who authorized rehiring Steve Kennedy and what it cost.

Does this signal a turf war between Johnson and the Legal Department?

Fec Stench

God, I wish my blog was working right now.

We know the Shopping Center story displays the Hammers' whackjob conspiracy thinking, but doesn't it also say something about the nature of their sources?

Ed Cone

The City seems not to have been involved in monkey business, but it does seem odd that a job could more than double in price without some extensive documentation and sign-off.

Bubba

"In a nutshell, RMA subcontracted a very specialized portion of their investigation with an expert in that field and passed along that expense to the city, not catching that the fee was higher than what our contract specified. RMA is rebating the total overcharge amount(($900+) to the city."

Sounds like a good excuse to me.

Why wasn't it caught in the first place?

What would have happened if the "overcharge" was not caught?

How often does this sort of thing happen in our city government?

"Obviously Bubba was incorrect that Sandy was trying to divert attention from the RMA story, as she quickly pointed to a public record of its rather authoritative dismissal."

It was a hypothesis, Ed....not a definitive statement.

I'm sure you just misread what I said.

The word "perhaps" should have been your clue.

AlphaOmega

Hey, let’s give Hammer a break and wait until we hear his side on this. I’m no cheerleader for John Hammer or The Rhino Times. But, in all fairness, we shouldn’t jump to conclusions without Hammer’s response. Unfortunately, Hammer usually doesn’t seem to respond except on Thursdays when his paper is distributed. And, if he was wrong, so be it; he’ll just have to take the well-deserved lumps.

I suspect that the underlying cause of the gleeful attack on The Rhino Times has more to do with Jerry Bledsoe’s big story on David Wray than the stories on the shopping center job and the RMA work. My, my, some of the council members are extremely sore at Hammer for publishing the weekly Bledsoe articles. Plus, it’s given them all the jitters. It wouldn’t surprise me if Johnson, Miles and some of the council members wake up on Thursday mornings with a bad case of the hives, anticipating what Bledsoe reveals next.

So, while Hammer’s detractors are gleefully pounding on The Rhino Times for the stories on the shopping center job and the RMA work, I wish to remind them that Jerry Bledsoe didn’t write those articles. And, since Ms. Carmany has been so good at pointing out the inaccuracies in the stories on the shopping center job and the RMA work, I challenge her to point out any inaccuracies in the Bledsoe articles about Wray; that’s the 800-pound gorilla that the council members have tried to ignore.

But, the gorilla ain’t going away and just stonewalling it on the Bledsoe stories won’t make the beast disappear.


Bubba

Good post, AO.

Did you notice that no one else, including the Councilwoman, talked about any of the other topics in the Rhino's RMA article except about the overcharges?

There were at least seven other points and issues that Hammer raised in the linked article Ed provided, but nary a comment on those things from the Councilwoman or from any of the other posters who disagreed with my remarks on that particular point.

There is a LOT more to the issues brought up by the Rhino's RMA story that cannnot just be dismissed with a comment like "the overcharge was $900? let's file this under 'a lotta noise about nothing' and move on folks..."

There's been too much of that sort of thing in City Council already.


Greensboro transplant

could someone tell me at what point in the meeting johnson's refutation took place? i'd like to see it, but i don't care to watch the whole meeting.

From what's been posted it seems that UMG must be a very trusting contractor. it seems like they did a lot of extra work without any written documentation - not even a handshake.

also, Hammer wrote that the city staff approved one change order. it seems curious they would seek a change order for one change and not another.

Ed Cone

GT, as Carmany says in both her post and her comment, look around the 2:16 mark on the clip.

benholder

Ed,

I see the rhino article Carmany slams caused Mitch to issue directives so change orders would not be handled ever again by verbal agrement. I thought that was good and certainly needed. In her post she admits there was a failure and then reports the city manager's efforts to see it doesn't happen again. Is that not what the media is kinda about? Accountability? Watch Dogging? Forcing the the government to be more responsible?

Sandy Carmany

AlphaOmega,

There are NUMEROUS inaccuracies, skewed perspectives, and omissions of key information in Bledsoe's reporting on the Wray case that I would love to refute and correct. However, council's and city staff's hands are tied because we still cannot legally reveal protected personnel information or evidence in the SBI's ongoing criminal investigation. So I grudgingly remain silent AT THIS TIME and smirk as I read each episode and think to myself "If they only knew..." Thankfully, the SBI investigation will soon be complete and "the rest of the story" can be revealed -- I eagerly await that moment.

Sandy Carmany

Ben,
Mitch took corrective action and issued his directives about the change orders MONTHS AGO when this incident occurred, NOT as a result of The Rhino's inaccurate reporting.

Ed Cone

Ben, as I commented earlier, it is not good that a project could double in cost without minimal documentation.

In this case, the process is said to have been fixed long before the Rhino article. That does not mean such articles can't be useful; they should in fact be a cornerstone of local journalism.

But if the press is sloppy in its sourcing and hasty in its conclusions, it doesn't do anyone much good.

Bubba

"So I grudgingly remain silent AT THIS TIME and smirk as I read each episode and think to myself 'If they only knew..."'Thankfully, the SBI investigation will soon be complete and "the rest of the story" can be revealed -- I eagerly await that moment."

We've heard that sort of thing before regarding the RMA report. We all know how flawed THAT particular bit of information turned out to be.

For the sake of the city and the taxpayers, I hope you're right. I fear you are not.

If you are not, every government official/employee connected to this sorry state of affairs should expect to be held accountable.

Joe Guarino

It should be noted that, in the RMA fee story in the Rhino Times, Hammer stated that he made a good faith effort to obtain an explanation for the discrepancy between what the price contracted for, and the price ultimately paid. City sources had every opportunity to advise him of what they considered to be exculpatory or explanatory information. They did not do so. We can infer from that failure by the City whatever we might.

Additionally, we need to be aware of the fact that the SBI investigation is not the last word on this matter. It is not the same as testing the matter in court.

meblogin

I hope that Sandy and city are correct. It would be great if we are or have been moving forward as a community.

Merry Christmas...or Happy Holidays to those that prefer.

benholder

What I think.

http://thetroublemaker.blogspot.com/2006/12/more-sandy-vision-this-issue-now-has-my.html

Sandy does not provide any date or document backing up her claim that the directive was changed months ago. They extra payment was made months ago but there is no proof that shows us what happened to prevent verbal agreements from taking place during big money deals. I know most think Carmany is the Virgin Mary's Little sister and always will defend her. However, i would like to see some documentation. Caramny's word has never meant much to me. Why?

http://thetroublemaker.blogspot.com/2006/03/we-dont-need-no-stinking-appraisal.html

Roch101

" I know most think Carmany is the Virgin Mary's Little sister and always will defend her." -- Ben

I don't know why you have to pepper your posts with personal attacks. You don't see Carmany referring to you as Satan's little brother, do you? You don't accomplish anything by taking the low road except to distract from any valid point you may have. You might consider giving Carmany a little credit for at least engaging in public discussion while her council brethren and sisters stay away.

Bubba

"You might consider giving Carmany a little credit for at least engaging in public discussion while her council brethren and sisters stay away."

Do you call a comment like this:


"So I grudgingly remain silent AT THIS TIME and smirk as I read each episode and think to myself 'If they only knew...'"

...engaging in "public discussion"?

"Smirk"?

I call it a highly inappropriate remark for an elected official to say, particularly in the matter of the Wray case and all the implications contained within it.

Mick

"We're from the Government and we're here to help."

Riiiiiight.

I hope SC is correct. However, I too will just have to "smirk" until the time comes. This whole episode has been a cluster from the start. I see lots of "things" that waddle and quack so at this time I am assuming they are ducks. If I am wrong... so be it.

Roch101

Bubba, you may not like the comments Ms. Carmany makes on blogs, you might find them worthy of contempt, nonetheless, yes, she is engaging in a public discussion her peers are avoiding, no?

Bubba

"...she is engaging in a public discussion her peers are avoiding, no?"

"Smirk"?

That little word tells us EXACTLY what we need to know about where Carmany stands.

"Public discussion", indeed.

meblogin

I agree that Sandy is taking a stance and trying to remain engaging with the public.

The comments to this entry are closed.