DIA CEO will look to philanthropists to close gap between project costs, profit

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

Apparently it isn't okay to give benefit of doubt or give credence to the fact that someone may change either.

I am not disagreeing with you. However, instead of complaining about his hire, how about asking who hired him and why?  And though I respect your previous role in the hiring atmosphere, it either wasn't direct or was some time ago because now, once hired there are laws that prohibit grounds for termination, especially the higher up the food chain you go.

And quite honestly, I'm appalled at your narrowed vision that it is better to throw him to the side and start over. Well, actually if he was removed it would probably be the end of the DIA for a little while. And that you think this is the better opportunity. How come you aren't raging against Scott as every decision he makes? How come you aren't out there campaigning with those trying to remove Angela Corey? Instead, you are harping on a situation that is done and over with. You had the chance to voice these concerns with the same facts you use today, yet for whatever reason you didn't. So basically, the other team cheated in the second quarter, and now that they have won you want the ref to throw his flag. That isn't settling, that's fact.

I typically respect, agree and even admire your positions on this board. I am hoping this is a little bit of pride or maybe pent up anger that is causing this view of yours.  Was it wrong to hire him? In my opinion, yes. But he is hired. So instead of getting all riled up over what cannot be changed, how about we focus on what can be done moving forward? People often say Jacksonville's biggest problem is that they remain stuck looking backwards. Today, you are proving that theory true. I am in full agreement with you, right up to the point where we differ on the action should be taken now. So turn around, look forward, and maybe you'll see things slightly differently.

Of course, lets look at your solution. What grounds do they have to terminate? Nothing new has come to light. All of this was apparently known by the hiring committee. Now, if you want to fire/remove whomever was in that committee and decided to overlook those past incidents, then by all means let me know where I can sign up and whom I'll be picketing because to me they are the ones who violated the taxpayers, the DIA, and even Mr Wallace.

She, like others, didn't start doing their own fact-checking into this until after the fact and once you start digging around you'll find lots of smoke.     

I think she is most definitely questioning the people that did the hiring as well as the hire himself.  Aren't you in the middle of an employee search?  You haven't hired anyone, have you?  Was it possibly because you couldn't find the 'right fit'? 

Now, you have the option to go back and hire the best of the worst, but I don't think you feel that as the best decision for your division here.  Because that's what I feel has happened.   I'm just curious how, with all of the previous allegations and lack of producing anything substantial, he ended up being the most qualified?  And why can't we just let him go?  It's a right to work state, correct?  Why should we have to wait for 18 months, dozens of empty promises and a DIA fund that is in the black because it 'borrowed' money from the city to pay for upfront billing on projects (sometimes 2-3 times on the same invoice)

[JayBird]

She, like others, didn't start doing their own fact-checking into this until after the fact and once you start digging around you'll find lots of smoke.   

I agree with that. And that is everyone's fault. That is our responsibility as citizens and the City's responsibility as our bidders, and the ball was dropped.    

I think she is most definitely questioning the people that did the hiring as well as the hire himself.  Aren't you in the middle of an employee search?  You haven't hired anyone, have you?  Was it possibly because you couldn't find the 'right fit'? 

That was what I was trying to express, that it should be the people who made the decision to hire, not the man himself. He didn't hide any facts. He hasn't been convicted of any wrongdoing, just allegations. Though in my own opinion there is probably truth to them, but it is still only an allegation. And yes, I did recently hire, and no if they don't work out I need a valid reason to terminate. If it can be proved that I knew of that reason BEFORE I decided to hire, than I cannot terminate because of that. What you are suggesting would equate to hiring someone based on qualifications, but then firing them because you didn't like them. That isn't the case here, but do you see why those labor laws are in place?

Now, you have the option to go back and hire the best of the worst, but I don't think you feel that as the best decision for your division here.  Because that's what I feel has happened.   I'm just curious how, with all of the previous allegations and lack of producing anything substantial, he ended up being the most qualified?  And why can't we just let him go?  It's a right to work state, correct?  Why should we have to wait for 18 months, dozens of empty promises and a DIA fund that is in the black because it 'borrowed' money from the city to pay for upfront billing on projects (sometimes 2-3 times on the same invoice)

That is exactly what has happened, we got the best of the worst. Not a good situation, but the one that we have. You also bring up funds, but yet propose spending MORE money to terminate a man whom has yet not done anything wrong in THIS position and go through the hiring process again. Wouldn't it be cheaper to watch over his actions and make sure that what occurred in Miami doesn't happen here? And if it does, to respond quickly and voice that opinion to those who are in the position of handling it efficiently?

Also I am not up to snuff on Right to Work, but I was under the impression it dealt with you not being denied employment in a trade/vocational job if you didn't belong to a union. I do know it has no bearing on my Corporate America job nor does it effect the work that happens in non-profits, so I don't see it's relevance here. But if it does affect government workers/appointees please correct me.

Also, in terms of character I hold everyone to high standard. To suggest that I or my generation or the people of this city lack character is not only wrong, it is flat out arrogant. I do not feel Mr. Wallace was the right or proper choice for Jacksonville. I fully agree with all of Diane's points, and thank her for the research she did to educate all of us. I only wish we had this information before, when the opportunity existed to speak out against his hiring. I just don't agree with the idea that we should spend the time and money to go through the process of removing him, which will be fought and which the city will lose, based upon something that the selection committee was already aware of. We do not know their reasoning, I do not even know exactly who made up this committee. So I just feel before we hang the rope up, we should see what happens and see what he does.

If we are going to start knocking out city employees/appointees for their misgivings in the past, than we better start printing a lot of pink slips.  I am not advocating for corruption, or even supporting it. However there is a proper time in which the public input can be highly effective, in this situation that time has passed.

And it is my belief that character still does mean something, to me, to this generation, to this city. I hire people based on character, otherwise I would never have to do an interview I could just look at a resume to see their qualifications. My work with Prisoners of Christ is based 100% on judging someones character because it is up to us to make sure the citizens stay safe from recently released offenders. And for my Catholic Charities of Jax Refugee Resettlement Program I have to judge the character of every person in my case load to determine what jobs they will be able to assimilate into easily. Character is not lost in Jacksonville among its people, however it may be blinded in the eye of the government.

[tufsu1]

I'm at the DIA meeting. Wallace just spoke. The DIA office is in the Ed Ball Building. His number is 255-7577. He said his office will be a one stop shop for everything concerning downtown.

good to know...maybe some folks who have concerns could call him up and ask for his side of the story

[Cheshire Cat]

Yesterday, I had a very bad day and really wasn't feeling at all well. That led to me making an emotional decision that was a bit selfish and I declared that I was done with worrying about Jacksonville issues and forum posting. After a good nights sleep and some introspection I have reconsidered.  I know how hard many who post and read here work for Jacksonville and how little return there sometimes is for caring or fighting for change, yet those who want positive change keep on keeping on.  I generally have done the same for most of my life but am not as young as I once was.  lol  Please pardon my momentary weakness and lets get on with the business of improving our city and it's leadership.  Thanks for your understanding.   

One of my favorite sayings from my Buddhist friends.

If someone behaves negatively towards you, it helps to remember that he or she is a human being like you and to distinguish between an action and the person who does it. If counter measures are needed to prevent someone doing harm, it's always better to do it with a calm rather than an agitated mind. If you act out of anger, the best part of your brain fails to function. Remember, compassion is not a sign of weakness.

[JayBird]

If someone behaves negatively towards you, it helps to remember that he or she is a human being like you and to distinguish between an action and the person who does it. If counter measures are needed to prevent someone doing harm, it's always better to do it with a calm rather than an agitated mind. If you act out of anger, the best part of your brain fails to function. Remember, compassion is not a sign of weakness.

I like that quote, very true.

[JayBird]

From an article in the Business Journal, I really like DIA Chairman Barakat's viewpoint at the end(in bold)

The office market, the longtime foundation for drawing people to the urban core, seems to have faded from the forefront of the Downtown revitalization conversation.

The city and state put together a $5 million incentive package that in late 2011 lured EverBank Financial Corp. (NYSE: EVER) from a suburban office park to 301 W. Bay St., where it leased 270,000 square feet, moved 1,500 people and took over the naming rights to the tower.

But since that deal, little has happened in Downtown's office market. In June, the city put together parking incentives to help convince C2C Solutions to lease one 30,000-square-foot floor in the EverBank Center, but AT&T Inc. (NYSE: T) is preparing to give back seven floors, or 245,000 square feet, in that building.

Is the occasional relocation of mid-size companies enough, particularly when such a large vacancy is coming on the market? I asked DIA CEO Aundra Wallace and DIA Chairman Oliver Barakat where office workers fit into a revitalization conversation that's largely turned to building a residential base and planning events to draw people Downtown.

"I think everyone agrees at the time of the EverBank move, Downtown was on the verge of a crisis, and that move and the incentives for that move were appropriate," said Barakat, who represented EverBank in the deal. "I think with that move, the vacancy rate has come down to a more acceptable 20 percent, and that there's probably just less motivation to incentivize another move like that."

In the current environment, Barakat said, incentivizing a company from outside the area to move Downtown might make more sense, but that's a conversation the board will be having in the coming months.

"I believe you have to do a little bit of everything, and even though I'm someone who makes a living off of leasing office space, I do believe residential is probably the most important component for Downtown development," he said. "From residential the demand for everything else will follow."

http://m.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/blog/2013/08/where-does-a-push-for-more-office.html?ana=e_du_pub&s=article_du&ed=2013-08-22&r=full

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

Which makes this hire the more stranger...  If the Chair of DIA truly believes that residential is the key to the revitalization of DT, then it would have made a lot more sense to bring in someone with a residential background. 

Wallace does have both - Commercial redev. in Miami, and Residential redev. in Detroit, so on the outset, you clap your hands and say, "Great hire."

His results in Miami were far from commendable, lacked substance and were completely tainted with scandal.

His results in Detroit seem to be better, but it was also a re-use of existing homes, HUD financing and a more dire situation than anywhere else in the US.  I'm sure the accounting hasn't even quite caught up and it's probably still too soon to see if his efforts are truly as good as they may appear.  Remember, he has a history of not quite following through the accounting aspect or staying on course with his projects. 

Sure, he appears to have turned $750k into $30M, but based on past lessons, where did the money come from, how much is the actual liability and how much, allegedly, was funneled through one of his own upstart businesses.

Maybe we should cut his $180/yr pay in half and use the remainder to hire an outside CPA ($55k/yr) and an office assistant ($35k/yr).   

I can tell you from personal experience (depending on the job) if I have to bring in extra help to manage my projects because I'm either:  a:) Overwhelmed or b:) incompetent, then some, most or all of that money is deducted from my salary.

[JayBird]

^Good points and like the salary idea, that is very true.

[Cheshire Cat]

To your point NRW, I was going to share a piece I saw earlier on Jacksonville.com, and to my surprise it appears to be gone, taken down for some reason.  The piece talked about what the DIA and Wallace wanted from the City going forward.  Among the want's was money to hire four more staff members for CEO Wallace one of them being a COO position.  In essence Wallace is asking to hire another person to shadow his job (or perhaps do it). Two top dogs as it were.  Wish the TU article was still up.  I did find one from the Daily Record which discusses some of what happened yesterday.


http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=540316

Thursday, August 22, 10:14 AM EDT

by David Chapman, Staff Writer
The Downtown Investment Authority Wednesday approved a $1.5 million budget and staked its position to City Council that a $9 million fund for Downtown revitalization should be retained in what the authority's chair described as a "new chapter" for the organization.

Authority Chair Oliver Barakat used the description for the arrival of authority CEO Aundra Wallace, who told the nine-member board he could take over some of the responsibilities from after a 10-month period with no dedicated or independent staff.

With Wallace aboard, Barakat said the group could relieve itself of day-to-day duties and "think strategically" about Downtown.

Wallace and Barakat are scheduled to address the Council Finance Committee today about the authority's budget.

Board members approved a $1.5 million budget that Wallace said was "fiscally conservative" and would include additional staffing. Mayor Alvin Brown's budget proposes an authority budget of $300,000.

The five-person staff would be Wallace, a chief operating officer, executive assistant and two project managers, with additional budget items dedicated to items such as professional services and internal service charges.

Board member Mike Saylor advocated for more funds for professional services and member Donald Harris pushed for more marketing dollars, but board Vice Chair Jim Bailey, publisher of the Financial News & Daily Record, warned the group it could be hitting a "buzzsaw" in the form of the Finance Committee that presses for budgetary detail.

Council member Lori Boyer, an authority liaison who is not on the committee, said she thought Bailey was right because the authority likely will "have to explain each item and why you need it."

No items were added and the $1.5 million budget motion passed.

The committee during its Aug. 9 meeting diverted a $9 million fund dedicated for Downtown development into a capital projects account, a step toward allocating the funds for fiscal 2013-14.

Last week, authority board members held a special meeting to determine how to react to the Finance Committee's action. Barakat drafted a resolution to Council that the money should be returned as a dedicated Downtown development source and presented it to the board Wednesday.

"I do not think it will be too detrimental," he told the board when describing the decision whether to submit it to Council or not.

He said that although he didn't know if the resolution would make much difference, members should consider the appearance to Downtown stakeholders if the board did nothing as a response.

"We don't have a real good history on these resolutions," Bailey responded, offering the best way to resolve the issue is "going toe-to-toe" with Finance Committee members and explaining in detail how the money and budget would spent.

While he said the resolution would not be a solution, he said he was not opposed to its message and supported it.

dchapman@baileypub.com

(904) 356-2466

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

Well, well, well....

Here are the follow up questions to that article:

1.)  Who's responsibility is it to hire the staffers?
2.)  Is the $1.5M an annual budget or just operating capital to get started?
3.)  RE:  The finance committee - why are they already trying to circumvent that department?  They haven't even started and they're already not wanting to explain expenditures, lol.  That could mean a couple of different things, but I'll leave the speculation to the individual. 

Besides, if history is any indication of the future, the $1.5M he's being given should be about $60M within a year or two....  ;-)

[Cheshire Cat]

It seems that there have been a lot of issues regarding finances and legislation recently that appear to have been worked "around" the proper city offices and committees as required by law rather than "through" them.  That is always a red flag.  We saw this recently with the SOE office selection that did not go through the RFP process.  It's bad city business.  This type of dealing is also the reason the T.U. is suing Alvin Brown and his office over the secretive pension discussions, the final deal in the end as most know was rejected by council.  I would not be surprised to see the Finance Committee ask for a complete breakdown of expenses and payroll for the DIA that have already been expended along with what is now being requested.  In fact I expect they will make these inquiries. 

[thelakelander]

I attended last night's meeting, so I got to hear them talk about why it's needed.  I'm actually fine with Wallace wanting an actual staff.  If the DIA is to be a one stop shop for DT, you're going to need more than one guy for day-to-day operations.  In all seriousness, you could easily argue that more than $1.5 million and five people are needed.  However, you have to start somewhere.  With that said, if you ask for the money, council should demand to know what it is going for.  I'd hope that anyone elected to serve the public would ask those questions before approving a budget.

[Cheshire Cat]

I attended last night's meeting, so I got to hear them talk about why it's needed.  I'm actually fine with Wallace wanting an actual staff.  If the DIA is to be a one stop shop for DT, you're going to need more than one guy for day-to-day operations.  In all seriousness, you could easily argue that more than $1.5 million and five people are needed.  However, you have to start somewhere.  With that said, if you ask for the money, council should demand to know what it is going for.  I'd hope that anyone elected to serve the public would ask those questions before approving a budget.

From what I gathered in the TU piece that is now deleted and the piece from the Daily Record, it surely sounds like council will be asking a lot of questions about funding requests.  Ennis, did they say who would do the hiring for the rest of the office if approved?  My guess would be Wallace. 

[thelakelander]

No, it never got that far. 

[Cheshire Cat]

No, it never got that far. 

Thanks Ennis.  It looks to me like the DIA threw out a financial wish list and is waiting to see how it is received, which is to be expected at this point.  Kind of testing the waters perhaps.