Editorial: Thoughts on the Aiken Corporation

Should the Aiken Corporation be dissolved? This question is not new, but the question is being raised more often today as growing numbers of citizens take a critical look at the purpose, performance and history of this organization and ask, “Whose interests are being served?”and “Has it been worth the cost over the past 25 years?” The thoughts, below, will be explored more fully in an upcoming article on the Aiken Corporation’s “Amentum Model.

Every so often, the Aiken Corporation gets a wild hair to do something big. It seems the bigger and boondogglier the project, the more urgent the push to get it done. Accounts from old newspaper articles, editorials and letters-to-the-editor regarding these projects suggest a habitual lack of organization, cost overruns, management by crisis, a disregard for citizen input, and promises of the economic prosperity to follow.

This all started in 2000, with the Amentum (nee Knudsen-Morrison-Westinghouse-Washington-URS-AECOM) building on Newberry Street, when the Aiken Corporation helped stage a corporate coup via an SRS contractor which transformed a modest community project into a $7.7 million boondoggle. The Amentum building project was plagued with so many cost overruns that the interior had to be finished with volunteer labor. The exterior suffered for lack of funds to extend the brickwork around to the backside of the building. There was talk for awhile of planting some shrubs to cover their derrière, but that idea passed.

____________

The 2002 Washington/Amentum Center building project went on to be repeated, albeit on a smaller scale, in the controversial Railroad Depot project on Union Street, which likewise promised to draw tourists and bring prosperity to the downtown. The Depot was to serve as the Aiken Visitors Center, the office for Aiken, Parks, Recreation and Tourism Department, a railroad museum, and an events space. The facility would be self-supporting, with rentals for events, reception and business meetings covering the operating and maintenance costs.

The Railroad Depot project was widely protested from its pre-2000 inception through the 2008 groundbreaking — and onward past its 2010 completion. Per the Amentum model, the Depot costs repeatedly overran the original projections. As one local resident wrote in a July 17, 2007 letter to the Aiken Standard:

“The Aiken Corporation and Depot Committee pat each other on the back and tell each other everybody loves their plan. I disliked this project for the original $300,000; for $3 million I hate it.”1

In this same letter, the citizen commented on the latest design changes to the Railroad Depot along with the Aiken Corporation’s request for another $250k:

“On Monday, the Depot project presenter used the Washington Center and Newberry Street as references. The Washington Center project and the problems that are now glossed over were a big mess — changing designs, not enough money, incomplete business plan. How soon Council forgets. This Depot seems on track for more of the same.”1

Another local citizen, who described the Railroad Depot project as a “D.C.-style bailout,” wrote in her August 23, 2010 letter to the editor,

“Ten years after the mayor and city council told taxpayers that the railroad depot would be privately funded, they have gone back on their promise, and now the taxpayer will be on the hook to complete and maintain the newest downtown money pit.“2

And speaking of pits, the self-supporting Railroad Depot was recipient to $0.9. million in plutonium money in 2022. The money will be used in the transition to “discontinue using the existing Depot as a Visitors Center and to use it for an upscale railroad museum.” 

_____________

Why is the Aiken Corporation pushing so urgently to shoehorn Pascalis 2.0, into the heart of our historic downtown? And is it our imagination that City Council seems to be pressing harder still on the accelerator pedal this September, as if there is a hurry to get someplace before November?

After the Amentum fiasco in 2002, there were calls for an independent, 3rd party audit. This never happened. After the Railroad Depot boondoggle in 2011, there were calls to dissolve the Aiken Corporation. This never happened.

It’s 2023. We’re eight+ months into the Aiken Corporation’s latest big project which has piggybacked atop the AMDC’s (Aiken Municipal Development Commission’s) failed $9.6 million Project Pascalis. Promised deadlines came and went. The long-awaited Feasibility Study revealed little. Taxpayers who footed the $250k bill for “predevelopment” work on the SRNL office complex would like to know what they bought with that money. The public has been very vocal for months now in their rejection of putting this lab in the downtown — and in the accompanying parking garage that this office complex would likely necessitate.

Citizens have been urging, ever since the SRNL project was announced, that properties outside the historic downtown core be considered. The old Aiken County Hospital property, whose buyer is clearly amenable to developing the SRNL office building on that property, has been perhaps the most favored site, followed by the various empty office buildings on the southside.

During a September 25, 2023 morning meeting, the Aiken Corporation Board described their consideration of the Hospital property as an act of “appeasing” and of going “above and beyond” in assessing it. Public participation in the upcoming City Council meeting was equated with “a circus.” There it is again — that disregard for public input.

It would appear that little has changed since 2002 and 2010.

This might be a good time to revisit the November 9, 2011 guest editorial in the Aiken Standard, written by then-Councilman Dick Dewar, who called into question the Aiken Corporation’s “financial and management acumen” in the wake of these projects.

On the Washington [Amentum] building, he described the Aiken Corporation’s latest request to change the terms of their $3.4 million loan — the third such request. On the Railroad Depot, he wrote:

“Without city Council approval, the Aiken corporation expanded the scope of the depot project and in the process spent over $2 million and incurred debt of over $800,000.”3

He also wrote,:

“In summary, the Aiken Corporation has repeatedly initiated projects for small amounts, or to be funded privately, but has an expanded the size incurring debt and responsibilities they cannot support. They then appeal to the City Council to use taxpayer dollars to meet these responsibilities. Given the history of financial and management problems with the Aiken corporation, I think the city Council needs to restrict their ability to initiate projects without adequate funding.”3

Laying the responsibility onto City Council to impose stringent costs controls on the Aiken Corporation, he finished with this:

“If City Council cannot get the Aiken Corporation under control, it should be dissolved.”3

This isn’t about disliking the individuals on the Aiken Corporation Board. This isn’t about disliking the Railroad Depot, the Amenteum Center, or the Savannah River Site. It’s about, among other things, returning the control over the decisions that affect the City to the people.

__________________


1. Stoker, Jenne, “Depot Project a Boondoggle?” Aiken Standard, July 17, 2007.
2. Pate, Kathy, “Depot Project a D.C.-style Bailout,” Aiken Standard, August 23, 2010.
3. Dewar, Dick, “Aiken Corp. Needs to be More Accountable,” Aiken Standard, November 9, 2011.

More on the Aiken Corporation: https://aikenchronicles.com/2023/07/13/news-release-aiken-corporation-issued-notice-of-violation/

16 thoughts on “Editorial: Thoughts on the Aiken Corporation”

  1. I opposed the Aiken Corp having anything to do with a project of this scope at the City Council meeting tonight, regardless of where it’s built. The Corp members who spoke tonight said they would bring it in on budget, it was just an office bldg. I have over 13 years in the commercial construction field as a construction administrator. I have worked on jobs that ranged anywhere from 20 to 120 million dollars. The AC has no one with this type of experience. It’s not just an office bldg that John Q Public can waltz into. It’s a federal installation with high security needs and requirements. It will house top secret documents and host high level officials. The shear fact that the AC calls it an office bldg shows they’re inept to oversee this project. And the fact that all 14 of them did not notice a big part of there presentation was missing shows they have no business overseeing anything. They practically begged for the lab tonight, it was pathetic. Disband them and hire a city manager that can do more than usher in idiotic ideas.

  2. We have here another well-researched and well-written article from “The Aiken Chronicles” and Laura Lance (doing what the “Aiken Substandard_ should be doing). Aiken City Council and the Aiken Corporation, along with Jacobs architectural firm, make for perfect partners. They are particularly adept at wasting other peoples’ money, while being quite deficient in the areas of common sense, fiscal responsibility, communication with the taxpayers, and any semblance of management skills. It is truly a pitiful track record, which City Council seems most anxious to continue.

  3. Could I get a few million for a Breyer horse museum with plastic model
    horses jumping plastic model jumps?
    I guess my chances would be better if I was the bank president?

  4. It seems that the most pressing issue facing Aiken is lack of trust in the city government. And, certainly, there is good reason for that. Fixing it will be challenging as many of those who felt betrayed by Pascalis have strong opinions on how to proceed and what to build (or not). Unfortunately, those opinions run the gamut and it will take time to reach a consensus.

  5. What I don’t understand is how the Aiken Corporation ( an unelected group) can spend tax payer money with no input from anyone.

  6. There appear to be case studies of Aiken Corp. not well serving the public interest. There appear to have been calls for audits of Aiken Corp, from City Clowncil members, following prior poor executions. To my eyes, the question of why Aiken Corp should be at all involved in City affairs is obvious. Prima facie, the local bidnessman’s ‘aw shucks, whodathunk it’d cost so much’ rope-a-dope ‘strategery’ is hard at work. Apparently, the pernicious taxpayer impact can be quantified in the $ millions. City of Aiken taxpayer dollars. Hard pass on my wanting to be annexed into that shitshow.

  7. I attended the Aiken Corp meeting this am and the description “Unforced Error” was used by K.J. Jacobs regarding the removal of the hospital site without communicating it to the Aiken board on Thursday evening prior to the Q and A session with the public. This didn’t exactly make them look on the ball as it was a citizen who pointed out it wasn’t on the poster board presentation.
    Jacobs also said during this morning’s meeting that “this is a project that folks are already just waiting to make a circus out of”
    Mr. Jacobs, you certainly don’t need our help, you already have three rings going and it looks to me like the same ringmaster from failed Project Pascalis is still running the show. Pass the popcorn.

    1. Kelly, I would be that person who asked the question about the missing board for the old Aiken Hospital. However, tonight, at the Council meeting, it was said that Buzz said why it wasn’t. I fortunately got to speak and said there has been si much conflicting information about it. I told Council that it was not Buzz but a member who responded that it was under contract so privately owned and not considered. Today, another member of Aiken Corp said it is not considered because it is not owned by the developer and never was considered because it is not City owned and she said the City Council said it had to be City owned for the lab. Then again tonight it was mentioned that there were five sites considered – which would have included the old hospital! Sorry but my head is spinning as to which way it is! Never once did the Aiken Corp or any members of the public that I know of from attending most of the meetings, including both “public input” meetings, ever mention the Newberry site as the best site. In fact, the Richland site appeared to be the preferred site by the contractor and members of the Aiken Corp and the old hospital was the preferred site by the majority of the public. Sorry this is so long but the conflicting details we received need to be shared.

      1. Linda, I didn’t hear the Aiken Corp give any update on citizen input this evening they were too busy patting themselves on the back and trying to cover for their “unforced error” as they called it at their meeting regarding the removal of the hospital site by the architect without actually telling the members (happening in ring number one).
        How would citizens ever be able to hold these unelected “cousins” of the city, as they were described tonight, accountable if they were put in charge of the actual project?

        1. I totally agree! They did not represent the public sentiment to the Aiken Council. They sounded like a bunch of used car salesmen selling a car they knew was a lemon. Who knows if the Aiken Council will buy it. We tried to share the majority of the public comments we heard but again, not sure who iz listening, if anyone! But rest assured, Pat Cunninv “promised” not a dime out of us for overruns, etc. in building the lab! Won’t that be a first! Ha! Ha!

  8. It seems very reasonable to suggest dissolution of Aiken Corporation in view of past & present performances. I also feel that the SRNL lab/ office building shouldn’t be decided until after the new Mayor is in office.

    1. If is too important of an issue to be pushed through in the eleventh hour. We must live with this decision for years to come!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *