Category Archives: Alley Series

A Hotel in The Alley: The Other 2021 Public-Private Partnership Failure.

In May 2021, Aiken attorney, real estate investor, and developer Ray Massey led an effort to obtain properties owned by the City of Aiken as part of a larger development that included a 100-room hotel and later Project Pascalis. This was an unknown public-private partnership effort that was negotiated in private; one that ultimately failed on its own, and before any public scrutiny emerged.

The object of Massey’s courtship with the City was a 0.21-acre, city-owned property—known alternatively as the Brinkley Property, the Bike Building, or the USC-Aiken Building (1), and herein, also referred to as the Alley Property—a parcel dominated by a 4,023 square-foot, one-story building at the corner of Newberry Street SW and the Alley (Figure 1a). At that time, the building was unoccupied and the property was destined to be declared surplus property.

Also at the time, Massey’s investment and development group, Aiken Alley Holdings, owned or had under contract 0.56 acres of property along Newberry Street, across the Alley from the City of Aiken’s “Brinkley Building” property (Figure 1c). Massey’s expressed intent was to construct a 100-room hotel on those 0.56 acres, preferably through a public-private partnership with the City of Aiken.

Aiken Alley Holdings’ first attempt to acquire the City of Aiken property was a proposal for a 99-year ground lease of the Brinkley Building, along with a 50-foot wide portion of Newberry Street itself, at a greatly discounted fixed rate of $12,000 per year. Their second attempt at acquisition was a proposed outright purchase of the building at the greatly discounted sale price of $750,000.
Both efforts ultimately failed to move forward to the necessary public hearing stage—both proposals failed without any public interference.

The negotiations on Massey’s ground lease proposal were conducted on the city side of the table solely by City Manager Stuart Bedenbaugh. This private negotiation for city property occurred despite the fact that Massey is a partner within the City’s law firm, Smith Massey Brodie Guynn and Mayes (SMBGM). Massey consistently used SMGMB letterhead in his business correspondence with both Bedenbaugh and Economic Development Director Tim O’Briant.

Today, a “portion of the building” is under consideration to install a much-need public restroom in The Alley—a facility the City failed to provide when it renovated the popular commercial district nearly a decade ago. But the future of the entire surplus property still remains in limbo
.

(All emails from Ray Massey to Aiken city officials that are cited or described in this article can be found in this file obtained via a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. A glossary of terms, individuals, and groups can be found on this page).


by Don Moniak
August 26, 2024

Aiken resident Jacob Ellis is known for asking questions to, and inducing answers from, Aiken city officials during public meetings. On June 10, 2024, Mr. Ellis asked, “Why are there no public restrooms in The Alley?”

According to the meeting minutes, City Manager Stuart Bedenbaugh responded, “The City is getting pricing on converting a portion of the building at Newberry (Street) and The Alley to public restrooms.” He noted he did not know if that would be the location. He said that, internally, staff had talked about the location for public restrooms but that “we need to talk to Council about the matter and the next steps.”

Mr. Bedenbaugh did not address future possibilities for the remainder of that building and its surrounding property (Figure 1a); nor whether any alternatives were under consideration.

Three years ago, Bedenbaugh was involved in another effort to develop the property in question, which is now the City’s only remaining parcel of land in The Alley. It was a complicated and stealthy effort to pursue a separate downtown development that originated during the first rendition of Project Pascalis, and continued to overlap with the second version of the Pascalis project. As with Project Pascalis, a public-private partnership involving city property and a development agreement was envisioned.

The City of Aiken obtained the Brinkley property in 2008 for $930,351; for the purpose of expanding its 224 Park Avenue SW Municipal Building. That repurposing was never realized, as City Council opted instead to buy and repurpose the historic Henderson Hotel (former Regions Bank building) at 111 Chesterfield Street.

From late May 2021 to January 2022, Aiken attorney Ray Massey lobbied Bedenbaugh on behalf of his newly formed investment and development group, Aiken Alley Holdings LLC, to control the City’s Alley property. Aiken Alley Holdings LLC had already purchased three properties on the north side of The Alley in March 2021 (Figure 1c).

First, Massey proposed a 99-year ground lease of the property and its building, as well as a 50-foot wide stretch of Newberry Street containing most of its southbound lane (Figures 1b and 3). When that effort ultimately failed to gain traction, Massey’s investment group offered to purchase the City’s Brinkley Property, along with the city-owned parking lot across from the Hotel Aiken.

These negotiations occurred in the absence of the City commissioning any appraisals, seeking competitive bids, conducting a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the soon-to-be-surplus property, and/or holding a public hearing; an absence of due diligence that, sadly, continues to this day.

Massey’s lobbying efforts began the day before the AMDC and City of Aiken, via the contract assignment to the Aiken Chamber of Commerce described in Part 1 of this story, gained control of the six properties in the Pascalis project footprint (collectively known as the “Shah Property”). The assignment was the culmination of a failed, two-month-long effort to pursue a larger version of Project Pascalis (1).

As reported in the three-part series Project Pascalis Includes the Alley, Ray Massey had been heavily involved in the first, failed rendition of Project Pascalis, thus obtaining considerable inside information on the inner workings of the project.

Figure 2: This April 2021, rendition of a hotel, apartments, and retail space at Newberry Street and The Alley was envisioned as part of the first version of Project Pascalis. The building on the left is on the site of the existing City of Aiken’s “Brinkley Property” along The Alley. The hotel was to be built on the north side of The Alley. That Project Pascalis effort quietly failed, without any public disclosure, in early May 2021.. The vision for a 100-room hotel on the north side of The Alley continued through much of 2021, with Aiken Alley Holdings LLC (Agent Ray Massey) lobbying City Manager Stuart Bedenbaugh to gain control of the city’s property in The Alley.

The Ground Lease Proposal

On May 24, 2021, Ray Massey sent a Letter of Interest (LOI) to City Manager Stuart Bedenbaugh. In the LOI, Massey relayed the desire of his investment and development group, Aiken Alley Holdings LLC, to build a 100-room hotel on the “Harrison Property” just north of the intersection of The Alley and Newberry Street.

To accomplish this goal, Massey proposed a 99-year ground lease for The Alley property owned by the City, and a 50-foot wide, 4,000-square-foot part of Newberry Street in front of the property. (Figure 3). He also sought a development agreement with the City to develop the immediate area.

Massey’s first offer to Bedenbaugh was submitted with the letterhead of his, and the City’s, law firm of Smith Massey Brodie Guynn and Mayes (SMBGM). The deal would be $10,000 per-year fixed rental rate to lease the City’s Alley property and 4,000 square feet of Newberry Street. A day later, Massey upped the offer to $12,000 per year; a meager $1,000 per month for 99 years (Figure 4).

The Letter of Interest stated that, “We believe this LOI can be consummated on or before December 31, 2021 (the ‘Target Closing Date’).” (emphasis original).

Figure 4. Portions of the Letter of Intent from Aiken Alley Holdings LLC, via SMBGM, to Stuart Bedenbaugh. (click to enlarge).

Neither the Aiken Municipal Development Commission (AMDC) nor Economic Development Director Tim O’Briant were listed as recipients of the ground lease proposal.

O’Briant had also emailed Massey on the 24th, attaching a prospectus for potential Project Pascalis developers, with the message:

Last week we sent out a packet to a number of interested developers as we try to develop proposals rooted in a common set of objectives. To date, we have had expressions of interest that are all over the map. The preference is for one developer to deliver all components of any eventual project and then sell back the portions that will be owned and operated by the public sector. (the conference center and garage primarily).  I know that your group’s vision is different than what is contained in this thumbprint, but I wanted you to have the same benefit as the others who will submit master developer proposals in the event that you decide to weigh in on that umbrella role.”

The next day, May 25th, in reference to the O’Briant email, Massey wrote to Bedenbaugh; but not O’Briant:

We can discuss this also after we discuss the LOI. I would prefer if just you and I are on the call.”

Shortly after that email, Massey sent Bedenbaugh a nearly 20-year old supporting document for his ground lease offer (Figure 5); an email that referenced a Letter of Interest for the Hotel Aiken from an unidentified party that included a $1 million offer price.

Figure 5. A LOI for the Hotel Aiken was submitted around May 24th. It is unknown how Massey knew about the $1 million proposal for the site, as all bids and proposals during the search for a Project Pascalis developer had not been publicly disclosed—and remain undisclosed. The one probability is that Greenville developer Andy Cajka had made the $1 million bid. Massey had been put in touch with Cajka by Tim O’Briant.


Over the next few months, Massey kept in contact with both Bedenbaugh and O’Briant, sometimes together, sometimes separately, literally working both sides of the street—or, in this case the Alley.

The Massey group’s overtures to Bedenbaugh began to further overlap with the updated Project Pascalis. In a June 4th, 2021 email to Chip Goforth, O’Briant described “awaiting whatever it is that Ray and his group come up with. Whatever it is it should be good for downtown.”

On June 7th, the deadline date for the new Pascalis project proposals, the group submitted a two-paragraph Letter of Intent—again on SMBGM letterhead. Massey reiterated his group’s desire to build a 100-room hotel at the corner of Newberry and The Alley, and also revealed, without actually identifying them by name, the background of partner firms Raines Corporation and Lat Purser & Associates (Figure 6).

HO
Figure 6: Letter of Intent from Ray Massey to Tim O’Briant to become the Project Pascalis developer. The letter shows that Massey was privy to the inside knowledge that the Chamber of Commerce had the properties under contract. Other developers had been told in Tim O’Briant’s prospectus letter that the AMDC “holds contracts to purchase roughly 1.6 acres in the downtown” but made no mention of the Chamber. The Chamber had signed its assignment papers for the “Anderson property” on June 3rd and for the “Shah property” on May 25th.

The AMDC met on June 8th to discuss the selection of a Pascalis project developer. After meeting in a closed-door Executive Session, the Commission voted to authorize Chairman Keith Wood to enter into negotiations with a potential developer related to Project Pascalis.

Prior to the meeting, Massey had written to Bedenbaugh, regarding the ground lease proposal:

What is the date the City will consider my LOI on the Bike Property? I believe you said June 15. Is that correct? Also, after I meet with my development team on the 15th, I would like to have a meeting with the City Council (work session) to discuss our proposal. Much like Mr. Wyatt did earlier this year. Is that possible, and can we schedule?”

Two days after he was authorized by AMDC to negotiate with potential Project Pascalis developers, Chairman Wood expressed concern over a potential “real or perceived conflict of interest” involving Aiken Alley Holdings Letter of Intent, writing to Bedenbaugh:

Stuart, 

Indirectly related, I have concerns relative to a conflict of interest the City Attorney may have in our process. I noted that Ray Massey submitted the Alley proposal on letterhead that included Gary Smith’s name. In addition, I am concerned that Gary’s attendance in future meetings with developers may compromise our process based on his relationship with Ray Massey (i.e. same legal firm). I recommend we ensure the proper firewall exists to alleviate any real or perceived conflict of interest.” 


Bedenbaugh dismissed the concerns, seeming to confuse ethics law with the issue of attorney-client privilege, and writing that “we have had similar issues in the past and have not had any problems.”

No “firewall” between City Attorney Smith—who still represented the AMDC at that point—and Aiken Alley Holdings was contemplated, and Massey continued to use SMBGM letterhead in business correspondence with city officials.

On June 24th, Massey continued lobbying for his 99-year ground lease, writing to Bedenbaugh,

Hi Stuart,

Now that we have met, and we are submitting this week the addendum, there is probably no need to meet yet with the City Council on the 28th of June. Do you agree?”


Bedenbaugh agreed, and no such meeting ever occurred. The addendum (not yet disclosed) to the Letter of Intent was sent to O’Briant and Bedenbaugh on June 24th.

On July 2, 2021, the overlap with version two of Project Pascalis continued to increase when Massey emailed both Bedenbaugh and O’Briant, again on SMBGM letterhead (Figure 7). This time he identified some of the investment group’s members—including PGA golfer and Aiken resident Kevin Kisner. Again, no member of the AMDC was cc’ed in the letter.

Figure 7: Letter from Ray Massey on behalf of an unnamed group and team.

The July 14th Cocktail Hour

On July 13, 2022, Massey emailed Bedenbaugh and O’Briant to inquire about the status of the Project Pascalis procurement process, again without cc’ing AMDC officials, writing:

“ I am following up regarding the pending project to see if you know when a decision will be made regarding selecting a developer. I believe it was said in our last meeting that a decision would be made to eventually dance with one partner.”

It was Bedenbaugh who replied that “We are at least several weeks from determining;” an indication that, at that point in time, he had taken a lead role in selecting a developer—rather than project leader Tim O’Briant or the authorized negotiator Keith Wood, and despite the fact that Bedenbaugh was only a non-voting ex-officio AMDC member.

The next day, Bedenbaugh and Massey exchanged emails (3), sans O’Briant and Wood, to set up a meeting, one that resulted in an agreement to meet for a drink instead of at Bedenbaugh’s office. The exchange read, in part:

8:14 a.m. Massey: Can you meet with me today at 5? We can meet for a drink or we can meet at your office, whatever you prefer, if you are available. I just want to give you a quick update, and provide you with some good news.

8:41 a.m. Bedenbaugh: We can meet at 5 for a drink. Name the place.

8:45 a.m. Massey: How about the Whitney at 5?

The outcome of that meeting is unknown.

The series of Pascalis project-related events that followed (4) included Bedenbaugh and O’Briant shepherding the approval of a $10 million bond issuance in August 2021; the October 2021 $9.6 million general obligation bond issuance; the AMDC’s $9.5 million purchase of Pascalis and public disclosure of the project status; and the subsequent $5 million Purchase and Sales Agreement for those same properties between the AMDC and the Massey-led RPM Development Partners LLC.

While Pascalis moved forward, Massey and his local investment group continued their attempts to gain control of The Alley property—this time by an outright purchase.

Another Bid for the City’s Alley Property.

On December 27, 2021, just three weeks after signing the Pascalis PSA (Purchase and Sale Agreement) on behalf of RPM Development Partners, Massey signed a PSA on behalf of another investment group, CTR, LLC, for both the City’s Alley property and for a city-owned parking lot behind the Security Federal building on Richland Avenue. The total purchase price was $750,000. (CTR stands for Craig (Heath), Todd (Gaul), Ray (Massey).

On January 24, 2022, the following item appeared on City Council’s meeting agenda:

(6) Reading and Public Hearing of an Ordinance Approving the Sale of Two Parcels of Property to CTR, LLC.”

Stuart Bedenbaugh’s supporting memorandum (Figure 8) for the Ordinance included no reference to competing bids nor any kind of appraisals, and justified the discounted sale prices on the basis of lost tax revenue in the previous thirteen years. In essence, Bedenbaugh argued that the city should accept the financial loss because it already had foregone tax revenues due to City Council approving purchase of the building in 2008; he included no references to increased downtown property values since that time.

The public hearing never happened. After a closed-door Executive Session attended by Massey, his investment and development partner Todd Gaul, and City Attorney Gary Smith, City Council took the proposal off the agenda, but did not table it.

The vote to remove it from the agenda was 6-1, with Councilwoman Andrea Gregory voting to keep it on the agenda and hold a public hearing.

Figure 8: The supporting memorandum for the discounted sale of The Alley property and a city-owned parking lot situated behind the Security Federal building and the then-Meybohm Building owned by (Agent: Todd Gaul).


Another Bid for Newberry Street.

While CTR’s effort to acquire the city-owned Alley property lay dormant, a second effort to acquire a part of Newberry Street prominently emerged in March of 2022.

The proposed privatization of a portion of the City’s Newberry Street—one similar to the Massey group’s 2021 ground-lease proposal—would ultimately direct more public scrutiny and outrage towards Project Pascalis than any other aspect of the project.

The proposal involved the conveyance of a portion of the city-owned street to the AMDC’s Pascalis project “preferred developer,” RPM Development Partners (a company formed in October 2021; whose acronym stands for Raines, Purser, and Massey; and whose Registered Agent is Ray Massey). In exchange, RPM would transfer the Harrison Property to the City—although the fate of the final ownership of that parcel if Project Pascalis succeeded was uncertain.

On March 28, 2022, the first Public Hearing on the privatization Ordinance was held. Twenty speakers walked to the podium to object to the Ordinance; no parties rose in support. Neither Massey nor any other member of the development team, if any were present, were asked to present their case.

City Attorney Gary Smith did not recuse himself at that meeting, and continued to serve as the City Council’s Parliamentarian and attorney; both at a prior closed-door Executive Session pertaining to Project Pascalis and during the Public Hearing. At one point, Smith provided a favorable interpretation of the deal that benefitted his partner’s investment and development group—but overall deferred to Bedenbaugh and O’Briant.

Early in the session, Bedenbaugh (Figure 9) praised the “piecemeal” nature of the process, stating:

One of the things that makes this project unique is that it is not being put together by a developer for a multi-layer plan that has multiple elements being presented to the public at one time. He pointed out that this plan is being done in a piecemeal fashion so there are elements that are easy to review and have public engagement.”

Stuart Bedenbaugh’s statement to Keith Wood in June 2021 about a lack of “problems” involving City Attorney Gary Smith proved to be no longer true; as Smiths’ presence at a public hearing that involved the acquisition of city-owned property by an investment and development group headed up by his partner Ray Massey galvanized enough community outrage to compel Smith to distance himself from the project.

At the second Public Hearing on the Newberry Street privatization Ordinance, AMDC Attorney Gary Pope Jr. sat in the City Attorney’s chair; the late Jim Holley was also retained to represent the Design Review Board and guide it through the Pascalis project review process; and after May 9, 2022 Attorney Daniel Plyler began to represent the City Council during any meetings where closed-door Executive Sessions pertaining to the Pascalis project were also held.

Even though the Newberry Street privatization Ordinance was approved on May 9, 2022, the lack of recusal by Smith during the first hearing, coupled with the effort to privatize part of Newberry Street were two contributing factors in the eventual demise of Project Pascalis.

Today, the City’s Alley Property remains vacant, and an informal proposal to convert part of the building to a public restroom facility is pending; the fate of the entire property is yet to be determined. Aiken Alley Holdings continues its ownership and leasing of the Harrison Property (Figure 10) and the adjacent properties in The Alley. It is unknown whether any redevelopment plans are under consideration.

Figure 9: City Manager Stuart Bedenbaugh at the First Reading of the Public Hearing (44:00 minute mark) for an Ordinance to privatize 0.6 acres of Newberry Street. A smaller-scale version of the Ordinance eventually was approved on May 9th. After the Pascalis project was cancelled, following intense public scrutiny and outcry and a major lawsuit, the Newberry Street privatization Ordinance was repealed in early November 2022.


Summary.

For nearly one year, Aiken property investor Ray Massey lobbied City Manager Stuart Bedenbaugh to control the City’s remaining property in The Alley; first via a 99-year lease and then through an outright purchase—all at deeply discounted prices, one of which Bedenbaugh favorably presented to City Council.

While the plans fizzled, the facts remain that Massey conducted business using the letterhead of the City’s Law Firm of Smith, Massey, Brodie, Guynn, and Mayes; and that Stuart Bedenbaugh, even when prompted by AMDC Chairman Keith Wood, did not view these circumstances as potentially suspect, if not locally explosive.

Instead, Bedenbaugh continued to meet with a member of the City’s law firm to discuss the sale and/or lease of a city property and the status of Project Pascalis negotiations. In January 2022, their negotiations culminated in an agreement to sell city properties at greatly discounted prices—an offer that City Council wisely chose to avoid even discussing in public.

At the same time, the Aiken Municipal Development Commission, and to a lesser extent Economic Development Director Tim O’Briant, was kept uninformed about the Bedenbaugh-Massey negotiations and discussions. The project concept was not only discussed outside of public view, the high level of stealthiness even excluded the very organization, the AMDC, charged with redevelopment efforts in the downtown area and Parkway District.

In spite of the Massey group’s intense interest in the building, the City has never pursued an RFP for the building, obtained an appraisal, sought competitive bids, or, until now, officially considered repurposing it for the public good such as for well-needed restroom facilities and a cooling station.

Two years after Project Pascalis failed, there has still been no activity or official proposals for the City’s Alley Property—proving that local government is very capable of internally fumbling management of its own properties. If not for a question posed by an Aiken citizen, the future possibilities for the property would be unknown.

Figure 10: The “Harrison Property” today. The building is occupied by a contractor whose window decal ironically portrays what would have been an interim scene in the surrounding downtown area had the Pascalis project and the Aiken Alley Holdings project moved forward.



Footnotes:

(1) The “Brinkley Property” is referred to as “The Alley” property for the purpose of this article, to simplify the situation and avoid confusion with the larger, private Brinkley Property on the adjacent parcel to the south.

The property has, over the years, had several occupants. From about 1954 to 1984 the bright yellow Birdsey Grocery building occupied the site. According to Laura Lance, “it was within walking distance to downtown homes, and was also a venue for poor people and black people, who often didn’t shop some of the other grocery stores during most of these years.”

Overall, Birdsey’s was a downtown institution for 50 years, as it was formerly called Birdsey Flour and Seed, an establishment that would grind wheat and other grains for farmers.

After Birdsey’s, the building became a restaurant, then a gift shop. From 1994 to 2004 it was the Cyclesport bicycle shop, thus earning it the nickname of “The Bike Shop.”

After the City obtained it in 2008, USC-Aiken occupied it for several years.

(2) The original PSA for the Harrison Property was signed on March 3, 2021 by WTC Investments, LLC partner Weldon Wyatt. At some point after April 30, 2021, the day that Wyatt offered to sell it to the City/AMDC, the PSA was assigned to Aiken Alley Holdings LLC; which bought the. the property on June 7, 2021, for $675,000.

(3) Prior to May 24, 2021, the following Project Pascalis events had transpired.

March 2, 2021: WTC Investments signed a PSA with the Shah family for six of the eventual Pascalis project properties; the package was referred to as “the Shah Property.”

March 3, 2021: WTC signed the PSA for the Harrison Property.

March 15, 2021: Aiken Alley Holdings purchased the “Laurens Building,” at 200 and 210 The Alley for $2 million. The properties would become part of the original Pascalis concept plan.

March 16, 2021: The existence of Project Pascalis was announced.

March 23, 2021: WTC’s development arm, GAC LLC, signed a Cost Sharing Agreement with the AMDC.

April 30 to May 6, 2021. A series of meetings between city officials and WTC/GAC management culminated in the end of the first Pascalis project. (Just prior to the collapse, Weldon Wyatt offered to sell the Harrison Property and the Aiken Alley Holdings properties to the AMDC. Although the offer was declined, it illustrated the strong connection and overlap between WTC and Aiken Alley Holdings.)

May 17, 2021. O’Briant began to recruit developers for a second, smaller-scale Project Pascalis effort.

May 25, 2021. The City of Aiken and the AMDC “gained control” of the Shah property via an assignment of the WTC PSA to the Chamber of Commerce. The same process involving the Anderson property occurred on June 3, 2021.

(3) The July 14, 2021, Massey to Bedenaugh email exchange:


(4) Pascalis related events from August 2021 to December 2021.

August 13, 2021: Tim O’Briant informed Massey that the AMDC had selected him to negotiate with potential Pascalis developers. (However, the meeting minutes for the August 10, 2021 AMDC meeting show no such decision was officially made or conveyed following an Executive Session.)

August 24, 2021; The City Council approved the $10 million bond issuance for the AMDC to potentially obtain properties in the “Parkway district”—even though city officials knew the properties in question were the seven Pascalis parcels in the downtown.

The day after the decision, Massey asked O’Briant in an email, “how did it go last night?”

October 6, 2021: Attorney Gary Pope of the law firm Pope and Flynn is retained by the COA and AMDC to act as the AMDC’s attorney.

October 17, 2021: Massey registers RPM (Raines, Purser, and Massey) Development Partners as a South Carolina LLC.

November 9, 2021: After more than a month of failed negotiations to reach a Master Development Agreement and purchase arrangement for the Pascalis Properties with RPM, or an equivalent consortium, the AMDC bought the properties at the $9.5 million price tag; and reimbursed the Chamber its $135,000 in earnest monies.

December 5, 2021: Massey signed, on behalf of RPM the PSA for the Pascalis Properties, at a greatly discounted price of $5 million.

Additional References:

The Pascalis Attorneys also provide details of the Newberry Street Ordinance and the Ordinance to approve $10 million of general obligation Municipal Bonds for purchasing properties in “The Parkway District.”

The AECOM Plan provides more details of the events leading up to the failure of the first version of Project Pascalis, where the A memorandum from Tim O’Briant to AMDC members Jameson, Chris Verenes, and Chairman Keith Wood  was first published.

Project Pascalis Conference Center Costs

Part I: ~ $86,000 + for “Convention Center” Planning

by Don Moniak

On January 23, 2023, Aiken Economic Development Director Tim O’Briant and Finance Director Kim Rooks co-signed a $36,799.93 check to the Aiken based law firm of Hull Barrett.  The check was reimbursement for the firm’s fifteen months of legal counsel on behalf of Newberry Hall in Aiken, LLC (Agent: Patrick Carlisle) during negotiations with the Aiken Municipal Development Commission (AMDC). The lengthy negotiations involved “convention center lease and operating agreements,” consulting agreements, and existing lease agreements. 

The invoice from Hull Barrett, PC.

This payment closed another chapter on the Project Pascalis story, this one involving the City of Aiken’s pursuit of a downtown conference center.  The check to Hull Barrett raised the costs of all Pascalis project work specific to conference center planning to approximately $86,000.

More than half of the costs were in legal fees, and another $30,800 was spent on market surveys conducted by Chicago-based consultants, money that left the community and the state. In addition to the Newberry Hall of Aiken negotiations and document reviews, the costs included a ground lease appraisal for a possible long-term lease of the city’s former historic municipal building at 214 Park Avenue.

Table 1: Direct Project Pascalis Convention/Conference Center Costs. 

PartyRoleTaskCost
Hull-BarrettNewberry Hall Legal CounselNegotiation of Legal Agreements                $36,799.93
Pope-FlynnAMDC Legal CounselNegotiation and Review of Legal Agreements                    $7,052.00
Capstone ServicesProject ManagerReview of Legal Agreements                   $1,615.00 
HVS ConsultingConsultantConference Center Market Review                   $6,000.00
AECOM Technical Services ConsultantProject Pascalis Market Review                 $24,800.00
McNeil Appraisal ServicesAppraiser Ground Lease Appraisal of 214 Park Ave                    $9,700.00
Total $85,966.93

Additional factors that would better reflect the true, total costs of conference center planning and design include city staff labor (1), Boudreaux Group’s work for the first, secret Project Pascalis effort in early 2021 (2), Cranston Engineering’s support in 2022 of the second Project Pascalis effort (3), and design work by the second Pascalis Project developer, RPM Development Partners, under a cost sharing agreement with the AMDC.   However, these costs are difficult to break down by project area.

The Convention Center and The Mayor’s Vision 

A downtown conference or convention center with a capacity of 500 people, along with a 100-room hotel, downtown apartments, and a parking garage, were the stated goal of Mayor Rick Osbon and City Council, articulated in the Mayor’s March 2021 letter to the AMDC

Explore meeting the existing demand for a conference/convention facility that will fulfill the persistent call from regional membership organizations and others who have indicated they would host regular large events in our charming and historic city if there were an appropriate venue here to meet their needs.  Such a venue would need to be adjacent to sufficient first-class lodging to accommodate as many as 500 overnight and multi-night attendees.”

Mayor Osbon’s letter was delivered two weeks after City Council adopted the $115,000 AECOM prepared Economic Development Strategic Master Plan, and the AMDC’s vague announcement of “Project Pascalis.”  At the time, the project was only known to involve an unnamed, “well-capitalized, seasoned investor” seeking to revitalize unidentified areas in the city’s historic and treasured Parkway District. Three weeks after the Mayor’s letter, conceptual designs of a new hotel, conference center, parking garage, and apartments were in the hands of the AMDC—but not shared with the citizenry.

The Market Surveys: $30,800+ 

The Mayor articulated his vision, and the concept designs were completed, prior to any market surveys being conducted.  In May 2021, the AMDC commissioned the first of two assessments, paying Chicago-based AECOM Technical Services $24,800 (4) to conduct a market and financial analysis for its downtown plan. Prior to procuring the study, AMDC Executive Director Tim O’Briant also described the intent of the study as a supporting document for potential Tax Increment Financing:

Here is the proposal for a full market study related to Project Pascalis from AECOM. Such as report would be required by law if the County considers a TIF for the project. I’d like to get these guys, or another firm if you have suggestions, started so we can be ready for the TIF debate ASAP. Let’s discuss.” 

The Chicago-based AECOM team submitted an underwhelming five-page report in July 2021, titled “Downtown Aiken Hotel + Conference Center + Municipal Garage Market & Financial Findings.” In regard to construction and operation of a conference center, AECOM’s authors presumed taxpayer subsidies: 

Presumes that a private operator can run the food and beverage business at break- even, with a focus on banquets and local events rather than conventions and trade shows

• Subsidy is likely needed to offset debt service on construction cost

• Estimated annual debt service: $300,000

Based on a total development cost per square foot of $221 in 2021 dollars-“ 

The AMDC purchased the seven Pascalis properties in November 2021 for $9.5 million. AMDC later procured, for $6,000, the services of Chicago-based HVS Convention, Sports & Entertainment Facilities Consulting to conduct a “Proposed Conference Center Market Analysis.” (5)

HVS conducted interviews with “key informants,” but did not identify any by name. Among the underwhelming take-aways from the interviews were: 

  • Downtown Aiken lacks a ballroom to host banquets of 300 or more.
  • Several events are lost annually to North Augusta, Augusta, and other nearby cities due to lack of facilities.
  • Opinions vary, but most agree there is occasional need for banquet seating capacity of 300 to 500.
  • Marketing and selling the facility will require significant investment in staff and other costs, especially in the first few years.
  • A City-owned conference center could require ongoing subsidies.

In terms of demand, HVS concurred with AECOM: there was low demand for conventions and trade shows without signficant taxpayer investments in marketing the venue. The demand forecast was for six conferences annually in the first few years of operation, and ten conferences annually after a “dedicated marketing and sales staff” was in place.

The Newberry Hall Negotiations: $45,000+ 

Among the seven properties the AMDC purchased was the “Anderson property”, home to popular event and catering facility Newberry Hall. The commission paid $2 million, more than 2.5 times the appraised market value of $712,000 listed by the Aiken County Assessor.  The intent of the AMDC and its developers was to demolish the Newberry Hall building, first built in 1965, and replace it with another conference center, in conjunction with a five-story parking garage and apartments.

This was all made possible when the owners of Newberry Hall exercised a one-time waiver on an existing option to purchase the property. As described in the Newberry Hall lease:

Section 5 of the Lease provides Carlisle with a purchase option (the “Option”) that would be triggered by the closing of the Purchase.
Anderson and Carlisle desire that Commission close the Purchase without triggering the Option and have requested that Carlisle grant a one-time waiver of the Option to allow Carlisle and Commission more time to attempt to finalize an Operating Agreement.”
(4)

The option was possibly negated by the high sales price originally offered by Weldon Wyatt’s WTC Investments, which was also negotiated with the Anderson family by members of the Smith, Massey, Brodie, Guynn, and Mayes law firm. Eight months after the first contract for $2 million was signed for the Anderson Property, Massey signed, on behalf of RPM Development Partners, a purchase and sale agreement with the AMDC for the Pascalis properties at nearly half the AMDC’s purchase price—-$5 million for properties that were bought with $9.5 of debt bonds issued by the city.

Bill submitted to WTC Investments, LLC, the property aquisition arm of the first Project Pascalis developer, GAC, LLC (Agent: Weldon Wyatt). This bill was obtained via a Freedom of Information Act request and first reported in The Pascalis Attorneys.


As reported in The Pascalis Evictees,  the “Amended Lease Agreement (Second Amendment)” included options for compensation for lost income during demolition and reconstruction, purchase of a new building following a complicated appraisal process, and negotiating to operate a new conference or convention center.  According to the appraisal clause, the owners of Newberry Hall had, as a tenant, reportedly invested $350,000 to improve the popular facility. (4)

Between October 15, 2021 and January 17, 2023, when Hull Barrett submitted its invoice, negotiations for operation of a future conference center and other matters, held between representatives of the AMDC and Newberry Hall, resulted in: 

  • Five “letters of intent” 
  • The November 2021 “Second Amendment to the Lease Agreement.” 
  • A ‘Third Amendment to the Lease Agreement,” which required two versions. 
  • Nine versions of the “Convention Center Lease and Operating Agreement.” 
  • An agreement to amend lease.
  • Five versions of consulting agreements. 

In response to a request for copies of the legal documents that were paid for with public funds, Aiken Economic Development Director Tim O’Briant responded:

Legal expenses related to a potential displacement of Newberry Hall were paid by agreement with the owners. The work product of their attorney and his services on their behalf is their attorney-client privilege to waive or maintain. Please contact them directly. As you know, the project was canceled and no draft of any agreement was ever produced for, presented to or considered by the AMDC and/or Aiken City Council due to that cancellation. No further records beyond the invoice will be provided.”

In actuality, the “Second Amendment to the Lease Agreement” was a final document that was publicly disclosed, and any subsequent lease agreements for a city tenant are subject to disclosure. No legal expenses were included in the relocation agreements for five other potential Pascalis evictees. (7)

According to legal invoices contained in the AMDC Financial Binder (pages 155-172) , the Columbia and Spartanburg based law firm of Pope-Flynn was responsible for protecting the legal interests of the AMDC, and thus the financial interests of Aiken city taxpayers, during conference center negotiations. Pope-Flynn billed the AMDC more than twenty hours and $7,000 for review of contracts, letters of intent, conference calls, and other work relevant to the negotiations.

An example of Pope-Flynn’s billings for Newberry Hall and conference center related work.

According to invoices on pages 44-59 of the financial binder, Aiken County based project manager Capstone Services also assisted in the review and discussion of the agreements and contracts. Upwards of seventeen hours and $1700 was devoted to tasks such as “reviewing pros and cons of conference center delivery method.”

The Ground Lease Appraisal: $9,700+

In April 2022 the AMDC decided, without any public input or formal City Council approval, to pursue a conference center at the soon to be vacated Municipal Building at 214 Park Avenue.  As reported in Why is the City of Aiken Toying with 113 Downtown Jobs, the discussion leading to the decision occurred in back channels involving the city’s reportedly independent Design Review Board and AMDC Executive Director Tim O’Briant. 

Following the announcement, O’Briant procured the services of local appraiser Thomas McNeil to conduct a “Ground Lease Appraisal” of the historic Municipal Building.  His  Appraisal and Ground Lease Market Survey was submitted to Tim O’Briant on June 6, 2022.

The purpose of the report was to:

“Assist the client in establishing a Ground Lease rental rate for the subject tracts, one parcel, as well as form an opinion of value of the subject site on the basis of the Ground Lease rental rate and other data. This report is contingent upon and made on the basis of the hypothetical condition that the improvements situated on the site, redeveloped as a portion of Project Pascalis and specifically denoted as the forty-six thousand gross leasable square foot, more or less conference center and commercial space, exists upon the site as of the effective date of this report.”

McNeil defined a ground lease as, “an agreement in which a tenant is permitted to develop a piece of property during the lease period, after which the land and all improvements are turned over to the property owner… In the case of a ground lease, generally one party owns the land (i.e. fee simple interest) while a separate party owns the improvements (i.e. leasehold interest). In most cases, the owner of the land leases the land to the owner of the improvements for an extended period of time (20 – 100 years).” 

The ground lease appraisal was hampered by a lack of “comparable properties,” specifically ground leases in the Aiken market area. Ironically, one of few local “ground leases” cited in the report included the new Taco Bell on Whiskey Road. That private redevelopment project was made possible after the locally owned bowling alley was demolished as the result of another City of Aiken project. 

By using an “Income Capitalization Approach” that postulated an annual income to the property owner of $104,157 for twenty years, supplemented by a limited local ground lease comparison approach, McNeil concluded the ground-lease value of the subject real estate, “on the basis of any and all assumptions, extraordinary assumptions and hypothetical conditions contained herein to be $2,200,000.00 TWO MILLION TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS.” 

How much is $86,000?

$86,000 would pay the annual salaries of three newly hired solid waste maintenance workers for the public sanitation department, or 7,227 lifeguard hours at the current advertised rate, or $1,000 bonuses to the eighty-six lowest paid city employees, many of whom are eligible for public welfare benefits.

FOOTNOTES: 

(1) Staff time devoted to any aspect of Project Pascalis is unknown. Monthly reports from the two person, $165,000 a year City of Aiken Economic Development Department provided no breakdown of time devoted to any Pascalis related tasks.  

(2) The conceptual plans for the first Project Pascalis effort were completed by the Boudreaux Group, on behalf of then project developer Weldon Wyatt, were publicly disclosed only after a Freedom of Information Act request in June 2022. The AMDC compensated Wyatt’s GAC, LLC $14,417.50 for the overall effort after the developer withdrew from the project less than two months after the first announcement. 

(3) Cranston Engineering billed the City of Aiken for $33,692.93   for professional services in support of “Raines development” in downtown Aiken between March and July of 2022. The invoices are on pages 86-90 of the FOIA-induced AMDC Financial Binder.

Cranston also received $18,504.00 for a condition assessment of 214 Park Avenue. Although this bill was paid for by the AMDC, the project was requested in September of 2021, prior to any proposal for a conference center at the Municipal Building.

(4) The AECOM invoice.


(5) The HSV Invoice


(6) The Newberry Hall Second Amended Lease, located on pages 39-43 of the AMDC’s November 9, 2021 meeting agenda packet, read, in part: 

“The development of the Project contemplates that the improvements on the Property would be demolished and replaced with a larger conference center and kitchen and that Carlisle would be compensated for loss of income during interruption of Carlisle’ s business and would lease the replacement conference center and kitchen pursuant to a replacement lease and operating agreement, the terms of which are under discussion but are not finalized (the “Operating Agreement”).

D. Section 5 of the Lease provides Carlisle with a purchase option (the “Option”) that would be triggered by the closing of the Purchase.

E. Anderson and Carlisle desire to that Commission close the Purchase without triggering the Option and have requested that Carlisle grant a one-time waiver of the Option to allow Carlisle and Commission more time to attempt to finalize an Operating Agreement.

NOW, THEREFORE, for ten dollars and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties hereby covenant and agree as follows:

1. One-Time Waiver of Option. Carlisle consents to the closing of the Purchase by Commission and agrees that closing of the Purchase by Commission shall not trigger the Option. Except for this one-time waiver by Carlisle of the triggering of the Option, the Option shall remain in full force and effect and shall be applicable to any future transactions that would otherwise trigger the Option.”

2. Negotiation of Operating Agreement. Carlisle and Commission shall continue good-faith negotiations of the Operating Agreement based on the latest draft of the letter of intent currently being discussed by them. However, the letter of intent has not been approved, and Carlisle and Commission agree that neither of them shall have any liability or obligations to the other for failure to enter into an Operating Agreement.

3. Failure to Enter into Operating Agreement. The Lease will continue in full force and effect after the Effective Date, with Carlisle being the “lessee” thereunder and Commission being the “lessor” thereunder. Failure of Carlisle and Commission to execute an Operating Agreement within five (5) years after the Effective Date shall trigger Carlisle’s Option to purchase the Property to the same extent as if “lessor” delivers to “lessee” notice of intention to sell the Property under Section 5(i) of the Lease. The closing of the purchase and sale of the Option shall be made under the same procedure as outlined in Section 5 of the Lease, except that the purchase price shall be determined by an appraisal as described below.” 

  1. Appraisal. The purchase price for the Property under the Option shall be the cash equivalent price at which the Property would change hands between a hypothetical willing buyer and a hypothetical willing seller, neither being under a compulsion to buy or sell and both having reasonable knowledge of relevant facts, as determined by an appraisal, minus $350,000 (which is the amount paid by Carlisle for leasehold improvements) (the “Appraised Value”). After the Option is triggered, Carlisle and Commission shall attempt to agree on an appraiser to perform the appraisal for ten (10) days. If Carlisle and Commission cannot agree on an appraiser within such ten-day period, each shall appoint a MAI appraiser who is approved to conduct appraisals for commercial properties located in Aiken, South Carolina by Security Federal Bank, First Community Bank, or First Citizens Bank by each party delivering notice of the identity of its respective appraiser to the other within twenty (20) days after the expiration o f such ten-day period . If the two appraisers cannot agree on an Appraised Value of the Property within thirty (30) days after the last of them is appointed, then within five (5) days, they shall appoint a third appraiser. The third appraiser shall determine the appraised value of the Property within thirty (30) days after such appraiser’s appointment. The Appraised Value shall be the average of the two (2) appraisals which are closest to each other. Commission and Carlisle shall each pay the costs of the appraiser appointed by them, and one-half (1/2) of the cost of the third appraiser. The purchase price as determined herein shall be conclusive and binding on Commission and Carlisle. If any party fails
    to appoint an appraiser within the time required herein, the Appraised Value shall be determined by the appraiser appointed by the other party and shall be conclusive and binding upon the Commission and Carlisle. In recognition that Commission may pay greater than fair market value for properties as part of economic development activities, properties acquired by Commission for the Project or otherwise shall be excluded from comparable sales by the appraisers conducting the appraisals. This Section shall supersede Section 5(ii) of the Lease.

    (7) The generic relocation assistance agreements for all other AMDC tenants on Pascalis properties reads:

    Upon the Tenant vacating the Premises, the Commission shall provide relocation assistance in the form of a single payment calculated as the amount paid by the Tenant as Rent to the Commission to such date, beginning with the Rent paid by the Tenant for the month of December 2021, less any amounts paid by the Commission to any property manager or property management agency .for the management of the Premises and the collection of Rent.”

    (8) The McNeil Appraisal Invoice (below) The Ground Lease survey was obtained via a FOIA request and is available here.

Project Pascalis Includes The Alley (A Four-Part Series): Part Three

The City, Wyatt, Ray and His Group, and Creative Ways

As previously reported, the $100 million plus downtown demolition and redevelopment project named Project Pascalis actually involves two project areas. The unpublicized  second project area is the popular commercial district and gathering spot known as The Alley, which has been a central and not peripheral part of the project. 

One way to think about this is to picture two adjacent construction zones.  

One zone is controlled by the City of Aiken’s Municipal Development Commission (AMDC) and its developers: first Weldon Wyatt’s GAC, LLC, which had contracts on seven properties, and now RPM Development Partners, LLC, which is seeking to purchase the seven properties at a discount from the city. It also involves a public-private partnership with a cost sharing agreement between the two. Because public funds and a public body are involved, the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) allows for better access to information, and a stricter set of rules applies to obtaining project approvals from city boards and council. Specifically, South Carolina Community Development law applies in this case because the AMDC is governed by Chapter 10 of that law. 

The second zone is privately controlled by Aiken Alley Holdings, LLC (Agent: Ray Massey), whose investors have remained silent, and are hereafter referred to as “Ray and his group” or “Ray’s group.”  Aiken Alley Holdings owns four properties in the project area. Because these properties are not part of any public-private cost sharing agreement, their plans and communications are not subject to FOIA and South Carolina Community Development law. 

Between March 2, 2021 and May 20, 2021 the two zones were treated more as a whole. The conceptual designs by the Boudreaux Group (an architectural firm who had signed an agreement with GAC, LLC in March) and its consultants clearly illustrate a seamless development that involved the Shah and Newberry Hall properties (under a purchase contract to Weldon Wyatt’s WTC Investments, LLC in the city’s zone) and properties owned by, or being sought by, Ray and his group.

Between June and November, 2021, the two zones were in limbo after Wyatt withdrew from the public-private project and the AMDC pursued a new developer, with some coordination with Ray’s group. 

Since November, 2021, the AMDC and its developer, RPM Development Partners, have controlled discussion and plans of the public-private zone, while plans for the private zone remain the purview of Ray and his group and have been withheld from public view. 

However, RPM stands for Raines, Purser and (Ray) Massey. At the April 20, 2022 AMDC public meeting, moderator Tim O’Briant stated that each party owns 1/3 of RPM. Ray and his group are a part of the public-private zone, but the AMDC is not a part of the private zone controlled by Ray’s group. If this were a swimming pool, the AMDC is only allowed to swim in the deep end, while Ray’s group can use the whole pool, an arrangement that has serious financial implications for taxpayer liability. 

“Ray and His Group”

The existence of two projects is confirmed in a brief but illuminating June 4, 2021 email exchange between Aiken Economic Development Director Tim O’Briant and WTC Investments, LLC representative Chip Goforth involving the assignment of properties by the Chamber of Commerce, purchase contract earnest money, a cost-share agreement invoice, and the future of the project. 

The two were cleaning house on the remants of the first public-private zone, which had crumbled when Weldon Wyatt’s development company GAC, LLC withdrew from the project in mid May, 2021.  Subsequent to the latest Wyatt exit from a major city project, the Aiken Chamber of Commerce, in coordination with the AMDC, had negotiated the “assignment” of WTC Investments’ contracts for the Shah and Newberry Hall properties. 

This involved transferring the contracts to the Chamber which would hold them for the AMDC to purchase after it procured funds from City Council; and helping WTC Investments salvage $135,000 in nonrefundable earnest deposits for its contracts. Yes, the city devoted administrative labor to insuring Mr. Wyatt recovered his otherwise nonrefundable earnest money. 

The AMDC opted to keep this entire affair secret, as it did with its private efforts to recruit a new developer, an effort that also involved Aiken Alley Holdings, referred to at the time as “Ray and his group.” 

In addition to confirming the two project zones, the exchange also indicates an amiable relationship, in spite of the Wyatt camp’s recent withdrawal from the project, and that Mr. O’Briant provided sympathetic assistance to WTC Investment’s efforts to retrieve their $135,000 in non refundable earnest money. 

In his email, Goforth wrote: 

How was your meeting with Andy Cajka. Thanks for helping get both Contracts assigned, glad we did the way we did and not a creative way. Better to all be on the same page. Will the Invoice attached work for reimbursement of the costs we spent. Let me know if you need anything. Also, sounds like Rays group has a lot of interest in the apartment side of the development. (1) 

O’Briant responded fifteen minutes later: 

The invoice looks fine. I’ll get that processed for you next week. It’s been busy but things are looking pretty good. The meeting with Andy was excellent. I hope to have a half dozen proposals in hand by a deadline next week to compare. Also waiting to see what Ray and his group come up with whatever it is it should be good for downtown. Hopefully we can figure out soon whether there’s a good way to overlap the two projects or if they work best independently. 

I’m really glad we were able to get the contract worked out so we can go ahead and get you the earnest money back and make it all clean. Thanks for your help on that end.

O’Briant-Goforth email
The O’Briant-Goforth email. Obtained via FOIA.

There were two project areas and two projects, one controlled by “Ray and his group” and one controlled by the AMDC and its private partner. In the beginning the private partner sought legal counsel and aid from Ray Massey’s law firm. In the existing stages, it is unknown what role the developers in RPM are playing in the plans of Ray and his group. 

The Wyatt Months: The Two Projects Merged

The issue of overlapping projects versus independent projects led to the creation of several design options in April, 2021; options that were scheduled to be presented to Aiken City Council on April 19th but never made it onto any public meeting agendas. 

In early April Boudreaux had late draft plans, but there was some disagreement over the future of Ray and his group’s recently purchased properties in The Alley. During the discussions, their retail and office buildings in The Alley are referred to as “The Laurens Center” and this designation also appears on some maps. 

In preparation for a meeting between AMDC Executive Director Tim O’Briant, Boudreaux, and Weldon Wyatt, Boudreaux group President Heather Mitchell wrote: 

Tim and Weldon spoke this morning. Weldon has clarified that he wanted to understand the impact of excluding the Laurens Center Alley buildings from the site, however he does want to proceed with developing the plan in accordance with the Option 2 version that includes rebuilding on the Alley (Laurens Center) retail site.

Three options focused mostly on The Alley portion were under discussion at that meeting: 

Option 2 involved retail space in The Alley extending deeper to the north and underneath the proposed parking deck. 

Option 2: “No Alley Building” involved leaving existing Alley retail buildings as is. This was looked at “per Weldon’s request,” and the issue that arose was that not modifying The Alley retail buildings would lead to a smaller hotel and less apartment space. 

Option 2A; “No Alley Building” involved a “reconsidered hotel location. Hotel is at corner of Richland and Laurens which gets it back to 100 rooms.

In an email, O’Briant wrote that he preferred the second option: keeping the existing retail. 

There is also a set of plans, obtained via FOIA, (see below), that shows a smaller hotel behind the Alley retail, with the lobby of the hotel at the same ground floor as retail. These could be the plans that have been described by Art and Soul co-owner Stacy O’Sullivan in Part Two of this series, and plans to build residential and/or hotel above the existing Alley buildings may still be in the works. 

The decision in the April 19, 2021 Conceptual Design Plans appeared to favor Option 2 .

The Two Projects Separate, But Ray’s Group Swims in Both Pools

Following the end of the AMDC/Wyatt partnership, the city secretly pursued a new developer. In the May 19, 2021 solicitation for Requests for Proposals (2), the AMDC only offered Option 2a, with a new hotel replacing the Hotel Aiken and no activity in The Alley. Apartments and a parking garage would replace the vacant historic Johnson Drug Store and adjacent existing businesses; a conference center would replace Newberry Hall. 

This is also the vision the AMDC and its chosen developer, RPM Development Partners, presented to the pubic between November 2021 and April 2022, when the AMDC unilaterally announced, without any public or even City Council input, a  conference center in the soon-to-be vacated City Hall at 214 Park Ave. W — an issue to be addressed in Part 4 of this series. 

Ray and his group retain control and ownership of the “Laurens Center” retail center in The Alley, as well as the former State Farm building (which it has offered as a “trade” with the City of Aiken in exchange for a portion of Newberry Street). Their plans are not publicly disclosed, but their property is now in the center of the larger Pascalis footprint. 

Ray and his group also sought to purchase part of the City’s municipal building complex in January, 2022. While that offer was tabled, the purchase agreement with the city remains in the files, and Part 4 of this series will discuss how Ray and his group tried to buy city property at a sizeable discount. 


Next: Part 4: Ray and His Group Angle for City Property

Part 5: The AMDC Pulls a Fast One: Old City Hall as a Conference Center. 

For Reference

(1) The invoice referred to the cost-sharing of the Boudreaux Group’s conceptual design. 

Andy Cajka is a member of the Clemson University Research Foundation. According to his bio on the foundations’s website, he is “the founder and president of Southern Hospitality Group, LLC, a hotel management and development company in Greenville, South Carolina. Prior to starting his own business, Mr. Cajka was a managing member of Hyatt Hotels Corporation from 1986 until 1998.” 

(2) The summary of that RFP is posted on the AMDC “transparency page.” Requests for the entire RFP continue to be denied by the city on the basis of a FOIA exemption. However, that exemption does not mandate nondisclosure, it is a choice. 

Project Pascalis Includes The Alley (A Four Part Series): Part Two

Option 2 Included a Radical Vision for The Alley

by Don Moniak

July 6, 2022

Until now, the AMDC has only revealed Option 2A (1) from its early 2021 deliberations. Option 2A was forwarded to select developers, along with a project “summary” (2) in a private solicitation for a request for proposals for an area only encompassing the “Shah Property” and Newberry Hall — but not The Alley. This solicitation represented a change in the direction of the project management, but not in the overall project vision detailed in the never released Option 2, a vision involving a radical redevelopment of The Alley. 

The Early Days of Project Pascalis: Option 2 Emerges

One week after the Aiken Municipal Development Commission (AMDC) announced a major, vaguely defined redevelopment effort named Project Pascalis, commission Chairman Keith Wood and Executive Director Tim O’Briant signed a cost sharing agreement with Weldon Wyatt’s GAC, LLC. (3) As with the Wyatt-Boudreaux agreement, references to “historic preservation” are absent. Demolition was the only consideration, and renovations were not options. 

Boudreaux Group architecture and its two subconsultants moved forward with an aggressive schedule of site visits, workshops, research, and preliminary design. While the Boudreaux Group was working on behalf of GAC, LLC, it was also designing for the Alley property recently obtained by Ray Massey’s Aiken Alley Holdings, and city owned property across from it, although no agreement detailing this arrangement is publicly available yet. 

The week of April 12 passed without the scheduled “presentation to city council and invited stakeholders,” and the AMDC only discussed the project in closed executive session on April 13th. 

On April 15th, Weldon Wyatt and Newberry Hall’s Myrtle Anderson signed a purchase and sale agreement for $2 million and options for the business’ operators to negotiate to repurchase a new building, operate the new conference center, and even be compensated for lost income during construction. 

Four days later the “Project Pascalis Conceptual Plans” were complete and ready for review.  The plan’s aerial view continued to match the description in the Boudreaux-Wyatt agreement, with the Aiken Antique Mall and the east half of The Alley remaining in the project footprint.

(Note: click on images, below, to enlarge views).

The conceptual plans, obtained on July 2, 2022, via a Freedom of Information Act request, featured “Option 2,” with the Hotel Aiken and Laurens properties replaced by ground floor retail below a three story apartment complex, a “Boutique Hotel” at the corner of Richland and Newberry, a conference center/apartments/garage complex replacing Newberry Hall, and street pattern changes on Richland and Newberry Street. 

Option 2: Five-story “Boutique Hotel” at the corner of Richland and Newberry. To the left is the 5-story conference center/parking garage/apartments complex at the corner of Newberry and The Alley.

Most dramatically, the plan envisioned retail space topped by four stories of apartments on the north side of The Alley; three stories across from it on city owned property, and a three story, elevated, enclosed walkway above the east entrance connecting apartments and providing a pathway to the parking garage. 

These plans were never shared as promised in mid-March by AMDC officials. The plans were shown to some of Massey’s newly acquired tenants. One of them is Stacy O’Sullivan, co-owner of “Art and Soul” gallery in The Alley. In 2019, “Aiken Blend” wrote of her and business partner Kim Rising’s presence in The Alley in an “entrepreneur of the week” profile: 

Art and Soul of Aiken isn’t exactly what you would call a “traditional” gallery. It is a place where local Aiken area artists can display their work in a free spirited and supportive space. Stacy O’Sullivan and Kim Rising established this co-op style business three years ago in a hidden store front on Richland Avenue. Two years ago, the business moved into the Alley. Since then, the two have had nothing but success. (4)

Their success must not have impressed her new landlords. O’Sullivan has described a visit from Massey and investment partner Todd Gaul, during which they revealed conceptual plans for their building, stating “We know this will take permits and such, but The City loves projects like this and it will not be a problem.”

O’Sullivan also describes an effort by Massey and Gaul to “illegally evict” them from their four-year old business home, and their intent to triple the rent, all while paying lip service to serious maintenance issues such as flooding in the recently renovated alley following heavy rains 

 Happy Days End 

While Massey and Gaul might not have anticipated a problem with the city, they should have anticipated one with Weldon Wyatt, especially considering his abrupt and unexplained withdrawal in January, 2020 from a purchase contract with Aiken County for the “old hospital” property at 828 Richland Ave E. 

Between April 19th and May 14th, two things happened. First, the preliminary cost estimates were completed on schedule. The estimates include a total budget of $118,372,104 and ninety eight cents; and total costs for “demolition and abatement” of the “Hotel Aiken, 108 Laurens Street, Holley House Motel, and Retail/Office Richland, Newberry, and The Alley” of $712,248. (5) 

Second, the man described by the AMDC a month previously as an “experienced and well-capitalized” private developer bailed on yet another major development on Mayor Rick Osbon’s wish list. Similar to the unexplained cancellation of the “old hospital” deal, the reason for the Project Pascalis exit remains a mystery. 

Instead of reassessing the project, AMDC officials scrambled to salvage the effort to demolish and reconstruct a major portion of historic downtown Aiken. As previously reported in A Project Pascalis Timeline, on May 14th “The Chamber of Commerce takes ‘assignment’ of the Shah property contracts, while the AMDC seeks funding to purchase them on behalf of the city. This all occurs behind closed doors.” (. ) Not until June 2 would the Chamber also arrange for “assignment” of the Newberry Hall property. 

The absence of a contract continuation with Newberry Hall’s owners did not deter the AMDC from immediately seeking a new developer for both the Shah and Newberry properties. On May 19th the AMDC sent its private solicitations for Requests for Proposals to continue the project—minus the Aiken Alley Holdings property and the Aiken Antique Mall.

There is no known formal agreement between the AMDC and Aiken Alley Holdings, but some form of unwritten agreement must have remained. Six days after the Chamber of Commerce took one for the team by taking assignment of the Newberry Hall property, Aiken Alley Holdings, LLC closed on the purchase of longtime State Farm agent Joseph Harrison’s 121 Newberry Street for $675,000, adding to the holdings in the original Pascalis footprint. 

Just over three months later, Massey was present at a “public meeting” at Victor’s Restaurant in Florence, SC hosted by the Raines Company. Two months later he was the agent for the newly formed RPM Development Partners, LLC; a consortium of Massey and other local, unnamed investors, the developers Rainesco and Lat Purser. In early December, 2021 RPM was named the Pascalis developer, pending a master agreement, although the legal advertisement for RFPs was not submitted until mid December. 


Next up: Project Pascalis Includes The Alley (A Four-Part Series): Part 3: The City, Wyatt, Ray and His Group, and Creative Ways.

For Reference

(1) The AMDC placed “Option 2A” on its “transparency page, but not Option 2; probably because a FOIA or other official request only asked for information pertaining to the AMDC’s private RFP solicitation in May 2021. This is known in some circles as willful nondisclosure. 


(2) https://aikenmdc.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Pascalis-summary.pdf

In the solicitation, the AMDC offers to privatize a part of Newberry Street. The entire solicitation remains secret to this day, withheld under a FOIA exemption by the City of Aiken, despite fact that FOIA clearly states the city “may” release the documents. The AMDC does not deny the solicitation is only for demolition, not renovation of Hotel Aiken and surrounding properties. 

(3) https://aikenmdc.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/Pre-development-cost-sharing-GAC-LLC-pascalis.pdf 

(Released by the AMDC in response to an unidentified FOIA request or other official request)

(4) https://aikenblend.com/2019/04/10/entrepreneur-of-the-week-stacy-osullivan-kim-rising/

(5) Draft Preliminary Order of Magnitude Cost Estimate Analysis. Project Pascalis. Obtained via the SC Freedom of Information Act from the City of Aiken, July 2, 2022. 

Project Pascalis Includes the Alley (A Three Part Series): Part One

The Wyatt-Boudreaux Agreement

Recently obtained documents confirm the evolution of the $75-100 million downtown demolition and reconstruction effort known as Project Pascalis. While one of the earliest project descriptions indicated a greater presence on Laurens Street, every conceptual design from the early days includes substantial development in The Alley, and an absence of options for renovating historic buildings such as the Hotel Aiken. 

Today, The Alley is in the midst of the project area, yet city officials have denied or downplayed any plans that may impact the popular gathering area and its businesses, just as officials withheld conceptual designs from 2021—just four years removed from the multi-million dollar renovation that disrupted local businesses for more than a year. 

For example, at the Aiken Municipal Development Commission’s (AMDC) April 20, 2022 public “design review” meeting, the following submitted question was read aloud by the meeting’s Zoom moderator: 

How much more will the Project Pascalis footprint grow? In 2020 downtown redevelopment only included properties fronting Richland and the new municipal building. The most recent online map includes Newberry. Now with the addition of the (old) Municipal building the project (area) has grown threefold and an (private) ownership island occupies the middle. Are there any plans for this existing private property?

The answer from AMDC executive director and meeting moderator Tim O’Briant was: “there are none.” (1) 

One of the earliest Project Pascalis documents is the Wyatt-Boudreaux Group letter of  agreement, recently obtained from the City of Aiken via a Freedom of Information Act request. 

On March 12, 2021 Boudreaux Group of Columbia President Heather Mitchell signed an agreement to complete  “Downtown Development Project Conceptual Design Services” on behalf of Wyatt Development (GAC, LLC) (2) for an unnamed project involving a 100 room hotel, 125 unit apartment complex, conference center with a 450 seat capacity, upscale retail space, and a parking garage large enough to complement the development. 

The Wyatt-Boudreaux agreement was finalized ten days after Weldon’s WTC Investments, LLC had signed a contract to purchase three downtown properties—collectively referred to later as the “Shah Property”—for $7.5 million. (3) WTC’s involvement came only one year after it backed out of a similar project at the “old hospital” and Aiken County office complex at 828 Richland Ave E. (4) Its “agent” in both the downtown Aiken deal and the failed old hospital venture was Aiken Attorney Ray Massey, whose law partner Gary Smith has served as Aiken City Attorney for more than twenty years. 

The Wyatt-Boudreaux agreement described the project as encompassing everything from The Antique Mall on Laurens to the Hotel Aiken, wrapping east around Richland Avenue to Newberry Street, south to The Alley, and north up Bee Lane. The description clearly includes buildings in The Alley as well as the eastern portion of the Aiken Municipal Building on The Alley’s south side. 

Aiken Antique Malll
Aiken Antique Mall, Candidate for Demolition in March 2021

Three days after the agreement was signed by Boudreaux and sent to Wyatt for his signature and Tim O’Briant for his records, Ray Massey’s “Aiken Alley Holdings, LLC” moved forward on procuring a key portion of The Alley for the project.  On March 15th his investment firm—registered with the SC Secretary of State only a month prior—closed on a $2.025 million deal for 200 The Alley and 214 The Alley, parcels housing TakoSushi, Aiken Taproom, and several other businesses.  The deal also included a parking area behind 214 The Alley on Bee Lane. 

Three days after the closing, the AMDC publicly announced Project Pascalis. Few details were announced beyond the news of a commission resolution allowing AMDC Chair Keith Wood and O’Briant to pursue an agreement with an “experienced and well-capitalized” private developer the commission had “recruited and identified.” 

In a subsequent interview, Tim O’Briant told the Aiken Standard  “transparency is key” and promised additional pubic information within a few months. The Boudreaux/Wyatt agreement specified a timeline of April 12, 2021 for a presentation to City Council and “invited stakeholders.” The terms “public meeting” and “public hearing” are absent from the agreement. 

That schedule was never met. No public meetings or presentations to council were held in April, 2021.  However, the AMDC did meet behind closed doors in Executive Session on April 13th; a habit the commission would undertake during more than sixty percent of its meetings in the next six months. (5) 


Coming Soon: Project Pascalis Includes The Alley (A Four-Part Series) Part Two: Option 2.

References

(1) April 20, 2021 AMDC “Design Workshop,” 5:30 meeting to 7:00 pm meeting that extended into a scheduled City Council work session. Listen to question/answer at 2:56:07 in the video below.

(2) Weldon Wyatt signed the agreement on March 23. The words “Wyatt Development Company” are crossed out below the letterhead and on the signature page, and  “GAC, LLC” is handwritten in their place.  This typo may have foreshadowed Wyatt’s early exit from the project; as well as the general lack of attention to detail that has plagued the project. The last version of Wyatt Development, LLC was actually dissolved in April, 2013. 

(3) From: “Resolution Authorizing Acceptance of Assignments

Adopted November 9, 2021” Aiken Municipal Development Commission: 

“In anticipation of the Commission’s efforts to consolidate ownership of real property in connection with Project Pascalis, the Greater Aiken County Chamber of Commerce (the “Chamber of Commerce”) has entered into the following purchase and sale agreeme for the acquisition of such real property: (i) a Purchase and Sale Agreement by and between Myrtle H. Anderson, seller, and WTC Investments, LLC, as purchaser, dated April 15, 2021 (the “Anderson Agreement”), for the purchase ofreal property identified as TMS# 121-21-08-004(the “Anderson Property”) for the purchase price of $2,000,000; and (ii) a Purchase and Sale Agreement by and among Historic Hospitality, LLC, S&N Hospitality, LLC, Shah Enterprises, LLC, and Paresh Shah, LLC, collectively as sellers, and WTC Investments, LLC, as purchaser, dated March 2, 2021 (the “Shah Agreement” and together with the Anderson Agreement, the “Agreements”), for the purchase of real property identified as TMS# 121-21-09-002121-21-08- 001121-21-08-002121-21-08-003121-21-08-009, and 121-21-09-001 (the “Shah Property” and collectively with the Anderson Property, the “Properties”), for the purchase price of $7,500,000. (5) Pursuant to a bond ordinance of City Council enacted August 23, 2021, the City issued its $9,600,000 General Obligation Bond, Taxable Series 2021.” 

(4) https://aikenchronicles.com/2022/06/21/project-pascalis-and-the-wyatt-factor/

(5) https://aikenchronicles.com/2022/07/01/project-pascalis-transparency-index/