The “Aiken Community Improvement Project” and the June 2022, collapse of Project Pascalis.

by Don Moniak

February 17, 2023

Recently obtained records (1) pertaining to The Aiken Municipal Development Commission’s (AMDC) Project Pascalis reveal the following: 

• Confirmation of past statements made by former AMDC Chair Keith Wood and Vice-Chair Chris Verenes regarding an effort in late June 2022, to restart Project Pascalis in a lawful manner.
• A tentative plan existed in late June 2022, to rebrand the endeavor the “Aiken Community Improvement Project,” and to lawfully rework the basis for the entire effort—including a new Redevelopment Plan with a proper public hearing, and a new Request for Proposals. Although the scheme was never implemented, its existence validates numerous instances of wrongdoing documented in the July 5, 2022, Blake et al vs City of Aiken et al lawsuit that, along with an ongoing citizen petition drive, kept the project derailed.
• AMDC Executive Director Tim O’Briant knowingly provided false information to local media in regard to the withdrawal of the Project Pascalis developer’s application to demolish six properties in downtown Aiken. O’Briant falsely claimed the demolition request hearing was “postponed” due to the holiday weekend and COVID-19 concerns.
• Aiken Mayor Rick Osbon, Aiken City Council, and City Manager Stuart Bedenbaugh were all briefed on project complications and the tentative plan to restart the project, but have chosen to hide the facts of the matter from Aiken citizens and taxpayers.
  
  The information obtained represents only a sliver of the record of what transpired the last week of June 2022. For example, the motive for the restart and the proposed amendments to the redevelopment plan remain undisclosed.

The Contentions of Keith Wood and Chris Verenes.

On September 29, 2022, the Aiken Municipal Development Commission (AMDC) voted to cancel its highly controversial $100 million plus downtown demolition and redevelopment project known as Project Pascalis—-after spending more than $10.5 million from the Aiken city treasury on the effort. 

Following the official meeting, AMDC Chairman Keith Wood and Vice Chair Chris Verenes read and issued personal written statements (2) alleging that unnamed city staff had manipulated the procurement process. The two appointed officials maintained that the legally required public advertisement for a Request for Proposals was withheld by staff until after a Purchase and Sale Agreement (PSA) was signed with the newly formed development consortium RPM Development Partners, LLC.

Chairman Wood wrote, in part, that

• “The AMDC was first informed of the detailed requirements of the Community Development Act by the staff and the AMDC attorney in a meeting on June 23, 2022.” 
• “AMDC was also informed on June 23, 2022, that staff delayed the publication of a Request for Proposal (RFP) without disclosing the action to the Commission. “
• “On June 23, 2022, both staff and the AMDC attorney recommended that the AMDC start the process over due to staff’s failure to advise the AMDC to strictly follow the required process of the Community Development Act.” 
  

Vice-Chair Verenes wrote, in part:

“A deliberate decision was made——WITHOUT OUR KNOWLEDGE OR APPROVAL…to delay running an ad for proposals until after we signed an agreement with a developer.” 

In his December 9, 2022, resignation letter, Vice-Chair Verenes further confirmed Project Pascalis was stopped after the June 23, 2022 meeting, writing, in part, that: 

“The focus should be on why this project was suddenly stopped as relayed to us in the AMDC meeting of June 23, 2022. Fifteen people attended that meeting to include city staff, consultants and commissioners. As relayed to us in that meeting, actions were taken that I cannot condone, approve or excuse.” 

No additional information was provided to support these contentions. According to their December 9, 2022, resignation letters (2) that reference a November 21, 2022, email to City Council, Wood and Verenes allege they continuously sought to meet with Aiken City Council to explain details of the project’s collapse, only to be rebuffed by all but two council members—Lessie Price and Ed Woltz.

Keith Wood wrote in his resignation letter: 

“Aiken City Council (who created the AMDC) refuses to hear from me (except for Mayor Pro Tem Ed Woltz and Councilwoman Lessie Price) and Chris Verenes…relative to the indefensible actions taken that resulted in the termination of Project Pascalis.” 

The June 23 to June 29, 2022, Project Pascalis Collapse.

The June 23 “Special Called” AMDC meeting, held entirely behind closed doors in Executive Session, is a matter of public record. The meeting notice was posted to the city’s public notice calendar, along with the meeting agenda, the morning of June 22, 2022; two days after publication of Project Pascalis is Arguably Proceeding in Violation of South Carolina Community Development Laws. 

In the two days leading up the meeting, AMDC attorneys from the Pope-Flynn law firm researched South Carolina Community Development law, worked on an “omnibus ordinance and revisions to the redevelopment plan, and held a conference call for “the next steps for AMDC,” eventually billing the commission $6925 for 20 hours of work.

The special-called June 23rd meeting was attended in person by Aiken City Manager Stuart Bedenbaugh, Aiken Corporation CEO and ex-officio member Buzz Rich, AMDC Project Manager Sabina Craig, AMDC Program Manager Tom Hallman, and all but one AMDC commissioner.  AMDC contract attorney Gary Pope and AMDC Executive Director Tim O’Briant attended via a ZOOM conference call connection. No information on the discussions of the nearly two-hour long meeting were publicly revealed.

According to the Pope-Flynn billing invoice, attorney Gary Pope, Jr. worked 5.7 hours the next day on “work on redevelopment plan and necessary items to pivot project.”

Three days later, on June 27, 2022, Aiken City Council met for one hour in closed-door Executive Session to discuss Project Pascalis developments.  Council opted to not provide a summary, or share any details, of the discussion after exiting executive session.  However, a recently obtained June 29, 2022, email exchange between Tim O’Briant and Keith Wood indicates that City Council was briefed on the rapidly eroding situation, but chose to remain mum.

On the morning of June 29, 2022, Tim O’Briant sent an email to Stuart Bedenbaugh and Gary Pope, Jr, blind copied to all AMDC commissioners.  The email contained a draft media release announcing “plans to update a preliminary 2020 Redevelopment Plan,” also known as Redevelopment Plan One, and issue a new Request for Proposals. The draft media release went on to say, in part: 

• “The best way to dispel any and all questions regarding the process is to begin it anew.” 
• RPM Development Partners, LLC had “been notified that talks related to a Project Pascalis have been terminated and that a new proposal opportunity will be forthcoming.” 
• The renaming of Project Pascalis to the “Aiken Community Improvement Project” 
  
  A draft Public Notice for the amended Redevelopment plan and public hearing was also made available, with a footnote stating:

 *  “ Notice assumes a 7/19 AMDC meeting and public hearing for the redevelopment plan

 *   Given that assumption, we need to publish on 7/4 (statute requires 15 days notice).

 *   To publish on 7/4, need to get the notice to The Aiken Standard by 10am tomorrow morning.”

According to the emails (4), release of the information was embargoed by Keith Wood until a formal vote by the commission could be held, and contractual and legal matters were resolved. Tim O’Briant argued the news should be released to clarify the impending announcement of the cancellation of a scheduled Pascalis properties demolition hearing before the city’s Design Review Board (DRB), and to provide an update in time for a planned Aiken Standard community forum on ZOOM.

The following debate occurred the morning of June 29, 2022—six days after Keith Wood and Chris Verenes later reported they were first informed of irregularities in the procurement process caused by alleged staff malfeasance.

Tim O’Briant: “Please review the attached draft media release detailing the process to amend the downtown redevelopment plan and to resolicit the project. Note the renaming of the project from Project Pascal to Aiken Community Improvement Project. 

“This needs to go out this afternoon so please share any thoughts or concerns quickly.” (9:51 a.m.)

Keith Wood; “Tim, I do not approve of this. The AMDC has not taken a formal vote, and until we do I do not agree with issuance of a press release. I ask that you stand down with issuing any such press release.” (10:11 a.m.) 

Tim O’Briant: Keith, That is entirely up to you and among the reasons this is being circulated as a draft. That said, please be aware of the following facts on the ground: 

– Some 48 signs posted all around the properties every 20 feet that announce a demolition request hearing before the DRB on Tuesday, July 5 are being altered as we speak to show the requests have been withdrawn. An announcement will go out later today that the meeting for Tuesday has been cancelled. That will beg questions and broad commentary. 

– Unrelated to anything we have or have not announced, the Aiken Standard has scheduled a “Beyond the Headlines” community zoom discussion at noon tomorrow to discuss Project Pascalis and it would be preferable to announce new direction prior to that event.

– In order to meet the schedule we discussed last week, the first legal ad notice must run in the paper no later than July 3 and July 10 to comply with Redevelopment Law provisions. 

– Following our discussion with a quorum of the full AMDC membership and Monday’s update to City Council in executive session, direction to staff was clear, at least to me and those in my obit (sic), as to how we should proceed. If you prefer a formal vote prior to any announcement that will put us well behind the pace of actual events.” 

Let me know your thoughts or whether you would feel more comfortable with a release from the City of Aiken. Doing nothing is the poorest option, but obviously that’s the commission’s call.” 
(10:44 a.m.)

Keith Wood: “My position has not changed and many of my concerns are outlined in my earlier email. I am very adamant that the AMDC not be a part of any news release or public notice on this issue at this time. We have numerous contractual and legal issues to be addressed and I do not want to make matters worse by issuing a press release.”  (11:01 a.m.)

Aiken City Solicitor and FOIA officer Laura Jordan cited the “attorney-client privilege” FOIA exemption when denying release of the “earlier email.” However, the final email from Keith Wood was labeled as attorney-client privilege, suggesting either selective use of FOIA exemptions or another staff oversight.

The Demolition Request Withdrawal.

Also on June 29, 2022, the City of Aiken publicly announced the cancellation of the scheduled Design Review Board Demolition Request hearing for five of the Pascalis properties and one private property within the demolition zone. On the same day he privately acknowledged the demolition request was withdrawn, Tim O’Briant falsely informed both the Aiken Standard and WJBF-News that the meeting had been “postponed” due to the Fourth of July holiday and COVID concerns.  

Aiken Standard reporter Matt Christian wrote that day: 

“Aiken Economic Development Director Tim O’Briant said Wednesday morning that the meeting had been postponed and would not take place as scheduled.

O’Briant said later Wednesday that the meeting was postponed because it was scheduled to take place the day after Independence Day and the city wanted to make sure that all interested people could attend the meeting. He added that the city was also working through some COVID-19 concerns as well.”

O’Briant was later interviewed by WJBF reporter Shawn Cabbagestalk, where he disputed the “withdrawn” label, and repeated the falsehood the hearing was merely postponed to an undetermined date. O’Briant also repeated the transparent lies that COVID-19 and the holiday weekend contributed to the “postponement:”

“O’Briant says the change is due to the July 4th weekend and COVID concerns.”

On June 30, 2022, the day of the WJBF interview, DRB counsel Jim Holly confirmed that the applications were withdrawn, by writing there were no pending applications before the DRB on the downtown project. In spite of this contradiction, Tim O’Briant continued to equivocate by saying the Demolition Hearing was postponed—instead of honestly replying that it was cancelled because the AMDC and its developer had withdrawn the request and further information was unavailable due to legal and contractual issues.

Eight Months Later: No Answers, No Accountability. 

Nearly eight months after the second rendition of Project Pascals imploded, Aiken City Council continues to refuse to divulge any details of the project failure. Evidence is lacking of any internal investigation into the repeated allegations made by former AMDC Chair Keith Wood and Vice-Chair Chris Verenes into what Wood’s deemed “the failure of the largest downtown redevelopment effort in our city’s history.”

On Monday, February 13, 2023, Aiken City Council voted 5-2 to assume the role and responsibilities of the AMDC. The two dissenting votes came from Council members Ed Woltz and Lessie Price. The remaining Council members continue to refuse to meet with the former commission leadership.

Council members continue to assert that the July 5, 2022, lawsuit, which effectively derailed any effort to restart and rebrand Project Pascalis, is hampering their discussions with citizens. While the advice of their attorneys are unknown, the lawsuit has not prevented Council from requesting an independent investigation into the economic development failure that left city taxpayers with a $9.6 million debt from the October 2021 general obligation bond issuance used to fund the purchase of Pascalis project properties.

For example, there was no reported followup to a report in the Aiken Standard that the Pascalis RFP was contracted with the paper for November 2021, but “its publication was stopped at the behest of O’Briant, who called the Aiken Standard to get the request for proposal canceled.”

On January 3, 2023, City Manager Stuart Bedenbaugh, acting as an ex-officio member of the depleted commission, re-instated Tim O’Briant as a signer for the commission’s checking account (5). O’Briant’s title AMDC Executive Director had been quietly removed from the commission’s website sometime in October 2022, not long after Keith Wood and Chris Verenes alleged that unnamed staff had contributed to the project’s failure by acting outside their authority and deceiving the commission.

Less than a month after Wood and Verenes resigned, Economic Development Director O’Briant’s AMDC responsibilities were restored. The North Augusta resident remains one of thirteen city employees with an annual salary exceeding $100,000. With city officials failing to heed Chris Verenes’ call that “the public deserves no less than the truth,” that salary and position appears secure as the city attempts to rebrand its next round of redevelopment for the seven downtown Project Pascalis properties.


Footnotes

(1) A Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request was on January 31, 2023 for “1. A copy of the June 29, 2022 letter sent from AMDC Chair Keith Wood to “appropriate city staff officials,” as reported in his public statement of September 29, 2022, which can be found at this link: https://aikenchronicles.com/2022/10/12/the-project-pascalis-rfp/ The appropriate city staff officials are estimated to include, but not limited to, City Manager Stuart Bedenbaugh. 2. A copy of any memorandum or notes prepared by Stuart Bedenbaugh, Tim O’Briant, Assistant City Managers Mary Tilton or Mary Lawton, or City Clerk Sara Ridout, regarding the discussion of the cited June 23, 2022 meeting referenced in Mr. Wood’s written public statement.”

The June 29, 2022 letter was denied by City Solicitor Laura Jordan, who cited the “attorney-client privileged information” exemption in SC FOIA. The three documents released were the email exchange in Footnote #4, the draft news release of June 29, 2022, and the draft Public Notice (below) of a public hearing for an amended redevelopment plan.

(2) Statements of September 29, 2022:

Keith Wood statement, Page One; Page 2
Chris Verenes statement

(3) December 9, 2022, resignation letters and joint statement:

Keith Wood resignation letter
Chris Verenes resignation letter

November 21, 2022, email to Aiken City Council, referenced in the December 9, 2022, resignations.

(4) Email exchange of June 29, 2022, between Tim O’Briant and Keith Wood. The last email is labeled “attorney-client” privilege.

(5) January 3, 2023, change to AMDC check signatory list.

(6) The 2/21/23 email and attachment from Tim O’Briant to Donald Moniak, which was not cc’ed to any other city employee or official, are below (click on images to enlargen):

(7) No “errors” were corrected, for reasons outlined in my email response of , which was also cc’ed to City Manager Stuart Bedenbaugh, Mayor Osbon, and City Council. There has been no response to date from any city officials.

“Mr. O’Briant, 

Your letter this morning fails to correct any perceived errors, and raises questions about what the City of Aiken knew in regard to an alleged COVID-19 outbreak within “DRB operations” on June 28, 2022, and whether public health information was withheld from people with a right to know. 

1. In regard to your statement: “As you will see from the attached correspondence, the developer was not the applicant, the AMDC was as owner of the properties.” 

Both applications clearly identified RPM as the applicant. The AMDC was listed as the owner on one application (below), and Aiken Alley Holdings was listed as the owner on the other application. While there is an obvious error in your statement, where is the error in the article? What do you expect to see corrected? 

2. In regard to your statement: 

“As for the ‘COVID-19 concerns,’ two key figures in DRB operations had, that day, fallen ill with COVID. One ended up suffering a fairly serious case. In both cases, it was clear they would be likely be unable to attend the forthcoming meeting. HIPPA protections do not allow me to individually disclose the private health data of those affected.” 

a. This is news that has not been confirmed, and vague news at that. Why did the City of Aiken choose to withhold this information? 

While you are prohibited from sharing this information, those who were sick are not. There is no shame in admitting one has or had COVID, and the fact that there was a COVID outbreak was not shared in your 6/28 letter to Ms. Moultrie, nor with the public in statements to the media. “Covid Concerns” are not an admission that incidences of covid preclude an event. Didn’t you learn anything from this pandemic? 

There was also no mention of this in any of the emails to Keith Wood and the Commission.  One would think that such a serious matter would be shared with them.  Would you care to share all of the correspondence that week to confirm your assertions?  

b. There was a long (more than 2 hours) and very crowded DRB Workshop on June 21, 2023, held in Room 315, and people were also packed into another room to watch on video. Masks were handed out during the meeting, and Mr. Bedenbaugh and three other city employees can be seen in the video utilizing that option. According to DHEC, there were COVID concerns that day. Covid concerns have yet to end, but such concerns were not often being used at that time to cancel meetings. 

c. A clear alternative for the June 21st work session was to hold it in Council Chambers and provide much better spacing between attendees. Why did the City of Aiken and its Design Review Board move forward with this meeting format, especially knowing that a DRB Board member was reportedly sick with COVID at that time and missed that meeting? 

d. If two members were sick seven days after that meeting, it is very possible that the meeting was the source of the spread. Even if it was not, their presence in that room indicated a need to notify other attendees of the situation. Your news raises even more issues: 

i. Was DHEC notified of this event so it could conduct contact tracing?  

ii. Were citizens who happened to be in that room notified that people who attended the 6/21/23 workshop were infected with COVID-19?

iii. How many other people became ill because they attended this meeting in a crowded, confined, poorly ventilated space when the city of Aiken had a much better alternative? 

iv. What were the City of Aiken’s COVID-19 official prevention protocols on that day? 

3. In regard to your continued insistence that “postponed,” was the apt description of the action, the fact remains the applications were withdrawn. They were no longer in place, and your statements to the media failed to make that clear. 

As for the definition of postponement, there is no single definition. The accurate description of the July 5 demo hearing is that it was cancelled (not postponed) because the applications were withdrawn (retracted being a synonym of withdrawn).

 I made that case on June 30, 2022. 

4. Your letter today confirms the fact that the 4th of July holiday excuse was a false assertion. 

There is nothing to correct in this story. It was based on available information at the time. You have provided additional information that only raises further issues about the city’s actions from June 21 to June 29, 2022. These questions need to be answered. According to your letter today, the City of Aiken knowingly withheld vital public health information from citizens, and failed to alert those who attended the June 21, 2023 meeting that it might be the source of a COVID-19 outbreak. 

Donald Moniak “