Category Archives: Project Pascalis 2022

City Government, July 2022, Project Pascalis 2022

The Cleaners: How Aiken City Council Got Taken to the Cleaners by the Wyatt Family

3 Comments

by Don Moniak
Originally published July 21, 2022
Updated April 13, and April 15, 2023

(Update 4/13/23: Mayor Rick Osbon did recuse himself from the proceedings of the sale of the City of Aiken’s Laurens Street Building. Not known at the time was that this recusal was recommended by the State Ethics Commission in response to a request for an information opinion from City Attorney Gary Smith. In the response, found here, the Ethics Commission wrote:

“Here, it is the opinion of Commission staff that the Council Member has an economic interest in the sale of the property because the value of his property would increase by more than fifty (50) dollars if the property is sold….Accordingly, it is staff’s opinion that the Council Member should recuse himself from voting on the sale of the property.”

Summary

In early 2020 the City of Aiken sold property located at 135 Laurens Street SW and 130 Pendleton Street SW to WTC Laurens, LLC,(agent: Thomas Goforth) for $1.3 million. WTC Laurens, LLC is a firm owned by local investor and developer Weldon Wyatt and managed by his son, Attorney Tom Wyatt. In April of 2020, WTC Laurens, LLC sold half of the property for $1.3 million to SRP Credit Union; and in May 2021 sold the remaining parcel to R and O LLC (Agent Rick Osbon) for $500,000. 

This is the story of how the transaction proceeded, all but one city council member defied good advice from knowledgeable citizens, and Weldon Wyatt managed to turn a half million dollar profit at the city’s expense in just over a year’s time. 

The Finance Building

In December, 2011 the City of Aiken purchased the former First Citizens Bank and Trust property for $735,000. The 0.63 acre property was composed of two parcels, the two story building at 135 Laurens Street and a parking lot with a drive through outbuilding at 130 Pendleton ST, SW.  (see inset) 

The City then spent just over $900,000 on renovations and improvements to the building, which had sat vacant for six years. By the time finance and administration offices were moved into the building in January, 2013, the total investment was more than $1.6 million. Other departments remained at the old municipal building at 214 Park Ave, West. 

In 2017 the city embarked on the controversial “Downtown Renaissance” effort. A proposal to consolidate city offices into one location was in the works, although the specifics were not yet planned. According to a question and answer on the Renaissance, “The hope is to recoup much of the investment in 135 Laurens as possible through its sale to the private sector and to proceed with the original plan voters were briefed on prior to the 2010 vote.” The appraised value of the Finance Building at that time was $1.04 million. (1) 

The Wyatt Offer

Although the “Downtown Renaissance” failed to proceed, the city moved forward with plans to consolidate, and continued to receive offers for the 135 Laurens St. complex. First a plan to expand the municipal building at 214 Park Avenue emerged, but was dismissed due to costs and lack of feasibility.  That was followed by a final plan to purchase and renovate the former Henderson Hotel (most recently a Regions Bank Building) and consolidate into a new City Hall. (2)

In mid October, 2019 WTC Laurens, LLC, a Wyatt family firm, approached the City of Aiken with a $1.2 million offer on the property. At the time the Wyatt family’s WTC Investments, LLC (agent Ray Massey) was seeking final rezoning approval from city council to allow the demolition of the historic Aiken hospital at 828 Richland Ave, E; and convert the surrounding nine acre property to a complex of apartments, 100-room hotel, conference center, and parking garage. This plan was deemed by Tom Wyatt as a “home run for the city.” (3)

This was not the Wyatt’s first offer to buy 135 Laurens St property, and undisclosed offers from other parties had also been made. To prepare for a probable sale, the city had procured J. Marshall Vann of Vann Appraisal Services, Inc. of Augusta, GA in 2019 to conduct a new appraisal of the property. Vann had nearly forty years of real estate experience and been licensed by the State of South Carolina since 1993.  He submitted his appraisal of the property on September 23, 2019, delivering a bottom line “fee simple ‘as is’” $1.3 million appraisal of the property. (4) 

Photos courtesy of Terry Cooper
The building and parking lot in the parcel at 135 Laurens St SW and 130 Pendleton St SW

Vann described the building as “well maintained” and in good condition. His comparison to other sales included the Wells Fargo Building at 111 Laurens Street, which had sold for $750,000 in 2018 to another Wyatt family firm, WTC of Aiken, LLC (agent: Ray Massey). The Wells Fargo property was also divided into two properties and also occupied two-thirds of an acre. That property sold at a considerably lower per square foot value than six other area properties analyzed. 

Discussion and Advice: The First Hearing

Note: Text in bold print below is sourced from meeting minutes.

City Council held its first hearing on the proposed sale at its November 25, 2019 public meeting. City Attorney Gary Smith announced Mayor Rick Osbon was recusing himself from participating in any discussions or votes, because: 

“Mayor Osbon’s family operates the business which is located adjacent to the building that is being considered for sale. He is recusing himself to avoid the appearance of any impropriety that may be involved in the transaction since he owns property adjacent to 135 Laurens Street SW,” 

According to meeting agenda and minutes (5), the key issues included the possible future value of the property, selling below both the appraisal value and investment costs, the lack of additonal bids, and the possibility of paying rent if plans to move into a new, consolidated City Hall were delayed by more than two years. In regard to the prospect of paying future rent, the City Manager’s supporting memorandum read: 

“Until that time or any time earlier when the City is ready to relocate to the Chesterfield Street building, the City will continue to own the building. Should the City not be ready to move into the new building rent would need to be paid beginning February 1, 2022 to WTC Laurens, LLC.” 

During the meeting, Dr. Rocky Napier of Aiken asked about the city’s investment to date. City Manager Stuart Mr. Bedenbaugh responded that, between the 2011 purchase and subsequent improvements, the City “has $1,655,678 in the building,” and admitted the city “has put more money in the building than the appraised value.” 

Dr. Napier raised concerns about the lack of specificity in the rental agreement,  recommended the city not rely upon a single bid:

“Dr. Napier stated he would suggest since the Aiken City Council is stressed for funding to meet current obligations,that it put this property out for bid and see what the market will bear rather than taking at least a $100,000 loss on the front end of this agreement without getting any detailed due diligence as it relates to a transaction of this magnitude.” 

Councilperson Kay Brohl, who was newly installed, spoke in favor of the sale after asking a series of questions about the Chesterfield Street building: 

“Councilwoman Brohl stated she felt the proposal to sell the Laurens Street property is good because she feels the City owns too much real estate. She did not feel it is a healthy thing for a city to be in the real estate business, because the property is not on the tax rolls and not bringing in tax revenue for the city. She felt it is better not to have a huge inventory of real estate. She said she just wanted to be sure that we are doing the best for Aiken.” 

Councilman Ed Girardeau also advocated for the sale on the basis of future uncertainty, stating he had “been a real estate appraiser for 35 years” and “was certified to review the appraisal.” However, he offered no insights on the appraisal other than “he did study” it; and proceeded to state: 

“He said in his opinion we have already agreed we are going to buy another building and renovate it. He said theoffer to purchase the Laurens Street building is sort of a ‘bird in hand as to two in the bush.’ The risk we take is if we don’t agree to the sale of the Laurens Street building now, and we go forward who knows what will happen in two years. It may be worth more, or it may be worth less. It may not even be marketable.” 

Councilman Ed Woltz provided the lone council dissent. He raised numerous issues associated with the prospect of future rent, accepting a sole bid, the uncertainties surrounding the proposed consolidation, and the lack of specifics in the purchase contract: 

“He felt we are doing this too quickly. He pointed out that we are not paying rent now, so talking about not being charged rent is a ridiculous comment…. We would be entering into an agreement to sell something and then hope everything else works out well. We don’t know what our rent will be if we get stuck there.” 

The “Two Year Plan:” Weldon Wyatt Makes His Case

The issue was important enough to discuss at a work session before holding the required second hearing and final vote. Council met for a work session prior to its December 9, 2019 meeting.  Mayor Osbon recused himself from the discussions again. 

Attending the work session was Weldon Wyatt. who described a two year plan for his proposed investment. According to the minutes (6)  the “only comment he had” was an assertion of a two year plan for the property: 

“They are looking at something two years out, and they do not know what will happen in two years, but they are willing to take that risk…He said he would not be looking at buying it if he didn’t think they could use it, but they do not know what they would use it for right now. He noted that he had bought the Wells Fargo property for$750,000, and does not have a use for it at this time. He said when looking at something two years out, it is difficult to figure out what you will do with it. He said he could not do anything with it for two years.” 

He further made his case by stating “They have been around Aiken a long time; Council knows what he does and what he has done,” that “it is hard to imagine what the building will be worth in two years. It could be more or less. He said what he was agreeing to pay is something they are putting their faith in Aiken that it will be worth the $1.2 million two years from now.” 

A few councilmembers sounded very deferential to Mr. Wyatt, with Mayor Pro Tem Lessie Price stating “Mr. Wyatt has been very considerate,” and that “Council appreciates the patience of WTC Laurens, LLC.” Council person Kay Brohl stated that “she knows WTC does good work,” while claiming “Council has not had a good track record with property.” 

No record of any challenge or questions regarding Mr. Wyatt’s offer were recorded. 

The City Sells Its Finance Building 

On Sunday, January 12, 2020, The Wyatt family abruptly, and without a stated reason, exited its contract with Aiken County to purchase the old hospital, and the Wyatt’s “home run” proposal to reinvigorate the West entrance to the historic district ended. 

The next day Aiken City Council proceeded with its second hearing to sell 135 Laurens Street to a family that had the day before cancelled a major project that had consumed hundreds of hours of county and city time. The meeting minutes provide no indication of knowledge or concern for this development. 

The January 13th meeting was dominated by an annexation and apartment complex proposal on Owens Street off Daugherty Road. Another hearing with high interest involved the million dollar subsidy to the Steeplechase Foundation to purchase a new property. By the time the Finance Building reading arrived, only two citizens rose to speak. 

The sale price was now at $1.3 million, matching the appraisal value. The same key issues raised during the first hearing lingered into this second reading. Mayor Osbon again recused himself from the discussion and vote. 

Dr. Rocky Napier reappeared and repeated his numerous concerns and questions. The answer to his first question, was WTC Laurens, LLC registered with the state of South Carolina, was a sure sign that City Council was underprepared to handle all the sale issues. The answer from City Attorney Gary Smith was uninspiring: 

“Mr. Gary Smith, City Attorney, stated he could not answer that question at this time. Before any transaction is made with him,the closing attorney would confirm their existence before closing takes place.” 

(Update, 4/15/22: WTC Laurens, LLC incorporation date is shown as March 9, 2020 on the SC Secretary of State’s website, so it was not yet registered with the State of SC. The closing attorney for the sale was Mary O. Guynn, Mr. Smith’s law partner).

Napier went on for another eight minutes with questions and concerns, most of which the city could not fully answer. Among the issues was the presence of a concept plan for future use of the property. WTC’s representative stated there was no concept plan yet, this was “just a year end investment opportunity.” 

Adding to Dr. Napier’s concerns was Dr. Taylor Garnett, a long time downtown landlord and investor. According to the meeting minutes, he touched on every key issue: 

“Mr. Garnett said he did not feel that it was done in a very business-like manner. It should have been presented to the public and advertised for sale. He said he did not like taking the first buyer coming down the pipe. He said he did not think there was a solid plan for the Chesterfield Street building….there should not be a big rush to sell the Laurens Street building and worry about rent, late payment clauses, upkeep and maintenance, etc. It needs to be presented to the public. There could be a buyer out there who would pay more than$1.3 million for it. He said he understands the city has between$1.7 and $1.8 million in the Laurens Street building. If we take $1.2 million, we leave $500,000 on the table. He said he felt we need to back up. It needs to be done in a business-like manner.” (7)

Once again, Ed Woltz offered the only objections from Council, stating he “was opposed to the sale because it is a bad time and not in the best interest of the City.”

Councilperson Brohl admitted to a lesson learned, “that everything we do should go out for bids,” and then offered a motion to approve and voted with the 5-1 majority to approve the sale. 

According to county records the sale to the Wyatts was finalized on March 26, 2020. Five days later Weldon Wyatt’s “two year plan” for the property ended.  (Updated 4/15/23 to change “less than one month later to “Five days later” and March 9, 2020 to March 26, 2020)

Acccording to Aiken County records, on April 1st, 2020, WTC Laurens, LLC sold 135 Laurens St., SW to SRP Credit Union for $1.3 million, but retained the parking lot at 130 Pendleton St, SW.  (Update 4/15/23: The closing attorney for the sale was City Attorney Law Partner Mary Guynn).

The unexpected sale to SRP Credit Union also cost the city at least $15,000 in moving costs when the finance department and city manager’s office temporarily relocated back to 214 Park Avenue, West in June of 2020. SRP Credit Union opened its new branch on November 20, 2020. 

Dr. Napier’s and Dr. Garnett’s assessment that a higher value for the property was likely and imminent proved to be accurate. WTC Laurens, LLC would, in essence, realize a profit of  $500,000 on the 130 Pendleton Street parking lot adjacent to Osbon Dry Cleaners.

Just over a year later WTC Laurens, LLC sold the 130 Pendleton St parking lot property. 

On May 27, 2021 R and O, LLC (agent/owner: Rick Osbon) purchased for $500,000 the 0.37 acre property adjacent to Osbon Dry Cleaners. The closing signature is Weldon Wyatt, who had departed from another major development earlier that month, the nascent Project Pascalis, after signing contracts to purchase more than two acres of downtown property for $9.5 million. 

(Update 4/15/23: Earlier in the month, on March 3, 2021, Mayor Rick Osbon had met with Weldon Wyatt and a hotel developer on another matter: the future of the Project Pascalis properties for which Mr. Wyatt had two contracts to purchase involving $135,000 in earnest money held in an escrow account by the law firm of Smith, Massey, Brodie, Guynn, and Mayes. The meeting was documented in a May 4, 2021 memo by Aiken Economic Development Director Tim O’Briant (excerpt below)

Conclusion

This story provides another example of Aiken city government officials making major financial decisions, involving large sums of taxpayer money, without a competitive bidding system. City Council disregarded the advice of knowledgable citizens looking out for the common good by insisting the city adhere to accepted and proven policies and procedures. 

Yet, a year later the city embarked down an even more expensive road called Project Pascalis, even teaming up with the same developer who had burned them on the old hospital redevelopment and took them to the cleaners on the Finance Building. 

_____________________

(1) https://www.cityofaikensc.gov/aiken-revitalization-project/

(2) Between land and improvements, the City of Aiken eventually spent $11.1 million on the Chesterfield St property; officially purchasing it from the Aiken Public Facilities Corporation on December 12, 2021. The move was completed in June of 2022. 

https://qpublic.schneidercorp.com/Application.aspx?AppID=844&LayerID=15264&PageTypeID=4&PageID=6879&KeyValue=121-21-05-002

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

(4) “AN APPRAISAL REPORT of a Municipal Building Located at135 Laurens Street SW & 130 Pendleton Street SW Aiken County
Aiken, South Carolina 29801.” September 13, 2021. 

J.Marshall Vann, MAI, SRA
Vann Appraisal Services, Inc. 

(5) November 25, 2019 Meeting Agenda: Pages 62-67

https://edoc.cityofaikensc.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=479198&dbid=0&repo=City-of-Aiken-LF

November 25, 2019 Meeting Minutes. 

https://edoc.cityofaikensc.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=481204&dbid=0&repo=City-of-Aiken-LF

(6) December 9, 2019 Work Session Minutes: 

https://edoc.cityofaikensc.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=483154&dbid=0&repo=City-of-Aiken-LF

(7) City Council meeting minutes for 1/13/20 

https://edoc.cityofaikensc.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=487473&dbid=0&repo=City-of-Aiken-LF

Inset: 

The Finance Building 

135 Laurens Street SW

County ID 105-28-030-012

0.26 Acres

Two story, 8,149 square foot building with 4, 197 square feet of “partially finished basement area” 

https://qpublic.schneidercorp.com/Application.aspx?AppID=844&LayerID=15264&PageTypeID=4&PageID=6879&Q=1513268534&KeyValue=105-28-03-012

The Parking Lot 

130 Pendleton Street SW 

0.37 acres

County ID 105-28-030-013

25 space parking area with a drive through

https://qpublic.schneidercorp.com/Application.aspx?AppID=844&LayerID=15264&PageTypeID=4&PageID=6879&Q=1356400372&KeyValue=105-28-03-013

130 Pendleton Street SW 

0.37 acres

County ID 105- 28- 03- 013 

25 space parking area with a drive through

(1) https://qpublic.schneidercorp.com/Application.aspx?AppID=844&LayerID=15264&PageTypeID=4&PageID=6879&Q=1513268534&KeyValue=105-28-03-012

(2) https://qpublic.schneidercorp.com/Application.aspx?AppID=844&LayerID=15264&PageTypeID=4&PageID=6879&Q=1356400372&KeyValue=105-28-03-013

City Government, July 2022, Project Pascalis 2022

The Chairman’s Bias

4 Comments

Recently obtained emails between City of Aiken officials further reveal bias and irregularities in the legal process for the controversial Project Pascalis. The emails to and from City of Aiken Design Review Board Chairman McDonald Law were obtained via a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request (1), and are dated between March 1st and June 22, 2022. They indicate: 

  • a strong bias in favor of the entirety of the project, illustrated by a dismissal of dissenting viewpoints, and a disregard for public input. Most notably, Chairman Law wrote that local historic preservationist contractors Bill and Bernice McGhee “have unfortunately been activated to oppose the entire project based on misinformation about efforts to preserve the corner.”
  • back channel efforts to influence the project outside of the legal process. 
  • a tendency to steer the process towards approval instead of conducting fair and open meetings and hearings. 
Aiken’s Design Review Board

The City of Aiken’s Design Review Board (DRB or Board) reviews all applications for any architectural change and enforcing the zoning ordinances in the city’s historic districts. Essentially, it’s purview is to protect the historical integrity that makes historic district neighborhoods some of the most financially valuable in South Carolina and certainly in Aiken County. 

The Board’s deliberations are described as “quasi-judicial,” meaning it functions as an administrative court of law in which fair, full, and unbiased hearings are expected. Since the Board’s decision can only be appealed in the courts, it is arguably the most city’s powerful arbiter regarding proposed changes to the historic district; making its Chairperson one of the more powerful appointed positions in the city. 

This year the Design Review Board has reviewed a wide array of proposed property changes in the historic district, including the following modifications to private homes: 

  • construction of a stone driveway, 
  • removal of two chimneys, 
  • window and garage door replacement
  • a front porch enclosure
  • construction of a pool guest house
  • replacement of a roof and windows

 This category of seemingly minor requests dominates the Board’s proceedings, but larger projects are also heard.  The two most notable this year were scheduled on March 1st and July 5th. 

The final item on the Board’s March 1, 2022 agenda was “hearing for demolition of 235 Richland Avenue and 106 Laurens Street.” These are the vacant Hotel Aiken, long a subject of dispute, and the adjacent building, also of 1920 origin, to its south housing a trio of active businesses: Beyond Bijou, Vampire Penguin, and Ginger Bee.  

The buildings were acquired by the Aiken Municipal Development Commission (AMDC) on November 9, 2021, following a complex and tangled web of transactions spanning eight months. (2) The AMDC is a redevelopment agency established by Aiken City Council in 2019. 

Beyond Bijoux, Vampire Penguin, Ginger Bee
106-108-110 Laurens St SW / Beyond Bijous-Vampire Penguin-Ginger Bee (Photo courtesy of Donald Moniak)

The March 1, 2022 hearing proceeded as planned, and the first demolition approval was made by a 6-1 vote, further inflaming an already contentious debate about the largest redevelopment project in downtown Aiken since the 1953 gas explosion. The DRB’s approval  of that demolition request was an essential first step in the City of Aiken’s downtown demolish and redevelop endeavor called Project Pascalis, an effort involving more than three acres of a city block of seven and a half acres. 

The Pascalis project will displace eight small businesses (3) and place Newberry Hall, the only business hosting and catering to large downtown meetings and conferences,  on hiatus during the three plus years of construction.  Large outdoor events will need to be relocated from the popular Newberry Street festival area that is also threatened with  demolition. 

A second hearing for demolition of the remaining four buildings owned by the AMDC, as well as a former State Farm Insurance office owned by Aiken Alley Holdings, LLC, was scheduled for July 5, 2022. The hearing was cancelled after the city’s chosen developer withdrew the application on June 30th. (4) Instead of a demolition hearing, a lawsuit seeking an injunction to halt the project was filed on July 5th, and prominently features the DRB among the many allegations of legal misconduct. (5)

Warneke Cleaners (Photo courtesy of Debbie Traves Brown)

The four buildings owned by the AMDC and subject to the cancelled demolition request are the Holley House motel (currently vacant), Newberry Hall (6), Warneke Cleaners, and the building known as the old CC Johnson Drug Store.

The former CC Johnson Drug Store
The corner business in the McGhee Block of buildings has housed a number of businesses over the past 100+ years, including the old CC Johnson Drug Store, (1920-1940), Cloud 7 Gift Shop (1960s-70s), and, most recently, Playoffs Sports Bar. (Photo courtesy of Michael Aiken)

The latter was built in 1920 by McGhee and McGhee general contractors to house the historic CC Johnson Drug Store. This business was an important Aiken feature in at least one edition of “The Negro Motorist Green Book.”  More recently the building housed Pat’s Restaurant and lastly the Playoffs Bar. 

Marginalizing A Popular Viewpoint

After the building was threatened with demolition during a previous downtown redevelopment proposal in 2017, Bill and Bernice McGhee expressed a desire to maintain the building.(7) Bill McGhee’s grandfather William McGhee, along with A.G. McGhee, owned and operated McGhee and McGhee, which also constructed the first Aiken Hospital in 1917, (no longer in existence), and notable Aiken landmarks including the Fermata Club and the iconic serpentine wall at Hopelands and Whiskey.

Newspaper clipping of 1918 advertisement for McGhee & McGhee Contractors and Builders of Aiken, SC

With a business motto of “restoring Aiken, one brick at a time,” the McGhee family remains prominently and deeply involved with historic preservation projects. The AMDC itself has proudly described them as partners in the commission’s Williamsburg Street redevelopment efforts. If you see an old house being moved on an Aiken street, it is likely to involve the McGhee family businesses. 

In January 2020 Bill McGhee received The Aiken Award “for his restoration work of old residences on the city’s Northside.” After that honor, Bill and Beatrice McGhee also received the second lifetime achievement award ever bestowed by the Historic Aiken Foundation. 

These efforts also made the McGhees regulars before the Design Review Board. For example, in January 2021 the Board unanimously approved their application to relocate and restore two historic homes to 222 Williamsburg, St, SE. One of the homes, at 147 Newberry Street, NW, had been previously approved for demolition, but the owner agreed to donate the structure to the McGhees. 

The McGhees advocacy for preserving the CC Johnson Drug Store was not well received by Chairman Law. In a March 20, 2022 email exchange, Mr. Law wrote to Aiken Economic Development Director Tim O’Briant: 

If the parking structure is rotated 90 degrees, the Richland Ave building frontage can remain its current length. Another advantage, and not a small one, is that the side of the McGhee and McGhee building can also be preserved. The McGhees have unfortunately been activated to oppose the entire project based on misinformation about efforts to preserve the corner.

This marginalization of the family’s concerns continued into April. On April 4th Mr. McGhee wrote to City Manager  Stuart Bedenbaugh: 

Sir

We have been in contact with Brent Leggs’ office of the National Trust African American Cultural Heritage Action Fund about the Dr. C. C. Johnson Drugstore/McGhee Building. We have provided Ms. Tiffany Tolbert, Associate Director, with information about the proposed demolition and the historic significance of the property to the City of Aiken. Ms. Tolbert has offered to examine options other than demolition and guidance from NTHP. When may we arrange a conference call with Ms. Tolbert, your office and members of the Concerned Citizens group?

Mr Bedenbaugh responded: 

Bill,

The property is owned by the Aiken Municipal Development Corporation, which is governed by its own board. You will need to work through Tim O’Briant [cc’d above] to schedule a meeting with their officials.

Mr. O’Briant then asked Mr. McGhee: 

Can your group and the Trust folks be available for the April 12 Commission meeting at 3:30 pm? Let me know and I can set it up.

A presentation slot was set up for the April 12th meeting. Normally presentations from outside parties are placed at or near the top of city council, board, and commission agendas.  For example, at its November 9, 2021 meeting the AMDC placed presentations by consultants Joseph Minicozzi of Urban3 and Chris Brewer of AECOM at the top of the agenda and before commission business. 

On April 12, the “presentation regarding CC Johnson Drug Store Recognition and Proposed Facade Preservation—Bill McGhee” was sixth on the agenda. An “Economic Development Master Plan Implementation Update” by $4,000-a-month consulting program manager Tom Hallman was at the top of the agenda. It was Mr. Hallman’s second update on the same master plan in six months. 

The AMDC’s meeting minutes for that day are long on detail for Mr. Hallman’s presentation and devoid of detail for Mr. McGhee’s presentation. Six pages of minutes are devoted to Mr. Hallman’s update and associated commissioner questions and comments. It was at this meeting that the issue of the Hitchcock Woods arose, with Chair Keith Wood asking: 

Mr. Wood noted that the Commission had talked about working with Hitchcock Woods to make the Woods more open for public use and for marketing. It is a huge resource for the city. He asked if anything had developed there yet, and if the Commission should revisit that.

The Hitchcock Woods are a large privately owned and managed “urban forest” mostly outside the physical jurisdiction of the AMDC, and entirely outside its legal jurisdiction. 

In contrast a short paragraph was devoted to the McGhee’s presentation regarding the CC Johnson Drug Store. 

The minutes merely read: 

Mr. Wood stated the next item is a presentation from Mr. Bill McGhee regarding recognition of  the CC Johnson Drug Store property on the corner of Newberry Street and Richland Avenue  which is a part of the Pascalis Project. 

Mr. McGhee stated he had been talking with the National Trust for historic preservation called Saving Places . He said he planned to have someone from that group to talk to MDC today , but he had not been able to make those arrangements. He is still working with them to see what they can do to help us save as much as we can of the Johnson Drug Store. He pointed out that presently the plan is to destroy the building and to leave a wall. He said he was looking to save the whole building.

If there were any comments or questions that day from Commissioners, they were not recorded in the minutes. McDonald Law was also at the meeting and received the email exchange leading to the presentation, but no other DRB members attended the event and it does not appear any other members were notified. According to the minutes, Mr. Law’s only comment that day, just a month after describing Mr. McGhee as “activated” by “misinformation” was: 

McDonald Law stated following up on the comment about DRB input on Pascalis , they had a work session and received a good many comments from the public and Commissioners. The developers responded very quickly to DRB’s comments at their last meeting.

On April 20th, Project Pascalis developers presented their latest renditions. A compromise was proposed to repurpose the existing storefront facade as the entrance to the proposed luxury apartments, with the idea to “tell the story of of the CC Johnson Drugstore and and that’s really the most important thing.” (8)

On May 3rd, the DRB held its monthly meeting. On the agenda was another demolition proposal, this time for the house at 147 Newberry St, NW which the McGhees had been methodically salvaging and preparing to move. The applicant this time was the Aiken Corporation, which had a contract to buy the property and two adjacent vacant lots. According to the application: 

The Board previously gave its consent to Bill McGhee to move the house to another location. Upon information and belief, Mr. McGhee was unable move the house due to the required removal and substantial trimming of a number of trees and abandoned all efforts to move it.(9) 

The Board voted unanimously to approve. Bill and Bernice McGhee were not present at the hearing. Two months later Bernice McGhee was listed as a plaintiff in the lawsuit to stop the Pascalis project; and McDonald Law was named as one of thirty defendants. 

________________

Next: Part 2: The Chairman’s Bias: A Demolition “Home Run,” evasion of the legal process, and the steering towards approval. 

References

(1) On June 23, 2022 I submitted a FOIA request asking for “All email and paper communication between Design Review Board Chair McDonald Law Economic Development Director Tim O’Briant, and/or AMDC Chair Keith Wood between March 1, 2022 and June 22, 2022.”  The intent of the request was to obtain information relating to Mr. Law’s advocacy for relocating the proposed conference center location to the recently vacated city hall building at 214 Park Avenue, West. 

The city responded on July 8th with 15 email exchanges and 16 attachments. 

(2) See “A Project Pascalis Timeline.” 

A Project Pascalis Timeline

(3) The businesses being forced to relocate or even close are Warneke Cleaners, Taj Restaurant, On Board Reality, Nationwide (already moved), Security Finance, Beyond Bijou, Vampire Penguin, and Ginger Bee. 

(4) https://aikenchronicles.com/2022/06/30/project-pascalis-demolition-applications-withdrawn-not-postponed/#jp-carousel-333

(5) The Historic Aiken Foundation is one of nine plaintiff’s in the lawsuit. A book-style presentation of the lawsuit, as well as a summary of project issues, is at: 

Project Pascalis

(6) For more information on how Newberry Hall became a part of the project, see: 

When No Info is Good Info: A City Not Listening, the Antique Mall, and Newberry Hall

(7) https://apnews.com/article/f5ba48e261d44842880a421a5264297c is an Aiken Standard article featuring the McGhee family. 

https://qpublic.schneidercorp.com/Application.aspx?AppID=844&LayerID=15264&PageTypeID=4&PageID=6879&Q=1422540524&KeyValue=121-21-08-003

(8) RPM Development Partner’s project manager Jay Hamm. See transcript at: 

https://pastebin.com/X7R9dkHb?fbclid=IwAR0PO4sICvolkCrEfVQdVkFCjl6Tv4sU2ArE5_VdR3qcPgOxazrmTHF18sg

(9) FOIA request for correspondence since January 1, 2022 between the AMDC and the Aiken Corporation was met with a $112 cost estimate for more than seven hours of search, retrieval, and review of records. The estimate has been appealed. 

Additional Information and Resources:

Design Review Board bylaws 

https://edoc.cityofaikensc.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=407760&dbid=0&repo=City-of-Aiken-LF

DRB Meeting Minutes: January 5, 2021 

https://edoc.cityofaikensc.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=551455&dbid=0&repo=City-of-Aiken-LF

DRB Meeting Minutes: March 1, 2022

https://edoc.cityofaikensc.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=2735903&dbid=0&repo=City-of-Aiken-LF

City Government, July 2022, Project Pascalis 2022

Citizens Release Project Pascalis Meeting Transcripts  

1 Comment

At the beginning of the April 20, 2022 public meeting on Project Pascalis, the City of Aiken’s Zoom moderator wrote: 

“TRANSCRIPTS WILL BE MADE AVAILABLE AT A LATER TIME.” 

Three months after these meetings, the city has still not issued transcripts, nor has it fully answered the questions posed during those meetings. A Freedom of Information Act request for transcripts, Zoom call notes, and a compilation of questions and answers yielded a fragmented YouTube transcript of the first meeting, a transcript of the second meeting devoid of public comment, and no question and answer compilation.(1) 

Today, Aiken resident and concerned citizen Tori McQuinn downloaded and posted the complete You Tube transcripts from both meetings in less than ten minutes. 

Ms. McQuinn’s posting of the first meeting is posted here: 

https://pastebin.com/HQyC8Zw9?fbclid=IwAR1AEG3y8J15wiGtErQ_HI3YRVxVXXo36oQfvIqHm3RDkz6I13izFffkq-M

The city’s version, never posted, but provided via FOIA, is posted here, and the difference in quality is readily ascertained: 

https://pastebin.com/HQyC8Zw9?fbclid=IwAR3ukSMKiW_rH25PF-UN-pedjX5e4me3NxOX4Wu2YkMlz02DHvMRUKPYItE

The City’s version of the second session, minus the public comment period, and obtained only via FOIA is posted here: 

https://pastebin.com/X7R9dkHb?fbclid=IwAR0PO4sICvolkCrEfVQdVkFCjl6Tv4sU2ArE5_VdR3qcPgOxazrmTHF18sg

The full YouTube transcript of the second meeting, with public comment, was downloaded and posted by Ms. McQuinn here: 

https://pastebin.com/v2ciEFng?fbclid=IwAR3CmDsWN1MRCWuCbdUh2Qx49GBFrmPvOpXZG-bRAIPW9sk_iGg5qpsC2s8

She also posted the transcript for the recent July 11 Aiken City Council meeting: 

https://pastebin.com/QwSRw94R?fbclid=IwAR2xd_nRfuNDY4JJK3sQG_8dWGbOzhxR26uoY-gWxWjrROjqP0V3jD2T0HM

The YouTube translations are of low quality and could never be used as a deposition. They illustrate how difficult it is for real court reporters to capture the essence of testimony. But in this case they are better than the promised alternative of nothing, while still serving as a repository of oral history for present and future interpretations of events. 

__________________

(1) See “When No Info is Good Info: A City Not Listening, the Aiken Antique Mall, and Newberry Hall” 

) https://aikenchronicles.com/2022/07/16/when-no-info-is-good-info-a-city-not-listening-the-antique-mall-and-newberry-hall/

On April 20, Chamber of Commerce President failed to identify himself as an AMDC Commissioner.
The first public comment on Project Pascalis. Note weaker quality of the city’s transcript.
In the Demolition Zone, July 2022, Project Pascalis 2022

When No Info is Good Info: A City Not Listening, the Antique Mall, and Newberry Hall

3 Comments

A sunny Saturday afternoon in downtown Aiken, July 2022 (Photo courtesy of Michael Aiken)

Three recent Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to the City of Aiken regarding the ongoing downtown demolition and redevelopment endeavor known as Project Pascalis yielded either no documents or incomplete documentation. But the paucity of documentation functions, in these cases, as good information shining more bad light on the vagaries of Project Pascalis.

The following information is good to know: 

  1. The City of Aiken has not compiled an account of questions and answers from its Project Pascalis public meetings of April 20th, 2022, and one of its meeting transcripts (which it has yet to release) omits all public comment. (1)
  2. An offer was made to purchase the Aiken Antique Mall in March, 2021 as part of a larger land consolidation effort during the earliest stage of project development (2). The Aiken City Attorney’s law firm billed Weldon Wyatt’s investment and development firm WTC, Investments, LLC for the effort. 
  3. There is no contract yet between the City of Aiken and Newberry Hall’s operators for the management and operation of the proposed city-owned conference center. (3)
The City’s Listening Skills Are Not on Display 

The City of Aiken’s website includes a five year old page titled “City of Aiken Revitalization Project.” This was the “Downtown Renaissance” project that included some elements found in the Project Pascalis proposal, but was more dispersed and did not involve demolishing a substantial portion of downtown Aiken. On that page, the City declared:

Downtown revitalization takes initiative, courage, and vision to look at what makes for a vibrant, walkable, livable center that fosters community vibrancy while creating economic opportunity. Aiken is no different. Our history of downtown revitalization is strong and the City stands ready to face the next chapter of downtown development. (4)

Although the “Downtown Renaissance” plan became mired in controversy and faded into recent history, the city did document citizen concerns in great detail. The revitalization project website features twenty pages of “Questions submitted from the public,” and links to other documents containing more than one hundred pages of comments and questions. 

In contrast, the City of Aiken has no similar record of public input for Project Pascalis. The two transcripts from the April 20, 2022 public meetings, when the city promised to have transcripts the next day, are poor and incomplete records of that event:

a. The morning meeting “You Tube” transcript is painfully difficult to read and does not identify speakers; and
b. The evening meeting transcript ends when public comment begins. 

Until now,  no transcript has ever been released to the public. 

When asked for a copy of a question and answer document similar to the one found for the “Downtown Renassaince,” the city came up empty. No efforts to document citizen questions and comments has occurred. Listening is not on the city’s agenda for Project Pascalis. 

The Antique Mall Was Targeted as Part of the Original Project Pascalis
Aiken Antique Mall, July 2022 (Photo courtesy of Michael Aiken)

The ownership of the Aiken Antique Mall has not changed hands, and there is no proposal to demolish it. But it was part of the aggressive effort to consolidate downtown property ownership to facilitate a major demolition and redevelopment project.

This consolidation effort is encouraged by the city’s “master economic development plan” completed by AECOM corporation in 2021, which cites “fragmented property ownership” as one of the “challenges for large-scale redevelopment.” This “fragmented property ownership” issue was cited by City Council in August, 2021 as a key justification to issue $10 million in bonds for the AMDC to purchase Parkway District properties. 

Aiken Antique Mall, July 2022

An offer (or offers) was made on the Aiken Antique Mall, and Weldon Wyatt’s investment and development firms had enough confidence the property would be obtained to include it in the first concept plans completed in April, 2021 by The Boudreaux Group. (5) 

In response to a FOIA request for the Antique Mall purchase and sale offer, the City of Aiken declared there is no responsive document. In response to a follow-up question, Aiken Economic Development Director and designated FOIA officer Tim O’Briant wrote:

WTC/GAC made an offer on the referenced property in the same timeframe that the firm(s) secured contracts on the other adjacent parcels. These discussions and agreements were in place prior to them approaching the City/AMDC about a public-private partnership and before the parties entered a cost-sharing agreement.

Since the contract on properties collectively referred to as “the Shah property” was secured on March 2, 2021 and the cost-sharing agreement was finalized on March 23, 2021, an offer on the Antique Mall was made during that period. It was then included in the planning process. Whether the developers had the consent of the owner to include their property in any plans is unknown at this point. 

What is known is that the Aiken City Attorney’s law firm billed WTC Investments, LLC for $6,800 to “prepare contracts and negotiate contracts for purchase of hotel, purchase of Mrs. Anderson’s property and purchase of Antique Mall.” (6) 

Another unknown is the status of the land consolidation effort that attempted to encompass the Antique Mall. The City of Aiken’s official economic growth strategy discourages “fragmented property ownership patterns.”

Aiken Antique Malll
Aiken Antique Mall, July 2022 (Photo courtesy of Michael Aiken)
Aiken Antique Mall detail, (Photo courtesy of Donald Moniak)

The Aiken Antique Mall property with its facade of flaking paint could be portrayed as crumbling and blighted by another slick public relations campaign targeting more properties for demolition and redevelopment. What is to stop it? 

Newberry Hall: No Contract, Yet. 

Newberry Hall is a private business catering to conferences, meetings, and weddings. It is a common venue for groups hosting political leaders. The influential Aiken Republican Club holds its monthly breakfasts there, which in June 2022 featured U.S. Congressman Joe Wilson. 

Newberry Hall’s website includes numerous favorable reviews, such as this one from City of Aiken public information officer Chris Ceasar: 

Newberry Hall is one of the premiere catering facilities in Aiken County. Whatever your dining pleasure, they can and will accommodate. The staff is very professional. The cuisine is most delectable. The facility is gorgeous. Try Newberry Hall. You will be pleasantly surprised!

Newberry Hall accurately describes its property located at 117 Newberry Street, SW as follows: 

Newberry Hall is on a tree-lined and beautifully landscaped city street in the heart of downtown Aiken. Walk through the front doors of Newberry Hall and enter the perfect environment for your social or corporate event.

Newberry Hall, July 2022. (Photo courtesy of Michael Aiken)

In March 2021 the development team led by Weldon Wyatt and Ray Massey sought to demolish this fixture of downtown Aiken life and the surrounding landscaping and replace it with a larger conference center connected to a new hotel. Eventually they signed a contract  with the owner, Myrtle Anderson, to purchase the property for $2 million. 

This negotiation was no cakewalk. Newberry Hall collectively negotiated favorable terms for the owner/operators of the Newberry Hall business, Patrick and Natalie Carlisle, and an “Agreement for Regarding Lease and Option” was added to the purchase and sale agreement and signed by Ms. Anderson and Weldon Wyatt. This agreement, first finalized on April 15, 2021, was retained by the Aiken Municipal Development Commission after the contracts were transferred to it via the Aiken Chamber of Commerce, which took “assignment” of the property from WTC Investments, LLC on June 3, 2021. 

The lease and option agreement included options for Newberry Hall to purchase the new building, operate the new city owned conference center, and be compensated for lost income during the construction period. The agreement states: 

C. 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.

In its response to the FOIA request for the contract to operate the future conference center, the The City of Aiken “determined that no contract as described has been considered for approval by Aiken City Council or the AMDC and to date no such instrument has been executed by the parties referenced.” 

The city did not provide any more information, yet, no followup questions have been posed. The fact that “no such instrument has been executed” implies that such an instrument is still under negotiation, and would arguably be exempt from disclosure by SC FOIA law due to being a contract under negotiation and not a final product. 

Newberry Hall, July 2022. (Photo courtesy of Debbie Traves Brown)

If Project Pascalis survives legal challenges and citizen outcry, downtown Aiken will endure a minimum of three years of major demolition followed by construction. By comparison, reconstruction of The Alley took sixteen months and the Hotel Aiken has been vacant for four years. The Wedding parties, meetings, conferences, breakfasts, and other events routinely held at Newberry Hall will be held elsewhere. How much of a loss to downtown businesses will this inflict? 

Commentary

Prying information from any government body that selectively spoon feeds the people its version of the truth can bring to mind former Secretary of State Donald Rumsfeld’s famous musing about information, a series of concepts so complex that even he tripped over them during later interviews. 

.

“There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don’t know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don’t know we don’t know.” 

— Donald Rumsfeld

The secrecy and intrigue surrounding the $100 million downtown Aiken demolition and redevelopment endeavor known as Project Pascalis pales in comparison to the world of international nuclear insecurity that Rumsfeld was in part referring to that day. But the concept of information confusion is relevant to any process plagued by secrecy. 

The details of Project Pascalis were kept secret for eight full months in 2021, and the AMDC met in closed door executive session more than fifty percent of the time since the project was announced in March, 2021, primarily to discuss the project. (8) 

My wife describes ‘transparency’ as “something you can see through,” while ‘openness’ means “listening to and talking about what people see on the other side.” The City of Aiken likes to talk about being transparent, but continues to disregard the more important character trait of openness during this process. 

________________________

(1) A FOIA request was filed on July 6th for “1. A transcript of both April 20, 2022 public “design workshop” meetings held at 214 Park Avenue W. The meetings were also was held on Zoom, and during the 530-700 pm meeting, and during this Zoom call participants were asked if they wanted a transcript of the meeting. 2. All comments and questions submitted to the Zoom moderator. 3. Any compilation of questions and answers by City of Aiken and/or AMDC staff from the April 20, 2022 meetings. If they exist, these documents should be readily available with minimal search time.”

The City responded the same day with three documents: 

a. A You Tube transcript for the morning session lacking identification of speakers and disrupted with time notifications. 
b. An orderly transcript of the afternoon/evening session that omits all public comments. 
c. Screen shots of the Zoom comments. 

No compilation of questions and answers from the meetings were provided, and none exist. 

(2) A FOIA request was filed on July 11th for a “copy of the purchase (agreement) of the Antique mall referenced in the attached invoice. Since this was a part of the public-private cost sharing agreement between the AMDC and GAC, LLC, this should be available from the City of Aiken.” 

The city replied there was no “responsive record,” meaning the record may exist but they do not possess it. The city did confirm “discussions” to purchase the property:

“The City replied determined the invoiced charge was related to  initial discussions with the owners of the referenced parcels by GAC, LCC. No agreement was struck, the property was never placed under contract with nor purchased by GAC, LLC, the City of Aiken nor the AMDC. Therefore, there is no responsive record.” (1) 

In a subsequent answer to a followup question, the city replied: 

“WTC/GAC made an offer on the referenced property in the same timeframe that the firm(s) secured contracts on the other adjacent parcels. These discussions and agreements were in place prior to them approaching the City/AMDC about a public-private partnership and before the parties entered a cost-sharing agreement. Therefore, no documents related to the earlier unsuccessful offer on the referenced property were ever shared with either the City or the AMDC. If such a record were available within the City’s possession and control, I’d be happy to provide it. There simply isn’t one.” 

(3) A FOIA request was filed on July 8, 2022 requesting: 

“A copy of The contract between the City of Aike or AMDC and the owners and operators of Newberry Hall for Rental and operation of the proposed City of Aiken conference center.” 

The city responded: 

“The City of Aiken has determined that no contract as described has been considered for approval by Aiken City Council or the AMDC and to date no such instrument has been executed by the parties referenced.” 

(4) https://www.cityofaikensc.gov/aiken-revitalization-project/

(5) Details of the first Project Pascalis conceptual plans are at: 

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

(6) Invoice obtained through Freedom of Information Act. 

(7) The purchase and sale agreement and lease agreement between WTC Investments and Newberry Hall’s owner is available at: 

Click to access Anderson-Contract.pdf

The document was first released to Kelly Cornelius via a FOIA request prior to the AMDC posting it to its “transparency” page. 

The final PSA and lease agreement involving the AMDC is at: 

Click to access 2021-11-09A-Municipal-Development-Commission-Agenda-Packet-Updated.pdf

The lease agreement begins on page 39. 

(8) Three previous reports and letters regarding openness can be found at The Aiken Chronicles: 

A June 21, 2022 letter to the Design Review Board 

Correspondence To/From the City of Aiken Design and Review Board (DRB)

A May 27, 2022 report “Did the AMDC Violate Open Meetings Laws?” 

Did the AMDC Violate Open Meetings Laws?

A report “Project Pascalis Transparency Index,” updated July 1, 2022: 

Project Pascalis Transparency Index
Alley Series, July 2022, Project Pascalis 2022

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

1 Comment
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. 

Ground Floor
Project Pascalis Option for The Alley, April 2021
2nd Floor
Project Pascalis Option for The Alley, April 2021
Floors 3 thru 4 and 5
Project Pascalis option for The Alley, April 2021. Images obtained via FOIA

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. 

Click to access Pascalis-summary.pdf