Category Archives: Plutonium Settlement

City Government, May 2024, Plutonium Settlement, Project Pascalis 2024

$850,000 Loss Anticipated on First Sale of a Project Pascalis Property.

14 Comments

Three years after the City of Aiken, its Municipal Development Commission (AMDC) and the Aiken Chamber of Commerce collectively took control of the seven Project Pascalis properties, the first negative rate of return on that investment has been realized. An appraiser for the first Pascalis property to be sold, Newberry Hall, has described the AMDC and City’s 2021 purchase of the property as “above market value.”

In 2021, AMDC paid $2 million for the property, which came with a long-term lease with eight years remaining, a first right to purchase clause for the lessee, a stipulation to reduce any future sale price by the amount of the lessee’s building improvement investments, and an agreement to pay the lessee lost income during the Pascalis project demolition and reconstruction phase.

Since the Newberry Hall property was recently appraised for $1.5 million, and the lessee’s improvement investments total $0.35 million, the City of Aiken proposes to sell the property for $1.15 million. Thus, one year after ownership was transferred from the AMDC to the City, the property will be sold at a $0.85 million loss. The loss could be viewed as $1.075 million, since the property was encumbered by a lease at the time of the AMDC purchase and the “leased fee interest” market value is only $0.925 million.

As Aiken City Council moves forward with the sale of the property to the owners of the popular Newberry Hall events and catering business, questions regarding the future of the sale proceeds remain. The property was obtained with state funds from the plutonium settlement agreement that was allocated for redevelopment purposes, not the purchase and sale of commercial downtown properties. Will it be a misappropriation of state funds if City Council opts to place the sale proceeds into the General Fund for any purposes other than downtown and Northside redevelopment?

by Don Moniak
May 13, 2024

Project Pascalis was announced in mid-March of 2021 with some fanfare by the Aiken Municipal Development Commission (AMDC). Details of the project, including the project’s downtown location, were not publicly disclosed.

Two months later, that initial version of the project failed when the first developer, GAC, LLC (Agent Weldon Wyatt), backed out of the project, and sought to renege on two purchase and sale agreements (PSA). The first was for $7.5 million for six properties owned by the Shah family of Aiken, and the second was for $2.0 million for the Newberry Hall property owned by the Anderson family of Aiken. Those agreements were negotiated and prepared, in part, by Aiken attorney and investor Ray Massey on behalf of WTC Investment, LLC. Again, no public disclosure was forthcoming.

When GAC backed out of the project, the City of Aiken, AMDC, and Aiken Chamber of Commerce secretly intervened to take assignment of the properties that were under contract to GAC’s property investment arm, WTC Investments, LLC (Agent Ray Massey.) The assignments, made through the Chamber, were completed for the purpose of salvaging a portion of the first, more grandiose Pascalis project; one that orginally included four to five-story apartments on both sides of The Alley.

The first assignment to the Chamber, with the City and AMDC listed as possible future assignees, was the package of six Shah family properties; it was signed on May 24, 2021. The second assignment to the Chamber was the Newberry Hall property; it was signed on June 3, 2021. All the purchase prices matched the collective $9.5 million offered by WTC Investments; which in the process was reimbursed its $135,000 in earnest funds.

In August 2021, Aiken City Council approved the issuance of up to $10 million in general obligation bonds to fund AMDC property purchases within the broad “Parkway District.” The existence of the $9.5 million in Pascalis project purchase and sale agreement assignments, held by the Chamber on behalf of the AMDC and City, was not publicly disclosed as the only set of properties then under consideration for purchase.

Three months later, the Chamber of Commerce’s interest in the Pascalis properties was transferred to the AMDC, which then paid $9.5 million for the seven properties, and reimbursed the Chamber its $135,000 in earnest funds. Only then were details of Project Pascalis finally released.

One month later, on December 6, 2021, the AMDC signed a $5 million Purchase and Sale Agreement (PSA) for the seven properties with the new developer, RPM Development Partners. RPM agent and investor Ray Massey signed the PSA on behalf of the developer. While the existence of the contract was publicly announced, the proposed sale price and other details were not discovered until a year later.

The $2.0 million purchase of the Newberry Hall property came with a long-term lease held by Patrick and Natalie Carlisle, the owners of the Newberry Hall events and catering business. The lease, first signed in in 2007 by owner Myrtle Anderson and lessees David and Margaret Sacks, was for 20 years—one ten-year period followed by two five-year renewal periods.

The first Newberry Hall contract signed by WTC in April 2021 that was assigned to the Chamber in June 2021, and executed by the AMDC in November 2021, contained an addendum with two new lease provisions. First, the Newberry Hall business owners would be granted the first right to own, or operate, the new conference center planned for the Pascalis project on the Newberry Hall property. Second, the business would be eligible for payments for lost income during the demolition and reconstruction period. The amended lease agreement stated, in part, that:

“The development of the (Pascalis) Project contemplates that the improvements on the Property would be demolished and replaced with a larger conference center and kitchen, and that (the) Carlisles 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”).

If the Pascalis project failed and the AMDC and the City chose to sell the property, the lessee still retained the first right of purchase. That purchase price would be determined by an appraisal value minus the costs of investments made to the building during the term of the lease to date; in this case $350,000.

Between November 2021 and June 2022, lengthy and unproductive negotiations occurred between the AMDC and Newberry Hall for future ownership or operations of the planned Pascalis project conference center. The negotiations were further complicated in April 2022, when the City and the AMDC opted to try to repurpose the Park Avenue Aiken Municipal Building into the Pascalis Project conference center. In total, the AMDC spent just under $86,000 on its conference center effort; including $36,000 to reimburse Newberry Hall for its legal costs.

In June 2022 the Pascalis project faltered due to legal and contractual issues, and was paused pending a major reorganization and rebranding effort; again with no public disclosure. In addition, the second round of demolition application approvals were withdrawn. Shortly thereafter, a major lawsuit was filed to stop the project, effectively putting a halt to the reorganization effort. Two months later RPM withdrew from the $5 million PSA. Two weeks after that the AMDC cancelled the project.

Nine months later, in early May 2023, following months of tumultous and disorganized efforts, City Council dissolved the AMDC and ownership of the properties was transferred to the City. One month previously, City Council also approved spending $9.6 of its $25 million in plutonium settlement funds to pay off, in full, the Pascalis properties general obligation bond. The City’s request for funds included the misguided inclusion of Newberry Hall in the same category as the vacant Hotel Aiken—of having “fallen into disrepair.”

Following the transfer of properties from the AMDC, progress towards the sale of Newberry Hall and other Pascalis project properties such as the Hotel Aiken were deferred as the only remnant of Project Pascalis, the SRNL/“Mixed Use” project, remained under deliberation.

Now, following at least four months negotiations, the City of Aiken and Newberry Hall have reached an agreement based on an appraisal by the firm of Willis Real Estate Services—an “as is” market value of $1.5 million and an “as is” leased fee interest value of $925,000 (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Market values for Newberry Hall identified in the recent appraisal. To date, the City of Aiken has only provided 19 pages of the 131-page appraisal. Availabe information regarding the purchase begins on Page 63 of the May 13, 2024 City Council agenda packet; ,with the well-written, plain English Appraisal Introduction, property data, and recent history of the property beginning on Page 66.


The appraisal includes the statement:

“Based on comparable sales and the market conditions in 2021, the 2021 sale from Myrtle Anderson to the City of Aiken Municipal Development Commission for $2,000,000 appears to be above market and is not considered arm’s length. The City of Aiken Municipal Development Commission(City of Aiken”

Once the Newberry Sale property sale is finalized, the City of Aiken will realize a net loss of $0.85 million. If this appraisal had been made in 2021, when the AMDC purchased the property using city funds, then the City of Aiken will arguably realize a loss of $1.075 million.

Where will the revenues go?

On April 10, 2023, Aiken City Council approved spending $9.6 of the City’s $25 million Plutonium Settlement allocation to pay off the entire Pascalis general obligation bond debt. At that time, Council opted to not commit to the allocation of proceeds of future sales of the property.

Unlike previous sales of city property, the proposed Newberry Hall sale contains no reference to the future use of the $1.15 million of sale revenue. For example, in September 2021, City Council approved placing the $150,000 from the sale of the Mattie Hall property to the General Fund.

According to a February 21, 2024, letter from State Senator Tom Young (R-Aiken), the legislative intent behind the allocation of Plutonium Settlement funds expressly did not include the “reduction of local government debt obligations.” Yet, to date that has been the only purpose of the approved $9.6 million allocation by City Council from The City’s portion of the settlement funds.

If City Council opts to place Pascalis property sale proceeds into the General Fund, and not return it to its Plutonium Settlement funds account, the overall process would arguably constitute a misappropriation of state settlement funds. If Council opts to return the sale proceeds to its Plutonium Settlement fund account, then the legislative intent of the allocation would be preserved.

Additional Reading. from The Aiken Chronicles

The first 19 pages of Daniel Willis’ Newberry Hall appraisal can be found on Pages 66-85 of the May 13th City Council Agenda Packet. This section of the appraisal is written in plain English and contains property data, appraisal definitions, and an explanation for the conclusion. The remaining 112 pages have not been publicly disclosed.

The AMDC Purchase and Sale Agreements and Amended Newberry Hall Lease Agreements are available in the November 9, 2021, AMDC Meeting Agenda Packet.

Previously in the Aiken Chronicles.

How Much Project Pascalis Can the Taxpayer Stand provides a simple accounting of the known market values of the Pascalis properties in 2021 compared to the purchase prices. This was followed up by Project Pascalis Has Exposed Aiken City Officials as Lousy Real Estate Investors.

Project Pascalis Includes the Alley and Project Pascalis and The Wyatt Factor both offer detailed accounts of the first failed Pascalis project.

The Project Pascalis RFP offers a review of the chain of events leading up to the cancellation of the project.

The Pascalis Attorneys and The AECOM Plan both contain more detailed accounts of the City of Aiken’s and AMDC Pascalis project properties acquisition process and the first year of the project.

When No Info is Good Info… contains details of the Newberry Hall lease and amended lease.

Project Pascalis Conference Center Costs breaks down the $86,000 the AMDC spent on studies and appraisals in support of a Conference Center; which included $35,000 to pay the legal costs to the owners of Newberry Hall.

Project Pascalis and the Plutonium Settlement, Offsite-Infrastructure, and Failed Project Pascalis, A Mayor’s Legacy all include details about the Plutonium Settlement allocation process.

Why is the City Toying with 113 Jobs provides details of the effort to convert the former Municipal Building on Park Avenue to a conference center.

Rebranding Project Pascalis details how in late June 2022, the AMDC was in the process of cancelling the project and rebranding it as “The Aiken Community Improvement” project; the effort to redo the project was further curtailed by the July 2022 Pascalis lawsuit.

Keeping Up Appearances provides more details of the $9.6 million bond.



Letters, March 2023, Pascalis 2023 - SRNL Lab, Plutonium Settlement, Project Pascalis 2022, Savannah River Site

Pascalis or SRS Downtown: Following a Snake Through Brush

10 Comments

by Dr. Rose O Hayes
March 27, 2023

I am concerned about the proposed Savannah River Site (SRS) lab building, and additional parking facility, in downtown Aiken.

The U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) SRS operations already have a large presence downtown. The old Post Office building at Park and Laurens is occupied by the main DOE/SRS contractor (Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, or SRNS). Another main DOE/SRS contractor, a spin off from AECOM called Amentum, is located on the Newberry Street mall. These are huge international firms. Such companies do not shrink, they expand.

The U.S. government’s proposal to locate a “nuclear lab/training center/administrative building” and parking garage in the heart of our small downtown is emblematic of that growth pattern. With that addition, federal government contractors also become the largest inextricably related business complex in our small downtown. These facilities, their architecture, and the nature of their business are a poor match with the unique southern belle character and look so popular with and enjoyed by Aiken residents and thousands of visitors each year. The growing presence of federal-government-business buildings in the midst of our small privately owned businesses harkens a significant change in the future profile and activities along Laurens Street and its crossing avenues, Park and Richland.

In addition, adding to the downtown federal worker and federal contract worker population will increase street traffic and require enlarged roadways for ingress and egress, supplementary traffic signals, etc. Whiskey Road is almost at maximum capacity now and years of planning have not resolved the traffic flow problem there. It will get decidedly worse if an SRS lab/training/admin center is added to the mix. Expanded infrastructures will also be required such as water and sewage systems. These modifications will have to be paid for by the taxpayers who are already footing the bill for the failed Pascalis Project.

Questions also remain about the tax and private interest dollars that have already been sunk into the failed Pascalis project. In order to have a clear understanding of the city’s $9.6 million debt for that cancelled plan, and why it was necessary, an audit should be conducted by an outside firm. Trying to follow the twists and turns the Pascalis planning took is like trying to chase a snake through brush. An audit would be in keeping with the mayor’s commitment to transparency and helpful in future planning as “lessons learned”.

Aikenites should be more concerned about the fact that the old leaking tanks and cleanup work on the edge of town at SRS are still not cleaned up, under the auspice of the major contractors, SRNS and Amentum. SRS remains a Superfund site on the PSL list (government priorities list ). The sites on the PSL list are areas contaminated with substances hazardous to the public. In addition, because of all the nuclear waste waiting to be cleaned up at SRS, the South Carolina Department of Health and Environment Control (SCDHEC) designated it as the major health and environment hazard in the state. Unfortunately, the former federal focus and commitment to clean up SRS has waned in favor of new processing campaigns involving imported foreign and domestic radioactive materials that produce more nuclear waste that has no place to go. Aiken needs the government/SRS to continue decontaminating the Superfund site, not expanding nuclear interests in the heart of our city.

The recent plutonium settlement monies, millions of which will be those tax payer dollars associated with the proposed SRS downtown lab, are state funds and must go to state political bodies (cities, towns, universities, counties, school districts, etc.) and not to any contractors. Since that money was a settlement due to the U.S. government’s failure to remove plutonium and other radioactive materials from SRS on a committed schedule (decades overdue), it should be repurposed to the cleanup mission. The critical need to continue the cleanup mission is highlighted by the recently released SRS plan indicating requirements to remediate cesium 137 detected in the site’s ponds, canal systems, creek banks and fish. The creek, Lower Three Runs, leads into the Savannah River. In humans, cesium 137 can cause skin burns, tumors and death.

And lastly, why is it necessary “to grow” Aiken’s downtown? It’s current state, popularity, and place for the community to enjoy is a model for success when compared to other small cities. Bringing in corporate-sized businesses will only detract from the charm that increasingly attracts people who come to enjoy and participate in it. Corporate office buildings will inevitably overshadow that alluring charm. Big business growth should occur on the edges of the town where space and parking is not an issue.

Universities with significant internship programs provide students with hands-on training at facilities where they are being trained to work. That suggests that the most advantageous location for the new SRS lab would should be the SRS site.

It’s time for Aikenites to decide if and how they want our downtown to grow, and speak out. Someone once said, “Things are run by those who show up.” A lot of people are saying they don’t speak out or show up because the officials no longer listen. Well, if enough of us show up and/or speak out often enough, we will be heard. Will Rogers said, “You get the government you deserve.” And, there are always the voting polls.

Dr. Rose O. Hayes, former member of the SRS CAB and chair of the Nuclear Materials Committee

March 2023, Pascalis 2023 - SRNL Lab, Plutonium Settlement

FOIA’ed Again: A $65,000 Question

4 Comments

By Kelly Cornelius
March 27, 2023.

The City Of Aiken either cannot or will not provide an accounting for $65,000 out of $100,000 requested from plutonium settlement funds to pay its $9.5 million debt from the Pascalis project property purchases of 2021.

Over the course of the past year the City of Aiken’s responses to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests pertaining to the now failed Project Pascalis have mirrored those of officials responsible for Project Pascalis.

City officials  have redacted information that should be public, denied a wide range of requested information, and even claimed they lacked the information requested. Many of the requests they did fill, or partially fill, have been quite costly to obtain, or were made cost-prohibitive to pursue. 

The list of concerns is long and they are well documented in the Aiken Chronicle’s City of Aiken’s Information Games series, which exposes the secrecy surrounding this unpopular project, as well as the lengths city officials will go to maintain that secrecy. These efforts now include redacting even the very name Project Pascalis from legal invoices! 

Kudos to all who fought to save downtown Aiken and shed light on Project Pascalis, whose name is now so tainted that FOIA officials have taken to redacting it.

Today, we can add ‘complete omission’ to that list of growing concerns regarding the actions of the City’s FOIA office.

The recently published  Pu Funds Con Games revealed that the City of Aiken is seeking to pay off $100,000 of “bond issuance” money.  What could possibly cost 100K to issue a bond? 

I recently FOIA’d to see an invoice for a payment to the Pope-Flynn law firm that appeared in the city’s finance department files.  The payment turned out to be for the $9.6 million General Obligation Bond for the “Parkway district” which would later be known as Project Pascalis. This FOIA request was submitted December 9th, 2022.(1) 

The response to that FOIA revealed that Pope-Flynn was paid $32,500 to perform its bond issuance tasks (see below), which led to more questions:

1. If the bond counsel was paid $32,500 (they actually charged $35,700 according to their invoice but were paid $32,500), what constitutes the remainder of the $100,000 in the plutonium funds line item request?

2. Why was this information not revealed in an earlier request for Pope-Flynn invoices(2) which I submitted on May 10th of 2022?

This very important information regarding that General Obligation Bond should have been included in that May FOIA response, but it was not. I would not be provided this Pope-Flynn payment information until some seven months later, after another FOIA request.  Why and how could officials tasked with organizing city records omit something this important? I posed this question to City Manager Stuart Bedenbaugh in a March 20, 2023 email; and at the time of this publishing there is no response. Cue the Jeopardy jingle.

Here is an overview of what was going on May 10, 2022,  the day the first FOIA was submitted. It was the day after the second and final reading of Aiken City Council voting to give away Newberry St to RPM Development Partners, which was represented by the City Attorney’s law partner Ray Massey. The meeting was packed and several citizens, including myself, spoke on the record regarding this conflict of interest, and many more spoke against the idea of giving away part of Newberry Street. 

May 10th was also the day the first lawsuit was filed against the city by Drew Johnson for violations of state ethics law. So on May 10th the situation was heating up, and the City was getting a much deserved public black eye for their actions as the anti-Pascalis movement grew, strengthened, and organized.

I paid $48 (or 2.5 Old Fashioneds) for that original May 10th FOIA and was instructed by then City of Aiken Economic Development Director, AMDC Executive Director, and FOIA Officer for his own department, Tim Obriant, on how to pay it.  I didn’t know at the time the depth of Obriant’s involvement but this would start to be revealed with the August 13th release of The Pascalis Attorneys. The point is that Obriant filling FOIA requests regarding Project Pascalis is the fox watching the henhouse personified.

After reading the emails unearthed in The Pascalis Attorneys, which showed the secrecy and deceit regarding preferred developers and conflicts of interest identified — all of which Obriant was copied on or had initiated himself as then Executive Director of the AMDC — one can’t help but wonder if the omission of that bond payment for the Pascalis Properties in that May FOIA return had anything to do with the city official who was filling them.

I not only asked City Manager Bedenbaugh why this information was withheld the first time I FOIA’d it, but also about the $65,000 discrepancy in the line item for his Pu Funds request in that March 20th, email. If $65,000 is unaccounted for in a $100,000 line item, what else might be amiss in the line below it, listed as “Other Capital Outlay” for $50.4M not to mention the $9.6M In the line about for property the AMDC contracted with RPM to sell for half of that . 

This city council and their staff are clearly accustomed to operating unquestioned. Their missteps on following development laws, FOIA requests and even open meeting laws have been routinely exposed by citizens this year. As we witness the failed Project Pascalis morph into Labscalis — the Bomb Plant lab proposed on the same, ill-begotten Pascalis properties — many questions remain.

FOOTNOTES: 

(1) Request #326-2022I request the invoice from Pope Flynn for the EFT payment dated 12/08/2021 for the amount of $32,500. The description of the payment is listed as 85.18 and is found on page 4 of the records listed in this link to save you time and me old fashion money. https://edoc.cityofaikensc.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=2751269&dbid=0&repo=City- of-Aiken-LF Thank you

(2) Request #86-2022
I request a copy of services rendered by Attorney Gary Pope for the City Of Aiken (City Council itself) not the AMDC by way of invoices from Oct 2021 to Present 5/10/2022.

Piggy graphic courtesy of Martin Buckley

February 2023, Pascalis 2023 - SRNL Lab, Plutonium Settlement, South Carolina Government

Letter to the Joint Bond Review Committee

7 Comments

The following letter, signed by 39 South Carolina taxpayers and residents as of February 27, 2023, has been sent to the ten-person South Carolina Joint Bond Review Committee (JBRC), which is tasked to “study and monitor policies and procedures relating to the approval of permanent improvement projects and to the issuance of State general obligation and institutional bonds; to evaluate the effect of current and past policies on the bond credit rating of the State; and provide advisory assistance in the establishment of future capital management policies.”

Any state-funded capital project must be reviewed and approved by the committee. The committee last met on January 25, 2023, and is next scheduled to meet on March 23, 2023.

Dear Joint Bond Review Committee members,

On Monday night, February 27, 2023, Aiken City Council will vote on the second reading of an ordinance to “amend the 2022-2023 Budget to include Plutonium Settlement Funds.”

The proposed amendment involves $16.1 million of the $25 million allocated in Line Item 72(I) of the Savannah River Site Litigation appropriations in House Bill 290: “City of Aiken/Aiken County- Redevelopment and Economic Development in Downtown and Aiken’s Northside Toward I-20, $25,000,000.” According to the Executive Budget Office, the funds are intended for “revitalization and redevelopment for areas that have fallen into disrepair or are currently underutilized.” 

This line item is one of the few allocations in the final legislative appropriation of settlement funds that was not project specific. While the funding was approved by the State’s Joint Bond Review Committee, Part 72.1 of the legislation requires “Funds in this item may be released to fund an eligible project at the direction of the Executive Budget Office, upon the Executive Budget Office’s receipt of a written request from the receiving county.” According to Aiken County Council, the county has yet to receive this $25 million disbursement from the Executive Budget Office.

We undersigned citizen tax payers of South Carolina request the Joint Bond Review Committee reconsider the $25 million disbursement of Savannah River Site Litigation Funds, to allow for a project-specific approach to releasing these state funds and avoid any subsequent wasteful or unintended expenditures.

1. The $3 million proposal to repair the Fairfield Street Bridge in downtown Aiken, which has been closed due to structural deficiencies since 2017, should be approved. This project clearly falls within the broad project purpose of “revitalization and redevelopment for areas that have fallen into disrepair or are currently underutilized.” 

2. The $3.5 million proposal for the Northside Gravity Sewer project should be deferred until the City of Aiken identifies how this project on unincorporated county property affects county residents, notifies County residents of its annexation and growth plans, and reports whether this project is primarily maintenance-related or expansionist in scope. It is unclear how this project qualifies as a “revitalization and redevelopment effort for areas that have fallen into disrepair or are currently underutilized.”

3. The $9.6 million proposal to pay off the principal of the General Obligation bond used to “purchase downtown property” should be rejected. The properties in question are presently known as the “Pascalis properties” and were purchased by the Aiken Municipal Development Commission (AMDC) through a grant from the City of Aiken raised via this general obligation bond. The properties were purchased as part of a demolition and redevelopment plan involving half a block of downtown Aiken, known as Project Pascalis, that was formally canceled by the developer and the AMDC in September, 2022.

The reasons to reject this $9.6 million project request are as follows:

a. The true nature of the property purchases were not revealed to citizen taxpayers during the approval and hearing process.

When the bond ordinance was approved following during two public readings in August 2021, City Council and the AMDC presented the funds as necessary for a “land bank” proposal to purchase “blighted” properties in Aiken’s ~575-acre “Parkway District.” In reality, it was a proposal to purchase seven properties, held in an assignment contract by the Aiken Chamber of Commerce, from two property owners in a 1.7 acre area where nine small businesses were operating.

Only one building in the Pascalis demolition zone lacked a tenant, and the two buildings associated with the Hotel Aiken were closed for a reported renovation. It was not a blighted area and had not been declared a blighted area.

This basic information about the actual real estate purchase intentions was withheld from citizens of Aiken until the first week of November, 2021, when the AMDC announced Project Pascalis , a $75-100 million project involving the demolition and redevelopment of the 1.7 acres and forced relocation of nine small businesses.

b. The properties were purchased without due diligence and were an unnecessary and ill-advised investment of taxpayer funds. The properties were purchased for $9.5 million without the AMDC or City of Aiken conducting any appraisals, and only required property inspections on two of the seven properties. After the Chamber of Commerce took assignment of the properties in late May of 2021, two developers offered the AMDC only $1 million for the most prominent property, the Hotel Aiken, in response to a solicitation for proposals that was not publicly advertised as mandated by SC Community Development Law. This offer was less than half the agreed-to price of $2.25 million in the assignment contract.

Existing Aiken County appraisal data, which City officials routinely use as a point of reference for other purchases and sales of city properties, showed the property + improvement values were collectively appraised by the Aiken County assessor at $4.683 million of market value. But since the AMDC intended to demolish the property, it essentially paid $9.5 million (not including demolition costs) for land with an appraised market value of $1.487 million. On a per-square-foot basis, the AMDC paid nearly five times more than the Aiken County appraised market values of the land at surrounding business properties. Notwithstanding the fact that the AMDC essentially assigned a zero value to the buildings on the seven properties (which were consigned to demolition), an alternative evaluation using recent sales of nearby business properties indicated the AMDC overpaid by “only” a factor of almost three.

These analyses in the summer of 2022 were validated in November 2022 by the revelation that the AMDC had signed a contract to sell the properties to the newly formed development consortium RPM Development Partners for $5 million, just one month after the commission had paid $9.5 million.

c. Aiken City Council counted its chickens a year before they hatched. According to the Executive Budget Office’s description of the entire $25 million line item allocation, submitted to the JBRC in January 2023, the City of Aiken’s “plan also includes the acquisition and assembly of land or properties for the purpose of redevelopment in the downtown area to promote economic development for the city, it’s residents and visitors

In reality, the bond was approved in August 2021, with the expectation of future allocation of plutonium funds, months before a single budgetary proposal was issued in the legislature. The bond was finalized in October 2021 and the properties were purchased in November 2021. Aiken City Council took an ill-advised risk by committing taxpayer funds in the expectation of state reimbursement from the Savannah River Site litigation settlement; which has resulted in a foolish expenditure of taxpayer funds.

The AMDC’s and City Council’s manifold instances of careless disregard for well-established business practices and fiduciary responsibilities should not be so easily finessed by conveniently applying Plutonium Settlement Funds to pay off the bond. In short, the proceeds from the bond issuance were used to further the folly of an illegally-formulated, ill-defined, and mismanaged project–which has now found a home in Aiken City Council’s dustbin.

d. There is no project. Since Project Pascalis was canceled in September, 2022, the general obligation bond is no longer associated with a redevelopment project or any project at all. Paying off the principal is not a development strategy, it is a bail-out strategy. Furthermore, the details of the failed project that resulted in the AMDC and City of Aiken owning seven properties in the downtown commercial district have yet to be fully revealed to taxpaying citizens. At a minimum, a full, independent financial and project audit should be completed prior to any state funds being released to the City of Aiken to pay off this unwise debt.

Summary: City Council has announced its intentions to transfer the Pascalis properties from AMDC control to city control and dissolve the AMDC. There is no development project presently involved with any of the properties. There is only a feasibility study underway for three of the properties. After the city takes control, it will replace the AMDC as a commercial real estate landlord for the six businesses that did not yield to the AMDC’s pressure to relocate; at least until the properties are sold on the open market, or transferred to another party.

Paying off the general obligation bond condones the city’s ill-advised investment, which no longer qualifies as a redevelopment project. Paying the debt for a failed project is not worthy of plutonium settlement funds that are intended to address real community needs: education, infrastructure, and well-planned economic development for the common good.

Thank you,

Donald Moniak
(and 38 South Carolina Taxpayers and Residents)






City Government, January 2023, Municipal Building, Pascalis 2023 - SRNL Lab, Plutonium Settlement

“There’s a Joke in There Somewhere.”

5 Comments

Aiken Chronicles Update:

Hearing on Ed Woltz Business License Appeal Postponed;
State of the City event: Future of Municipal Building, Hotel Aiken, the National Lab Office Building, and “There’s a Joke There Somewhere.”
The “ New Horizons” Meeting

By Don Moniak
January 24, 2023

Ed Woltz Business License Appeal Cancelled.

On Tuesday morning, the city issued a public notice stating:

“The meeting that was scheduled for Thursday, January 26, 2023, at 10 a.m. regarding appeal of a business license for Edward K. Woltz and Holly H. Woltz and S&C Properties LLC v. The City of Aiken, South Carolina and its Designated Business License Official has been cancelled. The meeting will be rescheduled at a date to be announced later. “

No reason for the cancellation was given. As reported in Ed Woltz’s Business License Citation. Aiken attorney Clark McCants III has represented Woltz on the case since December, 2021. While representing defendant Woltz against the plaintiff, Aiken City Solicitor Laura Jordan, McCants III also earned $1200 from the City for representing City Council and City Attorney Gary Smith in two lawsuits related to Project Pascalis.

McCants III also filed the answer on behalf of Smith in the Blake et al vs City of Aiken et al lawsuit. To add to his busy schedule McCants III is also one of two public defendants retained by the city, earning a $3000 a month flat fee for an unspecified number of hours.

Whether McCants III had other engagements is unknown.

State of the City , 2023

The City of Aiken’s 2023 State of the City public presentation is available for viewing on the city’s You Tube channel. For both city and county residents, the most important news was arguably Mayor Rick Osbon’s announcement that the preferred future of the city’s recently vacated, historic, New Deal era Municipal Building at 214 Park Avenue, SW is as a consolidated office for the county Solicitor’s Office.

The Solicitor, who is the local equivalent to a District Attorney, presently has offices scattered throughout the city. As reported in Why is the City of Aiken Toying with 113 Downtown Jobs, negotiations with the county were cut short when the city’s economic development department unilaterally decided to relocate the proposed Project Pascalis conference there. That option would have put the future of the downtown courthouse in doubt, placed 113 associated jobs at risk of leaving the downtown area, and possibly require a $40 million plus courthouse replacement on the outskirts of town.

Mayor Rick Osbon described the Solicitor Office option as a “win-win” situation:

“This evening I can tell you that I have had extensive discussions with the leadership of the Aiken County Government.  City council has discussed the best use for the building moving forward and there appears to be a consensus that offering it for sale to the county to house the solicitor’s office is the best path forward. Having the solicitor’s office there would likely play a key role in keeping the county courthouse downtown as Chairman Bunker has suggested. We hope to have an agreement drafted between the city and county for both councils to review and consider in the near future.” 

Hotel Aiken

The Hotel Aiken warranted extensive discussion—although the older Beckman Building next door on Laurens drew no mention. According to Mayor Osbon, the plan for the hotel is:

“To let the free market make the decision with lots of input and guidance from the public the experts any and all potential buyers and the city council. Within the next 45 to 60 days the plan is to craft a very broad request for proposals to purchase the hotel. There will be no preconceived ideas about what needs to be done with it, just a list of the parcels, a description of the buildings as they stand, and call for interested parties to make an offer to tell us their plan for it.”

“The RFP will encourage proposers to help our city with the important work of repurposing and complementing our Historic downtown assets. The requests will not suggest a future use for the property. Potential  buyers may want it to be a hotel once again. that’d be great. Others may suggest condos or apartments and still others may suggest a great idea that has never occurred to any of us.”

“Here’s another important promise to you. Shortly after those proposals are. received and opened by City staff, those that meet some basic qualifications will be released to the public each each and every one of us will be able to evaluate what the plans are, what purchase price is offered, and what incentives a potential buyer might ask for all of it.” 

“Keep in mind the plan the plan is for the private sector to pay for creating a profitable business at that site. In my opinion no proposal that asks the city to foot the bill for the actual Renovations or construction will seriously be considered. That said, if we all review the proposals together as a community and find one worth pursuing we’ll do just that if not we’ll reject them all and start again that’s my promise to you.” 

The Lab.

The most discussed and hyped item of the evening was the proposal for a 45,000 square foot Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) office building in downtown Aiken on the current site of Warneke’s Cleaners and the former CC Johnson Drug Store. The city released a lengthy news release on the plan just after the presentation providing more details. SRNL has been managed by Battelle Savannah River Alliance since early 2021.

The facility is proposed to be funded with some or all of the $20 million in plutonium settlement funds set aside by the state legislature for “SRS/National Lab Offsite Infrastructure.” This money is separate from the $25 million in settlement funds for unspecified “Downtown and Northside Redevelopment” projects.

As described in footnote #2 in Pascalis Properties on Aiken City Council Closed Door Agenda, the original proposed setting for the SRNL “offsite campus” was USC-Aiken, but the first mention of locating it downtown was made at the last planned public AMDC meeting.

One notable moment of the lab discussion occurred at 53:30 of the presentation, when Dr. Vahid Majidi, Director of Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) stated: 

“I should emphasize that this Savannah River National Laboratory building is being designed for only computational administrative work we don’t have any chemicals hoods or hazardous material in this facility uh….” 

After some applause and few laughs from the crowd, Dr. Majidi remarked:

“There is a joke there somewhere right?” 

No joke was revealed. It is unknown whether the light humor was related to an incident in January, 2022. After a shipment of unidentified radioactive materials were found to be erroneously labeled as nonradioactive, all offsite shipments of hazardous and radioactive materials. were suspended until corrective actions could be taken.

The unidentified customer, who was expecting a shipment of radioactive materials, discovered the error upon receipt and inspection. The length of the suspension was not identified in the incident report, but the deadline for corrections was identified as Augusta, 2022.

This was not the first time that hazardous materials were inappropriately transported from SRNL to an offsite location.

For example, on April 24, 2018, an SRNL researcher “transported a 125 mL bottle of aluminum powder (estimated at 100 g of material) from the lab to the Aiken County Technical Laboratory in his personal vehicle. The “highly flammable/reactive” material should have been transported in a placarded government vehicle in accordance with federal hazardous material transportation regulations. The “Lesson Learned Statement” was “Mentoring and proper onboarding should be done for new 
hires so that they are aware that their actions can have consequences concerning hazards and risks.”

Annual New Horizons Retreat

Today City Council also announced a “New Horizons” public meeting, during which the key agenda items will include Plutonium Settlement funding prioritization of the $25 million plutonium settlement allocation for “Downtown and Northside Redevelopment.” The full agenda packet of the meeting includes budget and revenue data.