Dear Aiken City Council,
Yesterday the AMDC issued a list of “25 public meetings and hearings held on Project Pascalis over the last 24 months.” This assertion is false at worst and disingenuous at best, but that did not stop Aiken Economic Development Director Tim O’Briant from repeating this distorted reality to reporters.
Here are just a few general ways in which this document is highly misleading:
First, Project Pascalis was not publicly announced until March 18, 2021. Eight of the meetings occurred before this date. One of these merely involved a potential letter to the existing Hotel Aiken owners. Three others were workshops that discussed downtown development in general.
Second, there were no conceptual designs for Project Pascalis available for public inspection prior to March 1, 2022. Sixteen of the meetings cited by the AMDC occurred prior to this time. Of the nine meetings that have occurred since the first drawings of Project Pascalis was revealed, two of them involved a narrow ordinance pertaining only to Newberry Street; and two were mere updates as part of larger meetings.
The fact is City of Aiken agencies have held only two public meetings, both on April 20, 2022, during which the entirety of the Project Pascalis proposal was presented and discussed. The Aiken Downtown Development Association held a public workshop on June 7th that did not include the entirety of the proposal.
Most important is what meetings have not been held. As of May 9, Aiken City Council had not met as a group with the AMDC and its development team to review and discuss Project Pascalis. For a public body that intends to spend $20-25 million dollars of federal funds from the Plutonium Settlement on this project, this is a disturbing abdication of responsibilities.
The City of Aiken has also not adopted a legally binding redevelopment plan nor held a public hearing to discuss one for Project Pascalis. The July 2020 “redevelopment plan” cited by the AMDC preceded Project Pascalis and bears no resemblance to it. It does not involve demolition, an apartment complex and garage at Newberry and Richland, a conference center on Park Avenue, or the forced relocation of eight to ten businesses. By law, that redevelopment plan must be amended or replaced, with subsequent public hearings on the updated product.
In fact, according to the minutes from May 16, 202 AMDC meeting, Tim O’Briant commented, quite appropriately:
“If this group has any thoughts about Hotel Aiken, it would be appropriate to have those discussions. Whether we come up with anything or not, we can’t really get into it if we don’t have a plan that encompasses that area.”
In other words, if part of the downtown was not in the redevelopment plan, it was not a part of the redevelopment plan. Newberry Street and the Park Avenue properties were not a part of the 2020 plan. (The AECOM plan is not a legally binding redevelopment plan, it is a well-written strategic guidance plan.)
Mayor Osbon, City Council and the City Manager should request that this highly misleading document be removed from the AMDC website. It serves no purpose other than to further inflame public opinion. In this regard, the words of Robert Stack written in a letter to the editor a week ago are even more pertinent:
““…the Four Way Test is Rotary’s unique approach and process to address conflicts, solve problems and make decisions to achieve desired outcomes and mutually beneficial solutions. That being said, the currently proposed Pascalis project has, to date, achieved the opposite effect by not being fair to all, creating bad will, stressing long-standing friendship and not being beneficial to all.”
The City of Aiken has done better than this and can do better than this.
Thank You,
Donald Moniak