Tag Archives: City Attorney

The Aiken City Attorney: No contract

by Don Moniak
September 17, 2022 

On August 16, 2022, a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request* was submitted for information related to City of Aiken legal work conducted by the law firm of Smith, Massey, Brodie, Guynn, and Mayes. Gary H Smith III has been the City of Aiken’s Attorney** for 27 years; and members of his firm have also performed various work for the City. For example, on August 26, 2022, Aiken Economic Development Director Tim O’Briant wrote in an email: 

The March 18, 2021 $173,047.51 wire transfer from the AMDC’s checking account to Smith, Massey, Brodie, Guynn, and Mayes was entirely unrelated to Pascalis. Attorney Mary Guynn has handled real estate closing for the City for several years. This was the balance due for the closing on the Jackson Petroleum/Williamsburg property closing.

The information request, based in part on this email, and involving the period since January 1, 2019, consisted of three parts: 

1. Copies of all closing documents, settlement documents, or other real-estate related documents for all City of Aiken real estate transactions involving any member of the Smith, Massey, Brodie, Guynn, and Mayes law firm, for the period January 1, 2019 to present.
2. A copy of the contract for services, or any contract for services, with any member of the Smith, Massey, Brodie, Guynn, and Mayes law firm, including City Attorney Gary Smith; for the period January 1, 2019 to present.
3. A listing, if available, of all City of Aiken real estate transactions for the period January 1, 2019 to present.

The response to date was completed on Friday September 15, 2022. Twenty-three documents were found to be responsive, much of it already in the public record. The first part of the response, involving twenty-two records, is under review. The results of the other two portions of the request can be summarized as follows: 

  • The City of Aiken does not keep an accounting of its real estate transactions which range from a few thousand dollars to nearly $10 million dollars, in a simple, easy to retrieve format; and
  • There are no contracts between the City of Aiken and members of the firm that conducts much of its real estate transactions; and the only record of any agreement is a letter from the City Attorney to the City Manager dated December 28, 2016. 

No Tracking of Real Estate Transactions 

As is the case with many FOIA responses, the most revealing information is the absence of information. In response to part three of the request for “a listing, if available, of all City of Aiken real estate transactions for the period January 1, 2019 to present,” Aiken City Solicitor responded: 

With regards to No. 3, South Carolina’s FOIA statute obligates the City to disclose “public records” which by definition only includes items in the possession of, or retained by the City. Accordingly, to the extent the City does not have a record conforming to your request, the City is under no obligation to create a public record and has not done so with respect to this item in your FOIA Request.

There is no tracking of city real estate deals, no one document that specifies what was bought or sold, who was involved, and the purchase and sale costs. 

No Attorney Contracts 

Part two of the request was for: 

A copy of the contract for services, or any contract for services, with any member of the Smith, Massey, Brodie, Guynn, and Mayes law firm, including City Attorney Gary Smith; for the period January 1, 2019 to present.

The only responsive record to this portion of the request is a December 28, 2016 letter from City Attorney Gary Smith to former City Manager John Klimm, titled a “Fee Arrangement Letter” in the city’s files. 

The 2016 “Fee Agreement Letter” between City Attorney Gary Smith and the City of Aiken.

Section 2-348 of Aiken’s Municipal Code pertains to professional services from a wide array of licensed professionals including law firms.

“Professional services shall be obtained through the process of requesting interested firms to submit their qualifications; reviewing the qualifications submitted and determining which firms are qualified; requesting the qualified firms to submit proposals; selecting the qualified firm with the best proposal; and negotiating the necessary contract. Except for agreements for less than $25,000.00 and that are provided for in the annual operating budget of a department, agreements for professional services shall state the terms and conditions and shall be approved by city council.”

No evidence of such a process or outcome for the City Attorney position has been provided in response to two FOIA requests.

The City Attorney is near the top of the city’s organizational chart, one of two most powerful unelected positions in local municipal government; and responsible for:

  • providing advice on municipal matters of law and jurisprudence to City Council, the City Manager, and boards, commissions, and committees; 
  • serving as parliamentarian to the City Council; and 
  • ensuring city government operates lawfully. 

Yet, for all this, the existing contract is a little more than a handshake, one that has lasted nearly six years.

______________

Footnotes: 

*This is the second FOIA request for the City Attorney’s contract this year. Aiken area resident Kelly Cornelius requested City Attorney Gary Smith’s contract and received the same response: the December 28, 2016 letter. 

** Aiken City Attorney Gary Smith is the defendant in three lawsuits (including one filed by Ms. Cornelius) regarding violations of state ethics law involving the Project Pascalis proceeedings. A detailed account of the record, including the City Attorney’s job description, is contained in “The Pascalis Attorneys,” which can be viewed at: 

A review of Mr. Smith’s defense in one of these lawsuits can be viewed at: 

Beyond Project Pascalis, two City of Aiken real estate transactions have been examined in The Aiken Chronicles:

“The City of Aiken’s Mattie C. Hall Property….”

https://aikenchronicles.com/2022/08/06/the-city-of-aikens-mattie-c-hall-property-another-curious-questionable-aiken-county-council-property-deal/

and

“The Cleaners…”

https://aikenchronicles.com/2022/07/21/the-cleaners-how-aiken-city-council-got-taken-to-the-cleaners-by-the-wyattfamily/

(Edit: The Orginal Title of this story was:

“City of Aiken’s Real Estate Deals: No Tracking and No Contracts.”

The title created confusion. The “tracking” referred to just that, a tracking system for real estate transactions. “No contracts” referred to contracts for professional legal services, not to real estate contracts.

My apologies for any confusion. Don Moniak, 9/18/22)

The City of Aiken’s Mattie C. Hall Property: Another Curious, Questionable Aiken City Property Deal

by Don Moniak
August 6, 2022
(Updated June 29, 2025)

In September 2021 Aiken City Council approved the sale of two undeveloped parcels of city-owned property in Kalmia Hills, running adjacent to the railroad tracks on Norfolk Southern Railroad property and east of its two acre Kalmia Hills City Park. The two parcels totaled four acres and were deeded to the City by the estate of Mattie C. Hall in 1973.  No land or timber appraisal was conducted and the property was not put up for bid. The property was sold to a single offeror, Scott and Adrienne Patterson. Mr. Patterson is a lawyer employed by Smith, Massey, Brodie, Guynn, and Mayes; which was also the city’s agent for the sale of the property. Aiken City Attorney Gary Smith, who is a partner in Smith, Massey et al, was responsible for the preparation and review of the ordinance and purchase and sale agreement required for approval of the sale. The city sold the properties for $150,000, and today it is divided into four lots being offered for a cumulative $700,000. 

(Update: As reported in The City of Aiken’s Law Firm: “although the sale was approved in September 2021, a title dispute created by a “scrivener’s error” prevented the closing until June 2022. During that time, Mr. Patterson represented the City of Aiken in court proceedings to rectify the title situation. In June 2023, half of the property was sold for $280,000; yielding a $130,000 profit in one year; with the western two-acre parcel still on the market.)

Deja Vu All Over Again


As reported in “How Aiken City Council Got Taken to the Cleaners by the Wyatt Family,” (1) in January, 2020, Aiken City Council approved the sale of property housing its former finance and administration building at 135 Laurens St, SW and parking lot/drive-up at 130 Pendleton St, SW.  The sale was a no-bid deal, pursued by the city when Weldon Wyatt’s WTC Laurens, LLC offered $1.2 million dollars. Before voting to approve the sale for the increased, negotiated price of $1.3 million, Council person Kay Brohl stated that one lesson learned was “that everything we do should go out for bids.” 

A month after the deal was finalized, WTC Laurens sold the 135 Laurens St parcel to SRP Credit Union for $1.3 million.  In May, 2021, WTC Laurens sold the Pendleton Street parcel to R and O, LLC (Agent: Rick Osbon) for $500,000. Mayor Osbon had recused himself during the sale process from November 2019 to January 2020 due to the proximity of his business and property to the city’s property. 

Two months after the Wyatt family realized a $500,000 return on this sale at the City of Aiken’s expense, another sole offer was presented to the Aiken City Council for city property — the Mattie C. Hall parcels.

The Mattie C. Hall Parcels in Kalmia Hills

On July 12, 2021, City Manager Stuart Bedenbaugh wrote to council in a supporting memorandum: 

Scott and Adrienne Patterson have approached the City about purchasing two parcels owned by the City of Aiken located on Summit Drive and Burgundy Drive. The two parcels are TPN 105-05-15-002 containing 1.9747 acres and TPN 088-08-20-001 containing 2.0348 acres. 

The Pattersons intend to purchase the approximately 4 acres to construct their residence on the property. They have offered $150,000 for the property. After discussion with Parks, Recreation & Tourism Director, Jessica Campbell, we would subdivide and maintain a portion of this property for future parking for the park. 

If Council approves this transaction, it is recommended by staff that the net proceeds from the sale of this property be placed into the General Fund. 

For Council consideration is first reading of an ordinance to sell approximately 4 acres on Summit Drive and Burgundy Drive to Scott and Adrienne Patterson for $150,000. (1) 

The two parcels are within the relatively affluent Kalmia Hills subdivision, extending from the intersection of Summit and Burgundy Drive. The western boundary and part of the northern boundary are bounded by Summit Drive. The rest of northern boundary fronts on Laurel Drive and Highland Park Avenue. All of the land is backed to the south by the railroad, with much of the terrain relatively steep. All of the land is heavily forested with a loblolly and longleaf pine overstory. The tall Kalmia shrubs that give the area its name are scattered throughout the understory. 

In the July 12, 2021, agenda packet was the proposed ordinance prepared and reviewed, as customary, by City Attorney Gary Smith, who is also a partner in the law firm of Smith, Massey, Brodie, Guynn, and Maynes. One of the purchasers, Scott Patterson is an attorney in the same law firm. (3) According to his Linked In profile, Mr. Patterson has been an associate lawyer at  Smith, Massey et al since 2008. 

Also in the July 12th agenda packet was the purchase and sale agreement (PSA), also the responsibility of the  City Attorney. The PSA required a $2500 earnest deposit with the “Agent,” Smith, Massey, et al and contained the following disclosure: 

(d) Disclosure Regarding Escrow Agent: Purchaser is aware that Agent serves as counsel to Seller in this and other transactions. Purchaser agrees that the duties of Agent here under are ministerial in nature and shall not disqualify Agent from representation of Seller in connection with this Agreement or any dispute that may arise hereunder.

The minutes of the July 12, 2021 public hearing (4) note that “the Pattersons had reached out to (City Manager Bedenbaugh) some time ago,” and that “the City has owned this property since the early 1970s. The deed basically says the property may be used for residential or recreational purposes.” 

Mr. Bedenbaugh did not disclose that the property had been deeded to the City of Aiken by the estate of Mattie C. Hall (1885-1961). In addition to being one of the original developers of the Kalmia Hills subdivision, Mattie Chafee Hall was a prominent local citizen, antiques dealer, businesswoman and realtor who gave generously to the Aiken community throughout her life. She is perhaps best known for the million dollar trust she left to the Aiken County hospital to fund indigent patient care, her trust ultimately going to a new nursing home for Aiken County — the Mattie C. Hall Nursing Home, (now Pruitt Health) on Laurens Street North. 

Specifically, the deed for the Kalmia Hill parcel from Mattie C. Hall’s estate reads:  

This real estate is conveyed subject to the restrictions that same is sold for recreational use or residential use only and shall not be used for any commercial or industrial purpose.

Click image for larger view.

The only significant issue was raised beforehand by the City’s Parks and Recreation Department, which sought to keep some of the parcel to expand parking at Kalmia Hills Park. The seller and purchaser eventually agreed to the city keeping 0.12 acres for parking purposes. 

No Appraisals, No Bids

Two council members spoke on the matter. Ed Woltz asked if the property had been appraised, and in response, according to the minutes:

Mr. Bedenbaugh stated it is an offer based on the value the Tax Assessor has for the property. The Tax Assessor has it valued at $120,000. The Pattersons offered more than the value listed by the Tax Assessor. He felt the offer was fair.

It is unclear where this figure derived. According to County Assessor records, the appraised property value for the easternmost property in 2020 was $80,000, which rose to $492,500 in the 2021 assessment. (5) The westernmost portion, which is narrower and steeper, has been valued by the assessor at $48,960 since 2019. (6) The rise in value of the eastern parcel may be related to the $210,000 sale in January, 2021 of a nearby 1.6 acre parcel, on Dibble Road on the south side of the Norfolk Southern property and also adjoining the tracks. 

According to the meeting minutes, Council Member Ed Girardeau spoke to these higher land values, stating:

he was very familiar with the property, as he grew up in the area.  He noted the best part of the property is where it is proposed to put the parking lot He pointed out that the property is very thin in the area between Laurel Drive and the railroad track. He pointed out that an area near there flooded in 1969 as there was not proper drainage in the area. He pointed out the area is in a flood zone. Mr. Bedenbaugh stated the Pattersons are aware of  that. Councilman Girardeau stated he had looked at the sale of some lots in the area and some have sold for $160,000 an acre.

In spite of this knowledge that the city was selling its Mattie C. Hall gifted land at one quarter of the values he described, at less than $40,000 per acre,  Girardeau made the original motion to approve the sale.  Council voted unanimously to approve the sale. On September 13, 2021; Council voted unanimously again at the second and final hearing on the sale, following a motion again made by Girardeau and minimal discussion. (8) 

No members of the public spoke at either meeting, and no councilmember suggested the city keep the property for recreational use to compliment adjacent Kalmia Hills Park. 

The city did not close on the sale until June 23, 2022.  On July 1, 2022, the properties were listed by the Carolina Real Estate Company and for sale signs were posted along their length.  

While the land itself is not on the land page of the carolinacompany.com website, it is referenced in numerous real estate sites, including Zillow, Remax, Coldwell Banker, and Weichert.  They all show the two properties have been further subdivided into four properties with a cumulative sale price of $700,000. (See Table 1) 

Table 1: Subdividing a $150,000 sale into $700,000

County Parcel ID MLS #LOT ID ACRESSale Price 
105–05-15-002202155A0.856$150,000
105-02-15-002202156B1.100$150,000
088-08-20-001202157C1.314$200,000
088-08-20-001202159D0.756$200,000
Each listing states “Beautiful lot with mature trees. Build your custom dream home.” 

__________________________

Investigation into the details of the sale, the property appraisal, the “flood plain” claim, and deed restriction continue.  

The Aiken Chronicles appreciates citizen tips, leads and insights into investigations. Information is held in strict confidence. Appreciation is also extended to the hardworking team of proofreaders and fact-checkers. 

FOR REFERENCE

(1) The Cleaners: How the Wyatt Family Took Aiken City Council to the Cleaners. 

(2) July 12, 2021 Aiken City Council Agenda Packet. Pages 108-115. 

https://edoc.cityofaikensc.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=619215&dbid=0&repo=City-of-Aiken-LF

(3) https://www.smbgm.com/attorney-profiles/scott-william-patterson/

(4) Meeting Minutes for July 12, 2021, Aiken City Council Meeting: 

https://edoc.cityofaikensc.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=785222&dbid=0&repo=City-of-Aiken-LF

(5) https://qpublic.schneidercorp.com/Application.aspx?AppID=844&LayerID=15264&PageTypeID=4&PageID=6879&KeyValue=105-05-15-002

(6) https://qpublic.schneidercorp.com/Application.aspx?AppID=844&LayerID=15264&PageTypeID=4&PageID=6879&KeyValue=088-08-20-001

(7) https://qpublic.schneidercorp.com/Application.aspx?AppID=844&LayerID=15264&PageTypeID=4&PageID=6879&KeyValue=105-05-11-001

(8) Meeting Minutes for September 13, 2021, Aiken City Council Meeting: 

https://edoc.cityofaikensc.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=1574371&dbid=0&repo=City-of-Aiken-LF

Project Pascalis Lawsuit Alleges an Abundance of Violations of State and Local Law. 

July 5, 2022

by Don Moniak


UPDATES:
August 11, 2022: Answer of Defendant Gary Smith
See also: “The Gary Smith Defense: An Admission, Inconsistencies, and More New Questions Than Answers,” by Donald Moniak

August 15, 2022: Answer on Behalf of Defendants City of Aiken, Osban, Brohl, Diggs, Girardeau, Gregory, Price, and Woltz

August 22, 2022: Defendants’ attorney submits Notice of Motion and Motion for Protective Order on Behalf of Defendants Obson, Brohl, Diggs, Girardeau, Gregory, Price, and Woltz.

Read full text of lawsuit here:

Page One view: Plaintiffs and Defendants in Project Pascalis lawsuit.

Lawyers for nine plaintiffs, including the Historic Aiken Foundation, Green Boundary Foundation and former City Councilperson Dick Dewar, filed a complaint in the Second Judicial Circuit of South Carolina against two dozen City of Aiken officials and a pair of development companies collaborating with the city to demolish and reconstruct a substantial portion of historic, downtown Aiken. 

Project Pascalis rendering

Pages one to thirty-six of the plea assiduously outline the legal basis for their claims, including South Carolina Community Development, Freedom of Information, Ethics and Government Accountability statutes; and City of Aiken zoning ordinances. 

Pages 36 to 90 contain the general factual allegations and provide welcome summertime nonfiction for a majority of Aiken area residents who object to Project Pascalis. Like a good true white collar crime story, the allegations detail sham proceedings, citizens locked out of a distorted and confusing public process, conflict of interest violations from the Mayor to the City Attorney, and city boards that regulate the public while serving the developers they are charged with monitoring.