Tag Archive for 'jekyll-island'

Common Cause-Georgia: Legislative Priorities!

Published
by
Wilson
on April 1, 2008
in Podcast
. 0 Comments

Common Cause of Georgia has several legislative intiatives which are (or should be) important to us all. In this interview, Bill Bozarth, Executive Director, and Jim Kulstad, their lobbyist, discuss their hopes for the 2008 Georgia Legislature.

While the budget and tax reform aren’t generally the focus of Common Cause, they did point out that they are concerned that the House eliminated funds from the Secretary of State’s budget to provide for voter education regarding the new Voter ID requirements. They hope to get these funds restored during the budget process.

At center stage of Common Cause’s priorities is SB 372 which seeks to give counties and cities a shove in the direction of ethics reform. Got a problem with a county commissioner or city councilman giving a buddy a contract to provide some service to the local government? What do you do? At this time there is not much you can do other than at the polls, unless the local paper publicizes the matter. If this legislation passes, citizens would have the right to file an ethics complaint. Only time will tell if such efforts will actually accomplish anything, but anything that helps shed the light of day on politicians and government has my support.

If you have been paying attention to the controversy over the planned development of the beach at Jekyll Island, you will want to know that Senator Jeff Chapman’s efforts to get the legislature to do something (anything really) to limit development of the beach have been rebuffed by the gurus of development-at-all-cost, the Georgia Republican Party. There is just too damn much money going to be made by Linger Longer, Mercer Reynolds and good ole Republican contributors to Gov. Perdue to let this gold mine get stopped by something as silly as the will of the people of Georgia. I have a lot of respect for Sen. Chapman who seems to be focused on trying to do what is right. I just wonder if his struggles to get the attention of the Republican leaders in the Georgia legislature might get him to change parties.

From my perspective, one of the Common Cause initiatives of utmost importance is judicial election reform. I don’t care whether you are conservative or liberal, you should want our courts to be fair, but above all, independent. Judicial elections were never a big deal and then the Supreme Court (US, and BTW not elected) gave us Roe v Wade, the abortion decision. While the efforts to change the Supreme Court dealt with judicial appointments, it has been broadened into attacks on state courts and state judicial elections. This undermining of the American judicial system is organized and funded by the U. S. Chamber of Commerce. Their goal: elect conservative judges who would favor business interest. As a result, these bastards of business target judges in various states. The Chamber has basked in successfully attacking good judges in several states such as Mississippi and West Virginia. They tried in 2006 to elect their guy, Mike Wiggins, to the Supreme Court of Georgia. They failed but that doesn’t mean they won’t keep coming.

But the bad side of the Chamber’s efforts to politicize the judiciary is that a race for the Supreme Court can now cost a million dollars or more. I don’t know how you can expect a judge who is supposed to be non-political, fair and independent to go out and raise a million dollars. Common Cause wants to change all that and have judicial elections publically funded. You can read more about the proposal here, and you can sign a petition supporting this endeavor here.

Common Cause doesn’t really expect the legislation to pass this session and is forcusing on a public awareness campaign. A resolution in the House would establish a study committee to study judicial elections and make recommendations at the 2009 session.

 
 Bill Bozarth, Common Cause of Georgia [29:00m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (282)

Jekyll Island Showdown: Chapman, Egan, Langford, Garvey

Published
by
Wilson
on January 25, 2008
in Podcast
. 11 Comments

The Jekyll Island development controversy gains new clarity in this interview with four of the primary participants. (1) Sen. Jeff Chapman (R-3) plans to introduce a resolution which would effectively prevent new development on the beach. (2) David Egan, Founder of the Initiative to Protect Jekyll Island, wants the Jekyll Island Authority to listen to what the people want. (3) Jim Langford is the Project Manager of Linger Longer, the Revitalization Partner selected by the JIA in a bid process that is currently in litigation. (4) Eric Garvy is the Senior Director of Marketing and Business Development for the Jekyll Island Authority and firmly defends its actions and decisions.

Because all 5 of us were on the phone at the same time, I scheduled this interview for an hour. While this may be long, it is well worth the effort. My previous interviews with Chapman, Egan, Langford, and Garvey provide a lot of background, but it took this interview for me to truly appreciate the real bottom line in this controversy: Will Jekyll Island be preserved or developed?

A little history. Jekyll was purchased by the State in the late 40s. The State still owns all the land and simply leases it to homeowners, motel and business owners to generate the income necessary to maintain the roads and other infrastructure, as well as other projects such as restoration of the historic district and the Georgia Sea Turtle Center.

In 2007 the legislature declared Jekyll to be Georgia’s Jewel, but it is on the verge of being a multimillion dollar jewel in the hat of developers if the current 63-acre development project proposed by Linger Longer and selected by the JIA goes forward.

The law that created the JIA contained a specific directive for the income generated on Jekyll Island:

All income and revenues arising out of the operation of Jekyll Island State Park, and all gifts, grants, appropriations, or bond or loan proceeds made specifically for Jekyll Island State Park, shall be used by the authority for the sole purpose of beautifying, improving, developing, enlarging, maintaining, administering, managing, and promoting Jekyll Island State Park at the lowest rates reasonable and possible for the benefit of the people of the State of Georgia.

While it is the responsibility of the JIA to manage Jekyll in a manner that generates sufficient income, it seems obvious, at least to me, that in 1950 the legislature envisioned something other than a fully developed resort type recreation area. This interview explores in depth several issues which arise from the manner in which the JIA seeks to fulfill its responsibility to Jekyll and to the people of Georgia.

This is clearly not a dispute about revitalization of the existing motels and convention facility. Everyone agrees this is necessary, and in fact, several facilities either have been or are in the process of major renovation or complete rebuilding. When all are back online the increased capacity and higher room rates will result in more annual income for the JIA.

The controversy focuses on two basic issues: (1) Is the propsed 63 acres of new development necessary to meet the reasonable income needs of the JIA? (2) Should any development be allowed on the prime stretch of beach (approximately 9000 ft.) that is, without question, unique, both in the quality of the beach and length.

IS THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT NECESSARY? The answer depends on your choice of goals. Langford of Linger Longer contends it will generate $100 million in income for the JIA over 10 or more years. It is hard to argue against such a project if your goal is to make as much money as possible. Not only that, but this project is just the first that the JIA is contemplating. Presumably, the JIA wants even more in income. The question is why? The answer to that question is not written in some brochure or noted on the JIA website. The motives of the JIA can only be judged in the context of the its actions and conduct regarding the development and promotion of the project.

While I am sure Linger Longer and the JIA will disagree, that judgment is not flattering to an entity like the JIA which is charged with a public trust. Rather, the JIA has made a mockery of the idea that it acts as a Trustee for the people of this State. It undertook this project without any apparent attempt to determine its actual income needs. The JIA cannot answer this question: Will the existing faciliities, once they are renovated, generate enough income to meet the operational needs of Jekyll? Even with the old motels, Jekyll operated in the black every year but one, and that was when the renovations may well have affected the number of rooms available.

Another breach of the public trust by the JIA is its apparent total lack of concern, bordering on scorn, for public opinion and input. It dreamed up this project, it issued a request for developers to submit proposals, and it gave its approval to Linger Longer without ever undertaking to find out first what the residents of Jekyll or what the people of the State of Georgia wanted. Like most bureaucratic entities, the JIA assumes it knows best in all things and the people that actually live on or visit Jekyll know nothing.

In this interview, Langford and Garvey suggest that the JIA and Linger Longer are willing to scrap this project if the people don’t want it or if someone has a better idea. The actions of the JIA in this entire process raise serious doubts as to whether or not this is anything other than mere lip service. It is rare to see a state agency or authority decide on a course of action and voluntarily yield to public pressure to change direction. While it can happen, it is not easy for the public to force the change without the assistance of a big stick. That big stick just might be the pending litigation or, in this election year, it might be public outcry.

One other point. The JIA clearly seems determined to develop Jekyll Island to the fullest extent possible. Why? That goal is not in the legislative directive which created the JIA. Since 1950 the JIA has never promoted development, first and foremost, above all other considerations. Why the change? Why now? It could be that the recent appointments by Governor Perdue to the JIA have a new idea for what should be done to Jekyll. But the real answer is money, plain and simple. If you ever have a question about why government does something, follow the money. If Linger Longer’s proposed project goes through, it will make tens of millions of dollars. The JIA’s plans for further development will put hundreds of millions of dollars of pure profit into the hands of Linger Longer or some other developer.

Why development? Because we can is the JIA’s position. Why not! Earn millions, spend milliions, put millions into the hands of people like Mercer Reynolds, the owner of Linger Longer, who gives big, big money to governors and presidents.

IS IT NECESSARY TO BUILD ON A BEACH THAT HAS BEEN UNOBSTRUCTED FOR MILLIONS OF YEARS? The JIA’s position on this simple issue reveals the simple truth: The JIA isn’t interested in earning enough income to provide accommodations at the lowest rates reasonable and possible for the benefit of the people of the State of Georgia. It’s interest is to suck just as much money out of Jekyll as it can, the beach be damned. That’s it, spread the love, baby!

Without a doubt, whatever project JIA and Linger Longer propose to build could be built somewhere else on Jekyll. So why not satisfy the people and just move the project to another location and leave the unobstructed beach unobstructed? The answer, money! As Langford said at the beginning of the interview, the present goal of the project is to create an “economic engine.” As Sen. Chapman points out, there is nothing to suggest that the legislature or the people of Georgia bought Jekyll Island for the purpose of creating an economic engine. That was not and is not Georgia’s intent for Jekyll. The problem is the JIA has forgotten or ignored that it holds Jekyll in trust for the rest of us. The JIA thinks it owns the place.

There are only two ways to deal with a state agency which has become arrogant, that won’t listen to anyone, that is intoxicated with its own power. One option involves violence, is clearly illegal, and therefore not one that I can recommend. The other option is legislative action which is exactly what Sen. Chapman proposes to do. His proposal would prohibit development on the beach so that the view we all grew up with would be there for our grandchildren. It would also insure that whatever leadership failures future members of the JIA exhibit, it won’t threaten the beach and the view.

Now, the question is whether or not that Republican majority in the legislature will exhibit some leadership on this issue. And that is a big question!

 
 Jekyll Island and Development [59:18m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (446)

Jekyll Island Development: A Question of Fairness and Justice?

Published
by
Wilson
on December 24, 2007
in Podcast
. 0 Comments

Last week, I interviewed Jim Langford, the Project Executive of Linger Longer about the status of the proposed development of a new Town Center on Jekyll. This week, Wade Shealy of the Jekyll Island Company responds.

The focus of the controversy is a simple question and answer asked by persons unknown and answered by persons unknown at at June 25, 2007 compulsory meeting. In this interview, Wade explains why neither the Jekyll Island Company nor any of the other companies submitting a proposal assumed that the question and answer changed the development project from a 45-acre development to a 63-acre development. His answer is fairly simple: The written request for proposal, RFP #244, said repeatedly: Do not exceed the 45 acres specified! If the JIA intended to change the acreage on something as important as a $500 million project, you would think that the one thing the JIA could get straight was the acreage to be developed.

Linger Longer seems to be hanging it’s hat on that question and answer. The ultimate success of that position will be determined by the Superior Court of Fulton County. A preliminary test is scheduled for January 14, 2008 when the court will hold a hearing on Jekyll Island Company’s request for an injunction to prevent JIA from going ahead with the development until the issues concerning the selection process are resolved.

If the court issues an injunction, it will be because justice demands it. The question will then be whether or not the JIA will continue to fight or do the right thing, the fair thing, and go through the selection process again.

Wade says that is all his company wants: a fair selection process. He is apparently willing to trust the JIA to make a fair selection, once the acreage issue is resolved. Wade may not have much of a choice, but I have little faith in the ability of JIA to do anything fairly when it comes to selecting one development proposal over another. Just about everything the JIA did in the selection process suggests secrecy and bias. Why you ask? Money!

At stake are profits which Wade estimates to be in the range of $500 million. Think about that: $500 million. $500 millioin in profit for a private company for the privilege of developing an island owned by the people of Georgia. This is not to minimize the risk involved, or to suggest that this level of profit is unreasonable. I simply don’t know. My point is the huge incentive for the selection process to become corrupted, for political favors to be paid, for campaign contributors to be rewarded, legally, so to speak.

A curious side note! Wade was appointed by Governor Perdue to the Georgia Land Conservation Council. On December 6, 2007 the Council announced the purchase of almost 20,000 acres in 3 Georgia counties at an expenditure of $92 million. Wade says he was advised that a press conference had been scheduled to announce the decision to purchase the property. The only problem: the press conference was being scheduled before the Council voted, which means the Council was expected to simply rubber stamp a decision that had already been made. Wade questioned the propriety of scheduling a press conference before a decision had been made. While Wade did vote for the purchases, his reward for asking the question: He gets a letter from Governor Perdue telling him he is no longer on the Council, effective at the end of the month!

And that ladies and gentlemen, is the state of leadership and politics in this great state on Christmas Eve 2007. If you voted for these guys, you asked for it, you got it!

 
 Wade Shealy, Jekyll Island Company [27:31m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (335)

The Jekyll Island Saga Is Taken Up A Notch!

Published
by
Wilson
on November 20, 2007
in Blog
. 2 Comments

If you have been following the interviews concerning the Jekyll Island controversy (1, 2, 3, 4, 5), you may be interested in this.  (BTW:  If you read the post in #3, it begins with a comment that the interview should piss you off. That reference was apparently confusing, particularly if you did not read the entire post. I was not referring to the person interviewed, Wade Shealy. Rather, I was referring to the subject of the interview, a corrupted bid selection process in which Shealy and his company did not appear to have been fairly treated.)

There was an article in the AJC last Friday about a lawsuit filed November 15th in Fulton Superior Court seeking judicial review of the process by which a politically connected developer, Linger Longer, was selected as the Revitalization Partner of the Jekyll Island Authority in the proposed development of 45 acres on Jekyll Island.

The Jekyll Island Revitalization Group (JIRG) and its related company, Jekyll Island Company are the plaintiffs in the lawsuit. The defendants are:

JEKYLL ISLAND – STATE PARK AUTHORITY; BENJAMIN G. PORTER, Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Jekyll Island – State Park Authority; EDWARD E. BOSHEARS, Secretary of the Board of Directors of the Jekyll Island – State Park Authority; HOMER DELOACH; MICHAEL D. HODGES; BECKY KELLEY; SYBIL D. LYNN; ROBERT W. KRUEGER; SAMUEL B. KELLETT; STEPHEN B. CROY, Members of the Board of Directors of the Jekyll Island – State Park Authority.

You can read a copy of the petition for judicial review, but these are the basic allegations:

COUNT I: THE PROPOSAL SELECTED BY JIA WAS NOT RESPONSIVE TO RFP 244, IT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED BY JIA, AND IT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN SELECTED BY JIA.

COUNT II: JIA EXCEEDED ITS AUTHORITY IN CONSIDERING AND SELECTING THE LINGER LONGER COMMUNITIES PROPOSAL.

COUNT III: JIA VIOLATED ITS DUTIES AS A TRUSTEE.

COUNT IV: JIA VIOLATED THE OPEN PUBLIC MEETINGS ACT, AND JIA FAILED TO FAIRLY AND EFFECTIVELY COMMUNICATE ALLEGED CHANGES IN THE REQUIREMENTS OF RFP 244.

COUNT V: JIA VIOLATED JIRG’S RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS.

COUNT VI: JIA VIOLATED JIRG’S RIGHT TO EQUAL PROTECTION.

COUNT VII: JIA’S ACTIONS CONSTITUTE A TAKING WITHOUT JUST COMPENSATION.

COUNT VIII: INJUNCTION AGAINST FURTHER NEGOTIATIONS BETWEEN DEFENDANTS AND LINGER LONGER COMMUNITIES.

In seeking an injunction, Count VIII alleges:

107. JIRG lacks an adequate remedy at law. Unless JIA and Linger Longer Communities are restrained and enjoined from conducting planning and contract negotiations concerning RFP 244, JIRG will suffer irreparable harm in it ability to not only seek and obtain effective judicial review of the Final Decisions, but also to obtain an effective and fair remedy if the Final Decision is reversed.
108. The public has a substantial interest in honest and fair bidding on public projects and decisions concerning requests for proposals. The public interest would likewise suffer immediate and irreparable injury should JIA and Linger Longer Communities not be enjoined from planning and contract negotiations.

And what does JIRG want the Superior Court to do?

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs pray:
(a) that this Court enjoin the following parties from taking any action in furtherance of negotiating a contract for RFP 244:
(i) Linger Longer Communities, including any person or entity that created or submitted any information on behalf of Linger Longer Communities in response to RFP 244, and the directors officers, members, employees, and agents of those entities; and;
(ii) Defendants, and the officers, employees, agents, and those acting in concert with the Jekyll Island – State Park Authority;
(b) that this Court order JIA to transmit the entire record in this matter before JIA to this Court;
(c) that this Court order, adjudge, declare and decree that the Final Decision is void and unenforceable in its entirety;
(i) that this Court order JIA to strike the proposal submitted by Linger Longer Communities and select the proposal submitted by JIRG;
(ii) in the alternative, that this Court order JIA to re-start the bidding process for RFP 244; and
(d) that this Court grant such other, further, plenary, and different relief as may be deemed just and proper.

Injunctions require hearings and I assume there will be a humdinger sometime in the near future.  If a temporary injunction is granted, the development projected will be on hold indefinitely. 

Sen. Jeff Chapman’s Report to the Oversight Committee: Jekyll Island!

Published
by
Wilson
on November 7, 2007
in Podcast
. 0 Comments

Sen. Jeff Chapman (R-3) isn’t one of the legislators designated as a member of the Jekyll Island Authority Advisory Board, but as he points out, this State owned island is in his district, his constituents have a great interest in what happens there and he is concerned about some of the recent actions of the Authority.

There are two aspects of the current controversy surrounding the Jekyll Island Authority (JIA). In September 2007 the JIA selected Linger Longer as its Revitalization Partner to design and develop a new 45 acre (or is it 63) tract with hotels, motels and all the things that go with them. The only problem, as discussed in my interview with Wade Shealy, in selecting Linger Longer the JIA engaged in some sleazy tricks that appear to have been intended to benefit a particular Republican contributor and which also appear to have violated the law. In the very least, the JIA tarnished its status and justified criticism that it was acting unfairly and arbitrarily.

Sen. Chapman left the issues surrounding the bidding process to be resolved between the JIA and the Jekyll Island Revitalization Group, whether in or outside of court.

His concern is a little more fundamental. Regardless of who was selected as the Revitalization Patner, Senator Chapman is concerned about the nature of the development being contemplated by the JIA. To understand his concerns you can listen to the interview or you can read his letter of November 5, 2007 to the Oversight Committee of the Legislature.

When you talk about Jekyll Island there is one distinguishing factor which you have to keep in mind: the State of Georgia owns it. We, the people, own it. It is for us, for all of us, for the rich, for the poor, for the old couple that wants to drive to the beach and sit in the sand for a few hours, and for the couple with 5 kids that can’t afford a trip this year, but can entertain the kids at the Jekyll beach where the sand is wet, the water salty and the waves mesmerizing.

The JIA seems to be focused on turning Jekyll Island into a money making venture which simply means nothing cheap, nothing affordable (or very little), nothing inviting to the good old, average Georgian.

And then there is that view of the ocean. Just as soon as you get to the end of the entrance road, you turn to the left and there it is. The ocean, the waves, that sound! And, it goes on and on and on. When I was a kid it was 3 zillion miles from that first view of the ocean to the hotel! It is public and it is big and it is accessible. In contrast, go ride around St. Simons and count the number of times you can see the beach. You can hardly find the beach unless you are at a hotel.

Senator Chapman points out in his letter that several actions of the JIA appear to be

inconsistent with the park’s statutory purpose as a public facility set aside for the benefit of “the plain people” of Georgia.

And what is it that the JIA has done?

1. The possible violation of a constitutional prohibition against granting gratuities, including the forgiveness of a public debt as a result of the JIA “…granting a rent abatement estimated to be in excess of $10,000,000 to Trammell Crow and Partners…”

A similar possible violation of the gratuities prohibition by the JIA’s acceptance of “Linger Longer’s proposal for a combination of general obligation and revenue bonds totaling $84,500,000 to cover infrastructure costs associated with the proposed town center.”

2. An expressed intent by the JIA to make sure that ocean view rooms are not affordable by the average Georgian by allowing developers to charge what the market will bear and letting the “not so rich” go elsewhere if they can’t pay the bill. Senator Chapman notes:

This kind of thinking is reflected in policy shown by the Board’s approval of the replacement of the affordable Buccaneer Resort by Trammell Crow and partners, where room rates averaged $89 per night during the years 2002-2006, with a 540-room upscale hotel, where room rates will average double that amount in the off-season and $250 per night during the summer months. Add to these 540 rooms the 400 high-end rooms proposed by Linger Longer for its Jekyll town center, along with the 157 existing rooms at the upscale Jekyll Island Club Hotel, and the park will have well over half of its lodgings priced beyond the means of most Georgians.

3. “The Board is currently considering a proposal by Linger Longer Communities which calls for a beachside Jekyll town center that would result in the elimination of the state park’s most popular oceanfront public parking lots.”

4. “The Board has failed to take into account the environmental impact of a beachside community of the scale proposed by Linger Longer.”

5. “The proposed Jekyll town center includes 14 acres, currently designated as a “nature preserve,” that lie within the park’s 65% protected zone. Acceptance of all or any part of this segment of the proposal would require a redrawing of the existing 65/35 map and would constitute an amendment of the park’s Master Plan. Accordingly, the Authority would have to comply with sections 12-3-243.1 of the GA Code (see Attachment B) beginning with the submission of “a complete copy of the proposed amendment to the Speaker of the House, President of the Senate, members of the Jekyll Island State Park Authority Oversight Committee, and Office of Legislative Counsel at least 60 days prior to the date of the meeting at which the proposed amendment will be considered.”

Senator Chapman suggests several recommendations for the Oversight Committee’s consideration:

1. Seek an Official Opinion of the Attorney General on the question of the power of the Jekyll Island Authority to grant rent abatements or other subsidies to persons and corporations leasing property in the State Park from the Authority. Included among such subsidies the Attorney General should be asked about: a) the Constitutionality of a sale of bonds by the Jekyll Island Authority at the prescription of a party to whom the Authority is leasing property, when the proceeds of the sale of such bonds is to be used for the improvement of that leased property, and b) the legality of granting a rent abatement to a party for hotel redevelopment on nine acres of prime oceanfront property in light of OCGA 12-3-271, which calls for the Jekyll Island Authority to develop the park “at the lowest rates reasonable and possible for the benefit of the people of the State of Georgia.”
2. Seek an Official Opinion of the Attorney General in regard to that portion of the GA Code OCGA 121-3-235(14), calling for Jekyll Island State Park to be available to and affordable for people of average income, specifically in light of the Authority’s failure to exercise its power in behalf of the interests of Georgians “of average income” in its pursuit of the redevelopment of the hotel and other lodging facilities at Jekyll Island State Park.
3. Seek an Official Opinion of the Attorney General in regard to the applicability of the Environmental Policy Act, OCGA 12-16-1 et. seq., to the actions of the Jekyll Island Authority, specifically its duty to prepare an “environmental effects report” pursuant to that statute’s requirements.
4. Notify the Board of the Jekyll Island Authority of its duty to conform to the provisions of OCGA 12-3-243.1, in which notice of changes to the Master Plan for Jekyll Island must be submitted to the Overview Committee.

While the JIA apparently has some autonomy in ruling Jekyll Island, I certainly hope that the Oversight Committee flexes its muscles and imposes the will of the people of Georgia. The Governor appoints the members of the JIA, they aren’t elected. But those elected officials that can fix this, ought to and if they don’t that is what elections are for. If you think the JIA is on the wrong road, you can notify the members of the Authority Board, or Governor Perdue, or Sen. Tommie Williams (R-19) who is a Senate member of the Oversight Committee or Senator Chapman.

Let’s hope that Jekyll’s great view of the ocean is preserved for our kids and grandchildren!

 
 Sen. Jeff Chapman (R-3), Jekyll Island Report [29:15m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (240)

Jekyll Island Revitalization Group Outlines Flaws in Bid Process!

Published
by
Wilson
on October 25, 2007
in Blog
. 0 Comments

The scandalous bid process for the redevelopment of Jekyll Island enters the next phase. In a protest letter to Bill Donahue, Executive Director of the Jekyll Island State Park Authority, Robert G. Brazier, the attorney for the Jekyll Island Revitalization Group, outlines numerous objections to and flaws in the bid process.

You may recall my interview with Wade Shealy in which we found out that political favoritism appears to be alive and well in Georgia. I don’t know how many people called Governor Perdue’s office to protest the shenanigans, but apparently the Jekyll Island Authority is going to stick by its guns and stand by its acceptance of Linger Longer’s bid.

That leaves the Jekyll Island Revitalization Group (JIRG) with little choice but to hire a lawyer and assert their rights, ultimately the right to go to court. (Which by the way, is probably the greatest right we have.) If you take the time to read the protest letter, you will find an overview of the various legal and constitutional issues resulting from the manner in which the bid process was handled.

What does JIRG want?

JIA is advised to consider these constitutional objections, as well as the facts presented to the JIA. JIA is requested to strike the proposal submitted by Linger Longer Communities and select the proposal submitted by Jekyll Island Revitalization Group. In the alternative, JIA is requested to re-start the entire bidding process for RFP 244.

Violations of the foregoing list of rights and guarantees with regard to Jekyll Island Revitalization Group give rise to a direct cause of action under 42 U.S.C.A. $ 1983 and $ 1988 for the violation of Federal Constitutional rights. Such causes of action allow for the recovery of all losses accruing to Jekyll Island Revitalization Group as a result of the JIA’s violation of these constitutional rights and guarantees, including attorneys fees and monetary damages. In addition, the violation of rights and guarantees could give rise to actions for a writ of mandamus or injunction.

Stay tuned. I am sure this ain’t over yet!

Say So Long to Jekyll Island, Hello to Money and Developers!

Published
by
Wilson
on September 17, 2007
in Podcast
. 2 Comments

In the nasty way that money and politics work in Georgia, the next victim appears to be Jekyll Island. In this interview with David Egan, Founder of Save Jekyll Island, you will, hopefully, better understand the battle that is being fought between the Jekyll Island Authority (JIA) and the residents and visitors that love Jekyll and want to see certain aspects of its beauty preserved and remain undeveloped.

If you have time, you might want to compare Egan’s comments with those of Eric Garvey, Senior Director of Marketing for JIA, in an interview a few weeks ago.

It seems that everyone agrees the motels on the Island need replacing. Fine! It seems that everyone agrees there should be motels that ordinary people can afford. But the JIA is planning to put the ordinary folks (Say, those who don’t want to pay more than $150 a night for a room!) across the street, not on the beach, while the higher priced motels get the beach side. And the word is, there will be a “few” of the more reasonably priced establishments.

A few? Why not all of them? Why not most of them? Let the rich boys drive a little further and go to Amelia Island!

Another big issue seems to be blocking the view from the road to the ocean. Anyone that has been to Jekyll should recall the fact that you can drive for several miles from the entrance road before concrete and steel blocks your view of the ocean. There aren’t many unobstructed views like that left on the Atlantic, at least not from a developed island as opposed to an undeveloped one like Cumberland.

The JIA apparently wants to develop a town center between the road and the beach. The question is why do you have to mess with that view? Why can’t you build the town center on the other side of the road? That’s where all the land is!

What really gets me is the way the JIA treats the citizens who are interested enough to attend their meetings. They treat them just like every other board that I know anything about in this state that is filled with Perdue appointees: the public doesn’t matter and the JIA will do what it damn well pleases. And that is the legacy of the Republican Party as a whole. They believe this State is red enough, that they will continue to get elected no matter what they do and they can continue to promote their individual interests and the interests of business above all others. The national Republican Party shot itself in the foot, and its just a matter of time until these guys in Georgia do the same.

I understand that even the local Senator from Glynn County, Jeff Chapman, is not happy with how the JIA is handling development issues.

Why did Tommie Williams remove Sally Bethea from the DNR Board? Why is the JIA going to do as it pleases in developing Jekyll? The answer is simply this: developers and their money! There are developers on the JIA. There are developers on the DNR Board. A majority I would bet. There are developers who want to plan the development of Jekyll. There are developers who want to build the motels and restaurants. There are developers who want to lease and operate the motels from the State. And all of them want to make money, lots of it.

Space for development on Jekyll is limited by law to 35% of the Island. There are only a few acres left and you can bet the next development plan adopted by the JIA will be the last opportunity the developers will have for decades to get their hands on Jekyll. There just aren’t that many opportunities to make sure that every inch of the best land with the best view has a building on it so they can make the most money possible.

And who are these developers? The ones that get the leases will be the politically connected ones. The ones that get the lucrative contracts will be the ones that contributed the most to the campaigns of our elected officials. And do we care?

Jekyll is called “Georgia’s Jewell” and we know what happens to jewels when they are not protected. They’re stolen. Jekyll wasn’t purchased by the State so developers could make money. The JIA wasn’t created to develop Jekyll to the fullest extent possible. And the State certainly didn’t buy the Island so that developers could get rich!

 
 David Eagan, Save Jekyll Island [27:07m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (215)

Interview with Eric Garvey, Jekyll Island Authority

Published
by
Wilson
on August 31, 2007
in Podcast
. 2 Comments

Eric is the Senior Director of Marketing and Business Development for the Jekyll Island Authority. Jekyll Island was bought by the State in 1947 from those rich boys who called themselves the Jekyll Island Club. You know, the Morgans, Rockefellers, Goulds, Vanderbuilts, but no Smiths.

In case you didn’t know it, the State owns all the land on Jekyll Island, even the land that homes and hotels are built upon. They all pay rent to the Authority and when the lease is up, usually 99 years, they can take their building with them. Sure they can! Even the Jekyll Island Authority has a 99 year lease which expires in 2049.

Eric explains some of the issues surrounding future development on the Island, particularly the hotels. According to Eric, a new hotel has not been built on the Island since about 1972 and the present hotel buildings are outdated. As a result, the Island is losing tourists and money.

To build new hotels or to renovate the old hotels would require the Authority to grant the hotel operators new and longer leases. Since the Authority’s lease expires in just over 40 years and since the hotels want 90+ year leases, the Authority can’t grant them what they need to invest in new hotels. Or can it? I checked and it appears that after the initial 99 year term, the lease is automatically extended for another 40 years.

Another issue is what kind of hotel to build. Should it be the Ritz Carlton or Comfort Inn. Should it be cheap hotels affordable by all Georgians or should there be some high priced hotels? According to Eric, the goal is to have a mix of hotels with a mix of room rates that might attract a broader spectrum of tourist.

By law, 65% of the Island must remain undeveloped. According to Eric, the Island consists of only about 5000 acres, that means that about 1700 acres can be developed. (The statute creating the authority states the Island consists of 11,000 acres.)

The Authority operates the Island without any financial support from the State. That is why the Authority pays the State $1 for the lease and why you pay to even drive onto the Island. And remember, in addition to hotel tax, etc., they have a golf course and a water park. The Authority also runs a restaurant and other enterprises. There is apparently some criticism of the State operating such mundane enterprises and there is an effort to turn them over to private enterprise. Hmmm! That smells like a lease I would like to have–and everyone else.

There is a Jekyll Island Foundation which helped raise the $3M for the Georigia Sea Turtle Center.

So there you have it, the usual tension between development and conservation. Who gets the leases? Who gets to make tons of money? Do the sea turtles still visit and lay their eggs on the beach or do they have to get a room?

 
 Eric Garvey [29:59m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (195)