|
Tennant answers
some questions
By CAL BEVERLY
Publisher
Peachtree City Councilman Dan
Tennant has made himself the point man in trying to calm the troubled
waters of the tennis center scandal. He sought a reversal of the city
Development Authority’s vote to resign from its management contract
overseeing the tennis center and the Fred Brown Amphitheater.
Tennant entered city politics as the consummate outsider, first challenging
Group VI president Jim Pace for a spot on the city council in a write-in
campaign. Later, Tennant was elected in a three-way race for another spot
on the council.
In his Sept. 30 letter to the city and the development authority, Tennant
wrote, “Therefore, I respectfully call upon the DAPC to hold a special
called meeting as soon as possible to decide whether or not to rescind
their previous announcement to terminate their management contract with
Peachtree City to operate the aforementioned venues, and whether or not
to accept Mr. Christian’s offer to resign.”
The DAPC subsequently did rescind their resignation vote.
I am fascinated with how Tennant has managed to perform a chameleon-like
change from outsider to insider-power-broker, I asked him to respond to
a few questions. My questions, and Tennant’s answers, are below.
Question: What is your assessment of Executive Director Virgil Christian’s
management skills and financial oversight of the tennis center?
Answer: “I have come to know Virgil Christian reasonably well over
the past several years. I consider him a friend, and a man of high moral
character. We are both Christian men with young children, we like sports,
and our wives are friends. I do not think he is a crook, I do not think
he is incompetent, and I don’t believe he would do anything knowingly
unethical or illegal. Having said that, I do not believe Virgil’s
educational background or work experience includes being an expert in
finance, but I do think he is a well-liked and respected manager of the
tennis center.
“While it is somewhat difficult to separate Virgil the friend from
Virgil the executive director of the DAPC, I will try to be as objective
and articulate as possible.
“Virgil Christian was selected by the DAPC to be its executive director
following Kristi Rapson’s termination of her employment with the
authority. The key element for everyone to understand is that Virgil Christian
does not report to the city council, the city manager or anyone else at
Peachtree City. He reports to a seven-member board appointed by the Peachtree
City Council, and that authority is a separate legal entity. It is not
my role or function to monitor Virgil’s management skills or financial
oversight. That is the job of the DAPC.
“It is my opinion that any member of council, including the mayor,
who interjects himself directly into the internal affairs of any other
separate legal entity is doing a disservice to the city and to the said
separate legal entity, i.e., authority. The primary role any member of
council, including the mayor, should play in this relationship, (other
than taking a genuine interest and understanding the authority’s
job) is to make appointments and in the case of the DAPC, allocate funds
from the hotel-motel tax.
“While I have heard the current mayor claim that there are financial
irregularities in the financial data and reporting of the DAPC, I have
no direct knowledge of it. I am certainly in favor of abiding by the law,
and I believe the DAPC and Mr. Christian share that view.
“It is my opinion that if our current mayor would spend one-tenth
the time being as concerned with the $27 million dollar budget he and
the rest of council oversees as he has on monitoring the DAPC budget and
operations, which he does not oversee, we would not have had an 18 percent
tax increase levied on PTC residents, which by the way, I voted against.”
Q.: Are you supporting Christian’s continued management of the center
and amphitheater? If so, why and on what basis?
A.: “Again, it is not my role to make the determination of who runs
the tennis center or amphitheater. I have already explained that. Having
said that, if the DAPC board feels that Virgil is the best candidate to
run those venues, then he should be retained. If not, they should find
someone else who can do a better job.
“I have not made any request to any DAPC authority member to retain
Virgil Christian or hire someone else to fulfill his duties. That is not
my job.
“I believe Virgil is a well known and highly respected man in the
world of tennis, and because of his networking abilities, if DAPC could
figure out some way to employ him in some capacity that fits them and
him best, everybody benefits.”
Q.: Do you think the DAPC has done a good job of overseeing the financial
operations of the two venues? Can you defend the proposition that the
DAPC should continue to manage the two venues? If so, please make your
case FOR the DAPC.
A.: “Let’s look at the negative side first. We have about $1.5
million in debt, some of which has not been accounted for, from what I
understand. In addition, it appears that money may have been borrowed
by the DAPC over the years for some degree of operational purposes. From
what I know of the law, that is not what should have been done, and I
want the law to be obeyed. I do not believe, however, that deliberate
fraudulent behavior ever existed. To my knowledge, all the DAPC members
from years gone by were ethical, honorable and decent men, who gave a
lot of free yet valuable time to the authority. It appears to be much
more likely to me that any improper financial accounting was a matter
of ignorance or bad judgment. In any case, I am neither an accountant
nor an attorney, and cannot make a firm judgment in the matter without
having accurate data and sound professional opinion presented to me.
“On the positive side, we have two world-class facilities in our
city that we can all take pride in, that operationally have not cost Peachtree
City taxpayers a dime, that bring in literally millions of dollars to
our community each year in trade and tourism, and that help to keep our
property values among the highest in metro Atlanta. I personally do not
play tennis, but I am an occasional patron of the amphitheater.
“As of last night, I saw documents which purport that the two venues
combined for a net profit of about $36,000 this past fiscal year, which
just ended on Sept. 30. If the numbers are correct, the amphitheater made
a profit of about $112,000, and the tennis center had a net loss of about
$65,000. I believe economic development activity showed a loss to account
for the difference. I don’t have the papers in front of me, so I
am going on memory from last night here.
“Given that we have first-class, pristine facilities that we can
all be proud of, I do not believe a legitimate argument can be made that
gross mismanagement of these facilities exists today, as has been argued
by the current mayor. That is not to say that some degree of mismanagement
never occurred over the past ten years.
“Finally, I have never argued that the management of these two venues
can solely be run by the DAPC. In fact, the whole reason I encouraged
the DAPC to reconsider their original decision to turn the venues over
to the city was to give us all ample time and opportunity to determine
the wisest course of action, and the make the most sensible management
arrangement. Evidently, there are several options to be explored, and
I am happy and relieved the city is not going to take over the venues
on Nov. 1 for the reasons stated in my previous letter about the subject.”
Q.: What is your opinion about Christian’s financial package with
the DAPC, including the rent-free pro shop and DAPC employees running
it?
A.: “This is America. It’s a land where you can dream and take
a chance and be handsomely rewarded or fall on your face. I do not begrudge
anybody for making a lot of money, if the money was earned honestly. My
understanding is that when Virgil was recruited by the DAPC in the early
’90s to build a tennis center at Planterra Ridge, he was given a
base salary of around $30,000 with some added incentives, which evidently
included his running a pro shop, commissions on lessons, etc. If the authority
members at that time agreed to that deal, based on a vision to build a
dream facility, I really don’t have a problem with it. It was part
of the package that it took to recruit Virgil. An old adage may apply
here: You don’t necessarily get what you deserve in life, you get
what you negotiate. Of course, it must be legal.
“While I have no firsthand knowledge of the profitability (or lack
thereof) of The Trading Post (or whatever the official name is of the
pro shop) Virgil has told me he has lost money on the venture in some
years. Although the property is indeed city owned, because it is managed
by the authority, I don’t have a problem with Virgil’s potential
to make a profit. Let’s face it, The Ashland Grille is a privately-owned
venture in the same city-owned building, and while they do pay rent, nobody
seems to object to a for-profit business operating on city property.
“It’s up to the management of the restaurant to make a profit.
The same is true of Virgil’s pro shop. The rent issue is a matter
between Virgil (or whoever the owner is) and the DAPC and what was negotiated.
“As far as DAPC employees “running” the pro shop, that
is a fair question. I would not be in favor of having any more employees
working at the tennis center check-in center where the pro shop is located
than otherwise would be necessary with no pro shop. In other words, if
the pro shop requires additional staffing than would otherwise be necessary
with no pro shop, I think those expenses should be paid for by the owner
of the pro shop. I do not know if the Trading Post pays for staffing.
Again, this is a matter between the DAPC and the owner of the pro shop,
not a matter for council to mandate.”
Q.: What is your opinion of the “commingling” of public and
private funds? How big a problem, in dollar terms and in public perception,
do you think “commingling” represents?
A.: “I am not in favor of commingling of private and public funds.
I have no idea how the day-to-day finances of the pro shop and DAPC revenues
work (which is what I assume you are talking about in asking the question)
but I would assume there are separate “tills” and accounting
procedures in place to prevent any abuse here. It is my understanding
that Virgil Christian is not involved in the deposit or accounting of
funds. I am in favor of any procedures that are put in place to eliminate
commingling of private and public money. I do not think Virgil Christian
is dishonest or would commit fraud, but I agree the public perception
of how this is handled could be improved. Again, this is a management
decision between the DAPC board and the owner of the pro shop, not a matter
for council to micro manage.”
Q.: What is your opinion as to whether there might be city ethics ordinance
issues involving Tate Godfrey, his position as an officer of Group VI,
Group VI’s status as one of DAPC’s major creditors, and Godfrey’s
votes, particularly the most recent votes which directly affect the repayment
of the debt owed to Group VI and others? I’m referring specifically
to city code sections 62-72, 62-81, 62-83 and 62-89. (Just FYI, looks
like there’s also a problem with state law, OCGA 36-62-5 (e)(1)(b)
and (f), not to mention years of open meetings and open records problems.)
A. “I am always in favor of all affected parties to adhere to the
PTC ethics ordinance. I am also a huge proponent of following open meeting
and open records laws.
“The contract to build the tennis center expansion was let when Godfrey
still worked at Pathways. It is my understanding that Jim Fulton was asked
to come back and help with the negotiations with the architect and builder.
It is my understanding that Tate Godfrey has abstained on all votes in
matters of Group VI where there could be a conflict of interest.
“As far as the recent vote to retain the management of the venues,
I personally do not see how that is a conflict of interest. The debt was
incurred by the DAPC, the DAPC is ultimately responsible for the debt,
and whether or not the DAPC maintains or relieves itself of the management
of the tennis center and amphitheater does not change those facts. It
is my opinion that while the DAPC is ultimately responsible for its own
debt, the city is morally and ethically bound to do whatever we can to
see that the debt is paid since the money was used to enhance city owned
facilities. Mr. Brown argues that the city has no obligation whatever.
Legally, he is right, I guess. Morally, he is wrong.
“I do not fault Godfrey for voting to retain management of the facilities,
since it was at my urging that the DAPC reconsidered its previous vote
to hand the management of the venues back to the city.”
Q.: If such legal issues are found to actually exist, what is your opinion
about what should be the outcome?
A.: “Again, I am always in favor of adhering to our ethics ordinance.
If someone feels there has been a violation of the ethics ordinance, he
or she should file a complaint and the process that is already set in
place to handle potential violations should be followed.”
Q.: Would you object to the Tommy Turner group contracting with the city
council, rather than the DAPC, to operate the two venues? Why or why not?
A.: “Whatever the best long-term solution is to efficiently operate
the venues, find a way to resolve the debt problem, and ensure the long-term
viability of both venues is what I am for. I would not have a problem
with the city contracting out with a private organization such as what
Turner seems to be proposing, but numerous legal questions need to be
answered such as how it would affect alcohol sales, sponsorships, debt
repayment, etc. Again, we are far better off taking the time to find the
answers to these and many other questions than to sit by idly and watch
the authority unexpectedly walk away and have the city run the facilities
with a patchwork plan put in place. Time is a friend to those who want
the best long-term solutions put in place.”
Q.: Now two strictly political questions of an active candidate: Do you
expect to get significant political campaign help from tennis center members
(I’m referring to your recent e-mail to tennis center members)? What
is the relationship, if any, between your support of the DAPC in recent
months and your reelection campaign?
A.: “As hard as this is for many to believe, I simply want to do
the right thing. I do not place my role as a city councilman above my
role as a husband or father. I have a full time job that is more demanding
since the economy has struggled, and I operate a small home based business.
I am active in my church and I am a trustee for a private charitable foundation.
And once in a while, I like to have a life and play golf or travel.
“Getting reelected to the PTC council is a matter that is important
to me because I want to serve average citizens and families effectively,
not because it gives me something to do or makes me feel better about
myself. I am a competitive person by nature, so I do want to win, but
winning a city council election is not nearly as important to me as being
an example to my kids to stand up and do the right thing, no matter who
the audience is.
“I find it almost amusing that some, including Mr. Brown, have chosen
to label me as the DAPC’s friend and savior (my words, not his).
The plain truth is that I know very few people at the tennis center, and
members of the DAPC are not my personal and social friends. I am standing
up for what I believe is the right thing to do.
“Of course, by taking a stand, you expect the support of those whom
you defend, so I don’t apologize for seeking the votes of those who
believe in me. The other side of the fence is that I incur the wrath of
those who think otherwise. That’s life.”
Q.: How would you characterize your September 2003 support base as contrasted
against your support base of four years ago? Are they approximately the
same, substantially different, or no change? How have you changed in your
political thinking and in your political alliances over the course of
four years?
A. “My base is still the same. I represent the needs of average PTC
families, and I try to do the right thing by them in every vote I make.
One thing I have learned over these past four years, is that it is far
better to communicate with everyone than to create factions. I have met
thousands of people over these past four years, and my sense of overall
understanding of issues and problems has increased dramatically. I am
better at understanding there are always two sides of every story, and
I think I have been a healing process in finding consensus and reaching
compromise whenever possible. The only change in my political thinking
has been to be more inclusive in reaching out to others for a different
point of view. At the same time, I am very strong-willed and am not afraid
to take a stand when I think I am right.”
My thoughts on this exchange will be in next week’s paper.
|
