I was referring to both the postings and your responses to those who leave comments on any topic other than BSL.

Zippy: We’ve not seen a market study that’s shown more retail would succeed because of our market realities. (See Peabody Place.) If we can lure some retail, we hope they’ll be in the CBID.

Mary: Are you talking about the comments or the posts themselves? We think the posts have been consistent, but we admit that Mike’s revisionist history and inability to see the mote in his own eye do test every ounce of our patience (and apparently we’ve failed).

By the way, does anyone here respect “anonymous? What the hell good is a comment if the author doesn’t have the testicular fortitude to put his name behind it? THOSE are the comments that should be pulled. But I digress……

Let me try to be gentle.

The problem here is that my good friend Lendermon is too much of a gentleman and pays far too much respect to fringe kooks and groups like “Friends for Our Riverfront”.

We are all allowing the discussion of far too many meaningless issues to get in the way of doing the right thing. The right thing is to finish BSL WITHOUT ANY REGARD
for those complaining.

The RDC has the standing, connections and clout to squash these fools and it’s time to do it. At the end of the day when the ribbon cutting ceremony takes place nobody is going to remember the old farts that got trampled over along the way.

You don’t want to be the bad guy? Why not? Is being polite to bullying buffoons really delivering the results you want? You’re gonna get attacked no matter what you do. Benny! RDC…. give the sunsabitches something to really be mad about.

Win, That’s what matters. Thats what the cotton traders did. They didn’t discuss how their actions would affect anyone else. They had courage and focused on doing what worked for them. RDC, please do the same.

Grab a firm grip on the pliers, squeeze on the tooth and yank the damned thing out.

I am Tommy Volinchak and I approve this message.

If you don’t like my message e mail me and I will smack you down some more. tommy@tunemanproductions.com

Hey, you know what? I approve of this message so much that if you don’t like it you can call me 901.949.2128

Ask For Testiculus Maximus.

* RDC………. hire me as a special consultant. I will get your funding, I’ll crush your cockroaches and I won’t go to one single public hearing or meeting to do it.

* Cromer….. call me, I’ll buy lunch.

SCM’s advocacy on behalf of the consolidation movement has been more subtle and without the hyperbole of the BSL postings although there is no doubt where they stand on that issue. Don’t believe me, read the archives. The postings are chock full of facts and data and SCM’s tone is persuasive, not ardent. Participants, even those who disagree, are treated with respect and aren’t labeled fools. You really can do better than that, can’t you?

Perhaps I’m comparing apples and oranges because how does one quantify the potential benefits of the BSL other than to suggest it will bring more people to the river?

My two cents from a faithful reader.

Opponents criticize the investment and the project in total. They would have Memphis simply walk away from the investment of millions and millions of dollars with no thought to the size of that loss. Well I believe it makes much more sense to provide the small amount of additional funding and complete the project. Beale Street Landing will certainly be a catalyst to attract more and more Memphians downtown to our beautiful riverfront.

Is it just me or do some of the comments seem like a huge overdose of faked outrage? Awfully defensive and why all the hate for Mike who posed some legitimate questions? Yeah, he’s angry but where was this level of vitriol at Branston’s highly critical piece about the RDC’s tactics recently?

The most thoughtful people in Memphis have always had their doubts about this project despite Smart City Memphis’ cheerleading. If they don’t like what we have to say, I suggest they stop shaking their pom-poms.

Fair?! How about, essential?

Agreed, stopping isn’t an option. Neither is forgetting. This fiasco reminds me of the missing floor of the garage. Nobody is ever held accountable for their mistakes. No wonder the citizens don’t trust the people who are making the big money decisions.

Has anyone sought to verify the RDC’s claims that they have saved the the city boat loads of money managing the riverfront? You know, like an actual accounting?

The efforts of the RDC have been instrumental in the vast majority of the improvements along Riverside Drive that we all now take for granted. The jihad waged by Mike Cromer to disparage Beale Street Landing and the RDC in particular is taking on the appearance of being a tad bit irrational. Does he have some personal financial stake in destroying a worthy project and demeaning good people? Who are the “money people” funding Mike’s war against the project? Inquiring minds want to know, hummm.

Be careful. If you ever fall off your high horse, you’re going to break your neck.

You have lost all sense of proportion and perspective on this issue, and we have other things to talk about, so we’ll not take the time correct all the misstatements, half-truths, and warped facts in your last comment.

No more questions at all. We just hate to see someone make this big a fool of themselves.

YOU: There never should have even been a 106 process. It was all politically motivated and not undertaken in good faith.

A: The section 106 was necessary because BSL sat right next to, and even overlapped, a historic area (the cobblestones). The SHPO report said that BSL should not be considered separately from the historic area — they should be considered together. They were right. In fact, the CR Master Plan said that the entire area should be thought of as one component, with the centerline at Union. BSL was essentially an enhancement to the cobblestone area — necessary only because the big boats were already banned at the cobblestones, and the Mud Island boat landing would be bulldozed by a land bridge.

The RDC was anxious to get BSL approved and did not want to show its hand on the cobblestones. They had long decided (contrary to the Master Plan) that the cobblestones were to be diminished and de-commissioned in favor of their shiny new object, BSL. To get around SHPO, they were able to use their political connections to have the report overruled by TDEC. The final public meeting was a complete sham. So, yes, you are correct, the process was politicized. But to RDC’s benefit.

YOU: If the RDC has 24/7 access to halls of poverty and is greasing the skids, why is this project in question then?

Don’t pretend to be naive. It’s because: (1) At long last the RDC has made a big ugly money goof they cannot easily cover up. (2) They have lost their protector (Herenton), and there is a new mayor and largely new City Council. (3) People are just getting weary of the no-results RDC and its b.s. (4) People are finally coming to the realization about some truths that I and others have been saying all along. (5) Money and priorities. We don’t need a boat dock to nowhere. And we can’t afford a $37M piece of urban art.

We don’t need an icon on our riverfront, either. We already have a recognizable one: A Bass Pro in the shape of a Pyramid.

YOU: And we notice that you and others never manage to point out the money that RDC has saved the city in maintenance, landscaping, etc., or the new additions RDC has given us, like stairway connecting bluffs to Tom Lee Park.

A: I specifically avoid talking about about RDC’s, separate management role, to keep my messages clear and focused. If the City thinks the RDC does a fine job, let them keep the contract. If not, let then let the contract be re-bid at next renewal. But let’s be clear on this: Whether or not they are good property managers has little to do with whether or not they should continue to have the exclusive development role. It won’t surprise you that I think they have proved to be incredibly incompetent in the development role. The City should have figured this out back in 2005, but by then the RDC had secured a ten-year Development contract.

And let’s not perpetuate the b.s.: In fact, the RDC has NOT provably saved the City any money. First, remember that the RDC gets to pocket every dime they can make off the riverfront. The City’s management fee may only be a little over $2M at this point, but the RDC’s total budget is more like $6-7M. Unaccounted for in this is all the off-books equipment, supplies, employees, free utilities, and whatever else the RDC “borrows” from the City. (For example, try to find even a truck on the RDC’s Form 990.) The fact is, the City isn’t paying them to manage the riverfront, they are subsidizing a private business down there on the riverfront.

Now you could argue that running the riverfront as a business concession is an efficient way to go, and I’d be inclined to agree — other policy questions aside. But comparing the RDC’s “management fee” to various rates of inflation (one of RDC’s PowerPoint slides) or even suggesting that it comprises the true cost to the City, just insults my intelligence.

Second, the stairway is actually the completion of a plan and project that began long before RDC was even a gleam in Herenton’s eye. And NONE of the small “development” projects the RDC has ever done have stemmed from the RDC’s own Master Plan — except BSL (allegedly) and we can see where that is.

YOU: If you don’t think that it’s fair to paint Friends group as the people in black hats (which we happen to agree with), why doesn’t that common sense approach apply to RDC too? And we think you underestimate what the board knows and supports, and suggestions that they are mere puppets is not only inaccurate, it is demeaning.

A: I sit in on those board meetings, which is more than you do. I know what the board is told. I know the the kind of questions they ask. It may be demeaning to say it, but the truth sometimes hurts.

What’s more, I’ve read all the minutes for the first 3-4 years of their existence — both the executive committee and the board. The decisions were and still are made by the insiders, starting with John Stokes and Benny Lendermon. What we can’t knows is whose advice they are following, if not their own. Because, you see, they do not open their Exec Committee meetings any more. They pretend they do not have such a thing. This is where they play the “private” side of their “public-private partnership” to the hilt. We do not know what developers, financiers, and other Memphis power-players Benny Lendermon gets his marching orders from by telephone. But we can guess that Mr. Lendermon doesn’t make a move regarding, say, the Promenade without a phone call to a certain developer.

If you look on my site you’ll find the story of the Scorpion and the Frog. I don’t “hate” the RDC. They are doing what God made and conditioned them to do. Like the scorpion in the fable, they can’t help themselves. It is their nature. They are, after all, wannabe developer-tycoons (and former city employees). The sad part is that they are plainly incompetent in that role. But I do not even blame them for that. They’re obviously conflicted. Their true role was to serve as puppets and tools for the real developers, who needed the cover of a public-private partnership to make a land grab on the riverfront.

YOU: And finally, the person you quote about the project is someone who was released by one of the companies working on Beale Street Landing, and he did not ever work on the project.

A: I had figured that you and Lendermon would have the guy investigated within 24 hours and report back to us. Thanks for the update. But no matter. The truth is that all the RDC got out of that design contest was a bunch of pretty pictures from some “internationally-acclaimed” urban artists. They still had to pay millions to turn the design into something they could actually build. The boat dock alone cost a small fortune to figure out, due to it’s being “unique” in the world. Now the RDC spinmeisters are trying to blame SHPO and other regulators for it all. That is total b.s.

Any more questions?