Ailing shopping centers, a set on Flickr.
Commercial vacancies and the Trader Joe's dilemma
A photographic companion as preview to our forthcoming editorial on the Trader Joe's dilemma, ailing shopping centers and anchor tenant vacancies
Alston: No constitutional violations in board's video presentation restriction
Guilford County Commission Chairman Skip Alston is defiant about pursuing a proposed policy to limit video presentations by citizens to material pre-cleared for placement on the agenda. He said he has not seen the ACLU letter charging that the policy appears to be in violation of the First Amendment, but responded to some of the points I relayed to him.
Previously.
Alston rejected the notion that the requirement that the only way to show is video is to seek approval from his Agenda Review Committee constitutes a prior restraint on speech. He said the free-speech rights of citizens such as Jodi Riddleberger are not being restricted because they can speak all they want during the public comment period, just not with video.
“If we do have access to video [in the meeting room], it’s our right to restrict access,” he said.
I asked how the county commission justified allowing its officers and employees to use PowerPoint, video and other electronic media to make presentations but restricted citizens to oration.
“We’re elected officials and we’re serving our privileges,” Alston responded. “She is not an elected official with privileges to use the facilities at our whim. She can’t come up and sit in my seat.”
Parker’s letter cites the Supreme Court’s 1992 Forsyth County, Georgia v. the Nationalist Movement ruling, which found that a government regulation “that allows arbitrary application is ‘inherently inconsistent with a valid time, place, and manner regulation because such a discretion has the potential for becoming a means of suppressing a particular point of view.”
The government bears an even greater burden in establishing that restrictions on the content of speech are necessary to serve a compelling governmental interest than it does in justifying time, place and manner regulations, Parker writes, while viewpoint restrictions are “patently unconstitutional.”
Alston told me he considers the county’s proposed policy to be a content restriction.
“As far as content, I think there should be some kind of restrictions on freedom of speech,” he said. “You can’t yell fire in crowded movie theater.
“The situation was she showed a video that we didn’t know what was going to be on it,” he added. “If that was the case then anybody could come up and show a pornographic video. What she tried to do is endorse certain candidates.”
If the county commission’s concern is what material a citizen might show on a video, I asked Alston how he would respond if a citizen came up to the podium during the speakers from the floor segment of the meeting and started graphically describing sex acts.
“Stop them,” Alston responded. “A person can come up there and, within reason, say whatever they want to. They also have to be respectful and maintain decorum. I can call them out of order if they are not respectful and do not maintain decorum.
“I can call them out of order for showing a video that is promoting a political agenda,” he added.
I pointed out in response that the First Amendment explicitly guarantees the right of people to “petition the government for a redress of grievances.”
Alston concurred that the First Amendment guarantees citizens the right to criticize their elected officials, but drew the line at promoting candidates.
The speech also “has to be based on governmental business and not personal business,” he further stipulated.
I noted that Alston turned down a request by Riddleberger to be placed on the agenda to show a video addressing the proposed policy change on multimedia presentations, which directly related to governmental business.
In response, Alston reiterated his stance that Riddleberger was free to address her concerns to the commission during speakers from the floor without the aid of a video.
What was the difference between using a video to make a public presentation and holding up a newspaper while addressing remarks to the commission, I wondered. Would the commission restrict citizens from holding up a copy of YES! Weekly or the Rhino Times while drawing attention to an article about a matter of concern, I asked.
Alston said he views this kind of free-speech activity differently.
“You can talk all you want within those parameters,” he said. “When you stop talking your constitutional right to speak has always been granted.”
Alston also rejected my suggestion that this dispute boils down to protecting even the most unpopular speech.
“I want to protect all speech,” he said. “I’m a proponent for free speech. I fight every day for free speech. When somebody tries to make a mockery and over-extend those parameters it’s a different thing.
“If the courts say that we’ve violated someone’s free speech we’ll stand corrected. At this point our lawyer says we’re in no way violating someone’s free speech by not allowing them to show a video.”
Previously.
Alston rejected the notion that the requirement that the only way to show is video is to seek approval from his Agenda Review Committee constitutes a prior restraint on speech. He said the free-speech rights of citizens such as Jodi Riddleberger are not being restricted because they can speak all they want during the public comment period, just not with video.
“If we do have access to video [in the meeting room], it’s our right to restrict access,” he said.
I asked how the county commission justified allowing its officers and employees to use PowerPoint, video and other electronic media to make presentations but restricted citizens to oration.
“We’re elected officials and we’re serving our privileges,” Alston responded. “She is not an elected official with privileges to use the facilities at our whim. She can’t come up and sit in my seat.”
Parker’s letter cites the Supreme Court’s 1992 Forsyth County, Georgia v. the Nationalist Movement ruling, which found that a government regulation “that allows arbitrary application is ‘inherently inconsistent with a valid time, place, and manner regulation because such a discretion has the potential for becoming a means of suppressing a particular point of view.”
The government bears an even greater burden in establishing that restrictions on the content of speech are necessary to serve a compelling governmental interest than it does in justifying time, place and manner regulations, Parker writes, while viewpoint restrictions are “patently unconstitutional.”
Alston told me he considers the county’s proposed policy to be a content restriction.
“As far as content, I think there should be some kind of restrictions on freedom of speech,” he said. “You can’t yell fire in crowded movie theater.
“The situation was she showed a video that we didn’t know what was going to be on it,” he added. “If that was the case then anybody could come up and show a pornographic video. What she tried to do is endorse certain candidates.”
If the county commission’s concern is what material a citizen might show on a video, I asked Alston how he would respond if a citizen came up to the podium during the speakers from the floor segment of the meeting and started graphically describing sex acts.
“Stop them,” Alston responded. “A person can come up there and, within reason, say whatever they want to. They also have to be respectful and maintain decorum. I can call them out of order if they are not respectful and do not maintain decorum.
“I can call them out of order for showing a video that is promoting a political agenda,” he added.
I pointed out in response that the First Amendment explicitly guarantees the right of people to “petition the government for a redress of grievances.”
Alston concurred that the First Amendment guarantees citizens the right to criticize their elected officials, but drew the line at promoting candidates.
The speech also “has to be based on governmental business and not personal business,” he further stipulated.
I noted that Alston turned down a request by Riddleberger to be placed on the agenda to show a video addressing the proposed policy change on multimedia presentations, which directly related to governmental business.
In response, Alston reiterated his stance that Riddleberger was free to address her concerns to the commission during speakers from the floor without the aid of a video.
What was the difference between using a video to make a public presentation and holding up a newspaper while addressing remarks to the commission, I wondered. Would the commission restrict citizens from holding up a copy of YES! Weekly or the Rhino Times while drawing attention to an article about a matter of concern, I asked.
Alston said he views this kind of free-speech activity differently.
“You can talk all you want within those parameters,” he said. “When you stop talking your constitutional right to speak has always been granted.”
Alston also rejected my suggestion that this dispute boils down to protecting even the most unpopular speech.
“I want to protect all speech,” he said. “I’m a proponent for free speech. I fight every day for free speech. When somebody tries to make a mockery and over-extend those parameters it’s a different thing.
“If the courts say that we’ve violated someone’s free speech we’ll stand corrected. At this point our lawyer says we’re in no way violating someone’s free speech by not allowing them to show a video.”
ACLU: County commission violating C4GC's free speech rights
ACLU of North Carolina Legal Director Katherine Lewis Parker expresses concerns about the constitutionality of the Guilford County Commission's proposed citizen multi-media presentation policy in a letter to the board today:
Additional material after the jump:
Parker:
The American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina Legal Foundation ("ACLU-NCLF")was contacted last week by Guilford County resident Jodi Riddleberger ("C4gc"). Ms. Riddleberger has requested our assistance in connection with a recent decision by the Guilford County Board of Commissioners ("the Board") to ban any and all multimedia presentations during prescribed public comment periods of Board meetings. After conducting an initial investigation, we have concerns that your Board is violating Ms. Riddleberger's rights under the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.
Additional material after the jump:
Parker:
It appears that the county's actions with regard to Ms. Riddleberger, as well as the passage of the ban on multimedia presentations during public comment period constitute violations of the First Amendment. First, we believe that the general requirement that individuals can show videos only if approved and placed on the agenda is an unconstitutional prior restraint on speech. Further, Chairman Alston's specific comments and actions against Ms. Riddleberger suggest that these new rules, while they appear to be content neutral, are a thinly-veiled disguise for impermissible content discrimination, or even viewpoint discrimination....
The actions of the chairman in response to Ms. Riddleberger's request to be placed on the December 1st agenda, as well as the language in the new proposed policy, suggest that the chairman has unbridled discretion to make decisions about who and whater material can be placed on the meeting agendas. There appear to be no standards in place to guide the chairman's actions. That is impermissible under the First Amendment.
Further, the decision to deny Ms. Riddleberger's request to be placed on the December 1st agenda and to show a video that appeared to relate specifically to board business, while noting that a request by the library would be approved, demonstrates that the chairman is making these decisions at least based on the content, and maybe the viewpoint, of the message. Content-based discrimination triggers strict scrutiny review — even higher than that for content-neutral regulations as described above. Under strict scrutiny, a regulation must be necessary to serve a compelling governmental interest by the least restrictive means available.... It seems unlikely that the county can meet this very heavy burden. Further, "[i]n its practical operation," the board's action and proposed policy may "go[] even beyond mere content discrimination," which is patently unconstitutional under the First Amendment.
Judge gives government another crack at turkey processor for Clean Water Act violations
A federal judge dismissed criminal charges against House of Raeford Farms and a plant manager for the turkey processing giant today for alleged violations of the Clean Water Act, but left the door open for the US government to reopen prosecution.US District Court Judge James A. Beaty ruled that dismissal was appropriate because prosecutors violated the Speedy Trial Act, but denied the defendants’ request to close the case for good, contending that “there would be a societal interest in protecting the public and re-prosecuting” the company and its plant manager. The hearing was held in a courtroom at the federal building in Winston-Salem.
Prosecutor Mary D. Carraway, assigned to the environmental crimes section at the US Justice Department, told the court the government intends to do just that. House of Raeford Farms, which employs more than 1,000 people in rural Hoke County (location), and plant manager Gregory Steenblock are defendants in the case.
“The people of the city of Raeford are best served by this case going to trial,” said prosecutor Daniel W. Dooher, also assigned to the environmental crimes section at Justice.
The most recent indictment against House of Raeford Farms and Steenblock alleges that in 2005 and 2006 the plant routinely made unauthorized releases of wastewater containing feathers, blood, internal organs and other body parts that bypassed pre-treatment tanks and dumped the contents directly into the city’s sewer.
Kearns Davis, a Greensboro lawyer with Brooks Pierce law firm who is representing House of Raeford Farms, said there is no evidence the company intentionally bypassed the pretreatment process.
“Nobody’s opening up a valve,” he told the court. “Nobody’s hooking up a hose…. What’s happening is that a pre-treatment tank is not keeping up capacity.”
The government states that the plant in Raeford slaughtered more than 30,000 turkeys per day, five days a week, generating about 1 million gallons of wastewater on an average day. The government’s trial brief promises that city of Raeford employees will testify that they observed turkey parts, fats and grease at the city’s wastewater treatment plant that were discharged from the company’s overflow pipe. The government also plans to call former and current workers at the processing plant to testify that they informed Steenblock that the facility lacked capacity to process the wastewater, yet the problem continued.
The company maintains that it subsequently eliminated the problem in the fall of 2006 by replacing portions of its pretreatment plant at a cost of $1.4 million and paid the city almost $1 million in fines while the upgrade was being planned and implemented.
In support of its motion to dismiss, the company and its plant manager have noted that “due to effective treatment by the municipality, the alleged pollutants did not reach navigable waters."
The government rejected that argument, responding in writing: “Defendants contend that a violation of the law enacted to protect the navigable waters of the United States does not become ‘serious’ until their illegal discharges actually contaminate the nation’s waters. Such logic does not make the crimes any less serious, but would eviscerate the very purpose of the pretreatment provisions of the Clean Water Act.”
Judge Beaty’s dismissal of the original case stems from the government’s failure to bring the case to trial within 70 days of Steenblock’s indictment, as required by the Speedy Trial Act. Dooher called the omission a “mistake in which the government takes full responsibility,” but prosecutors argued in an earlier motion that they immediately notified the court when the Supreme Court declined to intervene in the case at the defendants’ request.
The company argued in its motion to dismiss that the drawn-out nature of the case has particularly harmed Steenblock.
“Of course, some of what appears in Mr. Steenblock’s motion is peculiar to him,” the motion reads. “Most significantly, the shadow cast by federal indictment is larger and darker. House of Raeford is an important part of its community — it employs more than 1,000 people in a rural North Carolina county — but the personal stress and strain of this case are more severe for Mr. Steenblock.”
Davis also said that negative publicity surrounding the case has caused the company untold financial losses.
“A press release by the government resulted in media coverage such that a customer brought a turkey back to a retailer and said, ‘Don’t you know who you’re doing business with?’ implying that House of Raeford Farms is a major environmental violator,” he said. “We have no way of knowing how many people elected to not buy turkeys because of the news coverage.”
Judge rejects bail for convicted staffing executive
A federal judge turned down a bail request by a staffing executive convicted of obstructing the Internal Revenue Service and failing to pay over payroll taxes, reasoning that the defendant had not established that he is not a flight risk especially considering the potential prison time he faces.
Greg Harrison is being held in Piedmont Regional Jail in central Virginia as he awaits sentencing in April.
The US government submitted evidence that Harrison withdrew a total of $79,426 from a business account last year as he awaited trial. Assistant US Attorney Frank Chut argued that the transfers undercut the credibility of a statement reportedly given by Harrison to pre-trial services that he had access to 0 to $500 per month.
“The point is that this calls into question the notion that Mr. Harrison had no other source of income and should be eligible for your services,” Judge James A. Beaty Jr. told public defender Tom Cochran.
Cochran affirmed that Harrison was the president of Global Labor, a staffing licensing company, and that he did make the withdrawals, but argued that the government failed to establish that the money was used for any purpose other than business. Cochran prompted Special Agent J. Todd Purgason, an IRS criminal investigator, to testify that one $10,000 withdrawal was paid over to Puryear & Lingle, a Greensboro law firm. Puryear & Lingle is representing Global Labor as a defendant in a lawsuit brought by a creditor.
The government also introduced high-resolution color surveillance photographs of Harrison making the withdrawals into evidence.
“Maybe Mr. Harrison takes out withdrawals wearing shirt sleeves and does all his business in cash,” Chut told the court. “It’s not the government’s burden to prove he’s not at risk to flee.”
The government also submitted a record of a June 2010 transfer from Global Labor to Harrison in the amount of $131,786 bearing the memo inscription, “Purchase of furniture and equipment by Global Investment Properties." Five days later, the government’s evidence indicates a transfer from Global Labor to Brooks Pierce law firm in the amount of $181,941 with the notation, “Retainer — BGH.” The defendant, whose full name is Bruce Gregory Harrison III, was indicted in November 2010 and had been under investigation for at least a year prior to that.
“Mr. Harrison was represented by Brooks Pierce,” Chut said. “We don’t know what happened to that money. This shows that he had access to significant funds at a point when he said he had access to zero to $500 per month.”
Purgason also testified that Harrison made point-of-sale purchases at restaurants and cash withdrawals drawn from a Global Labor account on a company-issued debit card prior to the indictment. The transactions were recorded in Greensboro; Jamestown; Myrtle Beach, SC; and Vail, Colo., including a ski lift ticket and restaurant tabs.
Cochran addressed concerns about a series of trips Harrison took to South Carolina to visit Global Labor’s lender, GrandSouth Bank, while awaiting trial. The government had previously questioned whether the trips violated the conditions of Harrison’s pre-trial release. Cochran said his client had obtained permission before leaving the Middle District of North Carolina, and Chut did not indicate any difference of viewpoint on the matter.
“If he were considering fleeing, I suggest he would have done that long before he was convicted, maybe before he was charged,” Cochran argued.
Judge Beaty countered that the prospect of a significant prison sentence changed the circumstances, adding that Harrison might have believed he would be acquitted.
Cochran also offered that Harrison’s sister was willing to put up $50,000 in cash and that the defendant would consent to the appointment of two third-party custodians, one of whom would be in his presence at all times. Cochran acknowledged that one of the custodians was an employee of Global Labor.
“Put the fox in the henhouse,” Judge Beaty remarked, “if you want to be a little more specific about what that may represent.”
William Ray and Juraj Slovak, respectively the director and manager of Global Labor, attended the hearing, along with Harrison’s fiancée, Melissa Cullen; his ex-wife, Diona Slaughter; and Jessica Cox, a lawyer close to the family who has observed many of the court proceedings.
Chut argued that Harrison’s word has no credibility because he introduced a false document into evidence at the end of the trial and attempted to perpetrate a fraud on the court when he submitted a document purporting to show that he had transferred operations of the staffing companies to two partners before the period in which the payroll taxes were not paid. Chut told the court that the jury’s conviction after considering the document essentially amounted to a finding of perjury.
The hearing was held up for three hours when federal officials accidentally delivered Harrison to Alamance County instead of to the federal building in Winston-Salem.
Harrison entered the courtroom with a chain around his waist and with his hands cuffed in front of him. He wore a blue dress shirt, but not the jacket-and-tie ensemble that was a fixture of his appearance during the trial. Streaks of gray have appeared in his brown hair since the government took him into custody more than a month ago. He looked quietly hopeful throughout the hearing, even when he turned to look at his fiancée before walking back out.
Greg Harrison is being held in Piedmont Regional Jail in central Virginia as he awaits sentencing in April.
The US government submitted evidence that Harrison withdrew a total of $79,426 from a business account last year as he awaited trial. Assistant US Attorney Frank Chut argued that the transfers undercut the credibility of a statement reportedly given by Harrison to pre-trial services that he had access to 0 to $500 per month.
“The point is that this calls into question the notion that Mr. Harrison had no other source of income and should be eligible for your services,” Judge James A. Beaty Jr. told public defender Tom Cochran.
Cochran affirmed that Harrison was the president of Global Labor, a staffing licensing company, and that he did make the withdrawals, but argued that the government failed to establish that the money was used for any purpose other than business. Cochran prompted Special Agent J. Todd Purgason, an IRS criminal investigator, to testify that one $10,000 withdrawal was paid over to Puryear & Lingle, a Greensboro law firm. Puryear & Lingle is representing Global Labor as a defendant in a lawsuit brought by a creditor.
The government also introduced high-resolution color surveillance photographs of Harrison making the withdrawals into evidence.
“Maybe Mr. Harrison takes out withdrawals wearing shirt sleeves and does all his business in cash,” Chut told the court. “It’s not the government’s burden to prove he’s not at risk to flee.”
The government also submitted a record of a June 2010 transfer from Global Labor to Harrison in the amount of $131,786 bearing the memo inscription, “Purchase of furniture and equipment by Global Investment Properties." Five days later, the government’s evidence indicates a transfer from Global Labor to Brooks Pierce law firm in the amount of $181,941 with the notation, “Retainer — BGH.” The defendant, whose full name is Bruce Gregory Harrison III, was indicted in November 2010 and had been under investigation for at least a year prior to that.
“Mr. Harrison was represented by Brooks Pierce,” Chut said. “We don’t know what happened to that money. This shows that he had access to significant funds at a point when he said he had access to zero to $500 per month.”
Purgason also testified that Harrison made point-of-sale purchases at restaurants and cash withdrawals drawn from a Global Labor account on a company-issued debit card prior to the indictment. The transactions were recorded in Greensboro; Jamestown; Myrtle Beach, SC; and Vail, Colo., including a ski lift ticket and restaurant tabs.
Cochran addressed concerns about a series of trips Harrison took to South Carolina to visit Global Labor’s lender, GrandSouth Bank, while awaiting trial. The government had previously questioned whether the trips violated the conditions of Harrison’s pre-trial release. Cochran said his client had obtained permission before leaving the Middle District of North Carolina, and Chut did not indicate any difference of viewpoint on the matter.
“If he were considering fleeing, I suggest he would have done that long before he was convicted, maybe before he was charged,” Cochran argued.
Judge Beaty countered that the prospect of a significant prison sentence changed the circumstances, adding that Harrison might have believed he would be acquitted.
Cochran also offered that Harrison’s sister was willing to put up $50,000 in cash and that the defendant would consent to the appointment of two third-party custodians, one of whom would be in his presence at all times. Cochran acknowledged that one of the custodians was an employee of Global Labor.
“Put the fox in the henhouse,” Judge Beaty remarked, “if you want to be a little more specific about what that may represent.”
William Ray and Juraj Slovak, respectively the director and manager of Global Labor, attended the hearing, along with Harrison’s fiancée, Melissa Cullen; his ex-wife, Diona Slaughter; and Jessica Cox, a lawyer close to the family who has observed many of the court proceedings.
Chut argued that Harrison’s word has no credibility because he introduced a false document into evidence at the end of the trial and attempted to perpetrate a fraud on the court when he submitted a document purporting to show that he had transferred operations of the staffing companies to two partners before the period in which the payroll taxes were not paid. Chut told the court that the jury’s conviction after considering the document essentially amounted to a finding of perjury.
The hearing was held up for three hours when federal officials accidentally delivered Harrison to Alamance County instead of to the federal building in Winston-Salem.
Harrison entered the courtroom with a chain around his waist and with his hands cuffed in front of him. He wore a blue dress shirt, but not the jacket-and-tie ensemble that was a fixture of his appearance during the trial. Streaks of gray have appeared in his brown hair since the government took him into custody more than a month ago. He looked quietly hopeful throughout the hearing, even when he turned to look at his fiancée before walking back out.
Perkins to seek reelection to county commission
Two Republicans, Trudy Wade and Justin Conrad, have indicated plans to run for the new NC Senate District 27 seat. Meanwhile, some speculation has abounded about whether a Democrat will take a crack at the district, although it leans Republican.
Pricey Harrison, who has been "double-bunked" with fellow Democratic NC House member Maggie Jeffus in the same House District, said she has no plans to run for the new Senate seat. Likewise with Kirk Perkins, a Democrat on the Guilford County Commission, whose district has become somewhat less politically friendly following the imposition of a redistricting plan by the Republican-controlled General Assembly.
Perkins says he plans to seek reelection to the District 4 seat for Guilford County Commission.
Meanwhile, the announcement by US Rep. Brad Miller that he will not seek reelection is headline news this morning.
Pricey Harrison, who has been "double-bunked" with fellow Democratic NC House member Maggie Jeffus in the same House District, said she has no plans to run for the new Senate seat. Likewise with Kirk Perkins, a Democrat on the Guilford County Commission, whose district has become somewhat less politically friendly following the imposition of a redistricting plan by the Republican-controlled General Assembly.
Perkins says he plans to seek reelection to the District 4 seat for Guilford County Commission.
Meanwhile, the announcement by US Rep. Brad Miller that he will not seek reelection is headline news this morning.
Government asks judge to deny bail to Greg Harrison
The US government has asked a federal judge to deny former staffing executive Greg Harrison’s request for release on bail as he awaits sentencing in April, arguing that the defendant has not presented clear and convincing evidence that he is not a flight risk.
Laying out a case the government is likely to make during Harrison’s bail hearing in federal court tomorrow, a legal motion filed today highlights about 10 questionable trips to South Carolina while awaiting trial, evidence that surfaced in trial indicating the defendant earns $8,000 to $10,000 per month as president of a staffing licensing company and a contention that the defendant presented “false testimony and a false document” during trial.
The bail hearing is scheduled for 11 a.m. tomorrow in the Hiram H. Ward federal building in Winston-Salem. Harrison was convicted by a jury in December of 63 counts of obstructing the IRS, failing to pay payroll taxes and failing to pay individual income tax. The jury found that Harrison failed to pay almost $16 million, but prosecutors allege the true amount is closer to $40 million.
The government’s motion reports, “The court detained defendant Harrison and instructed the probation office to reevaluate his risk of non-appearance in light of the evidence at trial which indicated that the defendant had left the Middle District of North Carolina in ten separate trips.”
Doug Corriher, a loan officer and vice president at GrandSouth Bank, testified that Joey Medaloni, a friend, flew Harrison down to the bank headquarters in Greenville, SC several times last year in a corporate jet. Medaloni, formerly a high-profile nightclub owner in Greensboro, was facing sentencing for federal loan fraud at the time. His sentencing is scheduled for next month.
The government’s motion also reports that the court instructed the probation office to investigate Harrison’s financial status in consideration of evidence presented in trial indicating that the defendant served as president of Global Labor and was earning income through licensing contracts.
“The probation memo simply reports statements of defendant Harrison as to his finances,” the government’s motion contends. “These statements are not worthy of trust and do not rebut the evidence at trial as to his contract with Global Labor.”
The government also discounted information in the probation memo concerning the South Carolina trips, contending that Harrison’s representation that he obtained permission from his probation officer beforehand was not credible.
“At the trial of this matter defendant Harrison presented false testimony and a false document by which he claimed to have transferred operation of his staffing companies to Ray McDaniel and Mark Griffin,” the government contends. “Therefore, his statements to the probation office are not worthy of belief and should not be credited by the court.”
Laying out a case the government is likely to make during Harrison’s bail hearing in federal court tomorrow, a legal motion filed today highlights about 10 questionable trips to South Carolina while awaiting trial, evidence that surfaced in trial indicating the defendant earns $8,000 to $10,000 per month as president of a staffing licensing company and a contention that the defendant presented “false testimony and a false document” during trial.
The bail hearing is scheduled for 11 a.m. tomorrow in the Hiram H. Ward federal building in Winston-Salem. Harrison was convicted by a jury in December of 63 counts of obstructing the IRS, failing to pay payroll taxes and failing to pay individual income tax. The jury found that Harrison failed to pay almost $16 million, but prosecutors allege the true amount is closer to $40 million.
The government’s motion reports, “The court detained defendant Harrison and instructed the probation office to reevaluate his risk of non-appearance in light of the evidence at trial which indicated that the defendant had left the Middle District of North Carolina in ten separate trips.”
Doug Corriher, a loan officer and vice president at GrandSouth Bank, testified that Joey Medaloni, a friend, flew Harrison down to the bank headquarters in Greenville, SC several times last year in a corporate jet. Medaloni, formerly a high-profile nightclub owner in Greensboro, was facing sentencing for federal loan fraud at the time. His sentencing is scheduled for next month.
The government’s motion also reports that the court instructed the probation office to investigate Harrison’s financial status in consideration of evidence presented in trial indicating that the defendant served as president of Global Labor and was earning income through licensing contracts.
“The probation memo simply reports statements of defendant Harrison as to his finances,” the government’s motion contends. “These statements are not worthy of trust and do not rebut the evidence at trial as to his contract with Global Labor.”
The government also discounted information in the probation memo concerning the South Carolina trips, contending that Harrison’s representation that he obtained permission from his probation officer beforehand was not credible.
“At the trial of this matter defendant Harrison presented false testimony and a false document by which he claimed to have transferred operation of his staffing companies to Ray McDaniel and Mark Griffin,” the government contends. “Therefore, his statements to the probation office are not worthy of belief and should not be credited by the court.”
This week in YES! Weekly
feature: Greensboro Fringe Festival 10th year celebrates
be there: Guilford Masonic Lodge presents: Star Wars Uncut
dirt: Police response to burglary prompts feelings of neglect in southwest High Point
10 best: 10 best political conventions
voices: Learning to do it myself
editorial: Wanting it all
tunes: An evening at the Haw River Ballroom
flicks: Contraband teems with action, Red Tails doesn’t quite soar high enough
chow: High Point pizza joint is full of surprises
crash: All your droids are belong to us
Winston-Salem developers look to Greensboro for hope
The developers did most of the talking and city staff did most of the listening this morning at what was the last public comment session of the Development Review-Related Advisory Committee. Charlie Sweigart, vice president of Taylor Development Group, tried to refrain from telling “horror stories,” but that feeling distinctly textured his remarks about efforts to navigate the city of Winston-Salem’s permitting process.He found a sympathetic ear from Stan Senft, the vice-chair of the committee and a vice president of McNair Construction. Senft noted that developers must deal with seven separate city departments in the process of completing a project. The committee is planning a Valentines Day field trip to neighboring Greensboro to learn about the city’s development services department, a one-stop shop that has been lauded for streamlining local government bureaucracy to help developers expedite projects.
“They’re kind of our competitor in a friendly way,” Senft said.
“The impression I have is that if I walk into their office and want to have a Friday meeting, they can assemble their folks in one hour [to review plans],” he added after the session. “I think I can even come unannounced.”
Sweigart indicated that approach would be a welcome change from what he has experienced dealing with the city of Winston-Salem during the development of Arbor Place, a community marketed to elderly residents near the tony Buena Vista neighborhood, about four years ago.
“As you look at this process, I think there could be some advantage to have some kind of central oversight so that a single department, for example public safety in their silo, doesn’t have the power to veto a project.”
Sweigart lamented that a decision by a single department blocked a phase of the project from going forward and deprived the city of significant tax assessments.
After the public comment session, he explained: “We wanted to take the streets private to make it a gated community. It’s about half built out. If we were to take it private it would be three-quarters built out. Taking the streets private would eliminate through traffic. Public safety — they like through traffic. I understand that. When there’s a fire, the fire trucks need to be able to get in and out.”
During session Sweigart emphasized his displeasure with the typical review process.
“I got two infill projects, and it’s like I’m in a mud wrestling match with two different departments,” he said. “I thought you wanted infill. And then you just get thrown up against the wall. It’s maddening.”
Developers also expressed frustration about variations in code interpretations from one city inspector to another.
“You feel like you have to shop for a responsive inspector,” Senft said, summing up sentiment in the group.
An engineering consultant that attended the session said the city’s sequencing doesn’t always make sense. For example, the city required a client to submit plans for a driveway before issuing a grading permit, but sometimes developers want grade a site to make it more saleable before they know where the driveway needs to be located.
Developers also complained about the city requiring new sidewalk along the roadways adjacent to building sites, even in places where pedestrian demand is light. People in the industry have a derogatory term for the phenomenon: “sidewalks to nowhere.”
Their counterparts in Greensboro feel their pain. Despite streamlining the review process, the city in Triad East hasn’t cut developers much slack on this count. Illustration: The Jordan Creek subdivision located on satellite-annexed parcel on Mackay Road features sidewalk extending to the property lines along the roadway and then abruptly ending.
Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band coming to Greensboro, March 19
Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band
Announce First US Leg of 2012 ‘Wrecking Ball’ World Tour
Announce First US Leg of 2012 ‘Wrecking Ball’ World Tour
GREENSBORO COLISEUM – MARCH 19
**ONLY DATE IN THE CAROLINAS & VIRGINIA**
New Album 'Wrecking Ball' (Columbia Records) Out March 6
Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band launch the first US leg of the 2012 'Wrecking Ball' World Tour on March 18 in Atlanta. Bruce Springsteen's 17th studio album 'Wrecking Ball' will be released on Columbia Records on March 6.
Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band will play Greensboro Coliseum, the tour’s only date in the Carolinas and Virginia, on March 19.
Tickets will go on sale Friday, February 3 at 10:00 a.m. at www.ticketmaster.com, via Ticketmaster’s charge-by-phone network at 1-800-745-300, Ticketmaster outlets at participating Walmart locations and at the Coliseum advance box office.
"We Take Care Of Our Own," the album's first single,' is "classic Springsteen" with "anguish and challenge [that] run thick and fast" (Rolling Stone); a "richly orchestrated Wall of Sound… that nods to the 'Born to Run' era" (Billboard).
Stream "We Take Care of Our Own" and pre-order 'Wrecking Ball” at: http://www.brucespringsteen.net.
The E Street Band's members are: Roy Bittan – piano, synthesizer; Nils Lofgren – guitar, vocals; Patti Scialfa – guitar, vocals; Garry Tallent – bass guitar; Stevie Van Zandt – guitar, vocals; and Max Weinberg – drums; with Soozie Tyrell – violin, guitar, vocals and Charlie Giordano – keyboards.
Tickets will go on sale Friday, February 3 at 10:00 a.m. at www.ticketmaster.com, via Ticketmaster’s charge-by-phone network at 1-800-745-300, Ticketmaster outlets at participating Walmart locations and at the Coliseum advance box office.
"We Take Care Of Our Own," the album's first single,' is "classic Springsteen" with "anguish and challenge [that] run thick and fast" (Rolling Stone); a "richly orchestrated Wall of Sound… that nods to the 'Born to Run' era" (Billboard).
Stream "We Take Care of Our Own" and pre-order 'Wrecking Ball” at: http://www.brucespringsteen.net.
The E Street Band's members are: Roy Bittan – piano, synthesizer; Nils Lofgren – guitar, vocals; Patti Scialfa – guitar, vocals; Garry Tallent – bass guitar; Stevie Van Zandt – guitar, vocals; and Max Weinberg – drums; with Soozie Tyrell – violin, guitar, vocals and Charlie Giordano – keyboards.
Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band 2012 Tour Dates:
US Tour Dates
March 18 – Atlanta, GA – Philips Arena (on sale Feb 4)
March 19 – Greensboro, NC – Greensboro Coliseum (on sale Feb 3)
March 23 – Tampa, FL – Tampa Bay Times Forum (on sale Jan 28)
March 26 – Boston, MA – TD Garden (on sale Jan 28)
March 28 – Philadelphia, PA – Wells Fargo Center (on sale Jan 28)
March 29 – Philadelphia, PA – Wells Fargo Center (on sale Jan 28)
April 1 – Washington, DC – Verizon Center (on sale Jan 28)
April 3 – East Rutherford, NJ – Izod Center (on sale Jan 27)
April 4 – East Rutherford, NJ – Izod Center (on sale Jan 27)
April 6 – New York, NY – Madison Square Garden (on sale Jan 27)
April 9 – New York, NY – Madison Square Garden (on sale Jan 27)
April 12 – Detroit, MI – The Palace of Auburn Hills (on sale Jan 28)
April 13 – Buffalo, NY – First Niagara Center (on sale Jan 28)
April 16 – Albany, NY – Times Union Center (on sale Jan 28)
April 17 – Cleveland, OH – Quicken Loans Arena (on sale Jan 28)
April 24 – San Jose, CA – HP Pavilion (on sale Feb 3)
April 26 – Los Angeles, CA – Los Angeles Memorial Sports Arena (on sale Feb 3)
April 29 – New Orleans, LA – New Orleans Jazz & Heritage Festival (on sale now)
May 2 – Newark, NJ – Prudential Center (on sale Jan 27)
US Tour Dates
March 18 – Atlanta, GA – Philips Arena (on sale Feb 4)
March 19 – Greensboro, NC – Greensboro Coliseum (on sale Feb 3)
March 23 – Tampa, FL – Tampa Bay Times Forum (on sale Jan 28)
March 26 – Boston, MA – TD Garden (on sale Jan 28)
March 28 – Philadelphia, PA – Wells Fargo Center (on sale Jan 28)
March 29 – Philadelphia, PA – Wells Fargo Center (on sale Jan 28)
April 1 – Washington, DC – Verizon Center (on sale Jan 28)
April 3 – East Rutherford, NJ – Izod Center (on sale Jan 27)
April 4 – East Rutherford, NJ – Izod Center (on sale Jan 27)
April 6 – New York, NY – Madison Square Garden (on sale Jan 27)
April 9 – New York, NY – Madison Square Garden (on sale Jan 27)
April 12 – Detroit, MI – The Palace of Auburn Hills (on sale Jan 28)
April 13 – Buffalo, NY – First Niagara Center (on sale Jan 28)
April 16 – Albany, NY – Times Union Center (on sale Jan 28)
April 17 – Cleveland, OH – Quicken Loans Arena (on sale Jan 28)
April 24 – San Jose, CA – HP Pavilion (on sale Feb 3)
April 26 – Los Angeles, CA – Los Angeles Memorial Sports Arena (on sale Feb 3)
April 29 – New Orleans, LA – New Orleans Jazz & Heritage Festival (on sale now)
May 2 – Newark, NJ – Prudential Center (on sale Jan 27)
Proximity Hotel, O. Henry Hotel and Grandover Resort and Conference Center with Four Diamond awards
CHARLOTTE (Jan. 23, 2012) –AAA Carolinas will honor 14 North Carolina accommodations and eight restaurants for superior quality and service tonight. This year three new properties have achieved a prestigious AAA Four Diamond rating: The King’s Daughters Inn in Durham, the Renaissance Raleigh North Hills Hotel in Raleigh and The Sanderling Resort and Spa in Duck.
AAA Four Diamond awards, given out in three separate ceremonies around the state, continues tonight with an awards ceremony for central and eastern North Carolina at the Washington Duke Inn and Golf Club in Durham, NC. A total of 14 restaurants and 34 accommodations throughout the entire state have achieved this rating for a combined total of 461 years of service.
Central and eastern North Carolina Four Diamond accommodation winners, who will receive their awards tonight, listed with number of years won, include: The King’s Daughters Inn (First Year) in Durham, the Renaissance Raleigh North Hills Hotel (First Year) in Raleigh, the Sanderling Resort and Spa (First Year) in Duck, the Proximity Hotel(4 years) in Greensboro, the Arrowhead Inn Bed and Breakfast (9 years) in Durham, The Verandas (10 years) in Wilmington, The Holly Inn (10 years) in Pinehurst and theWashington Duke Inn & Golf Club (12 years) in Durham. Others that will receive awards tonight are: O. Henry Hotel (13 years) in Greensboro, The Grandover Resort and Conference Center (13 years) in Greensboro, Graystone Inn (13 years) in Wilmington, the Carolina Inn (15 years) in Chapel Hill, The Siena Hotel (16 years) in Chapel Hill and the Carolina Hotel in Pinehurst (30 years).
Central and eastern North Carolina Four Diamond restaurants receiving their awards tonight, listed with number of years won, include; Chef and The Farmer (2 years) in Kinston, Second Empire Restaurant & Tavern (8 years) in Raleigh, The Left Bank (8 years) in Duck, Carolina Crossroads (10 years), 1895 Grille (11 years) in Pinehurst, Four Square Restaurant (11 years) in Durham, The Fairview Dining Room (20 years) in Durham and Il Palio Ristoranté (22 years) in Chapel Hill.
“AAA’s requirements for a Four Diamond rating are rigorous, and those that win it are among the best hotels and restaurants in the world,” said Dave Parsons, president and CEO of AAA Carolinas. “Only 3.5 percent of the more than 58,000 annual inspections conducted nationally result in a Four Diamond rating.”
AAA gives the Four Diamond awards annually to qualified hotels and restaurants in North America. More than 2,000 properties nationally earn the Four Diamond ratings after specially trained evaluators conduct anonymous overnight stays or dine incognito. Lodgings include eight different classifications, such as bed and breakfast, hotel, cottage and country inn with four sub-classifications such as historic, classic, resort and casino.
Restaurants have varying cuisines and ambiances. Each restaurant and lodging that receives any level of diamond rating from AAA is listed in AAA’s TourBooks that are distributed free to any of the organization’s 53 million members nationwide.
Western North Carolina awards were distributed on January 16th and Charlotte area recipients will be honored on January 27th.
AAA Carolinas, an affiliate of the American Automobile Association, is a not-for-profit organization that serves more than 1.8 million members with travel, automobile and insurance services while being an advocate for the safety and security of all travelers.
AAA Four Diamond awards, given out in three separate ceremonies around the state, continues tonight with an awards ceremony for central and eastern North Carolina at the Washington Duke Inn and Golf Club in Durham, NC. A total of 14 restaurants and 34 accommodations throughout the entire state have achieved this rating for a combined total of 461 years of service.
Central and eastern North Carolina Four Diamond accommodation winners, who will receive their awards tonight, listed with number of years won, include: The King’s Daughters Inn (First Year) in Durham, the Renaissance Raleigh North Hills Hotel (First Year) in Raleigh, the Sanderling Resort and Spa (First Year) in Duck, the Proximity Hotel(4 years) in Greensboro, the Arrowhead Inn Bed and Breakfast (9 years) in Durham, The Verandas (10 years) in Wilmington, The Holly Inn (10 years) in Pinehurst and theWashington Duke Inn & Golf Club (12 years) in Durham. Others that will receive awards tonight are: O. Henry Hotel (13 years) in Greensboro, The Grandover Resort and Conference Center (13 years) in Greensboro, Graystone Inn (13 years) in Wilmington, the Carolina Inn (15 years) in Chapel Hill, The Siena Hotel (16 years) in Chapel Hill and the Carolina Hotel in Pinehurst (30 years).
Central and eastern North Carolina Four Diamond restaurants receiving their awards tonight, listed with number of years won, include; Chef and The Farmer (2 years) in Kinston, Second Empire Restaurant & Tavern (8 years) in Raleigh, The Left Bank (8 years) in Duck, Carolina Crossroads (10 years), 1895 Grille (11 years) in Pinehurst, Four Square Restaurant (11 years) in Durham, The Fairview Dining Room (20 years) in Durham and Il Palio Ristoranté (22 years) in Chapel Hill.
“AAA’s requirements for a Four Diamond rating are rigorous, and those that win it are among the best hotels and restaurants in the world,” said Dave Parsons, president and CEO of AAA Carolinas. “Only 3.5 percent of the more than 58,000 annual inspections conducted nationally result in a Four Diamond rating.”
AAA gives the Four Diamond awards annually to qualified hotels and restaurants in North America. More than 2,000 properties nationally earn the Four Diamond ratings after specially trained evaluators conduct anonymous overnight stays or dine incognito. Lodgings include eight different classifications, such as bed and breakfast, hotel, cottage and country inn with four sub-classifications such as historic, classic, resort and casino.
Restaurants have varying cuisines and ambiances. Each restaurant and lodging that receives any level of diamond rating from AAA is listed in AAA’s TourBooks that are distributed free to any of the organization’s 53 million members nationwide.
Western North Carolina awards were distributed on January 16th and Charlotte area recipients will be honored on January 27th.
AAA Carolinas, an affiliate of the American Automobile Association, is a not-for-profit organization that serves more than 1.8 million members with travel, automobile and insurance services while being an advocate for the safety and security of all travelers.
Foothills Brewing to release Sexual Chocolate
After months of eager anticipation from beer fans everywhere, Foothills Brewing is proud to announce the return of our world-renowned Sexual Chocolate Imperial Stout, on draft and in 22-ounce bottles.
Infused with organic cocoa nibs, this Russian imperial stout is a deep opaque black in color, offering notes of espresso, blackstrap molasses, toffee, and dark fruits that serve to mask an alcohol content approaching ten percent. The Sexual Chocolate and its barrel-aged cousin have received numerous accolades at beer competitions worldwide including the Great American Beer Festival and the World Beer Cup, and have been featured in magazines ranging from Draft and All About Beer to Maxim and even Hustler.
2012 Sexual Chocolate will debut on tap Friday, January 27. The following morning, biscuits and coffee will be available starting at 8 a.m., and bottles will go on sale at 9 a.m. 1800 bottles are being sold this year; in the interest of allowing as many people as possible to enjoy this beer, each customer is limited to four bottles.
Attendees are encouraged to arrive ahead of time for the release. In past years, lines have begun forming shortly after the restaurant closed for the night. Bottles have always sold out very quickly, and we are unable to guarantee or reserve bottles for anyone.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)