Cabarrus Cheap Seats

Update (Feb 05, 2006) - I added the “Voting Record” section explaining Joni Juba’s recusals and votes on this issue after Coy and Harold had to cover their rear ends following their “Commissoner Juba wanted Turner the whole time” argument was destroyed.

Update: The CM RFQ senders lists now has images which verify the list. Much to the chagrin of my commenters with their “inside” information

Update: I figured this letter from every elected judge, the DA, and the sheriff (both of whom are elected) would underscore the need for this jail facility

Since August 2005, Harold Smith has teamed with disgruntled ex-employees of Juba Aluminum and some of Joni Juba’s political opponents (including Coy Privette) to create what he calls the Juba Scandal. When he tells it, it smacks of a tale of yet another venal politician. However, when the facts come out, it’s obvious that this is another mendacious creation of Harold Smith.

The Argument

I think it would be useful to recap the general argument made by Harold Smith over the past few months. Here’s Harold’s argument:

A $60 million jail is unnecessary, because the jail is only overcrowded by 40 inmates. It is Juba, Carruth, and Carpenter who have forced this jail on the people of Downtown Concord without adequate review. The only reason that this project has not been cancelled is Juba Aluminum wants to be a subcontractor on the jail. Commissioners Carruth and Juba want to build this $60 million new jail in order to make money for Joni Juba’s business and to hire the entire Carruth family. Juba Aluminum will be granted subcontracts and other contracts from Turner Construction, because Joni Juba forced the committee to select Turner Construction as the Construction Manager on the jail project. It was then-Chairperson Carolyn Carpenter who single-handedly appointed Joni Juba to serve on this committee. Her service on the committee constitutes a “?conflict of interest”.? Also, her voting record is in violation of North Carolina law and was taken agains the advice of legal experts.Joni Juba has had her hand in the process in the whole time, that is why only three companies were sent the RFQ; because they all had relationships with Juba.

The Necessity of the JailA $60 million jail is unnecessary, because the jail is only overcrowded by 40 inmates.

Harold claims that the new jail is not necessary. In his words, the County is spending “$60 Million to solve a jail overcrowding of 40 inmates”.

When you look at the facts, Harold’s conclusion comes across as being a bit doltish. The scope of the jail project was based a several studies over the past couple of years which produced projections based on estimates over 15, 20, and 50 years. These projections took in a number of factors; but were largely based on population growth. Since Cabarrus County has been rapidly growing, it has had an increased need for all sorts of facilities including schools, roads, senior citizens services, health care, and law enforcement. So, when starting a capital project which will take a few years to design and build - that will be financed by debt to be paid off over decades - it is only prudent to build to suit future needs. Harold’s opinion about the necessity of the jail strikes me as someone who doesn’t have the good sense to believe the people that knows about these things and tinabilityity to see past his next pension check. The same can be said for Coy Privette’s pre-trial release proposal which would put people who belong in jail back out in the neighborhoods.

The John Locke Foundation President and Chairman John Hood stated this week that North Carolina has a “crisis in prison capacity”. This has also translated to a strain on local jail capacity. We cannot simultaneously grow as a county, imprison more people statewide, and expect law enforcement to find capacity in inadequate facilities. This public safety crisis is not something that’s going to get better with time.

Who says that? Well, every judge, the DA, and the Sheriff all stated in a January 23 letter to the Board of Commissioners that the project is not moving as quickly as they need it to.

The Publicity of the Jail

It is Juba, Carruth, and Carpenter who have forced this jail on the people of Downtown Concord without adequate review.The Cabarrus County Website has an interesting section where they detail comments collected from each of the meetings in 2005. After the scope, size, and location of the jail were all decided in July 2004 on a motion made by Coy Privette voted in favor by Commissioners Carruth, Freeman, Carpenter, and Privette (Juba was not on the board at the time). Those four commissioners have more to do with the downtown jail than does Commissioner Juba.

The Cabarrus County Website has where they detail comments collected from each of the meetings in 2005. After the on a motion made by Coy Privette voted in favor by Commissioners Carruth, Freeman, Carpenter, and Privette (Juba was not on the board at the time). Those four commissioners have more to do with the downtown jail than does Commissioner Juba.As a matter of fact, only one group, Historic Concord, has pulled their 2002 endorsement of the project. They endorsed the project before any design had been made (Ware Bosnall Architects had not been hired until 2003) and the project scope (50 years) had been decided on. However, no other community organization had pulled their endorsement for the project. The Citizens for a Better Concord has been opposed to the construction of the jail; but they formed only in 2005. Many of the endorsements were from speculations that the Courthouse, Jail, Sheriff’s department would be moved from Downtown Concord, these speculations were recorded in editorialtal article written by Coy Privette in early 2004. After more information from the architects, he later voted to keep the Justice Center in downtown Concord and put the new jail there.

The bottom line is that this had been made public knowledge, numerous meetings were held through 2003, 2004, and 2005. More on the chronology of the project here.

Joni Juba did not establish the scope of the jail project, and did not ever vote on its current location. The only current members of the Board of Commissioners that were present for votes on the location, size, and scope of the jail were Coy Privette, Robert Freeman, Bob Carruth, and Carolyn Carpenter. Joni Juba was not involved in that decision.

The Construction Manager

So far, we’ve established that jail is necessary to relieve overcrowding and Joni Juba had little or nothing to do with it. Now comes the “heart” of the Juba Scandal.

The only reason that this project has not been cancelled is Juba Aluminum wants to be a subcontractor on the jail…Juba Aluminum will be granted subcontracts and other contracts from Turner Construction, because Joni Juba forced the committee to select Turner Construction as the Construction Manager on the jail project. It was then-Chairperson Carolyn Carpenter who single-handedly appointed Joni Juba to serve on this committee. Her service on the committee constitutes a “conflict of interest”?

First, let’s address the possibility of Juba Aluminum being hired to do work on the jail. As I have mentioned before North Carolina General Statue 14-234 precludes her company from working on the Cabarrus County Jail. Violation of the statue is a First Class Misdemeanor, punishable by 6 months in jail.

Of course, there’s the claim made that her company might not get work on this job; but that Turner Construction will be nicer to her for securing this large project. This argument was made in public and on this blog by Coy Privette. He said the following:

However, as one contractor told me, you pull the strings and arrange for me to get a $60 million contract, I will take care of you on other projects down the road. 

So, now there’s a possibility that Joni Juba stays inside of the law; but still gets some underhanded benefit by being the lone commissioner, allegedly appointed solely by then-Chair Carolyn Carpenter reviewing these RFQs and tossing the work in the direction of her favored contractor. However, some digging reveals that this isn’t true.

The board agreed by consensus (without objection; but without a formal vote) that Joni Juba would assist a standing committee of County staff including John Day, Kelly Sifford, Jonathan Marshall, Mike Downs, Sheriff Riley, Chief Deputy Paul Hunt, with some others from the Sheriff’s Department consulting. In addition to that Ware Bonsal Architects was also on this committee.

So, Joni Juba wasn’t asked to review the RFQs all by her lonesome as both Harold and Coy suggested. In addition to that, Joni Juba didn’t push for Turner Construction. The following e-mails prove that:

From: Jonathan Marshall
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2005 8:49 AM
To: John Day; Mike Downs
Cc: Kelly Sifford
Subject: CM at risk 

After our 2 tours and follow-up interviews my opinion that we should
recommend Turner has not changed. The main reason is that I believe we
are looking for construction oversight and that Turner has offered the
strongest team for that role. This is reinforced by 2 items in the
Turner follow-up submissions to our tour: showing Joe Linehan as Project
Engineer beginning in October of this year, and adding Mark Alles as
Project Executive in response to our intended construction using
pre-cast cells. Overall, Turner was also more responsive from one
interview to the next by bringing Mark in to specifically discuss
pre-cast construction, while Thompson did not add anything new as a
follow up to the original interview.

Jonathan

Then the remainder of the staff responds. First, County Manager John Day:

From: John Day
To: Jonathan Marshall ; Mike Downs 

CC: Kelly Sifford
Sent: Thu Aug 04 09:45:11 2005
Subject: RE: CM at risk

I agree.

John Day

County Manager

Then Public Safety Director Mike Downs

From: Mike Downs
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2005 9:46 AM
To: John Day; Jonathan Marshall
Cc: Kelly Sifford
Subject: Re: CM at risk 

Me too
————————–
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld

County Manager John Day again

From: John Day
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2005 3:18 PM
To: Joni Juba
Cc: Kelly Sifford; Mike Downs; Jonathan Marshall
Subject: RE: CM at risk 

Jonathan speaks for us.

John Day

Before you read the e-mail response from Joni Juba ask yourself this question, is this someone who is dead-set towards Turner?

From: Joni Juba
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2005 10:07 PM
To: John Day
Subject: RE: CM at risk 

John, I replied earlier today but do not think I sent it to you, I got
sidetracked. So if this is a repeat, please excuse it. I have read
Jonathan’s email and understand his position. In light of our
discussions as a group post interview and tour, I will support the
committee’s decision to recommend Turner for the CM at risk on our
project. I think both firms bring different strengths to the table and
it’s a matter of “comfort level” for us. I still think Thompson would
probably do a more hands on approach relating to field installation
scope of work and Turner more administrative and management. If the
focus is construction oversight, then Turner is probably the best of the
two. At any rate, I will support the choice. Be sure we get all the
information we requested from Turner in our meetings as soon as
possible. Also, who will be the county staff contact person assigned to
this project to oversee from the owner’s perspective? If I can do
anything else to help, let me know.

Thanks,

J.

There you have it. If she was pushing for anyone, it was Thompson. When asked for clarification, she made sure that I understood that she told the committee that she felt any of the respondents to the RFQ would have done a fine job, which brings us to the next argument.

Joni Juba has had her hand in the process in the whole time, that is why only three companies were sent the RFQ; because they all had relationships with Juba.

Only three companies responded to the RFQ which was sent to eight companies. The CM At-Risk RFQ was sent to these eight companies, because they were the only companies to respond to the original RFQ. The original RFQ was completed and sent before Joni Juba was elected to the Board of Commissioners:

FN Thompson
Barnhill Contracting
Turner Construction
Bovis Lend Lease
Construction Control Corp.
SMG (Southern Management Group)
MBP Construction Engineering
Arris Services
Summit Construction
Heery International
Rodgers Builders

See some of the verification e-mails here

The committee made site visits to projects finished by Thompson and Turner.

Voting Record

Also, her voting record is in violation of North Carolina law and was taken agains the advice of legal experts.

There were three votes in question.

1. August 20, 2005 - Joni Juba asked to be recused from a vote to hire Turner Construction and prompt County Staff to draft a contract. She was recused without objection. The motion passed. Prior to this vote, Joni Juba had consulted with the University of North Carolina Institute of Government (IOG) and was advised that she should ask for recusal from this vote as a financal interest was evident.
2. September 1, 2005 (note to Coy & Harold - not November)- the Board voted to provide Turner Construction a letter of intent and to authorize $50,000 to start pre-construction activites
3. Dec. 19, 2005 (minutes not yet posted) - before this meeting, Joni Juba contacted the IOG again and explained the details of the upcoming vote. Given that the board had twice expressed its intent and money had changed hands, voting on a contract that would establish the terms and conditions of a contract with Turner Construction would not constitute a financial interest. Because of this, she could not ask for recusal and she voted accordingly.

It’s the subtlties where Coy operates best. For instance, he claimed that the County lost $130,000 on a settlement negotiated by then-County Attorney Fletcher Hartsell, when the County reasonably had that legal liability. If you read the post I made on this issue - it’s obvious…but it takes a bit of explaining.

In this case, one must look at those three votes and remember that, according to how the Board operates, each Commissioner must participate in votes unless they are recused by the remaining majority of the board. The Commissioner asking to be recused must come up with a compelling reason. On the first and second votes, the Board was selecting a contractor. In the third vote, the board was executing the terms and conditions. It’s gray area; but Coy’s and Harold’s descriptions convieniently ignore these details.

The Internship

Commissioners Carruth and Juba want to build this $60 million new jail in order to make money for Joni Juba’s business and to hire the entire Carruth family.

We’ve established that Joni Juba ain’t gonna make a dime off of the jail, and the people who’ve been claiming that (Harold Smith, Coy Privette, my beloved commenters) haven’t been able to produce a hint of a shred of evidence to that effect.

However, there is the issue of hiring Bob Carruth’s son. Here’s how this goes, Bob Carruth’s son approached John (not Joni) Juba about a job after meeting him at a conference early in 2005. Here are some details to put that in perspective: Alex Carruth was an 18-year-old recent high school graduate, after interviewing on his own, took a position in an intern capacity, working full time last summer. After starting RCCC last fall,continuedtinied to work with Juba, in the office, learning various things about the construction industry.

While not politically the best move in the world, I doubt that Bob Carruth is making plans for early retirement on the intern’s stipend his son is receiving.

Parting Shot

I did not start a blog to talk about this. Frankly, the only people who want to keep this going are a group of vengeful ex-employees of Joni Juba, and Coy Privette is exacting some political revenge for what happened to his ally, Richard Suggs. Joni Juba beat Richard Suggs so badly in the 2004 Republican Primary that even I think that she has something coming. Of course, that’s just because I’m a guy and I could only imagine what it would be like to be beaten that badly…by a girl. While the some of these ex-employees and Coy Privette may not have met each other, they have a mutual friend - Harold Smith.

There are some who agree with Harold Smith by default…they put a lot of faith in the guy. He says it, they believe it. There are others who listen to what he says and become “concerned”. However, I’ve found that his posts usually have a few things in common:

• They don’t tell the “whole” story. Usually there are what I’ve called in the past “clever omissions”. You can look at anything and tell just half of it. The scary part is, there are a fair number of people who only want to hear half.
• His stuff is almost never referenced. It’s hard to find an external link on his website. Also, he’s able to get his responses up quickly; because he doesn’t have to find facts. They are usually provided to him by his political allies or, apparently, by him making them up himself.
• If a County official or staffer tells him something he doesn’t want to hear - he accuses them of lying. I can assure Harold that there are some of us who have jobs where lying gets us fired. Apparently, the same doesn’t apply to copier salesmen or preachers.

In the future, if there’s anything worth responding to regarding the “Juba Scandal” on his site, I’m going to update this article and I’m leaving this open for comments.