Tuesday, April 18, 2017

WWL-TV Story on LaSalle Street

David Hammer and WWL-TV ran a great story on the LaSalle street "appropriation" by the LSED.

City never compensated for street engulfed by Champions Square

Zelia (Benson) claims they haven't benefited by the street appropriation in respect to their profit sharing plan because the LSED hasn't yet covered the cost of the money the state invested in capital investment on improvements to the area. Admittedly (and I stated this in the blog post) I wasn't sure what the nature of the profit sharing plan was.

However, there are still funding mechanisms between the LSED and Zelia that need to be scrutinized namely an interesting "marketing fund" that involves a 50/50 profit sharing plan of some source of revenue I haven't yet figured out.

Still, it's a dubious argument to say Benson isn't benefiting from the appropriation of the street. They are getting 2.3 million annually in a base lease agreement. The street has been illegitimately (I would say illegally) included into the Champions Square footprint and when the LSED covers their capital investment on improvements the profit sharing plan will kick in and then Zelia's entire argument becomes completely moot.

How can Zelia argue they aren't benefitting from the street appropriation by the LSED? If the city removed the permanent structures, opened it back up to traffic, put parking meters in...would it affect the income the LSED is generating off their lease of the property? Of course it would.

Zella's argument is that they are not benefitting by the appropriation of the street because the profit sharing plan hasn't kicked in....yet. I call bullshit. Are they going to refuse the surplus income when it does kick in because they recognize they don't own the street?

Why are Benson Tower security guards trying to block WWL-TV from shooting video on the street if they don't have any...forgive me...dominion...over it?

Still...still...the street has been illegally taken over by the LSED at great cost to the City. Take Zelia out of the equation and it's NOT LEGAL. The City is getting screwed...period.

Hammer and team did a great job getting to the bottom of this..and please read the story with the video as well because it's apparently rooted in a verbal deal (stand-off) bartered between former CNO Deputy Mayor Andy Kopplin and the Jindal admin. regarding a land swap with Duncan Plaza. A deal that was apparently never documented.

The bottom line is the LSED should never have moved forward with any alterations to the street without the legal protocols being met. It was illegal. The City has been screwed out of millions of dollars because a backroom, verbal deal was being cut and the guys that were dealing are all gone from the public realm leaving this turd behind with nary a shred of paperwork.

The other bottom line is that I have a face for radio.

Tuesday, March 28, 2017

Benson's Big Easy Street

NOTE:  If you don't have time to read...jump to the video at the bottom of the post for a quick synopsis. 

Having interviewed Mayor Landrieu in late September of 2016 regarding his intent to sell and/or lease the New Orleans Public Belt railroad, I pressed him on why he seemed so determined to sell, or “privatize”, many of New Orleans' largest public assets.  His general response was that the City was in dire financial straits when he took office and desperate actions were needed to pull it out of the hole.  Landrieu also continually referenced the wisdom of “public/private partnerships” and how cities all around the country were utilizing them to great benefit.  

I decided to go back and look at some of the public/private ventures in which the City has engaged over its history (namely since the 1984 World’s Fair) and examine if these ventures were truly beneficial to New Orleans or if they turned out to simply be windfalls for the private investors who acquired public assets. Upcoming stories will examine some of these deals.  
In the interview, Mayor Landrieu also expressed that he doesn’t feel the City has gotten a lot out of existing agreements with major entities that benefit from their relationship with New Orleans, particularly the Port of New Orleans.  But he also mentioned one entity that surprised me, the Louisiana Superdome....so I looked into it.

The Roadmap to the Glory Days of New Orleans Slush

The Superdome is owned and operated by a public entity itself, the Louisiana Superdome Exposition District, owned by the State of Louisiana.  It oversees many state assets other than the Superdome including the Smoothie King Center, the New Orleans Saints Training Facility in Kenner, The Alario Center in Westwego, the TPC of Louisiana Golf Course in Avondale, and the Shrine on Airline Highway in Kenner where the Baby Cakes play baseball.  
The LSED has a storied history as a public entity.  Back in 2012 when I was reporting on Congressman Cedric Richmond and political operative Ike Spears corruption with two non-profits they ran in the early 2000’s, I came across a grant program that had been instituted by the LSED from 2000 to 2004.  The program was essentially a giant (approximately $2.9 million annually) slush fund that was set up for New Orleans metro area politicians to dole out cash to their own special interests…mostly non-profits that were run by politically connected people controlling strategic voting blocs.  
The LSED grant program was terminated in 2004 having rained about $14.8 million down on politicians’ special interests in its five year run. In 2005, the LSED put an end to the grant program stating they needed the money for renovations to the Dome and other pending expenses…much to the dismay of politicos around the metro area.  
Still, the master grant list is a virtual road map of the period exposing “con-profits”, politician’s special interests and how the “game” operated before former U.S. Attorney Jim Letten began his white collar/government corruption sweep of the City. 

When the Saints almost went marching out

New Orleanians who lived through Katrina have no shortage of traumatic stories and memories they carry with them to this day.  But one trauma-inducing event that many people have suppressed or even forgotten about was the threat by the owner of the New Orleans Saints, Tom Benson, to move the Saints out of the city in the wake of the storm under the prospect of greener pastures in San Antonio, Texas.  

Forgive me, but this was a real dick move in a period when the City was on its knees gasping for breath.  Benson had already made continual threats to move the franchise before Katrina and The Federal Flood provided the opportune disaster capitalist moment to leverage the threat of a Saints exodus to his advantage.  
The State managed to pacify him in the immediate wake of the storm with various concessions and eventually went on to orchestrate a deal in 2009 in which Benson would purchase the 26-story Dominion Tower skyscraper next to the Superdome and the State of Louisiana would occupy 320,000 of the 480,000 square feet in the building, leasing office space at above average rates for various state agencies.  The total purchase, through Benson’s company, Zelia LLC., was $42.1 million which included the tower, a 2000-space parking garage and 400,000 sq. foot, open-space promenade area which Benson renamed “Champions Square”.  As of August 2012, the company which leases space in the buliding for Zelia stated that the tower was over 97.6% leased.  

Easy Street...courtesy of Louisiana

The 2009 deal between Benson and the State/LSED consisted of two parts.  

The first was an extension of the Superdome lease by LSED through 2025 and an $85 million dollar disbursement to the LSED by the State of Louisiana for improvements to the Dome as well as scaled payments to the Saints pending the amount of money the team generated annually from 2011 to 2024.  

The second part of the deal involved the newly acquired Dominion Tower and properties purchased by Benson’s Zellia, LLC.  In addition to the State agencies leasing over 70% of the office space in the tower, a state organization called the Louisiana Office Facilities Corporation (essentially an extension of the LSED) agreed to lease the New Orleans Center property which included the Mall and area now known as Champions Square, as well as the aforementioned parking garage for $2.3 million annually.  The LSED agreed to take on the operations of  the parking garage, mall and Macy’s retail store, retaining all revenues up to the $2.3 million mark (to compensate for the rent to Zelia), then any additional revenues would be split with Zelia 50/50.  The agreement called for Zelia to be responsible for any initial renovations and repairs to the properties with the LSED maintaining daily operations and maintenance.  
Benson/Zelia agreed to a $10.5 million dollar investment in the property over a three-year period (from 2010) and the LSED committed to making $85 million in capital improvements over the following two years with a completion date of 2011.

Public/Private Partnerships: The Road to Prosperity for the Private 

After ratifying the agreement in an LSED Board of Commissioners meeting, Commissioner Robert Bruno stated the deal was (paraphrased from meeting minutes), “One of the most complicated, creative, bipartisan examples of a public/private partnership that could ever be imagined.”  
Ron Forman, then President of the LSED Board of Commissioners and CEO/President of the Audubon Institute said (paraphrased from meeting minutes), “Without Mr. Benson’s willingness to invest, it could not have happened.”

How would one not be willing to invest in a multi-million dollar contract that placed any business risk solely on the State of Louisiana?  The deal guaranteed a near full occupancy rate of Benson Tower on top of a guaranteed 2.3 million dollars a year lease for the Champions Square property and the parking garage in which Zelia doesn’t even have to manage (The management of the properties is contracted to the company SMG by the LSED).

All Benson had to do was purchase the properties and the state took on any and all business risk to guarantee Zelia a financial windfall.  

A Three-Way Street?
Great deal if you can get it but after filing a public records request with the City of New Orleans in respect to the Champions Square footprint it appears Benson didn’t even have to purchase/lease or own the total area which is currently incorporated into the venue.  

The entire 1400 block of LaSalle Street has been closed to the public

and incorporated in to the Champions Square footprint
An entire city street, the 1400 block of LaSalle which lies between Benson Tower and the Superdome, has been appropriated into the Champions Square venue….sans any contract with the City.

The street has been completely closed to automobile traffic with numerous permanent structures erected by the LSED including gateways  on both ends of the street.  During concerts and events in the Square these gateways are closed to the general public and used as a ticketing entrance for private events.

One of two permanent "Gateway" structures on each end

of the 1400 block of LaSalle Street 

Even the map at Champions Square show LaSalle Street as an

official part of its footprint

The problem being there is no contract with the City to utilize the street, temporarily or permanently…not even a cooperative endeavor agreement.  This is problematic not just for the revenue lost by the City, it’s also a violation of Article 7, Section 14 of the Louisiana State Constitution.  

I filed a public records request with the City to see what agreement we made with Zelia and/or the LSED that allowed them to incorporate the street into the Champions Square footprint and it turned up nothing….zilch. 

I also filed a public records request with the LSED to see if they had any contracts with the City for the use of the street and to see their contract with Zelia, LLC.  While the LSED contract  with Zelia mentions Champions Square, there is no mention of the use of LaSalle Street.  Therefore, there is no contract that would allow Zelia or the LSED to use it, much less build permanent structures and close it to the public.

After receiving the LSED/Zelia contract I asked their current administration (they were quick to point out they have an entirely new board since the 2009 agreement was established) a series of questions about the nature of the contract and the appropriation of the 1400 block of LaSalle.

In respect to what is known regarding the use of the street, the LSED provided me with a “good faith” letter they sent to the City in 2011 regarding their construction plans for LaSalle which stated they would be pursuing a long-term lease of the property.

The City Real Estate Administrator, Marha J. Griset, replied that they were agreeing to enter into a long-term lease under the following conditions: A deposit shall be made, the City Planning Commission will grant approval, and the City Council will endorse the lease (ordinance).  Also that the LSED must continue with the process towards the signing of the long-term lease.

That didn’t happen and the LSED moved forward with their construction on the street without an official lease, purchase or city ordinance.  Six years later the City has not been compensated for the street and no ordinance officially exists.  

Lost Boulevard

If the City of New Orleans is as cash-strapped as Mayor Landrieu suggested when I interviewed him, why have we left millions of dollars on the table in respect to 1400 LaSalle?
When I asked the LSED if the City has received any compensation for the use of the street from them or Zelia they replied:

"The City of New Orleans has received the economic benefit of (i) the improvements that were made to LaSalle Street, (ii) the ongoing maintenance, repair, etc. of LaSalle Street, and (iii) increased tax revenues derived from events that occur at Champions Square. " 

It’s kind of hard to understand how shutting a city street off to the public, taking it out of commerce (including parking meters and fines), installing permanent fixtures....all to generate income for a private venture...is an “improvement” or benefit to the City.  
If I fix the potholes on my own street, can I put up two gateways on each end and charge people to use it?

The loss of 1400 LaSalle to the City without any compensation or contract is bad enough but the fact that a state entity, the LSED, has financed millions of public tax dollars to “improve” the street solely for the benefit of Zelia, a private entity, is a double-whammy to taxpayers. 

You essentially have a public entity (LSED) paying rent for a public street (CNO) to a private entity (Zelia, LLC) who doesn’t actually own the street to begin with.  
As I stated above….great deal if you can get it.

Down This Road Before

There is also a corollary to this issue in the private purchase of the 500 block of Fulton Street.  Harrah’s Casino had made significant “improvements” to Fulton Street but the City required them to purchase the street in order to take it out of public commerce.  If Harrah’s is required to purchase Fulton why would the Mayor allow a billionaire, in Benson, to take over 1400 LaSalle (per the LSED) for free? 

Crunching the numbers

I asked an accountant friend of mine to look at the LSED/Zelia contract to see how much the LSED has paid Benson under the contract since 2011.  While these numbers are not official, my friend estimated that the LSED has paid Zelia  at least around $14 million since the inception of the lease with an estimated $33.5 million due over the remaining life of the lease through 2026.  That would put the total amount of the contract around $47.5 million over a fifteen year period. 

However, The LSED also has a separate marketing fund for which it is responsible but doesn’t seem to be subject to state audit or public disclosure through the Legislative Auditor.  Individuals seeking more information on the marketing fund are directed to the LSED.  The reason this is significant is that the marketing fund also makes rent payments that look to be either profit sharing or revenue sharing arrangements for the Champions Square events, I believe this is part of the 50/50 profit split mentioned above but I’m not sure.  

As an example, in fiscal year 2014, LSED paid $2.3 million for the lease, but the marketing fund also paid $1.9 million.  For fiscal year 2016 the amounts were $2.5 million paid by the LSED and $2.0 million paid by the marketing fund. However, elsewhere these lease payments by the marketing fund are shown as revenue for Champions Square.

Hence, the total amount paid to Zelia by the LSED to date may be significantly higher than $14 million.  

No one rides for free...unless you're a billionaire
The appropriation of the 1400 block of LaSalle has taken on a new relevance in 2017. 

In January the Mayor informed many of the non-profit festivals in New Orleans that the City would no long waive various permit costs, including street closures and parking meter rental loss, to these festivals.  It greatly affected many of the festivals that already had fixed budgets in place for 2017 and are now facing thousands of dollars in added expenses. 

The non-profit entities are now being hit with multiple permitting fees for the use of public streets while Tom Benson has been given an entire street by the City, with the State paying him for its use.  


I asked Mayor Landrieu’s Deputy Mayor of External Affairs, Ryan Berni, if the Mayor was aware of the issue…here’s his response:

“We have been working with the State for the last several years on a property swap that would include the street and the State’s portion of Duncan Plaza.  For a number of reasons, it hasn’t been settled due to the values of the property not matching up.  It is something we are still working on with LSED and the State.”

The only problem with that is that no one I spoke with at the LSED mentioned anything about that deal, so I’m not sure who is negotiating with the City on the matter.  Nor could I find any documentation of the deal. 

Land swap deal aside, we’ve gone seven years with no contract in place and millions of dollars left on the table.  In fact, millions of state tax dollars have been paid to a private entity who doesn’t  even own the public property in question.  

For New Orleans it appears public/private partnerships are how financial champions are made.  More to come on this.

If you don't have time read it all....just watch this short video for the basic skinny on the story...

1400 LaSalle from Jason Berry on Vimeo.

 Relevant Documents not linked above:

The actual Lease between the LSED and Zelia, Inc.

Monday, February 06, 2017

New Orleans Public Belt Railroad - City of New Orleans releases RFQ

The City of New Orleans has issued a Request for Quotation to lease the management of the New Orleans Public Belt Railroad in what is being referred to as a public/private endeavor.

Last Wednesday, February 1, 2017, a mandatory pre-bid conference was hosted at City Hall by Ryan Berni, Deputy Mayor of External Affairs for CNO and the mayoral appointee to the NOPB commission.  Also present were representatives from KPMG, the firm hired by the City (independently of the Commission) to conduct the evaluation which led to the RFQ.

The room was packed as this Powerpoint presentation was presented to the prospective lease applicants and discussed by Berni and the KPMG team members:

New Orleans Public Belt Railroad Pre-Bid Conference PPT. 

Anyone attending the meeting was required to list their name and contact information.  That list is here:

New Orleans Public Belt Railroad Pre-Bid Conference attendees 

There was a brief question and answer session following the Powerpoint presentation but Berni informed the group that any questions could be submitted to the City's website where they will be publicly answered in an effort to maintain transparency.

He also stated a "cone of silence" has been issued for the NOPB staff and Commission through the RFQ process.  I have personally tried to contact the KPMG members heading up the evaluation but I got no response via email. I am assuming they are subject to the City's cone of silence as well.

Many of the questions posed surrounded the complicated contracts and labor agreements the NOPB holds with Class 1 railroads, the NOPB union workers and the Port of New Orleans.

In specific, the labor agreement with the Union was brought up more than once. Berni stated that the City was focused on keeping as many local jobs as possible but that doesn't seem likely if a private company takes over the management of NOPB.  The labor agreement seemed to be a point of concern among the prospective buyers, it will almost certainly be on the chopping block if the lease goes through.

Another question which arose was the exact nature of the partnership between the City, the NOPB and the prospective partner.  Berni stated that the City is looking for a partner to lease the "operation and asset management transfer" of the NOPB.  This subsequently brought up the issue of the property tax exemption the NOPB now enjoys as a public entity and how that would affect the new management entity.  Berni replied that "different assets will be attributed differently" in respect to property tax exemption.

Probably the biggest question mark with the RFQ is the nature of the current agreement the NOPB has with the Port of New Orleans.  Right now, because the structure of the NOPB is designed to solely serve the Port (not necessarily generate a profit), the Port has a $1/year lease agreement with the railroad.  If a private entity takes over the NOPB, that agreement will most likely be renegotiated...if the Port even chooses to do business with the new entity.

There was no clear answer from the City on how the Port and other issues would play out but Berni stated later in the meeting the City was looking for the applicants to propose solutions to the management challenges in their quotes.  The unknowns of the Port contract along with the complicated trackage rights issues with Class 1 railroads are going to make any proposal by the private bidders somewhat of a challenge.

One other issue that struck me personally is that there are no safeguards for the existing Port vendors who utilize the NOPB.  Berni did state they expect the prospective bidders to be "focused on local customers as opposed to third party entities" but it's not clear how the City would enforce that intent, especially after the current administration exits the stage.

Page 12 of the Powerpoint presentation highlights some of the select transportation and storage warehouse companies who depend on the NOPB.

The multi-million dollar question is how a private entity taking over the NOPB will disrupt, undercut or even bankrupt these existing local businesses.  There is no non-compete clause or provision for the prospective manager of the railroad mentioned in the RFQ so the private partner could theoretically build their own warehouses and competing business to cannibalize some or all of the existing businesses in this slide.

In previous posts, I documented some of these business owners' objections to the privatization of the NOPB as well as this RFQ that was just issued by the City.

As of now, the City is planning on choosing a preferred bidder on June 23, 2017.

However, the acceptance of a bid does not guarantee the NOPB Board of Commissioners approving the private/public partnership.  They did vote to research the possibility of the lease but they haven't voted on approving a lease as of yet.  That factor wasn't brought up in this pre-bid conference but it will have to occur at some point....the Powerpoint schedule states board approval would take place in the Summer of 2017 after the preferred bidder is chosen by the City.

Coming up, I will take a closer look at the Port's relationship with the City and the viability of public/private partnerships the City of New Orleans has executed in the past.

As always, email me with any questions or use the comment section.

Sunday, January 15, 2017

New Orleans Public Belt Railroad - KPMG Evaluation

Here's an update on what's happening with NOPB and the KPMG evaluation that led the City to decide they would not seek a sale of the Public Belt in lieu of a "Private/Public" partnership to lease the City-owned asset.

In the last post, I introduced an interview I conducted with Mayor Landrieu about his intent to sell and/or lease the NOPB.  In that interview I asked him if the company the City had hired to provide an evaluation of the railroad was taking in to account the myriad contract agreements and trackage rights with Class/Tier 1 railroad companies the NOPB had developed over the past 100+ years since it's inception.

I didn't get a very clear answer...from the Mayor or his appointee to the NOPB Commission, Ryan Berni.

NOPB - Complications in trackage rights, etc. from Jason Berry on Vimeo.

I don't have the full evaluation from KPMG but I do have an abbreviated version and it states that it was created under the assumption that existing"rights and leases" would remain intact.

That is quite an assumption.

I have not seen the full KPMG evaluation but it appears they did not address the complications of "clear title" to the NOPB's assets and operations.


Here is the abbreviated KPMG Evaluation material I currently have:

KPMG Evaluation

Upcoming...In our interview, I asked Mayor Landrieu about the wisdom of selling off City assets, his affinity for public/private partnerships and his strategy of "bully politics" when it comes to appointments to public boards, e.g., Wisner.

Coming soon...stay tuned.


Wednesday, November 30, 2016

New Orleans Public Belt Railroad - Interview with Mayor Mitch Landrieu - Part 1

At the end of August, Mayor Landrieu made good on his offer to allow me an interview with him regarding the fate of the New Orleans Public Belt Railroad.  The interview lasted an hour and I'm going to break it up in to sections on a few, possibly three, posts.

In this first sound byte, I asked the Mayor why he seemed so intent on selling and/or leasing the NOPB when nearly all of the other stakeholders, including the main stakeholder - The Port of New Orleans, were adamantly opposed to changing the status quo of the entity established over a century ago.  He quickly corrected me stating that his intent was not necessarily to sell the NOPB but to get an evaluation of the entity as a City asset:

NOPB - Mayor Landrieu - reasoning behind KPMG evaluation from Jason Berry on Vimeo.

The KPMG evaluation was delivered to the City a couple of weeks ago and in the last Board of Commissioners meeting the Mayor's representative on the Board, Ryan Berni, announced that the evaluation did not recommend a sale.  However, it did recommend either entering a public/private partnership for the lease of the Public Belt to be managed by a private company or maintaining the status quo of the NOPB with the City making improvements to the line in a yet to be determined agreement with the NOPB.

Berni then informed the Board that an RFP will be floated by the City to determine interest in the public/private lease option.

As I've posted previously, the Public Belt was originally designed to be a kind of market regulator for the Port of New Orleans.  It was never designed to be a profit-generating entity.  The Belt is a unique municipal asset among American cities in that it was created as a public entity to control rail costs for merchants looking to do business with the Port of New Orleans.

In that respect, many of the businesses that have invested in New Orleans, such as warehouses located along the NOPB line, built their investments on the premise that the rail lines connecting the Port to the Tier 1 railroads would remain in the public realm.  By privatizing the Public Belt (even as a public/private lease) a private company would immediately look at ways to gain a competitive advantage and subsequently pose a potential threat to the bottom line of not just the ancillary companies serving the Port but the Port itself.

Twisted Tracks

In the nearly 116 years since the NOPB's inception, some very complicated agreements with the Class 1 railroads have sprung up along with murky, undefined trackage rights. The most notable is a Joint Maintenance Agreement for the Huey P. Long Bridge involving The State of Louisiana, the NOPB (City of N.O.) and two private Tier 1 companies: BNSF and Union Pacific.  .

(For reference and the sake of brevity, I will list some of the main issues at the bottom of the thread for those who want to dig through them.)

In the interview, I asked both the Mayor and Ryan Berni if the KPMG evaluation was taking into account these myriad contract agreements and trackage rights issues that have developed over the last century surrounding the Public Belt and if it was even possible to create an accurate evaluation without understanding and unraveling these complications:

NOPB - Complications in trackage rights, etc. from Jason Berry on Vimeo.

I have not yet obtained a copy of the KPMG evaluation but have reached out to representatives from the company for comment.  I am not sure if the evaluation did take in to account any, all or none of the agreements of which I queried Mayor Landrieu and Berni.

In the meeting last week, Port stakeholders voiced their opposition to the public/private lease option and even the release of the RFP, stating it was creating a market disruption for future investment and business in the Port.  Berni dismissed the concern, noting that the NOPB just turned in a record month.

Also in the meeting, a letter was read from an attorney who represents the Tier 1 companies, Carmac M. Blackmon, esq., voicing the national rail carriers opposition to the public/private lease of the NOPB.

The dissent of the Tier 1 companies is disconcerting.  If these companies such as BNSF and Union Pacific decide to play hardball on the trackage rights issues upon the NOPB being leased to a private company, it could lead to a protracted legal battle with the City resulting in the NOPB losing access to portions of the NOPB line.  Worse, it could lead to some or many of the Tier 1 companies deciding to pull out of New Orleans completely, creating a significant disruption in Port business and operations.

I asked the Mayor if he was concerned about the effect the potential sale/lease of the NOPB was having on the Port, I will address that issue in the next post.

Contractual Issues surrounding the New Orleans Public Belt (not a definitive list):

-  The NOPB has twelve agreements with Canadian National Railway that range from trackage rights, customer service and wharfs, intermodal, and interlocker usage and maintenance. Canadian National actually owns a portion of the NOPB mainline that allows the NOPB to use for free.

-  The NOPB has three agreements with CSX Railroad regarding trackage rights, track maintenance, and signal maintenance of the Almonaster Bridge over the Industrial Canal which lies on the CSX mainline.

- BNSF has trackage rights from Avondale, over the Huey P. Long, all the way to Gentilly.

- The Huey P. Long Bridge is under a Joint Maintenance Agreement between BNSF, Union Pacific, the State of Louisiana and the NOPB.  It is unclear how the two Tier 1 rail companies would react to a private company taking over maintenance and full access to the bridge of which they have an ownership interest.

- The City would have to get federal approval from the Surface Transportation Board to lease the NOPB.

- Will the City protect the labor union jobs if the NOPB is leased to a private company?   Currently the NOPB supports about 160 high paying jobs.  How many of these jobs will be eliminated if a private company runs the Belt?

- Local stakeholders have existing agreements and contracts with the NOPB. Will these contracts be honored and if so for how long?

- The lease of the NOPB could greatly affect the New Orleans Gateway, particularly the highly trafficked French Quarter.  As of now, the City has ultimate control over the union workers that operate the NOPB and can control issues surrounding highly trafficked tourism events such as Mardi Gras.  The introduction of a private company could negate much of the control the City exercises over the rail usage and interfere with high volume events.  Especially if the Tier 1 companies choose to exercise their own trackage rights and bypass the NOPB altogether.

- Under current state laws, the NOPB and the City do not share revenue, expenses, or legal liability.  How will these issues be resolved and will it require changes to law on the state level?

-  Currently the NOPB is exempt from property and sales tax.  Would these exemptions be eliminated if a private company runs the Belt and if so how would that affect the cost of business for the Belt and subsequently the Port?

Friday, November 18, 2016

New Orleans Public Belt Railroad - November 2016 Commissioners Meeting

The long awaited KPMG analysis has finally been completed and turned in to the City.  Today at the monthly Board of Commissioners meeting Mayoral Representative Ryan Berni announced that the analysis recommends not selling the Public Belt but does recommend entering a public/private partnership to manage the railroad.  He went on to announce that the city would put out a Request for Proposal (RFP) and expected a decision to be made between 3 and 7 months:

Public Belt Railroad - Ryan Berni reports on City's decision regarding the outcome of the KPMG report from Jason Berry on Vimeo.

During public comment a handful of stakeholders once again objected to changing the status quo of the NOPB and the issuing of the RFP. One comment led to a somewhat contentious exchange between David Kearney, President of the Kearny Companies, Inc. and Ryan Berni starting at about the 4:40 mark:

Public Belt Railroad - Public Comment on KPMG report and announcment of Public-Private Partnership RFP from Jason Berry on Vimeo.

I didn't have a lot of time to comment tonight because I have some real world work to knock out but I plan on making some more in-depth posts over the weekend including publishing some excerpts from an interview with Mayor Landrieu about the status of the Public Belt.  He was kind of enough to grant me an audio interview about the NOPB back in September.

More to come.

Friday, October 28, 2016

Caroline Fayard...keepin' it classy

I really had every intention of keeping my opinion to myself during this Senate race....I swear.  I have been admittedly absent from the AZ world, even though I have some upcoming stories on the Public Belt I've been working on. Including an interview with Mayor Landrieu regarding his perspective of the issue.

As my readers know, I've written extensively about Caroline Fayard's father, Calvin Fayard, in respect to his role as a plaintiff steering committee attorney with the BP oil spill settlement and as one of the law firms who bullied their way in to the Wisner Trust oil spill settlement.  While Caroline did play a part in both stories, especially the Wisner drama, I figured I would just let the stories speak for themselves if anyone wanted to read about it.

Then Fayard announced she was opposed to the lawsuit the state is filing against oil and gas companies to hold them accountable for the damage they've done to our state's coast.  She said, "It's very easy for politicians and people to say, 'Let's just sue. Litigation's expensive.  It's costly. It's time consuming. And there's no guarantees."

I literally spit coffee on my keyboard the first time I read that.

Still....I had nothing to say.

Now...well...now...her campaign went and did this absurd, tasteless bullshit:

Caroline Fayard chooses to continue running David Duke-themed anti-Foster Campbell ad, loses Alliance for Good Government endorsement

After she accused Campbell's campaign of being focused on attacking her family:

An act of desperation?  Absolutely...and a pathetic one at that.  But the blowback has been swift and merciless leaving even the little, penny-ante sycophants running for cover (i could link that but I won't).

There's only so much sanctimony and hypocrisy a zombie can take, homeys.

Sooooo.....let me remind you of a little Vanity Fair article that was published back in June of 2006 in the wake of Hurricane Katrina.

It showcased Carloline's father, Calvin, playing Billy Joe Baddass in the front yard of his multi-million dollar wedding cake house (paid for with litigation that doesn't always work).

The online version of the story doesn't have the photos that were included in the magazine edition but luckily Zombie has a scanner.

Who you gonna shoot, Rambo?

Look at those swingin' dicks with their thousand dollar suits and Remington shotguns just waitin' for a "thug" to try and loot their mansion.

Finger on the trigger...judges on speed dial.

Here's the corresponding paragraph to the picture:
Some of the city’s richest residents stepped into the breach, taking security into their own hands. In New Orleans’s upscale Uptown neighborhood, well-heeled and well-armed property owners, sometimes with security guards to assist them, kept possible looters at bay, carrying firearms openly in their neighborhoods and looking after neighbors’ homes and valuables—even keeping a close watch on friends’ irreplaceable art collections. Attorney Calvin Fayard—one of the region’s major political fund-raisers for the Democratic Party, and the owner of the so-called Wedding Cake House, one of the city’s grand mansions—would remain at home and on guard with a coterie of like-minded friends. Some would use their powerboats to rescue the marooned. Their neighbors would dine on gourmet food from nearby specialty stores. Some would bathe in their stagnant swimming pools. One or two would take the opportunity to fly by helicopter to the office to shred potentially sensitive business documents—to prevent them from falling into the wrong hands, should law and order break down altogether.  

It cracks me up that he actually posed for this photo...replete with sunglasses and Armani, Perlis, (whatever) suit.  He must have been really proud of himself.  And something tells me even though Brinkley buried "Some would use their powerboats to rescue the marooned" in the middle of the paragraph as a compassionate caveat, Calvin was most likely not in that number.  

Fayard's campaign is trying desperately to associate Foster Campbell with something racist. Meanwhile, her Pops was flaunting that bullshit in Vanity Fair during the most vulnerable period this city ever experienced.