Providing Greater Lancaster with an Alternative Source for Local News and Commentary  _________________________________________________________
  September 5, 2006                                         Publisher: LLC                                   Volume 1, Number 3
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Digest
(Go to
for full articles)

  • Convention Center Fund Gap Not Filled
  • Historic Preservation Trust: No Money for Center
  • County Decides to Proceed with Purchase of Controversial E-Voting machines
  • Convention Center Authority Pays More Than $6.5 Million to One Law Firm. For What?

People Poll? will contribute $500 to
a local charity chosen by the Intelligencer Journal
if it will run a 'People Poll' asking:

"Do you support public guarantees of Convention Center Project debt?"

Preservation Trust to Project Sponsors:
"We Will Not be Giving Money"

   In yet another exposure of the Intelligencer Journal's fantasy headline on 8/11/06 ("Center fund gap filled") is the statement written by Timothy Smedick, Executive Director of the Historic Preservation Trust, to NewsLanc.Com:

   "We will not be giving money to the Convention Center Project."

   The non-existent $3 million from the Historic Preservation Trust is added to the so-called $7 million saved by eliminating a parking garage that was not even in the construction budget! Then there was $5.25 million in so-called savings from "value engineering," despite repeated earlier attempts to cut costs and the awarding of the construction contracts the next working day.

   The "smoke and mirrors" savings amount to $15 million of the previous $20 million gap (much larger when an $8 million allowance for contingencies is appropriately included).

Has the monopoly press no shame concerning how far it will mislead to salvage its 44% investment in the bloated and unfeasible convention center project?


Former City Controller to NewsLanc.Com:
'Sweetheart Deal' for Partners

   "My understanding is that [Penn Square Partners] has an option to purchase the Watt & Shand property from RACL for $2.5 million if no other party agrees to purchase it. PSP also has the first right of refusal to match any other party's offer to purchase the property. In my opinion, this is another example of RACL enhancing the current 'sweetheart deal' for PSP and not acting in the best interest of the taxpayers. Because of this first right of refusal, it is highly unlikely that any other party would even entertain the thought of making an offer on the property."

R.B. Campbell, former City Controller  


Say What?

   "[The Convention Center] Authority board and its staff will not participate in the process relating to the consulting services to be provided to the county by PKF Consulting."

-- C. Ted Darcus, Chairman

At Mayor Rick Gray's request at their meeting, the county commissioners ordered a $125,000 study by nationally renowned experts.

The Convention Center Authority and Darcus are city and county joint appointees.

Why was Darcus opposed to discovering the facts?