News
Apr 30 2008
Cleaning up
Augusta, Georgia’s façade grant program, a federally funded program administered by the city’s Housing and Community Development Department (AHCCD), is plagued by mismanagement, abuse and the potential for fraud, a study of city records shows.
For every dollar the city spends on grants and administration, only a fraction ends up in construction, mainly to correct deferred maintenance. Builders and property owners are often not held accountable for the proper spending of funds. Recipients complain about a murky bidding process, endless red tape and years of delays.
An inspection of records reveals the following problems:
— The city completed only eight façade grants in the past 10 years, and three of those properties are still vacant.
— Many properties improved with this federal money appear only marginally better after renovation.
— The city spends thousands of dollars in architectural fees for studies that recommend minor, cosmetic repairs.
— Some grant proposals drag on for more than three years, with dozens of meetings between engineers, planners, builders, program administrators and owners.
— The city has spent tens of thousands of dollars in architectural fees on some projects, even for owners who backed out of the program.
1127 Laney Walker: Never occupied after construction
A major objective of the city’s façade grant program is to eliminate “slum and blighting conditions” and to “help eliminate economic distress.”
The Pilgrim’s building at 1127 Laney Walker would seem to be an ideal candidate for the grant. Neighbors say this building has been vacant since the 1990s. A broken window is covered with plywood and mismatched paint hides graffiti. The façade surface is peeling away and windows and doors are in need of repair. The building is roomy, with a lot of potential for a business.
But this is one property that was already fixed up with federal funds in 2001. In that year, AHCCD paid $42,925 to renovate the exterior of this property, and a modest house next to it. Both properties are owned by Dee Crawford. Crawford is out of the country and unavailable for comment.
In addition to the $42,925, the city also paid $5,400 in architectural fees.
“We’re looking into changing the rules so property owners will be required to keep their properties occupied after receiving a grant,” said Henry Holt, director of the façade grant program. “We plan on revising the rules soon.”
3044 Deans Bridge Road: “It was supposed to take... six months”
Patricia Schaffer, co-owner of Villa Europa on Deans Bridge Road, has been a longtime advocate for business owners in the Rocky Creek Enterprise Zone, a reduced-tax district stretching between Peach Orchard and Milledgeville roads.
“As outreach, I try to get people to take advantage of the resources,” said Schaffer. “I started telling people to apply for the façade grants.”
But in the three years since Schaffer filed her own application for a façade grant, AHCCD has gone through three directors, each one with a say in her grant. The “constant delays and juggling” have soured Shaffer on the program, which she says is not living up to its potential to help blighted areas of the city.
“The biggest discrepancy is the difference between what the architect says it should cost and what the contractors are bidding.” In the first round of bidding, Virgo Gambill estimated the price tag of renovations to her property at $40,000. Four contractors who attended the bid meetings later backed out, leaving one contractor, Blount’s Complete Home Services, with a bid of $150,000.
“Blount seems to be a common name that comes up in the program,” said Schaffer. “I think they get comfortable dealing with someone and it gets easier.”
Schaffer describes a mountain of paperwork she had to file, including a detailed business plan, to show that her restaurant would create additional jobs with the façade money. The original plan was to increase seating space with a covered deck, and expand the restaurant’s capacity with a handicapped ramp and a duplicate entrance.
But because of the discrepancy between the architect’s price estimate and the construction companies’ bids, it took three bid rounds to get a plan that Schaffer could afford, and with each bid round the architect, Virgo Gambill, billed the city for new drawings. The most recent winning bid was for $25,600 and construction should begin this summer.
“The people at AHCCD have been great,” says Schaffer, “but it’s just this constant juggling. The requirements keep changing. They told me it was supposed to take six months between the application and the beginning of construction.”
511 Broad Street: “They ain’t done shit”
From a one-story brick building at 511 Broad Street, Command Uniforms supplies uniforms and equipment to the Augusta-Richmond County Sheriff’s Department. It is a simple structure, with a showroom in front and areas for a seamstress and storage in the rear.
Building owner Joseph E. Smith received a façade grant in 2005 to fix up this property. The technical specifications called for repairing minor chips in the brick façade, low-pressure cleaning, window caulking and repairing the aluminum awning, which is bolted to the structure.
For these repairs, AHCDD paid $31,900. Today the building looks much like it was before the repairs. An employee told the Metro Spirit that matching interior repairs were never completed. (Command Uniforms is merely the tenant at 511 Broad and is not responsible for either repairs or the façade grant.)
In October 2007, AHCDD Director Chester A. Wheeler wrote Smith that his obligation to make matching interior improvements had been met based on invoices from 2005 through September 2007.
One invoice mentioned painting the showroom, but the showroom and most other areas of the building are covered with wood paneling.
An employee of Command Uniforms says the work mentioned in the file wasn’t performed.
Asked about the matching interior improvements required by the grant, Peggy Haynes answered, “What work?”
“All they did was fix a door and a couple windows and put up that awning,” Haynes said about the exterior work. She said there was no work performed on the interior of the building.
Haynes’ story was backed up by Bill Prince, owner of Bill’s Place, a liquor store directly across the street from 511 Broad Street. He says he watched the façade renovations in 2005 and “it wasn’t much.”
“Oh, that building?” said Prince. “They ain’t done shit.”
3001 Deans Bridge Road: “That’s just how government works”
David Bell has poured thousands of dollars of his own money into his Subway franchise on Deans Bridge Road. He’s bullish on the area and praises local politicians for helping rejuvenate his neighborhood.
“Sometimes I come out here in the morning and the parking lot is covered with those dime bags used in crack deals,” says Bell. “But I’ve seen improvements driving out prostitution. It’s not as bad as it used to be. [Sheriff] Ronnie [Strength] has been good at cleaning this place up.”
He talks like a brave settler trying to clean up a lawless territory. He says he is grateful for the façade grant program, which will help improve the appearance of the neighborhood. Bell has taken the lead in cleaning up the property, which he rents from an out-of-town owner.
But the Subway shop and the attached sewing business are already one of the better maintained properties on Deans Bridge Road. Many neighboring properties look worse. And the price tag for his façade work, $34,400, seems high when the work details are examined.
Construction workers will keep the brick façade and only one window pane will be replaced, Bell says. The only major improvement will be a new awning. An architect has already been paid $4,400 for this project.
Bell says the high price is because of the program requirements: a minimum pay for workers, proof of workers compensation insurance, liability insurance, licenses and permits.
“The work has to be done to a certain standard, to an industrial standard, and it has to be done within a certain time frame,” says Bell. “All this adds to the expense.”
“I used to work at Savannah River Site and I know this is just how government works,” said Bell. “As taxpayers we want accountability for our money, and that accountability requires red tape.”
Bell started his façade grant application in May 2005. He says waiting three years for a series of simple improvements is worthwhile.
“That’s just the way it is when you work with the government,” Bell said.
429 Walker Street: “My tenants are getting nervous”
This is another property owned by Joseph E. Smith. Smith applied for a façade grant in 2001, and then fought with the city to allow the funds to be spent on a new roof.
In a 2001 letter to Keven Mack, then director of Housing and Neighborhood Development, Smith asked the city for additional funds to fix a leaking roof.
“As this has taken over a year to get this far, I would appreciate you moving this along as soon as possible,” Smith wrote. “My tenants are getting nervous.”
The city denied the request for the roof repairs, citing federal oversight of the program.
In 2005, after years of negotiation, the project was given the green light by AHCCD. In early 2005, architect Virgo Gambill completed a report of needed repairs, all minor.
Loose mortar between bricks should be replaced, Gambill said. Loose paint was to be removed from door and window frames, and gaps were to be filled in with a weatherproofing agent. Door and window frames were to be repainted.
Gambill charged $1,500 for the report, and contractors billed $27,231 for the repairs.
What Smith didn’t tell the city was that some of his tenants were also the co-owners of the property. Attorneys Percy J. Blount and Gary A. Glover, of Glover, Blount and Millians, have their practice in the office.
471-473 Broad Street: “It’s all ready for a Harley franchise”
This property, owned by Muhammad Mansour, is one of few properties in the façade grant program that has been substantially and noticeably improved. The files for Mansour’s property are in impeccable order, with every expense explained in detail.
Mansour’s building is one of few façade grant properties with new windows and doors. The inside has been completely redone to comply with the requirement of interior improvements.
Part of the façade was painted orange at the request of the tenant, who neighbors say is trying to attract a Harley Davidson franchise. He could not be located for this story.
305-307 James Brown Boulevard: “Didn’t realize what he was getting into”
Unlike many of the run-of-the mill buildings remodeled with the façade grant program, this building — an example of Second Empire — is an architectural gem.
Ralph Beardsworth bought the property in 2003 from Augusta Renaissance Partners, LLC, for $52,000 and then turned to the city to help with renovations.
Holt explained that Beardsworth applied for a façade grant in 2003, but backed out a year later after learning that he would have to put up more than $15,000 of his own money.
The low bid on the façade grant was for $45,700. Any work above the façade grant limit of $30,000 must be paid by the owner.
“I don’t think he realized what he was getting into,” said Holt. “That building needs a lot of work.”
Virgo Gambill charged the city $5,000 for a study.
1301 12th Street: In progress
This property, owned by Shannor Trotty, is located in one of the most blighted areas of Augusta. It is surrounded by properties that, by any reasonable measure, should be torn down as health hazards. One car near the property is missing doors. An emaciated cat walks down the middle of the street.
But Trotty has a thriving convenience store here, the only business activity for blocks in either direction. Last week workers were busy gutting the upper floors. Neighbors say this property renovation might be the help this neighborhood needs to get back on its feet.
Trotty did not return calls for comments, but a heavily tattooed employee of the convenience store said she is one of the first employees. She has worked there for three months and is happy to have work.
A “commence work” order has already been signed for this property. Workers have 90 days to complete construction.
512 Reynold Street: “The owner decided not to proceed”
James Kendrick, the soft-spoken owner of Augusta Blueprint at 512 Reynolds Street, says he looked into the façade grant program, but later discovered that his property needed substantial repairs beyond what the grant would pay.
“They [the architects] found out that walls were unstable,” said Kendrick. “It was just too much money to do all that they said needed done.”
For $8,000, Gambill wrote a report stating that the Reynolds Street property had a problem with “structural integrity.” Gambill estimated it would cost between $157,000 and $210,000 for a both a new façade and “sister walls” to stabilize the building.
The unstable walls that Gambill mentions in the report still stand crumbling.
Now Kendrick is banking on a high-profile development planned across the street.
“If something happens with that across the street, I’ll sell,” said Kendrick. Asked if he should at least patch his crumbling building in the meantime, he just shrugs.
516 Broad Street: Second façade grant in 20 years
This property is a project underway, with recent bids around $30,000 having been accepted by the city. William Murrell operates a limousine company. Vehicles are often parked in the lot next door.
AHCDD has accepted bids on this project, a narrow two-story building, for around $30,000. For $2,800, a local architect has determined that a new layer of stucco should be applied to the property. New windows and doors should be added soon.
But Prince, standing behind his counter at Bill’s Place, says this is the second façade grant at 516 Broad Street in 20 years.
“They did it once before in the late ’80s with new stucco,” he said. “But just a couple years after that, the stucco began coming off.”
Re-evaluating the program
Officials with AHCDD say one major difficulty in managing the façade grant program is bringing together many people with different interests.
“It’s a challenge,” said Holt. “You try to work with everybody, and you try to be fair to the owner and fair to the contractor.”
Holt said there will likely be major changes to the program in the coming months.
For every dollar the city spends on grants and administration, only a fraction ends up in construction, mainly to correct deferred maintenance. Builders and property owners are often not held accountable for the proper spending of funds. Recipients complain about a murky bidding process, endless red tape and years of delays.
An inspection of records reveals the following problems:
— The city completed only eight façade grants in the past 10 years, and three of those properties are still vacant.
— Many properties improved with this federal money appear only marginally better after renovation.
— The city spends thousands of dollars in architectural fees for studies that recommend minor, cosmetic repairs.
— Some grant proposals drag on for more than three years, with dozens of meetings between engineers, planners, builders, program administrators and owners.
— The city has spent tens of thousands of dollars in architectural fees on some projects, even for owners who backed out of the program.
1127 Laney Walker: Never occupied after construction
A major objective of the city’s façade grant program is to eliminate “slum and blighting conditions” and to “help eliminate economic distress.”
The Pilgrim’s building at 1127 Laney Walker would seem to be an ideal candidate for the grant. Neighbors say this building has been vacant since the 1990s. A broken window is covered with plywood and mismatched paint hides graffiti. The façade surface is peeling away and windows and doors are in need of repair. The building is roomy, with a lot of potential for a business.
But this is one property that was already fixed up with federal funds in 2001. In that year, AHCCD paid $42,925 to renovate the exterior of this property, and a modest house next to it. Both properties are owned by Dee Crawford. Crawford is out of the country and unavailable for comment.
In addition to the $42,925, the city also paid $5,400 in architectural fees.
“We’re looking into changing the rules so property owners will be required to keep their properties occupied after receiving a grant,” said Henry Holt, director of the façade grant program. “We plan on revising the rules soon.”
3044 Deans Bridge Road: “It was supposed to take... six months”
Patricia Schaffer, co-owner of Villa Europa on Deans Bridge Road, has been a longtime advocate for business owners in the Rocky Creek Enterprise Zone, a reduced-tax district stretching between Peach Orchard and Milledgeville roads.
“As outreach, I try to get people to take advantage of the resources,” said Schaffer. “I started telling people to apply for the façade grants.”
But in the three years since Schaffer filed her own application for a façade grant, AHCCD has gone through three directors, each one with a say in her grant. The “constant delays and juggling” have soured Shaffer on the program, which she says is not living up to its potential to help blighted areas of the city.
“The biggest discrepancy is the difference between what the architect says it should cost and what the contractors are bidding.” In the first round of bidding, Virgo Gambill estimated the price tag of renovations to her property at $40,000. Four contractors who attended the bid meetings later backed out, leaving one contractor, Blount’s Complete Home Services, with a bid of $150,000.
“Blount seems to be a common name that comes up in the program,” said Schaffer. “I think they get comfortable dealing with someone and it gets easier.”
Schaffer describes a mountain of paperwork she had to file, including a detailed business plan, to show that her restaurant would create additional jobs with the façade money. The original plan was to increase seating space with a covered deck, and expand the restaurant’s capacity with a handicapped ramp and a duplicate entrance.
But because of the discrepancy between the architect’s price estimate and the construction companies’ bids, it took three bid rounds to get a plan that Schaffer could afford, and with each bid round the architect, Virgo Gambill, billed the city for new drawings. The most recent winning bid was for $25,600 and construction should begin this summer.
“The people at AHCCD have been great,” says Schaffer, “but it’s just this constant juggling. The requirements keep changing. They told me it was supposed to take six months between the application and the beginning of construction.”
511 Broad Street: “They ain’t done shit”
From a one-story brick building at 511 Broad Street, Command Uniforms supplies uniforms and equipment to the Augusta-Richmond County Sheriff’s Department. It is a simple structure, with a showroom in front and areas for a seamstress and storage in the rear.
Building owner Joseph E. Smith received a façade grant in 2005 to fix up this property. The technical specifications called for repairing minor chips in the brick façade, low-pressure cleaning, window caulking and repairing the aluminum awning, which is bolted to the structure.
For these repairs, AHCDD paid $31,900. Today the building looks much like it was before the repairs. An employee told the Metro Spirit that matching interior repairs were never completed. (Command Uniforms is merely the tenant at 511 Broad and is not responsible for either repairs or the façade grant.)
In October 2007, AHCDD Director Chester A. Wheeler wrote Smith that his obligation to make matching interior improvements had been met based on invoices from 2005 through September 2007.
One invoice mentioned painting the showroom, but the showroom and most other areas of the building are covered with wood paneling.
An employee of Command Uniforms says the work mentioned in the file wasn’t performed.
Asked about the matching interior improvements required by the grant, Peggy Haynes answered, “What work?”
“All they did was fix a door and a couple windows and put up that awning,” Haynes said about the exterior work. She said there was no work performed on the interior of the building.
Haynes’ story was backed up by Bill Prince, owner of Bill’s Place, a liquor store directly across the street from 511 Broad Street. He says he watched the façade renovations in 2005 and “it wasn’t much.”
“Oh, that building?” said Prince. “They ain’t done shit.”
3001 Deans Bridge Road: “That’s just how government works”
David Bell has poured thousands of dollars of his own money into his Subway franchise on Deans Bridge Road. He’s bullish on the area and praises local politicians for helping rejuvenate his neighborhood.
“Sometimes I come out here in the morning and the parking lot is covered with those dime bags used in crack deals,” says Bell. “But I’ve seen improvements driving out prostitution. It’s not as bad as it used to be. [Sheriff] Ronnie [Strength] has been good at cleaning this place up.”
He talks like a brave settler trying to clean up a lawless territory. He says he is grateful for the façade grant program, which will help improve the appearance of the neighborhood. Bell has taken the lead in cleaning up the property, which he rents from an out-of-town owner.
But the Subway shop and the attached sewing business are already one of the better maintained properties on Deans Bridge Road. Many neighboring properties look worse. And the price tag for his façade work, $34,400, seems high when the work details are examined.
Construction workers will keep the brick façade and only one window pane will be replaced, Bell says. The only major improvement will be a new awning. An architect has already been paid $4,400 for this project.
Bell says the high price is because of the program requirements: a minimum pay for workers, proof of workers compensation insurance, liability insurance, licenses and permits.
“The work has to be done to a certain standard, to an industrial standard, and it has to be done within a certain time frame,” says Bell. “All this adds to the expense.”
“I used to work at Savannah River Site and I know this is just how government works,” said Bell. “As taxpayers we want accountability for our money, and that accountability requires red tape.”
Bell started his façade grant application in May 2005. He says waiting three years for a series of simple improvements is worthwhile.
“That’s just the way it is when you work with the government,” Bell said.
429 Walker Street: “My tenants are getting nervous”
This is another property owned by Joseph E. Smith. Smith applied for a façade grant in 2001, and then fought with the city to allow the funds to be spent on a new roof.
In a 2001 letter to Keven Mack, then director of Housing and Neighborhood Development, Smith asked the city for additional funds to fix a leaking roof.
“As this has taken over a year to get this far, I would appreciate you moving this along as soon as possible,” Smith wrote. “My tenants are getting nervous.”
The city denied the request for the roof repairs, citing federal oversight of the program.
In 2005, after years of negotiation, the project was given the green light by AHCCD. In early 2005, architect Virgo Gambill completed a report of needed repairs, all minor.
Loose mortar between bricks should be replaced, Gambill said. Loose paint was to be removed from door and window frames, and gaps were to be filled in with a weatherproofing agent. Door and window frames were to be repainted.
Gambill charged $1,500 for the report, and contractors billed $27,231 for the repairs.
What Smith didn’t tell the city was that some of his tenants were also the co-owners of the property. Attorneys Percy J. Blount and Gary A. Glover, of Glover, Blount and Millians, have their practice in the office.
471-473 Broad Street: “It’s all ready for a Harley franchise”
This property, owned by Muhammad Mansour, is one of few properties in the façade grant program that has been substantially and noticeably improved. The files for Mansour’s property are in impeccable order, with every expense explained in detail.
Mansour’s building is one of few façade grant properties with new windows and doors. The inside has been completely redone to comply with the requirement of interior improvements.
Part of the façade was painted orange at the request of the tenant, who neighbors say is trying to attract a Harley Davidson franchise. He could not be located for this story.
305-307 James Brown Boulevard: “Didn’t realize what he was getting into”
Unlike many of the run-of-the mill buildings remodeled with the façade grant program, this building — an example of Second Empire — is an architectural gem.
Ralph Beardsworth bought the property in 2003 from Augusta Renaissance Partners, LLC, for $52,000 and then turned to the city to help with renovations.
Holt explained that Beardsworth applied for a façade grant in 2003, but backed out a year later after learning that he would have to put up more than $15,000 of his own money.
The low bid on the façade grant was for $45,700. Any work above the façade grant limit of $30,000 must be paid by the owner.
“I don’t think he realized what he was getting into,” said Holt. “That building needs a lot of work.”
Virgo Gambill charged the city $5,000 for a study.
1301 12th Street: In progress
This property, owned by Shannor Trotty, is located in one of the most blighted areas of Augusta. It is surrounded by properties that, by any reasonable measure, should be torn down as health hazards. One car near the property is missing doors. An emaciated cat walks down the middle of the street.
But Trotty has a thriving convenience store here, the only business activity for blocks in either direction. Last week workers were busy gutting the upper floors. Neighbors say this property renovation might be the help this neighborhood needs to get back on its feet.
Trotty did not return calls for comments, but a heavily tattooed employee of the convenience store said she is one of the first employees. She has worked there for three months and is happy to have work.
A “commence work” order has already been signed for this property. Workers have 90 days to complete construction.
512 Reynold Street: “The owner decided not to proceed”
James Kendrick, the soft-spoken owner of Augusta Blueprint at 512 Reynolds Street, says he looked into the façade grant program, but later discovered that his property needed substantial repairs beyond what the grant would pay.
“They [the architects] found out that walls were unstable,” said Kendrick. “It was just too much money to do all that they said needed done.”
For $8,000, Gambill wrote a report stating that the Reynolds Street property had a problem with “structural integrity.” Gambill estimated it would cost between $157,000 and $210,000 for a both a new façade and “sister walls” to stabilize the building.
The unstable walls that Gambill mentions in the report still stand crumbling.
Now Kendrick is banking on a high-profile development planned across the street.
“If something happens with that across the street, I’ll sell,” said Kendrick. Asked if he should at least patch his crumbling building in the meantime, he just shrugs.
516 Broad Street: Second façade grant in 20 years
This property is a project underway, with recent bids around $30,000 having been accepted by the city. William Murrell operates a limousine company. Vehicles are often parked in the lot next door.
AHCDD has accepted bids on this project, a narrow two-story building, for around $30,000. For $2,800, a local architect has determined that a new layer of stucco should be applied to the property. New windows and doors should be added soon.
But Prince, standing behind his counter at Bill’s Place, says this is the second façade grant at 516 Broad Street in 20 years.
“They did it once before in the late ’80s with new stucco,” he said. “But just a couple years after that, the stucco began coming off.”
Re-evaluating the program
Officials with AHCDD say one major difficulty in managing the façade grant program is bringing together many people with different interests.
“It’s a challenge,” said Holt. “You try to work with everybody, and you try to be fair to the owner and fair to the contractor.”
Holt said there will likely be major changes to the program in the coming months.
