COLUMBUS, Ga. — The contract renewal between Uptown Columbus, Inc. and the Columbus Consolidated Government has been delayed pending a review by city auditors of Uptown’s past performance.
Uptown Columbus, Inc., a non-profit organization, has been partnered with the City of Columbus for ten years under its current contract. That contract is set to expire in February.
During the city council meeting held on January 3, 2023, that contract was supposed to be renewed — but it wasn't. Instead, city councilors voted to have the city’s internal auditor’s office review Uptown’s past performance before they just pencil-whipped signing off on another ten years.
UPTOWN’S RESPONSIBILITIES
According to city manager Isaiah Hugley, Uptown’s contract with the city would require Uptown to hold many of the same responsibilities it has for the past ten years. According to Hugley, those responsibilities will include:
THE PROBLEM
City manager Isaiah Hugly read the request for the contract’s renewal as if it were a sure-thing; it was quite clear Hugley was not expecting any backlash or delay on his agenda item.
Councilor Glenn Davis (District 2) quickly pointed out that Uptown’s contract is something that involves the “changing of money between different entities,” namely from a government to a private enterprise to perform duties on behalf of a government.
For that reason, Davis said he would like to “see some performance data on this contract that’s gone on for ten years.”
“There should be some kind of accounting and ledger on this contract; there’s obviously collections involved,” Davis said.
Davis made it clear that — while he feels Uptown’s contract should probably be renewed — he feels strongly that Uptown’s past performance and their upholding of the responsibilities involved in the contract should be adequately reviewed before the city just simply signs off on another ten years with Uptown.
THE EXIT CLAUSE: PROOF OF HASTE
Davis also asked if the contract contained an exit clause for the city, stating that he himself did not see one on the current contract that is up for renewal. An exit clause is a provision in a contract that allows a party to terminate the contract legally and usually without penalty. In short: an exit clause would allow Columbus to break their contract with Uptown if something went awry in the future.
In response, Hugley wrongfully told Davis that an exit clause was present in the contract, though one in fact was not. Hugley confidently went on to say the city always ensures there is an exit clause in any agreement they enter into. City attorney Clifton Fay would later correct Hugley on his wrongful assumption.
Had Uptown’s contract been renewed then-and-there without Davis’ questions, there would have been no exit clause in the contract between Uptown and the city of Columbus.
HUGLEY’S DIVERSION
Without bothering to speak to Davis’ concerns, Hugley then diverted the subject towards how much revenue the contract could potentially make for the city; about $50k/annum. Without answering Davis’ question about Uptown’s past-performance data, Hugley simply said that “Uptown Columbus is the ideal organization for us to handle this project.”
City attorney Clifton Fay then provided comment, again focusing on how the city can earn revenue from the contract’s renewal. Fay elaborated, stating “the city receives 3.5% of the prevailing approved outfitter guide service’s fee per rafter.”
Contradicting Hugley, Fay then clarified that there was in fact no exit clause in Uptown’s contract, though he said that one could easily be added. Fay repeated himself for emphasis and again clarified that the contract that was currently up for approval did not in fact contain any exit clause.
THE SENSIBLE ROOKIE
Joanne Cogle (Day-One Rookie, District 7) then provided her sensible and responsible input. Cogle stated she wished to delay the approval since it was literally her first day as a city councilor; since this is something that affects her district, she would like to be able to take the responsible approach by taking the time to properly wrap her head around the issue. “Ten years is a long time,” Cogle stated, “and we want to make sure we kind-of hash out the details for trash pickup and maintenance down on what is the face of our city.”
As her first official motion made as a city councilor, Joanne Cogle moved to delay the approval of Uptown Columbus’ contract renewal with the city. The motion was then seconded, and the delay was passed. Job well done, Cogle.
THE PUBLIC/PRIVATE DILEMA
After the formal vote to delay, Glenn Davis made a motion to have the city’s internal audit department work with Uptown Columbus to review their past performance records on behalf of the city.
In response, Hugley wrongfully but confidently asserted that Davis’ motion isn’t possible to enact, insisting that Uptown is a private entity and is not required to let city auditors review their records.
This raises a key point: that Uptown is in fact a private entity that is not subjected to the same level of scrutiny required of governments outside the scope of its contract, yet it can enact its own rules and regulations as a private entity on behalf of the city without that same scrutiny.
When challenged by Hugley, Davis doubled-down, appearing to make this inferred point. When Hugley arrogantly asked Davis what he wanted to do about it, Davis simply replied by looking Hugley square in the eye, saying, “I already made a motion (to have our auditors review Uptown’s performance).”
Mayor Henderson then laughed while erroneously telling Davis that Uptown is not obligated to open their books for the city. Davis rightfully corrected Henderson, stating that Uptown is acting as an agent of the government and is absolutely required to have that information audited as it relates to the contract in question. Henderson mistakenly doubled-down, insisting that Uptown is not a part of the city.
THE CRUX
Henderson’s misguided opinion on this dilemma is the crux of a recurring problem in the Columbus government: CCG operates through private/public partnerships that provide autonomy to private organizations to act as their agents, without also enforcing the necessary governmental oversight and auditing required by such an arrangement. As a result, Uptown gets to have their cake and eat it too, however they see fit, with no oversight — and the city earns revenue off of this arrangement at a rate of 3.5% of the river outfitter’s fee in return.
THE EPIPHANY
Henderson then restated Davis’ motion to have CCG’s internal auditors review Uptown’s past performance as it relates to the contract. The motion was then seconded.
Charmaine Crabb (District 5) then respectfully and diligently pointed out that Uptown’s contract does allow for exactly what Davis described, and also noted that this sort of auditing is what council spent nearly an hour lauding over in positivity just moments before in the same meeting. Council had just spent over an hour discussing the importance of government transparency while all lauded their support for the very thing Hugley and Henderson were now fighting against.
Crabb made it apparent that Davis’ motion was more than reasonable, stating that council absolutely should be double-checking to ensure Uptown’s performance and actions have been in order with what should be expected of them.
“Let’s not just put these things on autopilot and just keep on going,” Crabb said. “Yeah, we haven't had any problems, but is this a time that we can look into it and maybe tweak things and make it even better? I think we have an opportunity to do that right now.” Good job, Crabb.
Davis’ motion to have the internal auditor’s office review Uptown’s past performance was then passed by council’s vote. The contract now cannot be voted on by council until after they have reviewed a report from the auditor’s office, which may take a month or longer.
TEMPORARY EXTENSION
Since the current agreement already in-place between Uptown Columbus, Inc. and the Columbus Consolidated Government is set to expire in February, the current contract will be temporarily extended for 90 days to provide the continuity of operations between Uptown and the city.
An update will then be provided pending a report from the internal auditor’s office.
You can watch the full exchange and hear the words from the horses’ mouths themselves starting at the 2:31:56-mark in the video below.
Facts are stubborn things — and we’ll keep publishing them, whether city officials like them or not.
-30-
© 2023 Muscogee Muckraker. All rights reserved.
