Lamont’s reassurance today didn’t do much for me to quell the public’s frustration over this project;

Lamont mentioned media reports tying the hotel-parking ramp project to others involving Legacy Developments, including the collapsed former Copper Lounge building and stressed that they are separate from Village on the River.

“They’re a small partner in this project and have no control,” Lamont said. “They can’t make any decisions on this project.”

He estimated Legacy’s ownership in the limited liability company at less than 10 percent. Legacy has no involved in the construction and is not doing the leasing.

While it’s great that Legacy may not be making the decisions, it still doesn’t change the fact that Legacy will get some kind of commission from this project and ultimately paid for by the taxpayers. You don’t negotiate a $50 million dollar project RFP and not get paid. Legacy should have ZERO ownership, should get ZERO commission and the investors should be made public.

At the end of the press conference today councilor Stehly voiced concern that Legacy is still involved and should not be, she also questioned the privacy of the investors. We have no idea what other clowns are involved.

Todd Epp from KELO AM set Lamont straight after he said this (Read Epp’s take on this HERE);

Lamont mentioned media reports tying the hotel-parking ramp project to others involving Legacy Developments, including the collapsed former Copper Lounge building and stressed that they are separate from Village on the River.

Todd asked if somehow the media was getting it wrong? Lamont had to admit they were not. Legacy has their finger prints all over this project. They need to be cut loose with NO commission or we need to kill this thing all together and actually build a parking ramp that fills the needs of downtown and Legacy can go back to building pop up dog parks, hopefully no artificial turf will collapse on anyone.

13 Thoughts on “Update: We should be giving $0 to Legacy

  1. If Legacy is legitimate in the eyes of Lamont and the City, then why the apologetic tone, or downplay, towards Legacy’s “10%” involvement.

  2. I wish Stehly luck. If things go like they usually do, she’ll be the only voice or reason putting the citizen’s interest ahead of those of big business.

    Another test for the new administration.

  3. scott on August 1, 2018 at 7:12 pm said:

    can the public obtain a copy of the original contract? does it state that legacy can assign it to whoever they wish?

  4. I think the new administration is overall doing a good job, but this deal just looks terrible all the way around. It was negotiated behind closed doors. One of the guys that negotiated this deal is now working for Legacy. Legacy’s owners negligently operated a construction company that led to the death of a construction worker. They illegally disposed of asbestos. They are under federal investigation, etc. Why would city government partner with this company on anything?

    Maybe the city government should stop being so nice on matters involving Legacy, start throwing their weight around, making sure Legacy does not financially benefit from this project.

    There has to be a breach of contract somewhere that the city could use to void the deal legacy and renegotiate to build the building directly with Jeff Lamont, perhaps that would be easily found if the contract were public record (not sure if it is or not).

    Things are getting weird when I find myself in complete agreement with Scott Ehrisman.

  5. l3wis on August 1, 2018 at 7:55 pm said:

    MP – If it walks like a duck . . .

  6. scott on August 1, 2018 at 9:11 pm said:

    why hasn’t the media sued to get a copy of the contract, like with the siding deal?

  7. l3wis on August 1, 2018 at 9:18 pm said:

    scott – in concept that is a great idea, BUT, as Stehly mentions at the end, state law doesn’t require them to release the names of the investors, BUT, it also doesn’t prevent them. Lamont could tell us, but he is shielded by the PRO-BUSINESS, F’ck over the normal citizen, state legislature. And who wants to rock that boat? A Republican Mayor? A Republican COS? A Republican Deputy COS? A Republican business owner? They would get thrown out of the party.

  8. “There is no collusion”….. “Collusion is not a crime”…..”It’s time to end the Mueller probe”…. (Hey, what about the old “…There were no ‘successful’ hacks..”(But can’t a hack be unsuccessful, too?))

    Today’s press conference fits the pattern…. Not only should Legacy’s “10%” be removed from this project, but its time for Lamont to offer full disclosure as to who are its investors, or have been in the past.




  9. Drake the Snake on August 2, 2018 at 8:10 am said:

    I wonder if Big & Rich are among Lamont’s unnamed investors? A Redneck Riviera along the Big Poo seems fitting.

  10. D@ily Spin on August 2, 2018 at 10:44 am said:

    There seemed the wrong body language and major nervousness. There’s something not right. It’s just plain obvious. It will not be a shock when corruption is exposed during and after this project.

  11. DS, I totally agree. I thought this press conference was strange. It reminded me of the kid who claims he didn’t eat the candy, except that no one yet had accused the kid of eating it, however…

  12. The Guy from Guernsey on August 3, 2018 at 12:33 am said:

    Matthew P.
    Maybe everybody should stop being so nice on matters (and with people) involving Legacy.
    Norm Drake should be persona non grata. Yet, there is Joe Batcheller, representing DTSF, kissing Norm Drake’s arse because he is going to let the dogs of downtown defecate snd urinate on one of his properties … for a month !!!
    Shun them and their busineses. We deserve better neighbors.

  13. l3wis on August 3, 2018 at 9:38 am said:

    And notice who donated the turf? SF Parks and Rec (Us). Thanks Norm, for nothing.

Post Navigation