Local & State Headlines

ATI board responds to plaza criticism

• Albany Tomorrow Inc. officials note to appoint a committee to meet with city officials.

Carlton Fletcher

ALBANY — Albany Tomorrow Inc.’s Board of Directors rejected a call Wednesday to turn the almost finished Ray Charles Plaza project over to the city of Albany in response to comments made by city officials at a City Commission work session Tuesday morning.

The board instead voted to appoint a committee of three members to meet with the project’s architect and with city officials to try to settle concerns surrounding the project.

ATI board member and WALB-TV General Manager Jim Wilcox quoted city officials’ comments from an article that appeared Wednesday in The Albany Herald, then said, “If we’re seen as ‘incapable bureaucracy,’ we should turn the project over to a ‘capable’ group.

“If we’ve completed the project as (Project Manager) Ken (Cribb) says, per the specs, I move that we allow the city to take the project over.”

Wilcox, angry over what he labeled “leaked information” in The Herald article, was referring to comments made by Albany City Commissioner Bob Langstaff on Tuesday during an open commission work session. Langstaff, who suggested that the city remove $150,000 earmarked for ATI from the fiscal year 2009 budget that had been approved during FY ’08 budget negotiations, said, “Rather than using that $150,000 to essentially pay for bureaucracy we don’t need, let’s take it and fix things (ATI) did not accomplish ... like the Ray Charles Plaza.”

Except for followup comments made to a Herald reporter during a break in the commission meeting, Langstaff made his remarks with print and television news representatives present.

Responding to Wilcox’s motion, ATI Chair C.W. Grant said, “I’m a facilitator, and I know how to follow directions. But I’ll quote my grandmother when I say (the motion) is like cutting off your nose to spite your face. But if that’s what you want me to do, I’ll do it.”

ATI Treasurer Mike Marz — who said Tuesday after hearing Langstaff’s comments that the community needed to stay involved in downtown redevelopment — spoke against the drastic action called for by Wilcox, whose motion was seconded by John White.

“Change orders are a normal part of a building project,” Marz said. “I don’t know if we should draw a line in the sand to take on the city over this.”

Board Vice Chair Mary Helen Dykes echoed Marz’s comments.

“We’ve always had a good relationship with the city and county,” she said. “I don’t think we’re at a point where we need to, as Mike said, draw a line in the sand. Maybe we should let the negotiation process move forward and then see where we are at our next meeting.”

Wilcox warned, though, that the city could be “setting a precedent for future projects.”

The TV station executive withdrew his motion after he, White and Joe Tondera were appointed to a committee that will hold discussions about the completion of the Ray Charles Plaza.

In an update of the current projects being developed by ATI utilizing special-purpose local-option sales tax funds, Cribb said the city complaints surrounding the work at the park named for the Hall of Fame singer who was born in Albany amounted to a change order request.

“The design and specs (of the park) were approved by the city of Albany in April of 2007,” Cribb said. “The contractor built the project according to those plans and specifications. Now the city is saying they want to change the original design.

“If we do that, it’s going to require a change order, and that will mean additional costs.”

When Wilcox suggested before his motion that ATI “give the project to the city to complete,” Grant responded, “I wish it was that simple. But the city representative that I’ve been in contact with has indicated that the city will not accept the project (as substantially complete) until the changes they’re asking for have been made.”

Grant said after the meeting that ATI’s problems with the city were “solvable.”

“I don’t think (ATI and the city) are at an impasse,” he said. “Certainly Mr. Langstaff is entitled to his opinion about the role of ATI, but I respectfully disagree with him. I think we certainly can facilitate the changes that are being sought by the city on the park.

“We have always worked well with city and county officials, and ATI certainly does not want an adversarial relationship with the city over this issue.”

More Headlines>>