CPC Sued Over Open Lot Bidding Process

There’s increased suspicion of secret dealings between the city and the Charlottesville Parking Center, Rachana Dixit writes in the Daily Progress:

A rejected bidder for the Charlottesville Parking Center’s assets is filing a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the city, the latest development in an ongoing saga on whether the city will attempt to purchase CPC’s shares.

Spencer Connerat, formerly of Collective Resources Corp. and a CPC stockholder, said the suit is an attempt to force the city to specify if and when it inked a confidentiality agreement with the CPC. Such an agreement would be needed to allow the city to bid on CPC’s assets.

Connerat claimed city officials did not disclose the agreement’s date, and have not responded to his requests to get the information. The action was sent to the city’s General District Court last week.

All of this is over the open, paid lot on Water St:

View Larger Map

The Hook has been following this story for a while, and Hawes Spencer recently wrote about CPC’s odd rejection of a pair of private bids, leading some to suspect that CPC expects the city to come in with a higher price. The lot first went on the market three years ago, and Spencer called shenanigans on the whole thing last spring. So the suspicion that this isn’t entirely on the up-and-up isn’t totally out of the blue.

9 Responses to “CPC Sued Over Open Lot Bidding Process”

  • Charlottesville Old Timer says:

    Spencer C. is not well mentally and obviously Miss Dixit is too green to have known this.

  • Perlogik says:

    Regardless of Mr. Spencer C’s mental state this has been a troubling subject and there has been too much kept private. The stockholders were told for years hat their stock was worthless and now when it’s time for the big payoff everything is covered up.

    This was corporation was started by downtown businessman for the benefit of the downtown community not a privileged few. If a stockholder has had materials facts withheld that is a clear violation of the law. If their is nothing to hide then the lawsuit will come to nothing.

  • Dave says:

    Mr. Connerat was well enough to give a glowing endorsement to the last Rob Schilling CD!

  • You’ve got to give the guy props for putting together an entire album using nothing but the sample ditties that came with his Casio and the songs from that weird 11 AM “new contemporary” service we once went to at my Catholic church as a kid. I’ve been inspired release an album based on the tunes from Saturday morning cartoons and the punch lines from Bazooka Joe comics.

  • It’s a gold mine!

  • Dave says:

    Sing a psalm, baby!

  • Cville Eye says:

    Mr. Schilling said that while he was on council there were several closed door meetings about the potential development of the flat lot in conjunction with the metered lot. Although the meetings were not about the actual transfer of property and therefore, according to Virginia law, should have been public, there is a justification for people to wonder if everything is on the up-and-up. People should wonder exactly what is going on with million-dollar overruns, procurement contracts – before – contractor hiring,and misleading statements about the value of stocks in a corporation in which the city has a financial interest of partial ownership. Somebody’s getting rich around here while people are worrying about which party he belongs to or which restaurant is hot. It amazes still how Americans, to whom so much have been given, seem not to care about bad government processes which just might indicated some form of corruption using millions of tax dollars.

  • Ed in Belmont says:

    So Schilling was in on the secret meetings too. Figures. How much money did he make as a property speculator during his time on Council? Sorry Cville Eye, your hero is not looking very good.

  • Cville Eye says:

    Ed in Belmont, I would imagine that Schilling made no money since no stock was sold. Also, I don’t have heroes in Charlottesville. Also, the secret meetings were council meetings.

Comments are currently closed.