Peachtree City Councilman Dan

Tennant has made himself the point man in trying to calm the troubled

waters of the tennis center scandal. He sought a reversal of the city

Development Authority's vote to resign from its management contract

overseeing the tennis center and the Fred Brown Amphitheater.

Tennant entered city politics as the consummate outsider, first challenging

Group VI president Jim Pace for a spot on the city council in a write-in

campaign. Later, Tennant was elected in a three-way race for another spot

on the council.

In his Sept. 30 letter to the city and the development authority, Tennant

wrote, "Therefore, I respectfully call upon the DAPC to hold a special

called meeting as soon as possible to decide whether or not to rescind

their previous announcement to terminate their management contract with

Peachtree City to operate the aforementioned venues, and whether or not

to accept Mr. Christian's offer to resign."

The DAPC subsequently did rescind their resignation vote.

I am fascinated with how Tennant has managed to perform a chameleon-like

change from outsider to insider-power-broker, I asked him to respond to

a few questions. My questions, and Tennant's answers, are below.

Question: What is your assessment of Executive Director Virgil Christian's

management skills and financial oversight of the tennis center?

Answer: "I have come to know Virgil Christian reasonably well over

the past several years. I consider him a friend, and a man of high moral

character. We are both Christian men with young children, we like sports,

and our wives are friends. I do not think he is a crook, I do not think

he is incompetent, and I don't believe he would do anything knowingly

unethical or illegal. Having said that, I do not believe Virgil's

educational background or work experience includes being an expert in

finance, but I do think he is a well-liked and respected manager of the

tennis center.

"While it is somewhat difficult to separate Virgil the friend from

Virgil the executive director of the DAPC, I will try to be as objective

and articulate as possible.

"Virgil Christian was selected by the DAPC to be its executive director

following Kristi Rapson's termination of her employment with the

authority. The key element for everyone to understand is that Virgil Christian

does not report to the city council, the city manager or anyone else at

Peachtree City. He reports to a seven-member board appointed by the Peachtree

City Council, and that authority is a separate legal entity. It is not

my role or function to monitor Virgil's management skills or financial

oversight. That is the job of the DAPC.

"It is my opinion that any member of council, including the mayor,

who interjects himself directly into the internal affairs of any other

separate legal entity is doing a disservice to the city and to the said

separate legal entity, i.e., authority. The primary role any member of

council, including the mayor, should play in this relationship, (other

than taking a genuine interest and understanding the authority's

job) is to make appointments and in the case of the DAPC, allocate funds

from the hotel-motel tax.

"While I have heard the current mayor claim that there are financial

irregularities in the financial data and reporting of the DAPC, I have

no direct knowledge of it. I am certainly in favor of abiding by the law,

and I believe the DAPC and Mr. Christian share that view.

"It is my opinion that if our current mayor would spend one-tenth

the time being as concerned with the $27 million dollar budget he and

the rest of council oversees as he has on monitoring the DAPC budget and

operations, which he does not oversee, we would not have had an 18 percent

tax increase levied on PTC residents, which by the way, I voted against."

Q.: Are you supporting Christian's continued management of the center

and amphitheater? If so, why and on what basis?

A.: "Again, it is not my role to make the determination of who runs

the tennis center or amphitheater. I have already explained that. Having

said that, if the DAPC board feels that Virgil is the best candidate to

run those venues, then he should be retained. If not, they should find

someone else who can do a better job.

"I have not made any request to any DAPC authority member to retain

Virgil Christian or hire someone else to fulfill his duties. That is not

my job.

"I believe Virgil is a well known and highly respected man in the

world of tennis, and because of his networking abilities, if DAPC could

figure out some way to employ him in some capacity that fits them and

him best, everybody benefits."

Q.: Do you think the DAPC has done a good job of overseeing the financial

operations of the two venues? Can you defend the proposition that the

DAPC should continue to manage the two venues? If so, please make your

case FOR the DAPC.

A.: "Let's look at the negative side first. We have about $1.5

million in debt, some of which has not been accounted for, from what I

understand. In addition, it appears that money may have been borrowed

what I know of the law, that is not what should have been done, and I

want the law to be obeyed. I do not believe, however, that deliberate

fraudulent behavior ever existed. To my knowledge, all the DAPC members

from years gone by were ethical, honorable and decent men, who gave a

lot of free yet valuable time to the authority. It appears to be much

more likely to me that any improper financial accounting was a matter

of ignorance or bad judgment. In any case, I am neither an accountant

nor an attorney, and cannot make a firm judgment in the matter without

having accurate data and sound professional opinion presented to me.

"On the positive side, we have two world-class facilities in our

city that we can all take pride in, that operationally have not cost Peachtree

City taxpayers a dime, that bring in literally millions of dollars to

our community each year in trade and tourism, and that help to keep our

property values among the highest in metro Atlanta. I personally do not

play tennis, but I am an occasional patron of the amphitheater.

"As of last night, I saw documents which purport that the two venues

combined for a net profit of about $36,000 this past fiscal year, which

just ended on Sept. 30. If the numbers are correct, the amphitheater made

a profit of about $112,000, and the tennis center had a net loss of about

$65,000. I believe economic development activity showed a loss to account

for the difference. I don't have the papers in front of me, so I

am going on memory from last night here.

"Given that we have first-class, pristine facilities that we can

all be proud of, I do not believe a legitimate argument can be made that

gross mismanagement of these facilities exists today, as has been argued

never occurred over the past ten years.

"Finally, I have never argued that the management of these two venues

can solely be run by the DAPC. In fact, the whole reason I encouraged

the DAPC to reconsider their original decision to turn the venues over

to the city was to give us all ample time and opportunity to determine

the wisest course of action, and the make the most sensible management

arrangement. Evidently, there are several options to be explored, and

I am happy and relieved the city is not going to take over the venues

on Nov. 1 for the reasons stated in my previous letter about the subject."

Q.: What is your opinion about Christian's financial package with

the DAPC, including the rent-free pro shop and DAPC employees running

it?

A.: "This is America. It's a land where you can dream and take

a chance and be handsomely rewarded or fall on your face. I do not begrudge

anybody for making a lot of money, if the money was earned honestly. My

understanding is that when Virgil was recruited by the DAPC in the early

'90s to build a tennis center at Planterra Ridge, he was given a

base salary of around $30,000 with some added incentives, which evidently

included his running a pro shop, commissions on lessons, etc. If the authority

members at that time agreed to that deal, based on a vision to build a

dream facility, I really don't have a problem with it. It was part

of the package that it took to recruit Virgil. An old adage may apply

here: You don't necessarily get what you deserve in life, you get

what you negotiate. Of course, it must be legal.

"While I have no firsthand knowledge of the profitability (or lack

thereof) of The Trading Post (or whatever the official name is of the

pro shop) Virgil has told me he has lost money on the venture in some

years. Although the property is indeed city owned, because it is managed

to make a profit. Let's face it, The Ashland Grille is a privately-owned

venture in the same city-owned building, and while they do pay rent, nobody

seems to object to a for-profit business operating on city property.

"It's up to the management of the restaurant to make a profit.

The same is true of Virgil's pro shop. The rent issue is a matter

between Virgil (or whoever the owner is) and the DAPC and what was negotiated.

"As far as DAPC employees "running" the pro shop, that

is a fair question. I would not be in favor of having any more employees

working at the tennis center check-in center where the pro shop is located

than otherwise would be necessary with no pro shop. In other words, if

the pro shop requires additional staffing than would otherwise be necessary

with no pro shop, I think those expenses should be paid for by the owner

of the pro shop. I do not know if the Trading Post pays for staffing.

Again, this is a matter between the DAPC and the owner of the pro shop,

not a matter for council to mandate."

Q.: What is your opinion of the "commingling" of public and

private funds? How big a problem, in dollar terms and in public perception,

do you think "commingling" represents?

A.: "I am not in favor of commingling of private and public funds.

I have no idea how the day-to-day finances of the pro shop and DAPC revenues

work (which is what I assume you are talking about in asking the question)

but I would assume there are separate "tills" and accounting

procedures in place to prevent any abuse here. It is my understanding

that Virgil Christian is not involved in the deposit or accounting of

funds. I am in favor of any procedures that are put in place to eliminate

commingling of private and public money. I do not think Virgil Christian

is dishonest or would commit fraud, but I agree the public perception

of how this is handled could be improved. Again, this is a management

decision between the DAPC board and the owner of the pro shop, not a matter

for council to micro manage."

Q.: What is your opinion as to whether there might be city ethics ordinance

issues involving Tate Godfrey, his position as an officer of Group VI,

Group VI's status as one of DAPC's major creditors, and Godfrey's

votes, particularly the most recent votes which directly affect the repayment

of the debt owed to Group VI and others? I'm referring specifically

to city code sections 62-72, 62-81, 62-83 and 62-89. (Just FYI, looks

like there's also a problem with state law, OCGA 36-62-5 (e)(1)(b)

and (f), not to mention years of open meetings and open records problems.)

A. "I am always in favor of all affected parties to adhere to the

PTC ethics ordinance. I am also a huge proponent of following open meeting

and open records laws.

"The contract to build the tennis center expansion was let when Godfrey

still worked at Pathways. It is my understanding that Jim Fulton was asked

to come back and help with the negotiations with the architect and builder.

It is my understanding that Tate Godfrey has abstained on all votes in

matters of Group VI where there could be a conflict of interest.

"As far as the recent vote to retain the management of the venues,

I personally do not see how that is a conflict of interest. The debt was

incurred by the DAPC, the DAPC is ultimately responsible for the debt,

and whether or not the DAPC maintains or relieves itself of the management

of the tennis center and amphitheater does not change those facts. It

is my opinion that while the DAPC is ultimately responsible for its own

debt, the city is morally and ethically bound to do whatever we can to

see that the debt is paid since the money was used to enhance city owned

facilities. Mr. Brown argues that the city has no obligation whatever.

Legally, he is right, I guess. Morally, he is wrong.

"I do not fault Godfrey for voting to retain management of the facilities,

since it was at my urging that the DAPC reconsidered its previous vote

to hand the management of the venues