Elissa Yount: Recoup Our Investment


Questions about the status of the Embassy Foundation need answers. While giving very serious consideration to running for Mayor, I started researching some city issues. Among these were the budget and expenditures of the Redevelopment Commission, the perceived conflict over a council member’s employment, budget amendments, past due taxes, water operations, minimum housing enforcement, as well as the status of Embassy Foundation. My concerns with these issues were and remain grave. A decision not to run for Mayor was based on the fact that I know I can speak out and reveal facts about these and other issues more forcefully as a private citizen.

Now, to address the Embassy Foundation. Past audits of H. Leslie Perry Library as well as the tax returns for the Embassy Foundation revealed the library donating money to Embassy. My question became “Was the library using operational money which the library received from taxpayers –money that may have extended hours– and instead donating that money to Embassy?” This is still a question that has not been satisfactorily answered. So, in my follow-up investigation I found that Embassy’s tax returns were no longer available to the public. The Embassy’s non-profit status had expired; thus, the Secretary of State no longer had the records. Since it took a change to our City Charter (a change that was done without a public hearing and, to my mind, in a very questionable manner) to allow the city to give property to the non-profit Embassy, then how does this affect the contracts?

Why should we care about the library building or contracts at this stage of the game? We know the city is suppose to acquire the actual building, and of course the city would prefer that the loan would have been paid on the building, but a citizen cannot find out if the loan has been paid or how much money is owed. Could the building be mortgaged? The City Council does not seem to want the answer either. Why is this important? This building is being used jointly but the county has not put money into the building. Remember the city was asked to buy the county’s part of the old library on Rose Ave., but the county uses the new building without paying a cent. There are many financial advantages for the city to own this building. For instance, when the city has ownership of the building, then, at the very least, the city could barter with the county for land fill fees to dispose of demolished dilapidated houses. The city taxpayers invested greatly in the library building and, believe me, the city was left in perilous financial straits over these expenditures. It is time to recoup some of that investment.

There are other multiple questions that need clarification. The Daily Dispatch interviewed Sam Watkins recently and it appeared that the Embassy Foundation has not shelved plans for an auditorium. Now finding out who other than Mr. Watkins is on the Embassy Foundation Board, when they meet, and who is their registered agent is also important as Mr. Watkins has alerted opposition voices to “get out of his way.’ Do the other Foundation members feel he can act with impunity?

Much of the business about Embassy has not been straight forward and certainly it has not been open, but The Embassy Foundation contracts with the city are public business and unfortunately it is business that the city has not been very professional in administering. What better time than election time to get some answers and get the path forward straightened out?