Jackson Jambalaya

Madison County & inflated appraisal values...imagine that for a moment

*** Best Investigative Journalist in Mississippi ... In Any Media Format ... Is Kingfish ... Bar NONE! ***

Gerald Barber - conflict of interest - you think? How he continues to be elected to this office is beyound belief!!!!

Probably because the people who elect him don't have this sort of information when they go to the polls. I didn't. Did you?

wake up 8:50. This information was in the Sun Herald for your reading pleasure Sunday morning.

12:35am, ah, duh, because maybe he is white and a Republican? Ya think, in Madison County???

Wake up December 17, 2012 7:54 AM LOSER before you discover too late that you are an idiot.

There are media outlets all over this state benefiting from KF's work including the Fondren Pablum.

It is always interesting to see what the "final" result of the IG audit will be. Historically, when a federal IG conducts an audit, they find many things to be "wrong" but after the agency provides its response and then there is a resulting 'discussion' between the agency and the IG, the final audit $$ demand is less than 10% of the original sum determined to be misspent.

Not saying that will be the result in this case - have no idea. But lets see who bothers to report the final audit which will probably be sometimg this fall - well after the blood in the DMR waters has disappeared.

Sounds like the way an OSHA audit works. They always accept between 20 and 35% of their original demand.

I usually don’t make it a practice to respond to blogs, but your recent comments about my wife and our firm Barber and Mann, Inc. are so misguided and slanderous they need correcting and should be stopped. Much of your blog centered on the appraisals and land purchases by MS Dept. of Marine Resources and quoted Barber and Mann Inc. as the party responsible. The FACT is Barber and Mann Inc. was not hired to and did not perform any of the appraisals mentioned in the article, nor did we do an appraisal review with value on any of the properties in question. If you read the Notice of Potential Findings and Recommendations that you copied in your blog you will see a list of the appraisal firms that conducted the appraisals. Another major fact that you have left out is that Barber and Mann did not select any of the properties mentioned in the articles. Both the selection and hiring of appraisers and identification of properties were made by the MDMR staff or subgrantees under the Coastal Impact Assistance Program.
My wife’s contract (to assist with the administration of the CIAP program) was approved as a sole source provider on four different occasions by the Mississippi State Personal Services Contract Review Board on 5/13/10, 2/8/2011, 4/14/11 and 5/15/12 in accordance with the CIAP program guidance and the state procurement rules and regulations. She is eminently qualified as a grant administrator which is a fact you failed to research or ask for references regarding her vast experience in working with grant programs. In her entire career she has never had one singe blemish. She deserves better than a bunch of misinformed reporters lacking all the facts on a mission to sensationalize.
Now to answer questions about me as Madison County Tax Assessor -- I did not work on these projects. I file an annual Ethics Report with the State of Mississippi. It is public and lists all my business interest. I also list on the Madison County Tax Assessor web site that I own Barber and Mann. Inc. with my wife, and I list other business interests as well. No deep dark secrets there. I have had business interests outside my county elected office since the beginning of my elected career 25 years ago. I value the experience I receive from my work in the business world, and I apply those experiences in my elected position. A professional would apologize to my wife for being a part of slandering her reputation. I don’t expect an apology since elected officials appear to have a target on their back the day they are elected, which could be a reason many good and qualified folks don’t seek public office.


Gerald Barber

Raw nerve alert!

In times like these it is always important to remember the story about Marshand Crisler being shot in the leg.

No one has accused you of hiding anything. Period. I did check the statement of economic interest form as part of my research. Standard procedure and your company is out there for everyone to see.

I inserted and highlighted the fact in the post just now it was GVS that performed all but one of the appraisals in question. They did the work.

However, the feds did say B&M was supposed to review them. The report states on page 10 B&M did "not review the appraisals content for compliance". I interpreted that to mean B&M had a duty to review the appraisals before submitting them to D&M and to do so in a thorough and competent manner. Having said that, I stand by the rest of the paragraph unless shown otherwise.

I did not slander you, nor slander your wife. My error was not specifically pointing out GVS performed the appraisals. That information was inserted in a way that the reader will see it.
Keep in mind one thing, if you are big enough to take $600,000, you are big enough to take the scrutiny for it.

To Gerald Barber: She now has a single blemish.

So Mr. Barbers thinks that the coverage of this DMR debacle is sensationalist?!

Interesting to see Mr. Barber responding in the middle of the Monday workday probably from a taxpayer provided computer and internet connection, and obviously on the taxpayer payroll. I am sure he can eventually state his and his wife's case for the record to the federal authorities.

Shadow, I did not have this specific information; however, I have known him since the first time he ran for this position and have never cast my vote for him. And, yes, I am and do vote Republican!

9:14 That should make my case clear to you as well. I realize this does not speak well for the voters of Madison County, but I am only responsible for my vote.

The IG report was posted on your site earlier today. Was there a reason for taking it down?

It is there. If you are using an apple product, it might not pick it up as it is in Flash probably.

I love how everybody jumps on the bash wagon. Sounds like this is just some type of personal attack on Mr. Barber. It is strange that he is such a terrible person but keeps getting re-elected over and over again. I know him personally and professionally and he is an outstanding person. Judge not lest you want to be judged. Why don't you wait till the facts are in before you put the noose on the tree.

Do not know Mr.Barber but what has happened on the coast with DMR buying lowlying floodplain property with no public benefit or need from family and freinds who could not sell to anyone else is wrong an I hope illegal.Some of these properties, which I have looked at,sold to the public/DMR for more than $1,000,000.per acre.It along with leaseing 25 year old boats without engines and no bid contracts is just part of the scam that seems to benefit a select few connected people.Hope you good people at JJ can help get the word out state wide so someone will drain this cesspool of thieves.

8:16 PM ding ding ding... we have a winner!

8:16 PM ding ding ding, BINGO!

Why don't you wait till the facts are in before you put the noose on the tree.

How sad and pathetic that you would use that type of imagery. If Barber is indeed an outstanding person as you claim then he should lose your sorry ass as a friend, colleague or acquaintance ASAP.

Kangaroot: It's hardly 'raw nerves' when a man steps forward to defend his own and his wife's reputation. Quite manly and chivalrous in fact. What a concept that a person would speak in his own defense. What might YOU have done had you been the subject of this thread? As usual, you're on the top row of the bleachers tossing peanut hulls.

Anonymous Anonymous 7:47 PM - this has to be a Barber family member.

Where there's smoke there's fire....

Shadow you are absolutely correct. I mean I am in complete awe of you and your prowess of perception. I here-by dub you, intern "flounder."

Shadowfax - Jackson Jambalaya Intern

KF - good work, but have again placed implications in your reporting - this time about Barber and the appriasals. You did correct the first implication when Barber answered with the fact that B&M did not do the appraisals. Good reporting would have put that fairly important fact in your comments, not left the reader with the fact that B&M did not perform the questioned appraisals.

But in your reponse to Barber, you quote from the IG report (which I assume is a correct quote, but frankly I did not look it up) saying that "However, the feds did say B&M was supposed to review them. I interpreted that to mean B&M had a duty to review the appraisals before submitting them to D&M..."

Problem with IG draft reports is that they make statements like this because they often think it is how things "should be". But the contract between DMR and B&M does not list such a requirement as part of the scope of work. It appears that B&M was to "coordinate" the work of appraisers, but that is a long way different than "reviewing" or "approving" them.

Seeing as how your good work obtained a copy of these contracts, and it only took a couple of minutes to read through them, why would you "assume" that B&M had a duty to review these appraisals?

I don't give a damn about B&M - in fact, have many significant differences with Barber in his current position. But I have a disdain for "draft" audits that make claims that don't match the requirements. (BTW, I don't think that competitive bidding is required for this work under federal law. State law requires review and 'acceptance' by the CRB when done as a sole-source. Compliance with state law is generally the fed requirement for such procurements.)

So what is your point 1:33 PM?

How do you know this?

But the contract between DMR and B&M does not list such a requirement as part of the scope of work.

2:06, because I read the contract as posted by KF.

My point is the audit is about the DMR actions, but KF headline and focus is about B&M. Only thing I see in the audit about B&M is that they have contracts that were issued as sole-source - but for the purpose of grant writing and grant administration, not appraising. So, with a long, detailed audit about DMR land purchases, why is the KF article focused on B&M? Local news, therefore, local interest, therefore more hits to site?

Like the fact that the story is being told, and don't question that Barber/wife having a contract is part of the audit. But don't see where the land sales above audit claimed value is connected to B&M.

Additional from above:

The feds said Mr. Barber's firm had no experience with appraisals for this federal program, blatantly disregarded standard industry practices such as use of the sales comp method, and approved the purchase of properties by the state at prices that could not be supported or verified. The company had a duty (in my interpretation and opinion) to review the appraisals submitted by GVS before approving them.

NOTE: IN KF'S Opinion. That's not in the contract, just KF's "opinion". If B&M were contracted to do what KF "thinks should be done" this would be a decent article about Madison County Barber. BUT - B&M were not contracted to do this, so KF's opinoin (and wonderful reporting, according to his D/S friend that always chimes in about how wonderful he is) doesn't make B&M at fault for anything.

The whole posting points to appraisals and talks about "Appraiser Barber". Once caught, KF added a sentence to point out that B&M didn't do the appraisals. But, according to King KF, they should have kept this from happening because his "opinion" is such.

That's my point 2:06.

Geesh 5:28PM why not just use your real name. You must be new to these internets parts. Wacka-wacka.

$600,000 for merely coordination? That's some fine smelling dung.

In response to 1:33PM, 2:38PM and 5:28 PM:
K.F. has two links in the post labeled "Contract". This comes from pages one and two of the first one.

Section 3.0: Responsibilities of the DMR and the Contractor
(Refer to the linked document for 3.1 and 3.2)

3.3 Contractor Responsibilities

3.3.1 The Contractor shall be responsible for those services outlined in section 4.0, Scope of Services.

Section 4.0: Scope Of Services The Contractor shall

4.1 Coordinate all aspects of project management and implementation on project deliverables for CIAP land acquisition (for projects as specified on attachment A) including:

4.1.1 Project management and administration.
4.1.2 Project implementation (from parcel identification to close out of award). 4.1.3 Coordination and oversight of all subcontractors.
(Refer to the document for 4.1.4 through 4.1.9)

4.2 Coordinate and execute all work performed by other subcontractors or in house including:

4.2.1 Appraisers (Yellowbook appraisers and review).

Maybe someone who knows will state whether the term "Yellowbook" has a specific meaning when used in conjunction with appraisers and/or the acquisition of federal lands. I am not familiar with the term, but Google found this for me. Go to the bottom of page 9 of that pdf to find the details of the USDOJ and the Appraisal Institute jointly publishing "Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land Acquisitions" (aka the "Yellow Book").

I'm not an expert and your mileage may vary, but at least for the period of time covered by this contract, it would seem that Barber & Mann might have had some oversight of the appraisals, or at least were paid on that basis.

Bay Tech Building in Bay St. Louis?

Thank you 2:45, but your "findings" means that the appraisers have to follow those UASFLA standards. The contract does not call for B&M to review those appraisals. That was my point earlier. To "implement" the grant that was beind developed by DMR and B&M, there would be appraisers. Despite the reading of the blog post by his majesty KF, that was not the purpose of the contracts with Barber. And there is nothing in B&M's contract that they would have anything to do with the appraisals other than to coordinate the work of the appraisers (hired by DMR) as well as the work of other subcontractors.

I don't give a shit about B&M. Don't even particularly like them for that matter. But - I also don't like those that want to take some insinuations and smear people that aren't involved - have been there too many times personally.

Barber (like him or not) is not the focus of this audit by the IG. KF tried to make it appear that he was. Don't like the appraisals? Talk about those that either did the appraisals or those that purchased the property. But in the meantime, please tell me where Barber, B&M, or whatever else connection you want to make to Madison County, had a damn thing to do with them. Despite KF and his asskissers want to say that they did!

$600,000 for merely coordination? That's some fine smelling dung you've left here yet again today.

And you truly don't want anyone to believe you don't give a "shit" about B&M.
Yeah, sure, whatever you say Sparky.

Hey Sparky, me and Barber have been fighting over tax appraisals in Madison for a few years. I don't give a damn whether you believe it or not. He ain't a friend, associate, or ally. I don't know what kind of grant writing (not just coordinating) job his wife did at DMR. But I do know what this IG audit is about. And I don't jump up and down because KF tries to point fingers at someone in Madison County just to get more hits on his blog.

Go after the bad folks - fine. All for it. But no one has come on here - including you B&Asskisser - and connected the dots to where this IG audit indicates anything that justifies the headline - or even the "corrected" blog comments that introduces this article.

And, BTW, Barber - if you like this defense, the go and finally adjust the B/S appraisal of my Madison County property, since evidently I am your lacky!

Sorry. Tried to put a name on that to satisfy the Anonymous KaptKangaroo. But somehow screwed it up.

So Kaptain - let me apologize for having the "Kapt" name attached. Meant to be KaptAnanymous so you would be satisfied that there was a name attached. KMA

Your panties are in a wad about the headline? Get real.

The state and national purpose is coastal restoration with the proper enhancement of water quality and the fisheries. The tidal lands in a warming climate will be moving inland so their traditional economic value will diminish and the market value should reflect that. The state officials and their contractors failed the public purpose while enhancing their private interests. The public official with the private company should take great care with his reputation which he also failed to do. His name is tarnished regardless of the vigorous defense he is marshaling here. I wished he and his wife were as vigorous in carrying out the public purpose they originally outlined as they were here.

6:22, no dumbass. Not "just" the headline, but the entire comments in the spot. WITH the headline, all the comments about the appraisals that were questioned in the IG audit are implied to be about Barber, while in fact he (or wife) had nothing to do with them. But yet KF and his "you are the best investigative...." are again going after individuals he personally dislikes with implications. And I don't like "journalism" that misuses implications.

So I'm picking on the assessor. I'm smearing him. His company had no responsibility for any appraisals.

1. The reason for the headline is this is what is called a local angle. Statewide story, local angle. Happens all the time in the media. It is newsworthy that a local politician owns a company whose work is called into question by the feds. Its also worth reporting how much money the company made when the IG questions the work.

2. Now for the question of reviewing appraisals. Here is what page ten of the report states:

"Second, we have no assurance that DMR officials engaged the most competent, qualified, and experienced individuals to work on land acquisitions because they did not procure key services competitively. For example, DMR awarded a $75,000 sole-source contract to Barber & Mann, an envirnonmental and real estate consulting firm, to coordinate all aspects of CIAP land acquisitions, including work performed by third-party appraisers. The contract also requires B&M to gather and submit all deliverables, including appraisal reports, to DMR. B&M however, only checked the appraisals to determine if they covered each topic required by UAFLA. The contractor did not review the appraisals' content for compliance with UASFLA in spite of (1) its contractual responsibilities and (2) DMR's professed need for "technical expertise in .... appraisal and appraisal review", which was touted as a reason to hire B&M under sole-source procurement procedures. Furhtermore, the resume for B&M representative working on CIAP projects does not indicate any prior experience with UASFLA appraisals."

Yup, without a doubt, 8:06 AM has no dog in the hunt. ROFLMAO

BUT I HAVE NO DOG IN THIS HUNT!!!!! This is pure speculation on my part, firstly because I have no idea who this "KaptAnanymous is. Secondly because I have no idea if there are even any pictures. Yet.
That said, I wonder if KaptAnanymous or any of their 'mates' or 'wenches' shows his/her face in the rumored FB pictures on the "research vessels"? Maybe more than the face is showing? Lots of rumors about pleasure trips, partying and entertainment of friends family and important people. Boats, booze, fishing, sunshine, sign me up! What happens on the boats stays on the boats, until the phones come out.

But it might really be about the headline after all.

KF, so the IG says that DMR 'needed' somebody to do this, and that B&M did not have the professional expertise (don't know how they determine that, but that's ok) the fact is, B&M's contract did not require them to do the work. Should DMR contract with somebody to do this? Maybe so. But the fact that they didn't does not require B&M to perform that work. The controlling document is the contract, which as you note, was approved by the state CRB. Having been accepted by CRB, the procurement requirements were met.

Did B&M (local political guy with a company) get contracts that paid several thousand dollars? Evidently so. But did it require them to do whatever the IG thought somebody should be doing on this project? No. I'll bet when the response is submitted to the IG Audit that this is pointed out and that this claim will not be in the final audit. Want to take that bet? If so, name the amount.

And no, never been on the 'research vessels'. Known about them, but never set foot on the dock where they are kept, much less on either boat. Don't have any business with DMR - never been in their offices. No connection with Barber except a difference of opinion on his appraisals on some real estate in Madison County. And JAAK - don't see your name or face either. Remove your hoodie, and I'll remove mine. (Same to you KK)

Finally figured it out. You don't have a dog in the hunt because you are Barber's dog.

What may happen because of the way this has been done by B&M is the loss of future CIAP funds going to our state until somebody pays back the monies paid for these properties that were bought for as much as 16x assessed value and no public need.The tax payers of this state should be outraged by what has gone on at DMR.Did B&M play a part in this scheme? We will know as soon as the demand and/or target letters arrive.I have looked at all of the properties in question on the Coast and can honestly state we got screwed and somebody made a lot of money making this happen.Stay tuned,word is the first 8 indictments coming down in January.Who will they be?

What's matter KF? Kill my challenge and bet? Thought it was a good one - if something in it was offensive, let me know and I'll offer the deal again.

Evidently my comment - and challenge - from last night "disappeared". So I'll try again.

For those that question my not having any dog in this hunt - or for you 7:41, being the dog, I'll make this wager.

I'll stand behind each and every claim I made in my 12/20 7:06 comment (and previous ones if there are any denying any connection to Barber or DMR) - I haven't been on the dock, much less the boats; dont have business with DMR; never been in their offices; no connection to Barber, etc.

To back those up, I'll wager $1k against $100 and throw in a kicker. I'll disclose myself to KF, and submit to him to decide if my statements are accurate. To you, JAAK, or to 7:41 (or for that matter, anybody else that wants to jump in, come on - the water's fine) you disclose yourself to KF so that he can know who is in the wager.

If KF determines that my claims are accurate, he discloses who lost, by name. If my statements are not accurate, I'll let KF video me kissing your ass on the courthouse steps, and post it with all identification he chooses to add.

I just am constantly amazed at the folks who comment here behind aliases, but question those that just use the anonymous button.

Think its a bluff? Bring it on - I'll take any and all that want to take the wager.

Nothing of the sort came across yesterday. If I was going to do that, I wouldn't approve this comment.

KF - I understand. Sent it shortly before midnight last night. Agree that you wouldn't post this today if you were going to "kill it". I don't remember exactly how I worded it last night, but don't think I put anything offensive in it.

My only other thought was that you didn't want the appointment to be the arbitrator of the bet. Or else, you didn't want the possibility of having to video an "ass kissing". But don't worry - if JAAK, KK, or any of the anonymouses want to take up this bet, I won't be losing. Sorry you don't get the video!

Um, I only post under my Google ID - KaptKangaroo that links to a valid Google Blogger page with my credentials. Any other post with my name attached to it is stealing my identity to post.

OK Kap, didn't know that it connected. (I'm slow on the uptake of details of "Google Blogger"). I'll retract as to your comment. But it still applies to the others!

But the offer of the bet is still on - to anyone who wants to take it. Guess nobody wants to call. Or raise!

I'm not going to raise, but am a bit knowledgable about land on the coast. So I do have a question, how are the inflated costs of land assessments "getting through" an audit assessment?

Just a question, not throwing barbs.

how are the inflated costs of land assessments "getting through" an audit assessment?

I'm confused. Are you suggesting the costs of the assessments are inflated, or are the valuations inflated (and thus the costs of the purchases)? Or both?

KK, my comments have been focused on the fact that there was not any assessment - at least not by B&M - and that their contract doesn't contain any requirement for an assessment. Despite what KF's original (and corrected) blog post indicates.

True, the IG says that B&M "should have" made an assessment, although the IG says that B&M wasn't qualified to do so. (Figure that!)

My reading of the contract says that B&M as the grant coordinator was to "coordinate" the work of the appraisals (along with coordinating other contractors) and to "compile" the appraisals for DMR. There is no "assessment" as to whether the appraisals were appropriate or review of the appraisals by B&M.

Likewise, I don't think B&M should have "reviewed" or "assessed" the title work or the deeds prepared for DMR by other contractors.

Should DMR have had someone review? I don't have any idea, but if they should they could contract for it. If they wanted B&M to do it, they could have included it in their contract and paid them for it.

I'm with you - if (big if, dealing with IG's) the IG report is correct about the value of the land and what was paid - there are problems at DMR.

My bitch was with KF's focus - and all the KF Ass Kissers that blow smoke about his greatness, without paying attention to facts or truth, just like him beating up on some local politician. KF's reference to Madison County "APPRAISER" and reporting the "appraisals" and the overly inflated prices paid by DMR is taking shots at B&M or Barber when in fact they had nothing to do with the appraisals except "compile" them.

And, I generally like KF. Get along with him fine. But don't like him, or anyone else, taking unfair shots just for headlines and in his case "blog hits" ($$$)

Thanks for playing. Still haven't had any of those that believe I'm a shill for Barber step up and take the bet. Wish they would - reckon I need to up the ante?

Looks like Barber's dog got out again.

10:36 - said it before. Will say it again. I wouldn't know Barber if you put him in a lineup. Offered you a bet to see whether your 'accusation' is correct or whether my assertion is. Wanna take it? If so, feel free to raise.

My only other thought was that you didn't want the appointment to be the arbitrator of the bet. Or else, you didn't want the possibility of having to video an "ass kissing". But don't worry - if JAAK, KK, or any of the anonymouses want to take up this bet, I won't be losing. Sorry you don't get the video! property appraisal

good grief.