Jackson Jambalaya

Curious: What was Duckworth's total commission for the deal?

Why does it matter? Are you asking for anyone else's profit if their proposal was approved?

Are you trying to discourage comments?

Duckworth's commission is none of your business, or mine, 9:18.

Seems like a fair question. When it comes to outside counsel appointed by the AG to represent the state, this blog is certainly interested in their commission. Rightly so, it's state money, whether its being paid or collected.

Why so touchy? It was a harmless question, the answer of which should be part of the public record. Taxpayer money is being used and that makes it our business.

Aren't you embroiled in a legal battle to determine Precious Martin's compensation?

Yea just what is his Ducks Worth

Duckworth is the hottest man in town. A little extra money makes him just more attractive.

That is $2.8MM a year or $56MM over 20 years, which is $15 MM more that the $41MM reported publicly. This is a sham. The RINO'S prevailed. Landmark is clearly the best use of taxpayers money.

for a ten year lease, I'd guess 2%, or about 600,000. considering he's been working on it for two years, i'm sure he earned it. and I bet Southpointe was glad to pay it.

I wonder what Blount's commission would have been had they gone downtown?

At 2.8 Mil a year the State should build s place for $10,000,000 and save BIG-TIME

Blount simply doesn't have the juice.

Kingfish, speaking of leases, here's a lead for you to scoop. It's been in the news recently that Malcolm White is complainng about his lease or his Hal and Mal's building, that was transfered by the legislature to a real estate management company. A rumor I heard years ago from a very well connected source was that Mr White had an EXTREMELY low rent he had sweethearted from whoever was in charge of those things, like $500 per month for the whole building. It would be very interesting if you could FOI request any documents that might prove what he was actually paying.

Here we go again with all the naysayers and second-guessers and the gang that contests the umpire's final call at the plate from the game that ended last week. What next? Will Leland and Ben come out with another full page ad?

and Precious was paid directly by the county under its agreement. When you are paying a private party such as the landlord here, I don't expect to find out how much they are paying their people. That is their business. What is our business is how much we pay the landlord and compare it to other proposals.

Correct; The state is not and has not directly paid a commission to Duckworth as a line item of state expense. Duckworth's commission is not the state's concern any more than it is the munchers on here.

some of these anonymous posters sound like State fans after EVERY loss

Duckworths compensation for a state contract is our concern. Its public money and we have a right to know what he gets paid, period.

Munchers? Sounds like sniping Kingfish.

"We have a right"? Fine then ~ You pursue that and see where it gets you. When the first party contracts with the second party and the second party pays it's people for their efforts in forming the contract, neither the first party nor any of the onlookers has a right to pry into the business relationship between the second party and its spokesman/contractor. Take your bitch up in a court of competent jurisdiction.

and speaking of the Hal & Mal deal, check into why Hal & Mal never pay the property taxes on that sweetheart lease deal they have on their place. It's even gone to the tax sale a few times and then had the sale cancelled. wish I didn't have to pay the taxes on my house.

Hmmmm....all this talk about first party contracting and disclosure reminds me of Warnock and Hamer's arguments when it comes to Madison County and its expenses. What was their justification? Can't quite put my finger on it...

How can H&M pay property taxes on a lease?

Post at 4:32:

Oh ye of little knowledge: Please explain to us how the State's payment of rent entitles the public to know how much an independent contractor is being paid out of that rent? If that's true, then CERTAINLY the public is entitled to know how much the Landlord is actually making after all expenses are paid, right? Just like I'm sure you're quick to disclose exactly how much money you make, the Landlord should be required to disclose how much money they make, right?

In the real (not fantasy) world, the public should be entitled to know how much rent is being paid by the State, and it's also wise for them to ask for apples-to-apples comparisons to help assess whether the rent being paid to a property owner is fair or not. If the rent being paid by the State to a property owner is assessed to be fair for the taxpayers, then it's absolutely no one's business how the Landlord uses those payments. Period.

Duckworth is not a party to the contract. He is a separate entity working as broker or transaction maker. He doesn't make the agreement. His compensation is between him and the party(s) that pays him.

So when Scruggs was paid separately out of the tobacco settlement by a third party that wasn't a matter of public interest? Wasn't Ed Peters paid to influence a judge by a third party? Not my business either I guess. Ducksworth could never get favorable consideration through something like contributions to the Speaker's re-election fund. But hey, he's a private party. Sounds like an invitation to crony capitalism to me.

2:14 you're riding a dead horse. Are you envious because you weren't involved in the decision making process, or receiving a share of the bounty? What does Scruggs and Peters have to do with this? Who said Duckworth received favors? You need to go back to chopping wood, and let Duckworth mind his ducks.

Go back and read the post at 6:04 and moan about the reality stated there. It is what it is.

hey fish, check the terms of the lease. btw, its public record.

Reading comprehension problems 9:04?

11:32 I doubt if 9:04 could read the lease or understand what he was reading.

read the lease, geniuses. Then you can apologize. and check the county tax records.

No point in reading the lease. It is what it is, and isn't going to be amended at this point. I'd bet with all the lawyers involved, it is also legal. What are you in such a stew about?

Well, they're kicking Verizon out of Building 2 then. Verizon takes one floor, and two more companies take the other floors.

Lovely.

Obviously current tenants are on a month to month tenancy.