Forsyth County District 2 Planning Commissioner and chair Pam Livesay is drawing criticism for her dealings with a developer that paid her consulting fees and, in one case, built a tennis court on her property as compensation.
Livesay, who has been on the board 14 years, said the criticism is unfounded. She recused herself from three commission votes involving the developer, as required by law, and reflected in county records.
But critics say Livesay’s dealings with Riverbrooke Capital Partners -- a developer that, during the boom times five years ago, seemed to be buying up every piece of land in the county, but has since filed for bankruptcy –- give the appearance of conflict of interest.
Livesay said Friday said she is not the only commissioner to have recused herself or himself from votes over the years because of conflicts of interest with developers. The only times she has recused herself, she said, was in Riverbrooke votes. And, when she did, she was very clear and above board about why, she said.
“I went above and beyond in following the law,” she said. “ I didn’t just file the paperwork required when you recuse yourself from a vote because of a conflict. I also talked to staff. I’ve done nothing wrong.”
In a five year span, between 2000 and 2005, Riverbrooke came before the planning commission at least 20 times for zoning and development requests. Three of those occasions involved projects in which Livesay was used as a consultant -- a driving range on Peachtree Parkway, land on Old Atlanta Road, and property next to her home on Majors Road
Livesay declined to say how much she was paid, or how much the tennis court cost to build. She said Friday the only person who has complained to her that she may have violated state laws regarding conflict of interest is county blogger and activist David Milum.
Milum sent an email exchange he had with Livesay in early March over her dealings with Riverbrooke to county attorney Ken Jarrard and Stefan Ritter at the Attorney General’s office.
Jarrard declined to comment for this story because, as county attorney, he represents Livesay as a member of the planning commission.
State ethics laws require that public officers and officials should not have "significant private interests" that "may influence the discharge of their public duties and responsibilities."
District 2 County Commissioner and commissioner chairman Brian Tam, who has reappointed Livesay to the planning commission since he came into office in 2005, said he has had no questions about her work on the commission.
"Pam was on the Planning Commission when I came into office and has done a great service for the county and that's why I reappointed her," said Tam. "On the votes when she was supposed to recuse herself, she did."‘
Right now, there's no state watchdog agency to oversee the hazy area where the law ends and ethical considerations begin, said Stacey Kalberman, executive secretary of the Georgia Government Transparency and Campaign Finance Commission.
In its earlier incarnation as the State Ethics Commission, Kalberman said her agency might have looked into such cases. “There’s really no state agency that does that” since the ethics commission was restructured in January, said Kalberman. “Welcome to Georgia.”
William Perry, executive director of Common Cause Georgia, said he would recommend government officials such as Livesay stand completely above suspicion because, otherwise, they erode trust in the system.
“There are two kinds of conflict,” he said. “One is covered by law. One is a conflict of perception. In situations such as hers, she should have removed herself from voting on any business by that developer that came before the commission. To not do so would be advancing their issues, and possibly putting yourself in a position to be paid again."
Livesay said she’s followed the law and done nothing wrong.
“People say I sold votes,” she said during an hour and a half conversation at the county administration building. “I never sold a vote to anybody because there’s no vote to sell. All the planning commission is is a recommending board. The [County] commission makes the decisions. We couldn't sell a vote if we wanted to.”
About the Author
