Yo Greensboro

09/19/2026

TOURNAMENT TOWN MATH - PART I... How Greensboro turned $97.5 million into $553.5 million

Greensboro is a wholesome, mostly awesome little town…

We're polite, hospitable, we trust institutions, we've got that Southern charm, and an authentic local culture that rivals any, anywhere.

But we're also an easy mark.

A little like the crow in Aesop's fable, we're awfully susceptible to flattery… even when we're the ones paying for it.

The pitch always sounds the same: Momentum, exciting, couldn't be more thrilled, transformative, a real game-changer... did I mention super excited?

Throw in a giant economic-impact number, a couple of success stories, dinner at Ruth's Chris… and we become a sure thing... we put out.

And when something gets complicated, Greensboro has another habit: outsource the thinking.

Bring in the "experts." Let them walk everybody through it. Put the charts on the screen, nod a lot and when it's all done... treat the PowerPoint like scripture.

Somewhere in the fog of the courtship, we tend to ignore one detail: the "expert" quite often works for somebody with a stake in the answer.

Remember Boom Supersonic? NC Commerce's own announcement put the number at $32.3 billion in projected economic impact over 20 years.

We got very excited about that exciting, transformative, game-changing opportunity... excited enough that public money helped support it.

Sports tourism is the next giant number worth a closer look. So let's do something terribly unfashionable around here and check the math.

Let's start with the obvious: sports tourism can genuinely be good for Greensboro.

When we were regularly hosting the ACC Men's Basketball Tournament, hotels filled up, restaurants and bars got slammed, strip clubs were packed and dancers flew in from surrounding states for the occasion.

People came, stayed and spent money.

That was sports tourism you could actually see.

Today, one thing's still certain: sports tourism is good for the people directly in the sports-tourism business.

Tournaments fill "heads in beds" and events generate business for venue operators, promoters, select restaurants and preferred bars.

Cool... that's the good part.

What happens after that?

How much public money did it take to get them here?
How much came back to taxpayers?

"Good for hotels" and "good for Greensboro taxpayers" are not automatically the same fact.

So I went looking... again.

I read the actual reports and man... the math gets creative... possibly the one area where Greensboro consistently shows real imagination.

Nothing illustrates this practice better than the downtown “visitor” switch.

Downtown Greensboro isn't in a good place right now. We'll come back... but only if we stop pretending everything's fine and make the unpopular decisions needed to fix it.

Part of how we got here: SUCCESS THEATER

Downtown Greensboro Inc.'s own 2022–23 annual report cited roughly 8.4 million total visits downtown.

That's one hell of a number... until you keep reading and realize that the same report also listed the actual number of visitors at about 1.7 million.

So what happened to the other 6.7 million people?

Nothing...they don't exist.

DGI shifted its headline metric from visitors to visits, and the same person working or living downtown can rack up hundreds of visits a year without becoming a new human being.

Mathematically it works... 1.7 million people producing 8.4 million visits may be legitimate.

But come on... it is a little...how do you say.... sneaky?

The wording in the presentation talks about visitors one year, lead with visits the next, and downtown appears to explode from under 2 million people to over 8 million.

It did not... the metric simply changed.

And while the slides said "downtown is killing it," restaurants were dying and the warning signs were getting harder to ignore.

That my friends is the real danger of success theater... eventually you stop looking for the disease, and by the time reality catches up, you need to put your affairs in order.

That's Exhibit A: change the metric, expand the geography, count more activity, add a multiplier... and you've got yourself one hell of a headline.

Now look at The Coliseum numbers...

In 2013, Clemson's Thurmond Institute studied the Greensboro Coliseum Complex, based on 2012 operations, using hotel room-night data from the Greensboro CVB. Real, checkable numbers: 71,605 room nights tied to the Coliseum Complex, 25,657 tied to the Aquatic Center, a 1.16 operational multiplier, and an estimated county economic output of $48,342,700 to $64,551,800. For the 2013 ACC Men's Tournament alone: 16,200 room nights, about $3.6 million in output.

It was far from a perfect study, but it gave taxpayers something tangible to check against the headline.

Room nights and "heads in beds".

Now the newest Clemson study, commissioned by the Greensboro Sports Foundation, covering the Greensboro Complex and Tanger Center for FY2023–24.

The headline: $553.5 million in economic impact.

Holy mackerel !ll

Did Greensboro become ten times the tourism destination it was a decade ago?

Nope, not exactly... like for DGI, the scope changed, the assumptions changed, the model changed.

The earlier study counted 1.55 million attendees at the Coliseum Complex.

The new one counts 1.71 million... across a much bigger collection of venues, including Tanger.

That's roughly a 10 percent bump in attendance.

The headline number, meanwhile, went from roughly $48–65 million to $553.5 million.

Make that make sense... anyone? anyone? Bueller?

And it's not like every venue is bursting at the seams.

White Oak Amphitheatre... Greensboro's 7,666-seat outdoor venue, built for a May-through-October concert season... logged, per Concert Archives: 4 touring shows in 2022, 5 in 2023, zero recorded in 2024, 4 in 2025, 1 so far in 2026.

That won't catch every private or community event, but it doesn't describe a venue in the middle of some entertainment boom.

So maybe the math is the only thing that actually exploded.

The Complex pulled in $97.5 million in reported revenue for the year.

Run that through the REMI model and complex operations alone generate $275 million in output... a 2.82 multiplier, versus 1.16 in the older study. Local patron spending adds another $10 million.

Touted non-local patron spending adds $268.7 million.

Add it up and Clemson's own report lands on $553.5 million in total output, supporting 9,416 jobs and $203.9 million in compensation countywide.

Here's the part I think is telling: Clemson's own footnote says the individual pieces "may not sum precisely to the total impact" because of price-feedback effects inside the REMI model.
It also states:"The views presented here are those of the authors and are not necessarily those of the Regional Economic Analysis Laboratory (CU-REAL) or of Clemson University. Nothing in this report should be construed to indicate en-rsement by CU-REAL or by Clemson University."

Cool... now we know.

But that's also a pretty good illustration of what we're dealing with here.

Those numbers came from an economic model... yet somehow the final answer arrives looking pretty freaking precise:

$553.5 million.

Personally, I’d feel a little better if that number came from somebody emptying the cash registers at the end of the night and adding up the receipts.

But it doesn’t... It comes from a model.

A model that somehow turned roughly $97.5 million in reported revenue into more than half a billion dollars in economic output.

The activity grew a bit and the universe being measured grew a whole lot.

The model did the rest.

Worth noting… that $553.5 million isn’t even a sports-tourism number.

It covers the entire Greensboro Complex and Tanger Center… First Horizon Coliseum, the Aquatic Center, White Oak, Piedmont Hall, the Fieldhouse, the Special Events Center, the ACC Hall of Champions, Tanger… the works.

So woven into that number are basketball tournaments and swim meets… but also Paw Patrol, Wheel of Fortune Live, The Golden Girls… and the touring edition of The Price Is Right.

So that $553.5 million headline may be perfectly legitimate as modeled economic output… but as a sports-tourism number?

Come on... that part is bullsh*t.

Sports tourism is not generating half a billion dollars here…
at least not yet... I hope one day it does.

The study also treats anyone traveling from outside roughly 50 miles as a tourist, assumes two people per hotel room, and... for the tax math... assumes every one of those visitors stayed in a Greensboro hotel... every single one of them.

Unlike the earlier study, this one gives us no clean room-night total to check that against.

We keep getting the impact number but we almost never get the receipts.

One thing is very clear thing... $553.5 MILLION IS NOT $553.5 MILLION IN PUBLIC MONEY.

Clemson's own tax estimates: about $5.6 million in county sales tax, $1.7 million in county occupancy tax, $1.6 million in city occupancy tax... roughly $8.9 million in estimated local tax impact, against a $553.5 million headline.

$553.5 million and $8.9 million are not the same fact… and that’s one hell of a gap.

I think the easiest way to understand all of this is to ask one very simple question: Who paid for such a comprehensive… and remarkably generous… study?

The Greensboro Sports Foundation did... Dick "Pickleball" Beard is the CEO of the organization whose mission includes recruiting sporting events for Greensboro's facilities.

FOLLOW IT THROUGH: GSF commissions the study, the study produces a massive number, the Complex publicizes it, tourism organizations celebrate it, hospitality businesses benefit from the activity…
Abuzuaiter nods enthusiastically, smiles really big and grabs the scissors… she's now ready for the photo op and the ribbon cutting.

The number now becomes part of the case for putting even more public money back into the same ecosystem that produced it.

I get how the game is played. But for the love of Dick Beard, stop calling this an independent audit. It isn't.

It's a commissioned study, and it means you should know who paid for them.

There are also some very interesting people sitting around the tables involved in all this. Matt Brown alone could occupy another thousand words. So I'm saving him. We'll come back to him and others in Part II.

Look, to be fair… this is nothing new.
DGI does it with “visits.”
The Greenway does it with “economic impact.”
GSF does it with sports tourism.

Same basic playbook... find the biggest number the methodology can support, put it in giant type, and repeat it until it starts sounding like facts.

Finally... and sorry, I know it's long, but it's the week end...

We're already lining up the next giant number: the 2029 FISU World University Games.

When North Carolina landed the Games in January 2023, the projected economic impact was more than $150 million.

By March 2026, Greensboro's own legislative agenda was advertising: $300 MILLION.

Two months later… $370 MILLION.

Cool.

We've gone from $150 million to $370 million and not one athlete has arrived. The Games are still three years away.

At this rate, by opening ceremonies we'll be pushing $600 million… and somebody will probably round it up to a billion… you know… for the press release.

Meanwhile, here's a number worth remembering: about $100 million... what organizers say the Games themselves are expected to cost.

North Carolina has already put in $25 million in state money.

I hope the Games are spectacular. I hope they generate every penny projected.

But after watching how these numbers get built, I’m going to need something a little more convincing than Sport's Foundation sponsored study and the press release that comes with it.

PART II: The people, the hotels, the boards, the salaries, the contracts… and the incestuous web of overlapping seats holding the whole machine together.

09/18/2026

COUNTRY CLUB MATH... PART IV: BRYAN PARK

Well... who knew this “little insignificant page” would morph into an interactive community experiment?

You asked for Bryan Park... so I went looking.

And this one went in a slightly different direction.

The last three parts were about the wildly different values Guilford County assigns to golf-course land across different census tracts... where some of the poorer areas carried per-acre golf-course values several times higher than some of the most affluent.

For example: Gillespie sits in Census Tract 113, where the median household income is roughly $51,200 and about 25% of residents live below the poverty line.

Guilford County values Gillespie’s golf-course land at roughly:
$90,000 PER ACRE.

Meanwhile, Greensboro Country Club’s Irving Park property sits in Census Tract 104.04, where the median household income is roughly $202,700 and the poverty rate is about 3.5%.

Its golf-course land is appraised at $30,000 PER ACRE.

That makes Gillespie three times higher per acre.

That is what started this whole exercise.

Now let’s add Bryan Park.

Bryan Park is different from GCC, Sedgefield and Starmount because WE taxpayers own it... just like we own Gillespie.

So... back to Guilford County GIS.

The main Bryan Park recreational parcel at 6275 Bryan Park Road contains 366.35 ACRES.

Guilford County appraises the land alone at $8,792,400.

That works out to almost exactly $24,000 PER ACRE.

Buildings and other improvements bring the total appraised value to roughly $16.5 MILLION.

Taxable value? $0... because the City owns it and municipalities do not pay property taxes.

But that is not the point.

Bryan Park is also in a very different census tract from Gillespie.

Bryan Park falls in Census Tract 155, where the latest Census estimates put median household income at about $75,600 with a poverty rate of roughly 4.9%.

So now we have another data point.

Gillespie: $90,000 PER ACRE

Median household income in surrounding tract: ~$51,200

Poverty: approx 25%.

Bryan Park: $24,000 PER ACRE

Median household income in surrounding tract: approx $75,600

Poverty: approx 4.9%.

Again... I am well aware that census-tract income does NOT determine property value. Location, zoning, restrictions, development potential, improvements and use all factor into an appraisal.

But the whole point of this series is that the numbers keep going in directions you might not expect.

Same City owner, same County appraisal system... both recreational properties.

One: $90,000 PER ACRE.

The other: $24,000 PER ACRE.

Anyway... let’s keep going.

Bryan Park’s golf facilities are owned by the City of Greensboro, but Greensboro doesn’t actually operate them.

Bryan Park Golf LLC does.

In 2022, City Council approved a 10-year renewal of the City’s existing agreement with Bryan Park Golf LLC to manage and operate the golf facilities.

City records describe Bryan Park as City-owned and Bryan Park Golf LLC as the operator.

Under that agreement, Bryan Park Golf LLC pays the City:

$1 PER YEAR.

Yes... one whole dollar... four quarters... ten dimes.

Meanwhile, the City contributes $125,000 a year toward the golf operation, remains responsible for major portions of the infrastructure, and has separately approved millions more in capital improvements at Bryan Park, including $5.9 million for Bryan Park North infrastructure.

That is another difference from Gillespie, which is also City-owned but is operated directly by Greensboro Parks & Recreation.

So even before we get back to the appraisal numbers, these are two very different operating models:

Gillespie: City-owned, City-operated.

Bryan Park: City-owned, privately operated under lease.

I also have not found an RFP or competitive bidding process associated with the 2022 renewal.

City records describe it simply as a renewal of the existing agreement.

That does NOT mean there was never a competitive process before that.

I simply haven’t found one yet.

And that brings us to the Joseph M. Bryan Foundation.

The Foundation’s own federal tax filings historically listed:

BRYAN PARK GOLF, LLC — $538,825.

That number appears on the Foundation’s 2016 federal filing under “Other Assets.”

So while the City’s agreement is with Bryan Park Golf LLC, the historical financial connection between the LLC and the Bryan Foundation is documented.

But let’s bring this back to the math.

Here is what Guilford County is telling us these properties are worth per acre of land:

GILLESPIE — approx $90,000

GCC IRVING PARK — approx $30,000

BRYAN PARK — approx. $24,000 per acre (main recreational parcel)

GCC FARM COURSE — approx $14,400

STARMOUNT — approx $12,100

SEDGEFIELD — approx $8,800

How does Guilford County arrive at these values?

And why do the final numbers vary this dramatically?

Those seem like pretty reasonable questions when those appraisals determine who carries how much of the property-tax burden.

Finally... to the person who messaged me after midnight accusing me of creating “animosity towards those who maintain CC memberships” and warning that I was “walking a thin line of journalism, free speech and deformation”...

I’m pretty sure you meant defamation... but it was after midnight, so...

Anyway... if that was supposed to scare me, I’m pretty sure Greensboro’s country-club crowd has no shortage of lawyers.

If any of these facts are wrong, show me and I’ll correct them.

Asking questions about public records and significant appraisal discrepancies should not be a threat to anyone.

09/17/2026

COMING TOMORROW: BRYAN PARK

We’ve spent the last few days looking at how Guilford County values private golf-course land.

Tomorrow... we go somewhere a little different.

Bryan Park.

Millions more have gone into Bryan Park's infrastructure in the name of "sports-tourism".

This clip was filmed during the prepared-food-tax discussion... then-Mayor Nancy Vaughan said $5 million would only address two soccer fields.

Bryan Park has a total of 21 soccer fields.

Oh... and there are some very familiar Greensboro names buried in the history of the whole arrangement.

Bryan Park may be the most interesting one yet... so thank you to all of you who suggested it.

09/17/2026

COUNTRY CLUB MATH — PART III: SEDGEFIELD COUNTRY CLUB

We’ve already beaten the appraisal discrepancies to death in Parts I and II, so I’ll keep this one simple.

Home of the PGA TOUR’s Wyndham Championship.

Another private club...

Although Sedgefield is a little different from the others we’ve looked at.

Sedgefield was historically organized as a federal income-tax-exempt 501(c)(7) private social club, but after McConnell Golf purchased it in 2011, it became part of a privately owned, for-profit club company.

One of Sedgefield’s final nonprofit Form 990 filings before the sale reported approximately $4.3 million in annual revenue and $5.4 million in net assets.

Now to the dirt...

Sedgefield’s 128.4 acres of golf-course land are appraised by Guilford County at just:

$1,129,900.

That works out to roughly:

$8,800 per acre.

Worth noting that Sedgefield Country Club is in Guilford County but not within Greensboro city limits, so it does not pay property taxes to Greensboro.

But... even if Sedgefield were inside Greensboro city limits, at its current appraisal those 128.4 acres would generate only about $17,943 a year in combined City and County property taxes on the land...

Roughly $140 per acre, per year.

For comparison:

Gillespie Golf Course: $90,000/acre
Greensboro Country Club — Irving Park: $30,000/acre
Greensboro Country Club — Farm Course: ~$14,400/acre
Starmount Forest: ~$12,100/acre
Sedgefield: ~$8,800/acre

Same county... Same appraisal system.

And somehow, the more of these we look at, the cheaper the golf-course land gets.

Now... after three parts, let’s add up what we’ve found.

The four private golf properties we’ve looked at... Greensboro Country Club’s Irving Park and Farm courses, Starmount Forest and Sedgefield Country Club... total roughly 580 acres.

Their golf-course land is currently appraised at approximately:

$8.8 MILLION.

If those same roughly 580 acres were appraised at the $90,000-per-acre value Guilford County assigns to City-owned Gillespie Golf Course, the land would be valued at approximately:

$52.2 MILLION.

That is a difference of roughly $43.4 MILLION IN ASSESSED LAND VALUE.

Not $43.4 million in unpaid taxes.

All this work to say... if all four private golf properties we’ve examined were valued at the same $90,000 per acre Guilford County assigns to City-owned Gillespie Golf Course, roughly $43.4 million more in land value would be added to the property-tax base.

At current FY 2026–27 tax rates, that would mean an estimated $606,000 more in property-tax revenue every year... about $343,000 for Guilford County and another $263,000 for the City of Greensboro from the three courses inside city limits.

Every year... without raising the tax rate one penny.

So now, after three parts, I think the bigger question is pretty obvious:

Is this really just a series of unrelated appraisal quirks... or are we looking at a pattern?

And due to popular demand... next up: Bryan Park.

09/17/2026

FORMER GREENSBORO EMPLOYEE SUES CITY… alleges racial discrimination, retaliation and disability discrimination

Alrighty then… add another one to the list.

On September 15 2026, former City of Greensboro employee Eunika D. Smalls filed an 80-page federal lawsuit against the City of Greensboro and former Housing and Neighborhood Development Director Tracey Michelle Kennedy.

And this one is detailed…very detailed.

Smalls alleges racial discrimination, retaliation, disability discrimination and violations of the City’s own employee complaint policies.

She is suing the City under Title VII, the Americans with Disabilities Act and North Carolina law, and Kennedy individually under federal civil-rights law and for negligent infliction of emotional distress.

Ok now, these are allegations in a lawsuit and considering the formidable Pat Kane of Fox Rothschild is representing the city, and Ms. Kennedy… this needs to be clear upfront.

For the record, Pat Kane is about as good as they get, and believe me… I know.

I am not familiar with the plaintiff’s representative.

The City and Kennedy will have an opportunity to respond, and none of these allegations has yet been proven in court.

But the allegations themselves raise some very serious questions about how Greensboro City Hall handled an internal discrimination complaint.

According to the complaint, the City’s Employee Complaint Resolution policy requires a formal investigation of employee complaints, while its Harassment Free Workplace policy says Human Resources will investigate “ALL complaints.”
Smalls says she submitted a formal retaliation complaint on October 8, 2023.

Her lawsuit alleges the City never opened the investigation required by its own policy.

The complaint also says Smalls complained to Assistant City Manager Ednasha McCray in August 2023, complained in writing in September, met with then-City Manager Taiwo Jaiyeoba on October 5 and filed the formal retaliation complaint three days later.

According to Smalls, the very next day after her meeting with Jaiyeoba, Kennedy told her that Kennedy and McCray were extremely displeased that she had gone to the City Manager and said Kennedy would change Smalls' job description.

That is one of the central themes running through this lawsuit:
Smalls says she complained about discrimination and exclusion… and things got worse.

On January 25, 2024, City Council held an open public work session involving housing policy.

Smalls says Councilwoman Sharon Hightower texted her during the meeting asking where she was and whether she planned to attend.

Smalls attended.

Eight days later, according to the complaint, Kennedy signed Smalls' first formal disciplinary action and specifically cited her attendance at that Council meeting.

The lawsuit alleges that Smalls was the Department’s Council Liaison and that her written job duties contemplated communication with City Council.

It also alleges that a white Assistant Director at the same pay grade, whose job similarly contemplated Council contact, was not disciplined.

So yes… a City employee is alleging that her first formal discipline in nearly four years of employment included attending an open Greensboro City Council meeting.

And according to the complaint, she had no formal disciplinary history before February 2024.

Smalls added she invoked medical leave on the afternoon of February 7, 2024.

But according to the lawsuit, Human Resources had already circulated a draft dismissal letter earlier that same day.

The complaint says Smalls subsequently went on medical leave.
On February 20, Kennedy allegedly cut off Smalls' access to City email and information systems.

Smalls filed an EEOC discrimination charge on March 25.
The City received notice on April 3.

Then, according to the complaint, on April 19 the City formally approved extended leave as a reasonable accommodation under the ADA and asked Smalls whether she wanted to return to her existing position.

Three days later, Smalls alleges Kennedy told department employees that Smalls “would not be returning.”

According to the complaint, the City approved her leave as an ADA accommodation.

Her Director allegedly told staff she wasn't coming back.
Smalls says that in June 2024 she told the City she wanted to return to her Assistant Director position.

According to the complaint, McCray told her the position “will no longer exist,” gave her two “non-negotiable” options and one business day to decide.

Smalls was ultimately dismissed on August 13, 2024.
The complaint alleges that the position Smalls had been told ‘will no longer exist’ remained vacant for 19 months and was posted again in March 2026.

So I suspect somebody is eventually going to have to explain that one.

According to Smalls, the dismissal letter told her she could appeal… she did.

The City scheduled an appeal hearing for August 23, 2024… then canceled it.

Two months later, Smalls alleges the City told her that her separation was actually a “resignation or job abandonment” and therefore wasn't eligible for appeal.

The lawsuit claims the City has offered at least eight different explanations for how she was treated.

That is Smalls' allegation… not yet a judicial finding… but if the underlying documents support it, that could become a very uncomfortable timeline for City Hall.

The lawsuit says the EEOC issued Determinations and Notices of Rights on Smalls' two discrimination charges in June and July 2026, clearing the administrative path for this lawsuit to proceed.

It means Smalls completed the administrative process required before bringing these federal employment claims to court.

So what happens now?

Now the City gets to answer.

09/16/2026

HAVE YOU EVER DREAMED OF AUDITING THE CITY OF GREENSBORO?

Have you ever looked at a government financial statement and thought:

“WTF happened here?”

Do unexplained numbers excite you?

Do phrases like “material weakness,” “fund balance,” “internal controls” and “Unit Assistance List” make you want to ask uncomfortable questions?

Well, do I have a career opportunity for you.

The North Carolina State Auditor is hiring.

That’s right… you could potentially turn your fascination with municipal finances into an actual career.

And who knows?

Maybe one day you too could have the privilege of opening Greensboro’s books and asking:

"hmmm… who approved this?”

Anyone... anyone... anyone needs a job?

The North Carolina Office of the State Auditor is hiring! Join the team uncovering waste, fraud, and abuse in state government.

Benefits include:
• Excellent work-life balance with flexible schedule options
• Enrollment in the state’s pension plan
• Competitive pay and affordable health insurance options

Apply today or send to a friend (link in comments).

09/16/2026

BREAKING RUMOR: ANOTHER CITY HALL SHAKEUP?

Another day, another City Hall "Breaking Rumor"... this time, Assistant City Manager Larry Davis may be on his way out and it has been reported that Jamiah Waterman is already introducing himself as the new Assistant City Manager.

Now... I have not independently confirmed the personnel change.

City Hall typically doesn’t exactly announce these things in advance… they usually make a tidy announcement after the fact.

But so far, every single one of these “Breaking Rumors” I have reported has turned out to be true.

Of course, they could keep Davis out of spite, but I don't really think so.

As of today, the City’s own organizational chart still lists Larry Davis as an Assistant City Manager and Jamiah Waterman in People & Culture.

Waterman has worked for the City since 2007 and has served as Executive Director of People & Culture since 2024.

But if the information I just received is accurate, the timing is impossible to ignore.

Greensboro was placed on the State’s Unit Assistance List this month following review of its FY25 audited financial statements.

Larry Davis has been around City Hall for decades, including years connected to Budget & Evaluation before becoming Assistant City Manager.

So if Davis is now leaving and Waterman is moving upstairs, the obvious question is:

Is Larry Davis about to become the first senior executive to take the fall for Greensboro’s financial mess?

And if so... why just him?

Again, this is rumor at this point, although from a source that has proven to be very reliable.

But if Waterman really is already introducing himself as the new ACM, then something's up because... he is not... at least according to the city's web page.

I’m working to confirm it.

And if it is true, I have a few more questions:

Will Davis be retiring effective immediately or will he resign effective immediately?”

Or, is he being shown the door... effective immediately??

Either way, after nearly 40 years with the City, he could be looking at a substantial LGERS pension.

The actual formula is 1.85% of average final compensation multiplied by years of creditable service, with average final compensation generally based on the highest-paid 48 consecutive months.

So someone with roughly 40 years of creditable service could be in the neighborhood of 74%–80% of that four-year average, depending on actual service credit and retirement elections.

So no, I’m not going to claim Larry is getting exactly 80% of his current salary for life, but I may be close.

Davis may be leaving, but at least he’s leaving us in the capable hands of the State Treasurer and the Local Government Commission… so I guess we’re good.

Thanks Larry, and good luck to you.