Nom de Plume said:

---

My suggestion is put a group together and use the 10mins in a concise, factual, pointed message with 100 (or whatever) additional signatories. That will be much better than 3-4 of you giving potentially disjointed messages for 3mins each.

---

That's the plan. Not all ten of us railing for a minute

PS3D said:

---

REComBKR85 said:

---

This may have already been covered. The building sold for $3.50M, from Macy's to West Valley JMYL, LP in January of 2022. The City subsequently acquired the building for well north of $7MM, nine months later, in October of 2022, from JMYL, LP. The appraisal districts property deed history seems to be curiously missing the deed from Macy's to JMYL, LP, and shows a deed record from Macy's to the City of CS, which doesn't exist.

---

The appraisal district may not have recorded when the property changed hands, but it's here at the Brazos Co. county clerk search.

West Valley JMYL, according to the deed, is at 227 Pawnee St. in San Marcos CA, suite 101, and as of 2018 to present shows up as Steele Roofing. It's even in the Street View, but unrelated to the Tyler company of the same name. This is their website. Why would a California roofing company buy the Macy's building under a false name, and if they aren't, who's hijacking their address? The plot thickens.

---

I don't have any buddies that will tell me which real estate to buy and then sell soon after for twice the price.

Boozer92 said:

---

Interesting in one email NR says she met with Jim Lewis on May 11. But is the May 11 she indicates the city needs to buy Macy's and Bealls so they have space for a rec center and TAMU esports. I thought the Mayor said the esports thing was until after the purchase in June

---

I thought I remembered seeing that and it contradicting what the Mayor said... I'd like to see WTAW ask him about that, or a least it be included in the remarks at council.

maroon barchetta said:

---

PS3D said:

---

REComBKR85 said:

---

This may have already been covered. The building sold for $3.50M, from Macy's to West Valley JMYL, LP in January of 2022. The City subsequently acquired the building for well north of $7MM, nine months later, in October of 2022, from JMYL, LP. The appraisal districts property deed history seems to be curiously missing the deed from Macy's to JMYL, LP, and shows a deed record from Macy's to the City of CS, which doesn't exist.

---

The appraisal district may not have recorded when the property changed hands, but it's here at the Brazos Co. county clerk search.

West Valley JMYL, according to the deed, is at 227 Pawnee St. in San Marcos CA, suite 101, and as of 2018 to present shows up as Steele Roofing. It's even in the Street View, but unrelated to the Tyler company of the same name. This is their website. Why would a California roofing company buy the Macy's building under a false name, and if they aren't, who's hijacking their address? The plot thickens.

---

I don't have any buddies that will tell me which real estate to buy and then sell soon after for twice the price.

---

This whole deals lends me to think that may have been some funny businees going on betwen JMYL and a city official or two.

Taking the advice of a poster below, and in the interest of not posting info that may draw local ire, I'm editing my post to say, "The following site, available to the public, contains a wealth of corporate information. Registration only requires a login & password."

I'm a fairly heavy user and have never reached the point of subscription fees.
https://opencorporates.com
The Open Database Of The Corporate World

Tread carefully; someone posted some of this info a while back and got posts deleted and the permaban.

Duffel Pud said:

---

Tread carefully; someone posted some of this info a while back and got posts deleted and the permaban.

---

On the Macy's issue or something else?

PS3D said:

---

Duffel Pud said:

---

Tread carefully; someone posted some of this info a while back and got posts deleted and the permaban.

---

On the Macy's issue or something else?

---

One of those names, the address of the main corporation in California, a link to that address and a phone number.

The Macy's Deception: How City Officials Lied to Justify a $7.5 Million Mistake

The City Manager and Staff Misled the Council to Believe They Were Voting to "Save" the Mall

Key Evidence: Mayor Karl Mooney's Statement on WTAW (October 18, 2022)
Mayor Karl Mooney publicly justified the Macy's purchase by claiming it was necessary to protect the mall from an "incompatible use."

Listen to the full interview: https://wtaw.com/college-station-mayor-karl-mooney-on-wtaw-94/

Quote from Karl Mooney (Oct 18, 2022) a short-time after the purchase:

Quote:

---

"The city is not getting into the real estate business. We had folks that are planning to purchase that space and turn it into a use that will essentially end the mall, then you have to take steps. This was a preventative step."

---

The Truth: There Was No Real Threat to the Mall
The "incompatible use" narrative was a complete fabrication.
City records and emails reveal:
Storage was never a serious possibility as CBL's existing tenant agreements prohibited it.
Private business owners were actively negotiating to turn the space into an entertainment venue not storage. The City Manager and staff kept this information secret from the City Council.

Email evidence confirms that local buyers were in talks to turn Macy's into a bowling, go-kart, and entertainment center but the city shut them out of the process and falsely framed the purchase as a "protective measure."

FACT: The City Manager's office knew that storage was not a threat but still used it to manipulate the Council into approving the purchase.

The Council Was Either Lied to or Misled There Is No Other Explanation
Mayor Mooney's justification for his vote raises a fundamental question:
Either Karl Mooney was lying, or the City Manager and staff intentionally misled the Council by withholding key facts.
What We Know:
The City Manager and his staff falsely framed the purchase as "protecting" the mall when it was never in real danger.
The Council was not given all the facts before the vote.
Key meetings and documents were withheld from the Council and public.
City officials actively covered up these facts rather than admit their deception.

It is irrefutable that the City Manager and staff did not act in good faith before the purchase and have worked overtime to cover this up since then.

Final Conclusion: A Reckless, Deceptive Deal That Must Be Answered For
This was never about protecting the mall.
It was about pushing a hidden agenda, using a false narrative.
City leadership must be held accountable for misleading the public and City Council.
The current mayor, city manager, and several key staff members need to be held accountable.
College Station deserves leadership that acts transparently and in the best interest of its taxpayers.

Man, this keeps getting worse and worse.

Officer Fred coming in like Elon Musk to a DOGE meeting!

I love it.

Transparency folks, that's what keeps things like this from happening and then metastasizing.

OfficerFred really lays out the facts in a simple manner. Of even greater concern on the periphery is "Why does it take a group of citizens and business owners on this forum to repeatedly question, investigate, analyze, and then publicize these dealings to get to the bottom of this?" Where is council at when it comes to getting answers from their own appointed city manager and staff?

They dont care. OPM.

Truth is, most cities are run by the city manager and his staff and counsel. Most people who run for council know little if anything about city business and simply acquiesce to staff. I will admit that on the boards and committees I have served on throughout the BV, I have had to lean on staff often when I really didn't have all the info to make decisions. I have also abstained from voting when I didn't have a good feeling or enough info to vote.

City government works best when staff and council are in step, and staff provides answers to any and all questions council has and then lets council vote the will of their constituents, I don't think that's what happened here.

I agree entirely. When a sitting council member publicly states on this forum that he has requested information from city staff and he has not been provided that info either in a timely fashion or even at all, I think it shows significant fractures in what should be a working in step relationship.

I will throw out an alternate theory. May be the previous Mayor wanted his Y and this was his pretense and not the CM or staff. Just as possible the council was hiding the truth as staff.

ETA - I don't know which is true. Just throwing out the possibility that either could have started the false narrative.

Fact: This space was purchased to be a rec center from the start. The emails from the time of the bid confirm that.

That's actually a very reasonable and compelling possibility. I'd give you more stars if I could.

Councilman William Wright offers his opinion...and (surprise) it is the same as the mayor's.
https://wtaw.com/college-station-councilman-william-wright-on-wtaw/

"If I was on council I would have gone the way the mayor did. I think its a strategic piece of the puzzle."
"With the city's investment there, whether that's a building or a greenspace, I think that you can steer development the way that you want it to, right. Whatever was going to go there, I think that we are a player now in making sure that area looks the way we want it to look in 20 to 50 years."

lol wut?

tu ag said:

---

Councilman William Wright offers his opinion...and (surprise) it is the same as the mayor's.
https://wtaw.com/college-station-councilman-william-wright-on-wtaw/

"If I was on council I would have gone the way the mayor did. I think its a strategic piece of the puzzle."
"With the city's investment there, whether that's a building or a greenspace, I think that you can steer development the way that you want it to, right. Whatever was going to go there, I think that we are a player now in making sure that area looks the way we want it to look in 20 to 50 years."

---

ok fine...

then why in the HECK was the money not set aside for it and design planes already begun??

Lets spell out how a properly run city would handle this:

1.) Set goal of rec center
2.) Find/buy suitable place
3.) create design build out
4.) hire contractor
5.) open doors

we bought this property over what... a year ago and I haven't seen a single RFP or contract for rehab and design

The truth is plain for anyone to see

Proper Administration and efficiency vs. Not

Spend $7m - and then sit on the property until what?

I will say it again and again and again

This is what you get with one party rule. People who frankly dont know whats going on and or, dont care care so long as their single pet issue is being done.

CSAN is reasonable for nearly $50m+ in wasted cash... and the city got exactly ZERO out of it. And $50m is the low end

He's the same one that was making faces and playing on his phone while citizens were speaking about Northgate. Then practically fell out of his chair like a toddler when his side lost the vote.

trouble said:

---

He's the same one that was making faces and playing on his phone while citizens were speaking about Northgate. Then practically fell out of his chair like a toddler when his side lost the vote.

---

from everyone close to see how he works...

it is almost unanimous. He has no idea what he is doing. And that is why he was supported for council.

He doesnt know and maybe doesnt want to know anything but seeing his own picture

https://texags.com/forums/35/topics/3310708/replies/63673848

go back to fred's original post in 2022 about it...this poster Realestategod is quite fishy

tu ag said:

---

Councilman William Wright offers his opinion...and (surprise) it is the same as the mayor's.
https://wtaw.com/college-station-councilman-william-wright-on-wtaw/

"If I was on council I would have gone the way the mayor did. I think its a strategic piece of the puzzle."
"With the city's investment there, whether that's a building or a greenspace, I think that you can steer development the way that you want it to, right. Whatever was going to go there, I think that we are a player now in making sure that area looks the way we want it to look in 20 to 50 years."

---

Who is this "we" you are speaking of, Councilman? Your constituents? Because that's who you are supposed to be representing. Did your constituents approve of this purchase?

2020 said:

---

I agree entirely. When a sitting council member publicly states on this forum that he has requested information from city staff and he has not been provided that info either in a timely fashion or even at all, I think it shows significant fractures in what should be a working in step relationship.

---

To me if a city council person asks for information on a previous city activity, the city manager should make sure the council person gets as much information as possible within a 48 hour duration and then followup with a week or two at most will all the information.

From above.

Private business owners were actively negotiating to turn the space into an entertainment venue not storage. The City Manager and staff kept this information secret from the City Council.

Email evidence confirms that local buyers were in talks to turn Macy's into a bowling, go-kart, and entertainment center but the city shut them out of the process and falsely framed the purchase as a "protective measure."

end

If the city manager hid information from city council on Lewis's offer for the property or failed to provide full disclosure of it, he should be fired immediately.