Another shaky start for Green Diamond

What was the biggest mistake that the backers of Green Diamond made last time around, in terms of their ability to win over the people of the Midlands to their cause?

It was being mysterious.

They came in and announced that they were going to build something really exciting — a billion-dollar "city within a city" on undeveloped land within minutes of downtown — and then clammed up, for months and months on end. They spent that time trying to line up everyone of influence in the community that they could get on their side before telling the rest of us the particulars of their plan.

This created suspicion, and gave those inclined to oppose plenty of time to get organized before the unveiling. And by the time of the big presentation, the promoters had lost much of the community already.

So some folks are going to try again. This time, Greenville developer Bob Hughes is taking the lead, at the behest of…

Well, he’s not saying at whose behest.

This is not an auspicious beginning.


3 thoughts on “Another shaky start for Green Diamond

  1. John

    I thought their biggest mistake was proposing to build a “city” in a floodway…or maybe asking for huge public subsidies for their private, profit-making enterprise…or planning their surface drainage to vent into (or just above) a protected area…or relying on levee failure on the west bank to protect their development in case the river rose…or trying to get politicians to pressure FEMA to redefine “floodway” by citing incomplete data…maybe it would be easier to identify the things they did correctly? I think the list would be shorter.

  2. Lee

    Local politicians are slobbering at the prospect of being paid off to subsidize the development of Manning Swamp with tax money.
    Government has to increase its size and tax revenue to pay off the current debt they cannot afford. Mismanagement creates panic and more bad decisions.
    Will any of these politicians sign a contract taking responsibility for loss of life and property by future occupants? Of course not.

Comments are closed.