On the LAKE Front

Speakupaustin: a major MSA and local government transparency

The Austin reporting program is in addition to the posting a City Council agenda more than a week in advance (here's the 28 Feb 2013 agenda already on 16 Feb 2013) and including the entire board packets with working papers and other backup documentation with the minutes. Austin televises and webcasts its meetings live, with close captioning and transcripts online. They don't limit the number of citizens who can speak, or the subjects they can speak on, and they televise and webcast all of them as well. Plus citizens can speak on specific agenda issues, and Austin has an online forum for citizen suggestions on which citizens can vote on the ones they like.

Is there still back-door politics in Austin? For sure. But you can see a lot more of what is going on in Austin than they can about the local governments here, and citizens have a lot more input.

If Valdosta and Lowndes County (and Hahira and Lake Park and Dasher and Remerton) want to be treated like a major MSA, they might consider following Austin's lead. Instead of decreasing citizen input by exiling all citizen speakers to the end of a meeting and limiting the number who can speak, while not even putting board packets online, consider continually increasing local government transparency and citizen input.

-jsq

What people are interested in having their pennies spent on —Gretchen Quarterman

Received yesterday on Allocate resources in a yearly budget? -jsq

As I was out campaigning, it was interesting what people are interested in having their pennies spent on. Many want better sidewalks and safer places to ride their bikes. One Valdosta police officer particularly commented on the dangerous bike riding conditions (especially on North Oak Extension). Many in the un-incorporated areas want increased fire protection and it seems that everyone better drainage (and I don't mean simply open ditches for rain water) and still others would like to see some soccer fields.

It seems like we should be able to do some prioritizations and then save up for these things. I guess that will be up to the new commission chairman and members and they will have to figure out how to move forward without a SPLOST immediately in 2014.

Personally, I'd like to see a public accounting of how the previous SPLOSTS were spent. And not in big categories, but the actual details... But that's just me.

-Gretchen Quarterman

-jsq

Allocate resources in a yearly budget?

Received today on SPLOST VII lost. -jsq

After reading this post, a question came to mind. Have we the citizens of Lowndes County actually been encouraging our elected officials to be fiscally irresponsible with public funds by allowing SPLOST to continue? if elected officials had to allocate resources in a yearly budget, we may actually encourage our officials to allocate resources towards public projects that would be desirable by the public rather than a priority in pthe minds of our elected officials.

-Bill Grow

SPLOST VII lost

Speaking of transparency, Lowndes County voters defeated SPLOST VII 18,864 to 17,923 (51.28% to 48.72%). Kay Harris in the VDT today quoted Ashley Paulk with this reason:

The defeat came as a surprise to Mayor John Gayle but not to Lowndes County Commission Chairman Ashley Paulk, who said he warned the mayors of the five municipalities that if they continued to argue over LOST, the local option sales tax, that voters would turn against SPLOST in retaliation.

“I told them at the beginning if they didn't stop arguing over a few percent of the LOST and refused to leave the numbers as is by taking the county's offer, that taxpayers were going to turn against the SPLOST,” said Paulk.

“Voters are disenchanted with the way their local governments have gotten greedy and they're tired of the arguments over money. They voted SPLOST down because they don't trust us with their tax dollars, and it's a real shame.”

I would agree bickering over the LOST pie was one of the reasons SPLOST lost, and add to that the opaque back-room processes by which the SPLOST VII projects were selected. While the library needs updated and expanded facilities, the lack of documented decision process for the architect and lack of adequate explanation for that probably didn't help, either, nor did the county's puzzling lumping of the library in with Parks and Rec. which they later tried to clarify. Perhaps the voters are tired of seeing transparency be a constant source of tension. And I'm using the library as just one example. I could equally cite the project for a farmers market under the overpass, which I think is a bad idea because the farmers market already has a fabulous location at the historic Lowndes County Courthouse, and so far as I know none of the vendors who sell there were even asked if they wanted a new location, much less the public who buy there.

At the public-not-invited SPLOST VII kickoff speeches the last speaker said they were not there

15,006 Voted in Lowndes County Georgia by 27 Oct 2012

15,006 people have voted in Lowndes County Georgia in the first two weeks of early voting, including Saturday:

Date	Daily	Total
Monday October 15	1,636	1,636
Tuesday October 16	1,225	2,861
Wednesday October 17	956	3,817
Thursday October 18	643	4,460
Friday October 19	1,433	5,893
Tuesday October 23	1,449	9,173
Wednesday October 24	1,363	10,536
Thursday October 25	1,408	11,944
Friday October 26	1,783	13,727
Saturday October 27	1,279	15,003
Data courtesy of Lowndes County Board of Elections.

You can still vote during extended voting hours this week at the Board of Elections, or on that great election day, November 6^th, at your precinct. Several recent elections here have been decided by less than 100 votes. Your vote counts!

-jsq

Voted in Lowndes County Georgia by 25 Oct 2012

There was a dropoff in the first week of early voting, but it picked back up last Friday and this week. Daily and Total voting in Lowndes County Georgia by 25 October 2012:

Date	Daily	Total
October 15, 2012	1636	1636
October 16, 2012	1225	2861
October 17, 2012	956	3817
October 18, 2012	643	4460
October 19, 2012	1433	5893
October 23, 2012	1449	9173
October 24, 2012	1363	10536
October 25, 2012	1408	11944
Data courtesy of Tiffany Linkswiler, Lowndes County Board of Elections.

Somewhere around 20-25% of registered voters have already voted. But there are plenty more voters out there. You can still vote today, Saturday, during extended voting hours next week, or on that great election day, November 6^th. Several recent elections here have been decided by less than 100 votes. Your vote counts!

-jsq

County clarifies library and parks division in SPLOST VII

SPLOST VII's $22 million for a new library and parks and rec goes about 2/3 for the library and 1/3 for parks and rec, and the latter doesn't all go to parks and rec at Five Points, according to a mysterious red-letter note that has sprung up on the Lowndes County website.

The front page of lowndescounty.com has sprouted this undated and unsigned clarification under the SPLOST VII heading:

Exhibit A (Please note that the $22 million proposed by Lowndes County for the Library and Parks & Recreation, represents a division of approximately $14.5 million for the Library and approximately $7.5 million for Parks & Recreation. In addition, the $7.5 million proposed for Parks & Recreation is not allocated for parks and improvements at the 5-Points site. Parks & Recreation will use these funds for improvements in other areas of the county.)

Exhibit A is the list of projects and estimated costs that includes this item:

payment of bond debt for acquisition and construction of and equipping a new library facility and parks and recreation facilities

$ 22,000,000

Can somebody explain why the new library and Parks and Rec were lumped together in the first place? At least the county is sort of trying to explain the difference now.

They didn't include the pie chart with their clarification.

I made the pie chart; took about

SPLOST VII project totals don't match

It would be easier for people to vote for SPLOST VII if they knew what they were getting. So far, that's difficult to tell from what's been published. Many questions remain to be answered.

We've already seen the WCTV story that quotes a total of $35 million for SPLOST VII. And Jason Schaefer wrote for the VDT 5 August 2012, SPLOST project list released: Renewed sales tax would build library, auditorium

The county projects penny sales tax collections through SPLOST VII to total at least $150 million during a six-year period, a sum that could fund a library complex, an auditorium, the installation of a mandated public safety radio system, an array of municipal water and sewage improvements, new equipment for police officers and firefighters, and road maintenance projects.

There is not adequate funding for these projects if the SPLOST referendum does not pass, according to city and county planners.

$150 million is not $35 million. $150 million divided by six is $25 million, not $35 million.

The mystery deepens.

"No other state has had a positive outcome for a charter-positive ballot initiative" —former T-SPLOST proponents now pushing charter schools

The same people who pushed the failed T-SPLOST tax referendum on the July primary ballot are now pushing the charter school referendum on the November general election ballot. Four of their leaders are the same specific individuals, including one from right here in Lowndes County. They're pushing something they admit has failed in every other state. Let's not be the first to fall for it.

According to the Georgia Charter Schools Association (GCSA),

No other state has had a positive outcome for a charter-positive ballot initiative

So even one of the major proponents of charter schools admits no other state's voters have thought they were a good idea. Their slides lay out a pair of statewide major money campaigns to push the referendum anyway.

We know about this because these slides fell into the hands of the AJC, and Jim Galloway published them today, saying:

LOST Lawsuits Ahead?

Looks like history may repeat itself like last decade, now that LOST negotiations between the cities and the county have failed. Except this time apparently the law has changed so they can't sue each other directly. Instead next it goes to Superior Court "baseball arbitration". However, I bet that still involves lawyers at taxpayer expense, not to mention the Court's time.

Greg Gullberg reported for WCTV yesterday, Tax Negotiations Hit Another Dead End In Lowndes County, and asked Gretchen down at the County Extension, who said,

It's sort of sad because it is a waste, if you will, of taxpayer dollars. That the elected officials can't get together and come to some agreement to say that they all understand how the money has to be divided up Yeah, it's sad that more money has to go to lawyers insted of being spent on services.

I continue to think the local governments could spend their time together better trying to increase the size of the pie instead of squabbling over slices of it.

-jsq