5/28/2008

Cherry-picking commissioners to circumvent good government

A very disturbing phenomenom is being played out under the Chairmanship of Charles Laughinghouse; one that is stifling discussion, and allowing a minority of commissioners to make decisions on important issues facing this county without input from the remaining three. Many people might be saying, "Wait. I've heard this somewhere before". And they'd be right. Four years ago, another Chairman was doing the exact same thing. His name was Jack Conway, and our current Chairman was one of the more vocal opponents (next to me) of this particular process.

Here is 2008's version of this process. We have on-going litigation with the City of Cumming regarding SPLOST. One day before the county commission was to meet to decide whether or not to appeal a judge's ruling overturning the collection of SPLOST 6, two members of the Chamber of Commerce, James McCoy and Lynn Jackson, met with Charles Laughinghouse and Jim Harrell ONLY.

Why did they do this?

Because only one or the other of these two commissioner could squash any deal with the city by voting against any intergovernmental agreement, as our rules require a 4/5ths majority for an IGA. Since Brian Tam and Linda Ledbetter were known to be willing to give the city pretty much anything they wanted, and I was known to be against any agreement with the city, these two Chamber of Commerce leaders decided to employ the time-honored tactic of "divide and conquer". In other words, let's keep the elected representatives of this county out of the discussion, and do a back room, closed door deal without the prying eyes and ears of the people who took an oath of office to defend this county. We un-elected bureaucrats of the Chamber of Commerce (who, by the way, wouldn't stand up publicly for the SPLOST vote because of the mayor being against it), knowing better than the elected representatives of the people, are going to pressure one or more of these two commissioners to vote our way, regardless of the long-term implications to this county.

And it worked for them. In spades.

Rather than moving forward with the litigation, the 4/5ths majority decided to enter into negotiations with the city on what is fictionally called "an equitable split of SPLOST revenues".

But, as with every negotiation with the Good CM (Cumming Mayor) things bogged down when the rubber met the road. We sent suggestions of a rough framework for an IGA over to the city - they sent a draft IGA that looked almost nothing like our framework. We sent back an edited version of the IGA protecting the county's interests - the city sent back their original IGA before our changes took place. In other words, typical city / county negotiations. Do what we want you to do, or we'll sue. You (the county) don't exist to us. When the Good CM says that there was "good give and take between parties" in a negotiation it is all predicated on how much we give, and how much he takes.

So somehow, word must have gotten back to James McCoy and Lynn Jackson that the potential for an agreement on SPLOST was about to come crashing down around our heads due to the galactic stupidity of city leaders, so they hastily set up ANOTHER meeting with their two favorite commissioners, Laughinghouse and Harrell.  This time, they brought the Good CM, and representatives of North Georgia Community College, who will ultimately benefit from having the future aquatic center on their future site. In yet another closed-door meeting without 3/5ths of the elected representatives of the county present, a minority of commissioners gave away the store (yet again) in a 6-hour negotiating marathon.

All without contrary input from anyone.

Is it legal to do things this way? Absolutely.

Is it RIGHT to do things this way? Absolutely NOT.

Backroom deals (minus the smoke-filled rooms) are bad government, and current Chairman Charles Laughinghouse knows that. After all, he complained about it loudly enough in 2005 and 2006 when Jack Conway fostered it. But this is the government you get when your Chairman is more concerned about positive press than good government. Only one person can allow this type of backroom wheeling and dealing to occur, and that is the Chairman of the Board of Commissioners.  When virtually EVERY meeting he has is behind closed doors, it gets ingrained in you to have meetings behind closed doors, as has occurred over the past 12 months of Charlie's tenure as Chairman. We've come full circle on good, open government in less than 2 years, and the results are just the same - bad decison-making by a small group of elected officials cherry-picked for their loyalty.

James McCoy and Lynn Jackson are not substitutes for your elected representatives. These negotiations should have occurred in an executive session under litigation with everyone present, so that contrary views could have been voiced.

One commissioner of principle, either Charles Laughinghouse or Jim Harrell, could have made open government happen by refusing to participate in a back room deal. They each failed the citizens of Forsyth County on two very important occasions this month. Time, and the voices of the people who elected them, will determine if they get that message.

5/9/2008

Help Wanted! Skilled Negotiators on the County Commission

Well, in another stunning example of negotiating prowess, a super-majority of your elected representatives sat down and gave the people who voted for them the proverbial finger in the eye. It is interesting to note that on the same day that at least 2 commissioners refuse to listen to the constituents that voted them into office, the school board delays their redistricting plan in order to get MORE public input. When was the last time the school board outdid the county commission in listening to our constituents? And despite what another commissioner may think, I talk constantly to the people who helped get them elected, and whom I worked hard to convince to vote for them, and these folks are NOT very happy right now. Way to kick the people in the teeth who invited you into their homes and donated money to your campaigns, guys!

But I digress. Using the same negotiating skills that gave The Avenues - Forsyth every variance they requested, and that will likely give the Taubman folks every dollar they have demanded of us, Commissioners Laughinghouse, Harrell, Tam and Ledbetter just gave away a clear win in SPLOST litigation, and added another $12.5 million of your county dollars to sweeten the pot to the city that sues the county at the drop of a hat.

Look closely at the offer on www.cumminghome.com

The county gives the city 5 things, and the city gives us 1.  Man, that's great negotiating!

But let's look even closer at the "compromise". Your elected majority not only did what we complained about other counties doing, which was the equvalent of negotiating a SPLOST litigation away on the courthouse steps - they went ONE STEP FURTHER!

Your stalwart majority of county commissioners just negotiated a settlement AFTER we had the litigation and WON!  We're now not only a laughingstock within our OWN COUNTY, but the rest of the counties across the state will be joining in on the merriment as they read what we have just done.

But you know who is laughing the hardest this morning?

The Mayor and the rest of the City of Cumming.

They just stuck it to us for $12.5 million, and got all the favorable rulings for the county thrown out of court at the same time.  What a deal!

Unless, of course, the city shows even more galactically stupid reasoning and rejects our offer.  We can only hope.

Of course, when you try to get just ONE commissioner to listen to reason by using FACTS, you get the usual lame excuse "That is your opinion", which is doublespeak for "I can't argue with you on the basis of facts, so this is all I have to lean on".

Today, a majority of county commissioners continued the same, tired method of appeasing dictators; something that has never worked in the past, and will never work in the future. We not only have one Neville Chamberlain, we have four in Forsyth County (for Bell supporters, read a history book). One additional principled stand would have kept this from happening, yet one additional principled commissioner could not be found.

Never have so few done so little for so many.

5/1/2008

Mixed ruling on SPLOST challenge

Despite what you might read in the dino-media over the next couple of days, the county prevailed on far more points of law than the city did in their challenge to SPLOST 6 yesterday. While the judge's ruling ultimately invalidated the SPLOST vote for now, his ruling is, to say the least, incompehensible based on the law as written.

We'll go over each substantive point and what it means to Forsyth County.

Where we lost:

Judge Stone found that the county failed to list all projects expected to be completed in SPLOST at the time the SPLOST resolution was PASSED, which was on November 1, 2007. However, there is NO legal basis for that ruling, as no language in the SPLOST law exists that even comes close to mandating that. Moreover, there is no logic in having all your SPLOST projects approved at the time the resolution is passed, as the voters do not read the resolution, they read the ballot language in the voting booth. He specifically did NOT mandate that all projects be on the ballot language, so what's his point? We do not know that, and expect that his ruling in this regard will be overturned in the Supreme Court.

Judge Stone also found that the county was obligated to list each and every city project requested on the ballot, even if the money allocated for those projects would not fund the entire list of projects. So even if the city is expected to receive only $11.7 million in revenue, the county has to list all $50 million in requested projects.  He claims that the county has tied the hands of the city by only listing a project that the city claims cannot be built with the funds allocated. However, in court, the city admitted that the county called the city and verified that the parking deck was the project THEY WANTED on the ballot, even though they knew they wouldn't get the funds to build it entirely. Additionally, adding the entire list of projects to the ballot language will further confuse the voter as he or she sees $50 million in projects listed, but only $11.7 million (or less) in dollars. We think this will also be overturned rather quickly by the Supremes.

We also think the Supreme Court will not look favorably on overturning an election approved by 70% of the voters. No argument can be made that this large a majority didn't get it right the first time.

Also, knowing the litigious nature of the Good CM and his five hand puppets, we are certain that if 8 projects are listed on the ballot, and funding isn't provide for all 8, he'll be in court sometime before the SPLOST ends to demand that we fund "what the voters approved".

So, if you are a city supporter, today you'll see a win for the city.

But no so fast. The county prevailed on far more points than the city did yesterday.

Where we won:

The court ruled that, absent an Inter-Governmental Agreement, the split of population percentage is entirely legal and correct.

The court ruled that the county doesn't have to choose between ONLY Level-1 or Level-2 projects, and can in fact lump all projects into a broad catagory as all counties have done in the past. In fact, were the county or city to insist that Level-1 and Level-2 projects be identified, the city's split would be much lower, as 20% of the revenue would have to be dedicated to those Level-2 projects, and the 96%-4% split would be applied to the total amount LESS the Level-2 project costs.  This means that the city could actually get only $8 million instead of $11.7 million. Not a good ruling for the city.  File this under "Be careful what you wish for".

The judge also ruled the the county has no requirement to list all county projects on the ballot. Duh!

Judge Stone also ruled that the city and county do not have to enter into detalied negotiations. In fact, while he preferred that both sides showed more willingness to negotiate, he found that there was nothing legally wrong with what either side did.

He also ruled that the county did not exhibit bad faith in their negotiations, and refused to order attorney's fees awarded to the city.

Judge Stone also allowed the county to submit into evidence our bond validation order, which establishes that at least one legal body (state Superior Court) has already ruled that our resolution and ballot are legal. He didn't have the authority to overturn that, and we'll take that to the Supremes as well.

So, what does this all mean?

If we appeal and win:

Everything moves forward and the city gets 4.29% and a smaller parking deck if they so choose.

If we appeal and lose:

The earliest that a new vote can occur is the General Election on November 4, 2008. SPLOST 5 ends on June 30, 2008. That means that retailers will have to re-program their registers to reflect the loss of 1 cent tax that will not be collected. If voters approve the new ballot in November, the earliest that the tax can be re-imposed is around February of 2009. That means about 8-9 months with NO SPLOST revenue for the city or the county.  That means no money for the Taubman project, nor for Great Wolf Lodge. It means a delay in getting the intersections done around the new Lambert High School in time for opening day.

Now it is up to a majority of commissioners to decide which way the county needs to go. We'll see which ones are willing to stand up for the county's rights and which ones are willing to settle for less. Our rulings were made with SPLOST language; the city's rulings had no language backing up the judge's opinion. We know the Good CM is very interested in entering into "negotiations" with the county this morning, as he has a window of opportunity to get more than what he deserves to get. We'll see if his negotiation style has changed any.  Either way, my preference is to appeal this ruling and plan for another vote in November if we lose the appeal.

1/25/2008