Thursday, September 17, 2009
They say, when in Rome you've got to do as the Romans do. I think we miss out on a lot of life's richness when we don't do that.
Actually, when I toured Rome, Italy with my wife a few years ago, I ate some things I wouldn't step on at home. They turned out to be delicious, of course. I managed to put quite a few pounds of culture on these Georgia bones while I was over there.
It turns out you can get cultured right here in Albany, Georgia if you stop and look hard enough. Some culture won't even cost you any poundage.
I intend to post some things every now and then showing things that make the Albany, Georgia area unique to highlight our local culture. Someone once told me marketing is all about differentiation, i.e. promoting what makes you different than everybody else. Here's my first stab at it:
A few weeks ago a friend of mine asked me and my son to join him and his son at the Albany Dragstrip. Although I've lived in Albany for 30+ years of my life, I had never been.
It was quite an experience, especially considering it was only $10 per adult and free for children.
We saw/felt a jet car 30' away do the 1/8 mile @ 209 mph in 3.77 seconds. A video is below.
They don't do that in Rome...
As you may recall, it was a 7 year background check that failed to reveal Don Buie's prior conviction. FOX 31 News reported that this ASU professor who was arrested has two prior convictions -- one from the Atlanta area dating back to the 1980's for the solicitation of sodomy, but it was given first offender treatment. The most recent conviction was in Virginia in 2001, a misdemeanor for sexual battery.
Does anybody out there have a copy of the Georgia Board of Regents policy pertaining to background checks?
I am still trying to get a handle on exactly how far back the city should be going in doing its background checks...other than the obvious "as far as it can."
So far, the CED has only assisted the applicant with applying for the grant. Staff time has been spent on that. The applicant could not submit the application without CED approval due to the nature of this particular grant.
FYI, the city finance director tells me that CED funding comes 100% from outside sources like the state and federal government. It is a 100% grant-funded city department. It's budget has shrunk from $3.5 million in 2007/2008 to just over $2 million today.
The CED director also told me that if the Heritage House grant were approved, a percentage of the grant would be paid to the CED to be sure the grant receipient complied with HUD regulations. To secure that compliance, the CED would hold a second lien on the property. I was told neither the CED or the city would be on the hook for any grant money.
Although it sounds like there MIGHT be no harm in the CED assisting with the grant application, I received some information about the architect and the property owner today that really concerns me. Below is the email I just sent to staff and my fellow commissioners regarding this issue:
From: Bob Langstaff, Jr. [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Thu 9/17/2009 5:02 PM
To: Howard, Jon; email@example.com; Hubbard, Dorothy; Gurr, Morris; Marietta, Roger; Postell, Tommie; Adams Jr., Willie; Lott, Alfred; Taylor, James
Subject: Heritage House grant project
Several commissioners expressed concern about the above grant project at the least board meeting. I received some information that concerned me. Before staff spends anymore time with the project I request that some due diligence be conducted into the backgrounds and experience of the architect, the owner, and the holding company (“Greenbriar Holdings”???).
Attached are some downloads of fi.fa’s. against a Mr. Rivers and/or a Mr. Comeau in Muscogee County. I pulled these up in just a few minutes. There may be others. I just think there should be some further inquiry before too much staff time is invested. Thanks.
I can be reached by phone at 229-343-7617.
I can be emailed at mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org
My understanding is that Arthur Williams' challenge against Chris Pike will be heard at 4:00pm, and Lon McNeil's challenge against Arthur Williams will be heard at 4:30pm.
I do not really understand Arthur Williams' challenge against Chris Pike. My understanding is that Chris Pike qualified before the deadline passed.
With respect to Lon McNeil's challenge against Chris Pike, the challenge centers around a law passed many years ago. I believe it was sponsored by Albany's own Doug Everett who now serves on the Georgia Public Service Commission. The point of the law was to prevent those who don't pay their taxes from holding public office. Who can argue with that?
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
This whole thing started when a citizen sent me an email with a link to a Gucci Mane youtube video that seemed very offensive to me persnally. I heard the n-word used a lot, but couldn’t really understand most of the lyrics. So I pulled the lyrics up online, and found that some of Gucci's lyrics promote the use of illegal drugs and the…how do I say it…unloving use of women. I challenge you to go online, and actually read some of the lyrics. They’re not as innocent as some people are claiming. The citizen pointed out that his tax dollars didn’t need to be subsidizing this stuff, and I agreed with him.
I would also agree that your tax dollars should not go toward subsidizing the KKK or some other hate group that wants to have a convention at the civic center. Unfortunately, it appears under federal law that ANYONE can use the civic center, if they pay to use it. We legally cannot reject anyone. Not Marilyn Manson. Not the KKK. The KKK can pay to rent it out, just as they can obtain a permit to parade down city streets. Federal law says they just have to abide by the civic center rules and regulations. I asked the city attorney to research exactly what those "rules and regulations" are, and can be. Right now it is still unclear.
One problem I am still having with this issue is that the way we book acts in our civic center means that hardworking taxpaying citizens could be subsidizing some shows that absolutely repulse the MAJORITY of the city. That’s not right.
I am hoping that we can adopt a policy that EVERYONE pays the retail, published rate for civic center use, unless the city commission or an advisory committee votes to provide some sort of subsidy. By subsidy, I mean that a producer will sometimes convince the civic center to reduce certain fees in exchange for a larger percentage of the concessions, or waive certain fees just to land the act. In this sense, the taxpayers wind up "subsidizing" the show. Would you want to foot part of the bill for a hate group convention through your taxes? Of course not.
Thus, I think we need to see if we can legally adopt a policy regarding subsidizing shows that will at least help people feel better that their tax dollars aren’t paying for things that most despise. We would not censoring. We would just not be financially promoting.
I also think we can learn something from the movie and music industries, as well as the public library. A 16 year old can’t get into an R rated movie without an adult, but he can go see a KKK rally or Gucci Mane at the civic center. I understand that a young kid cannot buy the hard core Gucci Mane CD without an adult, but the kid can go to the civic center and hear him live without an adult. The public library doesn’t carry KKK rally material or Gucci Mane CD’s, but kids can go to the civic center to get both. Something’s just wrong with that picture.
What can legally be done?
There are civic center trade associations. Perhaps we can lobby them to adopt a rating system like the movie and music industries have done. The acts that make their way around the country would come with a rating to warn parents about what their kids are going to see at the local civic center.
The local public library doesn’t spend your tax dollars lining the shelves with KKK books, Penthouse, Playboy, and Playgirl. Why should your civic center do something similar? Perhaps a civic center advisory group should decide what entertainment deserves taxpayer subsidy, and let the rest pay full retail rental. That seems to be compliant with federal law. Then, when Gucci Mane, Marilyn Manson, or the KKK book the joint, you can feel confident that there was no taxpayer subsidy, and they are paying full retail rates.
Let me clear up a few more things. This is not an anti-rap position. I believe rap is an art form just as much as blues, jazz, and rock and roll. My nine year old and I listened to some Christian rap on my ipod this weekend. My wife listens to a variety of artists that rap on occasion. Basically, I am forced to listen to whatever my wife likes, so yes, I listen to rap occasionally.
In my lifetime, I have also watched movies, listened to songs, and read books with content that would be "appalling" to my mother (although I remember her laughing hysterically through Richard Pryor's HBO special 30 years ago). The point is that that's my personal choice for me and me only. I can take comfort in knowing that while my kids are under my roof, it will be very difficult for them to watch, listen, or read "appalling" content, thanks in part to the various systems in place at the movie theatre, the music store, and the public library. I don't see why our civic center should offer any less protection for our kids.
Friday, August 7, 2009
I just read the above headline on the WALB website. I am investigating, and this is what I know so far:
Ms. Woods was awarded a $100k loan through a federal grant program through the US Economic Development Administration. These funds were part of a revolving loan program initially funded after the Albany floods. The disbursement of those funds is handled through the City's Department of Community and Economic Development and their loan committee.
A lot of the initial flood loans from the EDA went bad, but as people have started to repay their flood loans the revolving loan pool has built back up. The federal funds are to be used for small businesses that cannot obtain traditional bank financing, but show the ability to repay a given loan. The loans are made for working capital, equipment, fixtures, etc. A recipient must show proof of a bank's denial of a traditional loan.
The EDA loans are approved by a local loan review committee which includes members from at least two local banks and two institutes of higher education. I have some names of members, but I will wait to publish the list when I receive all members' names, so no one is left out. This committee would have approved the loan.
This particular loan did not involve direct payments to the recipient. The recipient submitted invoices from vendors to be paid. There is still about $11k that can be drawn down on the $100k loan. Albany Community Together (ACT) handled the underwriting of the loan.
My understanding is that ACT and the loan committee were made aware of the $50k facade grant, and required documentation to be sure there were no duplicate invoices being paid.
I will provide more information as I am able.
Slavin uses the Whackenhut Corporation to do criminal background checks. You can read about Whackenhut at www.whackenhut.com or http://www.g4s.com/usw. Whackenhut appears to be a leader in worldwide pre-employment screenings.
According to Slavin, Whackenhut's menu of pre-employment screening products all go back 7 years. Up until a few years ago, they would go back 10 years. Slavin says there was a change in the law that shortened the lookback period. At this point, Slavin appears to believe federal law constrains the review period. Our outside employment lawyer believes the constraints of a company like Whackenhut are due to varying privacy laws in each of the 50 states, not federal law. In other words, Whackenhut could probe deeper in some states, but not others.
The questions I am still trying to get a definitive answer to are:
a) how far back can you legally search in a pre-employment screening generally, and in Buie's case in particular;
b) how far back you can feasibly search in a pre-employment screening generally, and in Buie's case in particular;
c) what is the simplest search that would have revealed Buie's prior criminal history?
My predicted/preliminary answers are:
a) My guess is you can go back as far as a particular state permits it, if you are willing to spend the money. Slavin says he obtained an authorization from Buie to conduct a background search with no specific number of years to look back.
b) A feasible search is probably 7 years on nationwide searches like for Buie because the big companies like Whackenhut don't want to be sued for going back too far in a state that does not allow but a 7 year look back period. However, for local hires a Georgia Crime Information Center (GCIC) report could be run by the local police dept. with proper authorization from the employee for a nominal charge. It would also seem prudent to run the same type of report for non-local hires from wherever they are coming from, i.e. a Maryland CIC search, if possible, on Buie. I do not know if a Maryland CIC search would have turned up this federal crime.
c) I am still researching the question of the simplest way to have discovered Buie's criminal past. Perhaps a search of federal prisons or a National Crime Information Center (NCIC) search could have uncovered the prior criminal activity for Mr. Buie.
More info to come.
Thursday, August 6, 2009
In 2007 the city hired Slavin Management Consultants of Atlanta to find qualified applicants for Buie's position. Here's their website: http://www.slavinweb.com.
Slavin has an excellent national reputation for recruiting for government positions. Their client list according to the web includes:
Ann Arbor, Michigan
Beverly Hills, California
Beaver Creek, Ohio
Birmngham-Jefferson County, Alabama
Boca Raton, Florida
Broward County, Florida
Charlotte, North Carolina
Clark County, Nevada
Dallas ISD (Texas)
Florida Association of Counties
Fresno Economic Development Commission
Fulton County, Georgia
Hall County, Georgia
Highland Park, Illinois
Honolulu Public Transit Authority
International City/County Management Assn.
Lake County, Illinois
LaPlata County, Colorado
Lee County, Florida
Los Angeles County, California
Mendocino County, California
Montgomery County, Maryland
Miami Valley Regional Transit Authority (OH)
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Prince William County, Virginia
Peoria County, Illinois
San Jose, California
Shaker Heights, Ohio
SW Florida Regional Planning Council
Takoma Park, Maryland
Volusia County, Florida
West Des Moines, Iowa
West Hollywood, California
Part of Slavin's recruitment process is to conduct criminal background checks. According to their website, this is part of Slavin's screening process:
D. Selection and Employment
In-depth Screening and Final Report... At this point, we will interview those semifinalist candidates whom the client representatives have the greatest interest in. Proper "fit" is as important as technical ability. We assess both. In order to better assess candidates' management style and interpersonal characteristics, we personally interview each in his or her present work location. We will closely examine each candidate's experience, qualifications, achievements, management style and interpersonal skills in view of the selection criteria and our professional expertise in evaluating the quality of such qualifications, skills and achievements.
We conduct in-depth background checks on those individuals who continue to demonstrate their overall suitability for the position. Included are detailed and extensive reference checks which cover a minimum period of ten years. In conducting these, it is our practice to speak directly to individuals who are now or have been in positions to evaluate the candidate's job performance. We ask each candidate to provide us with a large number of references. We then network these references to other persons who know the candidate. In this way, we thoroughly evaluate each candidate. These references and evaluations are combined to provide frank and objective appraisals of the top candidates.
As part of our evaluation process we conduct criminal history, civil court records, driving record and credit checks and we verify undergraduate and graduate college degrees. At the client's option we can arrange for assessment centers and/or psychological (or similar) testing of the candidates. (These optional items will result in extra cost.)
We will then meet with the client to present a group of well-qualified finalist candidates for interviews. These final candidates will not be ranked because, at this point, they will all be qualified and it will then be a matter of chemistry between the candidates and the client that should produce the final selection decision.
It is my understanding that Slavin outsourced the background search to another specialty firm. I do not have that name of that firm readily available. It is my understanding that a seven year credit and criminal check was performed. Obviously, since it was performed in 2007, it would not catch a 1994 conviction. Our outside employment attorney has informed me that the seven year search is the norm. He said you can spend several thousand dollars to try to go back further, but no results are guaranteed. He says not all convictions are reported to the reporting agencies. There has been improvement recently, but there are still large gaps in the reporting.
I have a call into Slavin to see exactly what went wrong with the background check, and to see what could have been done differently. It is possible that a refund of the search fee would be appropriate, but I have not yet heard Slavin's side of the story, and I am not sure if they did anything outside the norm.
Thursday, July 30, 2009
I want to set the record straight; there were no falsified documents filed by the city of Albany in the Coley Musgrove suit challenging the denial of a subdivision plat. The suit was filed by Coley Musgrove and the civil action number is 06CV2990-2. The following account may be verified by looking at the file on record with the court.
Coley Musgrove appealed the planning department’s denial of the subdivision plat application to the Albany Dougherty Planning Commission. The first hearing before the Planning Commission was conducted on November 2, 2006. The Planning Commission, upon hearing the appeal, upheld the planning department’s denial. Coley Musgrove then filed a suit for mandamus to the Dougherty Superior Court requesting that the court order the issuance of the permit for the proposed subdivision.
On January 11, 2007, the superior court held the first hearing on the case. At that time Coley Musgrove moved the court to grant the mandamus on the basis that they had only two days notice of the Planning Commission hearing which was not sufficient time to prepare. Note that Mr. Coley was present at the November 2nd Planning Commission hearing, but he was not represented by counsel. The court did not rule at the hearing and allowed additional time to file the record of the proceedings before the Planning Commission and any other documents deemed appropriate. Both the city and Coley Musgrove were allowed to file documents.
On February 1, 2007, the city filed the record of the preceding before the Planning Commission. In that record filed with the court are the official minutes of the Planning Commission hearing on November 2nd which were approved by the Planning Commission at its meeting in December 2006. The minutes start on page 4 because that’s the first page on which the Coley Musgrove appeal is mentioned. There were other matters in the minutes regarding other appeals. These minutes are accurate and are the actual minutes approved. In addition to the minutes, we filed a verbatim transcript of the hearing before the Planning Commission. The transcript was prepared from the tape recording of the hearing. (I previously sent you a copy of the record including the transcript filed with the court.) The first item is the verbatim transcript of the Planning Commission hearing which was certified by Elizabeth G. Kelly, assistant city clerk. The transcript is accurate and reveals exactly what happened at the hearing. It should be noted that Coley Musgrove’s attorney sent a letter to the court requesting that the court consider the transcript in making its decision in the case.
I filed a brief with the court on January 25, 2007, in response to Coley Musgrove’s contention that they did not have sufficient notice of the hearing before the Planning Commission. With that brief, I filed unofficial minutes which were prepared to give more detail about what happened at the Planning Commission meeting. These were prepared before we had the verbatim transcript prepared. These unofficial minutes accurately show what happened at the Planning Commission meeting. I invite anyone to compare the unofficial minutes with the transcript which will show that these minutes are completely accurate. (I understand there is a contention that there is no transcript of the hearing, but the court file will show that a certified transcript was prepared from the tape recording of the hearing.)
The court entered its order on February 12, 2007, ordering the Planning Commission to conduct another hearing on the subdivision plat appeal since the court found that Coley Musgrove had not been given enough notice of the first hearing. The Planning Commission again denied the appeal after the second hearing. Ultimately, the trial court found in favor the Coley Musgrove and ordered the city to grant the subdivision plat permit.
There was never any falsified document filed with the court, nor were any minutes of the Planning Commission falsified to mislead the court. I stand by the record now on file with the court. The minutes filed with the court may be compared with the verbatim transcript to confirm the accuracy of all documents filed with the court.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. Frank Jenkins
Our website can now be found at: www.joandb.com.
Frank E. Jenkins, III, Esq.
Jenkins, Olson & Bowen, P.C.
15 South Public Square
Cartersville, Georgia 30120-3350
Fax (770) 387-2396
24 Drayton Street, Suite 1000
Savannah, Georgia 31401
Fax (912) 236-7250
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
SOUTHWEST PUBLIC HEALTH DISTRICT
1109 North Jackson Street
Albany, Georgia 31701-2022
(229) 430-4599 Fax (229) 430-5143 Emergency 888-430-4590
July 29, 2009 Contact: Carolyn Maschke, Public Information Officer
For Immediate Release 229-430-1969, 229-357-0257; email@example.com
Southwest Health District investigates two Influenza A clusters involving children
In response to separate Influenza A outbreaks involving children in two of its 14 counties, Southwest Health District has partially reactivated its Pandemic H1N1 Emergency Operations Center and stepped up surveillance and education efforts in the region.
“We are monitoring what appear to be Influenza Type A clusters in Dougherty and Lee counties,” said Southwest Health District Deputy Director Brenda Greene. “One of the clusters is associated with attendance at a summer program, while the other is associated with a church-related trip. Any time clusters of disease occur, we are concerned. When the clusters involve children our level of concern grows even more.”
Public Health is working closely with the organizations, parents and other healthcare providers to provide guidance and assistance in prevention, control and treatment of the disease, Greene said.
“While these are the first such Influenza A outbreaks we have seen in our District, Pandemic H1N1 (a strain of Influenza A) clusters are becoming common in summer camps and programs elsewhere in Georgia and across the country,” added Southwest Health District Health Director Dr. Jacqueline Grant. “Unfortunately, we expect to see more people, including more children, fall ill, possibly require hospitalization and perhaps even die as the pandemic progresses. Southwest Georgia residents need to be aware of that and prepare, especially when students begin returning to school in the days ahead.”
Public Health disease investigators learned this week that 20 out of 40 students enrolled in a Dougherty County summer program had fallen ill with flu-like symptoms, including two children with confirmed cases of Influenza A, Greene said.
On Monday, the Dougherty County summer program director voluntarily discontinued the program.
Baker Calhoun Colquitt Decatur Dougherty Early Grady Lee Miller Mitchell Seminole Terrell Thomas Worth
At the same time, a cluster of 40 youngsters who had attended a youth-oriented conference was reported in Lee County, Greene said. Ten of the Lee County young people are experiencing flu-like symptoms, with two having confirmed cases of Influenza A.
“Pandemic H1N1 is now so prevalent that we are assuming anytime we see flu-like illness it is the pandemic virus, especially if initial tests confirm the presence of Influenza A,” said Greene, explaining that Pandemic H1N1 is a strain of Influenza A.
“Also, we know that the pandemic has a high attack rate among children, teens and young adults. That makes it even more likely that we are dealing with Pandemic H1N1 when we see clusters in children. Therefore, even though we do not have confirmation that the clusters in Dougherty and Lee are H1N1, we are operating under the assumption that they are,” Greene said.
Grant emphasized that the Dougherty County summer program’s director made a voluntary decision to discontinue the program.
“At this time, Public Health is following the Centers for Disease Control guidelines, which don’t call for closure of camps, schools or children’s programs with confirmed or suspected cases of H1N1. That’s different from what was recommended early in the outbreak, when we didn’t know how severe the virus was.”
Now, however, data shows most people who catch Pandemic H1N1 experience mild to moderate illness. “So we are going with the same recommendation for Pandemic H1N1 that we make for seasonal flu: Unless so many counselors or so many students are sick that the program can’t operate, there’s no need to cancel the program,” explained Grant.
However, she warned, recommendations could change again – rapidly – should the virus change and become more dangerous. “Influenza is extremely unpredictable. We know the virus mutates. Our concern is that it will begin causing more severe illness or that it will become drug resistant. It is vitally important that the public stays informed and prepared,” Grant said.
Because of the rapid spread of Pandemic H1N1, the World Health Organization, the CDC, and now the State of Georgia no longer count and report cases. The focus now is on severity of illness, Grant said.
Baker Calhoun Colquitt Decatur Dougherty Early Grady Lee Miller Mitchell Seminole Terrell Thomas Worth
“Although work is moving ahead on a vaccine for this new virus, it is not yet available and is unlikely to be available until mid-October. We cannot stop this pandemic, so our best line of defense is to slow its spread and to be prepared to care for cases of mild to moderate flu at home,” she said.
Influenza is thought to spread mainly through the coughs and sneezes of those infected. The main symptoms of Pandemic H1N1 Influenza are fever plus at least either a cough or sore throat. Additional symptoms associated with it include headache, tiredness, runny or stuffy nose, body aches, chills, diarrhea and vomiting.
Additional information on Pandemic H1N1, including homecare for patients with H1N1, is available online at www.southwestgeorgiapublichealth.org and www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/.
Baker Calhoun Colquitt Decatur Dougherty Early Grady Lee Miller Mitchell Seminole Terrell Thomas Worth
Mr. Buie has been terminated as downtown manager. I only wish it had come sooner. The negative effects of his tenure will be endured for years to come. As many people I have spoken to over the last month have said, this has set downtown redevelopment back at least 10 years.
What went wrong?
I accept some of the blame. I sincerely thought that Mr. Buie wasn't going to be able to sneeze without the city manager knowing about it. I was wrong. Although Mr. Buie was a city employee and reported directly to the city manager (and his office was only two doors down), Mr. Buie was able to write whatever checks he wanted at ADICA without so much as a second signature.
I incorrectly assumed that ADICA had the necessary tools to carry out its mission to redevelop downtown. Part of those tools would have been bylaws that required a second signature on checks, board approval on purchases above a threshold amount, adoption of city-like purchasing policies, etc. As it turned out, it does not appear ADICA had any of that. It boggles the mind how ADICA has existed as long as it has (many years before ATI was created) without those tools, but it apparently has.
The city reserved the right to do an audit in its contract with ADICA, but the right was not exercised until fairly recently. The sooner the city did its audit, the sooner Mr. Buie's transgressions would have come to light.
Although there were valid concerns raised by city staff about interfering with the GBI's criminal investigation, the city should have investigated ADICA's books sooner. As you may have read in the Albany Herald, a check and lease allegedly went missing from a file since the city audit of ADICA's books began. One of the dangers of having multiple concurrent investigations is that one of the investigators can be blamed for missing documents, as opposed to the missing document being used to show efforts of a cover-up on the part of the alleged perpertrator. That is why I personally contacted the GBI special agent in charge last week to confirm that we would not be interfering with his investigation if we conducted our own internal audit of the facade grants. I wish I had contacted the GBI myself sooner. I was too optimistic as to when the GBI investigation would be completed. To my knowledge, it is still ongoing.
What can be done now?
We have to assess the damage. That is going to take time. I can only imagine what will be uncovered by the GBI investigation. Now that we have shut down ATI, we are still having creditors come forward complaining that ATI failed to pay them. Our records show specific payments to ATI for the specific debts, but it appears ATI never actually paid some creditors. If that has happened with ATI, there is no telling what creditors will surface against ADICA in the coming months in the wake of Mr. Buie.
We have to cooperate fully with any prosecution that might result from this situation. The decision about whether there is anything to prosecute rests solely with the district attorney.
I agree that we need to hold off on spending anymore on downtown redevelopment until public confidence can be restored. I think that restoration will only occur when we get a downtown redevelopment professional who truly DEMANDS that confidence -- someone with real estate and business savvy and impeccable ethics, someone like a Larry Walden or a Lamar Reese. Perhaps the job of bringing private investment into downtown could be done by someone local in a consultant-type capacity to ADICA. There are some fantastic oppurtunities on the table for downtown (like an ASU bookstore) that need to be capitalized on before they disappear forever. We've got to find the RIGHT person soon, or we will find ourselves 20 years behind on downtown redevelopment.
The city has to provide the necessary support for ADICA to right its ship. City staff is going to have to help ADICA write or adopt appropriate safeguards and policies.
I have asked Phil Cannon of ADICA to consider having ADICA enter into an agreement with the city whereby the city manager would have to counter-sign every check written from ADICA accounts, and approve every ADICA expenditure. This would NOT allow the city commission itself to stick its nose into every ADICA matter, but it would require the city manager to be accountable for every expenditure ADICA makes. That type of accountability was what sold me on the city/ADICA model for downtown development over the city/ADICA/ATI model in the first place.
Monday, July 13, 2009
"If city property taxes aren't going up, then how do you explain my ridiculously escalating tax bill?"
Part of the answer to that question lies in the "Current 2009 Tax Digest and 5 Year History of Levy" that Georgia law requires the Dougherty County Board of Commissioners, the Board of Commissioners of the City of Albany, and the Dougherty County Board of Education each to separately publish in the Albany Herald. I will try to figure out how to post the ads as printed on this blog later, but for now I will just point out the pertinent figures.
Here's what each of the three entities collected in property taxes in 2004 and 2009 and the additional tax being collected:
City of Albany
diff + $586,171
diff + $1,933,858
Dougherty County Board of Education
According to the "Current 2009 Tax Digest and 5 Year History of Levy" published in the Herald, the City of Albany's two largest percentage tax increases came in 2005 at 1.43% and in 2009 at 1.02%. Dougherty County's two largest percentage tax increases came in 2004 at 22.75% and in 2007 at 7.78%. The Dougherty County Board of Education's two largest percentage increases came in 2007 at 15.88% and in 2005 at 0.76%.
Your property tax bill is also affected by action by the General Assembly this year which will add another $200 to $300 to most tax bills. A state homestead tax relief grant started when state coffers were fuller is not being funded in the current fiscal year and the next fiscal year.
The Georgia General Assembly paid about $428 million statewide in 2009 to local governments to offset the property tax bills of their residents. The theory was that the money would help offset some of the cost of the unfunded mandates passed onto local governments by the State of Georgia. That is no longer being done. Local governments won't receive more money because of the change, but taxpaying property owners will be paying more due to the state's decision not to continue this tax relief.
Friday, July 10, 2009
Myth: City Property Taxes are Rising Fast. Fact: City Property Tax Revenues are only up $400k since 2003.
How is the tax rate figured?
The tax rate, or millage, is set annually. A tax rate of one mill represents a tax liability of one dollar per $1,000 of assessed value. Example:The assessed value-40 percent of the fair market value-of a house that is worth $100,000 is $40,000. In a county where the millage rate is 25 mills the property tax on that house would be $1,000; $25 for every $1,000 of assessed value or $25 multiplied by 40 is $1,000.
If you live in the City of Albany, your property tax bill has 4 components which total 39.746 mills. Those 39.746 mills are collected for (1) the Dougherty County School System (2) Dougherty County (3) the City of Albany and (4) the State of Georgia. The State actually collects a very small amount to cover administrative costs -- 00.25 mills. The City of Albany receives the next smallest share of your property taxes at 9.157 mills. However, if you live within the city limits of Albany, you are still taxed by the Dougherty County School System at 18.445 mills and by Dougherty County at 11.894 mills.
According to the FY2010 budget passed by the City Commission (which I personally voted against for a variety of reasons I can explain later), the City will fund its budget with $14,672,008 in property taxes. The rest of the $102 million budget is funded from other sources including federal and state grants, sales taxes, fees, and fines.
What is interesting, is that the FY2003 budget which was passed under former city manager Janice Jackson included property tax revenues for the city of $14,283,023. That means that since 2003 property tax revenue for the city has only risen about $400k to its present FY2010 budget level of $14,672,008.
That's even more interesting when you consider that the police department budget from FY2003 was about $11 million, and now it is at $16 million for FY2010. Also, the fire department budget went from about $8 million in FY2003 to $11.9 million in FY2010. What this means is that City staff has found ways to increase funding to essential services without increasing property taxes.
I know some of you are asking how city property tax revenues could have only risen $400k since FY2003. I asked the same question of our finance director. The answer is that the City Commission has been doing city millage rate rollbacks for the last 5 years with very little fanfare. Here are the city millage rates from 2004-2008.
2004 -- 10.8
2005 -- 10.792
2006 -- 10.777
2007 -- 9.159
2008 -- 9.157
The city commission voted for a budget that assumes the millage rate will stay at 9.157 in 2009.
Remember, the total millage rate you pay if you live in the city limits of Albany is now 39.746. Thus, the city's portion of your property tax bill accounts for about 23% of your total property tax bill. Almost 30% of your property tax bill goes to the county. A whopping 46% of your tax bill goes to the school system. The state gets the remaining 1%.
Let me make it clear that I do think taxes for city residents are too high. A 2006 report from the governor's office stated that Albany residents suffered the highest "total" millage rate in the state, but I think you can see from the above data that the city does not receive the bulk of that "total" millage rate. I think the city's millage rate can be lower with certain belt tightening, and I'll continue to advocate for that. However, I am pleased to see that city staff has been able to keep a lid on the city millage rate since at least 2003.
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
For the record, I should first make it clear that Jon Howard and I were NOT satisfied with the new sign ordinance, and voted against it for a lot of different reasons. I am not against having a sign ordinance. They are GOOD for business. Sign ordinances keep the business next door from blocking the view of your sign with an enormous sign of their own. They keep the playing field fair. I just couldn't vote for the particular sign ordinance proposed.
Most recently, I was initially supportive of doing a moratorium on enforcement of the sign ordinance. Here's why:
The code enforcement director said Harvest Moon should never have received the warning handed out by one of his employees. Apparently, the director believes the ordinance gives Harvest Moon three years to rectify their alleged error in having two ground signs. Thus, it appears there is some confusion in the ranks about how the ordinance should be applied. Moreover, I understand that the owner believes he got some type of permission to use the sign, and invested money into it based on that permission. As a lawyer, that says to me that the owner may have detrimentally relied on city assurances, and may be entitled to some relief.
Overall, it seems ludicrous to me to worry about whether Harvest Moon is over the ground sign limit when we have burned out shells of buildings all over town. We have decades of ignored blight to deal with. That blight contributes to our crime problem. Crack heads, copper thieves, and meth cooks love abandoned buildings.
That is why I have asked staff to consult with outside legal counsel about the legality of adopting a resolution that acknowledges our limited code enforcement resources, and directs staff to focus on the worst code enforcement problems first -- namely dilapidated and abandoned buildings and junk cars. We would still enforce the sign ordinance, but enforcement would be complaint-driven. If a business complains that a business next door is blocking the view of his sign in violation of the sign ordinance, then we can address it.
The city attorney has given a preliminary opinion that we cannot do this, but I want to hear it from our sign expert. I have to believe this is permissible. As an analogy, we know we have speeders, robbers, burglars, and drug dealers in this town. The unwritten policy is that we put more resources into stopping drug dealers, robbers, and burglars than stopping speeders. We enforce all the laws on the books, but we put more money into stopping drug dealers, robbers, and burglars. If we cannot direct our resources via a resolution, then we should do it via our budget.
Then there's the whole Moe's thing about code enforcement going out and citing them for parking their Moe's van too close to the street. First off, the code enforcement director knew he had a problem after the Harvest Moon incident. Code enforcement did NOT go to Moe's as was reported. The code enforcement director met with the Moe's manager who appeared on TV as well as the owner. Both said code enforcement had not been out there in two years. In fact, the Moe's manager said she tried to explain that to the reporter who went out there. Unfortunately, that did not appear on camera.
Nonetheless, the Moe's story raises the issue of why we should even worry about trying to regulate the Moe's van signage anyway. There are cars driving all over this town with similar signage all day long!!!! All I can figure is that it wouldn't be fair to tell Harvest Moon they can only have one ground sign, but allow a pizza place to open next door and park a fleet of delivery vehicles with signs on them right next to Dawson Road. But I don't realistically see that happening. I am truly struggling to understand why we are concerned about car signage. That's one of the sign issues I want to explore further.
Okay, all the above suggests a moratorium would be a good idea, so last week I asked our planning director to call our outside attorney who is the sign ordinance expert about the pros and cons of a moratorium. This outside attorney is the one who has re-written sign ordinances for a number of cities in the state to make them enforceable. What is and is not enforceable changes every year. He has also been involved in lots of litigation over regular billboards and LED billboards. To date, our planning director has not heard back from him about the pros and cons of a sign ordinance moratorium.
Being a lawyer myself, here are the potential pitfalls I see in placing a general moratorium on enforcement of the sign ordinance. I defer to our sign expert to make the call, but I think it is my job to point out the issues.
First, right now the sign ordinance prohibits any NEW billboards in the city. If we say we are going to suspend enforcement of the sign ordinance for a period of time, I bet the billboard companies are going to immediately submit tons of requests to place more billboards all over town. Of course, if we have a moratorium on enforcement, they could really just put the billboards up wherever they wanted without submitting a request. That could be a mess.
Second, we have limited LED billboards in the city to 8, and are currently being sued to allow one more. During our last "moratorium" on LED billboards, we were slapped with about a dozen new LED billboard permit requests. If we put a moratorium on the ordinance which currently limits the number of LED billboards, then there is no law preventing billboard companies from putting up as many LED billboards as they want. That's another mess.
Third, let's say we just want to put a moratorium on enforcement of a specific provision in the sign ordinance, like say the one that is affecting Harvest Moon that says you can only have one ground sign. Well, if you stop enforcing that provision for 6 months, you can bet that a lot of businesses are going to take that opportunity to go ahead and plant another sign in the ground. Can you imagine if we woke up in six months, and had double the number of current ground signs? That could still be a mess.
Where do we go from here?
I am hopeful our sign expert is going to say we can adopt a policy regarding the allocation of our code enforcement resources that will take the focus off of aesthetics of our signage until we get the major blight cleaned up. Sign enforcement would be complaint-driven. That would give us the necessary time to get the sign ordinance right.
In the meantime, a task force (to include Chamber representatives, hopefully) is going to take a critical look at certain provisions within the sign ordinance. My hope is they will look at how cities like Valdosta, Tifton, Thomasville, etc. handle the same issues. I actually have a spreadsheet showing some comparisons that staff has worked up for me. I just have to figure out how to post it to this blog.
More to come...
The city manager informed me this week that he has consulted with our outside employment law specialist, as well as our own in-house attorney. The consensus among the attorneys is that suspension would NOT be appropriate at this time, and the city manager agrees. I believe the city manager has thoughtfully and professionally considered the issue.
I learned today that the GBI anticipates completing its investigation within the next two weeks. No matter what the outcome, ADICA and the city will need to make several administrative policy changes.
Friday, June 19, 2009
A non-binding budget work session vote was taken on May 12, 2009 as follows:
"Commissioner Gurr moved to reestablish the $90,000 for the Carver Pool, seconded by Commissioner Howard; the motion carried 4-2 with Mayor Adams and Commissioner Langstaff voting no."
During that May 12 work session I had listened to the arguments for reinstating the funding for Carver Pool. It was necessary for me to obtain additional documentation on the issue from city staff in order to respond to my fellow commissioners' concerns. Once I got that documentation and had it forwarded to the entire commission, I presented the following written argument to the Mayor and each of the Commissioners:
"Mayor and Commissioners and Staff,
Budget cuts are always tough. To me, the Carver pool budget cut seems to be one of those rare opportunities to utilize existing community resources to make a cut without completely cutting the service. I want our kids to stay busy in the summer. I want all of our children to learn to swim. I think those are very worthwhile goals. However, if we can save $90k and still meet those goals, I think we ought to give it a shot. Sure, for some it would be easier to walk to Carver to swim than ride a bus. However, we don’t have detailed enough data to know how many kids are catching rides to the Carver pool in the first place. This new system might actually be MORE convenient for the majority of the kids participating. I think it is worth trying this for a year to see how it works out. An added benefit would be introducing kids to the Boys & Girls Club who might otherwise not have given it a chance. It seems like a win-win to me.
Bob Langstaff, Jr."
Here is the data which was provided by city staff, and
sent to all commissioners which supports the closure of Carver Pool:
"Per your request, below is a brief summary on what Recreation and Parks would do if Carver Pool closes:
* The Boys & Girls Club has offered to accommodate those individuals who would be displaced if Carver Pool is closed.
* The Boys and Girls Club have agreed to work with ARPD to accommodate youth participants who attend the ARPD Summer Program from 1 to 4 pm daily.
* The Boys & Girls Club charges $0.50 per participant to attend the open swim period, but has offered to waive this fee for ARPD participants.
* Per Mr. Bob Hutchinson, the Boys & Girls Club is willing to use their 55 passenger bus to assist the Recreation and Parks with transport of participants to their facility daily(Monday - Friday) for swimming.
* The Boys and Girls Club are also willing to include ARPD participants in their morning Learn to Swim Classes at no charge. The Learn to Swim Classes are offered from 9am until noon and are age group specific.
* Recreation and Parks have two 15 passenger vans to transport participants to the Boys and Girls Club. Based on utilizing both City of Albany Recreation & Parks 15 passenger vans and ARPD full-time staff to drive the vans, the estimated cost to transport participants to the Boys & Girls Club for swimming would be 40 miles per day (using an average of 10 miles from each facility) for both vans. For a total of 13 weeks the total mileage would be 2600 miles driven to transport youth from ARPD facilities to the Boys & Girls Club for swimming. Each ARPD facility would have a designated day for swimming. Based on the IRS mileage reimbursement rate – the cost to transport ARPD program participant to alternate swimming sites would be approximately $1300 - $1500.
*****The following is a synopsis on the cost effectiveness of operations at the Carver Pool. Since attendance records were not kept, attendance averages were derived through analysis of revenues received and meetings with pool management staff for the summers of 2007 & 2008.Based on the following data the estimated cost to operate Carver Pool on a per participant basis, (not including full-time salaries which total $31,564) has ranged from $27 to over $60 per participant.
Estimated # of Participants
Average cost per participant
Here is a sampling of the arguments presented by some of my fellow commissioners at the May 12 budget work session with respect to the Carver Pool (as presented in the draft work session paraphrased minutes):
"Mayor Pro Tem Hubbard stated that she has received calls on the Carver Pool and asked how much would be saved by closing it. Mr. Lott explained that closing the pool will save $95,000. Mayor Pro Tem Hubbard stated that even though it is not in her ward, she supports keeping it in the budget. She expressed concerns about recreation especially charging membership fees and asked if it has been determined how much will be generated as a result of the membership. Darryl Smith, Asst. Rec. Director, stated that over $100,000 would be generated. Mayor Pro Tem Hubbard asked how the $10.00 charge was determined. Ms. Davis stated that the cost will be for the cards. Mayor Pro Tem Hubbard asked if consideration was given as to how the public can afford it and if usage will increase/decrease. Ms. Davis stated that the safety issue was looked at, i.e., keeping up with the students and their safety and security. She explained that during the summer, kids walk in and sign themselves in – they do not have adult supervision. Mayor Pro Tem Hubbard said this was also a concern to her; however, the health issue is of far greater concern. Mayor Adams mentioned the financial burden on a family of five wanting to enjoy the activities and taking into consideration our area being the 2nd poorest district in Georgia. He mentioned providing free recreation for kids in the summer, as they will turn to other undesirable activities. He asked if there is a system in place for those not able to afford the membership. Mr. Lott asked if this was plugged into the budget. Ms. Davis said it is in the revenue side. Mayor Pro Tem Hubbard asked how this will be eased in and if thought was given on phasing in to notify the public about the cost. Ms. Davis stated that the numbers are based on January 1 and they will not implement until January 1, which will give them time to notify the public."
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
The primary purpose of this blog is to explain in greater detail my current position on various issues as the City Commissioner serving Ward 5 in Albany, Georgia. If you are curious where I stand on an issue or you want to understand why I voted a certain way, come here.
The secondary purpose of this blog is to improve my service to the citizens of Albany by obtaining your input. This cannot be a primary purpose because, let's face it, only a very small percentage of my constituents will ever see this blog. Who really has the time? I cannot base my political decisions SOLELY on the postings of the few folks who make their way here. This is a learning tool -- for you AND me.
Also, there is no way to limit comments on this blog to merely Ward 5 constituents. The entire world can see this. Anyone can leave a comment here...a curious kid in Iowa, a grad student in Berlin, or the most despicable person you have ever met in your life. Thus, as the site moderator, I will review comments before posting, and edit out inappropriate material.
My initial rule of thumb is that content needs to be acceptable for publication in The Albany Herald (excluding some of the adult ads in the sports section). My 8 year old reads the Herald sports section every day. Content here needs to be just as safe. I don't care if it puts him to sleep. I just don't want him exposed to any more nastiness and hatred than he already gets reading about professional athletes. The content of your comments should take into consideration that he might read it over my shoulder and that my dear mother may surf here from time to time.
I pledge to do my best to post comments constituting a fair balance of pros, cons, questions, and concerns.
Since I am new to blogging, I am going to need my wife’s help. She’s more familiar with Blogspot, so I am going to begin blogging here. I may eventually wind up moving this site to http://www.boblangstaff.wordpress.com/, but I will let you know if I do and all postings will be transferred over. Thanks for stopping by.