The article titled “Vote NO Committee Responds to Opinion Article” deserves response because there are statements in it that are misleading or just plain wrong...
The article titled “Vote NO Committee Responds to Opinion Article” deserves response because there are statements in it that are misleading or just plain wrong.
The claim is that the “Vote No Committee” (committee) is not a Mayor Ford Gravitt Committee. However, the mayor initiated the committee, recruited committee members and instructed his city council to recruit committee members. The readers can look at these facts and use their own judgment as to whether or not this is a Mayor Ford Gravitt committee.
The article states: “as was inaccurately pointed out, the committee has not made an issue of the SPLOST split at any time.” That is just not true. The committee website had a statement on it last week that said: “the proposed split of the money with the City of Cumming is unjust. While the city generates over 20% of the revenue, the county wants to cut their share of funds to 4.29%.” That committee website statement fails to recognize that that city residents pay only 4% of the SPLOST paid by all county residents. And, I think because the author is a member of the committee we might also doubt his article statement: “At this time, I am not involved with the disagreement regarding division of SPLOST money so I will not address those comments at this time.”
The article states: “Taxes will go up if we approve SPLOST VI and its related $160 million bond if we cannot go back to the table and include other projects that are badly needed.” That is misleading statement statement. Property taxes will go up and/or necessary county projects will not be done if SPLOST VI is voted down.
The article states: “We need to find a way to include a jail and courthouse in SPLOST funding.” This is like trying to put ten pounds of sugar in a five pount bag. The county has many more needs than a 1% SPLOST can pay for. The county’s Capital Needs Review (on the web at http://www.forsythco.com/, click on SPLOST VI, then click on Capital Needs Review) last year identified $697.5 million dollars of Forsyth County capital needs. The most optimistic forcast for SPLOST VI revenue is $275 million. Therefore the county had to prioritize and include only the projects in SPLOST VI that most deserved to be there.
The article states: “Defeating the renewal of SPLOST VI for 12 months will not create an unbearable burden. Sometimes we have to face small burdens”. Delaying SPLOST VI for one year will reduce the county’s revenue by $30+ million. That is not a small burden, and there is no legitimate reason for a delay.
The article says: “SPLOST VI was not created to respect the citizens”. This is a bogus assertion. The county board of commissioners produced a “Capital Needs Review” last year from which a citizens committee helped the board of commissioners prioritize the projects to be included in SPLOST VI. That is a thoughtfully and respectully produced list of SPLOST VI projects.
The article states: “Regarding SPLOST 5 projects, I too want everyone to get the list from the county website.” The committee continues to assert that SPLOST V was mismanaged by the board of ommissioners. I just don’t agree. I think the board of commissioners has done a decent job of managing SPLOST V projects. Status of the SPLOST V projects is on the county website at http://www.forsythco.com/, click on SPLOST VI, then click on SPLOST V Update.
A county commissioner explained that most, but not all SPLOST V projects are completed or will be completed soon. He said: “the county did not receive $.75 on the dollar for every dollar of road costs as we were promised in 2003 - only $.15 on the dollar. Plus, construction costs ballooned in the past 5 years including right-of-way costs. Still, we have completed 70% of all road projects with the $.60 per dollar state deficit, and an 11% expected reduction in SPLOST revenues. Add to that, we have another 10% of planned projects either under construction today, or expected to have the state contracts let in February of 2008. We have completed all but three parks and rec projects, but two of those are the city's responsibility, not ours. We have completed all but two of our public safety projects, and have acquired land for one (Fire Station 7), and hope to have land for the other (Fire Station 6) shortly. Senior Center expansion is completed. Cumming Library expansion is completed. Hampton Library is ready to be built.”
The article states: “I propose we empower a citizens committee to be deeply involved with recreating SPLOST VI and that the committee remains in place to monitor SPLOST money management and monitor projects”. I think this is a bad idea.
We already elect a citizens committee called the board of commissioners. Who would appoint the suggested citizens committee? Special interest groups? City politicians? Another county wide election to elect a “super board of commissioners”? We elect our commissioners on a countywide basis and if a majority of citizens do not like a commissioner’s performance they can vote the commissioner out of office.
As you can see, there are a lot of things incorrect or misleading in the referenced article. It is important that we not let the demagoguery of the committee influence our vote.
A YES vote for SPLOST VI is best for Forsyth County Citizens.
