 |
|
 |
|
|||
 |
|
|
|
|
|
SPLOST VI - What Just Happened?
Originally Published May 2, 2008, 5:20pm
(Updated May 2, 2008, 5:22pm)
Subsequent to a 7 hour bench trial on April 30th, visiting Judge Hugh R. Stone enjoined Forsyth County from collecting the "penny tax" that was to begin on July 1st as an extension of the current SPLOST V. This was as a result of arguments by the City of Cumming that the ballot referendum language was improper because, among other things, it failed to list all 8 projects that the city presented to the county and it just listed one, with a potential funding amount less than the required amount the city presented. Additionally, the Judge felt that even though the Board of Commissioners publicly adopted the suggested transportation projects at their work session January 8th, this was not sufficient time for the public to know what they were voting for on February 5th.
Unless overturned between now and July 1st by the Georgia Supreme Court, a somewhat unlikely event in such a compressed timeframe, the county will experience significant revenue shortfalls of between $2 million and $3 million per month. Furthermore, a new SPLOST referendum is not likely to be put before the voters until November of this year, and according to Georgia Law (OCGA 48-8-112 (a) for those of you so inclined), it may not take effect until as late as April 1, 2009. In addition, there will be no revenue pass through to the City of Cumming after July 1st.
This scenario puts the revenue loss at between $20 million and $25 million. But there is more bad news.
The SPLOST VI provided a mechanism for immediate funding of the Ronald Reagan Parkway extension which would provide enhanced access to the future Taubman project. And while it is not necessarily an impossibility to overcome in time for the projected opening of the Taubman project, it makes things that much more difficult on everyone.
Also, the potential project at Mary Alice Park is in jeopardy since the funding for the road improvement was also from SPLOST VI proceeds.
And those other road-widening and intersection improvements that we so desperately need in our county? A year further out, I suspect.
A couple of observations from the proceeding…
There was confusion on the bench about motions made by the Board at the Tuesday work sessions and the Thursday meetings. Our Board of Commissioners makes motions both at the Thursday public meetings and the Tuesday work sessions. These motions are certified by the Board Clerk after each meeting, and if the motion was made during a work session, it is re-certified again at the larger Thursday Commission meeting. Regardless, the will of the Board is expressed when the motion was passed, and it is not ratification that takes place at the subsequent meeting, but merely re-certification. In determining the date of the motion to pass the resolution, the Judge engaged in close to an hour of discussion, asking the Board Clerk to explain to him the Commission process. Unfortunately the Judge ruled that the later date on the certification letter was the date that the will of the Board was stated. This appears faulty.
The jurist’s reasoning was that since the Board could change the motion between the work session and the regular meeting, the latter is when the motion was actually certified. What Judge Stone did not take into account was that any Board at any time can make a motion offsetting or cancelling previous business. This mattered somewhat because the Judge later used the reduced timeframe in determining when the general projects were made public.
The county attorney attempted to show that SPLOST VI resolution language was identical to other counties’ as well as language in previous SPLOST resolutions in Forsyth County. The judge would not allow previous SPLOST language in as testimony, ruling that there was no relevancy.
Denying evidence and testimony surrounding previous SPLOST action appears inconsistent with the same judge at the same trial allowing other case law to be cited, regardless of the relevancy finding. While it is true that only case law affirmed at the appellate level can be cited, I think it was unfair to disregard the fact that close to identical resolution language was presented to the voters in Forsyth County in previous SPLOSTs and that no legal challenge was raised ever to previous SPLOSTs.
Finally, the will of the voters has been spontaneously reversed by the bench; apparently the Judge had a different regard for the will of the majority of the voters of every precinct in our county that voted for SPLOST VI. And the enormous impact of this ruling is in disproportion to the alleged technical errors of the county.
The Board of Commissioners and legal counsel are working to determine what the best action would be in the immediate future. For now, the rest of us just have to hope the stars and planets line up just right and that a higher court will overturn all aspects of this unfortunate litigation.
Want More info? Submit Request
More from Politics
Would you like information on how to build a profitable online business like this one? Visit www.promoxie.com
Comments
13 comment(s) on this page. Add your own comment below.
I am curious about your [Charles Smith] opinion is over the comments by Vice-Chair Commissioner Richard’s in a related thread. Mr. Richard has said the county would not be appealing on the side of “Strategic thinking”. He also states very clearly that he likes this ruling very much. If I may quote him (I hope he doesn’t threaten to sue me)….”After further review, I like the ruling exactly as it stands.” He also clearly and very much to the point says…”Yeah, I like this ruling just fine today, thank you”. He boasts very much that the county won on several very important points. He really has me confused about this deal.
Chris, I don't know what the BoC will do or what course they will pursue in this matter. I've not seen Commissioner Richard's comment, but he should certainly be in a position to know if indeed the BoC has taken action or made any decisions one way or the other. This is a confusing matter for many observers, me included and I was there for the entire trial. It is my understanding that Judge Stone may have interpreted parts of OCGA 48-8 in a manner that makes it easier for all Georgia counties to conduct a SPLOST referendum and control the proceeds. If the ruling is unchallenged perhaps Forsyth can proceed in a manner that would suit its purposes.
It seems as though Mr. Smith supports good ol' Dave. Dave has spouted off all week from one side to the other, from we are gonna take this to the highest court in the land (lol) to the new strategic thinking.
I think Mr. Smith probably knows that Dave is dangerous to this county and should not be re-elected. Just an opinion though as nobody really knows what anyone else is thinking.
I just wish that the politics as usual would stop and for once and for all those that teeter on the fence would just own up to the fact that David is loco and should not be in office.
Marc,
If we had politics as usual, your boy Bell would be kissing up to Ford's butt and giving away the candy store; which has been the politics as usual for 37 years.
Politics as usual would have been that the commission caved in to Ford's demands and given him $33 million instead of the $11 million he got. Politics as usual would have kept over 25 intersections from being improved over the next 5 years. The judge acknowledged that the city was in no mood to negotiate. He also acknowledged that the county did, in fact, offer the city 10% instead of 15%, and that the city turned us down flat. In fact, if it wasn't for the collossal blunder of Linda Ledbetter, who voted AGAINST the motion to give the city 8%, the city might have had a reason to accept the offer.
What you and Patrick Bell can't understand is that you can't negotiate with another party who is UNWILLING to negotiate, and that the city is the only governmental body in this county that has repeated sued or threatened to sue the other one.
Don't you just hate it when facts get in the way of a good argument?
David, do you mean facts like you stating that we are "this close" to sharing the water allocation permit with the City of Cumming in a way more favorable to the county?
It's a fact that you said it. It's also a fact that it's a lie.
And speaking of being up somebody's butt? How are you getting along the folks at SmartGrowth Forsyth County these days?
Charles,
In visiting your website, I was impressed with your credentials and even more impressed with your attitude which seems to be an attitude of tolerance for those who may disagree with you on certain issues. That attitude seems to be in very short supply in Dist. 4.
But before I give you my vote and contact you about possibly volunteering to work on your behalf, I'd like to ask you a question.
Since we elect our commissioners county wide and since -- as an informed citizen of this county -- you will presumably be voting for a commissioner in District 4, I'd llike to know if you will be voting for David Richard or Patrick Bell?
I recognize there is a right to privacy where voting is concerned. However, you are asking citizens to give you one of their most precious possesions, their vote. Therefore, I believe we have a right to know where you stand on this issue.
Elected officials and candidates for elected office like to pontificate about "transparency" in government. OK let's have a little transparency. Who do you support in District 4?
Thanks and I look forward to your answer.
Debra?
Please provide any proof that what I said is a lie.
And we're not talking about your boy Bell's phantom discussions with "county and city leaders", we're talking facts, Debra.
And shame on you for asking someone how he or she would vote. You are a further disgrace to Mr. Bell's already disgraceful campaign, especially since you claim to represent him. You bandy about the "right" to know this and that. You know NOTHING about rights. You have NO RIGHT to know how someone is going to vote.
Bell supporters on this site continue to disgust people with their lies and their spouting off on non-existent "rights".
Let's start at the beginning and go real slow for the benefit of David Richard.
First, the proof of your lie has already been posted on cumminghome.com for all to see and hear. I have no time to waste on a commissioner who is too dimwitted to understand that.
You're like the husband who, when caught cheating on his wife, asks "Who are you going to believe me or your own eyes?"
Second, please provide proof of me saying I have the "right" to know how Mr. Smith will vote. I merely stated that I believe he will make a good commissioner and that I am willing to donate and also to do some volunteer work on his campaign. But before I make a commitment, I want to know if he plans to support the most dishonest, most divisive, most two-faced, most hypocritical and most disliked commissioner in Forsyth County history. (That's you, David)!
Not everyone keeps his ballot secret. Your homeboys Teddy Kennedy and John Kerry support Obama. You clearly stated your support for Jim Harrell and Charles Laughinghouse two years ago. So, why should Charles be afraid to let us know who he supports in District 4 this year?
What's the matter, David, afraid he'll have to distance himself from you to be a viable candidate?
Mr. Smith?
Clearly, this needs no response. Readers can plainly see that debra is missing a few cells upstairs as her own words speak for themselves.
Dave, you know it was a lie so quit yapping about proving it. You already proved it when you aswered the post and said that the county has applied and is waiting for an answer. That in itself says that you did not know but you opened up that mouth of yours to kiss up to the Smart Growth folks as you know you cannot (and did not) carry your own district and need the votes from the south. So you will resort to anything, no matter how much of a lie, to try and get those votes. Shameful!
You are very scared of Mr. Bell and you know it. Your webpage's list of lies is the silliest bunch on nonsense. I know, you want to be right so bad but just can't be. So you lie about someone else being a liar. You are very dishonest and one sided. You do not care about this county but only yourself.
And again, your comments about the Boy Scouts are awful. You should be tarred and feathered for trying to make an organization as fine as the scouts look bad to try and elevate your own pitiful, little self.
Oh yeah, the above is only my opinion you know.
I would still like to know who Mr. Smith supports for Dist. 4 Commissioner.
David Richard has been in office 3 1/2 years so he can't say he doesn't know how pathetic Richard's performance has been. That would be like Obama spending 20 years in Rev. Wright's church and saying he didn't know about his racial bias and anti-American sentiment.
Mr. Smith?
Well, I guess the non-answer is his answer. Nobody who supports David Richard would admit it publicly.
All:
My intent in writing to the cumminghome site was to pass along my perspective of the SPLOST VI situation to readers who concern themselves with this issue that is important to all of us. I did that as well as I could and as well as I understood at the time. Any failings of insight or errors are mine and I’ll take full responsibility for them. Also, I tried not to imply any action that either the city or county governing authority might take, since I’m not privy to their thinking.
Like many of you I am concerned over the ongoing and disconcerting situation we find ourselves in and I look forward to the day when I can perhaps contribute to the governance and operation of our county, of which the City of Cumming is an important part.
While I certainly welcome support if my thoughts and ideas resonate with you, I do not ask for it based upon my political allegiance or lack thereof. As a first time candidate in a county-wide election, I am focused primarily upon my own race; the other candidates have their own positions and history to deal with and voters should assess those things.
Thank you very much for your interest.
Charlie
Add a Comment
Please be civil.