Johnny, Saxby, y Inmigración

My understanding is that passage of the Senate’s version of immigration “reform,” S. 1619, will be a three-stage process. The first, yesterday’s cloture vote, passed by a margin of 64-35. That vote limited debate to the amendments already submitted (a.k.a. the “clay pigeon”), closing the bill to additional amendments. The second part will be another cloture vote tomorrow that would send the bill to the Senate floor for an up-or-down vote. The third part would be the up-or-down vote on the bill itself. Part two is the most important; if the bill gets the 60 votes needed for cloture, it is all but certain to pass the Senate by a simple majority vote. Of course, then the Senate version must be reconciled with whatever bill emerges from the House of Representatives

Today, the “clay pigeon” has been broken into its constituent amendments for the consideration of each in turn. Both of Georgia’s senators has an amendment to be taken up, Johnny Isakson’s about Home Depot day labor shelter preemption (S.A.1282) and Saxby Chambliss’ about Social Security Trust Fund “totalization” (S.A. 1318 – not that the Trust Fund actually exists in any meaningful sense).

Back in May, both Isakson and Chambliss addressed the Georgia Republican Party convention at the Gwinnett Center, and heard loud and clear that the party faithful were none too happy with the Senate bill as it then stood. A couple of weeks later they moved back toward the GOP base somewhat by modifying their support for immigration “reform” and sending a joint letter to President Bush urging a supplemental spending bill to fund beefed-up border security as a part of any consideration of the immigration issue. Both voted against yesterday’s cloture.

And on another subject, the FairTax town hall meeting scheduled for Monday, 09 July, at the Classic Center has been canceled.

Sphere: Related Content

My Take On The 10th

So, the powers that be over at One Press Place endorsed Paul Broun, pretty much saying that while the good doctor may be an SOB, at least he is our SOB.

I find the charge Broun was somehow opportunistic in his campaign curious, given the fact that Charlie Norwood’s deteriorating health was well known. Broun certainly was not the only candidate to lay the groundwork for a campaign before Norwood’s death – he was just honest about it. Even the editors commented on what a rare opportunity an open seat is.

I think that Broun will give Whitehead a run for his money. In the Augusta area, on the eastern end of the district, Bill Jackson won the race for Whitehead’s former seat in the State Senate without the need for a runoff, so turnout may be down there. On the western end of the district, some Democrats in Clarke County may cast ballots for Broun, if only for the purpose of voting against Jim “no show” Whitehead. And, regardless of what is going on with the Oconee County GOP, Broun should do well there.

If the local blogosphere is any indication, many Democrats will simply stay at home, rather than choose the lesser of two evils (and there is no clear consensus as to which candidate they think that may be). FWIW, it appears that the folks over at Flagpole, the house organ for “progressive” politics in Athens, are sitting the runoff out entirely, making no mention of it or either candidate in the current issue.

Sphere: Related Content

Impertinent Observations

This letter to the editor concerning the local stormwater utility fee prompts a couple of musings on my part.

The first is that those who live outside the old city limits have been rooked since city-county unification. As I noted on my former campaign web site: “A decade and a half after the fact, the explicit promises of city-county government unification remain conspicuously unfulfilled for residents in the peripheral areas of the county.” See sections 8-115 and 9-103 of the Charter. For about the first decade or so after unification, residents of that area were treated with what amounted to benign neglect. Over the past few years, however, rural residents have been systematically deprived of their property rights, while at the same time being subjected to oppressive ordinances and spiraling taxes and fees. The stormwater utility charge is merely a case in point. Thousands of residents are neither connected to the county’s sanitary sewer lines nor located anywhere near a stormwater drain, but pay the fee nonetheless.

A second is that once government expands into a given area (regulations, subsidies, taxes, fees, etc.) it is there forever, regardless of how good or how poor its performance. Unification will never be undone. FWIW, I supported unification. I thought that having overlapping, though separate, city and county bureaucracies in a geographic area as small as Clarke County was insane. Unfortunately, unification has not worked out as advertised.

Sphere: Related Content

Commission Voting Sessions (continued)

The Planning Commission voted unanimously against requiring those citizens who want to comment on zoning items to register before Commission voting sessions (see agenda items 21 & 22, the file is a large .pdf, so it may take a while to load).

Since this change in procedure involves alteration to the county’s zoning ordinances, the Planning Commission must make a recommendation to the Commission, which it has. Of course, the former is an advisory body that the latter is free to ignore, which it doubtlessly will in this case.

Sphere: Related Content

The Morning After

At present, with 96% of the vote counted, it appears that Whitehead will face Broun in a runoff.

The results speak for themselves. A bit of quick addition reveals that the three Democratic candidates in the race accounted for a combined 28.3% of the vote. Contrast that with the 32.6% Terry Holley garnered last November.

As I scan down the results, it appears that Whitehead polled the most votes in 16 counties, finished second in 3 counties, and third in 2 counties (Athens-Clarke, predictably, and Broun’s home county of Oconee).

Broun took the most votes in 4 counties, finishing second in 8 counties, third in 7 counties, and fourth in 2 counties (including Lincoln, from which Marlow hails).

Of course, James Marlow prevailed only in self-consciously “progressive” Athens-Clarke County, finished second in 9 counties, third in 9 counties and fourth in 2 counties (getting outpolled by Paschall in McDuffie and Freeman in Greene).

The striking thing is not that Whitehead did so well, after all he was the establishment choice in a heavily Republican district, but rather that Marlow did so poorly. He, too, was the establishment choice, even if unofficially, and the GOP vote was split six ways. Take Athens-Clarke County out of the figures and Marlow only got 7032 votes spread over 20 counties, significantly fewer than Whitehead received in Columbia County alone.

And why are the guys at Political Insider saying that Marlow is from Athens?

Sphere: Related Content

Mea Culpa

Commissioner Jordan responded privately to my post about commission voting sessions (since edited), taking me to task for implying “irresponsible and counterproductive” behavior on his part. He was entirely correct to do so.

In this instance, I allowed rhetoric to get the better of me. Over the years, I have taken great pains not to personalize the policy and procedural issues on which I comment. I pride myself on presenting rational arguments and being able to document the points that I make. I stand by my insistence that the consent agenda actually imply consent, but freely concede that the argument could (and should) have been better made without dragging personalities into it.

Commissioner Jordan and I agree on some issues and disagree on others. However, I have no doubts as to his abilities or his commitment to serving the community. He has my apologies.

Sphere: Related Content

Ben Epps Airport

I find the tussling between the Unified Government and the Clarke County Airport Authority interesting, though wholly unnecessary, because the issue of control of Ben Epps Airport should have been settled long ago.

In March 1988, prior to city-county unification, the General Assembly created the Clarke County Airport Authority through Act 1132 (which originated as Senate Bill 245, see Georgia Laws 1988, pages 4906-4922). This local law was incorporated verbatim as Part II Chapter 4 of the Unified Government’s Charter.

For whatever reason, no progress has been made on turning control of the airport over to the Authority since then. The Authority passed a formal resolution requesting the Unified Government transfer control of the airport to it in 2000. In 2002, the Authority reaffirmed the resolution and submitted a proposed management agreement to the Unified Government that would transfer control of the airport to the Authority. To date, no action has been taken on either.

As Section 23 of the local law creating the Authority and its incorporation into the Charter plainly imply, the intent was to transfer control of Ben Epps Airport to the Authority. In the almost two decades since the Authority was created, why has that not happened?

And yes, I have copies of the relavent documents.

Sphere: Related Content

Your Tax Dollars at Work

Readers will immediately notice that I have omitted names and many specifics from this post. Though the resulting text may read awkwardly, my intent is not to embarrass anyone, but rather to critique the competence (and in my opinion the arrogance) of the Unified Government, not of individuals. Nor I am interested in needlessly antagonizing county officials or the judiciary. However, property owners and taxpayers need to be aware of this situation. Of course, I suspect that members of the local legal community are well aware of this case (and the matter is public record in any event).

A particular property in our fair community was assessed at the fair market value of $190,236 in 2005. The next year, that assessment rose to a supposed fair market value of $361,583, an increase of 90%. Needless to say, the owner felt such a reassessment to be excessive. Upon discussion between the owner and the Tax Assessor’s office, the latter reduced the 2006 assessment to $298,406, an increase of a mere 57%. The owner found the revised assessment excessive as well and appealed to the Board of Equalization. That body heard the owner’s appeal, ruling in favor of the Board of Assessors. Still not satisfied, the owner appealed that decision to Superior Court.

Of the three cases originally scheduled for the week the owner’s appeal was to be tried, one settled and another was postponed, thus leaving the owner’s as the only case on the docket. Problems arose when the judge, owner, owner’s counsel, and 95 prospective jurors were in place, only to find the Board of Assessors represented by . . . an empty chair.

For whatever reason, the County Attorney’s office farmed the case out to “additional” counsel. The Entry of Appearance filed by that attorney indicated that he/she was serving as additional counsel to the County Attorney’s office. According to testimony given by the County Attorney’s office, it was under the impression that the “additional” counsel was, in fact, to be the sole counsel representing the Board.

Regardless, no one showed up in court to present the Board's case, even though the calendar indicating the trial date had been provided to the County Attorney’s office two months beforehand and through it to the “additional” counsel. Thus, when the trial date arrived, the Board’s counsel had neither prepared a case nor subpoenaed any witnesses. On the other hand, the owner’s counsel was ready to proceed, having prepared evidence and subpoenaed witnesses, some of whom were experts retained at the owner’s expense. Over the strong objections of the owner’s counsel, the judge granted a continuance.

A mere three days later, the judge issued a Consent Judgment agreed to by both sides, with the Board being represented by what appears to have been a second “additional” counsel, as again opposed to the County Attorney’s office. The Consent Judgment did three things:

1) Set the fair market value of the property at $190,236 for tax digest year 2006 and ordered a refund of overpayment, plus interest, for that year’s property taxes (i.e. the same assessment as for 2005)

2) Set the fair market value of the property at the same $190,236 for tax digest years 2007 and 2008 (assuming no improvements to the property)

3) Ordered the payment of $6300 for the fees and costs incurred by the owner to bring the case to trial

Notably, this amount does not include the $2375 paid to the 95 prospective jurors for their service. Neither does it include the refund and interest on 2006 property taxes mentioned above, nor does it include the potential property tax revenue lost to the county resulting from a freeze of the assessments for 2007 and 2008, which doubtlessly amount to a far greater sum.

From what I can gather, the owner’s counsel was well prepared to argue the appeal on its merits. On one hand, those preparations may not have mattered; since the county bungled the case so badly that it may have immediately agreed to the Consent Judgment without any evidence being presented in open court so as to be done with the matter. On the other hand, the county may have realized that is was destined to lose the case based on the strength of the owner’s evidence and simply thrown in the towel. Either way, the county’s taxpayers, save one, are on the financial hook for this debacle.

And yes, I have copies of the relevant documents (Civil Jury Trial Calendar, defendant counsel’s Entry of Appearance, Transcript of Proceedings, and Consent Judgment).

Sphere: Related Content

Privatization Works

As taxes, fees, and spending spiral ever upward in Athens-Clarke County, note that it does not have to be this way. See this commentary in the Tampa Tribune concerning the experience of the new municipality of Sandy Springs. They obviously know something that we do not.

Sphere: Related Content

FairTax

A “regional town hall” meeting to discuss the FairTax is scheduled for 7:00 p.m. on Monday, 09 July, at the Classic Center. Congressman John Linder will be in attendance, as will “other special guests to be announced.” The meeting is free and open to the public. Additional information will be forthcoming as the program is finalized.

Sphere: Related Content