Sole Commissioner
I did some research on the idea of sole commissioner. Did you know that at present, there are only eleven (11) other counties in the entire state of Georgia (total of 159 counties) that have sole commissioners? Here they are:
- Union
- Murray
- Pulaski
- Walker
- Pickens
- Haralson
- Chatooga
- Floyd
- Bartow
- Towns
- Bleckley
And, I've been told, but not been able to confirm yet, that there are no other states that have sole commissioners. Essentially, the masses have spoken:
We want democratic government!
We want consensus-driven, representative government!
We don't want Sole Dictatorships!
How can we seriously consider a sole commissioner? This coming especially at a time when we've gone to war for the express purpose of spreading democracy throughout the world by eliminating a dictator.
The contradictions in the conservative agenda are astounding. But, that's another post all by itself.
Tackling New Development
You know... as I'm researching impact fees, I started thinking about some frequent comments I've heard at public meetings. Many people in Catoosa County feel very strongly that they basically don't want more growth... that they would prefer to just keep what they've got now. And, there's nothing at all wrong with this concept.
The difficulty we face, however, is in keeping what we have, which implies keeping others (outsiders... new home buyers... new businesses, etc.) from getting their hands in our cookie jar.
I wonder if the community (and its leadership) would have the political hutzpah to put in place a set of policies, fees, regulations, zoning guidelines, etc., all designed to prevent new growth. This would also require a freeze on expansion of county services -- since we wouldn't need any additional services (with no net growth).
Basically the concept is this: We like what we have. We don't need or want any more. There's no room in our boat for others, though.
The County and Cities could dictate that "No new houses will be built. No new business space will be built. No new development unless an equivalent unit is removed from the county inventory."
Eventually, supply and demand would kick in... as the supply of existing housing and/or business space dwindles (fills up, is consumed), the prices would go up. Now, this assumes that outsiders still want to come to Catoosa County. If so, they'd be willing to pay more for the same existing houses (or business spaces).
It's an interesting scenario to ponder...
Impact Fees
Questions are being raised regarding negative consequences IMPACT FEES could have on economic development -- recruitment and retention. The County's Consultant says no (or at least said no at a public worksession of the County Commission).
I'm researching this issue... but what I've seen thus far concerns me to the extent that the impact fee structure could significantly impact the costs of new development. This at a time when other counties in the region (Murray, Gordon, etc.) are kicking our Economic Development butt because they appear to offer more competitive and attractive amenities and costs to developers.
Now, when I say "developers," I'm referring to businesses... not residential developers. We frequently take issue with the housing developers because they are building moderately priced homes which attracts more and more families (and their children) to move to Catoosa County, while mostly working in another county (or state). We all know the speech about how houses cost the county money, while businesses generate revenues.
But, insofar as development is concerned, an impact fee on business expansion and/or new placement certainly would influence the businesses' decision. Simply put: if the costs of building or expanding is higher in one county versus another, that's a signficant factor impacting the decision to move forward or not.
As far as new development goes, Catoosa County is clearly competitive in the low-, to moderate priced housing market. Those developers see great opportunity here: there's demand; there's cheap land; there are few costs associated with developing the land; and the county provides high services to the home buyers. Where Catoosa County struggles in competitiveness is with businesses... and if the cost of bringing business to Catoosa County goes up, our relative competitiveness goes down.
The Commission will hold two public hearings in November and December to further explore this issue and receive public input.
I suggest any and all business owners review their near-term expansion plans and figure out what the impact fee would do to their business plan.
The Impact Fee system might just be a wolf in sheep's clothing.
No Child Left Behind...
I was watching
The Daily Show with John Stewart yesterday and he reported about Gov. Perdue's decision to close schools recently because of feared gas shortages. He showed an interview with Gov. Perdue responding to a (real) reporter's questions as to whether or not the decision was excessive or harsh. Gov. Perdue said no.
Stewart's punchline on the story was something like this:
"Well, I guess in Georgia, the program is known as
Every Child Left Behind."
(Hey, if we can't laugh at ourselves, then we're taking ourselves too seriously!)
Budget Woes... Redux
I read the recent article about the Catoosa County Commission's latest "special called meeting" to discuss budget issues. (
Click here for the article in the Catoosa County News.) Seems Commissioner Clark brought the Commission together to discuss some proposals that (may have been or) were already voted on at previous meetings. Three of the commissioners had decided to end the meeting before it turned into yet another grandstanding moment for Mr. Clark and his "no government, no taxes, no services" approach to governance. (Those are my words, btw, not his.)
Honestly, I'm tired of watching this community wallow in a pool of disfunction. If it's not Ft. Oglethorpe and Ringgold fighting over unincorporated areas of the County, then it's the County complaining about not having enough money yet refusing to do what's necessary to get more.
I'd love to see a county budget where the dollars are shown along with some information about which of the service areas are mandatory (e.g. required by either state or federal law) versus those that are discretionary (e.g. luxury items for the betterment of our quality of life). I think a lot of residents think that there are lots of areas where we spend money and it's our choice, when the reality is that the items are mandatory for one reason or another. The "No Child Left Behind" Federal mandate on the school system is one good example.
Send out a menu of items and let residents select a la carte what they want to have or not have in the county. I think if more people were faced with the actual decision of giving up certain county services in lieu of getting other services, the results might be interesting. I suspect that more people would say that they don't want to give up most of the services and would therefore agree that the services are worth paying for.
I don't know... we're just wrestling in quicksand, with no one gaining any advantage, while we all sink into the pit.
