The Gwinnett Commission has completely ignored you!

EDIT (2 March 10): I stated below that the audience could not address the commission during the meeting.  I am watching the meeting right now and the audience does have the opportunity to address the board.  The first two speakers are grilling the commissioners - way to go!

Just when you thought it was safe to take your garbage to the curb, there stands the Gwinnett County Commission waiting at the end of your driveway to "help" you take out your garbage.  That's right - socialized garbage is back. Tomorrow, the board will consider a new version of the ordinance that looks almost identical to the old version.  What does that tell us?  The Gwinnett County Commission did not listen to a word that was said to them - loudly and clearly - at the various meetings and hearings in the last 15 months.  They have effectively brushed you aside and will do exactly what they intended to do all along - micromanage your life!

The most substantial difference between the previous ordinance and the current iteration is of little real importance to the average citizen: Gwinnett Clean and Beautiful will not be administering the program.  Whew!  That makes me feel so much better knowing that someone else will deny my economic freedom and tell me I am not capable of handing my own affairs.  At the end of the day, the county will still mandate that you must have garbage service.  The county will still tell you what company you must have as your garbage hauler.  They will still bill you for the service as part of your tax bill.  The only substantive item that appears to be different is that recycling is not mandatory.  Exactly how is this different than the socialistic program the board attempted to foist upon us last year?  In a nutshell- IT'S NOT!

Our commissioners are thumbing their noses at us.  They are saying we listened and we ignored virtually everything you told us.  Why?  Because we are politcians and we know how to live your life better than you do!  And these are supposed to be five REPUBLICANS, one of whom may want to go to Washington as a Congressman!

Unfortunately, this will ordinance will pass because this commission is not accountable to you.  Two members of the board, District 2 Commissioner Bert Nasuti and District 4 Commissioner Kevin Kenerly, are not running for reelection.  They can vote for the ordinance and not have to worry about facing the music from the voters.  That means there only needs to be one other vote to pass socialized garbage.  If Commission Chairman Charles Bannister has already decided not to seek a third term in 2012, he would be just as unaccountable as Nasuti and Kenerly.  I suspect he will not run again, but only he knows for sure.  The other likely source for the third vote is Mike Beaudreau.  Whether he runs for Congress or not, Beaudreau will likely run for a higher office in 2012 given that his interest in Congressman John Linder's congressional seat confirms my suspicions that Beaudreau is aiming politically higher than the county commission.  Granted, running for any office from within Gwinnett would force him to face voters in some way should he vote for socialized garbage. However, if his next race is for a different office, that would provide some insulation from voter angst over socialized garbage.  That leaves Shirley Lasseter who likely will run for relection in 2012.  With a third vote coming from Bannister or Beaudreau, Lasseter would be afforded political cover by being able to vote against the ordinance knowing that it will still pass.  (To be fair to Lasseter, the original socialized garbage ordinance was passed before she joined the Commission.  Thus, she may truly be opposed to the measure.)

The board will vote on this unAmerican ordinance tomorrow.  Conveniently, these sessions do not allow the public to address the commission, so you will not have the opportunity to remind the board that their support of socialized garbage is unacceptable.  Ironically, that is very appropriate given that they chose to ignore you when you did have the opportunity to speak.  Who needs Democrats when you have Republicans like this bunch?

Lynette Howard to run for District 2 seat

It's 2010 and that means I am hoping to get things back on track at the Gwinnett Buzz!  This year promises to have quite a bit happening in Gwinnett County, not the least of which is an election in which two Gwinnett County Commission seats are up for grabs.  Fittingly, my first post of the new year is an update on who is going to be running!

For the District 2 commission seat being vacated by Bert Nasuti, Gwinnett planning commissioner Lynette Howard has entered the race.  Howard is the former president of the United Peachtree Corners Civic Association.  She will run as a Republican and will face Jose Perez in the primary.

Howard will host a meet-and-greet from 2-4 PM on January 23 at the Norcross Depot.  Her campaign website can be found at www.electlynette.com.

Empty fire stations but plenty of illegal aliens

The Gwinnett County budget crunch continues to be felt in real and visible ways.  Last week, we learned that the Gwinnett County Public Library would implement to reduced hours.  This week we learn that three fire stations and a library currently under construction will likely sit idle when completed.

Three fire stations and a state-of-the-art library — representing altogether more than $21 million in construction costs — are expected to be completed this year. And the county has no money to staff them.

Furthermore, Gwinnett County parks cannot even afford to clean restrooms on the weekends anymore!  If this were not enough, the Gwinnett County Sheriff's Department may have to delay Gwinnett's participation in the 287(g) that will identify and remove illegal aliens from the Gwinnett County jail.  Why?  Because the county does have the funds to staff either the program or seven empty units in the jail needed to keep inmates from sleeping on the floor, a requirement for participation in the program.

However, dear Buzz reader, if this budget crunch concerns you, then you can take solace by spending a night at our very own government-funded minor-league baseball stadium.  Every night you pass Gwinnett Taxpayers' Stadium when the Government-funded Gwinnett Braves are playing at home, you should be reminded of what an absolute monument of taxpayer abuse and bumbling government leadership that stadium is.  Lillian Webb must be breathing a sigh of relief that this current bunch of commissioners has surpassed her era as the worst elected officials in the history of Gwinnett County.  I bet the stadium is fully staffed and gets its toilets cleaned every day it is used!

Take heart, though!  We are only about a year away from the Republican primaries for Bert Nasuti's and Kevin Kenerly's commission seats, meaning we are only about a year away from beginning to purge our commission of the minor-league leadership that thought a minor-league baseball team was an appropriate use of your hard-earned tax dollars.  Don't forget the horrendous state in which we find Gwinnett County's finances over the next year.  Turn that frustration into determination to elect true conservatives who will show more respect for the citizens of this county!

Beaudreau garbage panel - a committee of "yes men?"

Earlier this month, Commissioner Mike Beaudreau's garbage committee held it's final hearing.  The panel hopes to present its findings to the Gwinnett County Commission this week.  Unfortunately, despite loud voices against major tenets of socialized garbage, reports are suggesting that the committee will, for all intents and purposes, sign off on the heinous ordinance that so many Gwinnett residents have made clear that they do not support.

Socialized Garbage Tenet 1 - Mandatory pickup - The committee is reportedly in agreement on mandatory pickup at residences.  They may throw a bone to residents in the form of an opt-out clause for those with access to other disposal options (e.g., a small business owner who has a dumpster at the business).  I do not have a major problem with this if there is a legitimate dumping problem.  I still feel, however, that the county could better use resources wasted on its "Quality of Life" task force to track down those who are dumping illegally.  According to committee member Mack Perry, "...the illegal dumping isn't coming from people who have trash service."  If the county knows this, they can go after those who are guilty and not punish all residents with a government mandate.  

Socialized Garbage Tenet 2 - No Choice in Garbage Hauler - Residents were very clear that they wanted choice in selecting their garbage hauler.  This is one of the most egregious aspects of the ordinance.  However, despite there being little doubt about the feeling of the citizens, the committee, according to the Gwinnett Views blog, is considering an assignment of providers to regions, thus resulting in "one hauler, one neighborhood."  What part of choice does the committee not understand?  We do not want Mike Beaudreau and the rest of the commission to select our garbage hauler!  Reducing neighborhood truck traffic is a red herring used to justify substitution of a government decision for your free choice.  Rather than listen to the residents and respect their strong support of economic freedom of choice, the committee may be set to sign off on a second aspect of socialized garbage.

Socialized Garbage Tenet 3 - Garbage bill included on property tax bill - Another unpopular component of socialized garbage was the inclusion of garbage collection charges on property tax bills.  Here again, the committee may be leaning toward recommending just such a payment mechanism.  Gwinnett Views opines:

The majority of the MBSCT believe the only way to make sure that all of us residents are toeing the line is to put the trash bill on our tax bill.

I am sure that officials will try to justify this requirement by arguing that it simplifies their bill collection responsibilities.  Sorry, but I am not here to serve the government, the government is here to serve the citizens.  Trading our freedom of choice to save government the burden of dealing with those who do not pay is not an acceptable trade.  

Three pillars of socialized garbage, three thumbs up from the Mike Beaudreau committee.  Very interesting given resident opposition and Mack Perry's comment on his blog:

As a member of the committee I think I should tell you that this is not just a committee of a bunch of “Yes Men and Women” who are giving lip service to the commissioners.

Really?  Not a committee of "Yes Men and Women?"  Could have fooled me.  

I could live with mandatory pickup and even billing on my tax statement.  What I cannot quietly accept is the commission telling me who I have to use for garbage service.  Had socialized gone through in January, I would have been assigned to Waste Pro and I saw enough from that company during recent months to know that I would almost certainly not do business with them voluntarily.  Mike Beaudreau and his fellow commissioners should not be able to tell me I must use them.  Much of Gwinnett apparently agrees with me, but the Beaudreau committee apparently did not pay attention to this.

One bit of good news is that the county may be about to agree to an extension of the current garbage system (also known as a competitive market) through the end of the year.  While we cannot be sure that a recrafted solid waste ordinance won't look substantially the same as socialized garbage, at least we can go nine more months without the Gwinnett County Commission sticking its nose in our affairs.  Another advantage may be the reticence of commissioners Bert Nasuti and Kevin Kenerly to back the unpopular aspects of socialized garbage on the eve of potential reelection bids in 2010.

Here comes a property tax increase

Think you pay enough of your hard earned money to Gwinnett County?  Well get ready to pony up more.  The Gwinnett County Commission has passed the 2009 budget and there is a gaping $62 million hole to plug.  To its credit, the board has already cut many expenses such as the Gwinnett Glows Fourth of July fireworks display and turning off the underpass lights at I-85 and Sugarloaf Parkway.  But the gap remains and with commissioners refusing to use the "rainy day fund," the only option to balance the budget is to raise your taxes.

Apparently, Tuesday's meeting was rather contentious with Commissioner Mike Beaudreau and Commission Chairman Charles Bannister verbally sparring.  Gwinnett Views reports that the video of the meeting is worth watching.  I have not done so yet, so I can only go by news reports.  Though I have been very critical of Beaudreau, the commissioner did claim that his alternate proposal would have balanced the budget without the need for a tax increase.  While I cannot speak to the accuracy of this claim, Beaudreau is to be commended for his fiscal conservatism with regards to the budget.  Of course Chairman Bannister had a valid point about the timing of Beaudreau's 11th-hour proposal being too late.  Who is right?  Who knows, but ultimately Beaudreau claimed that three capital project cut from his district were politically motivated.  Makes you want to go and check out that video for sure!

The main takeaway is that the budget as passed is still in search of $62 million and that is going to hit you right in your wallet.  Bob Griggs at TalkGwinnett.com has posted an in-depth budget analysis and concludes that an increase of 2.06 mills will be necessary.  This translates into $144 more in property tax for a $200,000 home.  To a degree, I can accept that an increase is necessary when county revenues are down due to a weak economy.  However, when there is wasteful government spending that results in taxpayers having to dip a little further into their pocketbooks to cover the excesses of politicians, a tax increase is a much more bitter pill to swallow.  

Bob lists several examples of expenditures that could have been eliminated from the budget and apparently were not.  While I do not agree that all of the items are pork - an efficiency study could have a positive return down the road and software licenses may be critical to a certaindepartment, for example, - when the county is spending over a million dollars on a "green" initiative and $300,000 on a tennis center, supporting our officials on this vote is difficult.  This fails to even mention the $31 million the commission wasted on a minor league baseball stadium last year.  The total pledged to the Gwinnett Braves stadium amounts to half of the 2009 budget deficit.  If those funds had not been spend on an unneeded minor league baseball team and were available to offset decreased county revenue, your tax increase would be only $72.  I wonder if Commissioner Bert Nasuti would like to justify that cost to his constituents today?

The commission sure is a stubborn bunch

The AJC has an excellent article chronicling the Gwinnett Braves stadium history over the last year.  The article does a good job of outlining why this deal was bad for Gwinnett County taxpayers: cost overruns, weakening county tax revenues due to the recession, and inability to sell the stadium naming rights in the current economic environment.  All this while the county was slashing its budget, cutting jobs, and "[postponing] adding 88 positions for public safety and the courts."

Despite an overwhelming case that, financially, this was a worse deal in retrospect than it was initially, the commission stubbornly clings to the position that the county should have undertaken the project.

“Our board was completely unanimous on baseball Jan. 15 of last year, and I think our board will be completely unanimous on baseball today,” said Commissioner Bert Nasuti, the project’s chief proponent.

Gwinnett Board of Commissioners Chairman Charles Bannister, Commissioner Kevin Kenerly and Nasuti said they would have voted for financing the stadium last year even if they had known what they know now about the economy and the county’s finances.

“I think we would have voted for it,” Bannister said. “It would have been much cleaner — perhaps prettier — publicwise if all the dollars had been in the accounting upfront.”

What incredible arrogance to say that, even had they known then what they know now, they would have still proceeded.  What we know now is that, if the stadium revenue projections remain down, the stadium threatens to place a greater burden on taxpayer wallets.

Nasuti believes that the stadium will boost "boost Gwinnett’s economy."  He also made a valid point about economic development.

“You don’t shut down economic development opportunities when times are bad,” Nasuti said. “That is when you look at economic development opportunities.”

Nasuti is absolutely correct that smart managers pursue opportunities in hard times.  However, let the private sector make that decision, not government.  We elect Republicans because we want limited government, lower taxes and a positive environment for business.  I do not call making sweetheart deals for a professional sports franchise to be an example of limited government even the deal improves the business environment.  Over the life of the contract, the Braves will pay an average annual rent to Gwinnett County of $365,000 per year.  On top of that, the team keeps half of the parking revenue, all ticket revenue except for  $1 per ticket($400,000 minimum to the county), and a share of the stadium naming rights income.  This for an organization that just signed pitcher Derek Lowe for $60 million over four years.

I know I will never find the perfect elected official with whom I will agree all the time.  However, over the last year, the Gwinnett commission has begun to develop quite a track record of poor management of county government.  Socialized garbage.  Gwinnett Braves stadium.  North Georgia retreat to figure out how to save money.  The hole they are digging is already pretty deep.  Fortunately for them, the next election is still nearly two years away.  They have time to turn things around, but to climb out of this hole, they need to stop digging and starting putting the Gwinnett residents and taxpayers first in what they do.

Commissioners get earful over socialized garbage

Tonight was not a good night to be a Gwinnett County commissioner.  During the open comment period at the end of tonight's monthly public hearing, a string of unhappy Gwinnett residents clearly voiced their opposition to socialized garbage to the commissioners.  Speakers addressed the elimination of economic choice, potential fines, mandatory recycling, incorporation of payment into tax bills and the fact that the new program would cost some people more money.  While a few were less incensed than others, the opposition to the plan was virtually unanimous.  If you did not attend the hearing or watch the coverage live, I would strongly encourage you to go and view the archived video of the meeting.  I lived Twittered the comment period and you can find my observations on my Twitter feed.

I was glad to see such a strong element of community involvement tonight.  While I strongly agreed with most of the comments, I could not help but feel it was too little too late.  I know I have said this, but I will say it again because I think this is the key lesson here.  People should have been this engaged while the ordinance was being considered. If they had regularly followed the work of their government, their anger tonight could have been instrumental in forcing the commissioners to address solid waste issues in a different manner.  I am not attempting to criticize any readers who just recently became aware of what the commission has done to them;  I simply hope this lesson will result in an uptick in interest in county government.

I would like to take a moment to reflect on District 2 Commissioner Bert Nasuti's comments after many citizens had their say.  While I have been critical of Nasuti on several recent issues (the baseball stadium and the retreat), I generally have found him to be thoughtful commissioner who does try to consider both sides of an issue.  He offered an overview of the history of the ordinance's adoption.  According to Nasuti, one of the impetuses for the garbage monopolies in districts across the county was complaints regarding the number of weekly trips made by garbage trucks in neighborhoods.  I have commented before that this is a trivial complaint.  There is not much more I can think to add to what I have previously said, but I would like to counter this argument with a simple illustration.  If eight different haulers serve my neighborhood, that is eight to sixteen trips per week (depending on whether there is as separate trip by a recycling truck).  Every day, a school bus serving each of the local high school, middle school and elementary school makes two trips to my neighborhood for a total of six trips per day.  By Wednesday afternoon, with 12  trips remaining, school buses have surpassed the number of weekly garbage truck trips.  We don't hear people complaining about the number of times a school bus lumbers through the neighborhood do we?  If this complaint was a key reason for Nasuti to support this ordinance, I would encourage him to think very hard about taking the necessary steps to reverse this unAmerican law.

Nasuti, however, did make some very valid observations about opposition to the ordinance.  He noted that he never heard an outcry until about six weeks ago.  This highlights the point I made previously about residents not being involved.  He also noted that, when it comes to returning constituent phone calls, those who leave voicemails ranting and raving as opposed to offer reasoned feedback will fall to the bottom of the list.  This hit close to home, because I have been guilty of my fair share of ranting and raving here on the Buzz.  I know not to expect a lot of response from my commissioner or any other official on the board.  However, getting personal attention is not the role I play.  Being a vocal critic attracts attention.  In doing so, my goal is to encourage others to get involved, hopefully in a manner that will positively encourage change from our elected officials.  When my criticism attracts attention from the real news media, the goal of awareness is forwarded.  On a good day, 150 people might wander into the Buzz.  However, vastly more people that than will learn of a dissenting opinion when it gets covered, for example, in the AJC or on 11Alive News.

The above being said, I would hope that all citizens, even if very unhappy, remember that our commissioners are people too.  As a result, I would hope my fellow Gwinnettians would, as Chairman Bannister admonished the crowd several times tonight, "be nice."  These men and women, while definitely politicians, are not the hard-boiled Washington variety.  They are "citizen politicians," most of whom have a real day job just like you or I.  I know from experience, even if you strongly disagree, they are approachable as individuals and understand that politics will engender disagreement on issues.

To wrap up this up (because I could go on about this for hours), the commissioners got a very loud and clear message tonight.  Commissioner Nasuti even noted that, though they had good intentions - an assertion on which  I will give the benefit of the doubt - there were some points they did not consider.  The people made it clear that those points are far more important than the board may have recognized.  The question remains whether they will act on these citizen concerns.  As one speaker noted, contracts can be broken - corporate America does it all the time.  The board can regain a lot of respect, at least from me, if they are strong enough to admit an error and correct it to the fullest extent of their power.  I hope this is what happens, with or without a court forcing their hand.  I hope the Board of Commissioners do the right thing regarding the garbage ordinance.  However, if they don't, the people will be watching, and I get the sense that on this issue Gwinnett residents won't so easily forget, especially come election day.

AJC's Rick Badie gets it

It is hit or miss for me in agreeing with the AJC's Rick Badie.  However, Saturday's column captures the whole matter of principle behind the Gwinnett County Commission's retreat last week in the north Georgia mountains:

Call me a simpleton, but shouldn’t the county be saving money by any means necessary? Some county employees have been asked to work shorter weeks. Departments must do more with less personnel.

Shouldn’t an example be set by the higher-ups in command?

However, I could not help but shake my head at Commissioner Bert Nasuti's defense of the trip:

The retreat, [Nasuti] wrote, is not a “perk or getaway.” He views the meeting as a way to focus without distractions on complex issues that involve billions of dollars. Being away, he said, cuts down on buzzing Blackberries, ringing cell phones and other “home-turf” disturbances.

I agree that that an intensive meeting was warranted; I have never suggested otherwise.  However, the excuse about being interrupted by wireless devices is pretty weak.  Cell phones work in places outside of your "home-turf."  That's the whole point!  Perhaps the retreat is not a perk, but, if someone needs to get away from ringing cell phones, that can be accomplished by turning them off!  That could have been done at the Gwinnett Place Marriott, the Peachtree Corners Hilton, Stone Mountain's conference center and, most definitely, the GJAC auditorium.  (You don't even have to turn off your device in the GJAC auditorium.  I have tried to get online with my phone in there and it didn't work!)

Socialized garbage to cost jobs

Frankly, there is not much more that can be said about about the horrendous Gwinnett solid waste ordinance.  I have explained why this program is absolutely unnecessary.  I have pointed out that this ordinance usurps our economic freedom of choice.  I have outlined how this situation an example of out-of-control government.  I have exposed the fallacy of the notion that this program will save us money.  I have noted that government intends to mandate behavior.  However, as the furor over Gwinnett's socialized garbage program continues to rage, I wanted to take a moment and highlight an aspect of this program which I have not touched upon.  As bad as the above aspects are, several recent articles make clear that the worst consequence of this program is that, in the midst of a recession, people will lose their jobs.

“They put me out of business,” said Buddy Johnson, owner of Southern Sanitation, which has operated in the county for eight years and serves about 5,000 customers. “I’m going to last as long as I can last.”

"We’ve been providing service to Gwinnett County for about the past 13 years,” [Mike Ingle, vice president of Waste Industries] said. “And I was under the impression that we would continue to provide service to [those] residents. Now I’ve got an entire branch operation that has to be shut down and closed, and I will have 46 employees out of work in five weeks.”

S&P Recycling Co., which operates a facility in Lawrenceville, is likely to lose 25 percent of its metro Atlanta market share because of the change, according to Fred Johnson, corporate director of operations.

“To us it’s a big deal,” Johnson said. “The rub we have with it is that it’s going to cost taxpayer jobs and turn them over to prison labor.”

When I consider this aspect of socialized garbage, I realize that the cart collection charge that Allied Waste and Atlanta Waste Industries have charged their customers is fairly minor.  There is a legitimate business cost to collect garbage carts that the Gwinnett County Commission has forced upon these businesses.  Furthermore, I cannot argue with how Atlanta Waste Industries intends to use a portion of the fee proceeds.

Atlanta Waste Industries angered customers this week when it announced it will charge an additional $23.50 for discontinued service when it pulls out of the county Dec. 31. Company vice president Mike Ingle said the fee is to cover benefits to workers affected when the company stops operating in Gwinnett.

It also will defray some shutdown costs. He said he may have to contract for help in collecting about 30,000 carts still in the field.

However, our elected officials do not seem to care.  Though some have reported not receiving prior notification - including my own mother, District 3 Commissioner Mike Beaudreau leaned the fact that stuffers were sent with county water bills this summer.  The irony is that Beaudreau did not defend the ordinance, but rather defended the amount of notification.  Did he tell us why he thought it was ok to take away our freedom of choice?  Did he explain why Gwinnett County can fine me if I do not organize my garbage just so?  As a Buzz reader commented, did he justify why my home can have a lien placed on it rather than simply suspending service should I not pay my garbage bill?  Similarly, District 2 Commissioner Bert Nasuti attempted to legitimize socialized garbage by arguing that it is appropriate to kill a fly with a sledgehammer.  Nasuti claimied that the new ordinance would address the 20,000 Gwinnett residents that do not have garbage service.  However, let's not forget that there may be perfectly legitimate reasons for not having garbage service.  Nasuti's defense of this sordid ordinance is even more insulting given his harsh words for the compartively minor issue of the cart collection fee.  In summary, if this is the defense that Beaudreau and Nasuti offered, they did not defend the ordinance whatsover but spewed more talking points. Do they even care that their needless, bloated, big government program will cost real jobs for real people?  Sure, maybe these folks don't live in Gwinnett and maybe some will get hired by the new haulers chosen by Gwinnett Clean & Beautiful.  But if even one hard-working individual loses their jobs over this ordinance, these commissioners and any other who voted for this, should pay with their commission seats.

My fellow Gwinnettians, our commission has really gotten the best of us on this one.  The most frustrating point yet also the silver lining is that Gwinnett residents only have themselves to blame.  Beaudreau is technically right in that we all had a chance to comment on this.  While I cannot be certain our commissioners would have listened had we spoke out, the reality is that we are in this mess because of our own apathy.  Despite how our commissioners have disrespected us, the main point I would hope my readers recognize is very simple but so important as we move toward 2009.  When you do not pay attention to what your elected officials are doing and you do not get involved, government will run amok, trample over your freedoms and insert itself in as many nooks and crannies of your life as possible.  As has been the case with Gwinnett waste, too many elected officials cannot be trusted to act in our best interest.  My fervent hope is that this controversy will arouse my fellow residents, encourage them to get involved, and prompt them to closely monitor the actions of this commission and all their elected officials at all levels of government.  We ourselves must be engaged either to keep our officials in check or to throw them out of office when they fail us.

Taxpayers could be left holding the bag for Braves stadium

Listening to District 2 Commissioner Bert Nasuti, Gwinnett taxpayers should not have worried about the money being spent on the Gwinnett Braves stadium.  The facility would generate more revenue than it cost.  I guess that was supposed to comfort us taxpayers who were effectively made co-signers on the stadium financing deal by our wise Board of Commissioners.  Well, thanks to the tightening economy, the commission's chickens may be coming home to roost.  The naming rights crucial to generating stadium revenue for Gwinnett County may be a little harder to sell with corporate America seeing profits eroding in front of their collective eyes.

The county projected selling naming rights for $800,000, but a portion of the proceeds would go to the Braves. If the county can’t make a deal by September, the Braves get to sell the rights and keep more of the money.

If naming rights don’t bring in enough to cover the debt, the county might have to cover the cost even as it is cutting staff and expenses amid an effort to trim $35 million from its annual budget, said County Administrator Jock Connell.

...

The likely contender [to cover the shortfall] is property tax revenue from the county’s general fund, although there’s been some discussion about a longshot option — using proceeds from the county’s Special Purpose Local Option Sales Tax. Connell indicated that’s unlikely.

At a time when the county is already having difficulties balancing its 2009 budget and with the specter of a property tax hike looming, the construction of a baseball stadium that will bring an unnecessary minor league version of a sport to a major league metro area could worsen that problem.  What makes this all the more galling is the excess stadium costs approved this past summer so that, according to Commissioner Nasuti, the stadium could be built "right."

The disdain this commission has shown for Gwinnett residents is absolutely appalling.  Baseball stadiums being built for high-dollar private organizations with our tax money.  A socialized garbage program that could fine residents for putting a trash can on a curb at 6:45 in the evening.  An unneeded park planned for an area in order to pursue a political agenda (fortunately that commissioner won't be on the board come next month).  I am too young to remember details of the misadventures of the Lillian Webb commission in the 1980s, but I have to think that, in terms of sheer disdain for county residents and taxpayers, the current commission is rapidly approaching this low point.