Gwinnett Buzz

About a month ago, I posted an article about the poor customer service of the City of Lawrenceville in handling payments for its monopoly natural gas service.  I sent the following message along with a link to the article to Mayor Rex Millsaps, City Council members Marie Beiser, Bob Clark, Mike Crow, and P.K. Martin as well as then-incoming council member Katie Hart Smith.

Mayor Millsaps and members of the City Council,

I am writing to you to complain about the poor customer service in paying gas bills to the City of Lawrenceville.  While I do not live in Lawrenceville and am not a voter, I would hope you would still reconsider your business practices and make your bill payment system more customer friendly.  I have posted my serviceexperience with the City to my website, The Gwinnett Buzz.

…the City of Lawrenceville has a monopoly. I have no recourse whatsoever. I cannot vote with my feet and move to another gas provider. Not being a Lawrenceville resident, I do not have the ability to express my displeasure at the ballot box. While I am sending a copy of this article to Lawrenceville Mayor Rex Millsaps and the members of the Lawrenceville City Council, what incentive do they have to serve a non-voter who will continue to be a customer regardless of what they do?

I do not live within the city limits of Lawrenceville. I don’t even have a Lawrenceville mailing address. However, for some inexplicable reason, I am a customer of the City of Lawrenceville’s monopoly natural gas service. Unlike thousands of Gwinnett households, I do not have the option to choose my natural gas service provider. Generally, I have never felt a great urge to shop for providers – after all, is Company A’s gas going to heat my house any better than the City of Lawrenceville’s gas? Unfortunately, where I, as a consumer, lose being a customer of a government service monopoly is in the area of customer service.

Recently, I realized I was a few days late on my gas payment. That is not my complaint; that was my fault and I realized it would cost me a late fee. Upon realizing this, I stopped at the Lawrenceville City Hall on the way to work one morning to pay my bill. I handed my credit card to the lady at the window and was told “We are not setup to accept credit cards.” Excuse me? You process bills that can run into the hundreds of dollars and, in 2009, you are not able to take a credit card in your office? Fortunately, being that the bill was for a summer month, I had enough cash to cover the small total. I asked the lady if there was a way to establish direct payment for my bill. I was told that I could use Wachovia’s Bill Pay service. Because I have not had good experience with third-party bill pay as compared to setting up auto-payment directly with a service provider, I was not interested in this option. I asked if there was a way to have my bill directly charged to my credit card. The lady informed me I could online with a credit card. I knew that – and I try to avoid doing that. Why? Because, though companies across America have web-enabled their business processes due to the cost savings of technology and computing, the City of Lawrenceville opts to charge about three dollars to use a credit card online. The City deems this fee a “convenience charge.” I deem it a rip-off and lousy customer service.

Why does the City of Lawrenceville make things so difficult for its customers? Easy. Aside from the fact that government has a spotty track record for customer-friendly business practices, the City of Lawrenceville has a monopoly. I have no recourse whatsoever. I cannot vote with my feet and move to another gas provider. Not being a Lawrenceville resident, I do not have the ability to express my displeasure at the ballot box. While I am sending a copy of this article to Lawrenceville Mayor Rex Millsaps and the members of the Lawrenceville City Council, what incentive do they have to serve a non-voter who will continue to be a customer regardless of what they do?

Bottom-line, I am completely trapped in a government service monopoly that shows little concern for customer service. Consider how things would be different if the City had to compete with the many private service providers. If I could cancel my Lawrenceville gas service and choose another provider that strives to make doing business with them a customer-centric experience, the City would have a major incentive to do likewise. While my concerns may be specific to the City of Lawrenceville, poor customer service is a threat whenever any entity, especially government, holds a monopoly. (One should see a major risk in turning our healthcare over to the federal government – but that is a topic for a different forum.) To be fair, poor customer service is not always the case. Gwinnett County Public Utilities is my only option for water service, but they have very modern and customer-friendly business practices. The City of Lawrenceville could stand to learn a few things about customer service from their fellow government service provider.

I always think of Bartow Jenkins as the first ever football coach at Central Gwinnett High School.  Though I went to Central when Black Knight football was synonymous with Tally Johnson, I knew the name of Bartow Jenkins.  Jenkins died Wednesday of Alzheimer’s at the age of 81.

Not only was he a “first” for Central, Jenkins was also the first principal of Parkview High School.  In addition he served as the head of athletics for Gwinnett County Schools.  However, Jenkins also forged a long and successful political career at both the city and county levels.  He served three terms on the Lawrenceville City Council, won a special election for the Gwinnett County Commission and was Mayor of Lawrenceville for 14 years, retiring in 2002.

The Gwinnett Buzz sends it condolences and prayers to the family of Bartow Jenkins.

This was originally posted on The Grayson Buzz in March, 2006.

Lawrenceville denies it’s a speed trap (AJC.com - Free registration required)
Lawrenceville defends speeding policy (AJC.com - Free registration required)

I grew up in Lawrenceville, GA and I have driven in the city for nearly two decades. Lawrenceville residents and those who drive in the area have long known that the city is one big speed trap. And now, in a series of articles, the AJC has exposed this long held perception as reality. We have heard rumors of ticket quotas and driving through the town on a Saturday night without going through a police road block used to be nearly impossible. I was ticketed by the Lawrenceville Police (aka the Revenue Department) in 1992 and my sister was ticketed in 1996. In her case, she had not even traveled through the location where the citation claimed she was clocked! The officer apparently just guessed at which car had set off his radar gun (aka his Blue Light Lottery winner selector). Fortunately for her, the judge was reasonable and the ticket was dismissed but she was nearly a victim of Lawrenceville’s insatiable desire for revenue.

I formerly thought that the sorry reputation of the Lawrenceville Police Department was driven by then-Chief and current Gwinnett County Sheriff Butch Conway. Based on his days as Chief Revenue Collection Specialist in Lawreneceville and his failure to respond to a records request from a friend who was working on an opponent’s campaign during his first run for Sheriff, I had never trusted Conway. During the 2004 campaign I even wrote on the speed trap issue in my Gwinnett County voting guide here on the Buzz. To be fair, the Lawrenceville police do not seem to be as overagressive as they once were, but even in their toned down state, apparently the citywide speed trap still exists.

What is laughable is current Chief Randy Johnson’s feigned ignorance at what defines a speed trap. Johnson is quoted as saying “What is a ’speed trap?’ It’s a buzz word. So are we supposed to arrest just so many people?” and “I mean, if there’s a problem, you try to fix it, don’t you? We have a problem.” Let me first stipulate, that technically the citations issed in Lawrenceville are most likely legitimate and not trumped up charges. But there is such a thing as overaggressive enforcement. The vast majority of people speed. Cops speed too - just observe cops while you are driving in the Atlanta area. I have seen them (and not just in Lawrenceville) speed and commit illegal lane changes. Thus, hyperaggressive enforcement holds Joe Citizen to a standard to which many officers themselves do not even meet. If Lawrenceville is just engaging in normal enforcement why city police sitting on the roadside running radar far more often than you see county police or state patrol doing so? Considering that the majority of the state of Georgia is unincorporated areas, this suggests that such behavior is overaggressive enforcement that exceeds the typical enforcement norms which citizens come to understand. While it might not be illegal, one can - and should - raise questions regarding the ethics of such policies.

This picture of overagressive ticketing for traffic violations is borne out by the statistics reported by the AJC. Chief Johnson claims that Lawrenceville has a “problem.” Is he implying that Lawrenceville’s “problem” is atypical of elsewhere in the state? Is there any reason to believe that Lawrenceville is an anomaly where motorists mash the gas pedal once they see that Lawrecenville city limit sign? That defies logic. I have a friend who is a Gwinnett County police officer. I asked him once how fast someone has to be traveling on US 78 in southern Gwinnett County to get stopped. He told me it generally takes someone going 60+ in the 45 MPH limit on that road. State law provides for a speed trap law which can revoke a government’s right to use radar if revenue from traffic fines exceeds 40% of the city’s operating budget; the implication is that a government can, in fact, abuse its enforcement duties. Thus, if a speed trap is just a “buzz word” as claimed by Chief Johnson, then why does a Gwinnett County officer provide a reasonable cushion relative to the speed limit? If speed trap is just a “buzz word” then why does state law effetively acknowledge that governments can abuse their enforcement privileges? In light of this, Chief Johnson’s comments have a ring of defensiveness. What makes logical sense, based on the statistics, is that Lawrenceville has chosen to enforce traffic laws more aggressively in the city limits.

If I believed that the Lawrenceville Police Department had such a policy - stated or otherwise - for safety reasons, I would have less of a concern. But, because I do not believe traffic violations to be any more or less dangerous in Lawrencville than other areas of Gwinnett County, I suspect that revenue is the motivation, and revenue as a motivation is an odious abuse of government authority. In the case of Chief Johnson, he is not even being held accountable for running the Lawrenceville department in this manner. He holds a non-elected position so he reports to the city council and mayor. These are the people that Lawrencevile residents should be able to rely on to ensure that the police department is not abusing residents and visitors to Lawrenceville. What is distressing is that rather than vowing to further investigate what truly appears to be a problem, Councilman P.K. Martin makes a superficially valid but evasive excuse centered on the level of revenue collected by Lawrenceville via utilities. Personally, this is disspointing because Martin is a Georgia Tech man who is not effectively serving his constituents. There is certainly enough evidence to at least warrant a review of the police department operating standards if the mayor and city council were truly objective managers. The fact is, however, that the City has a financial incentive to simply ignore the situation and there is little recourse to address the situation otherwise since the enformcement is technically legal.

This was originally posted on The Grayson Buzz in November, 2003.

Yesterday I wrote of the controversy in Lawrenceville over a proposed Wal-Mart SuperCenter. The Lawrenceville City Council met last night, and I am happy to report that they approved the project! Looks like the residents of Lawrenceville can look forward to more convenient retail options in the coming months! I was actually a little confused as to where the site is located when I read the article yesterday. The new store is slated to go near the Sugarloaf/US 29 (Lawrenceville Highway)/Lawrenceville-Suwanee intersections. Should be convenient for my mom! The thing that confuses me now is since when is this area in the Lawrenceville city limits? I did not think that intersection was within the city.

One other thing that was not pointed out in yesterday’s article or by the protesters. Apparently, 26 acres of the project were already zoned commercial. The developer had every intention and every legal right to build a standalone SuperCenter on that site had the council rejected the proposed 30 acre development. With the larger project, the developer is going to go with upgraded building materials on the facade as well additional landscaping and buffer zones. So, had the protest been successful, the area residents would have been worse off by not having the extra amenities of the larger project! Just goes to demonstrate that these protesters come at these things with their narrow agendas and often do more damage than good, both directly and indirectly! Also, today’s article mentions that the anti-developer group had harassed one of the council member’s wife! That was what pushed him to vote for approval. I think these two factoids speak for themselves regarding this group.

Oh, and Rick Johnson voted against it. Hopefully his constituents will be paying attention to his abuse of governmental power. The other dissenting member in the 3-2 vote - Judy Johnson, a former Central Gwinnett teacher. Nice lady, apparently a poor politician.

AJC article on SuperCenter approval

This was originally posted in The Grayson Buzz in November, 2003.

I cannot say how much government meddling drives me nuts!! Throw in activists who lack a sufficient understanding of economics and I really get irritated. I was taking a brief break from drafting a document for work, so I pulled up the Atlanta Urinal & Constipation (the Atlanta newspaper for those not aware) to see what as going on there. There, linked off the main front page, was an article about empty former Wal-Mart stores in my hometown of Lawrenceville. Intrigued, I clicked on the article. (On a side note, I was met with a familiar picture. There was a photo of a lady by the name of Denise Nye, formerly Denise Rousselle, with whom I was in high school band.) In a nutshell, these protesters are opposed to building a brand new SuperCenter when the previous Lawrenceville Wal-Mart stands empty. This store closed about a year ago when Wal-Mart opened their first Lawrenceville SuperCenter north of town. Since then, the old store has stood empty. I agree with some of the comments about that area looking rough since the closing. However, the article does not tell you that that area began slowly sliding into blight well before Wal-Mart closed. A big catalyst in this was when the Town Center Cinemas, the main movie theater in town before the AMC opened, closed. The demographics of south Lawrenceville have undergone a significant shift. Not to say it is a completely bad area. The families of two close friends still live in this vicinity. However, there is no denying that the area has changed and I cannot believe that I am the only person that basically stopped going to that old Wal-Mart. It was small, cramped, and dirty. Why go there when I could drive just about as far from my house and go the new SuperCenter in Snellville. Ok…enough background, and on to my problems with what was reported in the article.

First, the placement of large retail outlets is not just dependant upon being able to acquire land. Demographics, housing development, infrastructure, vehicular traffic, and many other factors go into site selection. I am, of course, not privy to the parameters that Wal-Mart uses but I think it is safe to say that the old location did not meet the minimum requirements to support a store of the size of a SuperCenter. Thus, rebuilding the old Lawrenceville Wal-Mart may not be economically feasible. If the company cannot earn a sufficient profit to justify their investment, they will just not build. Plain and simple. Companies such as Wal-Mart are not charities nor are they in the business of urban/suburban renewal. Of course they do have a certain duty to the communities they serve to not cause unnecessary blight. However, as discussed above, the change in the area was NOT Wal-Mart’s responsibility. So now you have people protesting the new store which is located much more conveniently to where people are living now (the greater Grayson area is already growing rapidly and could be the next boom area in Gwinnett). I do not challenge their right to protest and speak out to the City Council, but it annoys me that they are doing so from an economically and business ignorant position. Because politicians pander for votes, if the protesters holler loud enough, the citizens of Lawrenceville will be deprived of amenities that stand to improve their quality of life in the area. This ultimately has a tangible impact on property values, which hits local residents right in the wallet.

What is even more annoying are some of the comments attributed to government officials in the article. I cannot blame the citizens that much because they are only responsible for their own interests and you cannot expect everyone to be in business school so as to more fully understand the issues. That is just reality. However, we can expect elected officials to protect the interests of the citizens while avoiding meddlesome tactics with legal business enterprises. In my line of work as a cell phone engineer, my company continually has to seek approval for cell sites from local governments and the level of meddling never ceases to incense me. It is my belief that unless the use of a certain piece of property can be shown to have a direct and relevant impact to another individual’s use of their property, then the government has NO business disallowing such a use. Note, this direct impact does NOT include another landowner not liking the land use in question. That is the issue here with Lawrenceville Councilman Rick Johnson feeling that the Wal-Mart SuperCenter is too intense of a land use to be adjancent to residential property. How is the property zoned? Will there be any REAL and direct impact that would be negative? Can he prove his assertion? I know, he is a politician and he does not have to prove his assertion to vote a certain way. But as a holder of government power, should the citizenry not expect this of him? A similar example in the article references an ordinance in the Peachtree City SSR south of Atlanta prohibiting the construction of stores larger than 32,000 sq. ft within the city. Are you kidding me??? How can a government justify such rules?? I have experience with Peachtree City in trying to get cell sites and they are a quite a bunch. Course if the people continue to elect people like that, they deserve what they get.

The final statement that really steams me is Councilman Johnson’s speculation that the new Wal-Mart could force the adjacent Ingle’s grocery store out of business. SO???? When did it become the role of the City of Lawrenceville to insert itself into the functioning of the grocery market in Lawrenceille??? This is an issue for the free market to sort out. If Ingle’s does not have a value offering sufficient to attract customers in a competitive environment, that is simply the nature of capitalistic competition. It is not the place of the Lawrenceville City Council or any other local government to involve itself with the efficient functioning of the market. Unbelievable how local governments love to wield their power and meddle.