Gwinnett Buzz

Yesterday, I received a copy of the Gwinett Daily Post’s article on socialized garbage via the Gwinnett Village CID mailing list.  There is not really any additional information that was not included in the AJC’s similar story, but again the Post outreports the AJC on Gwinnett issues.  However, there are a couple of claims by Gwinnett Clean and Beautiful’s Connie Wiggins I must rebut.

“Based on on-going market studies and rates reported by citizens, the current average price for garbage and recycling service in Gwinnett is $21 per month,” the statement said. “The ‘Greener Tomorrow’ program will provide services at more affordable rates.”

So if $21 per month is the average, then, by definition,some residents are paying less than that.  As I outlined in my earlier post, I was paying $18.23 per month to Allied Waste.  If others were paying more, that is their decision.  Residents could change providers if price was their absolute primary concern.  (And before someone complains that their homeowners association selected a single hauler for their neighborhood, that is your neighborhood’s fault for allowing your association’s leadership to take away your economic freedom.)  It is not the role of government to ensure equality of outcome.  Perhaps this is the local version of “spreading the wealth.”

For residents who have complained that the new system is being forced upon them, GCB Services points to two years of work with more than 5,000 citizens who’ve participated in the community forums and the public hearing process. There is also a citizens advisory board comprised of 50 residents where concerns can be addressed.

Wiggins’s argument simply does not hold water.  Since when do my neighbors and fellow Gwinnett residents have the right to deny my economic freedom of choice simply because they worked hard on a program?  When I visited the dealer and bought my car, I did not take along a committee that could override my choice of vehicles.  When I purchase merchandise, I do not have to go clear it with my next door neighbor.

Finally, the reasons that Wiggins cites for the program are spurious as I have previously outlined.  She specifically talks about residents who do not have service and even go to extremes as depicted in the story.  If Wiggins feels this is makes it ok for Gwinnett residents to be subjected to this program, I am glad she is not a doctor.  If she were, she might decide to cut off an arm rather than stitch up a cut.  Here is a better suggestion: if this is that serious of a problem, mandate that all residents have an active garbage service agreement.  While I do not like government mandates, such a solution would be preferable to a blanket denial of economic freedom.

I would like to close with a note regarding Connie Wiggins.  Ms. Wiggins has been the focus of my comments in this post because she was the official quoted in the article.  Ms. Wiggins, however, does not carry the burden of ultimate responsibility for this program.  Rather, our county commissioners are the ones that set aside our freedom of choice in favor of socialized garbage.  Wiggins is merely the public face at this point who will likely bear an unfair portion of the scorn over what Gwinnett’s government has done to its residents.

Gwinnett County has selected two haulers for its socialized garbage program which is slated to begin January 1, 2009.

Advanced Disposal Services Atlanta has been awarded the contract for four zones in the northern half of the county. Waste Pro Georgia, a subsidiary of Florida-based Waste Pro America, will service the county’s four southern zones.

Actually, I would prefer Advanced, so I think I will go with them instead.  What’s that?  I cannot choose?  My only option in Loganville is Waste Pro?  Ok.  Thanks, Gwinnett commissioners.  I am glad I had you to step in and help me from having to make such a hard decision.  But next time, before you come over to hold my hand, investigate the concept of “freedom of choice.”

The standardized pricing information has been set as well:

Initial cost for the service, which begins Jan. 2, will be $20.45 a month for trash and recycling. Yard-waste pickup will cost an additional $10 a month. Billing for the first six months will be handled by the hauling companies. In June, the fee for trash and recycling service will drop to $17.86 a month and will be billed on residential property tax notices.

Let’s consider the cost impact of this change in my case.  Previously, my quarterly bill from Allied Waste was $54.70.  For the fourth quarter of 2008, Allied increased my bill by $23.80 to cover their expenses related to being forced to terminate their existing customer relationships in Gwinnett County.  For the first six months of 2009, my quarterly rate will be $61.35.  This represents a price increase of $6.65 for each of the first two quarters in 2009.  Thus, before the enhanced socialized garbage program begins on July 1, 2009, the Gwinnett County Commission will have effectively increased my “taxes” by $37.10.  No, that is not a lot of money for me and many others.  However, there are homeowners to whom that represents an important amount of money.  Surely, though, given the promised “efficiencies” and “energy savings” of the new program, we homeowners will recover this increase in short order.  Right?

Starting July 1, the new quarterly rate of $53.58 goes into effect.  This represents a savings for me of a whole $1.12 per quarter!  Imagine my excitement that my freedom of choice has been yanked away and I am only compensated with about a buck per month!  At that rate, it would take nearly eight and a half years - yes YEARS - for me to break even with socialized garbage! So much for there being any cost savings in this program for me and other Allied Waste customers.  (And before, someone says that the commission did not require Allied to charge the termination fee, the only reason they are doing so is the Solid Waste Management Plan.  I think it is fair to blame our commissioners.)

Wow!  I tell ya, I really feel like our commissioners have the best interests of Gwinnett residents at heart!  Thanks to these nanny-state commissioners, come 2017, I will be able to get a cup of coffee every four months or so thanks to the cost savings arranged by our commissioners!  Also, I do not have to struggle considering which waste company to use.  Furthermore, I will get a whole ten extra minutes of quiet each week thanks to fewer garbage trucks in my neighborhood!  (Never mind the fact that they do those pickups while most of my neighbors and I will be at work and wouldn’t be impacted even if there a hundred garbages driving up and down my street!)

The reality is that we are stuck with this plan at this point.  I doubt these commissioners would admit their mistake even if they could get out of the contracts which I doubt.  However, I would urge Gwinnettians to consider the contrast between free market and socialized services and apply this lesson to possible intiatives on the national level for socialized medicine.  The government may promise you the world, but after they strip you of your economic freedom, reality does not live up to the picture they painted.  Fortunately, for those of us in Gwinnett, garbage collection is far less critical than our healthcare.

With nearly all precincts reporting, Commission Chairman Charles Bannister and District 3 Commissioner Mike Beaudreau have easily won reelection.  In school board races, District 1 board member Carol Boyce and District 3 board member Mary Kay Murphy both won fairly easy victories.  In School Board District 5 things appear to be a bit closer, but Louse Radloff appears headed to victory over Democrat challenger Ravindra Kuma.  Tom Lawler will hold onto his position as Superior Court Clerk.

However, not all incumbents fared well.  In a poor move by Gwinnett voters, Richard Winegarden will fall to Karen Beyers, a candidate who had no judicial experience coming into this election.

In the SPLOST vote, Gwinnett voters extended the 1-cent sales taxes by nearly 20,000 votes.

On a state level, Saxby Chambliss thankfully was relected to the United States Senate.  This was important to keeping enough Republicans in the Senate to maintain the threat of a filibuster against any extremely liberal legislation from Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and their ilk.  Congressman John Linder, who represents a large portion of the county, defeated Doug Heckman handily. All three Georgia constitutional amendments appear likely to pass, though Amendments 2 and 3 are a little tight with about 10% of the precincts still out.  I supported, with some concerns, Amendments 2 and 3 and am glad to see them gain approval.  However, I am disappointed to see Amendment 1 pass with its promise of placing additional funding responsibility for local schools on taxpayers throughout the state.  Amendment 2 was very important to providing the funding needed for the TADs that Gwinnett voters approved in the primary in July.

Thus, overall, a positive night for Gwinnett amidst a sad night for America overall.  Hopefully, as Republican conservatives seek to take back our national party and win back the voters that the big spending GOP of the last six years have allowed to flock to Barack Obama, Gwinnett and it’s strong conservative base can play a role in this effort.  Winning back the wayward center right voters is so critical to protecting the freedoms and values that America holds dear and that are sure to be threatened by the liberal Democrats starting in January.

Amid a move to exit the Atlanta market, Circuit City will close all three of its Gwinnett locations by December 31.  Circuit City has locations in Gwinnett on Venture Drive in Duluth near Gwinnett Place, on Buford Drive in Buford near Mall of Georgia and on Scenic Highway in Snellville.  The further worsens the competitive environment for electronics in Gwinnett with HiFi Buys having closed all of its Gwinnett stores in recent years.

Personally, I hate to see Circuit City leave the market.  While I generally prefer Best Buy, I often shopped Circuit City stores.  I remember a trip to the former Circuit City on Jimmy Carter Blvd. in the mid-80s with my late father to buy a brand new television which included our family’s first-ever remote control.  (Actually, my father had had remote control for years.  It was called my sister and I!)  Later, I made some of my own initial home entertainment electronics purchases from the same store.

As the new North Logan Commons bows today with the opening of Lowe’s, AccessLoganville.com is reporting that the Best Buy store in Loganville will not open until Spring 2009.  The store will replace the current Best Buy at Park Place in Lilburn.

Kelly Kautz is “pleased.”  The City of Snellville has won the latest round in its crusade against the Cremation Society of the South.  Simultaneously, the city has dealt a blow to small business and private property rights.  As a result of a Snellville Board of Appeals decision Tuesday,  the city today ordered the crematory to cease operations.  The question of whether to accept the changes to the building plan that was originally submitted to the city in comparison to what was actually built will now come before the city council.  This is the city council where several members have worked tirelessly to protect their political backsides while stomping all over Chris Nuzum’s property rights.  When this is heard, with a crowd likely packed with NIMBY neighbors of the crematory, what are the odds that the council will vote in a manner that will allow the crematory to resume business?  I would think slim to none.  Kautz and her council gang have clearly demonstrated they are more interesting in protecting their political power than protecting the rights of all members of the Snellville community.

While details of the appeals board reasoning is sketchy, one issue was the fact that the crematory has a smokestack.  That may sound like a pretty important deviation from the building plan.  However, this reason is as flimsy as tissue paper when you consider that the smokestack was build to look like a standard chimney, an architectural detail that fits perfectly for a business operating in a converted ranch-style home.  Setting aside the backdrop of the crematory controversy, residents should be apalled that the government can usurp a property owner’s rights for such a trivial point.

As is too often the case when government enters into a crusade against a private citizen, a lawsuit may be the only way for the citizen to protect his rights.  This appears to be the path that Chris Nuzum intends to follow.  Mayor Jerry Oberholtzer, one of the few fair-minded elected officials in Snellville, expects a similar course of action, saying, “It looks like we’re going to be in a lawsuit.”  As a Christian I do not support vengeance, but I do think Nuzum is well within bounds to seek redress in the court system.  The actions of those unfairly targeting his business are surely costing his business a significant amount of money.  According to the AJC, two nearby residents are behind the appeal that led to Tuesday’s decision:

Attorney Frank Jenkins, who argued Tuesday night on behalf of residents Milus and Charlene Maney, who filed the appeal, said the crematory should be shut down immediately.

While I am not an attorney, I would wonder, unless there is more impact to them other than proximity to the business and a chimney, if the Maneys have legal standing to pursue such an appeal.  (If they do, in the absence of a reasonable cause to appeal the city’s decision, the relevant ordinance should be changed such that nearby property owners cannot place their preferences over another person’s rights.)  Furthermore, even if the council were to accept the plan changes and allow the crematory to re-open, this vote may not come until November.  I would think that would give Nuzum cause to sue the city for loss of revenue.  Also, if the Maneys cannot show any substantitve cause for their appeal, Nuzum should be able to seek compensation from the couple (and perhaps get an ordinance that would such weak appeals to be overturned by the court).  If the law does not allow a victim of a specious legal action to seek such compensation, this law should be reconsidered by the state legislature in order to protect property owners from NIMBY crusades.

I find it disgraceful that as a legitimate member of the Snellville business community, operating a needed and respectable business, Chris Nuzum cannot expect simple fair treatment from several members of the Snellville City Council.  Politicians should pay for this affront to basic liberties with their jobs.  I earlier blogged that I doubted Kautz and company would be held responsible at election time since too many residents were more concerned about their wants and desires than the sanctity of property rights.  However, I take heart that the majority of comments to the AJC article are running against the NIMBY crowd.  If these commenters are other Snellville residents, perhaps there is hope that Kelly Kautz and her cohorts will not get away with their political games.  Regardless, this controversy is a frontal assault on property rights and a black eye for the City of Snellville.

Snellville City Councilwoman Kelly Kautz is continuing her politically-motivated assault on a private business.  Her proposed air quality ordinance could cost the Snellville crematory as much as $250,000 for air quality monitoring equipment.  I believe crematory owner Chris Nuzum hits the nail on the head in saying, “The city would like to make it cost prohibitive so we would have to close shop.”

These actions show that elected officials like Kelly Kautz are what is wrong with government.  She says she “doing this for the health of our citizens and our environment”, though this assertion rings hollow given that the need for or efficacy of this ordinance is questionable at best.  If Nuzum is right, Kautz is apparently willing to use the power of government to effectively put a legal business whose owner has followed all laws out of commission.  This is an absolute disgrace.  I do not know if Snellville has a recall law, but I would hope that someone would investigate whether such a citizen response is possible.  Regardless, if this is the disdain that a Snellville elected official shows to private business in her city, I am inclined to no longer spend any money with businesses within the Snellville city limits.  I hate to harm innocent businesses, but I would hope that eventually Snellville residents would realize that such behavior on the part of elected officials is absolutely unacceptable and would act to keep Snellville from being a dangerous precedence for other local governments.

The Lowe’s store in North Logan Commons is slated to open on October 25.  Now those of us in the Loganville area who prefer Lowe’s don’t have to drive to Snellville for our home improvement needs!

This is another of those articles that I missed during last month’s blogging slowdown.  It is a little dated but I wanted to bring closure to a story I followed closely this summer.  In late August, Chick-fil-a in Snellville removed the the curb cut to Westridge Drive that was first approved then denied by the City of Snellville.  After completion of construction, the restanrant intended to approach the City about restitution for construction and removal costs but I have seen no reports as to whether the City would reimburse the restaurant.  If you know what came of this situation, please respond to this post and let us know.

Last week I blogged about a price increase that Allied Waste is charging on fourth quarter waste bills.  This increase is intended to cover costs associated with closing out customer accounts as we more toward the start of Gwinnett’s socialized garbage plan.  Apparently, I am not the only person who has taken notice and is less than thrilled with the actions of the company.

Last Friday I was quoted in an AJC article on the Allied Waste charge.  The article, after being discussed by Rick Badie in his  “My Opinion” blog, generated several comments from Gwinnett residents.  A former colleague saw my quote in an email he received from his homeowners association regarding the charge.  On Monday I received a phone call from a fellow Gwinnett resident (he has not authorized me to post his name on the site so, out of respect for his privacy, I will only refer to him as Mr. S) wanting to talk to me about the charge.  Mr. S also disagreed with Allied’s fee increase and wanted to take action.  He suggested writing to the management of Allied Waste and/or refusing to pay the excess amount.  I encouraged him to post his thoughts here on the Buzz so that others who feel similarly could be encouraged to take voice their disagreement on this issue.  Mr. S forwarded the following letter to me which I would like to publish:

To Whom It May Concern –

I live in Gwinnett County, GA, and included with the bill for this coming three months service there was an unsigned letter requesting we pay an extra $28.72 for an uncertain situation. There have been no decisions made as of now which would create costs for “closing out the account, collecting carts and bins, etc”. It appears you anticipate losing the business, but, as was said, no decisions have been made. Thus there are questions raised by your action, answers to which would be appreciated.

1. Why are you doing this before you know what decisions have been made?

2. What makes you think you will lose all the area business?

3. Assuming the decisions are positive toward your company, how would you plan to return the monies charged for nothing extra?

4. If you lose the business, what is there to say that you will have to collect the carts and bins. Whoever takes care of this area would have to issue a cart and bin. Logic and common sense would say there would be exchanges between waste service companies, and thus no added expense.

5. Is this collection a new idea of yours to collect extra money? I know of some who were angered by something done, canceled your service and were never charged for carts and boxes, etc.

6. So far as now known, how is it you apparently are the only waste service company who has asked for this extra fee?

Since there was no one to whom this could be directed in the area affected, it has been sent to you. I will await answers to these questions before considering further the extra charges you have requested. In the meanwhile, enclosed is my check for services to come this next three months. The amount is $67.88, as was charged previously.

Mr. S also drafted a letter to Commission Chairman Charles Bannister:

Dear Mr Bannister, As you may be aware, the AW has done a despicable business in their new bills. All have been increased by an amount supposedly to cover extra expenses [picking up equipment] because of potential changes. These allegedly may be caused by Gwinnett Green and Beautiful Services Inc.when changes are made to the collectors of trash in various areas. It would appear that AW is thinking they may lose and thus are trying to increase there [coffers] “in case”.  However, nothing in the letter addresses how the money will be returned if they are awarded a contract. It appears to many of us that this is an unethical means of raising profits. They are asking us to pay an amount to cover expenses which may or may not occur. There is nothing said about what will happen if the amount charged is not paid, but assumptions can be made. I do not know that the commission can do anything about this, but this type of action should be recognized, and the commission should know what is being tried on the citizens of the county who they represent. Mr. S Lawrenceville, GA

(Note, I have edited out all personally identifying information in these letters.) I applaud Mr.S for taking action and writing these letters  He raises some excellent questions for Allied Waste.  Why are they assessing this charge before any decisions have been made as to who will be the haulers under the socialized garbage program?  (In a 26 September response to my mother’s email to Charles Bannister, Gwinnett Clean & Beautiful Executive Director Connie Wiggins confirmed that the selection process was still ongoing.)  What if Allied is the provider chosen for my area, why would they need to pick up my collection bins will I get a refund for the cost to collect the bins?

As I have made clear, my personal opinion is that this charge is unwarranted for existing customers and more appropriately should be folded into the costs underlying Allied’s bid to participate in the new program.  I encourage Gwinnett residents to contact Allied Waste regarding this unjustified charge.  I also encourage them to contact their commissioner and Chairman Bannister.  Despite extensive media coverage of this program, I suspect hitting residents in their wallets will do far more to bring attention to the socialized garbage debacle than any number of newspaper articles and blog posts.  If more residents would take action like Mr. S rather than simply signing the check with the additional charge with no questions, companies and governments would have a much harder time getting away with taking advantage of customers and constituents.  Bravo, Mr. S, for setting an example for Gwinnett residents in this and other important issues!