Gwinnett Buzz

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.

While the GOP swept all county government races yesterday, I must wonder if this is the last election we will see such a result?  Yesterday showed that the Democrats are gaining power in Gwinnett.  Are the days where Gwinnett races are over at the end of the Republican primary coming to a close?  How much of this Democrat strength was due to the very long coattails of Barack Obama and how much of it was from a shifting demographic empowering Gwinnett Democrats?  I agree with Gwinnett GOP chairman Gregory Howard that this is a wake-up call for Gwinnett Republicans.  All of us in Gwinnett must get active, involved and aware of our local government.  This is important to protect our property rights as the County Commission decides various issues, but it is even more important in strengthening the party to fight the battles that are likely coming down the road.  As I discussed in my general election endorsement of Mike Beaudreau, we may have issues with the GOP primary winners, but at the end of the day I trust that Charles Bannister, Shirley Lasseter, Bert Nasuti, Mike Beaudreau, and Kevin Kenerly will make more “right” decisions than a Democrat in their seats.

I plan to promote conservative ideals for Gwinnett County in this blog.  However, I would like to do more and would hope my readers would as well.  I know this blog is read by active members of the Gwinnett GOP and I would ask that you respond to this post with suggestions for what myself and others can do as we head into possibly tougher races in 2010.  Whether you approve of his record or not, Barack Obama showed what can happen if people pull together.  We are at the stage in the history of Gwinnett County where we need to pull together and work hard to ensure that Gwinnett remains great and remains a county we want to call home.  If we do not, we may suffer the consequences of Democrat chairman Mike Berlon’s hopes for our county:

If the Democratic party can improve its methods of fundraising, Berlon said, Gwinnett can look forward to a more balanced local government.

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.

The Gwinnett commission races in the general election are really not all that exciting.  Despite shifts in the county’s demographics in recent years, Gwinnett is still a primarily Republican county.  Thus, I do not expect the two Republican incumbents to have much trouble regaining their seats.  Nevertheless, the Buzz is a blog that takes a stand, whether popular or not, so I would like to make formal endorsements in both the Commission Chairman and District 3 Commissioner races.

Commission Chairman

The Gwinnett Buzz endorses Republican Chairman Charles Bannister to retain his seat as head of the Gwinnett County Commission. The Buzz was a supporter of Chairman Bannister during this summer’s primaries and nothing has happened to weaken this backing.  Mr. Bannister has done an adequate job as Chairman these last fours years and has earned the chance to continue in this role.  He has placed an emphasis on tax cuts, a position that will be welcome as we face the risk of the increased federal taxation in the coming years.

Commission District 3

The Gwinnett Buzz endorses Republican Commissioner Mike Beaudreau to retain his seat on the Gwinnett County Commission. Now, if you are a long time reader of the Buzz and followed the often intense primary campaign in July, you know that I was a strong supporter of challenger Doug Stacks.  As such, you may be stunned to see me endorsing the very candidate about whom I wrote several harsh critiques.  If so, neither you nor my friends in the Stacks campaign should worry.  I would still back Doug  today if he were in the race.  My positions on land use and property rights have wavered not at all.  However, our time to defeat Mike was in July.

The District 3 voters spoke loud and clear that they preferred Beaudreau to Stacks.  I don’t like that, but I can accept that.  I endorse Commission Beaudreau out of political practicality. First, Mike is a known quantity.  Whether we agree with him or not, we know where he stands and we know what to expect.  Democrat challenger Earn Herndon of Dacula is quite the opposite - an unknown.  Given the track record of the Democrat Party, I would expect that Herndon’s positions on land use and property rights are likely similar to those held by Beaudreau, if no worse!  Second, Mr. Beaudreau is a good person.  Setting politics aside, he is active in his church and community.  Having spoke with him in the past, I can attest that has an approachable personality.  In this day and age of self-serving, arrogant politicians in a sea of political bitterness, such traits count for something.  Finally, there is the practical reality that we do not want to allow the Democrats to gain even a single seat on the Gwinnett County Commission.  We need to stave off massive increases both in our property taxes and in the size of county government as long as possible.

Thus, all of these reasons points to a single logical conclusion.  Endorse the Republican and support the party.  That does not mean that you nor the Buzz should not remain vigilant and hold Commissioner Beaudreau accountable for his votes in the upcoming term.  This does not mean that you nor the Buzz, if Beaudreau does not change his positions, should not strongly consider any primary opponents in 2012 should Mike run again.  However, if on no other day than November 4, 2008, Mike Beaudreau deserves your vote and the Buzz urges you to support the incumbent Republcan commissioner.

DA Danny Porter will be asking the County Commission on Tuesday for persmission to dip into drug seizure funds in response to Gov. Sonny Perdue’s mandatory state budget cuts.  The funds would cover positions in the DA’s office that receive funding form the state.  Seems like a reasonable request to me.

This article is a little dated but I am still trying to clear out a backlog of articles that accumulated during my recent travels.  I was intrigued to read that the Gwinnett Democrat Party (Gwinnett has a Democrat Party?  Who knew!) is hoping to use anger over the Gwinnett Braves stadium fiasco to propel their candidates in November.  As readers of the Buzz know, I am certainly not happy with the stadium situation myself.  However, I am also a political pragmatist and I can say with great confidence that voting for Democrats in Gwinnett is the absolute wrong thing to do.  Many people say vote the person not the party, but in general I think this is naive.  Often, even the reasonable, more conservative Democrats wind up toeing their party line, a party that is among it national leadership ranks, very liberal and strong believers in the nanny state.  That is precisely what Gwinnett voters do not need to empower in this county.  While our current commissioners may have tossed fiscal responsibility out the window with the latest stadium funding vote, they provide  far more instances of fiscal rationality than we would likely see from a board dominated with Democrats.  Perhaps not, but with the track record of big spending, higher taxes, and big government is that really a risk we want to take?

The time to speak against current commissioners was in this summers’ primaries when we were choosing between two or more Republicans.  That ship has sailed.  Even though I was adamantly opposed to Mike Beaudreau in the primary, I certainly will not vote for his Democrat opponent in November.  I might not vote for Mike, but I have enough sense to do nothing foolish at the ballot box - well, I might write in Georgia Tech Coach Paul Johnson but I doubt he would get enough votes to unseat Beaudreau!  The best recourse now is to be vocal, visible and active as a voter and resident for the next two to four years leading to the next elections.  Work to hold our commissioners accountable for their decisions.  Call, write or visit your commissioner during office hours.  Write letters to the editor, participate in forums such as TalkGwinnett!, or comment here or on another of the Gwinnett blogs listed at left.   (I would say start a blog but I don’t need the competition!)  Do something, don’t just go home and vent and certainly don’t cut off your nose to spite your face by voting for a Democrat!

Tonight I received a letter in the mail from my current garbage hauler, Allied Waste.  The letter stated the following:

Dear Valued Customer:

There have been some recent developments in Gwinnett County that will bring major changes to your household trash and recycling service.  Gwinnett Clean & Beautiful Services, Inc. has been selected by Gwinnett County to manage all residential solid waste services within the county.  This agency is currently soliciting bids from contractors to provide these services to all residents in unincorporated Gwinnett County.  Effective 01/01/09, Gwinnett Clean & Beautiful Services, Inc. will assign a contractor to your residence and determine your service level. Unless Allied Waste is selected as your service provider, we will only be allowed to continue your current service through 12/31/08.

Because of these changes, we find it necessary to increase your quarterly service fee between now and the end of 2008 to help recover some of the costs associated with closing out your account, collecting carts and bins, etc. Your invoice (which is being sent separately) will reflect this increase.  We regret the need to raise the service charge as a result of our increased costs, and certainly the potential loss of your business, but actions beyond our control make this unavoidable.

Even though I have been a satisfied customer of Allied Waste since 2000, I can no longer choose to use them thanks to the Gwinnett County Commission.  They obviously feel they are better qualified to choose with which company I do business for trash collection.  Funny, I had no problem with that decision for my eight years as a Gwinnett homeowner.   In fact, there are some waste companies with whom I do not wish to do business.  I used to receive routine mailers from one hauler that touted their Homeowners Association services.  Being that I abhor homeowners associations, I would rather not do business with a company who makes blatent catering to these organizations a cornerstone of their business.  However, thanks to Gwinnett’s new socialized garbage program, I may not have a choice if they “assign” that company to my area.

The second paragraph is what really steams me.  Thanks to a decision that I did not make, a decision that I feel is completely unnecessary and an abuse of government power, I have to bear an additional charge as a result.  In fact this letter simply demonstrates a point that I made in April about the effect of the elimination of competition on service delivery.  Allied Wastes knows that I no longer have any say in which company provides my garbage service.  Therefore, they can cram a cost increase down my throat to cover their business costs without fear of any consequences.  Sure, I intend to call and insist on a credit for this amount but what leverage do I have?  I cannot threaten to change haulers.  I could call my commissioner Mike Beaudreau, but what good would that do?  He is a member of the board that foisted this program on us and would likely be sympathetic to Allied’s claim that they need this cost recovery increase.  I ask you, dear reader, can we not already see the first evidence of what eliminating competition does to the consumer?  So let me say thanks to Lorraine Green, Bert Nasuti, Mike Beaudreau, Kevin Kenerly and Charles Bannister for looking out for me so well.  Thanks to you, I, along with probably the vast majority of your constituents, get to see a nearly a 50% increase in this quarter’s garbage bill.

To my fellow Gwinnett residents who may receive the same or similar letters in your fourth quarter bill, I encourage you to be vocal about this.  Call your garbage hauler and insist on a credit for any increase.  It will likely do no good, but they should be made aware that we are still their customers and we are not happy.  In addition, I urge you to write your commissioner and Chairman Charles Bannister.  Chairman Bannister told us during a candidates’ forums this summer that residents could contact him with service problems related to the new socialized garbage program.  Sounds like now is the time to start.  The bottomline is speak up!  Make your voice heard!  So long as you do not voice your displeasure, politicians will continue to treat you like children that need to have their hand held while telling you to pay for the comfort they are providing.  The elections are effectively over and the socialized garbage program is a done deal.  However, if we are vocal enough, perhaps we can head another overstep of government authority or perhaps even eventually convice the board to repeal this anti-free market, anti-consumer program.

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.

The Gwinnett County Commission on Tuesday killed the Pleasant Hill Village mixed-use development in Duluth.  The project, slated to be adjacent to Shorty Howell Park, was deemed by outgoing District 3 Commissioner Lorraine Green (how good does it feel to precede Green’s name and title with “outgoing!”) to be too dense for the area.  Green commented:

“The density here at 1.9 million square feet is just way too much. This density, this height is just not what the area needs right now.”

Even on her way out the door, Lorraine Green shows her inclination to play nanny to District 1 residents rather than limiting her governmental role to that of referee.  Apparently, there must be a pretty strong business case for this project - thus, implying that it is something that is demanded by the market - if a developer is willing to sink $390 million in the project in this economic environment.

I am not going to dig too deeply into this one as I have not even caught up with several topics from my recent hiatus from the blog.  Perhaps there is merit in the board’s decision, but I do want to point out a few surface inconsistencies with Lorraine Green’s conclusion.  According to developer L. Anthony Greene (no relation to the Commissioner), “The people in the planning department said this was the best project they had ever seen.”  If this is accurate, why would the board want to deny this project, especially in area that is pursuing revitalization?  While not directly part of the Gwinnett Place CID, the project is slightly more than a mile from the CID.  Isn’t it reasonable to think that such a development could contribute to revitalization efforts around Gwinnett Place?  In a broader sense, why does the county employ a staff of land use professionals to assess proposals only to have the amateurs who happened to win an election routinely cast aside the professional recommendations?  I would suggest that it is politics but that is a different post for a different day.

As for density in the area, a quick look at the surrounding properties on Pleasant Hill is instructive.  Across the street is a lumber company, hardly a light use in the immediate vicinity of neighborhoods.  Just south on Pleasant Hill is a Wal-Mart Supercenter, a retail center with a Super H Mart, and a Nissan car dealer.  This location is hardly in the heart of a sleepy residential area.

Now, we have to wait and see if Tony Greene sues Gwinnett County over this project.  If he does and he wins, the losers will be us Gwinnett taxpayers who would again have to foot the bill for a legal defense of the votes of one of our anti-development elected officials.

Earlier this week, I summarized the cost overruns for the new Gwinnett Braves baseball stadium that were funded by the Gwinnett County Commission.  Against that backdrop, I would now like to explore the financial wisdom behind this move.  I will set aside for the moment the non-financial question of whether government should be paying in the first place for a place of business - which, after all, is what a stadium is to a baseball team - for a private organization.  The reality is that we are in a financial strain in Gwinnett.  So why are our commissioners cavalierly throwing around millions of our dollars?

Several factors are contributing to the revenue pinch that Gwinnett is feeling right now.  On factor is the effect of slowing population growth on revenue generation.  While many would applaud this slowdown, unless the cost of government similarly slows, the gap between costs and revenue will have an impact on the county budget.  In response, several cost-savings measures have been implemented by the county:

Last week, the county announced a hiring freeze meant to put a dent in rising costs that will sap $20 million from the county’s budget this year. The tax commissioner’s office recently cut the work week to four days to save on energy costs, and police and fire employees have been asked to take measures to save on fuel costs.

Let’s consider this scenario.  If you are having to cut back on your living expenses - eliminating those premium cable channels or eating out less each week - because your household income has taken a hit, is that the time to go out and buy a new car that you don’t really need?  What if you pay for that car by drawing money from your rainy day fund, a fund that you have already been tapping in recent years to make ends meet?  Consider now that you are buying the car for a friend of the family.  This friend has the money to buy the car himself, but you are going to buy it and let him have primary use of the vehicle.  Also consider that, rather than getting a nice, serviceable Chevrolet or Buick, you and your friend decide that you are going to get a fine Cadillac.  After all, if you are going to buy the car, you might as well do it right.  Would you consider this wise management of your money?  Well, this is basically what the Gwinnett County Commission is doing with the Gwinnett Braves stadium.  Yes, it is an oversimplification and it does not adequately capture the expectation that the stadium will generate additional revenues from various sources for Gwinnett County, but I think this is a pretty fair representation of the situation.

This reckless use of our money is further compounded by the fact that the County denied quite a few law enforcement funding requests during the 2008 budget process.  I understand how budgeting processes work and I understand that departments ask for more than they expect to get so that their basic needs are met.  However, funding only a quarter of requested county positions seems too thin to account for normal budget inflation.  Some of the key positions denied include:

• Two victim assistance positions
• One prosecutor for Juvenile Court
• Two assistant district attorneys for the drug task force
• One criminal investigator for white-collar and computer crime
• Three additional investigators
• 20 Sheriff’s deputies and staff for criminal warrants
• 18 Sheriff department positions for jail operations

I do not know the total cost in compensation, benefits, training and other expenses that these positions would entail, but I think it is probably less than the $19 million that the commission just spent on upgraded leather, wheels, and navigation system for the their new stadium.  This failure to fund law enforcement positions is especially galling with today’s news of the impact on crime by illegal immigrants.

While Gwinnett County government does not have as poor a record of wasting taxpayer dollars as some other government entities, the Gwinnett Braves stadium shows absolute disrespect by our elected officials for the taxpayers of Gwinnett.  Bert Nasuti and Kevin Kenerly were quite smug in their comments defending this move.  County Administrator Jock Connell exhibited a similar tone in saying the reserve allows the County to pursue “opportunities,” noting, “We knew a time was coming when we would use these funds.”  What about opportunities that Gwinnett taxpayers would like to pursue with their funds?

$31 million of our money is being given to the Atlanta Braves organization, a business that can afford to pay four of its employees $14 million or more apiece in just 2008 alone.  This amount by itself could pay for the entire “enhanced” Gwinnett Braves facility!  The $31 million represents a transfer of $150 from each Gwinnett household to a business that pays multi-million dollar employees to play a game that you have to pay for your kids to play at a local park.  (Note:  This value uses the 2000 census count of households in Gwinnett County.)  I do not subscribe the wealth envy/class warfare politics so often used by Democrats.  Pro sports is a free market business and the Braves can spend whatever the market will bear on their players.  However, forceibly taking money from families that cannot even dream of making millions per year and giving it to a private business with such an enormous payroll is irresponsible on the part of elected officials.  To do so in a time when crime is a significant issue and those officials cannot even fully fund law enforcement budget requests is a dereliction of their duty to county residents.