CVI Working For The County

The DeKalb delegation is holding an info session to review, with the public, the implications of a CVI study on the impact (negative) of new cities on the county. This focuses on finances and if you believe that a government with more money is a better government then you might want to scoot on over here, but if you're not not sure then the report may be of interest. Though largely reading like the script for Captain Obvious, the real meat is what is missing. Isn't that always the case when government is involved? What you're NOT being told is often the most important part (think: Village Developers' Plan).

So what is missing in these City vs County CVI dust-ups? The public school system. That's what is missing. No one has the courage to whisper about the serious damage done to public schools by these new cities. The process is straightforward, clearly destructive and inevitable. A new city will be a weak city, at least from the point of view of local control. What many folks, even in this smarting city, don't realize is we have a "weak mayor" form of government. In fact, we have weak council as well. The fact is Dunwoody is run by a city manager and a bunch of bureaucrats with council and mayor provided with rubber stamps to approve what is put before them. And it gets worse.

A new city means a new development authority. Ostensibly appointed but one that will be driven by the developers, will get input exclusively from developers and in no way beholding to the residents of Dunwoody. Unless one of the developers happens to live here--want to be how many that might be? They are more likely to live in Country Club of the South where no one is going to drop a trendy clutter-development in their backyard.

It is this Developers' Authority that does the damage to the schools. First, they will push for "re-vitalization" re-development that will include a residential component, one they will downplay but one that will overload the schools while lining their pockets. And because they don't want to talk about residential they are not likely to coordinate their plans with the school system. Once they've slashed an open wound they rub in the salt. The Developers' Authority have some financial machinations to remove the property from the tax rolls, not just dodging city taxes (remember it is the city's Developers' Authority) but from all taxes. So they overload the schools with apartment kids (yes, these WILL BE rentals) and they make sure the school system's funding is undercut so they cannot remediate the damage even if they wanted.

Brookhaven: Learn from Dunwoody

Brookhaven is well along in fulfilling its destiny as the next city to incorporate in DeKalb and there is much to be learned from its slightly older sister to the north.

First, it is inevitable, don't fight it. You don't have to blindly embrace it, but fighting will be like swimming in quicksand, but with a peanut gallery rooting for the sand. In the end you're going down and all you will succeed in accomplishing is adding your name to the list that includes "Shrill Jill" and "Farmer Bob". But again, you don't have to just sit in the corner, eat your cookies and drink your milk. You can think. You can analyze. And...if you are very careful, you can criticize.

Your CVI study is complete. In terms of content this is relatively insignificant, but as a milestone it means that the dominant power structure is in place. Just check out the assumptions underpinning the foregone conclusion that "shows Brookhaven would be viable". Then pull that string. Who insisted on these assumptions? Is it the same group that paid for the study? Just who are these people--not a group--real, flesh and blood, money makin', power-hungry people? Who the hell are they? They need to be outed. Early.

These are the folks who will run your city for the first few to several years. And they will run it to their benefit, not the benefit of the Citizens of Brookhaven (see, now doesn't that just sound right?). They will be pulling the strings of council and mayor, but even before, it is these, the few, the empowered, that will draft your ordinances, set the rules that dominate your life, and unlike the benign neglect of DeKalb, these folks will see to it that you toe the line. Or else. If you're in a HOA and hate it, think of this as a HOA on steroids, with the power to tax, condemn, and compel with an armed force. If you're in a HOA and just love it, then you're probably one of the assholes that will be running the city anyway.

When it comes time to vote, not for the referendum--that will be rigged, but for mayor and council, you might want to pretend it is the second or third election, not the first. By the time you get to the third election you will have become thoroughly disillusioned with all the pompous asses that promote themselves as having been some kind of great contributor to the cityhood movement or who played patty-fingers with other power-hungry frat boys in one of the unavoidable string of "non-profits" that foisted this city upon you. Those are the people you'll certainly vote against then. Cut to the chase. Vote against them now.

And you might just want to look at the financials. See, the proponents of cityhood are gonna tell you how "we can have the same or better services for even less money". Maybe. And they love to point out the elimination of the bifurcated "Special Services Tax District" which covers two of the much ballyhooed "3-P's" of new DeKalb Cities: Police and Parks. Fact is, these have to be paid for, and you will have your own overhead to cover down at the newly minted city hall. Expect "parks bonds" to be floated within three years of incorporation. Expect a police force that is twice as large as you will be sold on pre-referendum and a never-ending stream of budget increases backed by little more than flag waving.

As you dig down into the revenue side you'll see a big chunk o' cash: franchise fees. Turns out the county gets virtually none of this money as it is not incorporated but your newly incorporated Brookhaven will, so any financial comparison that ignores this disparity is intellectually bankrupt. Now much of this money comes from folks in unincorporated areas of the state, including yourselves at this point, but it largely/only goes to cities. Some folks, often those in unincorporated areas, find this morally reprehensible. But, as has been pointed out by leaders in Dunwoody, this money is necessary to support the city, and in your case it helps eliminate that SSTD assessment. So it's OK, right? After all, you've been on the downside of this great moral divide and now it is your turn to reap the rewards. This is how "situation ethics" works. All you need to bring to the table is a very flexible moral spine and an equally firm sense of self righteousness.

But wait! There's more!

You're gonna start this city, so you're gonna need "City Services". One thing Dunwoody did right (really, you finally read it here) was to ignore the siren song of the "Shills for CH2M Hill" who were advocates of Whole Hog "P Three Uh Oh", otherwise known as "privatization". Clearly many services should not add head count to the city payroll with its generous benefit package--and yes, you will find one of the first things enacted will be generous benefits. If you have a janitor, electrician, HVAC tech, mechanic, or even an IT guy, on city payroll then you're an idiot. By the same token, you'll probably NOT want to contract for police services. But there is much grey in between. Fortunately there is a simple rule to follow in deciding whether to outsource or not: if you can envision requesting information under the Open Records Act, then you want that function in-house. Otherwise, you're screwed. Well, you're probably screwed anyway, but if they can throw up the "sorry, private business information" roadblock, then you're screwed, glued and tattooed.

And finally, don't let your guard down. You're gonna have yet another set of politicians that require constant watching and frequent changing. Buck up. You gotta do both every chance you get.

A Shout Out to Frederick County, MD

Google Analytics indicates the good folk of Frederick County, Maryland have been doing due diligence before moving from a traditional service approach to the once-favored "Public Private Partnership" or "Three Pee UhOh". Since our new cities north of Atlanta seem to be the breeding ground for Three Pee UhOh, perhaps the experiences of these communities can provide some guidance.

In no particular order...

Be wary of studies. The outcome of any study is based on assumptions. Whoever controls the assumptions controls the results and recommendations.

Be wary of consultants. Consultants are a bit like picking a doctor. If you talk to a surgeon, your ailment will most likely be treated by surgery. A homeopath? Not so much. If you hire a consultant with a track record of advising wholesale outsourcing of services, well, don't be too surprised when he recommends you do the same. And you should be no less surprised to find out he just happens to know of a company that can get the job done.

Be careful what you ask for.  If the motivation is to free the county from a Wisconsin-like death grip of public worker unions, then perhaps wholesale outsourcing is required to break free. Be sure the contract is no greater than a term in office or you will simply trade one demon for another. Plan a clear path to the optimal solution arrived at by some of our communities.

If the change is the result of a political shift from democrats, generally beholding to unions, towards republicans, generally beholding to business, be very wary. You are probably just trading one form of political corruption for another.

Wholesale outsourcing is dubious at best. The financial arguments are simple enough: like Walmart, these mega-corps allegedly enjoy economies of scale. Perhaps they do. But one thing is certain, when you pay the contract, you are paying their profits, their executive bonuses, and funding their re-investment in their business. Little of this money will stay in Frederick County.

When you outsource services you outsource quality. More importantly you outsource accountability and transparency. What is now subject to open records requests will magically become "the proprietary business information of a private corporation".

Full frontal Three Pee UhOh has lost its luster. Before rampant city formation had run its course north of Atlanta, at least one of the new cities rejected full outsourcing from the very beginning. The others have or are in the process of moving towards in-house management with multiple contracts for various work. This is being done not only to ensure the best service levels, but to save money. Ironically it is saving money that is offered as the primary reason to outsource but it simply has not withstood the onslaught of reality.

We in The Other Dunwoody hope this helps.

A Momentus Day

December 1st marks the end of the 2008 Hurricane Season. It offers a time to reflect on the pre-season predictions and assess the accuracy of the experts. As sometimes happens, the predictions didn't quite meet with reality.

But December 1st is also the first day in the existence of the City of Dunwoody. This also offers the opportunity to reflect on where we are and how we got here, the end of our first season of Dunwoody.

Given that Dunwoody doesn't even officially start until Monday December 1st this might seem difficult, but...Dunwoody's Mayor and City Council have been in operation since being sworn in and prior to that operated under the auspices of the Governor's office and prior to that these very same folks who comprise the fledging government of Dunwoody operated the wholly political and quasi-governmental Citizens for Dunwoody and Dunwoody Yes! organizations. And as Dr. Phil likes to say "the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior". This gives a significant body of work to evaluate.

To make the job more manageable, let's look at some key metrics: No Taxation without Representation, Service Value, Integrity, and Transparency.

Taxation: D. This covers not only the taxation of various businesses operating within Dunwoody which likely have little say in city operations, but also the imposition of the Franchise Fee Tax which negatively affects everyone who lives in and uses utilities in Dunwoody, but more importantly represents a tax levied by Dunwoody on Georgians who live outside Dunwoody. Remember the primal scream of cityhood? No Taxation Without Representation!

Service Value: C. This is one political hot potato. On the plus side: a city hall not in the city because it is cheaper; and dodging the CH2M bullet, but on the minus side: tacit acknowledgment that the CVI study was bogus; serious, allegedly surprising, startup cash flow problems; insufficient funds for promised police staffing; and no immediate prospects for park or road improvements.

Integrity: F. There is just no other way to say it: the citizens of Dunwoody have been lied to from the beginning. A now suspect Carl Vinson Study produced under the direction of cityhood proponents. Task Force reports withheld until after the referendum. The Citizens for Dunwoody and Dunwoody Yes! operating outside public view and review as was their legal right, but since they were influencing events affecting us all there was a moral imperative to operate openly. A moral imperative they diligently ignored.

Transparency: F. You probably cannot have integrity without transparency, at least in government, and when the first official meeting of the City Council results in the first official open records request, you get a pretty good idea how committed the Mayor and Council will be to their pledges of transparent and open government. One might accept them as technological novices but for the fact that someone associated with CfD and DY! demonstrated an amazing ability to put up (and tear down) websites and post Shrill Jill videos when it suited their purpose.

So there you have it. On the issues that matter most to most of us, Taxes, Services, Integrity and Transparency, this city earned a first term grade of D-, far short of their original promises. Maybe next year there will be a hurricane Dunwoody that meets predictions.

TOD

A Foundation of Lies

"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State."

Joseph Goebbels.

It appears Dunwoody's Powers-That-Be are losing their ability to shield The Other Dunwoody from their lies. And make no mistake, we have been lied to and it is becoming inescapable that it was done with malice and forethought.

The reports from the Citizens for Dunwoody's clandestine Task Forces have been presented to the political elites: the candidates for city council. Not only were they not created with public review or provided to the citizens before the referendum, they are still withheld from Dunwoody's citizens. Apparently they are available on a need to know basis and mere citizen-taxpayers simply don't need to know.

We can gather some interesting insights from Sunday's AJC Metro article, "Dunwoody candidates see preview of operations proposals":

• As the title clearly states, this information was presented exclusively to candidates. Given that it is already too late to negatively impact the referendum, how bad can it really be? Apparently pretty bad.


• "The reports are only recommendations and are not binding. But they likely will carry significant weight with new council members, who will have little time to prepare for cityhood after Sept. 16..." Obviously these reports were intentionally delayed, forcing the newly formed council to accept these recommendations without serious debate or plausible alternatives. Someone has a vested interest in this outcome. Who is it and what do they get?


• This is all clearly intentional. When a constituent questioned Fran Millar, a prime mover behind the Dunwoody movement, about cityhood being sought "the right way", he responded:
  
  

  "[...]by delaying this one year to try to get the best data for people to make a decision (unlike Milton, Johns Creek) I do think it was the right way. Are there assumptions that might be wrong-probably. However it will be better than DeKalb in the long run if we elect responsible people and you can throw them out if they do not do a good job-unlike DeKalb."
  

  
  Well, it seems these folks had an extra year and still could not pull together their reports in a timely fashion, even for presentation to decision makers. It is a sad state of affairs when incompetence is the most palatable explanation.


• Then there is Chem2Hill and an apparently cozy relationship with some members of these clandestine task forces: "The company was selected over another bidder by a panel appointed by Citizens for Dunwoody Inc., the group that headed the task force effort." So there was an RFP issued, bids were taken and a winner selected. All on our behalf, but without our knowledge or permission.

• The company seems quite sure of it's future business with Dunwoody, Inc.: "the company already has selected the staff that will work for Dunwoody if the council selects the firm. The company also has a building that initially would be used as a City Hall." Initiative or a done deal--which do you think it is?

• Finally, one of our fine candidates for City Council, a past task force commandant, is recommending a police budget that is 20% over that in the Vinson study--the only detailed information provided before the referendum. Of course, we, The Other Dunwoody, are not allowed to know why and for what purpose the budget ballooned.

This is the kind of "behind closed doors" good old boy politics, deception and fiscal irresponsibility we've come to expect from the county. Dunwoody was supposed to do better.

TOD

Franchise Fees 101

What are franchise fees?

Well it depends on whom you ask.

If you ask Ga Power, they consider it a "local tax imposed on utilities for the privilege of providing a service within city limits". Georgia Power, like everyone else, recognizes that each individual customer does not, and many cannot, pay the full cost of delivering electricity to their individual home or business. That is why these fees had been rolled into the rate structure and hidden from the rate payers.

But if you ask the Georgia Municipal Association they consider franchise fees " rent paid for the use of city public property by a utility ". They will assert this 'rental' costs the utility less than free market acquisition of rights of way or condemnation. This conveniently ignores the facts:

• this 'rent' is paid in perpetuity, and always increases
• however, an outright purchase is a one-time cost amortized over the same period
• the municipality provides no service for this 'rent'
• most municipal easements have been in place for a long time
• new cities are taking over existing assets without compensation

The bottom line is that utility franchise fees levied by municipalities are little more than a tax on the revenue earned by a utility within that municipality.

But how do they work?

Georgia Power pays municipalities a sum of 4% of the power sold within that municipality. Georgia Power, like all successful businesses, does not pay taxes, they collect taxes, so they pass this cost along to their customers. In total Georgia Power collects and pays municipal taxes totalling over $100 million annually which no one sees on their power bill. In the past the statewide municipal franchise fees were simply rolled into the rate structure, appearing nowhere on any customer's power bill.

That has recently changed: siding, at least to some degree, with the "it's a tax" point of view, the Georgia Public Service Commission ruled in 2006 that Georgia Power should get one half of these municipal fees exclusively from rate payers in those municipalities with the rest remaining hidden in the rate structure. This resulted in municipal customers paying approximately 2.9% of their usage while unincorporated customers (or those living in cities forgoing the franchise fee) pay only 1.1%.

Needless to say the Georgia Municipal Association took the issue to court and after losing the case (and more of our tax dollars) the ruling took effect in January of 2008.

But all is not lost. City-folk are still getting a free ride on the backs of other rate payers, and not just those in unincorporated areas. All municipal customers pay the 2.9% tax including commercial and industrial users. And they pay proportionally more than residential users because they use proportionally more electricity. Since they don't get a vote in city elections it is politically expedient to institute taxes that hit the business community harder than residential users. That is already being leveraged by candidates and elected officials in recently formed Georgia cities.

Now this is just for electricity, which is by far the largest. However, franchise fees apply to gas, cable and telephone as well, but these are just other verses of the same song. All these bills are going up on December 1.

What does this have to do with Dunwoody?

Georgia Power franchise fees appear in the Carl Vinson study under 'other' franchise fees despite it being second only property taxes and representing over 13% of the budget. Given statements from the Citizens for Dunwoody that they directed the CVIG to include $1.5 million to cover potentially lost HOST funds, it seems likely this deceptive categoriziation was also at their direction.

Dunwoody is new. At the time of this writing, the city is not even in operation. All those power poles, transmission lines and substations pre-date the city, and presumably Georgia Power already owns the property and easements. Yet this new city proposes to charge them rent (which we will pay) for assets Georgia Power already owns.

We, the citizens of Dunwoody, have already paid for these assets through our past power bills, cable bills and phone bills. It was on the county's watch that our water lines were punctured installing fiber. But now, because of reckless city financial planning, we will be forced to pay for these again, and again, and again.

But what can we do?

Contact the Georgia Public Service Commission demanding that they complete the job they started in 2006. Ask them to:

• require that new cities compensate utilities for properties and easements that they intend to 'rent' back via franchise fees.
• change the franchise fee structure so that 100% of municipal fees are paid by rate payers in that municipality.

Vote for city councilmen who support not assessing these fees. But be very skeptical: they have 2.4 million reasons to lie.

TOD