Project Logic Ga

Posted in politics | Tagged augusta, Libertarian, local politics, SPLOST | 11 Comments

11 Responses

1. on June 4, 2009 at 11:40 am slyram

   Helen: you know I love you like a play cousin but I don’t get how you are for SPLOST yet early this year you were a tea partier. What up with that.

   
   
2. on June 4, 2009 at 11:56 am hba1

   Augusta’s Tea Party was more about ‘excessive spending’ that’s gotten out of control among our elected officials in Washington, DC. Reasonable people recognize that there must be some tax because that’s what funds government in the first place. However, the excess and the borrowing to the extent we are putting our great, great grandchildren in financial jeopardy is what the message resonated in Augusta. The SPLOST VI is NOT an additional tax. It’s the same 1 cent that people have been paying for years. Without it we would not have a multi-million new library being built here in Augusta as we speak; a new judicial center; enhanced recreational facilities; enhanced quality of life with new venues for the arts and culture.I can go on and on. I was recently given a first hand tour from the Fire Chief of the new, state of the art fire training facility that ‘s located in an area of town that is near to my heart in South Augusta. It’s paid for by SPLOST VI. And you know what I like so much about SPLOST funds is that it’s the fairest method of taxing someone. EVERYONE who comes into Augusta/Richmond County and spends a dime, one penny stays here. Yes, I do support SPLOST VI.

   
   
3. on June 9, 2009 at 3:39 am Helen Blocker-Adams

   Here is the transcript from today’s
   Live chat: SPLOST VI debate
   Monday, June 08, 2009

   Radio host Helen Blocker-Adams and Libertarian party chairman Rocky Eades faced off Monday in a live Web chat with AugustaChronicle.com readers over the upcoming SPLOST vote. The following is a transcript of the discussion.
   Johnny Edwards, Government Reporter and Columnist for the Augusta Chronicle was the moderator. Based on the feedback I’ve received, it was a TKO (for me). What do you think?

   Johnny Edwards: Okay, I’ve got 3:30 p.m. by my cell phone, so let’s get started. Both of our participants are here. We’re going to be debating the merits of SPLOST VI. Arguing against the package will be Rocky Eades , the chairman of the Libertarian Party of the CSRA. Advocating for it will be Helen Blocker-Adams, a former mayoral candidate and the host of People and Issues with Helen on WNRR-AM (1230). First off, I want to thank both of you for taking time to participate in what I hope will be a very educational debate.

   Helen Blocker-Adams: My pleasure

   Rocky Eades: Thank you, Johnny for putting this together

   Johnny Edwards: I’ve already got a few questions from readers in my cue, but let me start off with a few of my own. Let’s start with an easy question that can double as a chance to make opening statements. I did a coin toss this morning in advance, and Mr. Eades won, so he’ll go first. Mr. Eades, tell us why you oppose SPLOST VI, and why Augusta’s voters should shoot it down.

   Rocky Eades: These SPLOST referendums are too often just a grab bag of special interest pork projects which offer the voters no real options. Many people think that by approving this kind of referendum, they will be getting theri roads paved and such, history shows that’s no the case

   Johnny Edwards: Thanks. Ms. Blocker-Adams, tell us why you support SPLOST VI, and why voters should pass this package on June 16.

   Helen Blocker-Adams: I believe Richmond County voters should support it because this is the fairest method of acquiring much needed revenue in order to provide a better quality of life. I’ve seen first hand what the SPLOST dollars can do. The new Fire Dept. Training center on Deansbridge Road and Bobby Jones. That building, in particular, had been vacant for over ten years. Now there’s life there. Diamond Lakes, the new library, the new judicial center, etc. Every time I see someone with out of town license plate, I am thinking ‘their one cent any time they spend something in staying in our economy.’

   Helen Blocker-Adams: Hi Johnny did I lose you guys?

   Rocky Eades: I’m here, waiting on Johnny

   Johnny Edwards: No, hold up. Technical glitch to overcome.

   Helen Blocker-Adams: Gotcha’

   Johnny Edwards: Here’s a question that’s for both of you to address. Something I’m hearing from a lot of voters is that the most irritating infrastructure issue they face is the pothole- and divot-laden roads all over the city, which tear up their tires and alignment. Riding on some streets around here feels like off-roading to me. Quite of an embarrassment to outsiders, I’d say.

   Johnny Edwards: As an indicator of how much work is needed on our roads, the first SPLOST package presented to the commission had $235.5 million for engineering (roadwork and drainage improvements and such) and $30.7 million for traffic engineering (such as signal improvements). Compare that to the pared-down list going before voters, which has $35.7 million for engineering and $8.6 million for traffic engineering. Ms. Blocker-Adams, considering the total $184.7 million package includes $12 million for outside special-interests groups and $10.9 million for parks, why shouldn’t voters defeat this package and send a message to the commission that 67 percent infrastructure just isn’t enough?

   Helen Blocker-Adams: I guess the question might be. Would the $235.5/$30.7 million be enough to take care of all the infrastructure/road/repair needs? Probably not. There has to be a balance. We can repair all of the roads and invite new business to come in the city. But when we bring business, that means people. People need a quality of life. They have to feel safe, feel like there are choices in which to play, live and work. If we use most or all of the SPLOST monies for roads, we’re going to be sorely lacking in other areas that are important to ‘people.’

   Johnny Edwards: On that same note, Mr. Eades, considering the condition of our roads, and considering that SPLOST dollars can get repairs done, how can you oppose this mechanism that gets it done without raising property taxes?

   Rocky Eades: Can I respond, Johnny?

   Johnny Edwards: Certainly.

   Rocky Eades: Repairing roads is not a Level 1 project. That means that what people expect their tax money to be doing is actually being diverted to some other project that has gone over budget. The Phase iii and iv SPLOSts for instance originally budgeted $24 million to paving, etc. By Oct 2007 that budget had been pared down to $10 million. And that’s just a quick snapshot.

   Helen Blocker-Adams: Rocky are you going to respond to Johnny’s previous question about the ‘raising property taxes.?’

   Johnny Edwards: Mr. Eades, why don’t you respond to that, then we’ll do a reader question.

   Rocky Eades: I will echo Joe Boyles comment about “raising property taxes”. There is a rate cap in Richmond co and the property tax rate is just about there now. Combined with a lawful reassessment, the chances of anyone’s property taxes being raised is very slim.

   mdown3040: Is a NO vote for the SPLOST almost an automatic YES vote to raise taxes? It appears to me that many of the things on the list are things that will have to bought regardless of whether there is a SPLOST or not.

   Johnny Edwards: Both of you can respond to that one, by the way.

   Helen Blocker-Adams: I agree that many of the items on the list are things that are needed anyway. So where else would the money come from? That is why when I think of one cents being left in our coffers (here in Richmond County) anytime money is spent, it’s a reasonable, fair way of collecting revenue so that the infrastructure, roads, culture, quality of life can be enhanced.

   Rocky Eades: There is in fact very little on this list that “has” to be bought – especially in the middle of a recession. And what often happens with these construction projects is that the maintenance and operations costs, which are not included in the SPLOST will then have to be paid out of general revenues, ie, property taxes

   Johnny Edwards: This next question is about the $3.5 million plan, included in SPLOST VI, to build a lake near Regency Mall to spur redevelopment.

   Helen Blocker-Adams: Another thing to consider is if the monies are NOT collected. Public safety, libraries, etc. are needed.The money has to come from somewhere. The property owner. Well, I’m one of thousands in Richmond County who is NOT a property owner. I don’t think it would be fair to put such a burden on a relatively small segment of the market versus a penny from millions of people who spend money in our county on an annual basis.

   ONLY THE TRUTH: Concerning the pond idea… Has anyone discussed the maintenance costs of the pond. This will cost the taxpayers every year from now on. Should we not be looking for projects to increase the tax base–not suck it dry??

   Rocky Eades: helen, if we leave the money in taxpayers pockets, and let them spend it as they best see fit, it will also likely stay here in our community

   Johnny Edwards: Sorry, little time lapse problem there. Let’s address Only the Truth’s question. I want to give readers a chance to get their questions out there before we run out of time.

   Rocky Eades: The pond is only one of the projects from SPLOST referenda which generate obligations on the general fund.

   Johnny Edwards: Could you elaborate, Mr. Eades?

   Helen Blocker-Adams: Anyone knows that I am an advocate for doing ‘something’ with the Regency Mall. Now the pond idea is a long shot to say the least. I support private enterprise doing something with that property. But that dollar amount of $3.5 is negligible.

   Rocky Eades: buildings and parks and road expansions will do the same

   Johnny Edwards: This next question appears to come from a familiar face:

   mayoryoung: How can people be outraged at earmarks in the Federal budget, be leaders in a “Tea Party” against special interest spending, then openly support a SPLOST that is packed with money for non-government special interests. Looks like alleged fiscal conservatives want to have it both ways. And the sales tax is not collected exclusively from out of town folks. Look at your sales receipt from Wal Mart or your recipt from lunch today. We all pay.

   Johnny Edwards: I believe that’s a question for you, Ms. Blocker-Adams.

   Rocky Eades: I would expand on what mayor young says. How can “liberals” be in favor of a SPLOST that contains so much “corporate welfare”?

   Helen Blocker-Adams: Yes, we all pay.That is the beauty of the SPLOST in my mind. And I’m not a liberal, by any stretch of the imagination. I do believe that the 1 cents is not the ‘cure all.’ And we definitely have excess spending on the federal spending on ‘both’ sides of the aisles. But my thing is, where else is the money going to come from to take care of of the needs of this county? I said SPLOST funds.

   Rocky Eades: Can I respond?

   Johnny Edwards: Let me direct a question to Mr. Eades, on that note. A major argument for SPLOST is that it holds property taxes down. In fact, I’ve heard it estimated that if the sales tax was raised another penny, it would make up for all city property taxes. I’ve heard it estimated that if it was raised two more pennies, it could do away with school taxes. All that, plus outsiders paying a big chunk of it. With that in mind, how can you oppose the penny sales tax?

   Johnny Edwards: By the way, please feel free to respond at any time. We’ll await your response and answer.

   Helen Blocker-Adams: Yes, we do have some long lags. I’m trying to type as fast as I can.:)

   Johnny Edwards: No problem. We all have a learning curve, here.

   Helen Blocker-Adams: I’m also anxious to hear how my opponent responds to your last question.

   Rocky Eades: I’ll handle the outsiders part first. Where do “we” get the moral authority to expect outsiders to finance project primarily for our benefit. As for eliminating the property tax, i’m allfor it. Let’s see how much of the pork that the property tax pays for can be eliminated and go for it.

   Johnny Edwards: Here’s a question for Ms. Blocker-Adams:

   disssman: Helen why are taxpayers funding private organizations with no public oversight? I am refering to the non-profits that are organized and controlled by boards that have no appointed members to represent taxpayers. Isn’t this like taxation without representation? Wouldn’t it be more appropriate for the taxpayers to have a voice in these organizations to insure that our hard earned money isn’t watered away on parties and programs designed to satisfy the whims of the well-to-do only?

   Rocky Eades: disssman, i think it would be even more appropriate for these “non-profits” to figure out a way to keep themselves in business without taxpayer assistance. “Taxation with representation ain’t so hot either!”

   Helen Blocker-Adams: I do believe there should be some oversight. If I am not mistaken, Fred Russell has said that there is a caveat in place that if the organization doesn’t raise a percentage (I think matching) of the dollars they are requesting, they will not receive the SPLOST funds. I do think there should be an oversight board or review that includes county commissioners, that maybe quarterly or twice a year can review what the organizations goals and objectives are/match them up with the monies they’ve received. Something like. The CSRA Community Foundation has a mechanism in place that does exactly that. Provide oversight.

   Rocky Eades: excuse me for jumping the gun on you, helen

   Helen Blocker-Adams: Hey no problem at all Rocky.

   Johnny Edwards: Let’s talk about the TEE center, which may or may not factor into this vote. I was at “yes to SPLOST” meeting last week, and a big point they wanted to make was that the TEE center isn’t part of SPLOST VI. However, I would say that it’s very much a part of it as far as voter perception goes. It seems projects are always going on SPLOST lists with the appearance that this money will get it done. But then it turns out the money isn’t enough, and the government comes back to the people for more. The TEE center was approved at $20 million, but debt will have to be issued for the full construction cost of $38 million, plus a $12 to $17 million parking deck.

   Rocky Eades: oversight or not, the fact remains that these are private instituions that serve particular constituencies and should not be subsidized by the general population. There are many “for profit” venues in richmond co. that provide musical entertainment without taxpayer subsidy.

   Johnny Edwards: Same thing happened with the judicial center, and how many times has the Augusta Mini Theater come back for more? Look at the Golf and Gardens. It got $6 million, and when it didn’t get the rest it needed to build the building, it eventually shut down and became a vacant eyesore. Ms. Blocker-Adams, what assurances can you give that the projects in SPLOST VI aren’t just to get taxpayers on the hook for things, that they won’t be called on again for more money to complete what they think they’re approving on June 16?

   Helen Blocker-Adams: Johnny, Johnny, Johnny. 🙂

   Johnny Edwards: Does my long-winded question make sense?

   Rocky Eades: The tee center is certainly a symptom of the problem with these SPLOST’s. You can go back through each of them and find numerous examples of projects that ballooned 2 or 3 times their original budgets.

   Johnny Edwards: While Ms. Blocker-Adams is handling that one (sorry), here’s a question for you, Mr. Eades:

   Helen Blocker-Adams: Well first of all, I am NOT going to go on record to provide any assurances on behalf of our local government, state or federal government. I would go out on the limb and say that some of the same issues that we faced with the judicial, golf and gardens, TEE Center WILL occur again. Now I know that sounds funny for me to agree with that, and I am still in support of SPLOST VI. It’s not a perfect system. To say the least. But it’s all we’ve got. More people need to be involved BEFORE we get to the vote. Where were the masses during the public meetings regarding the items that are on the current and past SPLOST?

   abeecee: Mr Eades. Thousands of non-Richmond County residents use our roads, visit our parks, use our infrastructure every day. Just watch the commute on Riverwatch. One might ask, where do the out-of-towners get the ‘moral authority’ to use our resources and not pay for them?

   Rocky Eades: more often than not, i suspect, these projects which see the worst cost overruns are the Level 1 projects, which must be completed before lesser level projects, like road maintenance receive any funding at all

   Helen Blocker-Adams: Oh, yes, your question made alot of sense. You three a fast ball at me pretty quick my friend.:)

   Helen Blocker-Adams: Good question, abeecee.

   Rocky Eades: The out-of-towners are generally not just passing through on their way to somewhere else. They are coming here to support our businesses and to visit with our neighbors and to otherwise brighten our day. I don’t expect a friend to help pay for my driveway when i invite him over to drink a beer

   Johnny Edwards: Mr. Eades, was that your response to abeecee?

   Johnny Edwards: Sorry, time lapse thing again. In the interest of fairness, here’s a fast ball for Mr. Eades. Do you support the Fair Tax?

   Helen Blocker-Adams: I haven’t heard Rocky provide any ‘alternative’ methods or game plan to achieve the goals of providing a quality of life, paving our roads, repairing our bridges, etc. I’m a reasonable person and am waiting to hear a plan. I see on a national level all the time, complaints about this or that. But when there is a complaint/concern bring a solution. I like to hear solutions. Right now SPLOST VI seems to be the only solution (albeit as imperfect as it is).

   Rocky Eades: try and keep up, Johnny! 🙂

   Rocky Eades: There are any number of voting schemes which could be implemented to let voters determine which – if any – projects they want to fund. Rank choice voting options, for instance, would avoid these yes/no grab bag kind of referendums we have now. Put each project to the voters on its own merits

   Johnny Edwards: Mr. Eades, while you’re responding to my Fair Tax question, here’s a reader with some observations that you can both respond to, if you like:

   abeecee: I understand that the Lake Regency is actually a dressed up drainage project. It is neede to control Rocky Creek floooding, and with a little extra attention to cosmetics, it becomes a recreational and development asset.

   Rocky Eades: The problem with doing something like that of course is that when projects have been put to voters on their own merits before, the voters have rejected them.

   Helen Blocker-Adams: I don’t like the term ‘schemes.’ But we have 15% of the registered voters slated to come to the polls. How in the world would you get people to come to the polls on separate issues like that? As it is, it’s going to cost over $83,000 for the June 16th vote. Rocky, I’m sorry that doesn’t sound realistic to me.

   Helen Blocker-Adams: abeecee, I believe you are right about that. So in other words it (the $3.5 mil) can be accomplishing two things at the same time. More bang for the buck.

   Johnny Edwards: Well, my point about the Fair Tax, something many conservatives support, is that it seems very similar to SPLOST to me, a tax based on how much people spend rather than on how much they earn. And I believe what Ms. Blocker-Adams is saying is that this is the best method we have available for getting these projets done.

   Rocky Eades: Lake Regency – why is it needed now? like many of the other projects in this splost, is the middle of a deepening recession, when ordinary citizens are having to find ways to make do and avoid making major purchases, should the government be looking to spend, spend, spend. the reason of course is that the commissioners are spending “other people’s money”

   Helen Blocker-Adams: That is precisely what I am saying. Not perfect, but the best source of the fairest way of bringing in revenue.

   Johnny Edwards: Before we run out of time, let me address this question to Mr. Eades: Mr. Eades, the turnout in this election is only expected to be 10 to 15 percent. It’s a single-issue, spring referendum. I would bet that most people who bother to vote are going to have some vested interest, perhaps because they’re connected to one of the 12 special interests groups benefiting from it. My question is: Do you think you really have any chance of seeing this thing defeated? At the same time, Ms. Blocker-Adams, give us your prediction on the outcome.

   Helen Blocker-Adams: Rocky, I’m still not hearing ‘solutions’ from your end.

   Rocky Eades: the problem is not “how” to do the projects; the question really is “whether” to do the projects

   Helen Blocker-Adams: You’re right, many of the people from the different special interest groups you’re mentioning will be rallying their folks, per se, to go and vote YES. I do believe it will pass. I do believe we will have about 12% of the registered voters to vote.

   Rocky Eades: yes, i think so, johnny. There are a lot of people in the county across the political spectrum and the demographic spectrum that are fed up with feeding the government pork barrels. I think that many of them will come out and say so on june 16

   Johnny Edwards: Mr. Eades, your opponent has said repeatedly that you’re not offering solutions. Could you address that?

   Rocky Eades: i think that better than 95% of the registered voters will decide to NOT vote “Yes” on this splost

   Helen Blocker-Adams: I do think the vote will be close, but the final tally will be a YES vote.

   Rocky Eades: i did offer a solution. the ranked choice voting option would allow voters to pick and choose the particular projects they want to fund

   Helen Blocker-Adams: That’s not reasonable Rocky.

   Rocky Eades: i would submit that it is more reasonable than asking taxpayers to fund a pork barrel full of projects that they don’t even have any details about

   Helen Blocker-Adams: People can visit http://www.augustaga.gov and/or visit and meet with the executives of each of these local organizations and gain any knowledge they need.

   Johnny Edwards: Well, we just passed 4:30. I wish we had another hour. I want to thank both of your for taking part in this. We’ve covered a lot of territory in an hour, and there’s obviously far more that we could go into. My thanks to both of you.

   Rocky Eades: i’m amazed for instance that the municipal center renovation is going to cost $18 million dollars. I would have thought it would be something like $17.87 or something

   Helen Blocker-Adams: Many thanks to you Johnny for organizing this. And thanks Rocky for being my ‘opponent.’ Have a great day.

   Rocky Eades: thanks johnny, enjoyed it. thanks for the opportunity. and thank you helen.

   Johnny Edwards: Signing off …

   Johnny Edwards: This chat has been closed.

   
   
4. on June 9, 2009 at 5:23 pm slyram

   While this debate is about the Augusta area, the SPLOST discussion happens all over the state so thanks for sharing this post. Helen, those LP guys bring the details to the debate table. Both of you did a fine job.

   
   
5. on June 10, 2009 at 1:55 am Helen Blocker-Adams

   Thanks. But the LP didn’t give any realistic alternative solutions that can take the place of SPLOST. That is what I was looking for and didn’t get it. As of today, the voting has picked up a bit. Although turnout is expected to be light.

   
   
6. on June 10, 2009 at 3:29 pm Tom

   I can’t speak for Rocky, as I don’t know him personally, but my take was that the LP’s stance was that the SPLOST was unnecessary because the projects themselves were unnecessary and therefore wasteful. An alternative to the SPLOST isn’t something we Libertarians are going to spend a lot of time on if it’s still to pay for projects that we don’t think should be paid for.

   Not being knee deep in the debate though, I’m just guessing from Rocky’s part of the transcript above.

   
   
7. on June 10, 2009 at 5:54 pm Jeff

   Agree with Tom here. Cut the waste first and fund ONLY those programs which government has a legitimate purpose in.

   Do that, and not only do you not need SPLOST, you also don’t need anywhere between 50-90% of taxes collected already.

   
   
8. on June 10, 2009 at 8:25 pm Helen Blocker-Adams

   Certainly all of the projects don’t fit the ‘taste test’ per se. However, putting a new roof on an old building, paving roads that are in disrepair, funding a culturally-related organization that provides programs that benefit the community are all reasonable projects that should and can be funded by SPLOST. Public meetings were held, many meetings were held over a few months. The first proposed was over $800 million and they pared it down to $187 million. And that got the vote of the 10 commissioners. Regarding ‘waste’ how does one determine what ‘waste’ is? I’ve heard the saying ‘one person’s trash is another person’s treasure.’

   
   
9. on June 11, 2009 at 9:10 am Tom

   First, I have to talk in generalities because I don’t know the specifics of your local politics, but even on the legitimate expenses like paving roads, there is an argument that cutting waste out of the regular budget would pay for this so that SPLOST wouldn’t be necessary in the first place.

   Really, from a Libertarian perspective, every city government has far, far to much waste because every city government is involved in things that they really have no business in. Cutting some of these wasteful programs could pay for a lot of this stuff without putting more of a burden on the tax payers.

   I wish I could talk specifics, but I’m knee deep in looking at Albany’s budget right now 😉

   
   
10. on June 11, 2009 at 11:04 am Helen Blocker-Adams

    Tom, you’re absolutely right, there is alot of waste in local, state and federal government. And I don’t think one has to be a Libertarian to feel that way. But frankly, I don’t know how we’re going to ever get a true handle on that problem. We, as concerned citizens, have to a better job at holding our elected officials accountable and not giving them a blank check after they have won their political seat. We have a tendency to vote people in, ‘assume’ they’re going to do the right thing, and then wait to vote them in office again. And the cycle goes on and on. But thanks for your dialogue and feedback.

    
    
11. on June 12, 2009 at 10:13 am Tom

    I think there are few who disagree about waste in local government. Where we seem to diverge is in what to do about it. Most Libertarians, myself included, oppose putting more money into a flawed system but to force the government in question to make better use of what they currently have coming in.

    Obviously, not everyone will agree with this one.

    However, we’re in agreement about how people elect these folks into office then don’t really hold their feet to the fire. We try to do that over on SWGA Politics, but there’s only so much a blog can do after all 😉

    
    

Leave a Reply

Enter your comment here...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Email (required) (Address never made public)

Name (required)

Website

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out /  Change )

You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Cancel

Connecting to %s

Notify me of new comments via email.

Notify me of new posts via email.

Δ