The mayor did have his detractors, but there probably were not enough of them to jeopardize his political future. Then an entrepreneur desiring to develop a 1,000 acre landfill, in the county, outside of the city, came to town. Easters became the most visible local supporter of the landfill, and several times referred to its approval as a “done deal.” The deal wasn't done, but much of his popularity was.
My disenchantment began early in his term.
6/17/01An open letter to:
Mayor and City Council Members
Crawfordville, Georgia
Dear Public Servants:
Everyone knows it is possible to have too much of a good thing. Well folks, government isn’t even a good thing. It is a necessary evil. In fact, Ronald Reagan, a great American, said, “Government is the enemy.”
I, for one, believe in limited government. The role of government is to provide necessary protection and services that citizens can’t reasonably provide for themselves or obtain from the private sector.
In Crawfordville, the government has long provided paid police and volunteer fire protection. Since the late 1930s, the city has provided a public water system, a successor to public wells. Later, sometimes decades later, the city paved streets, built a sewer system and a natural gas distribution network and implemented garbage pickup. I think most would agree that these are necessary services, unlikely to be provided by private enterprise.
Those of us who grew up in this town, when it was a bustling locale, remember it as an easygoing, live and let live kind of place. The current mayor and council seem hellbent to change that. Back-off, no one elected you folks to make Crawfordville over in the image of some city where people live so close together that almost everything has to be regulated.
When you meet and fulfill your oversight and fiduciary responsibilities as government officials, don’t look around for something else to meddle in. Move to adjoin. Turn out the lights, lock the doors and go home. Your family will appreciate it, and so will we.
##########
8/30/02
The Advocate Democrat
Greensboro, Georgia
Mr. Editor:
Question: When is a tax increase not a tax increase?
Answer: When a tax supported service is changed to fee supported, and the government does not cut taxes.
State law requires local government to hold three public hearings, place notices of the increase in the paper and issue press releases when they raise taxes. However, adopting a fee for services, under the city charter, apparently requires only minimum public notice. Perhaps, posting a notice at city hall, where most of the public never goes.
It is my belief that imposing a garbage fee, while adopting the rollback millage rate, which included the old garbage fee, is technically and morally, but not legally, the same as a tax increase. It is certainly an increase in the cost of government, and an increase in out of pocket cost for every family residing in Crawfordville.
If it walks like a duck and it quacks like a duck.... This turkey is a tax increase.
##############
9/8/02
The Advocate Democrat
Greensboro, Georgia
Mr. Editor:
The following paragraph was copied from the Georgia Municipal Association’s web site:
“House Bill 1321 extends homeowner tax relief grants to municipalities. The Homeowner Tax Relief Grant for 2002 amounts to the equivalent of an $8,000 exemption per homestead. This amount will be determined by multiplying the millage rate by $8,000, and deducting that amount from the property tax on each homestead. This credit does not apply to a millage levied for bonded indebtedness. The state will give each municipality a credit to reimburse these exemptions. In order to receive the credit, immediately following the preparation of property tax bills, each municipality’s fiscal authority must notify the Department of Revenue of the total amount of tax revenue which would be generated by applying the millage rate to the allowable exemption. The credit for each municipality is conditioned on the municipality’s fiscal authority reducing each qualified homestead’s otherwise applicable liability for municipal taxes by the credit amount.”
At a time when the city fathers and mothers are receiving increasing criticism for the growing cost of government, this looks like a bandwagon they should jump on. If city officials already plan to avail themselves of this opportunity, why haven’t they publicized it? It certainly looks like the kind of tax relief that would mean a great deal to many of our citizens.
On the other hand, if they plan to skip this opportunity, they certainly owe us an explanation? I think a public response to this newspaper would be appropriate.
##################
9/20/02
The Advocate Democrat
Greensboro, Georgia
Mr. Editor:
Twenty-five years ago, I was mayor of a city with a population greater than 60,000. I was reelected and I retired voluntarily, undefeated. I say this not as a boast, but to place my comments in perspective.
That city was served by seven daily and two weekly newspapers. Three of the daily papers and both weekly papers had city hall reporters. Most city council actions were reported in stories published in one or more of the newspapers. Therefore, citizens, who never darkened the door at city hall, had an opportunity to read about city council actions. Unfortunately, Crawfordville does not have the luxury of even one city hall reporter.
In my former city, an ordinance could not be adopted without an advertised public hearing. Advertising required, not only a posting of the proposed ordinance at city hall, but the publication in a local newspaper of a summary description of the ordinance and the time and place of the public hearing. In Crawfordville, I have seen some ordinances advertised in the Advocate, but I certainly did not see the ordinance to impose a garbage collection fee advertised.
I partially agree with the mayor’s policy of not responding to letters in the newspaper. I also partially disagree with his stance. Personally, I would never respond to a personal attack. However, I would respond to an attack on actions by the city council or requests for information of general interest.
It was (and is) my belief that the knowledge many citizens had about city business was limited to material published in the newspaper. In my opinion, leaving a published comment about the conduct of the city’s business as the last word, makes the comment a fact in the minds of many readers.
The responsibility to set the record straight falls upon the mayor. I do not think this obligation can be fulfilled with a town hall meeting or by waiting for people to call or come by city hall. People who won’t do any of these things pay taxes and fees. They also vote. An effort should be made to keep them informed.
The city has as least two low cost ways to reach out to these people with the city administration’s side of any story. Either a letter can be submitted to this newspaper or an insert can be sent with the monthly utility bills. I think they owe us no less.
#######################
9/24/02
The Advocate Democrat
Greensboro, Georgia
Mr. Editor:
The mayor of Crawfordville conducted a town hall meeting on September 23. There was a nice turnout, but only a small portion of the over three hundred locations receiving monthly bills for city services were represented. I hope this communication reaches some of the folks who pay the bills, but did not attend the meeting.
The three city council members, who were present, addressed the group. They appear to be sincere, dedicated people with nothing but the best interest of the city and its citizens at heart. Representatives of the organizations that contract with the city to provide accounting, engineering and grant administration were also present. These folks are experienced professionals. While I would not expect them to bite the hand that feeds them, I doubt that anyone of them would condone misuse of public funds.
There were several heated exchanges between the mayor and some members of the audience. If you are interested in those, you will have to find another source.
An attendee asked, if the feasibility of combining the city police department with the sheriff’s office had been investigated? The answer was, no, the idea has not been explored. The representative from the engineering firm stated the city charter required the city to have a police department. The mayor indicated that the police department is self supporting. End of discussion. Does anyone remember Ludowici*? They had a self supporting police department and a national reputation. It seems to me the question should be studied. A current charter limitation should not prevent the exploration. As I recall, when the mayor took office, he did not have a vote. The city charter was amended. Now he can vote.
There was good news for city taxpayers. Any city taxpayer, who is entitled to a county homestead exemption, will receive an $8,000 homestead exemption on their city tax bill.
The mayor indicated that he does not like it when citizens bring up matters of public business, like the foregoing, in the newspaper. His amen chorus apparently agrees with him. To put it mildly, I vehemently disagree.
The mayor explained the new garbage fee. I am not quoting him. I am stating my understanding of his explanation. The garbage fee was previously embedded somewhere in the fees collected for water, sewer and gas. To comply with the terms of some of the grants received for water and sewer improvements, those fees must be separated from any other fees collected. It is unclear to me whether any other fees are being reduced by this change. The mayor informed us that fees are not set by ordinance. Therefore, there was no need to publicize the intent to increase fees, in advance. I beg to disagree. When government intends to use its police powers to extract more money from the pockets of the public, they have a moral duty to announce it well ahead of the time the action will be taken and the announcement should be in a form likely to reach those most affected.
There were those in the mayor’s amen chorus, who opined that we should go along to get along and that nothing negative about the city should ever appear in print. This country’s very foundation was built on the words that dissenters were able to print. If our founders had been ready to go along to get along, our current anthem would be, God Save the Queen.
*For those who never heard of Ludowici, Georgia, it is a town in south Georgia located on a main route from the north to Florida. For many years, it was listed by the American Automobile Association (AAA) as a speed trap.
#########
6/20/2003
Editor
The Advocate Democrat
Greensboro, GA
Mr. Editor:
Somebody at Crawfordville city hall apparently never saw a freedom they didn’t want to limit. The latest city utility bill contains a proposed ordinance intended to limit on-street parking. What problem is this ordinance intended to solve? How have we survived since horse and buggy days without it?
I recall a time when, on a Saturday afternoon, the streets were lined with parked cars, and pedestrian traffic on the sidewalks was so heavy that it was hard to move about. At that time, on-street parking was never limited. Today, you could fire a shotgun down Broad Street at almost any hour of any day and never harm a soul. NOW, we need to regulate on-street parking? Give me a break.
Is this ordinance designed to solve a problem or promote an agenda? It seems to me that under its existing police powers the city can already ticket or tow a vehicle which is a traffic hazard or impediment. If a vehicle is a hazard or impediment to traffic, why does the ordinance allow it to stay parked for one hour? If it is neither, why must it be moved after one hour?
I looked around for vehicles which could be in violation of the proposed ordinance. There are the Taliaferro Transit buses parked near the Senior Citizens Center. There is the trucker who parks either his rig or car in front of the vacant buildings on Commerce Street. There is my car parked on the dirt strip between the pavement and the sidewalk. There are the vehicles that line the street near the mayor’s business when he holds an event. There are vehicles which sometimes line both sides of Monument Street, near the Sunshine House. Which of these could be the target for this ordinance?
When this ordinance comes up for a vote, I hope a majority of the City Council will place freedom ahead of petty restrictions and vote NO.
In closing, I would like to thank the city for keeping us informed by distributing this ordinance with the utility bill. However, it would have been more informative with an annotation or cover letter explaining that it was a proposed ordinance, to be voted on at the July City Council meeting. ##############
A few months later, Lois Richards, who had held several elective county offices, ran against Easters in the November municipal election. She asked me to serve as her adviser, because of my previous city government experience. I also ran for a seat on the city council.
Click here for news storyThe state legislature adopted a well publicized tax relief scheme for municipal taxpayers. You would think local officials would be quick to jump on board and cut taxes. Until the next letter was published, this regime was oblivious to this opportunity.
9/8/02
The Advocate Democrat
Greensboro, Georgia
Mr. Editor:
The following paragraph was copied from the Georgia Municipal Association’s web site:
“House Bill 1321 extends homeowner tax relief grants to municipalities. The Homeowner Tax Relief Grant for 2002 amounts to the equivalent of an $8,000 exemption per homestead. This amount will be determined by multiplying the millage rate by $8,000, and deducting that amount from the property tax on each homestead. This credit does not apply to a millage levied for bonded indebtedness. The state will give each municipality a credit to reimburse these exemptions. In order to receive the credit, immediately following the preparation of property tax bills, each municipality’s fiscal authority must notify the Department of Revenue of the total amount of tax revenue which would be generated by applying the millage rate to the allowable exemption. The credit for each municipality is conditioned on the municipality’s fiscal authority reducing each qualified homestead’s otherwise applicable liability for municipal taxes by the credit amount.”
At a time when the city fathers and mothers are receiving increasing criticism for the growing cost of government, this looks like a bandwagon they should jump on. If city officials already plan to avail themselves of this opportunity, why haven’t they publicized it? It certainly looks like the kind of tax relief that would mean a great deal to many of our citizens.
On the other hand, if they plan to skip this opportunity, they certainly owe us an explanation? I think a public response to this newspaper would be appropriate.
##################
9/20/02
The Advocate Democrat
Greensboro, Georgia
Mr. Editor:
Twenty-five years ago, I was mayor of a city with a population greater than 60,000. I was reelected and I retired voluntarily, undefeated. I say this not as a boast, but to place my comments in perspective.
That city was served by seven daily and two weekly newspapers. Three of the daily papers and both weekly papers had city hall reporters. Most city council actions were reported in stories published in one or more of the newspapers. Therefore, citizens, who never darkened the door at city hall, had an opportunity to read about city council actions. Unfortunately, Crawfordville does not have the luxury of even one city hall reporter.
In my former city, an ordinance could not be adopted without an advertised public hearing. Advertising required, not only a posting of the proposed ordinance at city hall, but the publication in a local newspaper of a summary description of the ordinance and the time and place of the public hearing. In Crawfordville, I have seen some ordinances advertised in the Advocate, but I certainly did not see the ordinance to impose a garbage collection fee advertised.
I partially agree with the mayor’s policy of not responding to letters in the newspaper. I also partially disagree with his stance. Personally, I would never respond to a personal attack. However, I would respond to an attack on actions by the city council or requests for information of general interest.
It was (and is) my belief that the knowledge many citizens had about city business was limited to material published in the newspaper. In my opinion, leaving a published comment about the conduct of the city’s business as the last word, makes the comment a fact in the minds of many readers.
The responsibility to set the record straight falls upon the mayor. I do not think this obligation can be fulfilled with a town hall meeting or by waiting for people to call or come by city hall. People who won’t do any of these things pay taxes and fees. They also vote. An effort should be made to keep them informed.
The city has as least two low cost ways to reach out to these people with the city administration’s side of any story. Either a letter can be submitted to this newspaper or an insert can be sent with the monthly utility bills. I think they owe us no less.
#######################
9/24/02
The Advocate Democrat
Greensboro, Georgia
Mr. Editor:
The mayor of Crawfordville conducted a town hall meeting on September 23. There was a nice turnout, but only a small portion of the over three hundred locations receiving monthly bills for city services were represented. I hope this communication reaches some of the folks who pay the bills, but did not attend the meeting.
The three city council members, who were present, addressed the group. They appear to be sincere, dedicated people with nothing but the best interest of the city and its citizens at heart. Representatives of the organizations that contract with the city to provide accounting, engineering and grant administration were also present. These folks are experienced professionals. While I would not expect them to bite the hand that feeds them, I doubt that anyone of them would condone misuse of public funds.
There were several heated exchanges between the mayor and some members of the audience. If you are interested in those, you will have to find another source.
An attendee asked, if the feasibility of combining the city police department with the sheriff’s office had been investigated? The answer was, no, the idea has not been explored. The representative from the engineering firm stated the city charter required the city to have a police department. The mayor indicated that the police department is self supporting. End of discussion. Does anyone remember Ludowici*? They had a self supporting police department and a national reputation. It seems to me the question should be studied. A current charter limitation should not prevent the exploration. As I recall, when the mayor took office, he did not have a vote. The city charter was amended. Now he can vote.
There was good news for city taxpayers. Any city taxpayer, who is entitled to a county homestead exemption, will receive an $8,000 homestead exemption on their city tax bill.
The mayor indicated that he does not like it when citizens bring up matters of public business, like the foregoing, in the newspaper. His amen chorus apparently agrees with him. To put it mildly, I vehemently disagree.
The mayor explained the new garbage fee. I am not quoting him. I am stating my understanding of his explanation. The garbage fee was previously embedded somewhere in the fees collected for water, sewer and gas. To comply with the terms of some of the grants received for water and sewer improvements, those fees must be separated from any other fees collected. It is unclear to me whether any other fees are being reduced by this change. The mayor informed us that fees are not set by ordinance. Therefore, there was no need to publicize the intent to increase fees, in advance. I beg to disagree. When government intends to use its police powers to extract more money from the pockets of the public, they have a moral duty to announce it well ahead of the time the action will be taken and the announcement should be in a form likely to reach those most affected.
There were those in the mayor’s amen chorus, who opined that we should go along to get along and that nothing negative about the city should ever appear in print. This country’s very foundation was built on the words that dissenters were able to print. If our founders had been ready to go along to get along, our current anthem would be, God Save the Queen.
*For those who never heard of Ludowici, Georgia, it is a town in south Georgia located on a main route from the north to Florida. For many years, it was listed by the American Automobile Association (AAA) as a speed trap.
#########
6/20/2003
Editor
The Advocate Democrat
Greensboro, GA
Mr. Editor:
Somebody at Crawfordville city hall apparently never saw a freedom they didn’t want to limit. The latest city utility bill contains a proposed ordinance intended to limit on-street parking. What problem is this ordinance intended to solve? How have we survived since horse and buggy days without it?
I recall a time when, on a Saturday afternoon, the streets were lined with parked cars, and pedestrian traffic on the sidewalks was so heavy that it was hard to move about. At that time, on-street parking was never limited. Today, you could fire a shotgun down Broad Street at almost any hour of any day and never harm a soul. NOW, we need to regulate on-street parking? Give me a break.
Is this ordinance designed to solve a problem or promote an agenda? It seems to me that under its existing police powers the city can already ticket or tow a vehicle which is a traffic hazard or impediment. If a vehicle is a hazard or impediment to traffic, why does the ordinance allow it to stay parked for one hour? If it is neither, why must it be moved after one hour?
I looked around for vehicles which could be in violation of the proposed ordinance. There are the Taliaferro Transit buses parked near the Senior Citizens Center. There is the trucker who parks either his rig or car in front of the vacant buildings on Commerce Street. There is my car parked on the dirt strip between the pavement and the sidewalk. There are the vehicles that line the street near the mayor’s business when he holds an event. There are vehicles which sometimes line both sides of Monument Street, near the Sunshine House. Which of these could be the target for this ordinance?
When this ordinance comes up for a vote, I hope a majority of the City Council will place freedom ahead of petty restrictions and vote NO.
In closing, I would like to thank the city for keeping us informed by distributing this ordinance with the utility bill. However, it would have been more informative with an annotation or cover letter explaining that it was a proposed ordinance, to be voted on at the July City Council meeting. ##############
A few months later, Lois Richards, who had held several elective county offices, ran against Easters in the November municipal election. She asked me to serve as her adviser, because of my previous city government experience. I also ran for a seat on the city council.
Mrs. Richards won; I didn't. The editor of our local newspaper basically reported that Easters lost, rather than that Richards won. The entire report seemed to be slanted in favor of the loser. When my follow-up letter to the editor was not published, I bought space to publish the following:
11/14/2003
Editor
The Advocate Democrat
Greensboro, GA 30642
Mr. Editor:
As Lester Maddox once did with the Atlanta fish wrapper*, I have purchased this space to respond to your editorial comments favoring the outgoing mayor.
It seems to me that you, Mr. Editor, have based your evaluation of Mayor Easters on your view from afar. Each time you talked with the mayor, I am certain he was on his best behavior, and I know that he can be a charming man. What you needed to be was a fly on the wall at some of the town hall meetings. You would have seen behavior that, in my opinion, was arrogant, boastful, mean-spirited, quick tempered and out of control. In Crawfordville, such behavior is not overlooked.
Mr. Editor, it appears that the mayor told you about the things he has done to improve the city’s infrastructure. As he has told us, over, and over, and over, and over.... I think most citizens would agree that the city’s infrastructure has been greatly improved. However, if I recall history correctly, many visitors to Nazi Germany were impressed by the fact that Hitler made the trains run on time.
Good government is not about structures, streets, or water and sewer services. It is about how you treat the people you govern. This election was the mayor’s report card.
And that’s my opinion.
*Maddox's name for the Atlanta Journal Constitution.
Before Mrs. Richards was sworn in, she was asked to meet with a representative of the Georgia Public Service Commission to discuss the city owned natural gas system. She was told the existing natural gas system needed many repairs and upgrades, and the city needed to employ a qualified operator. This was just the first hidden problem to surface, more were to come.
Utilities Incorrectly Billed
1/18/2004
The Advocate Democrat
Greensboro, Georgia
Mr. Editor:
To recap a bit of history, that most citizens of Crawfordville already know, the city’s current sewage treatment pond is inadequate to meet present needs. We are under a consent order from the EPD to fix the problem. The previous administration obtained a combined grant and loan from USDA to cover the improvements needed to resolve the problem. As a condition of the grant/loan, the previous administration adopted new sewer rates as of January 2002.
On January 12, 2004, representatives from USDA, the city’s grant specialist, and the city’s engineers met with Mayor Richards. The mayor invited me to participate in the meeting. The purpose of the meeting was to brief the mayor on what has been done and what needs to be done to keep the project on schedule.
After the meeting broke-up, the engineers mentioned the need for the city to adopt the required sewer rates. They were shown the rates the previous administration had adopted and they agreed these were the correct rates. Then they asked to see a few actual bills and they manually calculated the rates applied. The results of their calculations show that no one, using more than the three thousand gallon minimum, is being correctly billed. The bad news is that we are being under billed.
After the engineers departed, I, personally, recalculated a sample of twenty water and sewer bills. I found that not only is the sewer usage being under billed, but the water is, too. To find how long this problem has existed, I selected four of my personal bills dating back to March, 2002. The under billing was featured in all four bills. The most glaring example does not require any calculation at all. Remember the minimum bill covers 3,000 gallons and usage greater than that should be billed at a set rate. One month, my consumption was 3,500 gallons, but I was only billed the minimum for both water and sewer. According to my calculations, the city lost $1.00 on water and $2.38 on sewer on my bill alone that month. I don’t think it would be useful to try to determine how much money was lost during the past two years, since it can’t be recouped. However, I will mention that of the twenty bills I checked, eight, forty percent, were under billed by $8.00 or more, and that is just for one month.
I guess this tale should conclude with, “What is going to happen now?” Simple answer, our bills are going up. The longer answer involves how a correct bill will be produced. The City of Union Point uses the same billing software that Crawfordville uses. Union Point City Clerk Wayne Jackson was kind enough to come down and correctly enter the approved rates into the billing program. This will correct water and sewer billing on a going forward basis.
As a side effect of Wayne’s visit, he discovered the software is not correctly applying our gas rates, either. The software doesn’t appear to correctly handle Crawfordville’s rate structure, which differs from Union Point’ rate structure. The result is Union Point can produce a correctly calculated gas bill, Crawfordville can’t. Wayne is going to contact the software developer about this problem. Once the software problem is resolved, gas billing will be correctly calculated. No effort has been made to recalculate old gas bills, so I don’t know if the new bills will be higher or lower.
Well folks, that’s the news from Lake Woebegone.
####################### 1/18/2004
The Advocate Democrat
Greensboro, Georgia
Mr. Editor:
To recap a bit of history, that most citizens of Crawfordville already know, the city’s current sewage treatment pond is inadequate to meet present needs. We are under a consent order from the EPD to fix the problem. The previous administration obtained a combined grant and loan from USDA to cover the improvements needed to resolve the problem. As a condition of the grant/loan, the previous administration adopted new sewer rates as of January 2002.
On January 12, 2004, representatives from USDA, the city’s grant specialist, and the city’s engineers met with Mayor Richards. The mayor invited me to participate in the meeting. The purpose of the meeting was to brief the mayor on what has been done and what needs to be done to keep the project on schedule.
After the meeting broke-up, the engineers mentioned the need for the city to adopt the required sewer rates. They were shown the rates the previous administration had adopted and they agreed these were the correct rates. Then they asked to see a few actual bills and they manually calculated the rates applied. The results of their calculations show that no one, using more than the three thousand gallon minimum, is being correctly billed. The bad news is that we are being under billed.
After the engineers departed, I, personally, recalculated a sample of twenty water and sewer bills. I found that not only is the sewer usage being under billed, but the water is, too. To find how long this problem has existed, I selected four of my personal bills dating back to March, 2002. The under billing was featured in all four bills. The most glaring example does not require any calculation at all. Remember the minimum bill covers 3,000 gallons and usage greater than that should be billed at a set rate. One month, my consumption was 3,500 gallons, but I was only billed the minimum for both water and sewer. According to my calculations, the city lost $1.00 on water and $2.38 on sewer on my bill alone that month. I don’t think it would be useful to try to determine how much money was lost during the past two years, since it can’t be recouped. However, I will mention that of the twenty bills I checked, eight, forty percent, were under billed by $8.00 or more, and that is just for one month.
I guess this tale should conclude with, “What is going to happen now?” Simple answer, our bills are going up. The longer answer involves how a correct bill will be produced. The City of Union Point uses the same billing software that Crawfordville uses. Union Point City Clerk Wayne Jackson was kind enough to come down and correctly enter the approved rates into the billing program. This will correct water and sewer billing on a going forward basis.
As a side effect of Wayne’s visit, he discovered the software is not correctly applying our gas rates, either. The software doesn’t appear to correctly handle Crawfordville’s rate structure, which differs from Union Point’ rate structure. The result is Union Point can produce a correctly calculated gas bill, Crawfordville can’t. Wayne is going to contact the software developer about this problem. Once the software problem is resolved, gas billing will be correctly calculated. No effort has been made to recalculate old gas bills, so I don’t know if the new bills will be higher or lower.
Well folks, that’s the news from Lake Woebegone.
Water Not Treated
2/1/2004
The Advocate Democrat
Greensboro, GA 30642
Mr. Editor,
One of the often mentioned accomplishments of the previous city administration was chlorinating the water distributed to our homes. Strangely enough, this benefit was terminated before that administration left office. On January 14, 2004, the State Environmental Protection Division (EPD) investigated two anonymous complaints and found the city was not in compliance with requirements to have, “chlorine disinfection in its Permitted Public Drinking Water System.”
The city has two wells in service, Well #1 across the street opposite the Presbyterian Church and Well #4 east of Highway 22, in a cow pasture, near the Mile Branch (more about this later). The EPD investigator and Councilman Bobby Chapman, “went to both Well # 1 and Well # 4 and found that the chlorine feeder pumps were not operating.”
A contractor, working for the city, brought the chlorine pump at Well #1 back on line that day. New chlorine pumps were installed at both wells by January 16.
The history of Well #4 begins with its drilling during the previous administration. In August 2002 and August 2003, reports to the City Council indicated the water supply from this well was not adequate to meet the city’s needs. Last month, the EPD found, “At Well # 4, the chlorine container was dirty and must be replaced. The injection line contained a leak and needs to be closer to the injection point. The ground around the outside of the well house was eroding and contained manure due to the cattle in the pasture where the well is located. In trying to locate an area around the well house to place a fence, it was determined no survey or warranty deed exists to indicate the City owns Well # 4.”
It appears to me that this well has been in a pasture and not on city property from the day it went on line. As an interested citizen, I wonder why EPD just got around to finding these conditions to be a problem. In any event, I understand the site is now fenced and negotiations are underway for the city to acquire ownership.
I have quoted only selected highlights from the EPD letter. Its entire contents, in mind numbing detail, is available at city hall for your review.
##########
Funds Not Managed
2/6/2004
The Advocate Democrat
Greensboro, GA 30631
Mr. Editor:
In my mind one of the top responsibilities of government is managing the money it takes from us. The current Crawfordville city administration hasn’t had much time to show us how it will handle our money. We do, however, have access to incomplete records that tell us how the previous administration handled our funds.
When the new administration took office, one of its first discoveries was stacks and scattered pieces of unopened correspondence. This correspondence contained many past due bills and numerous undeposited checks.
Several of the past due bills were from Georgia Power Company. Early last month, a representative of that company came by city hall to say he was supposed to cutoff power to our well pumps. Fortunately, he was reasonable and no service interruption occurred. I wonder if among the vendors we are known as a deadbeat city?
All previously undeposited checks found were deposited in the bank. It was known that some of the checks could be too old to be valid. As it turned out, twelve checks, amounting to $1877.28, bounced. Most bounced checks are from reputable companies, who will send a new check, but some funds may be lost forever.
Although files are incomplete, I have reviewed many of the bills the city actually paid last year. I found a couple of things that were interesting to me. I hope you agree.
In April 2001, when the new city complex was being renovated, the City Council voted the mayor a $300 per month truck allowance, for the use of his truck during the renovation process. He continued to draw $300 every month from that vote until he left office. That amounted to $3600 last year.
Most residents of Crawfordville know there have been water leaks and other infrastructure problems throughout the city. In recent years, when a problem occurred, you would see Bob Anderson and his tractor working at the site. Did you ever wonder what the repairs cost the city? Well, in 2003, we paid Bob Anderson over $53,000.
Several people have been kind enough to tell me they appreciated my letter forewarning them of the change in water, sewer and gas billing. Now that the bills are out, I understand that at least one local citizen says that Wayne Jackson must have applied Union Point rates, rather than Crawfordville rates. Nothing could be farther from the truth. After the correct Crawfordville rates were entered into the program, a customer bill was produced. Wayne and I, separately, manually calculated the amount, based on Crawfordville rates. All three results were identical. It is unfortunate that the billing correction occurred just as natural gas prices reached their highest level of the season, but the calculations are correct. And they are based on rates adopted by the Crawfordville City Council.
Until next time.
###################
Incomplete Audit
2/14/2004
The Advocate Democrat
Greensboro, GA 30642
Mr. Editor,
Last fall this paper published a report from the State Auditor advising that the City of Crawfordville’s audits for 2000, 2001 and 2002 had not been accepted by the state. In the same edition, you published a letter from the city’s auditor, Don Briscoe, accepting responsibility for the audits being rejected. He said the audits were not accepted because his firm’s credentials were not in order, and he would correct the problem.
In a letter dated February 4, 2004, the State Auditor advised the city that previously identified deficiencies in the year 2000 Audit Report have not been corrected. This letter further states that state agencies would be notified to suspend transmittal of all state grant funds until the corrected audit report is received.
So far as I can tell, none of the issues cited by the State Auditor, in October 2003, have anything to do with the qualifications of Mr. Briscoe’s firm, unless errors and omissions are considered measurements of competence. The city received three grants from the Governor’s Discretionary Fund in the year 2000. For each grant, the city is required to submit a form certified by the local government and its auditor that the funds were used solely for the purpose for which they were granted. Failure to comply, results in forfeiture of the grant and requires the city to return the funds to the state.
This is serious stuff. The total of the three grants is $32,000. If the city is required to return these funds to the state, every citizen of Crawfordville will feel the impact. I believe the city should advise Mr. Briscoe to either fix the problem or prepare to be taken to court.
Three other items cited by the State Auditor appear less serious, but still must be addressed by the city’s auditor. These items relate to information which should be disclosed in Notes to the Financial Statement. While these requirements do not appear to be onerous, they must be corrected for the city to secure state approval of the year 2000 audit.
The State Auditor also lists an additional eleven items the city’s auditor must include in future audits. I think this direction applies to year 2001 and beyond. If my assessment is correct, the 2001 and 2002 audits will again be rejected by the state for failure to address these items. That’s if the audit otherwise meets state requirements, not a given by any means.
Until next time.
##################
Stiffing the IRS
2/21/2004
The Advocate Democrat
Greensboro, GA 30642
Mr. Editor:
Anyone who has received a paycheck knows that their take home pay is just a shadow of the wages they earn, because of amounts withheld. A big chunk of the withholding is for Federal taxes, i. e. income tax, Social Security and Medicare. An employer is supposed to send these withheld amounts, along with the employer’s contribution to Social Security and Medicare, to the U. S. Treasury each quarter.
Did you know that we, citizens of Crawfordville, are behind in paying the city’s obligations to the U. S. Treasury? In October 2003, the city received notice that it owed almost $10,000 due to underpayment of its year 2000 tax obligation. This was after receiving, in July, notice of tax amounts due for the third and fourth quarters of 2001 and the first quarter of 2002. The sum of these latter debts is over $6,000. The only record of a payment to settle these debts, I’ve found, is a $500 check issued last August. That payment doesn’t even cover the interest the IRS charges.
Some have asked, why delve into past mistakes? My answer is, past mistakes frequently result in current debts. I want to know whose mistake I am paying for, and pay we will. These debts must be paid off, and the only sure source of money is our tax dollars. Furthermore, I resent the fact that money withheld from employees’ wages was not forwarded to the Federal treasury in a timely manner, as was the city’s duty. I also resent the fact that the interest the IRS charges on unpaid taxes balloons the final cost to us to ridiculously high levels.
Until next time.
###################
Stiffing Our Insurance Carrier
2/28/2004
The Advocate Democrat
Greensboro, Georgia 30631
Mr. Editor:
Someday I hope to write good news about the City of Crawfordville’s fiscal status. Unfortunately, today is not that day. Most of us have heard of Workers Compensation and may have a general idea what it is, but I will define it as the State of Georgia does.
From the georgia.gov internet site, “The Workers’ Compensation Act defines the responsibility of the employer to provide prompt medical and disability benefits for injuries sustained on the job by workers, resulting in partial or total incapacity or death. In return, the employer is shielded from tort liability for these injuries.”
Failure to provide the coverage is a criminal act. From the same source, “Employers refusing or willfully neglecting to secure insurance coverage as required by law shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be punishable by a fine of not less than $1,000.00 or more than $10,000.00 or imprisonment not to exceed 12 months, or both.”
You may wonder what the above has to do with the City of Crawfordville. Well, the city is an employer and the city did not pay its Workers Comp insurance bill last year. We did not become a criminal city because our insurer, the Georgia Municipal Association, carried us, on the cuff, all year. (I wonder if they would have continued to carry us if an employee had received an expensive injury?)
As things stand today, last year’s premium, $2,837, was paid last week and this year’s premium, $2,872, will be paid, shortly.
Last week I reported the city was being billed by the IRS for unpaid past due taxes. Since that writing, the city’s original Employer’s Quarterly Federal Tax Return for October 2003, with a “SIGN HERE” sticker in place, has turned up at city hall, unsigned. This document was prepared by the city’s auditor and forwarded to the city to be signed and mailed to the IRS. It states that the amount due for the third quarter of 2003 has been deposited with the IRS. It is possible that a duplicate of this return was filed. However, this original copy was neither signed nor filed with IRS. There is probably a penalty for not filing.
In the folder with the federal tax return, were three original vouchers to the State of Georgia covering withholding tax payments for each month of the third quarter. These vouchers, each of which is intended to be accompanied by a check, were never signed, despite “SIGN HERE” stickers, and have not been filed with the state. Again, it is possible that duplicates of these vouchers were filed with the state, but no evidence to that effect exists. The total amount involved here is about $1,300.
Until next time.
#######################
The Bills Don't Add Up
3/7/2004
The Advocate Democrat
Greensboro, GA 30642
Mr. Editor:
This correspondence may sound as if I’ve stopped providing information and started meddling. In January, the citizens of Crawfordville received utility bills that were the largest most folks had ever seen. My subsequent research indicates the bills should have been larger. I know nobody wants to hear this, but the city has to pay for the services we receive, and we are its only source of funds. Let me explain my findings.
The city has received a past due bill from the firm that formerly collected our garbage. The bill is for the last three months of 2003. It amounts to more than $9,000. As fair minded people, I think most of us would agree that we received the service and we should pay the bill.
I don’t know if the past administration would have paid this bill, if they had collected the money. The truth is, they did not collect enough money on the last bill they rendered to cover the costs of garbage collection. Further, the new administration used the same method to calculate its first bills, with the same results. Collections don’t cover costs.
All city utility rates set by the City Council are based on a bill being sent every month. The last bill rendered by the previous administration covers an interval from early October to early December, about two months. Meters were not read in December. Consequently, the first bill rendered by this administration covered the period from early December 2003 until near January 22 2004, almost two months.
During the period covered by the two bills, we had garbage pickup for four months, but users were only billed for two months’ service. The companies who provided this service expect the city to pay them for all four months. The city does not have the funds to make the payments, because it did not collect enough money. I have recommended to the City Council that they add these charges to a future bill, after gas usage drops to a lower level.
At the time I addressed the City Council, I had not thought through the full impact of the billing mistakes. The rule that applies for garbage collection also applies to all other services appearing on the bill. As a rough estimate, I would say that each user was under billed by $12.00 for gas, $10.00 for water and $15.25 for sewer on each bill. These adjustments should be offset, for consumers who used over 3,000 gallons of water, by the amount paid for that quantity of water and sewage, up to 6,000 gallons..
If you add in the $9.75 per month garbage collection charge, before adjustments, a user of all services was under billed by $47.00 on each bill or $94.00 over the four month time span. This means the city has failed to collect over $10,000 in revenue that it should have billed and collected, on each of the last two bills.. In some cities, a $20,000 oversight might not be significant, but in Crawfordville, $20,000 is big money. I think proper stewardship of the city’s finances requires the City Council to collect this money from us.
Until next time
####################
Summary of Findings
3/14/2004
The Advocate Democrat
Greensboro, GA 30642
Mr. Editor:
Last week Mrs. Draper-Jones wrote, “The tone of the letters written by Mr. Milner imply that we were incompetent at best or criminal at worst.” Mr. Editor, I have cited facts which I can backup with either documents or the testimony of other witnesses. I leave it to the reader to decide what implications to draw from the cited facts.
Let’s recap some of those facts, (date published in parentheses):
1. The city did not correctly calculate our bills for water, sewer or gas service for at least the past two years. (1/23/04)
2. The new city administration found stacks of unopened correspondence containing both past due bills and overage payments to the city. (2/13/04)
3. Until his term in office ended, the previous mayor continued to draw a $300 per month truck allowance, originally authorized in April 2001 in connection with the renovation of city hall. (2/13/04)
4. The State Auditor has advised the city that its year 2000 Audit Report was previously rejected and had not been corrected. (2/20/04)
5. The city owes the IRS money for unpaid 2000, 2001 and 2002 taxes. (2/27/04)
6. The bill for the year 2003 Workers Compensation insurance, due in February 2003, was not paid by the previous administration. (3/5/04)
7. The original unfiled state and federal tax returns for October 2003 were found in a file at city hall. (3/5/04)
8. The final utility bill rendered by the previous administration covered two months of usage, but was calculated using the one month rate, under billing by at least $10,000. This is not the same error mentioned in item 1, above. (In fairness, I must say the new administration did the same thing, but they had less than three weeks experience. The previous administration had four years experience.) (3/12/04)
Two facts can be established from the above list. (1) The city neither billed nor collected all of the revenue it should have. (2) Even though the city must have had money at some point during the year, it did not pay all past due bills.
A fact that I consider noteworthy, but had not previously mentioned, no friend of the mayor ever failed to be paid. Bob Anderson, City Attorney Wheeler, and City Auditor Briscoe, who never got an audit accepted by the state, always got paid on time. Yet, the IRS, an agency with the power to seize any bank account it chooses, gets ignored. Go figure.
Until next time,
#####################
What Others Are Saying
3/28/2004
The Advocate Democrat
Greensboro GA 30642
Mr. Editor:
During the weekend of March 20th, the City of Crawfordville’s recently elected mayor and council members participated in training the state provides for newly elected public officials. I understand one speaker mentioned that some cities had not had an audit accepted by the state for three years. Later on, Crawfordville was identified as such a city. It was also identified as a city no longer eligible to receive state grants. Surely, this is not the kind of recognition we seek or desire.
And what of our former auditor who left this fine mess? Since Mr. Briscoe was fired, he has failed to respond to any correspondence from the mayor. He has also failed to respond to correspondence from the city’s new auditor. I believe a licensed professional has duties and responsibilities that transcend termination. It seems to me he has an obligation to turn over all documents created for the City of Crawfordville to either the city or its designee.
The consequences of Mr. Briscoe’s past performance are potentially devastating for the city. Considerable expense will be involved in clearing past audit discrepancies with a new auditor. I think the city should pursue legal action against Mr. Briscoe, and also bring his behavior to the attention of the licensing board.
Mr. Editor, I hear via the local grapevine that a former elected city official is saying the information I’ve published is untrue. In response to this, I make the following offer. I will show the documents that backup my previous assertions to anyone who comes by city hall, while I’m there. I cannot commit the mayor or city clerk, but I believe they will be helpful, when I’m not around.
Until next time,
#######################
Stiffing Everybody
4/5/2004
The Advocate Democrat
Greensboro, GA 30642
Mr. Editor:
As I try to get a handle on the City of Crawfordville’s current financial condition, I continue to find unpaid, past due bills left by the previous administration. For instance, last year, our garbage was dumped at McDuffie County Solid Waste. The last payment the city made to this firm was in June 2003. This got the account caught up through January 2003. Including finance charges, the city now owes this company $7,800 for February through December 2003.
Then, there is the case of the city’s property and motor vehicle insurance coverage. A $7,600 premium was due in September 2003. No payment was made until the new administration took office last January. Then half the premium was paid. Despite this payment, the city received a notice, dated February 16, stating the policy had been canceled. This was followed by a notice, dated the next day, which reinstated the policy and gave the city until May 4 to pay the remaining premium. This little fiasco cost the city an extra $43.
The city is being dunned by debt collectors. In one case, an invoice indicates John Jones purchased 24 padlocks for $174, in September 2003. Current city employees have not seen these high priced locks. In fact, the current administration has found it necessary to purchase additional locks to secure critical locations. Maybe this is a matter for the city police to investigate.
In December 2003, the city received a collection notice for past due state withholding taxes for August 2002 in the amount, with penalties, of $548. And this is not the only carryover from August 2002 of funds due the State of Georgia.
A separate notice from the State of Georgia / DNR, also received in December 2003, indicates the city has not paid drinking water fees, for laboratory testing, etc., due in August 2002 and August 2003. The total fees due amount to $4,700. This notice indicates all drinking water services under this agreement have been suspended.
In the long run, this may not be as bad for the city as it sounds. When this notice was reviewed with the contractor, who oversees the operation of our water and sewer system, he indicated the charges appeared excessive. Upon further investigation, he determined the price is based on four wells. The city currently has only two wells in service. This fact will reduce future bills, but no concession will be made on the past due amount. In the end, we may actually be able to cut costs, but not right now.
Until next time,
####################
The City's Financial Condition January 1, 2004
5/22/2004
The Advocate Democrat
Greensboro GA 30642
Mr. Editor:
For almost five months, I have worked to create accounting records for the City of Crawfordville. I started with no city financial records and no help from the former city auditor. The cost to the city has been the purchase prices of a decent computer, accounting software, and a chair. Now, I believe I have a handle on the state of the city’s finances, on New Year’s Day 2004. The basic accounting data the new city auditors will require for a year 2003 audit are available for their use.
Perhaps some local citizens will be interested in the state of the city’s finances, on January 1, 2004. The city has several bank accounts, some of which may only be used for specific purposes (example: Labor Day Fair). The funds available in unrestricted bank accounts the first of this year amounted to $8,500. Current debts of the city, generally past due, amounted to $67,700.
That is a difference of more than $59,000. These are debts I can document. However, I have an uncomfortable feeling that the city did not fully pay payroll taxes to the state and federal governments, last year.
This indebtedness is spread over more than thirty business firms and government agencies. Some business have the clout required to force payment. If, for instance, Georgia Power cut the city’s electric service, there would be no street lights and no water service. Some other businesses can also withhold services, in one way or another, until paid. And government agencies will eventually get paid. The question then become, “What will happen to firms with no leverage?”
An example, the city ended the year owing almost $7,000 in garbage collection charges and $7,600 in landfill fees. Without question, Crawfordville residents received the service. The firms did their jobs, for our benefit, but were never paid.
Former Congressman J. C. Watts once said, “Character is doing the right thing when nobody’s looking.” We now know some things the previous administration did while nobody was looking. How will the current administration handle this situation?
Until next time,
##########################
More Incomplete Audits
5/30/2004
The Advocate Democrat
Greensboro, GA 30642
Mr. Editor:
The City of Crawfordville has received two letters, both dated May 20, 2004, reiterating the fact that the city’s audits for the years 2000 and 2001 were found not acceptable by the State Auditor. Since city officials had previously been told that the city’s audit for 2002 had not been accepted, either, the city’s current auditor inquired of state officials about its status. He was told the year 2002 audit for Crawfordville was never received by the state.
In retrospect, the only audit submitted by the previous city administration found acceptable by the State of Georgia was the audit for 1999, the final year of the Reynolds’ administration. Thanks, Harry.
In 2000, the city received state grants of ten, ten, and twelve thousand dollars, a total of $32,000. For each grant, the audit should contain a certification, by both the local government and its auditor, that the funds were used solely for the purpose for which the grant was made. Failure to comply results in forfeiture of the grant and return to the state of any grant funds received by the city. The year 2000 audit was rejected because the three required certifications were not provided.
In 2001, the city received additional state grants of twenty-five, fifteen, five, and ten thousand dollars, a total of $55,000. No certificates were filed for any of these grants, nor were certificates filed for any of the grants obtained the previous year. An additional item to be corrected was the need for the auditor to have a, “live permit for the practice of public accountancy.” This one finding appears consistent with the explanation published in Mr. Briscoe’s letter to the Advocate, last fall. However, his letter overlooked all of the other reasons the audits were rejected.
At this point, we know the city received $87,000 in grants from the state over the years 2000 and 2001, and no one has certified the funds were appropriately spent. We do not know anything at all about the city’s finances for 2002. This latter situation cannot be allowed to continue. The state will not tolerate it, nor will the current city administration.
I hear by the grapevine that the former mayor, whose leadership left the above financial problems, is attempting to orchestrate a drive to recall our current mayor. While I doubt that grounds for a recall exist, he is free to make the attempt. The state legislature has made the recall of an elected official very difficult. (A form of self preservation, no doubt.) The first requirement is to recruit sponsors of the recall application equal in number to 10 percent of the registered voters in the last election. That’s over 40 people. When a legal application is filed with the election supervisor, the target of the recall must be notified. At that point, the recall target may petition the circuit court for review of the sufficiency of the grounds for the recall. If the recall petition survives all challenges, the petitioners must then obtain, within 30 days, the signatures of registered voters equal to 30 percent of those registered in the last election. That is more than 120 valid signatures, and that number is greater than the number of votes the loser received in the last election.
Until next time,
####################
Condition of Natural Gas System
6/26/2004
The Advocate Democrat
Greensboro, GA 30642
Mr. Editor:
At the June meeting of the Crawfordville City Council, representatives of Tri-County Natural Gas (TCNG) discussed a proposal to purchase the city's natural gas distribution system. Council members agreed to consider the offer and to seek expert advice before taking any action.
I suppose the first question one would ask is, "Why would the City Council even think about selling the gas system?"
That's a fair question, which deserves an answer. Let's review some facts.
First, the gas system was installed in the mid 1960s. This means it is nearly forty years old. According to the city's longtime technical advisor on gas matters, the system has neither been updated nor adequately maintained, since it was built. He estimates an investment of about $300,000 would be required to bring the system up to current standards. There are no grants available for modernizing a gas system.
One symptom indicating the condition of our gas system is the percentage of purchased gas lost and not delivered to the customers. The loss rate generally accepted in the gas industry is three percent. The City of Union Point claims a zero percent loss. During 2003, the City of Crawfordville lost as much as thirty percent in one month. This means the city is billing for seventy percent of the gas received, but having to pay for 100% of it. The city's markup on gas is not enough to cover this level of loss.
In case you are wondering, "What happened to the lost gas?" It didn't all just leak out into the air. According to the expert, gas meters should be replaced at eight to ten year intervals. If meters aren't replaced at the proper interval, they will slow down. This means more gas flows through the meter than the amount shown on the gauges. Basically, customers used much of the missing gas, but were not billed for it.
A second reason to consider selling the gas system is the change in government regulations over the last forty years. In the sixties, there were few regulations. Today, our local gas system is covered by federal regulations, and these regulations are enforced by the Georgia Public Service Commission (PSC).
The regulations having the greatest financial impact upon the city involve the qualifications of the system's operator. The funds required to conform to current regulations exceed the net income from gas sales; that's revenue left after paying for the gas. The annual pay for a qualified gas person would exceed $30,000. The initial training to qualify a person would cost over $10,000. The city currently has none of the tools and test equipment a gas operator would require (cost over $15,000). The annual training, to keep a gas operator up-to-date, would run about $4,000. The expert also believes, the gas system operator would need an assistant, especially during any type of emergency.
Lastly, the gas system is not currently in compliance with federal regulations, and the PSC could begin imposing fines at any time.
In summary, after almost forty years of use, the Crawfordville gas distribution system is worn out. The costs of upgrading the system, plus the costs of operating it are greater than the city can afford.
The City Council could increase the markup on the gas it sells, but this, along with the ever increasing cost to purchase gas, would probably cause many customers to disconnect.
The city has received an offer from TCNG for the gas distribution system. TCNG would become the owner and operator of the system, with rates set by the PSC. TCNG would have to comply with all federal regulations, and like Georgia Power and Wilkes Telephone, would pay the city a franchise fee and ad valorem tax, each year.
The purchase offer made by TCNG is in the range of sales prices recommended by the city's gas consultant. The offer has also been looked at by the gas system experts at the Georgia Municipal Association, and found reasonable.
At a special City Council meeting, on June 24, 2004, the council members reviewed all of the above facts, and voted unanimously to sell the city's gas system to TCNG. As I understand it, a formal city ordinance must be prepared, set for public hearing, and adopted to finalize the deal. The council members want this process to be on a fast track.
As a result of the City Council's action, TCNG has agreed to accept maintenance responsibility for the gas system, immediately. It is believed this action will satisfy current concerns of the PSC, and allow the city to avoid being fined, while the sale is completed.
Until next time,
#####################
My opponent and the winner of a city council seat in the November 2003 municipal election passed away, without attending a 2004 city council meeting. I was appointed to serve until a special election. I was unopposed in the special election.
7/18/2004
The Advocate Democrat
Greensboro GA 30642
Mr. Editor:
As you report, the Crawfordville City Council appointed me to fill the vacancy on the Council, until the September 21st municipal election. I, hereby, publicly thank each Council member for the honor they have bestowed upon me. I look forward to working with them for the betterment of our city.
The mayor has received another letter from the state reiterating the fact that the city’s 2001 audit has not been accepted by the state. The letter again reminds the mayor that the state can demand the refund of any grant funds not spent for the purpose for which they were granted. The burden of proof lies with the city.
The city’s auditor has asked that I develop financial records for previous years, so that he can help the city find a way out of the current situation. As I dug through old records, I struck gold. I found four checks from November 2002, each in its own unopened envelop. The sum of the checks amounted to more than $800. One of these checks, for $458, was from the County Tax Commissioner. That check is still good because the Commissioner stood behind it. However, the funds the other checks represent are gone, forever.
Previously, I have written that the City Council approved a $300 per month truck allowance for the former mayor in April 2002. This allowance, approved while the new city hall was under construction, continued until the former mayor left office. A further search of the records reveals the former mayor began drawing a $100 monthly car allowance in January 2000 and continued to do so until he received the raise to $300. I don’t know if this allowance was approved by City Council. I do know, he also received mileage for out of town conferences and training.
In closing, I hope everyone cherishes the memory of the town’s Christmas decorations back in 2000. We paid $1,250 to have an artist hang and remove the decorations. Oh, the artist was a relative of the then mayor.
#######################
Speed Trap
9/11/2004
The Advocate Democrat
Greensboro GA 30642
Mr. Editor:
A supporter of our former mayor told me I write too much about the past. She also mentioned an issue she had been trying to get the city to resolve for three and one-half years. Who was bringing up the past, there?
I readily admit to writing about things that happened in the past. Frankly, I think I am a better historian than prophet. I have spent many hours, since January 1, digging through city files in an attempt to develop some semblance of financial records for the city. In doing this, I sometimes find information I think the citizens of Crawfordville should know. Anything I report is an act or omission I believe will affect the taxpayers. Sometimes it is necessary to summarize an old issue, when reporting a new one. Also, I did prepare one overall summary, several months back. However, in general, it is my intention to bring new information to the public’s attention.
Now, I want to report a current event. On August 31, 2004, the Georgia Department of Public Safety sent a letter to the mayor finding that the City of Crawfordville had operated a speed trap in 2003. As a result of this finding, the city’s radar permit has been placed on probation for two years. During the period of probation, “ [T]he Crawfordville Police Department is prohibited from utilizing speed detection devices in any manner other than for purposes of promoting the public health, welfare, and safety. Any violation of this probation condition will result in the revocation of the Police Department’s permit.”
How did this come to pass? A Crawfordville police officer ticketed the wrong guy. The ticketed driver filed a complaint with the Department of Public Safety, and they conducted an investigation.
The investigation led to only one finding against the City of Crawfordville. The finding was that speeding fines generated more than 40% of the Crawfordville Police Department’s budget. The letter states, “Where revenues are generated from speeding fines in excess of 40% the law enforcement agency’s budget, a presumption of improper purpose arises. (Emphasis added.) The investigation concluded that speeding fines amounted to 79% of the Crawfordville Police Department’s budget.”
The letter continues, “Due to this finding, the Department [of Public Safety] is compelled to take action regarding the radar operation permit issued to the Crawfordville Police Department. The Department’s action, however, is mitigated by the fact that there has been a recent change in administration of the Crawfordville Police Department. Since beginning this investigation, the administration of Crawfordville has changed. You [Mayor Richards] have recently taken over the city’s operations and the Police Chief and any officers working at the time of this complaint have resigned.”
The letter concludes with, “In light of these administrative changes, the radar permit issued to the City of Crawfordville will not be revoked or suspended. However, the radar permit ... will be placed on two (2) years probation. ... [E]ffective September 30, 2004.” (Emphasis theirs.)
I said above that I was not a prophet and I’ll stick with that. However, after a Town Hall meeting, on Sept 23, 2002, in a letter published in The Advocate, I wrote, “The mayor indicated that the police department is self supporting. End of discussion. Does anyone remember Ludowici? They had a self supporting police department and a national reputation.”
For folks too young to remember Ludowici, it is a Georgia town on U. S. Highway 301. US 301 was a primary route from the northeast to Florida before I-95 opened. Ludowici, in its day, was probably the most notorious speed trap in the nation. It may well be the reason for the law that caused Crawfordville to be placed on probation.
Until next time,
###################
More from the IRS
11/21/2004
The Advocate Democrat
Greensboro GA 30642
Mr. Editor:
Supporters of our former mayor say we should move on and look to the future, rather than continuing to look back. This may be the right thing to do, but the city’s creditors just don’t see it that way. For instance, the folks over at the IRS just won’t forget about those unpaid taxes.
In several pieces of correspondence, all dated November 15, 2004, the IRS has requested various payments. The largest single amount, $13,164, is a penalty for failing to file Forms W-2 with the IRS for the year 2001. Presumably, the city prepared W-2s which were furnished to employees, but copies were not filed directly with the IRS. The penalty has no relationship to any taxes the city may owe. It is simply an assessment for failing to comply with the tax laws. This correspondence from the IRS also specified other tax and interest assessments against the city. The current balance due from September 2001 is $1,820, from December 2001, $4,688 and from March 2002, $95. This all adds up to a total of $19,767.
In a recent telephone conversation, an IRS representative said the city failed to file Forms W-2 for 2000. This brings forth another $9,950 penalty. During the same conversation, the IRS representative also said the City of Crawfordville had failed to file quarterly tax returns for the fourth quarter of 2002 and all four quarters of 2003. The taxes and penalties for these breeches of the law are unknown, at this time.
The IRS has not yet determined if the city filed Forms W-2 for the years 2002 and 2003. Based on past performance, I don’t expect the W-2s to be found. This means more penalties will be assessed against the city.
Until next time,
#############################
A Few Words from Mayor Richards
August 14, 2006
Advocate Democrat
Greensboro, GA 30642
Citizens of Crawfordville:
When my term of office began, the City of Crawfordville was under an order from the State Environmental Protection Division to stop polluting the waters down stream from its sewage treatment pond. Studies, already completed by the City’s engineers, had determined that the City would have to build a sewage treatment plant to comply with the order. State and federal commitments for grant funds to partially pay for sewage plant construction had been obtained. As a condition of the federal grant, the City was committed to issue $450,000 in water and sewer revenue bonds to be paid off over the next forty years. The City was obligated to actually spend the $450,000 before the bonds could be issued. To do this, the City had to borrow money from the local bank to fund the first $450,000 of the project’s cost. Before the 1st of January 2004, this loan was already in effect and significant funds had been spent to design the sewage treatment plant.
On August 7, 2006, the water and sewer revenue bonds were issued and the bank loan was retired. The bonds could not be issued so long as the Internal Revenue Service had outstanding claims against the City. Therefore, based on the advice of the city attorney, and against my personal wishes, I have settled all claims the IRS had against the previous administration. The cost to Crawfordville taxpayers was over $33,000.
The payments to the IRS covered unpaid taxes, plus accumulated interest, for the third quarter of 2001 ($2,033.54) and the fourth quarter of 2001 ($5,103.39). Additionally, civil penalties, plus accumulated interest, for the City failing to file W-2 forms with the IRS for the year 2000 ($11,609.81) and the year 2001 ($14,701.57) were paid. The third and fourth quarter 2001 taxes were legitimate debts of the City, which should have been settled in 2001, when they were due. However, there is no excuse for the City to have been subject to civil penalties for failing to take care of business, and not filing W-2 forms with the IRS.
We have settled all claims the IRS had against the City on August 7, 2006. I wish I could tell you that the IRS will not have any additional claims against the City, but I can not. I have seen evidence that some tax returns were not filed during 2003. There are also indications that some taxes may not have been paid for the years 2002 and 2003 and we simply do not know if the W-2 forms were filed with the IRS for those years.
I close by assuring you that during my administration all required IRS forms have been filed and all taxes due have been paid. Along with you, I wait to see if the IRS will make new claims for earlier years against the City.
Lois Richards, Mayor
Click & see third story
