Category Archives: Lowndes County Commission

“We’ve been chosen” —Barbara Stratton

Received Saturday on Public hearing doesn’t mean the public gets to know anything. -jsq
I’ve made these same comments before. It’s just part of the attitude that is popular with some elected & appointed officials “We’ve been chosen. Now go away & don’t ask any questions about what we are doing until it’s time to vote again.” I don’t think all the individuals share the attitude, but some do & over time it has become standard procedure. Hopefully, as more citizens pay attention & ask for more insight procedure will adjust. There is a reason for open meetings & sunshine laws & it’s not so citizens can listen to or read about decisions based on information they are not allowed to hear or observe.

-Barbara Stratton

Public hearing doesn’t mean the public gets to know anything

Jane Osborn wrote:
Requesting such a hearing before January 24 would give the opportunity to have all this information presented and for questions to be asked and answered.
Except that’s not the way it works around here. Public hearing locally means the chairman or mayor or whoever says “Who wants to speak for?” and maybe somebody speaks. And then “Who wants to speak against?” and maybe somebody speaks. It doesn’t mean that the Commission or the Council or the Authority presents anything for the public to consider.

Witness the hearing the Lowndes County Commission held in December on the documents related to the Comprehensive Plan. The only reason the public knew anything about what was in those documents was that Gretchen got them from somewhere else after the Commission refused to supply them in response to an open records request. The Commission never distributed any of the relevant documents to the public. Only one citizen spoke, perhaps because nobody else knew what to speak about.

Almost none of the local municipalities or boards or authorities routinely present to the public the information that is in the packets they see before the discuss or vote. There are rare exceptions, such as the VLMPO and other organizations or projects administered by the Southern Georgia Regional Commission (SGRC). SGRC is a state agency, not a local agency. Why does Lowndes County and all its municipalities and boards avoid transparency?

Why can’t you, the public, see what’s in a rezoning request before Continue reading →

No public hearing unless someone asks for it —Jane Osborn

Received yesterday on Public transportation and public records in Lowndes County,
Another issue here is that there will be no public hearing on this issue unless someone ASKS for it. Without a hearing, it just goes forward with no other public information about being presented. Anyone may ask for a hearing, but I would especially think that there are people who really need a functional system that is not just focused on people who have access to Medicaid as a payment source due to illness or disability. Requesting such a hearing before January 24 would give the opportunity to have all this information presented and for questions to be asked and answered.

-Jane Osborn

What is MIDS, anyway?

Here’s a bit from a VDT article about MIDS, by Malynda Fulton 11 July 2009, The bus stops here: Proposed plan will not affect county buses
Lowndes County officials assure citizens who use the county’s current transit program that they will not be affected if the proposed Valdosta-Lowndes County Transit Service Plan is implemented in the area.

The current Lowndes County 5311 Transit Program falls under the jurisdiction of the Georgia Department of Transportation. Ten percent of the program is subsidized by the state and 80 percent is subsidized by federal funds. Lowndes County provides 10 percent of the cost of each bus.

Lowndes County’s 5311 Transit Program was implemented in December 2001 with only three buses. The program now includes six buses that provide transportation throughout Lowndes County.

That may make MIDS the biggest bus system in the county. VSU may have more busses. Does Moody run busses?

More about MIDS: Continue reading →

Public transportation and public records in Lowndes County

Jane Osborn asked me 6 Jan 2011:
Here are the notices about public transportation that was supposed to be done some time ago. I am trying to figure out how the county will compensate private providers for all this transportation.
Good question. I can’t answer it, but maybe I can point at some related information that might help.

She was referring to two public notices in the VDT of that same day, Exhibit 8B, which is about the MIDS service, which is one of the ones in the list in Exhibit 8A. If you call MIDS, a small van will pick you up and deliver you, all for a flat fee, if I understand it correctly. It’s the closest thing we have to a bus system around here.

It looks like MIDS comes up for renewal about every two years, according to the agendas: Continue reading →

Ankle monitoring system budget adjustment: Lowndes County Commission 9-10 January 2012

Two more board appointments, several road and infrastructure items, and a budget adjustment to the ankle monitoring system, among many other items on the agenda for the Lowndes County Commission. The Commission will vote Tuesday on its meeting schedule and its budget calendar. This morning’s meeting is the Work Session; no voting during that, but maybe some information that won’t get mentioned Tuesday.

They can change their meeting schedule at any time. Did you know they had a special called meeting December 1st? They didn’t mention that during their 12-13 Dec meetings; there’s no agenda for it on their web pages; and this agenda doesn’t say what it was for.

Here’s the agenda.

LOWNDES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
PROPOSED AGENDA
WORK SESSION, MONDAY, JANUARY 9, 2012, 8:30 a.m.
REGULAR SESSION, TUESDAY, JANUARY 10, 2012, 5:30 p.m.
327 N. Ashley Street – 2nd Floor
Continue reading →

More County Commission Transparency: Chatham County, Georgia

The Chatham County, Georgia Board of Commissioners has its agendas and minutes online. The agenda for 2 December 2011 does not include the detailed packet materials for most of the items to be voted on. However, it does include a table of dollar amounts and other details for bids that were to be voted on, so the public doesn’t have to go to the work session and scribble down what staff read aloud.

There’s also this interesting boilerplate:

Proposed changes to ordinances must be read or presented in written form at two meetings held not less than one week apart. A vote on the following listed matters will occur at the next regularly scheduled meeting. On first reading, presentation by MPC staff and discussion only by Commissioners will be heard.

Comments, discussion and debate from members of the public will be received only at the meeting at which a vote is to be taken on one of the following listed items.

So in Chatham County the Commission can’t just decide one day to change an ordinance.

Also it appears that the public does get to discuss and debate ordinance changes.

The minutes for 2 December 2011 contain quite a bit of detail as to who said what. Plus for each agenda item that was approved it includes the agenda packet information, such as item IX-2 on the right here, which is about local participation in jail construction.

This isn’t as transparent as Travis County, Texas. Chatham County doesn’t put the agenda packet items in the agenda, and doesn’t do videos. But it’s still more transparent than Lowndes County, Georgia, which doesn’t provide agenda packet items unless you do an open records request for each item you want to see.

-jsq

Cloudy transparency on RFP & bidding —Barbara Stratton

Received today on Transparency by a County Commission. -jsq
I don’t know how you found this example, but good work & thanks for the research. This is a real genuine effort to produce government transparency. Anything short of this is faux transparancy. Can you find out how the citizens were able to get this good faith transparancy enacted?

I am expecially concerned with the cloudy transparancy on RFP & bidding procedures within our county. Having spent 12 years in government construction contracting I know the detailed safeguards that have been enacted to protect the taxpayers from contracting fraud & crony capitalist back door agreements. It is my observation that these safeguards are being bypassed by end around tactics & the current popularity of public/private partnerships has a plethora of possiblities for good old boy system abuses.

Recently a local contractor started work on an unfunded, unawarded government project that was exposed by the local newspaper. The city’s answer to the illegal contracting procedures was to issue a contract change order for $143,807 with a 10% contingency. It has been my experience that anytime a contractor starts work on an unfunded project said contractor eats the cost of any work completed & all contractors are aware of this rule.

In addition it is a dis-service to taxpayers for that amount of money to be

Continue reading →

I really support … allowing non-violent offenders the opportunity to work and rehabilitate — Jessica B. Hughes

Received yesterday on Ankle monitoring for Lowndes County Jail. -jsq
I really support this idea. Initially, I was concerned about it, because I know that things like the SCRAM bracelet and the ignition interlock devices are very expensive to install and maintain, especially if you consider the costs involved with probation fees. $213.00/month may not sound like a lot of money to some people, but it is a king’s ransom to others (saying $7.00/day makes it seem more manageable). Still, allowing non-violent offenders the opportunity to work and rehabilitate themselves outside of a prison is a big step forward in the philosophy of crime and punishment in this county, in my opinion.

-Jessica B. Hughes

Transparency by a County Commission

Here’s what local government transparency via the web looks like. Our county commission could do this.

Here’s how the Commissioners of Travis County, Texas do it:

Video files of commissioners court meetings are available online. Agenda items are available by noon the day after the meeting.
For example:
Voting Session Agenda
Tuesday, December 13, 2011 Complete Agenda Backup Materials, 120 MB

This web page version is derived from a manual conversion of the official document of record for the convenience of the user. Travis County has posted this notice and agenda in good faith, in compliance with Government Code section 551.056. Please note that, in the event of a technical problem beyond the county’s control that prevents the county from posting here or that results in an erroneous posting, notice of this meeting and agenda posted at the courthouse remains valid

By “Backup Materials” they mean the packet the Commissioners got.

The rest of that web page fior their 13 December 2011 meeting has video and text for ciizens communications and consent items, plus each item that had its backup information in the Commissioners’ packet is separated out with video, text, and backup links.

And for next week’s meeting, 20 December 2011, the complete agenda with links to Continue reading →