Mason Rountree

Yes, he did claim that he is a professional engineer as specifically indicated under Georgia law. Under Official Code of Georgia section 43-15-2 (11), "[a] person shall be construed to practice or offer to practice professional engineering...who by verbal claim, sign, advertisement, letterhead, card, or in any other way represents or holds himself out as a professional engineer or engineer or as able or qualified to perform engineering services or who does perform any [such] services." Under Official Code of Georgia section 43-15-7 (a), "[it] shall be unlawful for any person other th

It is official code of Georgia section 43-15-2(11).

.

Georgia law is absolutely clear that a person cannot hold himself out as an engineer unless he is licensed by the State of Georgia. It is not BS. It is the law.

In his official Senate biography, Senator Bill Heath claims that he is "self-employed as...an engineer with Design Specialists and B&S Farms" where he lives in Haralson County. Moreover, on his Facebook page he lists Design Specialists as an employer, and Design Specialists is identified on various websites as an engineering business. Under Georgia law, if a person holds himself out as an engineer, he must be licensed by the State of Georgia. See Official Code of Georgia 45-15-30(11) (defining professional engineering as someone who holds himself out as an engineer by verbal claim, sig

I don't agree on lawsuits causing much of the Problem. The accepted estimate is that frivolous suits are responsible for 5 to 10 percent of the premium. (I cant recall exact figure right now but can pull later). Also, how do you define a loser? If a jury finds a doctor liable after a contested trial and awards a patient $1,did he win or lose if he asked for a million?

Before Speaker Murphy's defeat in 2002, he secured substantial funding from the State of Georgia for the acquisition/construction of the reservoir in Haralson. Heath actually ran against Speaker Murphy in 2000 as well but was defeated that year. During the campaigns, Heath claimed Speaker Murphy would have personally benefited from the construction of the reservoir where it was planned because the Speaker (or one of his family members) owned land near to where it was to be located. Heath's campaign openly criticized the reservoir and Heath made comments along the line that there's enough ra

As a quick follow up for those interested, our rental management company has the house listed for rent on its website at www.southernshoresre.com Go to pull down menu for vacation rentals and house address is 6 33rd Avenue, Isle of Palms. If interested, send me a PM.

When Bill Carruth was chairman of the commission in 1999, he initiated the funding for the reservoir. After Jerry Shearin was elected chairman in 2000, he continued the effort for the County and started acquiring property for it in around 2000. This was around the same time that then Representative Bill Heath lost the state funding that had been set aside for the construction of a reservoir in Haralson County, which was a major legislative debacle after years of work by Haralson County.

We have a house for rent on isle of palms with pool. 4th row house with 4 beds and 2 baths. Send me a PM and I can get you more info. Last week in July is still available. Charleston is awesome.

I think the real question is why didn't Mr. Heath VOLUNTEER his time to help Paulding County with the reservoir?

Did you follow the money on Bill Heath's last campaign disclosure in 2012? In summary, 95% of the donors came from special interests and PAC's. Only one contribution (representing about 1% of the money he received from all donors in 2012) came from a person who actually lives in the 31st Senate District. Where is the incredulity? It's probably why Sen. Heath refuses to support legislation limiting the amount of lobbyist gifts.

You are correct that we ran against each other in 2004, which is why I placed my name at the end of the post rather than using my screen name. Full disclosure is fair. Just for clarification, though, we did not make his criminalization of voluntary genital piercing a major issue in race. The point was that Mr. Heath's priorities (as demonstrated by the fact that this legislation was the only legislation he ever authored while serving in the House) were misplaced and preoccupied with a woman voluntarily piercing her genitalia, while my priorities were water, education, taxes and economic dev

DV: I am a proud conservative and do not support Sen. Heath. I disagree that Mr. Heath has led the State to lower taxes. In fact, in the last 2 years, he has supported higher taxes (hospital bed tax) and voted to raise $100 million from new fees on taxpayers. The additional revenue he supported comes from around 1,000 new fees, such as higher fees on homeowners applying for new mortgages or re-financing their mortgage, fees on day care centers, and higher fees on non=profit organizations.

ST: Mr. Heath did NOT introduce such legislation; rather, he killed the legislation to protect little girls from genital mutilation. Senator Untermann introduced a bill outlawing the practice. Near the end of the legislative session, Representative Bill Heath offered an amendment to Sen. Untermann's bill. The amendment proposed to incarcerate women for 20 years in prison if they chose to voluntarily pierce their own genitalia. Because the House and Senate could not reconcile the differences before the session ended, Senator Untermann's bill died that year. Thanks to Mr. Heath, the Sta

The Grand Jury returned a true bill for interference with custody against Ms. Low in 2009. On January 25, 2011 (over a year before the Court of Appeals even made its decision in the civil case), the Paulding District Attorney dismissed the case against Ms. Lowe with the approval and request of her ex-husband and after the civil matter was supposedly resolved. These reasons for the dismissal were specifically indicated on the dismissal approved by Judge Beavers. If the investigative reporter had actually taken the time to read the decisions and investigate, rather than regurgitate, I doubt

That is absolutely false. The decision of the Georgia Court of Appeals had nothing to do with the dismissal of the warrant issued against Ms. Lowe by a superior court judge. Rather, the Court of Appeals' decision involved a civil case in which the Court found that Paulding was not the proper jurisdiction for the dispute. This story was very poorly researched and an unfair attempt at character assassination. Very pathetic.

Sorry newsjunky. The response was supposed to be to eym sirius, but I posted from my new droid and am less than efficient with it.

I'm not sure where you get your misinformation but you are way off base on what physicians are paid. Also, contrary to former member's statement, I can tell you that my primary care physician stopped taking all medicare and referred all existing medicare patients out because she could not make money and actually lost money with medicare patients. Tip of the iceberg.

My wife and I were #'s 14 and 15 at the Courthouse at around 11:30 am on Tuesday. But there were 6 voting machines to choose from.

We've had our law firm in Dallas for over 10 years. There are no Paulding attorneys who specialize in Social Security law. I refer my clients and others who want a referral to Larry Christensen in Marietta. He has been handling SS claims for a long time and is very good. PM me for his number.

The idea about vouchers started in the 1800's. I understand that some state governments misused them in the 1960's because of the opposition to integration. However, vouchers today expressly prohibit racial discrimination. Vouchers are not intended to fund private education; rather, they are used to off-set the cost of education. Vouchers are not a panacea, but they do challenge the status quo, which unions bosses strongly oppose. I fail to see why you would be opposed to them, as they provide an incentive for families, regarding of race or ethnicity, to seek alternatives to failing publi

If the 7.4% trend continues, then the Legislature is looking at revenues of around $15.1 billion for July 1, 2011 to June 1, 2012. (Of course, revenue fluctuates on a quarterly basis, so it may not be accurate to project $15.1B over 12 months using only the third quarter revenue for 2010). For July 1, 2010 to June 30, 2011, the total budget was around $17.5B, which included $2B in stimulus funds from the federal government. We will not receive this supplement from the feds again for next year, so our state budget will likely be in the $15B to $16B range. It appears that the $1B to $1.5B cu

Your assumptions are seriously flawed. As far as I know, there are no current members of the Legislature who even served in the 1960's, so I can't see how they are de-funding education today. It's possible that there are a couple left, but I can't think of any. For the most part, the folks currently serving in Legislature were born in the 50's and 60's. As far as de-funding education at the state level, where in the world did you get that idea? The bulk of the state budget is spent on education and the amount we spend has increased dramatically since the 1960's. Vouchers and school

It's a $90 million SPLOST with around $55M being used to cover the bond payments. The other $35M will be used for capital improvements, as indicated by the language of the SPLOST. The approximately 3 mils being currently used to pay the bond theoretically equates to the $55M anticipated to be generated from the 1% sales tax. However, as for the remaining $35M additional revenue we just passed, it is, indeed, a significant tax which will be used to cover future capital projects. Now, we will have to see whether the School Board does, in fact, reduce the millage rate by 3 mils, as it indicat