WHITEY
-
Content Count
6,877 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
26
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by WHITEY
-
-
It seems that Howard Maxwell has got into mud slinging in order to discredit his oppoment. Folks don't fall for that smoke screen ask Howard why he raised the Gasoline tax for Georgians. Better yet ask why most of his contributions come from Super PAC's
Shame on you Howard, lets see a flyer stating why you raised our gas taxes to among the highest of ANY STATE IN THE UNITED STATES!!!!!
https://www.facebook.com/kerstinliberty4ga/videos/1081020241972246/
-
2
-
-
Whitey:
Our entire campaign finance system is corrupt from the ground up. Has been since before Watergate in the 1970s. Heck, the idea that reporting of campaign finance sources was only intended as a first step in campaign finance reform. Then they put limits on individual contributions, outlawed extortion by employers to get extort money from their employees on behalf of a favored candidate (that is what got the company that built the courthouse in trouble, remember
) . They also largely outlawed corporate contributions. And dang, anyone who looks at it really does see there are conflicts inherent in this system that is virtually indistinguishable from bribery. But it is the law and everyone elected plays this game. People like me who don't play it well generally don't win.
Now ask yourself,
WHO IS ACTUALLY MAKING PROPOSALS TO CHANGE IT ON A LOCAL, STATE or NATIONAL LEVEL????
(There actually are a few including Lawrence Lessig, if memory serves but I doubt Lessig's name means jack to you or 95 % of Pcoms readers. I've made a post about it once and if memory serves, it was roundly ignored by all the reform minded folks here ... because they don't understand or grasp what reform means or how you actually reform.
If you want to castigate anyone on this, you need to castigate everyone on it.
The problem that I with the election in May 2014 is that a good part of the money was never run through campaigns and was exempt from reporting because of the super pac rules inherent in the SCOTUS Citizens United ruling letting anonymous entities advocate for candidates and positions during political campaign season with impunity and no REPORTING.
There is no transparency and I don't see Vernon, Todd or Tony saying jack.
David's campaign, to my knowledge was done through the state reporting regime and you published his contributors from the prez of Wellstar to the folks at Comcast to ... well go ahead and copy each and every one and publish them here including their amounts because that is public record.
Oh well. food is burning
pubby
Pubby I may just publish the entire campaign disclosure all the way back to the 2008 campaign it is very interesting!!!!
-
As far as comparison to Burl Ellis of DeKalb ... I don't think that Mr. Austin has appeared before a grand jury or lied to an investigor; I don't think there are rumors or allegations of bid rigging; there is a difference between extorting a campaign contribution and accepting one over dinner and drinks.
Bring me a tape of a conversation where he extorts a contributor. Hell, bring me a contributor who will swear an affidavit that they've been strongarmed into contributing and I'll publish the sumbitch.
But without proof, Whitey, you got jack.
pubby
Pubby The comparison To Burl Ellis is what appears to be a shakedown of vendors and Engineering firms who have or will do business with the County; I could not get Item #3 to post in the thread above I tried to edit the post but was un able to do so here it is..........
The Campaign disclosure report clearly reflect that a lot of the folks making major contributions to David Austin clearly have performed work for the county totaling Millions of dollars and some are still performing work for the County on a weekly, monthly, yearly basis. http://media.ethics.ga.gov/search/Campaign/Campaign_ByContributions_RFR.aspx?NameID=8107&FilerID=C2010001234&CDRID=88566&Name=Austin,%20David%20Arthur&Year=2013&Report=June%2030th%20-%20Non-Election%20Year
As noted in the other post this Fund Raiser was by invitation, it is clear that a vast majority of the donors were people who had done work for the County the IBA and the Airport Authority.
Another significant point is the campaign donations from out of state.
But my main point in this post is the minions who are admonishing Tony and Vernon about there campaign contributions they received.( I believe you are one of them) And now it is okay if David receives thousands from contractors who were doing millions in work at a special off year fund raiser to recover thousands that he overspent in the previous election.
This is not his only fund raiser since he borrowed money to run a campaign. I did not see a loan for the past campaign would you like to point that out to me?
You can say what you want but this is one of the very things that got Mr. Ellis in trouble, Of course.... like you said things like this needs to come from the Grand Jury and how many times have you seen the grand Jury of Paulding County indict for this kind of behavior ?????
-
Toxic
The Chamber of commerce has a history of promoting things in Paulding County that I am quite sure the majority of the 155,000 citizens do not approve of.
The tax dollars given to the Chamber is not a budgeted item, it is not a part of the County budget.
The money is donated through the Industrial Building Authority and comes from their budgeted money, In addition the Chairman has a discretionary fund in which he can write a check for up to $49,999.99 without any approval from the budgeting process or approval from the rest of the Commissioners , Furthermore David Austin created a new committee The” Paulding County Economic Development” which is funded by approximately $300,000 dollars per year, sort of a slush fund that is used for various entities one of which I suspect the chamber gets some of its funding?
Since you speak of special interest money are you okay with all the special interest money being given every year to the Chamber of Commerce? Are you okay with the CEO of the Chamber being appointed to the major Boards without having been elected by the citizens of this county?
In return for these special interest dollars the Chamber has received, they have promoted every SPLOST TAX increase that has been proposed and passed by the residents of Paulding County.
One that comes to mind is the $125,000,000 School Bond that was first rejected and was later passed with the efforts of the Chamber DOLLARS!!!!
If you want to discuss special interest dollars into our local elections it would only be proper to discuss David Austin’s FUND RAISER HELD AT A GOLF RESORT AND WAS BY INVITATION ONLY AND THE DOLLARS RECEIVED DURING THIS FUND RAISER WAS FOR THE MOST PART FOR VENDORS WHO HAVE OR WANT TO DO BUSINESS WITH THE COINTY.
Also do note that this fund raiser was in March 2013 months after David Austin’s last election and it cost Thousands of dollars to promote (which was donated) and he received thousands of dollars in donations from those who do business with the county, which pales in comparison to what any other commissioner received during the past election cycle.
Anyone who wishes to check the validity of my claim I welcome you to go to the Secretary of State web site and check for yourself!!!!
You will then come to the same conclusion that I have. David Austin is the one who has used Special Interest money to further his own political interest……. Check it out….. http://media.ethics.ga.gov/search/Campaign/Campaign_ByContributions_RFR.aspx?NameID=8107&FilerID=C2010001234&CDRID=88566&Name=Austin,%20David%20Arthur&Year=2013&Report=June%2030th%20-%20Non-Election%20Year
This is just the tip of the iceberg for commissions Chairman Davis A Austin If you have time, browse all of his Campaign disclosures
The three commissioners Todd Pownall, Vernon Collett and Tony Crowe all ran openly on a campaign to stop Commercial Passenger service, they were elected based on their campaign promises, and defeated all opponents by a landslide of epic proportions.
Todd Pownall did not even have any opposition in the Republican Primary and only Token opposition in the General election from a Democrat.
It is quite refreshing to me to see Candidates run a campaign on the issues, Get elected on those issues, and, continue to fight to bring about the change that they campaigned on.
If David Austin had done this the County would not have been talking about the Airport today. Politicians should always keep campaign promises
Did anyone notice that the contributions were for the 2012 "General Election"..... Heck he did not even have any opposition for the 2012 general election, He was only opposed in the primary
Sure was a lot of folks on this list of donor's that does work for the County, and the Airport wonder how they knew about the fund raiser ?
Something smells fishy here???????
-
2
-
-
I think the Chamber of Commerce does a great job promoting Paulding. It is sad that a dozen or so disgruntled anti-airport citizens can put such a grey cloud over this county. Sadder still is Todd, Tony, an Vernon take their orders from these idiots. So how much money is in the budget for the Chamber this year??? Take that figure and divide that number by 155,000 residents. If it is over 5 cents a person I would be shocked.
Why don't you spend time worrying about who "bought" Todd, Tony and Vernon and feeds them their opinions to further their special interest causes. Where is the money coming from??
They spend a great deal of time in the shadows. I know, I know... Todd is great, Todd is good, let us thank him for our food.... Bla, bla, bla... Pardon me while I puke...
These three morons couldn't find their way out of a closet unless the Troutman & Sanders law firm held the flashlight and guided them out.
Toxic
The Chamber of commerce has a history of promoting things in Paulding County that I am quite sure the majority of the 155,000 citizens do not approve of.
The tax dollars given to the Chamber is not a budgeted item, it is not a part of the County budget.
The money is donated through the Industrial Building Authority and comes from their budgeted money, In addition the Chairman has a discretionary fund in which he can write a check for up to $49,999.99 without any approval from the budgeting process or approval from the rest of the Commissioners , Furthermore David Austin created a new committee The” Paulding County Economic Development” which is funded by approximately $300,000 dollars per year, sort of a slush fund that is used for various entities one of which I suspect the chamber gets some of its funding?
Since you speak of special interest money are you okay with all the special interest money being given every year to the Chamber of Commerce? Are you okay with the CEO of the Chamber being appointed to the major Boards without having been elected by the citizens of this county?
In return for these special interest dollars the Chamber has received, they have promoted every SPLOST TAX increase that has been proposed and passed by the residents of Paulding County.
One that comes to mind is the $125,000,000 School Bond that was first rejected and was later passed with the efforts of the Chamber DOLLARS!!!!
If you want to discuss special interest dollars into our local elections it would only be proper to discuss David Austin’s FUND RAISER HELD AT A GOLF RESORT AND WAS BY INVITATION ONLY AND THE DOLLARS RECEIVED DURING THIS FUND RAISER WAS FOR THE MOST PART FOR VENDORS WHO HAVE OR WANT TO DO BUSINESS WITH THE COINTY.
Also do note that this fund raiser was in March 2013 months after David Austin’s last election and it cost Thousands of dollars to promote (which was donated) and he received thousands of dollars in donations from those who do business with the county, which pales in comparison to what any other commissioner received during the past election cycle.
Anyone who wishes to check the validity of my claim I welcome you to go to the Secretary of State web site and check for yourself!!!!
You will then come to the same conclusion that I have. David Austin is the one who has used Special Interest money to further his own political interest……. Check it out….. http://media.ethics.ga.gov/search/Campaign/Campaign_ByContributions_RFR.aspx?NameID=8107&FilerID=C2010001234&CDRID=88566&Name=Austin,%20David%20Arthur&Year=2013&Report=June%2030th%20-%20Non-Election%20Year
This is just the tip of the iceberg for commissions Chairman Davis A Austin If you have time, browse all of his Campaign disclosures
The three commissioners Todd Pownall, Vernon Collett and Tony Crowe all ran openly on a campaign to stop Commercial Passenger service, they were elected based on their campaign promises, and defeated all opponents by a landslide of epic proportions.
Todd Pownall did not even have any opposition in the Republican Primary and only Token opposition in the General election from a Democrat.
It is quite refreshing to me to see Candidates run a campaign on the issues, Get elected on those issues, and, continue to fight to bring about the change that they campaigned on.
If David Austin had done this the County would not have been talking about the Airport today. Politicians should always keep campaign promises
-
6
-
-
Yep, I dont like the thought of commercialization and am opposed to it but am a realist-- if I was a betting woman, other than the occasional lottery ticket-- its coming. Paulding is not the ideal location for a 2nd airport,but lets face it ATL needs another commercial airport. If you dont want planes flying over your head, get out.. We most likely will, for other reasons.
I never thought of you as a quitter but......... I think I will stick around and fight for what is right for the folks of Paulding County.
If you allow the secret deals to go uncontested the next thing that we may get is a nuclear dump in our prized green space we voted for .
Fact 2/3 of a recent poll are opposed to the airport.... That is why I am not throwing in the towel.
-
4
-
-
Whose comments are these? It appears to be something quoted that was said by Pubby, but the writing style certainly doesn't appear to be his-nor does the sentiment expressed align with some of his previous posts. If improperly quoted it should either be deleted and reposted or corrected to reflect the actual author of the post.
If it is a quote from Pubby - wth?
I tried to edit the comments but was unable to do so the first line of the post needs to be deleted I was responding to a post that Pubby had made earlier in this thread. Maybe the mods can delete the reference to Pubby in the first line of the post
WHITEY
-
What is so strange to me is why the Chamber of Commerce has to live off the government’s teat in order to survive.
Without the Paulding County Taxpayers bailing them out each year they would have been out of business years ago.
As a Paulding County Tax payer I resent using tax dollars in order to have luncheons, award dinners ( out of the county) breakfast and supporting public private partnership using our tax dollars as collateral to make the payments for the failed projects.
The film Studio and the General Aviation airport come to mind as two endeavors that the Chamber supported whole hearted and today we see both as a complete failures even though millions in tax dollars has been poured into these two projects and now the County has given up on both of these.
So ……………….. Now someone got the bright idea to convert the airport to a commercial passenger airport and it would create thousands of jobs and have a economic impact of millions and millions of dollars with only a couple of flights per week ?........ Really
How many of you citizens want to pay more taxes to fund this endeavor???
The county Commission Chairman David Austin is proposing to collect $6,000,000 more in tax dollars this year than he did last year, and has the gall to sit at the podium and say that his budget does not represent a tax increase.
In addition the Paulding County school district has already announced a 12.5% property tax increase and scheduled public hearings for the purpose of discussing this with the citizens.
Of course the Chamber will support both of these tax increases and at the same time support spending millions more on a failed management of the airport. This is the same folks that supported the $125,000,000 school bond a few years back that your kids will have to pay off and we still owe about 25 years on this issue that the Chamber supported.
Facts….. A majority of the members on the Board of Directors of the Chamber of commerce do not even live in Paulding County therefore they could care less how much their actions increase the taxes on the property owners of the county. Heck the Airport Director does not even live in Paulding County.
For years and years the tax payers have bailed out the Paulding County Chamber of Commerce.. It is past time for the chamber to pass a budget live within the budget or fail as a entity.
Something is really wrong in Paulding County when a organization and some of its members can make promises to the citizens of this County, go back on those promises and use tax dollars to promote those broken promises.
-
5
-
-
I never did think it was proper for the BoC and the BoE to funnel tax dollars to the chamber whereby one individual could be paid a six figure salary.
The BoC is collecting $ 6 million more dollars in taxes this year over last year and the BoE is proposing a hefty tax increase this year.
This is what you get when you spend tax dollars on things like the Airport and the film studio and allow the appointed
folks to spend tax dollars like drunken sailors.
-
6
-
-
The scare innuendo in this thread is not even worth commenting on, I see you and David are still scared of the BOOGEY MAN.Surepip:
You know and I know that the airport was a perk that was a flex of the muscles of the Paulding establishment under the Shearin Administration. That muscle included being home to Paulding's first Speaker (and first Republican speaker of the Georgia House since reconstruction). It included not just Richardson but also the folks who were on the plane that crashed in February 2008.
It was also conceived of in the context of the housing boom and Paulding being in the top 10 fastest growing counties in the USA for more than a decade.
The local economy, based on development and homebuilding, was making all sorts of things not just possible, but the lack of them almost insulting. I recall many of the same folks balking at the general aviation airport as loudly as they are against commercialization now ... and for the same reasons (we don't want no growth.) I recall being for the airport before its inception (going back to the Doc Goodman period when he got the AA formed in the 1990s).
I looked around and saw that one of the communities I lived in, in western Oklahoma had a 5000-ft paved airport ... in a county with 15,000 residents - not one with 150,000. I was appalled that the county didn't have an airport.
The idea that airports were some exotic monster from the past and every community that had one would be smited by the Good Lord for having one because God didn't intend man to fly is to me (and I know you) a totally alien idea.
You and a vast majority of the folks in the county supported a general aviation airport back in 2004 when the decision to proceed was made.
As to the choice of Blake Swafford. Blake has proper credentials and was 'on board' in the county's transportation department when this came up. There was no outcry that we need to get the worlds' most qualified commercial aviation airport operator for this facility because ... well it was supposed to be a general aviation airport.
Things changed and the folks from propeller were looking for a commercial airport location in the largest airport market that doesn't have a relief or secondary commercial airport - i.e. Atlanta. Not only do larger cities have multiple commercial airports but many markets smaller than Atlanta do. It is really an anomaly that Atlanta doesn't ... like it is really queer that it doesn't.
But I think we all know why it is queer like that ... and that is that folks Delta pretty much put it to anyone who entertains that thought.
Now come the continued complaints ... that the airport authority is not qualified.
I think they recognize that, that is why they created a PPP that included propeller which, incidentally includes the guy that Delta used to employ to run their largest airport property - Atlanta's Hartsfield-Jackson Airport. He was knowledgeable enough to be invited to a congressional hearing to talk about public, private partnerships - a concept being promoted (especially by the Republican Congress) for airports through special provisions of the law.
One of the funniest - aw hell, call it queer - things is that those same folks that yell loudest about government are the ones screaming don't commercialize the airport which is the same as saying "don't privatize with a 3P" the airport.
Now surepip, I know and you know also that the airport is a secondary in your complaints with the county and that your personal complaints all relate to one of the biggest blunders made in the county when they dropped the historical development plan for the land on the southwest corner of 278 and 120/Bill Carruth. According to long-term planning that property was supposed to be commercial/industrial given its flatness, access to sewerage, rail and highways. You fought for that development plan despite your home being there and I do give you significant credit in bringing the level of investment in the new Paulding hospital because of your tip to them that they could pick up an additional - 30-40 acres before Womble planted more homes on it.
And while the airport is a development issue, I recognize that your opposition is based more on you animosity toward anything the Austin Administration is seeking to accomplish.
There is more about the Delta connection, BTW. What I understand is that they can't expand H-J at all. I also understand that Paulding really is their preferred location and a lot of what they say about it being a bad place is misinformation designed to keep their plans close to the vest. What they are especially afraid of is Paulding getting its own 139 permit because that means they can't just come in and take over (which they can with relative ease if the current airport is a general aviation facility.)
The perspective that drives my decision to support our application and effort for a commercial airport permit in Paulding is that I think a commercial airport in Paulding is inevitable and the real question is whether it will be locally controlled or not.
I believe if you saw the issue as local control or not, you'd prefer local control ... hell I believe that Tundra, Whitey and the lot would as well.
But they don't see it that way. The current politics frames this issue in the only way that Delta/HJIA 'win' (and gain control over our airport). They've framed the issue as incompetence, over-reaching, unrealistic, ambition coupled with hubris with unsubstantiated hints of corruption that engage and fool some of the people they are not interested.
Coming up with broad-based cons like that are why the big firms tend to win... oh and they pay big bucks for that kind of PRopaganda.
Why do they do it? Because they know they can fool all the people some of the time ...
pubby
-
1
-
-
Name me one person on the airport board that has any experience training or educational back ground on how to run a commercial or General aviation airportYou, I think, are the first person I've seen criticize the IBA/AA board members for not "doing their job." What, exactly, have they been doing or not been doing?
Boards like these are designed to have a staggered schedule for replacing board members. That setup allows each iteration of the organization tasked with naming board members to have the ability to name at least one board member during their time in office. The setup also allows the board to have a mostly consistent and knowledgeable makeup, meaning you don't have a majority of your board members with experience leaving all at once.
The latter reason is the problem with a proposal to replace several board members at once. In doing so, you're kicking out members with several years of experience, likely replacing them with individuals with little to no experience. Even if the proposed replacements have experience in aviation, business or other related fields, there's a definite learning curve that will have to be overcome when you add that many new faces — they have to be taught procedures, the history of the organization and its dealings, and overall brought up to speed. There may also be a need for training.
Now, if there were some actual malfeasance that could be proved, as in some criminal activity, then there is a reason to replace so many members at once. Your compatriots whine that the voters had spoken when they elected the three anti-airport commissioners last spring, but replacing board members named during the previous administration undermines the will of the voters who elected the commissioners who named those board members.
You can't have every new administration "clean house" on every board, especially when the terms of each board member are already spelled out in a charter or some other document.
===
And as far as Jamie Gilbert being "chased away," don't you think the anti-airport group had something to do with it? When you have individuals and potentially businesses funding billboards in your county that speak out against a certain development in your community, don't you think that would scare off someone tasked with actually developing the community? Seeing anti- people swarm county meetings and speak out against those tasked with promoting the county, from the Chamber to most government leaders, also definitely indicates that you're working in a less-than-supportive community.
Name me one person on the Industrial Building authority that has any experience training or educational background that makes them capable of running the Industrial Building Authority?
-
2
-
-
And the first thing the 3 that won did was ditch honest, transparent and ethical government by ramrodding in a slam-bam thankyou mam introduce at 10 and pass at 2 measure. (See vindictiveness above - got them suckers so clap and yell.)
What was that I was saying about PR, I mean propaganda, I mean politicians saying what they want you to hear?
pubby
BTW: I would amend the (2) that you said: Ran on "The Guys In There Are Doing Good, Let's Stay With Their Program, With Some Procedural Adjustments". to say, something more like, "We are committed for better or worse so lets not blow the sumbitch up and instead make the best of it ... limit it (referendum for expansion of runway) ... but lets institute some procedural adjustments that slow things down so there is discussion.
I know it is a more complex and nuanced approach but it frankly is and was the right approach.
pubby
And the one that is most vocal, and seems to know it all today was also the lowest vote getter of all the candidates in the race
-
1
-
-
I never said what the county was doing was journalism either Whitey.
Indeed, it is not. It is "Public Relations" ... aka: propaganda.
Even the BBC, Great Britain's stellar public broadcasting service, has had moments of compromise in its history as it pursued the policies of the government over the rights of the people to be informed and entertained.
<
"The whole point is if you are the government and If you don't like something... you just make it illegal." - British undersecretary in Pirate Radio...
The fallacy is to think they should act differently. That they come out and compete with independent media is my complaint but then I don't expect them to do differently because that is their nature. I just don't get my panties in a wad because of it.
pubby
While you say it is public relations, I say it is misleading the citizens, and is unethical I doubt very seriously any of our elected officials would post on a election flyer that they support this alleged PR. What happened to being honest, open and transparent??
-
I have no problem with the county doing this. I suspect that I could do it if I had a little help.
What you don't understand, Whitey, is that the meetings are theater ... they are a production. If you think that decisions are made in these meetings based on what is said in the meetings, they I've got some beach front land I want to sell you in Utah.
The point is that the official record of the meeting are the 'minutes' which, if you've ever read the actual minutes, contains very little of the discussion if any discussion.
If you're going to complain about and characterize the commission producing stuff that says what they want, then complain about the Paulding Post or the notes on the water bills or the notices they put up in the lobby ... or hell, the color on the walls and say that because they're not chartreuse, the county is censoring them.
They are producing a program that is the program that they want to produce. It is not a legally required document of record.
If you want me to become upset, let the commission pass an ordinance stating that from henceforth, the commission clerk will attach to the official record a DVD disk with the complete video of the commission meeting proceedings from the (specify meeting) and shall make that digital video document available to the public for a fee of $ and shall have the complete recording placed on the county's website, etc. and this document will be part of the official minutes of the meeting to accompany the written/transcribed meeting minutes.
That would make the video an official document.
No, tundra.
As it stands it is an exercise of the publishing rights of those charged with producing the video. The provisions for the public to speak to the commission did not include include language stating that the comments received from the public shall be included in the official minutes of the meetings or promise that the presentations would be broadcast, or placed on the website.
Indeed, in the history of the country, the videotaping of the proceedings of legislative bodies is a relatively new thing. There was no live feed of actions from the US Senate until the 1990s although the US House did let Cspan in a bit earlier (in the 1980s).
One could argue that it was a bad idea as the debate on the floor in the days prior to the video feed of floor action, tended to not be as a polarizing and divisive. Now, as was predicted by many (I missed this one myself being in favor of the video feed), the floor action has become a dog and pony show that as often as not, shows a guy at the podium and one overseeing the house operations and the guy is speaking to an empty chamber.
As far as the charge of suppressing citizen voices, get your facts straight and I mean going back to the old days when there was no video. Those who spoke to the commission were given due notice including follow up questions and even standalone stories to highlight their complaints. The Neighbor management would have been happier doing a piece on a car wash with teens at East or human interest story about a veteran because all they were ever after was filling the pages. And the New Era ... well they did little reporting other than the actual votes taken.
The crux of what I'm saying is that the sole purpose of allowing the citizens to speak is to give the commissioners on the dais the benefit of their input. They do that at the meeting.
If the commissioners, at least a majority of them, think it is wise to create a platform for any and every person who wants to address the BOC a platform to speak to the public on whatever topic they feel is worthy, then the commission can pass an ordinance saying that.
I know that in my role as media, I reserve the right to not publish or write about virtually anything I choose not to waste my time on and regardless of what the commission decides to do, I'm not abdicating my first amendment rights as guaranteed under the constitution to feel compelled to publish anything.
Indeed, I could shut the site down and get out of the publishing business if I choose to do so. Hell, I could sell the paulding.com domain to those folks in Ohio
So, instead of lecturing me on 'how it is supposed to work' I'd suggest you instead learn how it really works 'cause tundra, you don't have a clue.
pubby
And after spewing out all the aforementioned garbage, the very first thing you do is seek out the you tube that Roy made and post it because the county does not want you to use theirs, And in all reality you really want to hear all that is said. And oh.....In most cases that is the only video of the IBA and the PCAA meetings, And it surely is the only un edited version of the BOC meetings. Censorship is not Journalism PUBBY
-
Whitey:
I used to video tape the meetings myself going back to Jerry's administration because it took the county too long to edit them and they weren't putting them on the web either. The county was also using a third-party video production company to do that and it wasn't likely that I would have access to the video - especially in a timely manner - so I didn't pay much attention to what they did at all.
As far as editing the video, in those days the ability to upload large files was problematic and, going back to the days as a reporter where we had a maximum 15 column inches of paper to tell the story, it was a matter of prioritizing what was and what was not news. There was never any idea that we had to show every second of the video of some interminably long, boring meetings. We'd pick out what was important, distill it to a meaningful portion, explain it and ask questions to explain more.
This idea that the only acceptable record of a 2 hour meeting must include every sneeze is really rather amusing but a horrible waste of time.
The same is true for some of the commentary that is provided.
My point is that it is a true service when an hour long meeting is distilled to a three to-five minute story that tells what really happened with honesty.
pubby
Why edit anything, let the viewer make the determination as to what they want to view play the entire meeting like they do In all ethical commission meetings. We have a budget of over $100,000 per year to provide this program to the citizens of this County. Make the best use of these tax dollars.
CENSORSHIP IS HOW SADDAM HUSSEIN controlled his people.
What is really sad Pubby I can remember the day when you would of been all over this censorship and now it seems that you promote it????
-
3
-
-
Whitey:
I understand completely your point of view but the county administration is not about creating an official record, just answering the request years ago to video the meetings. How they did it was a footnote but, for instance, when Todd would appear and speak against Jerry (2004) before there were rules barring people associated with political candidates; all you had was a series of campaign ads in the videos. It was at that time that the decision to eliminate - not include - citizen comments was established. (SO in a real sense, I suppose you could blame Todd for the rule as he was speaking for challenger Van Westbrook at the commission meetings.)
Surepip:
You are correct, the county does not record the detail of the planning and zoning meetings. However, these are hearings and the discussions can and do become part of the court record ... but only when a petitioner asserts their constitutional rights and brings a court reporter to capture and transcribe the hearing testimony into a certified document.
The point I was making was not whether or not they recorded on tape the meetings, but that the testimony from those in favor of or opposing a zoning matter was indeed testimony in a public hearing and therefore different than the expression of opinion from the public at commission meetings. It is a somewhat esoteric difference but formal public hearings are technically a different beast than offering the public an opportunity to speak on a breadth of issues.
To make comments from the public an element that should be included would require that the time allocated be organized as a public hearing on particular ordinances ... i.e. by requiring that the county call a public hearing on all issues in which a change in a local ordinance is contemplated before the commission can take action on said amendments to the local ordinances.
I think the most recent example was the open-ended public hearing on the budget this past summer when Whitey spoke for 40+ minutes on that topic before the commission called a recess. There may have been technical reasons - I know I ran out of recording space and battery on my equipment - that those comments were not included in their entirety but that was 'a public hearing.'
pubby
Whitey:
I understand completely your point of view but the county administration is not about creating an official record, just answering the request years ago to video the meetings. How they did it was a footnote but, for instance, when Todd would appear and speak against Jerry (2004) before there were rules barring people associated with political candidates; all you had was a series of campaign ads in the videos. It was at that time that the decision to eliminate - not include - citizen comments was established. (SO in a real sense, I suppose you could blame Todd for the rule as he was speaking for challenger Van Westbrook at the commission meetings.)
Surepip:
You are correct, the county does not record the detail of the planning and zoning meetings. However, these are hearings and the discussions can and do become part of the court record ... but only when a petitioner asserts their constitutional rights and brings a court reporter to capture and transcribe the hearing testimony into a certified document.
The point I was making was not whether or not they recorded on tape the meetings, but that the testimony from those in favor of or opposing a zoning matter was indeed testimony in a public hearing and therefore different than the expression of opinion from the public at commission meetings. It is a somewhat esoteric difference but formal public hearings are technically a different beast than offering the public an opportunity to speak on a breadth of issues.
To make comments from the public an element that should be included would require that the time allocated be organized as a public hearing on particular ordinances ... i.e. by requiring that the county call a public hearing on all issues in which a change in a local ordinance is contemplated before the commission can take action on said amendments to the local ordinances.
I think the most recent example was the open-ended public hearing on the budget this past summer when Whitey spoke for 40+ minutes on that topic before the commission called a recess. There may have been technical reasons - I know I ran out of recording space and battery on my equipment - that those comments were not included in their entirety but that was 'a public hearing.'
pubby
I figured you would blame Todd in some way, Shame on you for misleading, The videos were always included except on rare occasions under Jerry Shearin, Heck I will be willing to go back and show you some if they are archived. David Austin is the one that censored all the citizens wishing to speak, heck under his administration they have now included speaking on agenda items on that date just sign up prior to the meeting just about every commission plays the video of the meeting in their entirety.
Davis started the censoring and I am sure you are aware of that...... Remember David and Boyd got the city of Dallas and Paulding County certified as cites and counties of certified ethics and just recently got the certification renewed yea....... Even had it proudly posted in the lobby yea....... Open ,honest and transparent certification.
Agreed those running for public office cannot speak at the meeting David Changed that after him and Boykin used that effectively against Jerry.
Bottom line Pubby as a self proclaimed Journalist you should be in favor of a citizen addressing the commission and voicing a grievance against them, Furthermore you should promote the idea that all citizens should be afforded the opportunity to listen to all comments that are made at the commission meetings.75% of our working citizens leave the county to work everyday and have no other way to know the issues facing them within the County. A censored video is not ethical nor is it fair to a majority of the citizens that are unable to attend the meetings.
-
I think you read way too much into the editing of the videos of the commission meetings. I've not viewed them nor have do I intend to do so in part because I don't believe they include the 'citizen input' sections as a matter of course. I would be surprised, however if the editing extended to the sometimes extended remarks of the post commissioners who may be debating an issue like the removal of appointed board members.
From a logical point of view, the public comments at commission meetings in particular (but also meetings of boards like the IBA, etc.) are provided the public as a courtesy and are not a requirement of the law nor are they an official part of the order of business of the county or the various boards.
The one exception to this being the formal elements of the planning and zoning function where the future use of a piece of land is at question and the comments of the land owner and residents surrounding the proposed land development are relevant and part of a specific public hearing. Other events where a public hearing with comments are formally called for to be part of the public record are also circumstances where the comments should be captured and be part of the video record.
However, comments at commission meetings aren't among the public comments with any standing in relation to the business of the meeting.
That the commissioners sit on their dais and listen (or not) is the reality. In the context that actions speak louder than words; the elimination of the discussions from the video record (whether or not they are pro or anti the commissions approach) is just a statement that the comments 'don't really count.'
Oh, and before you think that I'm being mean or supporting the commission or any of that other rot ... please forgive me for saying this too - there is no Santa Claus.
pubby
Pubby
I disagree the two times that a citizen can speak are Agenda Items.
First you can speak only on items that are currently on the Agenda and you sign up just prior to the meeting for this option, Secondly you sign up on the Friday prior to the meeting to talk about non agenda items.
A citizen who is unable to attend the meeting and who views the program on the County web site or on Comcast are not getting the fully scope of what occurred at that meeting.
Ethically the commissioners should have nothing to hide and what is the need of spending extra dollars to edit out part of the meeting. Heck Jerry only edited certain things and sometimes asked for videos others made to include in the programing.
The lady that spoke a few meetings back about the slaughtering of the dogs and cats at the Dog Kennel should of been aired in its entirety , Volunteers that are willing to help could of been attained through the viewership of this program on Comcast and the county web site.
Bottom line the meeting is being taped in its entirety and tax dollars should not be spent to edit the programing
-
Greatma....In this day in time, it takes more than a good man to hold office. Years ago, it would have been ok. It takes education now>
The best trait of any elected official is openness, honesty , and Transparency, politicians who have these traits do not tend to censor citizens speaking out at public meetings.
-
2
-
-
Yea sometimes those pro airport folks do get carried away
-
Tony Crowe don't have enough sense to be chairman. I am not sure he can be post. He proved this to me the last time he run. Sorry
but truth is the truth.
See, I don't know how to type, so I am not smart enough to be one either. Only thing different, I am smart enough not to try.
Tony was pretty sharp last meeting when he got the bonding attorney to admit to pro bono legal service for the intergovernmental agreement, And I still say that this is borderline unethical ?
-
2
-
-
I remember people saying that David Austin was going to bring integrity back to the office after Jerry Shearin had tainted it so bad...
David and his Brother Boykin has completely let the power they have go to their heads They are on too many authorities that tend to corrupt good honest people. No two Brothers should ever have this much authority in a county.
Thankfully next November Boykin will have to face the voters and brother David will have to face them the following year.
-
That was 9 years ago. Why don't you call to see if they are following the same practice?
Actually El Zorro the videos to these meetings are archived and can be brought up weeks and months later for review. On the Paulding County Government web site along with many more videos that are posted their unedited
The problem I have with the videos is the fact that a lot of citizens rely on these in order to learn about what is going on within the County and in fact there are no time restraints on the length of the videos since the videos are available here http://www.paulding.gov/MediaCenter.aspx?VID=BOC-12715-Work-Session-468#player on the government web site and it implies that this is a video of the meeting, which it certainty is not. Here is the video that the county has implied was the January 27, 2015 work session.
It is quite obvious that all of the citizens comments have been edited out and in no way represents many items of discussion at this meeting.
If the County is not going to post the videos in their entirety them they need to run a disclaimer at the beginning and the end of the videos stating that certain portions of the video has been censored and does not represent n its entirety what was said during the meetings.
Bottom line ALL of the commissioners need to be open, honest and transparent with the people that elected them., The past administration was the most secret one I have ever known.
-
1
-
-
Yes by all means please do look at what the David Austin administration has done to this county he is so incompetent that he does not even have a clue of how to chair a meeting even after being on the job for six yearsNot at all. There is a huge difference. Look at the long list of fires that are burning under the Watch of this administration. Look at the IRS for one and all the lies about missing emails. Look at what it took to take out Nixon and make a comparison. We are on a scary path.
-
NewsJunky Does Bob Snelling support David Austin and the Airport Authority in expanding the Airport for commercial passenger service?
TAX ASSESSMENTS?
in Paulding County NEWS
Posted
This is the most outrageous reassessment of property values county wide that I have ever experienced. in Paulding County!!!
A review of my sub division reassessments reveals huge increases invaluations ranging in excess of $52,000,
I own a 40 year old FRAME construction homes located on a road that is in need of road repair with crumbling driveways, with homes sitting vacant and unsold for over a year, with over grown yards and my valuation went up over $ 41,000 dollars.
This assessors office is out of control and Commission Chairman David Carmichael does not have the ability, desire, or intentions of bringing this Department which falls under his jurisdiction in compliance with the laws of the state of Georgia.
Paulding County residents it is time to rise up and appeal these unjust and unfair assessments in an effort to reduce the tax liability of property owners.
There is no way that property valuations have increased 50% to 60% over the period of one year.
Time to make visits to the assessors office and file the necessary appeals to the reassessments!!!!!
PS They are located on the Third floor of the Administration Building in the Court House complex