Play or Pay: How We Are Subject to TSPLOST Extortion

Cities in Fulton County are being held up at legislative gunpoint in Fulton County, Georgia, and if they do not play along with how the rules have been written by the State Legislature, their constituents will pay the price.

Cities within Fulton County (I live in Johns Creek) are required to either get on board with a Transportation Local Option Sales Tax (TSPLOST) or run the risk of having the TSPLOST passed in the fall of 2016, and their jurisdictions be subject to the tax and receive nothing. Continue reading

Me Versus You

In the City of Johns Creek, there is a very interesting battle taking shape over a proposed noise ordinance which is meant to address sound(and the sound waves that generate vibrations) from a commercial business, which is detrimental to the homeowners nearby.

At first glance, it would seem to be a rather easy situation to address.  There are the usual questions people like to discuss: Continue reading

What’s The Real Cost Of the Old Alabama Road Delay to Drivers, Johns Creek?

Johns Creek residents have been fighting a losing battle with traffic for the past several years.  Key road closures and construction projects have taken their toll on drivers and residents who find themselves trapped in their neighborhoods during rush hours, or face 20 minute ride to the grocery or school, which is within a mile or two of their homes.

Last year I did some calculations to determine what our delays cost us. Some local residents asked me to do the same for the Old Alabama-141 project, and so I have. You can read more about the details in the link below, but I explain as we go how the numbers are generated.

http://1c4.f98.myftpupload.com/2015/06/05/the-high-cost-of-traffic-dollar-and-sense/

The Old Alabama Road project is, has, and will be going on for a long time, by any measure that you can find.  With less than a 1/2 mile of widening to be accomplished, the cost of the road construction itself is at least $5 million and maybe higher.  The City of Johns Creek went with the GDOT to do the project to save the taxpayers money.

But, like any government agency, they seem to forget about the costs to the taxpayers themselves.  Being stuck in traffic for two years or more has a very high price. Most DOT project guides that I have seen give credence to the costs of that impact on residents.  Johns Creek may be the exception.

According to the Georgia DOT webserver on traffic volumes, there were about 8619 cars per day traveling on Old Alabama during the three morning and evening hours that make up peak travel periods in Johns Creek in 2013.

Most of us have experienced worse delays than the 10 minutes I use for this example, but we will use that as the additional time each vehicle is taking to make it through the intersection.

That equals 86,190 minutes per day wasted sitting in traffic.

That equals 1,436 hours per day.  At a value of $16 per hour(based on what other DOTs use for the cost of traffic delays), that works out to a cost of $22,984.00 per day.

And since there are 250 or so work days a year, that works out to $5,975,840.00 per year.

This suggests to me that the residents and drivers in and around Johns Creek will have nearly $12 million dollars in lost time, wear and tear on their vehicles, and general frustration while the City of Johns Creek will have saved around $5 million by having the Georgia Department of Transportation run this project.

Was it worth it?

MARTA: It’s Not About Racism-It’s About the Math

MARTA_trainSince the beginning of the Mass Transit era in the Atlanta metropolitan area, I’ve constantly heard the arguments that the reason people were against the transit system was racism.

This is usually the moment that the local politician or commentator makes the statement about how people feared that their homes would be broken into and their tv set stolen and taken away on a bus or train. It’s a tired example, and an inaccurate example. Continue reading

Johns Creek and MARTA: The REAL Reason it is NOT the Right Answer

Recently, the City of Johns Creek passed a resolution effectively saying they would not support an increase in the MARTA sales tax, which is and has been collected in Johns Creek since MARTA was formed.

That decision has led to the usual bellowing of racism.  Racism is on the path to becoming the argument of first resort when people, generally on the left, do not get their way.  It used to be the argument of last resort, but why wait?

I am sure that there will be people that claim that my views are biased as well.  They would be wrong.  I graduated from Georgia State University, and I took the train from Hightower to Georgia State daily.  Even then, it took longer by train than by car.  Which is generally true for a lot of MARTA versus car travel cases.

For example, Windward Parkway in Alpharetta to the Atlanta Airport would take 42 minutes at 1:33 p.m. on 11/23/2015.  By bus/rail? One hour and 27 minutes(if you get there as soon as the bus arrives).  Click on the link below, and it will show you current travel times by both modes.

https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Windward+Pkwy,+Alpharetta,+GA/Hartsfield-Jackson+Atlanta+International+Airport,+6000+North+Terminal+Parkway,+Atlanta,+GA+30320/@33.8724997,-84.6242664,10z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m14!4m13!1m5!1m1!1s0x88f59e6c38cf93d3:0x8fcf80e0cde8a243!2m2!1d-84.2459577!2d34.091148!1m5!1m1!1s0x88f4fd2fe1035901:0x4117a3ef1892b048!2m2!1d-84.4277001!2d33.6407282!3e3

We are often told “Look at how successful the METRO is in Washington, D.C.”.  Of course that system is successful.  It was designed and built the proper way a transportation system should be built.  MARTA took a different path.  Well they basically took two paths: North-South and East-West.  That’s their failure.  That they have continued to this day without modifying that plan is why MARTA is not and cannot be the answer.

Have a look at the two systems.  Here are the maps for each:

Washington METRO Map

Washington METRO Map

Washington’s METRO has multiple 8 spokes to their transportation system.  Those 8 spokes three separate transportation circular routes that allow passengers to get to where they are going without the need for everyone to transfer at one primary station if they need to change directions while traveling.

This system is a functional system, and provides for additional expansion because they can connect any two outer spokes, creating another circular path, when the demand is there.

The Washington Metro was started in 1976.  It has:

  • Six Lines
  • 91 Stations
  • 117 miles of track
  • 712,843 passengers per day
marta-map

MARTA Metro Atlanta Rail Map

Atlanta’s MARTA system is shown here:

MARTA was started in 1971:

  • Two Main Lines
  • 38 Stations
  • 48 miles of track
  • 438,900 passengers per day
  • No new stations since 2000

 

As you can see, there is no connectivity between the two main spokes, except at Five Points.  There are no circular paths for patrons to take to get to their destination.

This also creates another major problem.  If MARTA has a failure between Lindbergh and the Airport, or between Holmes and Indian Creek, it disrupts all traffic and buses muse be used.  The Washington METRO allows riders to pick another route if one of the stations happens to be on one of their circular sections of track. Continue reading

Conflicts of Interest

As a Libertarian, I understand what it is like to be perceived as being against anything and everything. Those that try to characterize Libertarians in this manner often have a conflict of interest.

There are many conflicts of interest that we are surrounded with each and every day. The best way to address these issues is to be up front and acknowledge that “Yes, here is my conflict of interest, and this is how I will attempt to balance it with the issue”.

Instead, we see the denial of the conflict of interest through carefully worded statements. Statements that seem to give the sense that there is no conflict. But that does not eliminate the real conflict that exists. Continue reading

Introducing the Fulton County Residential Authority( Or Why We Should Not have the Fulton County Development Authority)

I’d like to propose (for illustration only) a new agency for Fulton County.  We will call it the Fulton County Residential Authority(FCRA).  This authority will do for residents what the Fulton County Development Authority(FCDA) does for businesses.

Fulton County needs to attract some of the best and brightest residents out there who are looking for new homes.  There are many attractive locations, and it would be in Fulton County’s own best interest to attract them here.

We can attract them by helping them get the financing they need for their homes.  We will help them to float bonds for their residences, and offer tax incentives for those that are willing to purchase those bonds.

thankyouCurrent residents that are already in their homes?

We will offer you a hearty thank you. Thank you for not questioning our actions.[read more=”Read more” less=”Read less”]

Thank you for continuing to pay the full taxes on your property.

Thank you Thank you Thank you.   (If you are one of our valued residents come in and chat-we may be able to work a favorable deal for you as well)

We will also offer through the FCRA property tax breaks for you that will lower your cost of residency during your first ten years.  We will lower your property taxes by 50%, and then slowly increase your taxes over the years.  And if needed to keep you happy, we will work with you to help lower those taxes in other ways as well.  We are here for you.

thankyouCurrent residents that are already in their homes, and paying the full tax rates without any abatements-once again we offer you a hearty thank you!

 

 

 

Once a month, the FCRA will get together and look over the list of those who have applied for an inducement to have their residence within Fulton County.  We will be evaluating you based on what you say will be the benefits of having you here.

Are you a high income earner and will be spending dollars?  There’s a plus.

Going to be hiring a maid and lawn care and nannies?  Babies on the way? Greater purchases of goods and job creation is always a plus.

Building a new home versus a resale?  Even better. Raw materials purchased.  Building permits and inspections.   More jobs.

So we invite you to apply.  Make your case.  Help make Fulton County a better place for all.  Your FCRA will make the right choices picking the right new residents for Fulton County.

Crying-baby-cartoon_0For those current residents who will be living besides our beneficiaries of the FCRA, do not be concerned, upset, or feel cheated.  These new residents will add value.  They are bringing in new construction projects, jobs, and other intangibles.

We assure you this will not lead to overbuilding or speculation in our markets.  Do not look at these new residents as getting a tax break at your expense.  Look at it as incremental revenue that we will spend on behalf of everyone.

Let’s create the FCRA and do for residents what we are doing so well for our business community!

++++

Now that you have a sense of how the Fulton County Residential Authority might work, you can see why I would oppose the Fulton County Development Authority.

It picks winners actively and losers passively.  Current businesses pay more taxes than those that make deals with the FCDA.

It encourages speculation and overbuilding.

My list is long as to why I think the FCDA is a bad idea.  Despite the fact that “everyone has or wants a development authority”, it artificially stimulates demand for commercial space.  It also comes with a price: Property Tax Abatements.

Treat everyone and every business equally.  If the idea is accepted that lower taxes stimulate(as the FCDA can affirm by why it does what it does), then lower taxes across the board for EVERYONE.

Lower business taxes for everyone.  It’s the only equitable way to do business.

If you create a business environment that benefits ALL participants then that is the single best thing you can do.

Do not penalize current businesses by giving newcomers better deals and tax breaks.

It’s just that simple.

If you create that sort of environment for your businesses, you will not have to “induce” them to be in your community.  Instead, they will beat a path to your community, and everyone will benefit.

[thumbs-rating-buttons]

[/read]

[thumbs-rating-buttons]


Economies Of Scale Vs. Scope of Government

One of the greatest mysteries to me is why we see no economies of scale the bigger cities get and the bigger governments get.  And I think that I am on the brink of resolving that mystery for myself finally.

For our example, we will take two municipalities of obviously different size: Johns Creek and Atlanta.  Both have the same state government, operate in the same environmental and economic environments and co-exist 15 miles or so apart.

And without evening providing the numbers that support the statement, we all know that it is much more expensive from a tax perspective to live in Atlanta than Johns Creek.

I have decided to provide the numbers after it was suggested that they were important.

Brief back of the envelope calculations shows that the City of Atlanta spends $1265 per resident while Johns Creek spends $637.  And on property taxes. the City of Atlanta has a millage rate 30% higher than Johns Creek.

As a more or less rational thinker, this has left me puzzled more often than not.  What is it that makes it more expensive per capita to provide services to the public, which seem to defy the concept of Economies of Scale that function flawlessly in other aspects of our life?

And then it hit me.  It’s NOT the economies of scale that are at question.  It’s the scope of government services provided.

At this point I am going to add another city to our conversation.  This one is fictional, but we all have a good understanding of how it is defined: Mayberry.

The city of Mayberry provided the most basic of services for the common good.  Court, jail, police, fire and education.

All the residents were potential beneficiaries of these services.

But when a city gets larger, like Johns Creek has, then more services are provided. Wants seem to morph into needs.   And these services may not benefit all citizens but a sub-section.     At first, it might be that a new service benefits 90% of the public. We tax all for the benefit of those 90%.  And 10% pay for services they never use.

Then the City grows larger.  Soon we add additional services, and then more additional services until the new services aret being used by 10% or less of the population and are being subsidized by the 90% that are not using them.

The larger the city the smaller the beneficiary group as a % of the whole needs to be.

Much to the chagrin of dog lovers, I’ll use the example of dog parks.  (and I love the name of the Chattapoochie Dog Park in Gwinnett so I am not a total grump).  Here’s a service provided by municipalities that only benefits dog owners.  More specifically, it only benefits that sub-segment of dog owners that want to take their dogs to a park to roam around.  If 1 in ten residents in Johns Creek have taken their pooch to the park more than 6 times in a year, I’d be shocked.

Were Johns Creek to get large enough, we’d likely have a different park for small dogs, and big dogs.  Even larger and we would have one for medium sized dogs.

We see the same effect with Arts Centers, Aquatic Centers, Nature Centers (insert the others you know are coming here).  We also see it with other services the City decides that they must provide such as bulk recycling.  The list becomes endless as long as there are funds to start the program.  And they never end. Get a few federal or state dollars to start and it’s a certainty to get started and be with you forever more.

Which brings us back to my original observation.  There are no economies of scale for bigger and bigger cites because the scope of the services these cities provide expand in such a way that there are fewer users as a % of the population, forcing the majority to subsidize them.  By the end the 99% are funding programs for the 1% that use them.

How does one reign in the “service creep” that cities seem to engage in the larger they get?

One answer would be to set a minimal level of actual users that a city expects to see from this service.  Fifty per cent would be a good starting point for discussion’s sake.

Another answer would be to cut the funds flowing into the cities that fund such projects of such a narrow scope.  To do so you will need to be ready to speak up to your local government and say “NO!”.

As a Libertarian, this is exactly why I am for  a smaller government.  Let’s do the things that we need to do for everyone’s benefit, and do them the best we can.

Then we could see economies of scale.  We could lower our taxes, and those with dogs, for instance, could fund their own private dog park with their own dollars.

Otherwise, where does the “Service Creep” end?

That’s my opinion.  I’d love to hear yours.

[thumbs-rating-buttons]

Johns Creek: Foolin’ Ourselves

The residents of Johns Creek, Georgia have lots of things going for it.  Excellent housing, many of the best schools in the state for kids, and income levels that surpass nearly every other community.

Those positive attributes, however, have led to a flow of tax dollars into the City’s Coffers that is now doing more harm than good.

Since 2006, the year the city formed, the City has amassed $54,348,545 at the end of the fiscal year 2014, according to the City’s Certified Audited Financial Report.  That represents an increase of almost $7,000,000 per year of revenue over expenses.  With a population of around 80,000, that works out to more than $670 per every man, woman and child.

That’s an astonishing amount of money to be held per capita, and it’s growing.  Last evening, the City Council, under the lead of Mayor Mike Bodker voted to maintain the City’s millage rate at it’s current level, despite the property valuations rising sharply over the last year.  More money will be flowing into the City’s coffers again in 2016 coming directly out of the pockets of the residents.  And while it may not seem like a big deal to many outside of Johns Creek(after all, they can afford it), it is creating problems that will soon become more and more apparent as time passes.

[read more=”Read more” less=”Read less”]Incredibly, the Reserve Growth has grown at an annualized rate of 27.35%.  Mayor Bodker and the rest of the City Council have been asked numerous times why are our reserves growing so rapidly?  What will this money be used for?  From listening to dialogue at the City Council’s work session, the perception is that the public just doesn’t understand.   I think we do. I think we also know that other cities, operating under the same general rules as Johns Creek, are not rolling up such large sums of money.

Of course, some of this money is used for day to day operations as a float for paying bills and salaries as funds come and go.  But if we did not have such a large reserve fund, there would be some other financial tool to deal with  cash flow, for instance.  There would be a cost to that technique, of course.  And there are the recommendations of how much to set aside, just in case.  But it seems to me that we have more than enough set aside for a city like Johns Creek that is collecting 10 % more than they are spending year in and year out.  In fact, we have a greater margin of error than a city that barely collects enough revenue to cover expenses.

So there is absolutely no reason that the reserve funds continue to grow at such an astonishing rate without a clear explanation.  And I firmly believe that this Reserve Fund’s size is doing much more harm than good.

The size of this Reserve Fund has not kept Mayor Bodker or the City Manager, Warren Hutmacher, from speculating that one of the wealthiest cities in Georgia has a sustainability issue (despite the rapid growth of the reserve fund).  A wish list of projects was created that totals more than $180 million dollars,which would indeed suggest there is a problem.  There would be if all of these wished for items were approved.  But they haven’t been.  And like a cloud hanging over the City, this wish list is negatively influencing the decisions of the City Council.

First, there is no sustainability issue if the City of Johns Creek sticks to what it is supposed to be doing, rather than dreaming of exceptional projects that have not been proven to be desired by the majority of residents.

Second, the Reserve Fund allows for the perception that we can afford lots of lower cost projects, regardless of the return on the investment(something cities apparently are not as concerned about as the private sector).  Consequently we see 100’s of thousands of dollars allocated for purposes that might not otherwise be approved if we had a lower reserve fund and managed our decisions much more wisely.

Many residents have attempted to point out the lopsided salary structure of the City’s Employees.  They have been met with dismissive attitudes(I am being polite) and promises that this will be looked into.

Residents have pointed out that we are overpaying for certain services, and that we are wasting funds on various projects that benefit only a handful of residents or that the residents already have access to via other means.

Residents have scrutinized the City’s financial results, offering observations and asking questions that go largely unanswered.

As the monies continue to roll into Johns Creek’s coffers, there is simply no pressure to address these concerns.  The residents and the business community are both left paying for this malinvestment.

In an effort to “move the needle” on the City’s revenue sources (too much of the load is on property owners and not enough on business), the concept of a Central Business District was launched.  Several hundred thousand dollars was voted on an approved to explore this “idea”. An outside firm, Urban Design Associates, was hired to bring the concept closer to reality.

The Central Business District has morphed from a :hypothesis” that was going to generate enough revenue to help offset the $180 million in projects on the wish list to being financially accretive.

DEFINITION of ‘Accretive’

The process of accretion, which is the growth or increase by gradual addition, in finance and general nomenclature. An acquisition is considered accretive if it adds to earnings per share.

Applying this word to our situation, if it costs us $10,000,000, and we generate $10,100,000, then it was accretive.  However, that is a very low bar for performance and a horrible return on investment.

This City Council needs to apply the brakes, and hard.  The hard earned money that they are collecting from residents at these levels, which are not being spent on services deemed needs by the residents, and is inducing the Council to approve projects that offer little return on investment, needs to be returned to its rightful owners.

That means cutting the tax rates for both businesses and residents.

One of the Council Members spoke of his concern for residents where even $30 a year makes a big difference.  He voted for a rollback.

I suggest he think about the $670 already collected from those very same residents.

Johns Creek has been a city too long now to keep finding excuses as to why we do not have the budget tools in place to have a firm and clear grip on our fiscal health.

Johns Creek pays the professionals too well to expect anything less than the best analysis from the beginning.  A 10 year financial forecast that would have landed you a D in your college finance course should not be acceptable to anyone, even as a “draft”.

The performance bar must be raised.  We have too much at stake to have sub-par performance from the very same people we are paying top dollars for in compensation.

Below is a chart I adapted from their ten year financial forecast.  I have included some crucial elements that needed to be included, for context.  Prior year data is from the Johns Creek CAFR report, 2015 data comes from the Mid Year Budget Report and years 2016-2025 are from the 10 year financial forecast.

Click on it and have a look.

Reserve Growth, Expense, Revenues, and Capital Expenses

Reserve Growth, Expense, Revenues, and Capital Expenses

These are my opinions.  I’d love to hear yours.
[/read]

[thumbs-rating-buttons]