RESERVOIR PLANS GET BOOST IN NORTH GEORGIA:  A new state law has reinvigorated plans for a new reservoir on a North Georgia site owned by the city of Atlanta.  Two competitors presented plans recently to the Dawson County Commission for a reservoir on up to 2,200 acres of the 10,130-acre Dawson Forest property the city bought in the early 1970s as a potential site for a second airport.

The project would yield up to 100 million gallons of water per day, enough to serve the rapidly growing Atlanta region either as a major complement or alternative to Lake Lanier, depending on the outcome of the long-running legal tug-of-war over water allocation between Georgia, Alabama and Florida.

“We’re going to have to impound water in North Georgia, not only to supply Atlanta but to supply ourselves,” said Gary Pichon, a Dawson County commissioner and reservoir supporter. “If Atlanta doesn’t have adequate water supply in the future, Georgia starts to look a lot like Mississippi.”

But to become reality, the Dawson Forest Reservoir still must await a final result in the tri-state water war.

Absent a settlement of that dispute, Gov. Nathan Deal and legislative leaders are hesitant to create additional water supplies in a river basin that Georgia shares with either of the other two states. The Dawson Forest Reservoir would be formed by damming a tributary of the Etowah River, which flows from Georgia into Alabama.

The proposed reservoir also must surmount opposition from environmental advocates worried about the effects of piping huge quantities of water out of the Etowah basin and from local residents against flooding the pristine property.

Atlanta industrial developer Jerry Daws, president of Republic Resources Inc., first proposed the reservoir more than two years ago.

At the time, he was working in partnership with the Dawsonville, Ga.-based Etowah Water & Sewer Authority. But since then, the two have parted ways and become competitors.

The General Assembly passed legislation this year allowing municipal water systems to form public-private partnerships to finance and build water improvements. In the spirit of that measure, publicly owned Etowah is now partnering with New Jersey-based American Water Co. on plans for a $650 million reservoir covering 1,200 acres.

“We sought additional resources because this project is too big for us,” Jim King, Etowah’s board chairman, told Dawson County commissioners Sept. 22 during a public hearing at Dawsonville City Hall. “American Water is the largest private provider of water in the United States. They have the resources, the expertise and the funding to do this project without one red cent coming from Dawson County or the state.”

Etowah General Manager Brooke Anderson emphasized the water authority’s local connections in his pitch to the county commission.

“We are part of this community,” he said.

But Daws argued that his Atlanta-based company is the only competitor offering to make Dawson County a “true partner” in the project.

Under Republic Resources’ proposal to invest $800 million in a 2,200-acre reservoir, the county would receive a one-time $7 million “advisory fee” for its assistance with the project and estimated annual payments of $8.3 million to $10.2 million upon full operation of the reservoir.

“They’re the local guys,” Daws said of Etowah. “But they’re not giving [the county] anything. … All the money is going to New Jersey.”

The city of Atlanta, which also would partner with Republic Resources, would get $10 million in advisory fees.

One aspect of the plan the competitors share is that both are offering to preserve 8,000 acres at the Dawson Forest site as perpetual green space in exchange for the land they need for the reservoir.

Neither Dawson County nor the cash-strapped state government has the financial wherewithal to acquire and save Dawson Forest, Anderson said.

“There is no money to allow the state to develop this park in a meaningful way,” he said.

But Will Wingate, vice president of advocacy and land conservation for the Georgia Conservancy, said there’s an alternative to seeking local or state funds to preserve the property or cutting a deal with one of the reservoir developers.

He offered to work with Dawson County to raise the money needed to preserve the property through a SPLOST (Special Purpose Local Option Sales Tax) referendum.

He pointed to recent SPLOSTs for open space preservation in Paulding and Decatur counties that passed despite the current anti-tax climate.

“If the public knows there’s a specific piece of property that’s critical to a community, they’re willing to pay for it,” he said.

Besides the potential to lose increasingly rare forestland, Wingate and other environmentalists are concerned about the potential effects of withdrawing up to 100 million gallons a day from the Etowah River on downstream communities.

“This would be the single-largest interbasin transfer in the state,” said Joe Cook, executive director of the Rome, Ga.-based Coosa River Basin Initiative.

Cook also pointed to a legal obstacle to the Dawson Forest Reservoir. When the General Assembly created the Metropolitan North Georgia Water Planning District a decade ago, lawmakers prohibited piping water from outside of the district to customers inside its boundaries.

Dawson County is outside of the metro water district.
The project’s supporters say all of the legal and environmental issues surrounding the project must be fully vetted before the reservoir could win approval.
Since Atlanta owns the property, the city will have a great deal of say in whether the reservoir ever gets built and, if so, who builds and operates it.
Pichon said that, for now, he would be satisfied if the Dawson County Commission passes a resolution he plans to introduce supporting the project.
“I’m just trying to tee this up,” he said. “It would give [Atlanta] and the water companies interested in doing this some notice as to where we are.”
New reservoir
Two proposals are competing to build a reservoir in Dawson County on 10,130 acres owned by the city of Atlanta.
Republic Resources Inc.
Size of reservoir: 2,200 acres
Expected yield: 100 million gallons per day
Cost: $800 million
Etowah Water & Sewer Authority
Size of reservoir: 1,200 acres
Expected yield: 90 million gallons per day
Cost: $650 million
Sources: Republic Resources Inc., Etowah Water & Sewer Authority

The Atlanta Humane Society spay/neuter mobile unit will be at the Lumpkin County Animal Shelter on Wednesday and Thursday, September 28 and 29.  If you know anyone who has a dog or cat that has not been altered, please tell them about this opportunity.

The efforts of PAWS and TLC to create a North Georgia Spay/Neuter mobile unit ended when we learned that Atlanta Humane was developing a mobile unit that could serve our area.  Atlanta Humane already has funding sources to accomplish this goal and by serving rural areas, they will be immediately eligible for additional funds from grants.

My only concern is that we must get the word out to everyone who could take advantage of the service.  If Lumpkin residents fail to take advantage of this clinic, Atlanta Humane can be expected to go elsewhere.

Atlanta Humane’s original proposal was for them to place ads in The Dahlonega Nugget providing contact information for appointments made directly with them.  Now that the county has taken responsibility for appointments and scheduling, we must all do everything we can to make certain that local residents know about the program.

Appointments must be made in person at the shelter prior to the clinic dates.  Availability will be “first come, first served.”  The shelter number is 706-867-7297.

Jefferson County, Alabama ( Birmingham) has received a lot of attention lately.  The extent of their excess borrowing (aka ..spending) is almost unbelievable.   An individual homeowner’s sewer bill that is now $50 a month is expected to be more than $200 a month before the current sewer loan deal is paid off.  These folks will pay more the $2500 a year just to flush their waste!

Elise Le Guevel and her crew from national French TV were in Birmingham to “inoculate French viewers to our financial contagion.”  It seems that Europeans are horrified that if this can happen in the United States, if could happen in their country, too.

Elise Le Guevel wanted a simple, understandable explanation for what happened.  The writers struggled to find a simple explanation.  It boils down to:

• Jefferson County government was overextended by elected officials who ignored the risks of such a huge undertaking.

• In an effort to protect the current commission from bankruptcy, a $500-an-hour sewer receiver (and big bank representative) recommended a settlement that pleases the state and big business.

• The lenders (banks) are absolved from their responsibility for inept business decisions.

• Residents no longer trust their leaders, but they will still be stuck paying the bills.

Questions that remain include, “What will be the effect on future growth?  Will people choose to live in a place where they face exorbitant utility costs?   Will the benefits of this sewer system outweigh the costs?

No individual and no government should ever borrow money or enter into any contract without careful examination of the risks and recognition of responsibility to the other party.

Advice to voters:   Never vote for a candidate that you would not trust to put their hands in your pockets.  As an elected official, that is what they do.

Facts taken from a story published: Sunday, September 18, 2011   By John Archibald -The Birmingham News
(Tamika Moore — The Birmingham News)

John Archibald’s column appears Sundays, Wednesdays and Fridays. Write him at
jarchibald@bhamnews.com.
© 2011 al.com. All rights reserved.

With the economy in a mess, tolls set to go on the new express lanes on I-85 and Atlanta voters facing the choice of accepting still-higher water rates or voting to renew their special water and sewer tax, the timing is terrible for the metro district, which is key to the entire state’s transportation network. And it isn’t too much better for the other districts around the state.

Whether you were a fan of his work or not, the recent resignation under pressure of Vance Smith – the Department of Transportation’s third commissioner in four years – surely suggests to all that the state lacks stability in the agency responsible for putting asphalt on the ground.

But unlike the days when legislators had to go hat in hand to the powerful “Mr. Jim” Gillis, the DOT isn’t the only player in transportation anymore. It’s just one of several.

Since 2009, when the Legislature aided by then-Gov. Sonny Perdue clipped the DOT’s wings, we’ve had a director of planning – appointed by the governor – to design the state’s transportation vision and also to work with each of the state’s transportation districts to develop a list of projects that would be funded by the proposed 1 percent T-Splost (Transportation Local Option Sales Tax) should it pass in one or more or even all of the districts.

But I’m wondering where that has gotten us. It appears from news accounts that the biggest region – Atlanta – may be about to rip itself apart because of territorial concerns among its various cities.

The AJC reported recently that suburban mayors in the district are beginning to complain about Atlanta-centric projects like the Beltline boondoggle and the proposed rail line from Cobb County to midtown Atlanta – projects they say would suck needed dollars away from their own pet projects.

Finally, of course, we have the State Road and Tollway Authority in the mix. That’s the group that’s putting the tolls on express lanes on I-85. Those lanes formerly were free so long as you had two or more people in the car.

Taken altogether, this is a terribly disjointed way to deal with an issue as vital as transportation. It begs the questions of who’s in charge and do they know what they doing?

It didn’t have to be this way.

Back in the 70s, somebody should have whispered in the late Gov. George Busbee’s ear that the idea of growing Georgia through foreign investment was great but that we needed a planning system in place to get ready for the growth.

In the 80s, then-Gov. Joe Frank Harris proposed a sweeping plan to manage growth. Some of it was passed but some of the key components either weren’t passed or have been allowed to lie fallow. Impact fees, for example, always seemed like a good idea to me. The guys who built all the apartments and the homes at will across the state should have been required to pay a fee to help build the schools, hire the cops and manage the traffic their developments would bring. It wouldn’t have come out of the developers pockets, of course. It would have been passed along to the homebuyer. Why we didn’t do that I don’t know.

Former Gov. Zell Miller, who deserves kudos for much of what he did during his administration, didn’t do so good in planning. He let the Harris initiative drop without further attention.
So much for planning for growth.

As far as transportation governance, every governor has tinkered with it but in recent years former Gov. Sonny Perdue was in a unique position at one point during his term to build a lasting legacy by revitalizing the state’s road and providing a clear vision. It would have required much more political muscle and much more time from him to achieve that goal but unfortunately he didn’t provide it.

And so we are at a point when SRTA is about to put tolls on 16-miles of hitherto-free lanes on I-85, the DOT is hunting for a new commissioner, the metro area’s cities and counties are sniping at the proposed list of projects to be funded by the 1 percent local option sales tax (should it pass) and the economy is lousy.But maybe there is hope.

Gov. Nathan Deal recently formed a transit task force to look toward streamlining and coordinating the individual transit systems in metro Atlanta, and that surely indicates an interest in transportation as a whole.
Maybe he’s the governor who will fix our transportation problems and thereby ensure a lasting legacy. He could do worse.

That’s the view from the ridge.

Editor’s Note: Dick Pettys covered the Georgia Capitol for The Associated Press from 1970 to 2005 and then served as editor of this publication for five years. He is now editor emeritus and has moved to the northeast Georgia mountains, where he has built a house on a ridge. He will be contributing a column a week, appearing every Monday. The opinions are his own and may or may not represent the views of InsiderAdvantage, its staff and its management. Agree or disagree with this or other columns? <dpettys@windstream.net>

Questions that were not asked, but should have been asked:

• What is it going to cost?

• Where is the money coming from?

• What are the long and short term benefits for Dahlonega and Lumpkin County?

The presentation focused on irrelevant, technical data to the exclusion of real world information that would convince anyone that the project should receive public support.  Their discussion of inter-basin transfers required for the project did not convince the public that this would be a good thing or that it would be in compliance with state law.

These folks have been trying with little success for some time to get this project off the ground.  Special offers to those who give up their land for the reservoir would be:

• a right of first refusal of newly created lake lots and

• their names on a plaque.

Whopee!  Don’t you know the landowners will be standing in line for these goodies.

Prior threats to obtain land using eminent domain have made all area landowners suspicious of the project.  Denials of such efforts by current promoters fall on deaf ears when those folks have once been threatened with the use of eminent domain.

As members of the public were leaving the meeting, numerous comments were made relative to snake oil salesmen and P.T. Barnum’s quote,  “There is a sucker born every minute.”

This is the first in what will be a series of posts about PAWS and the Lumpkin County Animal Shelter.  The shelter belongs to residents of our county.  We pay the bills and we are responsible for what goes on there.  Good things are happening.  You will soon hear  about more options becoming available for low cost spay/neuter.  You will be asked for your suggestions on how to get the message out about pet over-population and improvements to our county shelter.

Difficult economic times are being felt at the Lumpkin County Animal Shelter.  Families losing their homes and folks losing their jobs is not good for the family pet.  A lot of animals are finding themselves on the street or turned in to the shelter.

Our county and the shelter staff are doing the best they can in an impossible situation.

As the president of PAWS, I am not pleased with the situation.  Shelter staff cannot begin to do the job as it needs to be done because too many animals pass through.

About half the animals that come in are brought in by Animal Control.  The rest are brought in by owners or someone who finds an animal and turns it in to the shelter.

Those brought in by Animal Control are held for five days before coming under control of the Shelter unless they are in such bad shape that they are euthanized.  Found animals are also held for five days during which time attempts are made to locate the owners.  After five days, these animals become available for adoption, transfer to rescue groups, or euthanization.

Owner surrenders become available for all options as soon as a release is obtained.  If there is no space for the animal, it can be euthanized immediately.

Let’s be very clear, the desirable outcome for all animals is a loving home.  Reality is there are no homes available for many of these great animals.  When PAWS takes animals to off-site adoptions, we find that most local residents already have as many pets as they can afford.  We work with shelter management to arrange as many transfers to rescue groups as we can …but there are never enough.  Many healthy, adoptable pets are euthanized because there is no space to hold them.  During July, adoptions and transfers were down.  A dog that had been in the shelter for just two weeks could be on the list for euthanization to make room for those being brought in.

I have been blunt in stating to management that twice as many animals are going through the shelter as they are capable of properly handling.  Two weeks is not nearly long enough to hold a lost pet or for new owners to be found.

The response to my concerns has been a proposal to charge a $25 fee for anyone bringing in an animal or animals.  Although I personally support the fee, many are concerned that people will just dump the animals instead of bringing them to the shelter.

One way or another, this community must get the message out that it is unacceptable to allow pets to run loose, especially when they have not been spayed or neutered.

I don’t know about you, but I consider it morally reprehensible to allow puppies and kittens to be born just to be killed.  I cannot believe that the people of this county want their children to grow up accepting such cruelty.

PAWS  www.pawsdahlonega.com and the Lumpkin County Animal Shelter already offer help for those who cannot afford to have their pets spayed/neutered.  Help us get the word out.  Post comments about this article.  Let your county commissioners know what you think.

The responsibility belongs to all of us.  The concern we all have for “Nugget,” the community dog, is needed for the many hundreds of animals that have no home.

Emily Lewy, PAWS President

PAWS (Pet Animal Welfare Society) and TLC (Dahlonega-Lumpkin County Humane Society) are being offered an opportunity to work with a veterinarian to create a low cost North Georgia Spay Neuter Clinic.  Both are 501(c)3 organizations that would qualify for numerous grants for such a project.

State law requires that animals passing through shelters be altered to keep unwanted pets from becoming a burden on taxpayers.  Lumpkin County has legally circumvented the problem by requiring adoptive owners to sign a contract that makes them responsible for the procedure.  County employees have not followed up on enforcement of the contract; consequently, many shelter animals continue to reproduce exacerbating the over-population problem.

Vouchers provided as part of the adoption process are inadequate to cover the cost charged by many local vets.  The reality is that a lot of folks simply don’t have money for the kind of care offered by local veterinarians.   A  low cost clinic for spay/neuter appears to be the only humane way to stop animals from reproducing and their offspring being euthanized.

No matter how much we love our pets, there is a limit to the number we can have.  Most residents of our area already have as many as they can manage.  Although volunteers transport hundreds of pets to rescue groups and adoption opportunities in other parts of the country where spay/neuter laws are actually enforced, our shelters continue to euthanize many healthy pets.  We have not solved the problem.

A low cost spay/neuter clinic is the only thing that can help us eliminate unwanted pets, come into true compliance with state law, and reduce the burden on local taxpayers.

There has been reluctance on the part of PAWS CEO Dan Bowers to allow the PAWS name to be used to solicit funds for this project.  It would be a great travesty if we lose this opportunity.  We cannot expect Dr. Land’s offer to last forever.

If you support a spay/neuter clinic that will save taxpayers money, reduce the numbers of unwanted animals and eliminate unnecessary euthanasia, please, let your voice be heard.  Contact PAWS and TLC members, write letters to The Dahlonega Nugget and post your comments on this website.

An investigator by the name of Jennifer Keaton from One Mediation was hired by “the City” to investigate allegations of abuse of authority and retaliation against a City Employee.  Based on the biased opinions and astounding findings in Keaton’s three reports, it appears that she was hired to recommend that Johnny Ariemma be removed from the council.

Keaton never waivers from the premise that Ariemma is guilty; however, she may begin to suspect the truth by report number three.  A cautionary statement was placed on the front page bottom of the Third Report dated February 8, 2011.  Notice to Mayor and Council:  This Document is provided to you with the specific understanding that you are not to form any conclusions based on this report or prior reports or discuss the content of the reports with anyone.  I can hardly wait to find out what she was paid for this project.

The whole mess started when Councilman Ariemma’s permits were approved to construct a building in downtown Dahlonega.  No special approval or zoning changes were needed.  Once construction was underway, parking for construction and materials delivery proved to be an issue.

On September 20, 2010, two parking tickets were issued for contractor vehicles parked on the sidewalk.  Ariemma complained about the parking tickets and the limited parking.  He asked Code Enforcement Officer Tim Martin if he liked his job and stated that over the last three weeks he had seen a different side of him and this was not the Tim Martin he knows.

Although Ariemma complained about parking tickets issued to his contractors, he actually paid them all himself.  It is interesting that during a time when the City needs all the business it can get, the City was unwilling to work with contractors trying to get work done.

Ariemma told the Code Enforcement Officer that since he has realized parking was such a problem, he would make sure more was available before investing in another development.  He informed City Manager Bill Lewis that he intended to discuss parking issues with other council members at their next meeting.  As a sitting member of the council, Ariemma had a duty to bring up such issues.

On September 21, the day after writing the parking tickets, Martin asked Department Head, Chris Head, if he might be in trouble for writing them.  Ms Head called in City Manager Bill Lewis who reassured Martin that his job was not in jeopardy and that Lewis himself was the only one who could fire Martin.  Those are the facts elicited from Keaton’s three reports totaling 34 pages plus exhibits.

Quoting Keaton, “After this meeting, Lewis became more concerned about the earlier call from Ariemma.  To him, it appeared that Ariemma was attempting to intimidate an employee from performing his work duties. … Further, Lewis was concerned that Ariemma was using his position as a Council member to mitigate the parking tickets which Ariemma suggested hurt his business interests… In short, Lewis became very concerned about what Ariemma had said and done that suggested retaliation against a City employee and abuse of authority … Therefore, he sought advice of legal counsel.”

Based on Keaton’s report, Lewis had reinterpreted the facts.  However, Keaton found no evidence that Martin or  Lewis had any motivation to fabricate allegations.  And then, she simply chose to not believe Ariemma in spite of all evidence to the contrary.

Keaton’s first report was responsible for stampeding the Council to publicly accuse and threaten a fellow Council member.

After writing two reports in which the facts were stretched to justify a predetermined conclusion, she was asked to write a third after recorded conversations were made available.  When Keaton heard taped statements of Martin repeatedly telling Ariemma that he was not threatened by any of Ariemma’s comments, she discussed the taped statements with Martin and decided that the man did not understand the meaning of the word “threaten.”

Keaton refused to acknowledge Martin’s very clear, taped statement that Bill Lewis must be responsible for information in her report that she attributed to Martin.

Keaton described Martin as a victim even though he voluntarily went into Ariemma’s home to discuss what was going on.  Her report ignored the fact that Martin was clearly reading her report as Ariemma taped a 39 minute recording.  She accused Ariemma of misrepresenting what was in the report even though he was the only person who had provided an opportunity for Martin to see and read it.  She found Ariemma’s plea for Martin to clear his name by telling the truth be a effort to manipulate a “victim.”

Keaton concludes that Ariemma’s recording of his conservation with Martin was “covert” and further evidence of retaliatory motives.  She ignores the fact that the recording was necessary to challenge her report of threats and requests for intervention by the City Manager.   She concludes that Ariemma’s refusal to talk with her after the second report was evidence of having something to hide.  This in spite of the fact that in the prior reports she had distorted the facts and everything he said to discredit him.

In the February 8 report, Keaton for the first time brings in allegations of violating the city’s Ethics Code section relative to using coercion for financial benefit.  Yet, no evidence of financial benefit has been presented in spite of all her efforts to create an illusion of such benefits.

At the end of the February 8 report, Jennifer Keaton finally admits that this is her interpretation of events.  My own interpretation of those same events is that she was hired to discredit Councilman Ariemma.  Her statement of facts leads me to believe that City Manager Bill Lewis orchestrated this witch hunt.  While Code Enforcement Officer Tim Martin had no reason to fear being fired by a council member, he did have reason to fear being fired by the City Manager.  Martin could not call his boss a liar.

Martin necessarily backpedaled after being caught on tape stating that the accusations against Ariemma should be credited to Lewis.  He was indeed in fear of losing his job.  A taped conversation with Martin was the only way Ariemma could bring out the truth and disprove Keaton’s creative narrative and Lewis’s reinterpretation of the facts.

The Dahlonega City Council was deceived instead of informed by this investigation. It remains to be seen how they will resolve the mess in which they find themselves.

Alleged incidents on which all allegations against Councilman Ariemma are based took place over six months ago.  According to a report created for the City Council, City Manager Bill Lewis reinterpreted a question from his employee and turned that question into an accusation against Councilman Ariemma. The Mayor and City Council received the report that described Lewis’ expansion of the facts some four and a half months ago.

You would think the charges against Ariemma would have been dropped and long forgotten.  Only a vendetta against Ariemma could keep this thing going.  Efforts to “get” Ariemma continued even after the councilman informed the Mayor and Council that he had proof of his innocence.  That “proof” was provided to them;  yet, their vendetta continues with no facts to support their charges.  

The numerous attorneys representing the council allowed them to proceed with a resolution setting out the process for removing an elected official that was front page news in the February 23 edition of The Dahlonega Nugget.  Allegations against Ariemma were repeated and his picture prominently displayed.  Council members suggested that charges would be filed against Ariemma.

During Public Comments of the March 7 Council Meeting, the Mayor rudely interrupted and challenged a private individual speaking on the matter.  The Mayor’s remarks included, “you’re a lawyer” and  “if you want to talk more than a minute you need to get on the agenda.”

The March 16 edition of The Dahlonega Nugget ran a story, Council members rarely removed in Georgia,  http://www.thedahloneganugget.com/articles/2011/03/17/news/05%20councilremoval.txt . Facts that vindicate Ariemma have never been provided to the reporter; therefore, the allegations against Ariemma are again repeated and his removal anticipated.

The story referred to a similar controversy in Morrow, Georgia where the council is in the process of removing a fellow member.  However the two situations are vastly different.  In the Morrow case, a city employee had filed charges against the council member before any action was taken by the council.

In Dahlonega, the Council initiated the process of removal presumably on the recommendation of the City Manager with no employee to officially bring charges.  They brought in a consultant to interview witnesses and apparently to try to make a case for removing Ariemma.

I find it difficult to believe that council’s attorneys have not laid out the facts and explained to the council members that there is no evidence to support their allegations.  If they are aware of the facts, a vendetta is the only way to explain the continued persecution of Ariemma.  If council members don’t know what’s going on, each and every one should be immediately recalled because they are not doing the job we pay them to do.

How much longer do the voters of Dahlonega have to wait?  How much longer will Councilman Ariemma be the subject of a City Council vendetta?

Government can only be truly accountable if the citizenry regularly learns what our elected or appointed servants are up to. That’s a concept celebrated during national Sunshine Week, which begins today.  Friday, March 11, 2011

The opposite of that ideal is a secretive government — one whose unseen hands have liberty to pursue actions that may not be in the best interests of the governed.

Georgia Senate Bill 159 would make this undesirable outcome much easier to achieve by tossing a larger cloak of confidentiality over the economic development deals governments often negotiate with private interests. This legislation should die in its tracks before it moves any further around the Gold Dome.

The bill, whose sponsors include Sen. Jeff Mullis, R-Chickamauga, decrees that “information relating to a private person or entity’s economic development project … shall not be subject to any mandatory public disclosure requirement, and no document or record containing information about such private economic development project shall constitute a matter of public record.”

This outrageous blanket grant of anonymity would not be lifted until such time that said “private person” or entity “announces to the general public” that a decision good, bad or indifferent to Georgian interests has been reached.

If passed, this legislation could enable bad or costly ideas to be foisted onto the public after it is too late for their outcry to affect outcomes. So much for government of the people, by the people and for the people.

SB 159 smacks of a “we know what’s best for you” Big Brotherism that should be anathema to the will of a free people. We believe Georgians deserve the chance to apply Ronald Reagan’s oft-quoted adage to “trust, but verify.” That can only happen if taxpayers are clued in on economic development plans as early as prudence allows and while there’s still time to effect changes, if warranted.

That’s less likely to happen if SB 159 drops a concealing cover on economic development in this state.

Georgians should demand better of their lawmakers, and they should do so quickly, given that the bill was voted out of the Senate Economic Development Committee last week.

It will be said that bringing jobs here is the sole motivation behind SB 159. Georgia, the bill’s supporters say, is hamstrung by current requirements that economic incentives be publicized upon request. Competing states can, and have, pried open what should be confidential playbooks by filing open records requests demanding details of incentive packages, some say. “Often, our trade secrets are in the window for everybody to see,” Mullis said during a committee hearing last week.

That reasonably open window hasn’t kept Georgia from luring companies large and small to this pro-business state, even amid the greatest economic decline since the Great Depression. Site Selection magazine this month ranked Georgia No. 5 among states when it comes to drawing businesses.

That said, this editorial board recognizes well that state and local governments aren’t exempt from the forces of a competitive marketplace. That means the practice of using public money to fuel private development will likely be around for a long time as smart businesspeople shrewdly shop for the best possible deal.

That’s the real world. We believe that when taxpayer dollars are used in this way, the details should be made public in a timely manner. It’s the people’s money, after all.

Georgia’s prowess in drawing commerce and jobs shows that existing allowances for secrecy in negotiations seem adequate for safeguarding legitimate business interests.

Even company executives are often quick to say that incentives were not the deciding factor in relocation decisions. To believe that on its face may be naive, but it is beyond argument that many other factors, such as tax rates, quality of life and the availability of a trained work force weigh heavily in these calculations.

Lastly, once companies are lured to Georgia, they become taxpayers with a vested interest in how their money is being spent to lure the next business to town. SB 159 would hinder efforts to learn about deals that could affect their bottom line.

Sen. Mullis told the committee last week that only a pesky news media has so far opposed the bill. That wasn’t the case in 2005 when public heat nixed similar legislation.

Taking Mullis at his word this time around, we believe Georgians should again make their voices heard and help bury this bad idea for a second, and final, time.

Andre Jackson, 
for the Editorial Board