Yes, mewbet, you are on point. I, JimmyMack, a liberal Democrat, voted for a certified card carrying Tea Party Conservative, for Mayor by the name of Bill Kitchens in the last election. I did this because of the things you so very well note above. However, we exist in an era where local voter apathy reigns suprememe. I do not understand it at all.
I think Sebe put it best when he said it is going to have to get even more painful before the electorate will get out and vote these people out of office.
They seem to have a very high threshold for pain and the City and County representatives know this and enjoy impunity regarding their voter be damned governance of us.
If this was a stable community and did not have a large transient population, then things would be different. You have to be invested in your community in order to change things. People will complain but when it comes down to doing something as simple as voting, then they don't have the time.
All of you have made good points in this case.
"If this was a stable community and did not have a large transient population,
then things would be different."
If you don't have a vested interest in the place where you sleep, You don't share the tax burden of those who do.
I'm going to call out the 400lbs gorilla in the room. if everyone voting looked at what the people running for have done rather than their race, Hinesville wouldn't be in the mess that they are.
gacpl, you are absolutely correct.
And if everyone voting looked at what the people running for have done rather than their race, the USA wouldn't be in the mess that it is.
Having said that let me add that it is really not a racial issue it is a party loylty issue.
We have fellow bloggers who proudly condemn our local politicians for "JAMMING IT DOWN OUR THROATS" when they have proudly supported Obama and the national democratic and they too are "JAMMING IT DOWN OUR THROATS"
Nice comeback TOT: it is just that there are not checks and balance here at the local level unlike what BHO has to deal with.
Here: they are all in the same bed.
The first two of three public hearings on Hinesville’s proposed property-tax increase took place Thursday in council chambers at city hall. Though sparsely attended by city leaders and concerned residents, the morning meeting prompted some bitter public comments.
After opening the meeting, Mayor Pro Tem Charles Frasier welcomed those in attendance and asked City Manager Billy Edwards to explain the purpose of the public hearing. Edwards said the hearing was one of three that would allow the public to make comments about the proposal to raise the millage rate for property taxes by just under one mill.
“Where is everybody?” asked Hinesville resident Larry Boggs, who complained that too few community members attended the hearing. “How can you have a public hearing if nobody’s here?”
the community members that have gone to past meetings have noticed the patterns of the past with this mayor. the have a public meeting to make people happy, then he will bully the council members to give him what he wants, so why waste your time going. the only chance this would have been blocked was by not reelecting them.
Yes - that's what I've consistently seen reported about the meetings. Supposedly, the mayor "bullied" the rest of the city council (save one) to vote for those SNEAKY PAY RAISES a few years back. Term limits will help with the next election as far as the mayor goes. It would be great if an "outsider" (i.e., someone not in the current clique) were elected. I expect the money to be behind the "crony candidate."
On a related note: there's an article in today's print Courier about the Moody investor service assigning a "negative outlook'" to the city's public debt. The city manager basically explains this as a reflection of "hard times" and actually partially blames the taxpayers - saying that keeping taxes low is part of the problem. Can anyone guess where our local government is going with THAT attitude?
The article also says that the negative outlook is based in part on "the absence of a formal plan to either maintain or improve current fund balance levels." At the recent tax hearing, Council Keith Jenkins is quoted as saying: "We’re not on a spending rampage as some people have accused us. I think the city is doing a pretty good job of managing folks’ money.” Hmmmmm.....Moody's assigns a negative outlook to the city's public debt based partially on the lack of a plan to maintain or balance fund levels? That may not be a "spending rampage," but it sure sounds like they're playing fast and loose with our money. Then they say the only solution is to raise taxes. And now a credit rating agency is sending a signal that things are expected to get WORSE (i.e., "negative outlook").
We all need to wise up before things DO get a lot worse. We need a new crew in there to run the city government. We must remember this at election time.
The city manager was reported to have said that they used up the fund balance in order to avoid raising taxes for the past three years.
Did they vote themselves pay raises to be effective after being reelected?????
Then for the remainder of their current term they exhausted the fund balance in order to appear to be governing better than they actually were.
Sounds like fraud to me.
Can anyone spell recall.
Sebe what would it take to launch a recall of Mayor Thomas??????????????
IMHO it would take a whole lot more juice than could possibly be mustered - absent something far worse being revealed. The main reason I don't trust this crew is because of the pay raises. But the voters put them back in knowing this. Budget-busting - aside from unfortunately being all too common in government - is probably in and of itself insufficient to support any recall.