Saturday, January 26, 2008

Written 1/26/2008

Bids Closed to Public to be Discussed by BOC

The Oconee County Board of Commissioners will get an update on the bids for the upgrade of the Rocky Branch sewage treatment plant at its meeting on Tuesday, January 29, according to the draft agenda released by Oconee County Clerk Gina Lindsey on Friday afternoon, January 25.

Rocky Branch will be the first item on the agenda, but it is not possible to know if the Board will be asked to take action or anything about the bids themselves or the review process since the County decided to close the entire process to citizens.

The County holds a state permit to discharge up to 1 million gallons per day of treated sewage water from an upgraded Rocky Branch plant into Barber Creek, which flows through the northern part of the County.

Citizen scrutiny of the first round of bidding in late summer showed that the County had given tips to at least some bidders that it was interested in using a less sophisticated treatment technology than was called for in the Request for Proposal.

County officials recommended that a bidder who intended to use the lesser technology be given the contract, but the County threw out the bids after these irregularities were exposed.

In the second RFP, the County offered bidders the option of using both the original technology and a second technology.

Feng Jiang, who did graduate work involving these technologies at the University of Georgia, informed me that they are not equivalent and that the only way to know which will produce the higher quality water is to know the characteristics of the sewage coming in to the plant.

Board of Commissioners member Chuck Horton, who attended a closed meeting of the bid Selection Committee, said he did not believe the Committee was interested in recommending an inferior technology. He admitted, however, that he did not know the difference between the two technologies or the implications of selecting one over the other.

The Selection Committee, with Horton present, met on January 4. Members of the Committee are John Hatcher, Utilities Department director, Emil Beshara, Public Works Department director, Alan Theriault, County administrative officer, Jim Sunta, from Precision Planning Inc., and Jimmy Parker, also from Precision Planning.

Parker has been given the responsibility by the County for handling the bid review process, and he set up the January 4 meeting.

The County has acknowledged the names of the nine bidders, but not other information about the bidders or the bids.

I asked to be informed about the time and place of the Selection Committee meeting, but I was told by Theriault that I would not be. I learned that the Committee met only through an open records request I filed on January 7. I also was denied access to the bids and to details of the evaluation of those bids.

While Georgia law does allow–but not require–counties to close bids, it requires open access to public meetings, with limited exceptions. I have filed a complaint with the Attorney General about the County’s unwillingness to post notice about the January 4 meeting.

I also contacted the Georgia First Amendment Foundation and provide it a copy of my complaint to the Attorney General. Hollie Manheimer, executive director of the Foundation, wrote to Theriault on January 23, 2008, asking him to offer an "explanation of what will be done to remendy these actions that go against the interests of the public."

At the BOC meeting on Tuesday, members of the Board of Directors of Friends of Barber Creek will ask the BOC not to take any action on the Rocky Branch bids until the public has been given an opportunity to review them and have access to the evaluation process.

Commissioners Margaret Hale and Horton have told me personally they want citizens to have access to the bids. Commission Jim Luke has told me he does not.

Commissioner Don Norris usually supports what County officials, such as Theriault, propose. Those officials are appointed by and report to Board of Commissioners Chairman Melvin Davis.

Two other items on the January 29 agenda also are important. One is a discussion of Transfer of Development Rights, which advocates argue could be used to protect the rural parts of the County from development. The other is Impact Fees, which many counties impose on developers to cover costs associated with development.

These two items follow the Rocky Branch update on the draft agenda.

Wednesday, January 16, 2008

Written 1/16/2008

Keep ‘Em in the Dark

The County confirmed its plans to keep citizens in the dark about the second round of bids on the upgrade of Rocky Branch sewage treatment plant last week by officially denying my Open Records Request for access to the bids and the review documents.

In a letter dated January 10, 2008, County Administrative Office Alan Theriault rejected my request on January 7 for access to the nine submitted bids and to the documents produced by the County during the evaluation of the bids.

The County also denied me access to other documents I requested regarding correspondence between Consultant Jimmy Parker and the County relating to the evaluation of the nine bids.

All I was given was copies of nine sheets of paper, including a blank evaluation form.

In denying the request, Theriault cited state law allowing the County to deny access to bids. The law does not require the County to deny access.

The County had allowed us access to the bids and the evaluation materials during the first round of bidding in late summer.

My examination of those bids showed that the County had given tips to bidders that it would entertain a design not specified in the formal Request for Proposal (RFP). The recommended bidder proposed use of a technologically less sophisticated design that could not treat the water to the same standard as the membrane filtration system specified in the RFP.

The low bidder had stuck by the published specifications and was passed over by the reviewers. In addition, the recommended bidder actually had drawn up the written specifications for the plant that was included in the RFP.

After I pointed out these problems in a posting to my blog (see my posting of 9/2/2007 below), the County tossed out the bids and decided to rebid the process.

The documents the County did release to me when I went to the courthouse on January 11 indicate that the County did hold a meeting of the review committee on January 4. As I reported on 12/28/2007 (below), Theriault denied me advance notice of that meeting in an email message he sent me on 12/21/2007.

The documents the County did released to me include correspondence between Theriault and Jimmy Parker from Precision Planning regarding how they were going to involve the Board of Commissioners in the decision. Parker is chairing the evaluation committee.

Parker suggested that he present a short list of three firms to the BOC for final approval and request the Board’s authorization that the Chairman of the Board and the staff negotiate with the three firms.

"I just want to make sure we cover all the political bases," Parker said.

Theriault said this issue would be discussed at the January 4 meeting. The notes I received do not indicate the outcome of that discussion.

I have talked with two legal experts with considerable experience with the Georgia laws governing public access to meetings. Both said they believe that the County violated state law in closing the review meeting and indicated that the Georgia Supreme Court has ruled clearly that official meetings of almost all sorts are open to the public.

Any action taken at an illegally closed meeting can be declared void by the courts.

The County did release to me a copy of correspondence between Theriault and BOC Chairman Melvin Davis in which Theriault advises Davis on how the County can close the bidding process. Theriault repeated the statement he made to me that the public "could compromise the entire process."

The response of the nine bidders to the second RFP is important because the second RFP asks bidders to submit a base and an alternate design. The base design should follow the original membrane design specifications submitted to the Georgia EPD as part of the application for the permit to discharge treated sewage water into Barber Creek. The alternate design calls for membrane filtration as a tertiary step, rather than the use of a membrane biological reaction.

I have spoken with an expert on sewage plant designs who has assured me that this difference is not a trivial one.

The decision by the County administration–under the control of Chairman Melvin Davis–guarantees that we will never know which of the nine bidders was proposing to use a technology to treat the water to the highest quality at the lowest price.

Yet we are the ones who are going to have to deal with the water discharged and pay for the $8-10 million plant.

This is a County administration that has demonstrated once again that it prefers to make important decisions that affect the public behind closed doors.

Sunday, January 13, 2008

Written 1/13/2008

Decide First, Then I'll Tell You What I Wanted You To Do

The Oconee County Board of Commissioners, saying it does not want to tell the Georgia General Assembly in advance how it feels about key water issues in the state, has refused to take action on a resolution presented to it by the Board of Directors of Friends of Barber Creek.

At the January 3, 2008, meeting, the Commissioners said they were not ready to tell the legislature how they feel about comprehensive regional and statewide water planning and monitoring.

They also said they were not ready to ask the legislature to pass a statute that prevents the transfer of water from one basin to another to the detriment of current and future downstream economic growth or to the detriment of the natural health of the stream.

And they were not even ready to tell the legislature whether it was important that elected local government officials should be represented on regional water councils that will decide how water resources are allocated in the state.

"I certainly believe there needs to be local representation on those committees, otherwise the state is left to pass down any kind of mandate to local government," Commissioner Chuck Horton said. "I’m a little bit reluctant to say I want to vote tonight because I haven’t seen the initial part of what I think probably will happen in Atlanta."

"I might be prepared to pass the strongest of these resolutions," Commissioner Jim Luke responded. "But with the information I have, I am not prepared to vote for any of them before I see more about what is going to happen at the state level."

"It is entirely too much uncertainty to proceed at this time and make decisions," Commissioner Don Norris said.

"I agree," said Commissioner Margaret Hale. "It is nice to have the resolutions in front of us that have been worked on. But I think we are all in agreement that it is just too early. We need to wait and see what the state is going to do. I propose that we delay this, delay a vote on this."

"I think with no motion that in effect squares with what the Board desires to do at this particular time," Board of Commissioners Chairman Melvin Davis said in conclusion.

With that, the Board dismissed the resolution presented to it by the Friends of Barber Creek as well as two others that had been prepared by County Administrative Officer Alan Theriault.

Twenty-nine governments around the state, including Athens-Clarke County, have passed resolutions of the sort Oconee County refused to consider.

The Board of Directors of Friends of Barber Creek first asked the Board to consider the draft resolution, written by the Georgia Water Coalition, of which Friends of Barber Creek is a partner, in a letter of November 23, 2007.

I appeared at BOC meetings of November 27 and December 4, asking that the Board at least put the issue on its agenda for discussion.

On December 13, 2007, Chairman Davis wrote me a letter, saying that the "Board of Commissioners appreciates" my bringing the resolution before it, but "we respectively believe it is not in the best interest of Oconee County to consider this proposed resolution..."

That letter provided me with the tip about the unposted BOC meeting on December 7 in Madison, Georgia. My open records request subsequently uncovered the meeting and indicated that the Board had discussed the Georgia Water Coalition resolution at that time.

At the December 18 meeting or the BOC, I challenged the Board to "take action in public on this issue." I also said the Board was free to modify the original resolution to reflect local concerns.

At 11:10 a.m. on December 28, I filed my open records request regarding that meeting. County Clerk Gina Lindsey sent out an agenda for the January 3 meeting at 2:42 p.m.on December 28 that did not contain the Georgia Water Coalition resolution. She sent out a revised agenda at 4:57 p.m. on that date that did.

County Administrative Officer Theriault drafted two alternate resolutions. One eliminated the interbasin transfer references and simply called on the state to fully fund comprehensive regional and statewide water planning and monitoring.

The other also eliminated the interbasin transfer references and added two options regarding local representation on the regional water and planning councils.

The Athens Banner-Herald ran a story on January 3 about those resolutions, but it never followed up to indicate that the Board refused to consider any of them at that meeting.

Chairman Davis raised the issue of interbasin transfer with me in a telephone conversation on November 29, two days after my initial appearance before the BOC regarding the resolution.

He said the Hard Labor Creek Reservoir Project–a collaboration between Walton and Oconee Counties–was an example of an interbasin transfer and had been approved by the state Environmental Protection Division.

Chairman Davis reiterated this position in his letter to me of December 13. He wrote:

"We also have concerns with the Interbasin Transfer portion of the resolution. Currently, there are over 25 permits issued by EPD permitting Interbasin Transfers. Oconee currently has voted to participate in the Hard Labor Creek Reservoir project (approved by EPD), which is also an Interbasin Transfer."

On 12/19, I sent this e-mail message to Davis:

"Perhaps it would be easier for me and other members of our Board to understand your concern, and the concern of the other commissioners, over the interbasin transfer language of the Georgia Water Coalition draft resolution if we saw the application for the permit the County has for drawing water from the Apalachee and the permit itself. Would you be willing to make these available to me for review and copying?"

Davis never responded to that request, so I asked for these materials in a separate open records request I filed on December 28 with the open records request regarding the December 7 meeting.

The permit, which I received on January 3, shows that Oconee County lost its 2003 permit to withdraw 1.8 million gallons per day of water from the Apalachee River when it decided to join the Hard Labor Creek project.

If water from the Apalachee is to be pumped to the Hard Labor Creek Reservoir, as is planned, the counties will need a new permit from the state EPD to do so.

"If Oconee County elects to participate in Hard Labor Creek Reservoir, this permitted withdrawal allocation will become void once the reservoir project is completed and in service," the 2003 permit states.

Because Walton County straddles the Ocmulgee and Oconee river basins, the transfer of water from the Apalachee, a part of the Oconee basin, to Walton County is an interbasin transfer. In addition, the reservoir will be built on Hard Labor Creek, which drains into the Oconee basin.

Water transferred to western Walton County from Hard Labor Creek and from the Apalachee and not returned represents a transfer of water from the Oconee basin.

This is the kind of interbasin transfer that robs downstream communities of water and was opposed by the Georgia Water Coalition resolution.

On January 8, the Georgia Water Council–the state governmental body dealing with water–created 11 regional water planning districts.

Walton County became a part of the Metro Atlanta district, while Oconee County is in the Upper Oconee district.

The Metro Atlanta district also includes Hall and Gwinnett counties. In each case, a part of the county is in the Oconee basin, giving Atlanta access to Oconee River basin water upstream from Oconee County.

Bear Creek, on which lies the reservoir which currently serves Barrow, Clarke, Jackson and Oconee counties, is in the Oconee basin.

Had the Oconee Commissioners been more willing to have an open discussion of the Georgia Water Coalition resolution, some of these issues might have come to light.

That does not seem to be what Chairman Davis and the Commissioners wanted.

Saturday, January 12, 2008

Written 1/12/08

A Story, an Apology, an Editorial, a No Comment

The posting of Sunday (1/6/08) about the December 7 meeting of the Board of Commissioners in Madison has generated some informative reactions.

Board of Commissioners Chairman Melvin Davis posted an apology of sorts on the County web site on Tuesday (1/8/08) saying "an error was made" in giving "notice to the press of a facilitated retreat of the Oconee County Board of Commissioners scheduled for December 7, 2007, in Madison, Georgia."

According to the apology, in an "Open Letter to Oconee County Citizens," Davis and others ("we") discovered the error on Monday (1/7/08) as a result of the open records request I filed on 12/28/07. I picked up the requested materials on 1/3/08 and filed my report on my blog about 6 p.m. on Sunday (1/6).

I also sent that posting to the three local newspapers and WGAU radio. The Athens Banner-Herald contacted Chairman Davis on Tuesday (1/8) for a story it was preparing for Wednesday’s paper on the meeting.

Chairman Davis said in his apology letter that proper notice had been posted at the courthouse but that The Oconee Enterprise had been given less than 24-hour notice.

"I accept full responsibility for the error and apologize," Davis said.

In my open records request that forced the County to acknowledge the meeting, I had asked explicitly for all notices given, including any posted at the courthouse. All I received was a copy of a fax to the Enterprise.

In fact, the County legally could have given less than 24 hours notice for an emergency meeting.

Here, is what the law says:

"Whenever any meeting required to be open to the public is to be held at a time or place other than at the time and place prescribed for regular meetings, the agency shall give due notice thereof. ‘Due notice’ shall be the posting of a written notice for at least 24 hours at the place of regular meetings and giving of written or oral notice at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting to the legal organ in which notices of sheriff's sales are published in the county where regular meetings are held or at the option of the agency to a newspaper having a general circulation in said county at least equal to that of the legal organ."

All Board of Commission meetings are required by the law to be open to the public. The "agency" is the Board of Commissioners. The "legal organ" is The Oconee Enterprise.

The law goes on to say:

"When special circumstances occur and are so declared by an agency, that agency may hold a meeting with less than 24 hours' notice upon giving such notice of the meeting and subjects expected to be considered at the meeting as is reasonable under the circumstances including notice to said county legal organ or a newspaper having a general circulation in the county at least equal to that of the legal organ, in which event the reason for holding the meeting within 24 hours and the nature of the notice shall be recorded in the minutes."

So the County did not violate the law in giving less than 24 hours notice. What the County did not do was explain in the minutes the reason for holding the meeting within 24 hours, and it did not record in those minutes the nature of the notice given. It violated the law in not doing that.

Davis’ apology, of course, focuses on a technicality–albeit the wrong one–rather than the real issue. The County planned a meeting at least three weeks in advance but didn’t tell people about it. It also held the meeting more than 20 miles from the Courthouse, making it unlikely citizens would have been able to attend even if they had known about it.

And that was the goal.

It is legal to give minimal notice. It is not what one does if one wants to involve the citizens in the discussion. Clearly Davis did not want citizens involved. For that, he has not apologized.

In the Banner-Herald story, Commissioners Margaret Hale, Chuck Horton and Jim Luke criticized Davis for not getting the notice right, since he called the meeting. They didn’t criticize him for setting up the retreat in a way to keep citizens from being involved.

Commissioner Don Norris said the importance of the whole issue was being exaggerated.

The Board of Commissioners could have met at the Library, at the Civic Center, at the Daniells House off Daniells Bridge Road, or at a number of other local venues. It paid $250 for the meeting room at the James Madison Inn & Conference Center, plus another $433 for food service and taxes.

The Banner-Herald story said that the Board of Commissioners traditionally meets about once a year for a retreat, though two retreats were held in 2007. No source is given for that statement.

The Banner-Herald on Thursday (1/10) followed its coverage of the day before with a stinging editorial. The paper challenged Davis’ apology and suggested he make a donation of $500 to a charity–the amount of the fine for violating the open meetings law–to show his sincerity.

Banner-Herald reporter Adam Thompson told me the newspaper also has informed the County it wants to be put on the list of media to be notified in the future for Board of Commissioner meetings. Georgia law allows the paper to make that request and requires the County to honor it.

The Oconee Leader did not contain anything about the controversy in its January 10 edition.

The Oconee Enterprise, however, ran three stories on the December 7 meeting on the front page of its edition of January 10.

One dealt with the discussion at the December 7 meeting of the request by the Chamber of Commerce that the Board of Commissioners approve beer and wine sales at restaurants.

Another dealt with the discussion at the December 7 meeting of a possible extension of the Special Purpose Local Option Sales Tax (SPLOST).

The third dealt with the County’s apology for not giving proper notice of the December 7 meeting.

In that third story, the paper said that "county did send out notices of the meeting, but they went out less than 24 hours in advance of the gathering." The information is attributed to County Administrator Alan Theriault.

The County has not claimed it notified any media other than the Enterprise. No where in the paper did the Enterprise confirm–or deny–that it received the fax notifying it of the December 7 meeting.

What is clear is that the Enterprise never wrote about the December 7 meeting–until after I posted my blog.

I received an invoice on Tuesday (1/8) from the County, dated the day before--the day the County said it learned of its error as a result of my open records request.

It was for $37.24 to cover search and retrieval expenses the County said it incurred doing my open records search. According to the invoice, the County invested 2.5 hours @ $16.55 per hour. It reduced the bill by $4.14 to give me the first 15 minutes free.

I paid the bill on Friday, 1-11. I think it was money well spent.

Sunday, January 06, 2008

Written 1/6/08

It's an Emergency: We Need to Get Out of Town to Talk

In a meeting Oconee County Board of Commissioners Chairman Melvin Davis has tried to keep out of the public eye, the five-member board, the County attorney, five staff members and two County consultants met on December 7 in Madison, Georgia, to discuss a variety of issues, including water and sewage services and the sale of beer, wine and alcohol by the drink in the County.

Northeast Georgia Regional Development Center Executive Director Jim Dove and Executive Assistant Mott Beck also attended the meeting to serve as "facilitators."

The meeting took place at the James Madison Inn & Conference Center in Morgan County. The Inn invoiced Oconee County the day before the meeting $250 for the meeting room, $36 for coffee services, $144 for continental breakfasts, and $180 for lunches. The total bill, including taxes, was $683.20, payable on the day of the meeting.

Chairman Davis used emergency procedures to give minimal public notice of the meeting, which actually was planned at least three weeks in advance. Georgia law stipulates that the meeting had to be open to the public.

The announcement of the agenda for the December 7 meeting did not appear on the County’s web site, though meetings, even unscheduled or "called" meetings, are usually announced on the site. The minutes of the meeting also have not been posted on the site and were not approved by the full Board when it approved the minutes of the meetings of December 4 and 18 at its regular meeting on January 3, 2008.

The existence of the December 7 meeting was revealed in documents the County released to me on January 3, 2008, in response to an open records request I filed with the County on December 28, 2007.

Georgia law requires that meetings of the Board of Commissioners be scheduled and open. If a meeting is "to be held at a time or place other than at the time and place prescribed for regular meetings, the agency shall give due notice thereof. ‘Due notice’ shall be the posting of a written notice for at least 24 hours at the place of regular meetings and giving of written or oral notice at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting to the legal organ" of the County, which is The Oconee Enterprise.

The law further states that "When special circumstances occur and are so declared by an agency, that agency may hold a meeting with less than 24 hours’ notice." In that case, the agency (Board of Commissioners) must give notice "of the meeting and the subjects to be considered at the meeting as is reasonable under the circumstances." This includes informing the newspaper that is the legal organ of the County.

The law also requires the Board to have an agenda of the meeting prior to the meeting itself, a summary of the subjects acted on and a list of those present available within two business days after the meeting, and minutes of the meeting no later than immediately following the next regular meeting of the Board.

In my open records request, I asked to see "A copy of the written notice posted in advance of any meeting or meetings of the Board of Commissioners held after December 4, 2007, and before December 18, 2007, and any evidence available indicating that the notice was posted "at the place of regular meetings" of the Board of Commissioners as required by Georgia Code Section 50-14-1 (d)."

I received two sheets of paper. One was a single paragraph notice of the meeting. Attached to it was a fax cover sheet directed to Vinnie Williams, the publisher and editor of The Oconee Enterprise. A hand written note indicated that the two pages were faxed at noon on December 6, or less than 24 hours before the meeting began.

The Enterprise has not written a story about the meeting.

I also asked for written and e-mail correspondence "between the Chairman of the Oconee County Board of Commissioners and/or his representative(s) and other members of the Board of Commissioners, appointed officials and department heads, employees of the County, and/or consultants to the County regarding a meeting or meetings of the Board of Commissioners held after December 4, 2007, and before December 18, 2007."

I received a memorandum from Gina Lindsey, County clerk, addressed to the Board of Commissioners, Dan Haygood, the County attorney, Alan Theriault, the County’s administrative officer, and Jeff Benko, the County finance director.

It was dated December 4 and indicated that "We have scheduled the BOC Retreat at the James Madision Inn in Madison, GA on Friday, December 7th from 8:30 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.

I also received a copy of an e-mail message from Lindsey to Chairman Davis written on November 16 indicating that "Tricia stopped by the James Madison Inn and Conference Center yesterday. She said it was beautiful...If this is satisfactory with you, we should go ahead and book it now. Please advise."

Davis wrote back three hours later–at 1:49 p.m. on November 16, or three weeks before the meeting–saying: "OK with me."

Commissioner Chuck Horton sent an e-mail to Chairman Davis at 8:16 a.m. on December 5, saying "I see that we have not been provided an agenda for the retreat on Friday. It is now Wed morning and if I am to have any thoughts on any issue it would be nice to at least know what the topics are in advance. I see no need for me to drive to Madison if I don’t know what you want us to hear. To be honest, I don’t want to go to Madison. I don’t know why we couldn’t find something closer. If an agenda is not provided by this afternoon I will not be in attendance."

Chairman Davis wrote back about a half hour later:

"I thought the attached draft agenda was in your packet last night. We will need to add the requested Water Coalition Resolution as well as pending litigation. As you know retreat sessions by Boards have normally been held in out of county locations. Madison is about as close as we can get."

In my open records requests, I also asked for the agenda, a summary of the subjects acted upon and the names of persons present, and the minutes. I received a copy of the agenda and the minutes, which indicated that all five commissioners attended, as did Haygood, Theriault, Benko, Lindsey, Strategic and Long-Range Planning Director Wayne Provost, and Planning Director B.R. White.

In addition, Gary Dodd, former Utility Department director and now a County consultant, and Jimmy Parker, from Precision Planning Inc. and also a County consultant, attended.

Parker and PPI are working with the County on the Rocky Branch sewage plant upgrade, which will result in the discharge of 1 million gallons per day of treated sewage water into Barber Creek. The County has received bids on the project, but it has refused to open the bids for public inspection. (See my posting of 12/28/2007 below.)

I also asked in my open records requests for correspondence with the operator of any possible venue for the meeting, for requests for reimbursement of expenses submitted by the owner of the venue, by County employees, and by County consultants, and for records of actual disbursements.

All I received was the invoice from the conference center.

The County also provided copies of at least some of the documents distributed at the December 7 meeting.

The December 7 meeting covered some topics that were then repeated at the December 18 public meeting. Water and sewage were discussed at both, supplemented by a largely similar PowerPoint presentation by Parker in both cases.

The December 7 meeting included a discussion of a "potential SPLOST referendum" by Theriault. The current SPLOST, or Special Purpose Local Option Sales Tax, ends in July of 2009, and, according to the minutes of the meeting, "Commissioners do not want lag in collections." Among the "ideas for future projects funded by SPLOST, according to the minutes, were courthouse space, "water, sewer, roads," community center facilities, new fire stations, and library expansion.

"Educate public as soon as feasible as to need for another SPLOST," the minutes say. "Attendees suggested a minimum of six months is needed to prepare for a successful referendum."

According to the minutes, Parker told the BOC that the Calls Creek and Rocky Branch sewage plants both can be upgraded to 2 million gallons per day. He also suggested that the Board should consider an upgrade of the Land Application System, which is now used at Rocky Branch, "as compared to cooperation with neighboring county regarding plan on Middle Oconee River." The minutes contain the following note: "LAS may ‘fill gap,’ (8-10 years) but begin planning toward cooperative effort."

The minutes contain the following report on the discussion of beer, wine and alcohol by the drink:

"SPLOST referendum should not be ‘tainted’ with this issue.
"Letter from Chamber of Commerce requesting a vote on the sale of beer and wine by the glass be placed on BOC agenda was discussed.
"Members offered comment and considerable discussion on this matter.
"Economic issue.
"Chamber might gather enough signatures to request referendum.
"Public needs to be engaged.
"A strong, restrictive ordinance would have to be in place.
"Legal Counsel was asked to continue work on ordinance."

I did not receive a copy of the letter from the Chamber of Commerce.

Chairman Davis has been struggling with the beer and wine issue since the summer, when the Chamber of Commerce began putting pressure on the Board to approve the sale of beer and wine in County restaurants. The Board held two public meetings on the issue, one in May and the other in June.

For the issue to pass, two commissioners would have to support it, allowing Chairman Davis to break the tie. If Chairman Davis does not want to vote, he would need three votes in support of the beer and wine ordinance.

The Athens Banner-Herald contained a story on December 28–after the meeting in Madison--in which Chairman Davis is quoted as saying he has no immediate plans to ask Commissioners to vote on the issue.

The Banner-Herald story reports that Chamber of Commerce President Charles Grimes sent a letter to the Commission in late November asking it to take action and contains a link to that letter. The letter is dated November 19, 2007, and asks Davis to "schedule a vote on the sale of beer and wine by the glass" on the December 4, 2007, meeting of the Board of Commissioners.

The Banner-Herald story contains the following statement, that is not attributed to anyone: "Since those June hearings, though, commissioners haven’t discussed the ordinance." The minutes of the December show otherwise.

The likelihood that a meeting had taken place between the December 4 and 18 regular meetings was suggested in a letter Chairman Davis wrote to me and the three others members of the Board of Directors of Friends of Barber Creek on December 13.

In that letter, Mr. Davis said that the members of the Board of Commissioners "respectively believe it is not in the best interest of Oconee County to consider" a resolution we had asked the Board to adopt.

That resolution, drafted by the Georgia Water Coalition, asks the Georgia General Assembly to fund regional and statewide water planning and monitoring and to prevent the transfer of water from one basin to another.

The Board of Directors of Friends of Barber Creek had presented the draft resolution to the Board of Commissioners on November 27 and again on December 4. No action was taken at either meeting.

At the meeting on December 18, I made the following public statement:

"I am well aware that Georgia law requires only minimal notification by posting of a notice in this courthouse of an emergency meeting. Your letter suggests that such a meeting took place, though there is no record of minutes of that meeting posted on the County web site."

Following my prepared comments, Mr. Davis responded:

"I believe in my letter to you it did appear that we had made a vote. That is incorrect. I had conversation with various members of the commission and that is my perception of how the commission felt at that particular time."

The Georgia Water Coalition resolution was the 9th item on the 10-item agenda for the December 7 meeting. The minutes indicate the issue was discussed.

The Board of Commissioners did consider the Georgia Water Coalition resolution at its January 3 meeting, but it did not vote on it.

Chairman Davis’ tactics made it unlikely that any citizens could attend the December 7 meeting in Madison, and, in fact, the record shows none did.

By law, even an "emergency" retreat leaves behind a record. It is good fortune that Chairman Davis dropped his guard in his letter to the Board of Directors of Friends of Barber Creek.
Without that, the meeting might never have come to light.

Georgia law says that governments must conduct their business in public, since it is the public’s business. This case shows, however, how easy it is to keep the public in the dark if that is what the County leaders want.