Huckaby, Shook and Cowsert Also Qualify
Incumbent Board of Education member Kim Argo and incumbent County Commissioner John Daniell qualified for the July 20 primary ballot today when they submitted their filing fees at the Oconee County Board of Elections and Registration office near the courthouse.
Elections and Registration Chair Pat Hayes said Argo and Daniell were the only two Oconee County candidates to file their paperwork and pay their fees before the 5 p.m. closing for the first of five days of registration. Both filed as Republicans.
According to the online real-time filing database of the Secretary of State, Hank Huckaby and Kirk Shook filed as Republicans for the State Representative 113 District now held by Republican Bob Smith, who is retiring.
Incumbent Bill Cowsert filed for the State Senate 46th District. Cowsert is a Republican.
Oconee County falls entirely within the 113 House and 46 Senate districts.
Argo currently is in her first term as Post 3 Board of Education member. Daniell is in his first term as Post 2 commissioner.
Board of Education Post 2 also is up for election. Mack Guest currently holds that position.
The term of Post 3 Commissioner Margaret Hale also is ending, and she has indicated she plans to run for reelection.
Argo paid $54 as a filing fee and Daniell paid $594.42. The filing fee for Huckaby, Shook and Cowsert was $400. Those fees are set by state law.
Argo lives at 1230 Bent Creek road near Hodges Mill road in the northern part of the county and Daniell lives at 1922 Elder road near North High Shoals. Argo is a teacher and Daniell is an executive with Boswell Oil.
Huckaby, 1041 Knox Ridge in Spartan Lane subdivision off US 441 in Oconee County, lists himself as retired. He formerly was the vice president for finance and administration at the University of Georgia.
Shook, who lives in Crawford, lists his occupation as a teacher.
Cowsert is an attorney from Athens.
Monday, April 26, 2010
Friday, April 23, 2010
Oconee County Utility Proposed Budget Includes Nearly $1 Million in Hard Labor Creek Debt Payments
Standard & Poor’s Knew
The Oconee County Utility Department is asking the Board of Commissioners to approve a balanced $6.4 million budget for the fiscal year beginning July 1 that includes nearly $3 million in debt service.
Of that $3 million in debt payments, $924,000 will pay interest on the $19.5 million bond the county sold in 2008 as part of its share in the expenses of Hard Labor Creek Reservoir, which Oconee and Walton counties are partnering to build in southern Walton County. That bond will mature in 2023.
The $924,000 is up from the $764,000 the county paid on interest on the bond in fiscal year 2010, the first year that Hard Labor Creek financing appeared in the Oconee County Utility Department budget.
The county did not make any payment against the principal of the Hard Labor Creek bond in the last fiscal year, and none is included in the budget under review.
The proposed fiscal year 2011 budget also includes $1,188,060 in payments on principal on a bond originally sold in 1998, on another bond sold in 2004 and on bonds sold for construction of the Bear Creek Reservoir in Jackson County.
The proposed Oconee County Utility Department budget also contains interest payments on those bonds of $880,099.
The 1998 bond was refinanced by the county in October of 2009 to reduce the interest rate. The result was that the county will pay less both in interest and against the principal in the upcoming fiscal year than was originally planned.
Oconee is one of four counties involved in the Bear Creek Reservoir. Barrow, Clarke and Jackson are the other three.
The debt payments are by far the biggest expenses for the Utility Department in the proposed budget.
The Department expects to pay $932,000 to purchase the water it will sell, most of which will come from Bear Creek, and $800,000 in salaries for its employees.
To make the budget balance, the Utility Department has proposed increases in both water and sewage rates starting on July 1.
The minimum monthly amount a water customer would pay would go from $16.50 to $19. Base sewer rates would increase from either $15.48 or $12.48, depending on area, to $18.
The county also increased water and sewerage rates last year.
The BOC asked Utility Department Director Chris Thomas at the budget hearing on April 14 to try to find a way to reduce the base rate increase, but he said it was difficult given the kinds of data he has on customer water use to know how to do that.
Through the proposed rate increases and because of hoped-for increases in water sales now that the drought has passed, Thomas is projecting that he will have $5.1 million in water revenue, up from a little more than $4 million proposed in the 2010 budget.
The 2011 budget projects $800,000 in sewage revenue, up from $625,000 in this year’s budget.
On April 6 the BOC reduced the sewer capacity fees paid by commercial users to gain access to the county’s sewage treatment system, and Thomas is projecting a decline in revenue of $150,000 in that category.
When the county decided to join with Walton County in the $170 million Hard Labor Creek project in 2007, proponents said it would be paid for by new water sales, not by sale of water to existing customers.
Of the existing Board, Chairman Melvin Davis and Commissioner Jim Luke were advocates of the project, along with then-Commissioner Don Norris. Commissioners Margaret Hale and Chuck Horton voted against it.
A Standard & Poor’s rating statement on the Utility Department of Sept. 30, 2009, said that, “According to county management, given the $30 million of capital needs associated with the Hard Labor Creek project, the board (of commissioners) has recognized the need to raise rates to provide adequate coverage of operating and debt service costs.”
Oconee County’s costs for the full project are projected to be $49 million, but the $19.5 million in bonds had already been sold when that report was written.
Water and sewer rates “are currently in-line with the regional average,” the Standard & Poor’s report noted, and the increases “might push the rates to slightly above the average.”
The report did not see this as a problem because “county income levels are, in our opinion, very strong.”
If the $924,000 in interest payments for Hard Labor Creek were removed from the proposed 2011 Utility Department budget, it would be $5,462,000, or $222,368 more than the budget in fiscal year 2009–the last year in which Hard Labor Creek was not part of the expenses.
Consistent with the Standard & Poor’s analysis, the rate increases needed for fiscal year 2011 would have been much smaller minus the county’s decision to join Walton County on the Hard Labor Creek project.
The Oconee County Utility Department is asking the Board of Commissioners to approve a balanced $6.4 million budget for the fiscal year beginning July 1 that includes nearly $3 million in debt service.
Of that $3 million in debt payments, $924,000 will pay interest on the $19.5 million bond the county sold in 2008 as part of its share in the expenses of Hard Labor Creek Reservoir, which Oconee and Walton counties are partnering to build in southern Walton County. That bond will mature in 2023.
The $924,000 is up from the $764,000 the county paid on interest on the bond in fiscal year 2010, the first year that Hard Labor Creek financing appeared in the Oconee County Utility Department budget.
The county did not make any payment against the principal of the Hard Labor Creek bond in the last fiscal year, and none is included in the budget under review.
The proposed fiscal year 2011 budget also includes $1,188,060 in payments on principal on a bond originally sold in 1998, on another bond sold in 2004 and on bonds sold for construction of the Bear Creek Reservoir in Jackson County.
The proposed Oconee County Utility Department budget also contains interest payments on those bonds of $880,099.
Oconee is one of four counties involved in the Bear Creek Reservoir. Barrow, Clarke and Jackson are the other three.
The debt payments are by far the biggest expenses for the Utility Department in the proposed budget.
The Department expects to pay $932,000 to purchase the water it will sell, most of which will come from Bear Creek, and $800,000 in salaries for its employees.
To make the budget balance, the Utility Department has proposed increases in both water and sewage rates starting on July 1.
The minimum monthly amount a water customer would pay would go from $16.50 to $19. Base sewer rates would increase from either $15.48 or $12.48, depending on area, to $18.
The county also increased water and sewerage rates last year.
The BOC asked Utility Department Director Chris Thomas at the budget hearing on April 14 to try to find a way to reduce the base rate increase, but he said it was difficult given the kinds of data he has on customer water use to know how to do that.
Through the proposed rate increases and because of hoped-for increases in water sales now that the drought has passed, Thomas is projecting that he will have $5.1 million in water revenue, up from a little more than $4 million proposed in the 2010 budget.
The 2011 budget projects $800,000 in sewage revenue, up from $625,000 in this year’s budget.
On April 6 the BOC reduced the sewer capacity fees paid by commercial users to gain access to the county’s sewage treatment system, and Thomas is projecting a decline in revenue of $150,000 in that category.
When the county decided to join with Walton County in the $170 million Hard Labor Creek project in 2007, proponents said it would be paid for by new water sales, not by sale of water to existing customers.
Of the existing Board, Chairman Melvin Davis and Commissioner Jim Luke were advocates of the project, along with then-Commissioner Don Norris. Commissioners Margaret Hale and Chuck Horton voted against it.
A Standard & Poor’s rating statement on the Utility Department of Sept. 30, 2009, said that, “According to county management, given the $30 million of capital needs associated with the Hard Labor Creek project, the board (of commissioners) has recognized the need to raise rates to provide adequate coverage of operating and debt service costs.”
Oconee County’s costs for the full project are projected to be $49 million, but the $19.5 million in bonds had already been sold when that report was written.
Water and sewer rates “are currently in-line with the regional average,” the Standard & Poor’s report noted, and the increases “might push the rates to slightly above the average.”
The report did not see this as a problem because “county income levels are, in our opinion, very strong.”
If the $924,000 in interest payments for Hard Labor Creek were removed from the proposed 2011 Utility Department budget, it would be $5,462,000, or $222,368 more than the budget in fiscal year 2009–the last year in which Hard Labor Creek was not part of the expenses.
Consistent with the Standard & Poor’s analysis, the rate increases needed for fiscal year 2011 would have been much smaller minus the county’s decision to join Walton County on the Hard Labor Creek project.
Thursday, April 22, 2010
County Attorney Presents Draft Ethics Ordinance to Oconee County Commissioners
Anyone Can Complain
Oconee County Attorney Daniel Haygood presented the Board of Commissioners an 11-page draft ethics ordinance Tuesday night that spells out ethical standards and sets up conditions for creation of a Board of Ethics to hear complaints about Board members.
The ordinance says, among other things, that commissioners shall not have an interest in any contracts or transactions affected by their actions, attempt to influence a county officer making country purchases, withhold information from county boards or departments or make unauthorized use of county property.
The draft ordinance states that anyone can initiate a complaint against a Board member. The complaint will be reviewed initially by the county attorney and, if it involves a commissioner, forwarded to a special master. If the special master determines that the complaint has merit, the master will appoint an ad hoc ethics board to hear the complaint.
Commissioners found in violation of the ethics ordinance could receive a warning, censure or reprimand, be made to make repayment to the county for any unjust enrichment, be asked to resign and be referred to criminal authorities for prosecution.
Haygood drafted the ordinance at the request of the Board and forwarded it to members along with a Draft Model Ethics Ordinance for Counties prepared by the Association County Commissioners of Georgia,
Haygood also sent to the board an analysis of ethics ordinances prepared by the Carl Vinson Institute of Government at the University of Georgia for Gwinnett County.
Following the presentation of the draft ordinance, the Board decided to schedule an open work session to discuss further the ordinance after the Board has completed its budget deliberations. The Board is schedule to vote on the budget on June 1.
County Administrative Officer Alan Theriault proposed that he put the materials provided by Haygood on the web for the public to view, but Commission Chairman Melvin Davis said he wanted to wait until after the work session to share the documents with the public.
I obtained the documents via an open records request and have placed them on Google Documents as public files.
Commissioner John Daniell has taken the initiative in pushing for an ethics ordinance since he joined the Board in January of last year.
Daniell also pushed another of his interests at the meeting on Tuesday night in proposing a special, town-hall style meeting to discuss economic development in the county.
Theriault was instructed to set up the meeting and invite not only the general public but members of the Chamber of Commerce and others interested in finding ways to promote economic development in the county.
Oconee County and Athens/Clarke County officials have discussed collaborative efforts at development in recent years, and Daniell has been a proponent of consideration of these.
He indicated that all such issues should be discussed at the as yet unscheduled town hall meeting.
Here are the three documents:
Ethics Ordinance for the Oconee County Board of Commissioners (Haygood)
Draft Model Ethics Ordinance for Counties (ACCG)
County Ethics Ordinances: An Analysis and Comparison (CVIOG)
Oconee County Attorney Daniel Haygood presented the Board of Commissioners an 11-page draft ethics ordinance Tuesday night that spells out ethical standards and sets up conditions for creation of a Board of Ethics to hear complaints about Board members.
The ordinance says, among other things, that commissioners shall not have an interest in any contracts or transactions affected by their actions, attempt to influence a county officer making country purchases, withhold information from county boards or departments or make unauthorized use of county property.
The draft ordinance states that anyone can initiate a complaint against a Board member. The complaint will be reviewed initially by the county attorney and, if it involves a commissioner, forwarded to a special master. If the special master determines that the complaint has merit, the master will appoint an ad hoc ethics board to hear the complaint.
Commissioners found in violation of the ethics ordinance could receive a warning, censure or reprimand, be made to make repayment to the county for any unjust enrichment, be asked to resign and be referred to criminal authorities for prosecution.
Haygood drafted the ordinance at the request of the Board and forwarded it to members along with a Draft Model Ethics Ordinance for Counties prepared by the Association County Commissioners of Georgia,
Haygood also sent to the board an analysis of ethics ordinances prepared by the Carl Vinson Institute of Government at the University of Georgia for Gwinnett County.
Following the presentation of the draft ordinance, the Board decided to schedule an open work session to discuss further the ordinance after the Board has completed its budget deliberations. The Board is schedule to vote on the budget on June 1.
County Administrative Officer Alan Theriault proposed that he put the materials provided by Haygood on the web for the public to view, but Commission Chairman Melvin Davis said he wanted to wait until after the work session to share the documents with the public.
I obtained the documents via an open records request and have placed them on Google Documents as public files.
Commissioner John Daniell has taken the initiative in pushing for an ethics ordinance since he joined the Board in January of last year.
Daniell also pushed another of his interests at the meeting on Tuesday night in proposing a special, town-hall style meeting to discuss economic development in the county.
Theriault was instructed to set up the meeting and invite not only the general public but members of the Chamber of Commerce and others interested in finding ways to promote economic development in the county.
Oconee County and Athens/Clarke County officials have discussed collaborative efforts at development in recent years, and Daniell has been a proponent of consideration of these.
He indicated that all such issues should be discussed at the as yet unscheduled town hall meeting.
Here are the three documents:
Ethics Ordinance for the Oconee County Board of Commissioners (Haygood)
Draft Model Ethics Ordinance for Counties (ACCG)
County Ethics Ordinances: An Analysis and Comparison (CVIOG)
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Oconee County Utility Department Proposes Water and Sewer Rate Increases
BOC Questions Rate
The Oconee County Utility Department has proposed increases in water and sewage fees beginning on July 1 that–if approved by the Board of Commissioners–would increase the base fee for monthly residential water use from $16.50 to $19 and the base monthly residential sewer fee from either $12.48 or $15.48 to $18.
The increases are necessary, according to Utility Department Director Chris Thomas, to cover the increased costs for operation of the department, including the cost of retirement of debt for water and sewage capacity expansion.
Commissioners Jim Luke and Chuck Horton asked Thomas at the budget hearings on April 14, when the rate increase proposal was announced, to try to find a way of increasing revenues without increasing the base water rate itself.
Thomas said he would try.
Last year, Thomas asked the commissioners to approve an increase in the base water rate from $14.04 to $18.50, but the commissioners reduced the increase to the $16.50 figure. Thomas told the Board that he was merely seeking this year to get the rate increase he had asked for but been denied a year earlier.
The base rate is what the 8,700 commercial and residential water customers pay for the first 2,000 gallons of water used, and customers pay that amount whether they use 1 or 2,000 gallons.
For residential users, water rates increase in steps after that base rate. Under the proposal submitted by Thomas, residential customers would pay 5 percent more next year than this for water used beyond the base amount.
For example, customers using between 2,001 and 5,000 gallons per month would pay $4.10 per 1,000 gallons over the base 2,000 gallons, up from $3.90 at present.
Commercial customers would pay $5.15 per 1,000 gallons beyond the base 2,000, up from $4.90. The rate stays the same for commercial users regardless of amount of water used.
Sewer users now pay different rates depending on which sewage plant treats the waste, and under the new rate schedule the differences would be eliminated.
The base rate of $18 for residential users would cover treatment for 2,000 of sewage, with additional treatment at $3.70 per 1,000 gallons, up from the current rates of either $3.22 or $2.84.
Commercial sewage customers would pay $30 for from 0 to 2,000 gallons under the new rate, up from either $22.51 or $25.51. Commercial rates for treatment beyond that base level would be at $4.05 per 1,000 gallons, up from $2.84 or $3.52.
Thomas had proposed sewage rate increases last year, and those were approved by the Board as requested. Residential rates increased from $12.48 to $15.48.
The county only has about 1,200 sewage customers.
On April 1, 2008, the Utility Department increased water rates, but only for those using more than 5,000 gallons per month.
The overall budget for the Utility Department that Thomas proposed increased from $5,549,676 in fiscal year 2010 to $6,385,676 for fiscal year. That included an increase in service on debt of from $445,000 in the current fiscal year to 880,099 in the upcoming fiscal year.
At the April 14 meeting, Thomas said the increased debt was the result in part of the county’s decision to partner with Walton County on the Hard Labor Creek reservoir.
When the Hard Labor Creek reservoir was proposed, proponents said debt would be covered by the sale of water to new customers rather than by existing customers.
The Oconee County Utility Department has proposed increases in water and sewage fees beginning on July 1 that–if approved by the Board of Commissioners–would increase the base fee for monthly residential water use from $16.50 to $19 and the base monthly residential sewer fee from either $12.48 or $15.48 to $18.
The increases are necessary, according to Utility Department Director Chris Thomas, to cover the increased costs for operation of the department, including the cost of retirement of debt for water and sewage capacity expansion.
Commissioners Jim Luke and Chuck Horton asked Thomas at the budget hearings on April 14, when the rate increase proposal was announced, to try to find a way of increasing revenues without increasing the base water rate itself.
Thomas said he would try.
Last year, Thomas asked the commissioners to approve an increase in the base water rate from $14.04 to $18.50, but the commissioners reduced the increase to the $16.50 figure. Thomas told the Board that he was merely seeking this year to get the rate increase he had asked for but been denied a year earlier.
The base rate is what the 8,700 commercial and residential water customers pay for the first 2,000 gallons of water used, and customers pay that amount whether they use 1 or 2,000 gallons.
For residential users, water rates increase in steps after that base rate. Under the proposal submitted by Thomas, residential customers would pay 5 percent more next year than this for water used beyond the base amount.
For example, customers using between 2,001 and 5,000 gallons per month would pay $4.10 per 1,000 gallons over the base 2,000 gallons, up from $3.90 at present.
Commercial customers would pay $5.15 per 1,000 gallons beyond the base 2,000, up from $4.90. The rate stays the same for commercial users regardless of amount of water used.
Sewer users now pay different rates depending on which sewage plant treats the waste, and under the new rate schedule the differences would be eliminated.
The base rate of $18 for residential users would cover treatment for 2,000 of sewage, with additional treatment at $3.70 per 1,000 gallons, up from the current rates of either $3.22 or $2.84.
Commercial sewage customers would pay $30 for from 0 to 2,000 gallons under the new rate, up from either $22.51 or $25.51. Commercial rates for treatment beyond that base level would be at $4.05 per 1,000 gallons, up from $2.84 or $3.52.
Thomas had proposed sewage rate increases last year, and those were approved by the Board as requested. Residential rates increased from $12.48 to $15.48.
The county only has about 1,200 sewage customers.
On April 1, 2008, the Utility Department increased water rates, but only for those using more than 5,000 gallons per month.
The overall budget for the Utility Department that Thomas proposed increased from $5,549,676 in fiscal year 2010 to $6,385,676 for fiscal year. That included an increase in service on debt of from $445,000 in the current fiscal year to 880,099 in the upcoming fiscal year.
At the April 14 meeting, Thomas said the increased debt was the result in part of the county’s decision to partner with Walton County on the Hard Labor Creek reservoir.
When the Hard Labor Creek reservoir was proposed, proponents said debt would be covered by the sale of water to new customers rather than by existing customers.
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
Four of Five Oconee BOC Members Say Courthouse Property Not Discussed
One Man Out
At least four of the five members of the Oconee County Board of Commissioners said tonight that a report in the Athens Banner-Herald on Monday that the Commission is pricing various lots around the courthouse and near the jail in preparation for building a new judicial facility is wrong.
The only member who did not deny the newspaper story was Chairman Melvin Davis, who was quoted in the paper by reporter Erin France as making the claim that the commissioners were looking at properties and checking into the potential costs of the properties.
I asked the members of the Commission to respond to the newspaper story. Since no discussion had taken place in public, I said I was assuming the discussion had taken place in secret or executive session.
Davis said he thought the way to respond to my question “was to put some information on our web site” so everyone has a chance to see it.
But the other four commissioners had different answers.
“I don’t think there has been anything done in secret on this,” Commissioner John Daniell said.
“I don’t think there has been any discussion of land prices in executive session or even pieces of land,” Commissioner Jim Luke said.
“I’m not aware of discussions in executive session,” Commissioner Margaret Hale said.
“It never happened,” Commissioner Chuck Horton said.
I asked the commissioners during the public comment section of the agenda-setting meeting to respond to the story in the Banner-Herald and indicate at least the “parameters of the discussions” that had taken place.
I also asked them to indicate how the public would be involved in the decision in the future.
All made promises that the process would be open as it progresses.
At the agenda-setting meeting of the BOC on March 30, Commissioner Jim Luke used the commissioner comment section at the beginning of the meeting to emphasize that no decisions on the courthouse had been made or were even imminent.
The Oconee Enterprise wrote just the opposite in its report on the meeting, saying that the Board had made a decision.
The story in the Banner-Herald on Monday was the first time the paper wrote about the assertions of Davis, Luke and others that any decision about a courthouse would come in the future after additional public discussion.
The second-to-the-last paragraph of the 23-paragraph story, however, said the following:
The commission is pricing various lots around the courthouse near the jail, Davis said, checking into the potential costs of various scenarios the planning committee considered.
The reference to the planning committee is to the Land Use and Transportation Planning Committee, which deliberated on the issue for a year but never considered specific properties and simply recommended that the county separate the court and administrative offices and move the former to somewhere near the jail.
+++
Chairman Davis posted his response to my question on the county web site on April 22, 2010.
At least four of the five members of the Oconee County Board of Commissioners said tonight that a report in the Athens Banner-Herald on Monday that the Commission is pricing various lots around the courthouse and near the jail in preparation for building a new judicial facility is wrong.
The only member who did not deny the newspaper story was Chairman Melvin Davis, who was quoted in the paper by reporter Erin France as making the claim that the commissioners were looking at properties and checking into the potential costs of the properties.
I asked the members of the Commission to respond to the newspaper story. Since no discussion had taken place in public, I said I was assuming the discussion had taken place in secret or executive session.
Davis said he thought the way to respond to my question “was to put some information on our web site” so everyone has a chance to see it.
But the other four commissioners had different answers.
“I don’t think there has been anything done in secret on this,” Commissioner John Daniell said.
“I don’t think there has been any discussion of land prices in executive session or even pieces of land,” Commissioner Jim Luke said.
“I’m not aware of discussions in executive session,” Commissioner Margaret Hale said.
“It never happened,” Commissioner Chuck Horton said.
I asked the commissioners during the public comment section of the agenda-setting meeting to respond to the story in the Banner-Herald and indicate at least the “parameters of the discussions” that had taken place.
I also asked them to indicate how the public would be involved in the decision in the future.
All made promises that the process would be open as it progresses.
At the agenda-setting meeting of the BOC on March 30, Commissioner Jim Luke used the commissioner comment section at the beginning of the meeting to emphasize that no decisions on the courthouse had been made or were even imminent.
The Oconee Enterprise wrote just the opposite in its report on the meeting, saying that the Board had made a decision.
The story in the Banner-Herald on Monday was the first time the paper wrote about the assertions of Davis, Luke and others that any decision about a courthouse would come in the future after additional public discussion.
The second-to-the-last paragraph of the 23-paragraph story, however, said the following:
The commission is pricing various lots around the courthouse near the jail, Davis said, checking into the potential costs of various scenarios the planning committee considered.
The reference to the planning committee is to the Land Use and Transportation Planning Committee, which deliberated on the issue for a year but never considered specific properties and simply recommended that the county separate the court and administrative offices and move the former to somewhere near the jail.
+++
Chairman Davis posted his response to my question on the county web site on April 22, 2010.
Monday, April 19, 2010
Oconee Farmers Market To Launch on May 8; Strolls at Harris Shoals Start A Week Earlier
Watkinsville a Destination
Oconee County’s Farmers Market will launch its 2010 season on May 8 in the area behind and beside Eagle Tavern in Watkinsville.
Russ Page, one of the two members or the Board of Directors of the market, told me that the decision on the start date was made last evening in a meeting at the library in Watkinsville attended by himself and Board Member Jamie Swedberg as well as about a dozen vendors.
Page said about 25 vendors have expressed an interest in participating in the market this year.
Another event, launched last year by Oconee Democrats, will start in Watkinsville on May 1.
The Saturday Strolls, which last year began at the courthouse across the street from the Farmers Market, will be based this year at Harris Shoals Park on Experiment Station road.
Brad Sanders, an authority on the naturalist William Bartram, will lead the May 1 stroll and talk about the landscape Bartram saw when he visited the North Oconee River in the summer of 1773.
Robert Wyatt, adjunct professor of ecology at the University of Georgia, will lead the stroll on May 8, the date the Farmers Market gets underway. Wyatt will identify trees and shrubs on his tour.
Pat Priest organized the strolls last year and has done so again this year. The stroll lasts for an hour. Participants make a $5 contribution to the cause of choice of the stroll leader.
Contributions to the stroll led by Sanders will go to the Bartram Trail Conference, while contributions to the Wyatt stroll will go to the Oconee River Land Trust.
Last year's Saturday Strolls series raised more than $1,000 for non-profits in the area, according to Priest.
The series this year is scheduled to run through July 31.
The Farmers Market, which started in 2004 on the front lawn of Eagle Tavern and moved to the rear last year to accommodate more vendors, has helped make Watkinsville a Saturday destination.
Vendors frequently sell fruits and vegetables, fresh flowers, homemade baked goods, jellies, jams and preserves.
Other attractions in Watkinsville are the shops on Main street and The Granary Bakery and Country Store and Jittery Joe’s at the south end of downtown.
Big Easy, Krimson Café and Miss Gail’s, all at the Barnett Shoals and SR15 intersection, offer lunches.
Thomas Orchards, at the US 441 bypass west of downtown, already is open for the season selling plants and garden supplies, as well as the usual flavors of ice cream.
Jerry Thomas told me on Saturday he expects to have South Carolina peaches for sale in the middle of May and his own peaches available a month later.
Oconee County’s Farmers Market will launch its 2010 season on May 8 in the area behind and beside Eagle Tavern in Watkinsville.
Russ Page, one of the two members or the Board of Directors of the market, told me that the decision on the start date was made last evening in a meeting at the library in Watkinsville attended by himself and Board Member Jamie Swedberg as well as about a dozen vendors.
Page said about 25 vendors have expressed an interest in participating in the market this year.
The Saturday Strolls, which last year began at the courthouse across the street from the Farmers Market, will be based this year at Harris Shoals Park on Experiment Station road.
Brad Sanders, an authority on the naturalist William Bartram, will lead the May 1 stroll and talk about the landscape Bartram saw when he visited the North Oconee River in the summer of 1773.
Robert Wyatt, adjunct professor of ecology at the University of Georgia, will lead the stroll on May 8, the date the Farmers Market gets underway. Wyatt will identify trees and shrubs on his tour.
Pat Priest organized the strolls last year and has done so again this year. The stroll lasts for an hour. Participants make a $5 contribution to the cause of choice of the stroll leader.
Contributions to the stroll led by Sanders will go to the Bartram Trail Conference, while contributions to the Wyatt stroll will go to the Oconee River Land Trust.
Last year's Saturday Strolls series raised more than $1,000 for non-profits in the area, according to Priest.
The series this year is scheduled to run through July 31.
The Farmers Market, which started in 2004 on the front lawn of Eagle Tavern and moved to the rear last year to accommodate more vendors, has helped make Watkinsville a Saturday destination.
Vendors frequently sell fruits and vegetables, fresh flowers, homemade baked goods, jellies, jams and preserves.
Other attractions in Watkinsville are the shops on Main street and The Granary Bakery and Country Store and Jittery Joe’s at the south end of downtown.
Big Easy, Krimson Café and Miss Gail’s, all at the Barnett Shoals and SR15 intersection, offer lunches.
Thomas Orchards, at the US 441 bypass west of downtown, already is open for the season selling plants and garden supplies, as well as the usual flavors of ice cream.
Jerry Thomas told me on Saturday he expects to have South Carolina peaches for sale in the middle of May and his own peaches available a month later.
Sunday, April 18, 2010
Oconee County BOC Holding Occupancy Permit as Leverage on Storage Site
The Brick Facade Problem
When the Oconee County Board of Commissioners approved a second rezone request and conditional use permit for Oconee Safe Storage on Hog Mountain road on Dec. 1, it tried to use some leverage with the owner.
The Commission was upset that one of the buildings–the tallest and most visible from Hog Mountain road and labeled Building No. 5 on the plans--had a grayish-green metal rather than brick facade.
This was true despite the fact that the property owner, Rose Creek Development LLC, had promised to have brick facades on building exteriors facing Hog Mountain road when it asked for the original rezone for the site back in 2006.
The metal, rather than brick, had several of the commissioners upset, Commissioner Chuck Horton most notable among them.
To fix this discrepancy, the commissioners wrote into the zoning ordinance passed on Dec. 1 the requirement that “All building exteriors visible from public streets shall have brick or brick face facades.”
And to make sure Oconee Safe Storage managers got the point, the Commission said that the county would not issue a Certificate of Occupancy for the lower level of Building No. 5 until the brick facade problem was fixed.
Oconee Safe Storage has solved the brick facade problem rather simply.
It hasn’t asked for a Certificate of Occupancy for the bottom level of Building No. 5.
And the county has done the only things left open to it.
Nothing.
Passers-by on Hog Mountain road--as well as any of the often numerous cows and calves on the neighboring USDA pastureland--that happen to look are seeing metal rather than brick on the back and visible side of Building No. 5, though there is no evidence the cows and calves recognize the difference.
In fact, it was the amount of space, not the metal facade, that brought Oconee Safe Storage back to the Commission on Dec. 1.
To date, the county has issued three Certificates of Occupancy for Oconee Safe Storage, a review of the file in Code Enforcement office shows.
The first was on Feb. 24 for 684 square feet of heated space–the office building.
The second was on Feb. 27, was temporary, and was for 50,810 square feet of unheated space–the eight storage buildings, including Building No. 5.
On March 30, 2009, the county issued a new, non-temporary permit for the eight storage buildings, including Building No. 5.
What caught code enforcement’s attention, according to B.R. White, head of the county Planning Department, was that the office building was actually 1,270 square feet in size, rather than the 684 covered by the Occupancy Permit issued on Feb. 24.
And, with the two stories of Building No. 5, the total storage space was 68,210 square feet, not the 50,810 covered by the permanent permit issued on March 30.
Code enforcement discovered that discrepancy when doing inspection before the occupancy permit were issued, White told me in December.
Until Oconee Safe Storage needs the extra space in Building No. 5 or has some other reason to want the new Certificate of Occupancy, passers-by–and the cows and calves on the USDA farms–will be looking at gray-green metal instead of brick on Building No. 5.
When the Oconee County Board of Commissioners approved a second rezone request and conditional use permit for Oconee Safe Storage on Hog Mountain road on Dec. 1, it tried to use some leverage with the owner.
The Commission was upset that one of the buildings–the tallest and most visible from Hog Mountain road and labeled Building No. 5 on the plans--had a grayish-green metal rather than brick facade.
This was true despite the fact that the property owner, Rose Creek Development LLC, had promised to have brick facades on building exteriors facing Hog Mountain road when it asked for the original rezone for the site back in 2006.
The metal, rather than brick, had several of the commissioners upset, Commissioner Chuck Horton most notable among them.
To fix this discrepancy, the commissioners wrote into the zoning ordinance passed on Dec. 1 the requirement that “All building exteriors visible from public streets shall have brick or brick face facades.”
And to make sure Oconee Safe Storage managers got the point, the Commission said that the county would not issue a Certificate of Occupancy for the lower level of Building No. 5 until the brick facade problem was fixed.
Oconee Safe Storage has solved the brick facade problem rather simply.
It hasn’t asked for a Certificate of Occupancy for the bottom level of Building No. 5.
And the county has done the only things left open to it.
Nothing.
Passers-by on Hog Mountain road--as well as any of the often numerous cows and calves on the neighboring USDA pastureland--that happen to look are seeing metal rather than brick on the back and visible side of Building No. 5, though there is no evidence the cows and calves recognize the difference.
In fact, it was the amount of space, not the metal facade, that brought Oconee Safe Storage back to the Commission on Dec. 1.
To date, the county has issued three Certificates of Occupancy for Oconee Safe Storage, a review of the file in Code Enforcement office shows.
The first was on Feb. 24 for 684 square feet of heated space–the office building.
The second was on Feb. 27, was temporary, and was for 50,810 square feet of unheated space–the eight storage buildings, including Building No. 5.
On March 30, 2009, the county issued a new, non-temporary permit for the eight storage buildings, including Building No. 5.
What caught code enforcement’s attention, according to B.R. White, head of the county Planning Department, was that the office building was actually 1,270 square feet in size, rather than the 684 covered by the Occupancy Permit issued on Feb. 24.
And, with the two stories of Building No. 5, the total storage space was 68,210 square feet, not the 50,810 covered by the permanent permit issued on March 30.
Code enforcement discovered that discrepancy when doing inspection before the occupancy permit were issued, White told me in December.
Until Oconee Safe Storage needs the extra space in Building No. 5 or has some other reason to want the new Certificate of Occupancy, passers-by–and the cows and calves on the USDA farms–will be looking at gray-green metal instead of brick on Building No. 5.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)