A federal judge has issued a preliminary injunction blocking the enforcement of the Voter ID law until the pending lawsuit is decided. Read about it here.
Toss some backwards spit in our direction.
Tuesday, October 18, 2005
Whither La Puerta?
The ABH has precious little on LPDS today (actually, a quick scan of the online headlines netted nothing whatsoever for me; if I'm wrong somebody point it out to me). Perhaps this is a sign that everybody's talked out on this thing. I'm pretty sure that I am personally. I think we've pretty well hashed it out on both sides here (thanks for those who disagree with us for contributing). There's two weeks until the vote, and it seems like everybody knows where they stand and don't intend to change their minds; that is, except for the Commissioners themselves. Precious little is known about how most of them feel, and if anybody changes their mind on this issue in the next two weeks, it will be those Commissioners in the middle.
We will be watching the meeting in two weeks with much interest; not just because of our interest in the outcome, but because of our interest in the process as well. I am personally hoping that the number of "3 minute" speakers is fairly low, and that instead the Commissioners spend a lot of time hashing it out aloud. This may at first seem anti-democratic, but let me explain why I hope for this. As I alluded to above, Athens has heard from those for and against this; the positions are well-known and for most people they are fixed at this point. Although the number of speakers for and against may be somewhat instructive for the Commissioners on Nov. 1, I would certainly hope that they would not ultimately base their vote on that. What I want to hear at the meeting, therefore, is some discussion that enlightens me on what exactly does drive the votes; I want to know the process this Commission went through to make this decision, whatever it ends up being. I think that may be bigger than the decision itself, because it should provide insight in to how similar decisions would be made in the future. If nothing else positive comes out of this whole thing, it may be that a few more people at least will understand the importance of zoning decisions and of land use planning generally. Hopefully we will emerge from this thing with more people engaged with their local government; and that can't be a bad thing.
We will be watching the meeting in two weeks with much interest; not just because of our interest in the outcome, but because of our interest in the process as well. I am personally hoping that the number of "3 minute" speakers is fairly low, and that instead the Commissioners spend a lot of time hashing it out aloud. This may at first seem anti-democratic, but let me explain why I hope for this. As I alluded to above, Athens has heard from those for and against this; the positions are well-known and for most people they are fixed at this point. Although the number of speakers for and against may be somewhat instructive for the Commissioners on Nov. 1, I would certainly hope that they would not ultimately base their vote on that. What I want to hear at the meeting, therefore, is some discussion that enlightens me on what exactly does drive the votes; I want to know the process this Commission went through to make this decision, whatever it ends up being. I think that may be bigger than the decision itself, because it should provide insight in to how similar decisions would be made in the future. If nothing else positive comes out of this whole thing, it may be that a few more people at least will understand the importance of zoning decisions and of land use planning generally. Hopefully we will emerge from this thing with more people engaged with their local government; and that can't be a bad thing.
Monday, October 17, 2005
LPDS, Live Music, and Noise
As promised, the response from LPDS (in this case, Matt Casey) on the noise issue, specifically the live music issue. We’ve gotten a few comments about this, and of course there’s also a letter in the ABH today about it. Without further ado, here’s Matt.
And there you have it.
I need to find some time to finish working on that FAQ's page.. I was planning on putting this up there among others. [We mentioned to Matt in our email that this might be a good question for the FAQ page on the LPDS website. Eds.]
Basically our response is that 80% - 90% of the time we will have piped in background Latin music both inside the restaurant and in the plaza to add to the ambiance and solidify the Latin concept. This music will be played at a level that will enable comfortable conversation to our guests, and not require them to have to shout over the music. On the occasions that we have live music it will primarily be kept in doors and consist of small groups of Latin artists. Again we do not envision this to be much louder then the background piped music that we will traditionally feature. We only plan on having moderate live music outdoors, and this would primarily be in the nature of a flamenco guitarist, or perhaps a traditional Peruvian flute artists
(example: http://www.acclaimimages.com/_gallery/_pages/0027-0406-0906-5320.html).
Again this would only be background in nature to add to the ambiance we would try to create.
Above all this we are working on revising the plans to possibly add a concrete wall barrier at the edge of the property, and believe that once the building[sic] that surround the plaza are complete the noise generated from the plaza will be contained for the most part.
And there you have it.
LPDS Mailbag
In the ABH LPDS Mailbag today:
The noise issue rears its ugly head. It reared its ugly head on the blog last night too, so we’ve pledged to get to the bottom of this. Late last night, we emailed LPDS to ask them what type of live music they’re envisioning. We’ve heard anecdotally that they’re thinking strolling guitarists, many opponents are (legitimately) nervous about 9-piece salsa bands. We’ll post the LPDS response here as soon as we get it. This is a big concern for east side opponents, and as blatant LPDS partisans, we’re happy to help allay any concerns on this issue to the best of our ability.
Meanwhile, in the ABH, letter writer worries about noise too. Read it here.
East side resident says it’s a small world after all, at least at Caliente Cab. Makes good points on C-N zoning.
And someone is less than gruntled about the whole thing, and for the first time, ties in the Prince Avenue medical center thingamabob. Reaches a level of snarkiness hitherto unknown to us. Thanks for writing in, Bub, but remember that the ABH doesn’t have a “sarcastic” font.
Mr. T pities the fool that don’t tip off AP.
The noise issue rears its ugly head. It reared its ugly head on the blog last night too, so we’ve pledged to get to the bottom of this. Late last night, we emailed LPDS to ask them what type of live music they’re envisioning. We’ve heard anecdotally that they’re thinking strolling guitarists, many opponents are (legitimately) nervous about 9-piece salsa bands. We’ll post the LPDS response here as soon as we get it. This is a big concern for east side opponents, and as blatant LPDS partisans, we’re happy to help allay any concerns on this issue to the best of our ability.
Meanwhile, in the ABH, letter writer worries about noise too. Read it here.
East side resident says it’s a small world after all, at least at Caliente Cab. Makes good points on C-N zoning.
And someone is less than gruntled about the whole thing, and for the first time, ties in the Prince Avenue medical center thingamabob. Reaches a level of snarkiness hitherto unknown to us. Thanks for writing in, Bub, but remember that the ABH doesn’t have a “sarcastic” font.
Mr. T pities the fool that don’t tip off AP.
Sunday, October 16, 2005
All politics is local
Y’know, one of the great things about writing about local politics as we do here, is that whenever you want to write about something beyond the pale of local politics, you can always just fall back on Tip O’Neill’s famous line, “All politics is local.”
We beg your indulgence while we do just that. We’ll finish off the weekend with the blog equivalent of that last story on the evening news, about a “very special little kitten,” or some such fluffery.
Y’see, the fine folks over at NBC are doing something that has the potential to be really interesting or really lame, and we wanted to mention it.
If you’re a fan of The West Wing, as we are, you’ll know already that on the show, they’re in the midst of a Presidential campaign, pitting Republican Arnold Vinick (played by the incomparable Alan Alda, sans bathrobe) against Democrat Matt Santos (played by the incomparable Jimmy Smits.)
To that end, NBC has actually launched faux candidate websites, complete with (extremely poorly updated) blogs. The NBC folks are also doing a live candidate debate for the November 6th episode.
This has the potential to be kind of cool, if NBC actually takes the time to do it right. Right now, though, they really aren’t. (C’mon guys, how much money does it take to buy two damn domains?)
Anyway, check ‘em out.
Santos/McGarry Vinick/Sullivan
Tips.
We beg your indulgence while we do just that. We’ll finish off the weekend with the blog equivalent of that last story on the evening news, about a “very special little kitten,” or some such fluffery.
Y’see, the fine folks over at NBC are doing something that has the potential to be really interesting or really lame, and we wanted to mention it.
If you’re a fan of The West Wing, as we are, you’ll know already that on the show, they’re in the midst of a Presidential campaign, pitting Republican Arnold Vinick (played by the incomparable Alan Alda, sans bathrobe) against Democrat Matt Santos (played by the incomparable Jimmy Smits.)
To that end, NBC has actually launched faux candidate websites, complete with (extremely poorly updated) blogs. The NBC folks are also doing a live candidate debate for the November 6th episode.
This has the potential to be kind of cool, if NBC actually takes the time to do it right. Right now, though, they really aren’t. (C’mon guys, how much money does it take to buy two damn domains?)
Anyway, check ‘em out.
Santos/McGarry Vinick/Sullivan
Tips.
ABH Roundup
Also in the news today:
“Lelia Tory was one of Athens' residents who wanted a photo ID Saturday. Her driver's license was revoked in 1999, she said. Tory said she is regular voter, and wanted a new card to ensure she could continue to vote.
‘I really need an ID,’ she said. ‘I've been using (the old one), but some places I can do it and some places I can't.’
However, highlighting confusion surrounding the system, Tory said she brought the wrong documents to the bus.”
- John Barrow has lotsa dough. If we were in the mood to be mean, we’d probably say something like this. “Fundraising is the mother’s milk of politics, and donors are the teat from which the milk flows, and Lord knows, no one sucks like John Barrow.”
- The GLOW bus (Georgia Licensing on Wheels) roared into Athens this weekend and handed out a whopping 20 new ID’s. (Hey, don’t laugh. According to the story that’s about 10% of what it’s done statewide so far.) We’ve made our feelings on the Voter ID bill pretty clear, so no need to belabor the point.
“Lelia Tory was one of Athens' residents who wanted a photo ID Saturday. Her driver's license was revoked in 1999, she said. Tory said she is regular voter, and wanted a new card to ensure she could continue to vote.
‘I really need an ID,’ she said. ‘I've been using (the old one), but some places I can do it and some places I can't.’
However, highlighting confusion surrounding the system, Tory said she brought the wrong documents to the bus.”
- Aued: Black people will vote entirely on race or NAACP membership, not ideas or experience. Ok, well that’s how he makes it sound. But, Blake also does some good writing here, highlighting the inequalities that (majority black) North Athens has suffered in services, noting as a good example the North Athens Fire Station v. new Five Points Fire Station controversy.
- Also Aued: Andy Rusk hits the web. This is news? Sounds more like olds to us, since we tooted that horn some weeks ago.
- On the editorial page, Jim Thompson leaves no education bill uncriticized. (You know, we like Jim more and more each time he writes, and one day, we’re going to buy him lunch just to show our appreciation.)
- Also, Bill Shipp warns us about the dangers of those tax and spend conservatives. (It occurs to us that certain conservatives who read and post here are going to snark on about how the poor Republican majority only has to raise taxes to pay for the massive spending the former Democratic majority ran up. Whatevs.)
LPDS, ABH, yada yada yada
The ABH gets all long-winded about La Puerta del Sol today. It’s a good piece, and Blake has obviously done the research on this one. Among the points Blake makes:
Tips.
- Opposition to LPDS comes mostly from the Cedar Creek folks, led by States McCarter. (“Opposition to the mixed-use development is largely centered in the Cedar Creek Civic Association, which represents the massive 650-home subdivision that's traditionally the apex of power on the eastside. Eighth District Commissioner States McCarter got his start in politics there, and like many other Cedar Creek residents, sees the rezoning battle as just one step in the struggle to keep businesses from encroaching into residential areas.”)
- The C-N rezoning does not allow strip malls, which eliminates one bit of misinformation that has been making the anti-LPDS rounds lately. (“…Rubio now wants it once again rezoned from commercial-office, which allows offices and small retail shops, to commercial-neighborhood, which allows larger stores and restaurants, but not strip malls. The two types of zoning are kissing cousins.”
- The LPDS proposal is much more in line with the existing C-O zoning than it is in opposition to it. Note however, that we also got it wrong as far as zoning changes in our post about the issue. We’ll assume that Blake (who actually gets paid for talking about this sort of thing) has the more accurate research on this. (“’A restaurant is really the only difference’ between commercial-office and commercial-neighborhood, Athens-Clarke planner Rick Cowick said. ‘The standards are pretty much the same.’")
- LPDS is consistent with the ACC Land Use Plan. (“Although La Puerta del Sol would require a rezoning, it's consistent with the county's future land-use map, a plan for future development that guides local officials in zoning decisions. Clarke County residents and local officials decided in 2000 to designate Cedar Shoals Drive as ‘Main Street Business,’ a category that can include stores, offices and restaurants with residences above them, and encourages mixed-use and pedestrian-friendly developments. ‘We feel like it was compatible,’ Cowick said.
- The opposition to LPDS is overrated by McCarter and others, and is mostly limited to two subdivisions. (“Rubio's support, though, seems to be getting stronger, or at least louder. Despite McCarter's claim that 90 percent to 95 percent of people in his district oppose the rezoning, La Puerta del Sol appears to have substantial support, especially among younger residents and people outside the Cedar Creek and Spring Lake subdivisions.”)
- States McCarter can be something of a bully. (“Rubio tried to start a petition of his own to match the 700 signatures gathered by about 20 opponents in Cedar Creek, but was told by McCarter not to bother unless the signatures came from Cedar Shoals Drive residents, he said. ‘I could have got a lot of signatures from people who came into Caliente (Cab, his now-closed Tallassee Road restaurant),’ Rubio said. ‘I was getting lots of signatures in the beginning. But (McCarter) told me it didn't count, that anyone could come in and sign it.’
- The petition used by McCarter and the Cedar Creek Homeowner’s Association is also somewhat suspect. (“The Cedar Creek petition, though, has also drawn suspicion. Some eastsiders who signed the petition told the Athens-Clarke Commission last week that they were duped into thinking the restaurant was going to be a nightclub, and actually support the project.”)
Tips.
Friday, October 14, 2005
Get your $20 ID from the bus, Gus
Ok, that was interesting, but for God's sake people, we had to start a new post sometime. So here goes. Relevant to the initial previous post topic (which is more than I can say for 90% of the 51 comments following it; but's that ok, it was entertaining) is ABH's report today that the "Georgia Licensing on Wheels" bus is coming to Athens on Saturday. The GLOW bus will be in the iron triangle from noon to 3. It's actually free to "indigent" voters (I'm not sure how they determine indigency for this purpose), or $25 for a 5 yr ID or $35 for a 10 yr ID for those who "can afford" it, according to the article. If you know someone who needs an ID, get em out there on Saturday.
Meanwhile, back in LPDSland, Margaret Johnston's letter grossly mischaracterizes the zoning issues. First, she states that Stuart Cofer wants "another bite of the rezoning apple". The request is as much, if not more, Bruno's that Stuart's. Next, she states that the rezoning would allow mixed-use, as if that's a bad thing. Then she suggests that LPDS's submitted plans were short of what is required for planned developments. Oh really? So the Planning Commission approved LPDS unanimously, even though the submitted plans didn't even meet their guidelines for consideration? Curious. She then suggests that LPDS will somehow "open the way for other property owners along Cedar Shoals Drive to obtain zoning permits even for strip malls, of which the eastside has an ample supply". Margaret, Margaret, Margaret. That's the everloving point! LPDS is MIXED-USE!!!!! NOT A STRIP MALL!!! Ahem, Sorry. If anything, LPDS will make it much more likely that you'll never see a new strip mall on the east side again. Instead, you'll probably see more and more of the very mixed-use development that you seem to deplore for some reason. For her last point, she does what I knew it wouldn't take long for some opponent to do: she uses Bruno's other lease issues as a reason he shouldn't get LPDS. I'll leave the debate on what's going on with those other leases to others, but saying he shouldn't get LPDS because of that is like saying...well, I don't know what's it's like saying, but it's ridiculous. The two things are apples and plaintains.
T to the I to the P to the S, yo.
Meanwhile, back in LPDSland, Margaret Johnston's letter grossly mischaracterizes the zoning issues. First, she states that Stuart Cofer wants "another bite of the rezoning apple". The request is as much, if not more, Bruno's that Stuart's. Next, she states that the rezoning would allow mixed-use, as if that's a bad thing. Then she suggests that LPDS's submitted plans were short of what is required for planned developments. Oh really? So the Planning Commission approved LPDS unanimously, even though the submitted plans didn't even meet their guidelines for consideration? Curious. She then suggests that LPDS will somehow "open the way for other property owners along Cedar Shoals Drive to obtain zoning permits even for strip malls, of which the eastside has an ample supply". Margaret, Margaret, Margaret. That's the everloving point! LPDS is MIXED-USE!!!!! NOT A STRIP MALL!!! Ahem, Sorry. If anything, LPDS will make it much more likely that you'll never see a new strip mall on the east side again. Instead, you'll probably see more and more of the very mixed-use development that you seem to deplore for some reason. For her last point, she does what I knew it wouldn't take long for some opponent to do: she uses Bruno's other lease issues as a reason he shouldn't get LPDS. I'll leave the debate on what's going on with those other leases to others, but saying he shouldn't get LPDS because of that is like saying...well, I don't know what's it's like saying, but it's ridiculous. The two things are apples and plaintains.
T to the I to the P to the S, yo.
ABH Miscellany
Barrow
The Eds at the ABH dish out a heapin' helpin' of praise for local boy made good John Barrow today, and for once, we agree. At issue is Barrow's bill H.R. 4025, the "Disabled Veterans Fairness Act," which would peg the mileage reimbursement rate for vets going to VA hospitals to the mileage rate paid to government employees.
Now, as you good folks know, we haven't always been the biggest fans of Barrow here at AP, but this time, we're going to give him a laurel (and hearty handshake) for introducing this measure. Funding for veterans' programs traditionally gets short shrift from administrations of both parties (it seems like about every two years legislation to fix the concurrent benefits debacle passes Congress and promptly gets vetoed by the White House.)
Y'see, this is the kind of thing that freshman Congressmen should do. Pick an issue, work up some legislation, and get it out of committee. It helps if (like this one) it's an issue that no one else is really paying much attention to. We also idly wonder if it isn't a pretty smart communications move, to take the spotlight (such as it is) off Barrow's donations from Karl Rove's lawyer, and his mis-step on the whole flag-burning thing. Note that in our discussion of the latter, we mentioned a few days ago that "if you're really worried about [responding to the Visitations] go make some new news, instead of rehashing the old stuff."
Bike Lanes
Big ol' story in the ABH today about Prince Avenue. Putting aside the fact that the headline is a little confusing on the first read (who is this "Safety King," and where can I meet him?), Blake does a good job of rehashing the meeting last night. We're still making up our minds on this one.
One interesting phrase to note is this: "'You are trading in one type of accident for another type of accident, but it's a safer type of accident,' [ACC Transportation Director David Clark] said."
Trade in one type of accident for a safer type of accident. We think that might have been John Kerry's slogan last year.
Bruno
One anti-LPDS letter in the ABH mailbag today. The writer implies the specter of spot zoning again. Writer also implies that by eliminating the existing spot zoning, the east side will explode into a frenzy of strip malls. Funny, we kind of already thought it had. Also launches a few ill-researched and unfounded charges. Find those on your own.
Got a tip for AP? Email us here, and as always, all sources are confidential. Unless a federal grand jury gets involved.
The Eds at the ABH dish out a heapin' helpin' of praise for local boy made good John Barrow today, and for once, we agree. At issue is Barrow's bill H.R. 4025, the "Disabled Veterans Fairness Act," which would peg the mileage reimbursement rate for vets going to VA hospitals to the mileage rate paid to government employees.
Now, as you good folks know, we haven't always been the biggest fans of Barrow here at AP, but this time, we're going to give him a laurel (and hearty handshake) for introducing this measure. Funding for veterans' programs traditionally gets short shrift from administrations of both parties (it seems like about every two years legislation to fix the concurrent benefits debacle passes Congress and promptly gets vetoed by the White House.)
Y'see, this is the kind of thing that freshman Congressmen should do. Pick an issue, work up some legislation, and get it out of committee. It helps if (like this one) it's an issue that no one else is really paying much attention to. We also idly wonder if it isn't a pretty smart communications move, to take the spotlight (such as it is) off Barrow's donations from Karl Rove's lawyer, and his mis-step on the whole flag-burning thing. Note that in our discussion of the latter, we mentioned a few days ago that "if you're really worried about [responding to the Visitations] go make some new news, instead of rehashing the old stuff."
Bike Lanes
Big ol' story in the ABH today about Prince Avenue. Putting aside the fact that the headline is a little confusing on the first read (who is this "Safety King," and where can I meet him?), Blake does a good job of rehashing the meeting last night. We're still making up our minds on this one.
One interesting phrase to note is this: "'You are trading in one type of accident for another type of accident, but it's a safer type of accident,' [ACC Transportation Director David Clark] said."
Trade in one type of accident for a safer type of accident. We think that might have been John Kerry's slogan last year.
Bruno
One anti-LPDS letter in the ABH mailbag today. The writer implies the specter of spot zoning again. Writer also implies that by eliminating the existing spot zoning, the east side will explode into a frenzy of strip malls. Funny, we kind of already thought it had. Also launches a few ill-researched and unfounded charges. Find those on your own.
Got a tip for AP? Email us here, and as always, all sources are confidential. Unless a federal grand jury gets involved.
Thursday, October 13, 2005
Lest we forget...
Hey kids.
This is going to come as a shock to you, so you'd better sit down.
Thanks.
Hey, you know, there are other things going on in politics besides La Puerta Del Sol. Seriously. In fact, there's a story in the ABH today about another issue that we are very passionate about - namely the racist voter ID bill that was passed (by ethics guru and campaign finance law violater Bill Stephens) and the ensuing challenge in federal court.
Now this is important stuff. In fact, thousands of people's abilities to vote may be riding on it. The law is being challenged by the ACLU, AARP, and League of Women Voters.
And during a hearing yesterday, Cathy Cox (wearing her Secretary of State hat, not her candidate for Governor hat) testified. According to Cox, this law actually makes it easier to commit voter fraud, because no ID is required to vote absentee.
We should also point out that in our political opinion, this law is nothing more than a blatant attempt to disenfranchise minorites, the elderly, and poor people. Why so bold, Athens Politics? Because according to Cox, who as the state's numbah one election official should know these things, there have no cases of voter fraud by impersonation in Georgia.
Some hotshot Republican appointee to the State Elections Board told reporters that they had a list of "5,400 people [who] had voted who had names similar to those found on a database of dead Georgians."
Similar? Like what? John Smith? Robert Green? Professor Plum with a candlestick in the conservatory? Sorry, we digress.
Similar names do not convincing evidence make, pal. And unless you've got hard evidence that someone is committing voter fraud that the Secretary of State doesn't know about, then keep yer yap shut.
It's also interesting to note that when 13 Augusta voters were turned away under the new law for not having photo ID, only two returned to make their provisional ballot official. (Voters who don't have their ID are allowed to vote on a provisional ballot, and then by showing ID can make their votes count). That's hardly a representative sample, we know, but what if it is indicative of what's going to happen under this law?
Anyway, the federal judge is going to rule on this one "as soon as possible."
For more background on this law, we'd refer you to this post and this post.
Tips.
This is going to come as a shock to you, so you'd better sit down.
Thanks.
Hey, you know, there are other things going on in politics besides La Puerta Del Sol. Seriously. In fact, there's a story in the ABH today about another issue that we are very passionate about - namely the racist voter ID bill that was passed (by ethics guru and campaign finance law violater Bill Stephens) and the ensuing challenge in federal court.
Now this is important stuff. In fact, thousands of people's abilities to vote may be riding on it. The law is being challenged by the ACLU, AARP, and League of Women Voters.
And during a hearing yesterday, Cathy Cox (wearing her Secretary of State hat, not her candidate for Governor hat) testified. According to Cox, this law actually makes it easier to commit voter fraud, because no ID is required to vote absentee.
We should also point out that in our political opinion, this law is nothing more than a blatant attempt to disenfranchise minorites, the elderly, and poor people. Why so bold, Athens Politics? Because according to Cox, who as the state's numbah one election official should know these things, there have no cases of voter fraud by impersonation in Georgia.
Some hotshot Republican appointee to the State Elections Board told reporters that they had a list of "5,400 people [who] had voted who had names similar to those found on a database of dead Georgians."
Similar? Like what? John Smith? Robert Green? Professor Plum with a candlestick in the conservatory? Sorry, we digress.
Similar names do not convincing evidence make, pal. And unless you've got hard evidence that someone is committing voter fraud that the Secretary of State doesn't know about, then keep yer yap shut.
It's also interesting to note that when 13 Augusta voters were turned away under the new law for not having photo ID, only two returned to make their provisional ballot official. (Voters who don't have their ID are allowed to vote on a provisional ballot, and then by showing ID can make their votes count). That's hardly a representative sample, we know, but what if it is indicative of what's going to happen under this law?
Anyway, the federal judge is going to rule on this one "as soon as possible."
For more background on this law, we'd refer you to this post and this post.
Tips.
LPDS: The ABH Mailbag
Three letters in the ABH over la Puerta del Sol today:
East side resident is 100% gruntled about McCarter's representation. Key quote: "I can only fervently wish other elected officials worked as untiringly as he in the interests of those he serves."
We couldn't agree more. For the people he actually serves (meaning Cedar Creek residents) States works very hard. But we only wish he would work as untiringly for everyone who lives in the district he represents.
Armchair economist lectures us about the market and capitalist theory. Problem is, the US (and ACC, by extension) isn't a pure capitalist society. Also, instead of reversing an existing spot zoning decision, we should just rewrite the whole land use plan. Tough to tell which side this guy is on, since he also points out that the arguments against LPDS based on traffic and noise are bogus too. Key statement: "I would also add that the government should not get into the business of bailing out failed businesses by rezoning their property."
Agreed. Of course, as we pointed out yesterday, the zoning that allowed Cofer's to build in the first place was the spot zoning. Not this.
And finally, in one letter writer's opinion, the kids are alright. Sort of.
Also, dig this. As postulated yesterday, there may be more to the Pollo Criollo story than originally thought. Jmac gets the scoopy scoop scoop.
Tips.
East side resident is 100% gruntled about McCarter's representation. Key quote: "I can only fervently wish other elected officials worked as untiringly as he in the interests of those he serves."
We couldn't agree more. For the people he actually serves (meaning Cedar Creek residents) States works very hard. But we only wish he would work as untiringly for everyone who lives in the district he represents.
Armchair economist lectures us about the market and capitalist theory. Problem is, the US (and ACC, by extension) isn't a pure capitalist society. Also, instead of reversing an existing spot zoning decision, we should just rewrite the whole land use plan. Tough to tell which side this guy is on, since he also points out that the arguments against LPDS based on traffic and noise are bogus too. Key statement: "I would also add that the government should not get into the business of bailing out failed businesses by rezoning their property."
Agreed. Of course, as we pointed out yesterday, the zoning that allowed Cofer's to build in the first place was the spot zoning. Not this.
And finally, in one letter writer's opinion, the kids are alright. Sort of.
Also, dig this. As postulated yesterday, there may be more to the Pollo Criollo story than originally thought. Jmac gets the scoopy scoop scoop.
Tips.
Wednesday, October 12, 2005
Pollo Oh No
According to the ABH, Bruno may have no Athens restaurants left if the LPDS rezoning is not allowed. He has apparently been given 60-day notice on the Pollo Criollo lease. Fortunately for those of us in love with Bruno's cuisine, he says that he plans to fight the eviction, look for another westside site, and if LPDS is shot down, another one on the eastside. The man is undaunted; gotta love it.
Meanwhile, look here if you want to see a more classic example of spot zoning. One which was approved, by the way, although not without some controversy of its own.
Meanwhile, look here if you want to see a more classic example of spot zoning. One which was approved, by the way, although not without some controversy of its own.
Out, Out, Damned Spot (Zoning)!!
If you’re following LPDS closely (and if you’re reading this, we’re pretty sure that you are), no doubt you’ve heard the phrase “spot-zoning” thrown around pretty regularly. In fact, this is one of the more commonly-used arguments against LPDS, so we’d like to briefly address it here. (We’ve never “briefly” addressed anything in our lives. Ed.)
Spot-zoning is just what it sounds like, changing the zoning permissions for one particular piece of land while leaving the parcels nearby in their original zoning configuration.
If you want a more textbook definition, then law.com defines it as: “a provision in a general plan which benefits a single parcel of land by creating a zone for use just for that parcel and different from the surrounding properties in the area.”
Spot zoning is, by the way, not always a bad thing. For instance, putting a police substation in a residential area might require spot zoning. Or a school, for that matter. We’re big fans of the dog park over on Whit Davis Road, and we wonder if any changes in zoning were necessary to create the park there.
(We also wonder if we couldn’t get something like that on the west side, but that’s a different post for a different day.)
Opponents of LPDS will tell you that spot zoning is necessary in order for Bruno Rubio to develop the land. This isn’t actually the case.
The Cofer’s property, which we’d like to see made into LPDS, is actually already spot-zoned. LPDS merely seeks to reverse that existing spot zoning, and to return the property to its original zoning, under the existing land-use plan.
As it stands right now, just about the only thing that can go on that particular parcel of land is another lawn and garden store like Cofer’s. Our understanding is that they had to request the rezoning in order to build their greenhouse.
With Lowe’s coming to the east side, and with already existing businesses like Charmar nearby, what are the chances that anyone would want to put another store like Cofer’s in that location? Heck, Cofer’s went under in that location, so it doesn’t exactly lend itself to inspiring confidence in anyone else wanting to do the same thing there.
The fact is that the land was zoned commercial, as Super-Commissioner (and poverty warrior) Elton Dodson has pointed out. Cedar Shoals Drive was intended, under the ACC Land Use Plan, to be a commercial corridor. And nothing short of rezoning the entire area is going to change that.
The question is then, what type of development do we want to see on Cedar Shoals Drive?
We’ve been clear all along. This is a good development; it’s a project that the ACC Planning Commission approved unanimously. The Planning Commission, much like the residents, carefully considered the problems of traffic and noise, and found those concerns to be negligible. (The nearest homeowner lives almost three football fields away, and the existing surface streets can easily handle the marginal increase in traffic volume, says the Planning Commission)
So if not LPDS, then what? Another big box store? Another cookie-cutter TGI O’Applebee’s restaurant? An office park that turns into a ghost town after dark?
Or a destination with truly local flavor and truly local color, that contributes more to the local economy than any of the other options ever would?
The most important point is that this is not spot zoning. It’s the reversal of spot zoning.
Email the crack editorial staff here.
Spot-zoning is just what it sounds like, changing the zoning permissions for one particular piece of land while leaving the parcels nearby in their original zoning configuration.
If you want a more textbook definition, then law.com defines it as: “a provision in a general plan which benefits a single parcel of land by creating a zone for use just for that parcel and different from the surrounding properties in the area.”
Spot zoning is, by the way, not always a bad thing. For instance, putting a police substation in a residential area might require spot zoning. Or a school, for that matter. We’re big fans of the dog park over on Whit Davis Road, and we wonder if any changes in zoning were necessary to create the park there.
(We also wonder if we couldn’t get something like that on the west side, but that’s a different post for a different day.)
Opponents of LPDS will tell you that spot zoning is necessary in order for Bruno Rubio to develop the land. This isn’t actually the case.
The Cofer’s property, which we’d like to see made into LPDS, is actually already spot-zoned. LPDS merely seeks to reverse that existing spot zoning, and to return the property to its original zoning, under the existing land-use plan.
As it stands right now, just about the only thing that can go on that particular parcel of land is another lawn and garden store like Cofer’s. Our understanding is that they had to request the rezoning in order to build their greenhouse.
With Lowe’s coming to the east side, and with already existing businesses like Charmar nearby, what are the chances that anyone would want to put another store like Cofer’s in that location? Heck, Cofer’s went under in that location, so it doesn’t exactly lend itself to inspiring confidence in anyone else wanting to do the same thing there.
The fact is that the land was zoned commercial, as Super-Commissioner (and poverty warrior) Elton Dodson has pointed out. Cedar Shoals Drive was intended, under the ACC Land Use Plan, to be a commercial corridor. And nothing short of rezoning the entire area is going to change that.
The question is then, what type of development do we want to see on Cedar Shoals Drive?
We’ve been clear all along. This is a good development; it’s a project that the ACC Planning Commission approved unanimously. The Planning Commission, much like the residents, carefully considered the problems of traffic and noise, and found those concerns to be negligible. (The nearest homeowner lives almost three football fields away, and the existing surface streets can easily handle the marginal increase in traffic volume, says the Planning Commission)
So if not LPDS, then what? Another big box store? Another cookie-cutter TGI O’Applebee’s restaurant? An office park that turns into a ghost town after dark?
Or a destination with truly local flavor and truly local color, that contributes more to the local economy than any of the other options ever would?
The most important point is that this is not spot zoning. It’s the reversal of spot zoning.
Email the crack editorial staff here.
Tuesday, October 11, 2005
LPDS Daily Dose
Several letters in the ABH on LPDS, most notably one from States himself, defending himself against Monday's editorial and other recent news of his behavior after the meeting last week and in misrepresenting the facts on LPDS. Next, there's one from Mollie Parry King, apparently an opposed resident of David Lynn's district, giving her preemptive I-told-you-so for when LPDS turns the east side into the Mos Eisley bar scene from Star Wars. Finally, there is a supportive letter from Caren M. Snook, an east side resident, which details once again most of the arguments for and against.
I want to thank the Cedar Creek resident who responded to my previous post. I responded to the editorial somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but after further thought and after reading that response, I think the editorial is absolutely right in one sense. States behavior makes it impossible for those who wish to express reasonable concerns, like that poster, to do so. While it is not very likely that my opinion will change at this late date on this issue, and equally unlikely that those opposed will have a change of heart, perhaps if the two sides engage in a reasonable dialogue, the best result for the east side and the community at large can be reached, with or without LPDS (hopefully with).
I want to thank the Cedar Creek resident who responded to my previous post. I responded to the editorial somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but after further thought and after reading that response, I think the editorial is absolutely right in one sense. States behavior makes it impossible for those who wish to express reasonable concerns, like that poster, to do so. While it is not very likely that my opinion will change at this late date on this issue, and equally unlikely that those opposed will have a change of heart, perhaps if the two sides engage in a reasonable dialogue, the best result for the east side and the community at large can be reached, with or without LPDS (hopefully with).
John Barrow - WTF?? (Part Deux)
After yesterday's post about John Barrow, we thought we'd be able to leave him alone for awhile. After all, he's up there in Washington, DC where, as a back benching freshman Congressman, he can't really hurt anyone.
But then, a friend sent us a note this morning about some other, non-flag-burning-related John Barrow stuff that we feel compelled to mention.
During his race last year, Barrow was as proud as a peacock about his fundraising prowess. He raised money from all over Athens, all over the state, heck, all over the country. Money from activists, other politicians, personal friends, and...
Karl Rove's lawyer?
WTF?
It breaks down like this. Robert Luskin, Rove's personal attorney, and his law firm Patton Boggs, are decent Democratic donors. Patton Boggs bunded some cash to Gore in 2000, and Luskin himself shelled out $2,750.00 to Democratic candidates last year, including a total of $1,000.00 to Barrow.
You know, we're not in the business of being apologists for any politicians here. If they screw the pooch, we call them on it.
But, there's not much of a story here, unless its the one about Karl Rove being so desperate for good legal counsel (not that Luskin is doing a particularly bang-up job in our opinion) that he forgets to check donor records.
In fact, most of your big time trial lawyers support Democrats. Why? Two words.
Tort reform.
The only trial lawyers who tend to support the GOP are the ones who defend the companies named in litigation, but that's a relatively small number.
Anyway, the only big question here is, how big are the legs on this story? We're guessing that they really aren't that big.
Of course, please check yesterday's post for evidence on the Barrow communications staff's proclivities to make press molehills into press mountains.
Still, having one's name mentioned on Wonkette is something of a status symbol in Beltway politics (translation: Hollywood for ugly people), and we're betting that Barrow is a trifle peeved that his first mention had to be in the same post with Karl Rove.
Here's a few related links from Wonkette and Petrelis.
Tips.
But then, a friend sent us a note this morning about some other, non-flag-burning-related John Barrow stuff that we feel compelled to mention.
During his race last year, Barrow was as proud as a peacock about his fundraising prowess. He raised money from all over Athens, all over the state, heck, all over the country. Money from activists, other politicians, personal friends, and...
Karl Rove's lawyer?
WTF?
It breaks down like this. Robert Luskin, Rove's personal attorney, and his law firm Patton Boggs, are decent Democratic donors. Patton Boggs bunded some cash to Gore in 2000, and Luskin himself shelled out $2,750.00 to Democratic candidates last year, including a total of $1,000.00 to Barrow.
You know, we're not in the business of being apologists for any politicians here. If they screw the pooch, we call them on it.
But, there's not much of a story here, unless its the one about Karl Rove being so desperate for good legal counsel (not that Luskin is doing a particularly bang-up job in our opinion) that he forgets to check donor records.
In fact, most of your big time trial lawyers support Democrats. Why? Two words.
Tort reform.
The only trial lawyers who tend to support the GOP are the ones who defend the companies named in litigation, but that's a relatively small number.
Anyway, the only big question here is, how big are the legs on this story? We're guessing that they really aren't that big.
Of course, please check yesterday's post for evidence on the Barrow communications staff's proclivities to make press molehills into press mountains.
Still, having one's name mentioned on Wonkette is something of a status symbol in Beltway politics (translation: Hollywood for ugly people), and we're betting that Barrow is a trifle peeved that his first mention had to be in the same post with Karl Rove.
Here's a few related links from Wonkette and Petrelis.
Tips.
Vote for us!
Right here.
While you're at it, put in a good word for AP friends Safe as Houses, Antidisingenousmentarianism, and the Day Jobs.
While you're at it, put in a good word for AP friends Safe as Houses, Antidisingenousmentarianism, and the Day Jobs.
Monday, October 10, 2005
LPDS (no creative title this time)
Another editorial in the ABH on LPDS. It does a good job of laying out once again all of States' ridiculous shenanigans last week and how silly he looks. However, it basically ends up saying that this behavior is bad for his constituents because he can't be taken seriously on the LPDS issue, and that therefore he can't do his job for them (which apparently, in the opinion of this editorial, is to keep LPDS from happening). Using that rationale, I'd say he's doing his constituents a great service by ensuring that the LPDS opposition can't be taken seriously.
Way to go, Lameduck Yosemite.
Way to go, Lameduck Yosemite.
John Barrow - WTF??
If you happened to read Blake Aued's column on October 2, then you would have seen an interesting piece about the band the Visitations, who apparently paid a little visit to our Congressman, John Barrow. Seems the band had some concerns about Barrow's disdain for the 1st Amendment (or perhaps his disdain for losing his re-election campaign next year).
To be more specific, the band was hacked off (rightfully so, in our opinion) about Barrow's support for a Constitutional amendment that bans burning the U.S. flag.
According to Blake's column, the band was told that the Republicans are making Johnny B hate the 1st Amendment, since redistricting his made his district more conservative.
Also according to Blake, the Congressman (or more accurately, a member of his staff) promised the band a flag that was flown over the Capitol.
Today, Barrow writes in to the ABH to set the record straight.
Sez Barrow:
Our question is this. Why?
Why make an issue out of this at all? Are you really that worried 13 months before the election?
John Barrow has smart folks working for him, and there's no denying that. But sometimes, Barrow's beltway brain trust is just a leeeeeeeeetle too smart for their own good. This is a good example.
Living in the fishbowl that is beltway politics does strange things to a person. There's a certain mindset that folks get into in DC, and part and parcel of that mindset is the unshakeable belief that the folks back in your district are watching every move you make and grading you accordingly.
Not exactly. And that's why the folks up in Barrow's DC headquarters kind of blew it.
Y'see, most folks had already forgotten about this particular story, especially in Athens, where politically, we have much bigger fish to fry right now, politically speaking. (Hey, you guys heard anything about this La Puerta del Sol thing?) So, the thing is, we aren't really paying that much attention to Barrow, and it's pretty much accepted as gospel that he's trying to run to the right, in order to avoid being labeled with the dreaded l-word.
But, by writing in, Barrow (and his communications staff) have turned a one-day story into a minor campaign issue. Left alone, this story doesn't go anywhere. Heck, we're not even sure that Max Burns (Barrow's ostensible opponent next year) would have picked up on it. And, even if ol' Maxie and the RNC did pick up on it, they've got better things to use against Barrow than this. The best thing to do was to let this go, and if you're really worried about it, go make some new news, instead of rehashing the old stuff.
Instead, though, Barrow chose to respond, and in a matter that was more defensive than statesmanlike to boot. As a result, what was a one-day story now has more legs. Granted, if Barrow's folks don't talk about it any more, then chances are the story dies now. Of course, there's always the chance that the Visitations might decide to respond now, and suddenly a story becomes a Story.
Worse though, is that a response actually makes Barrow more vulnerable to attack on the issue, because we've got a news story that says Barrow (via his staff) promised the band a flag, then, one week later, a letter from Barrow denying it. And what's the favorite epithet thrown at Kerry by Bush, and by extension at Democrats everywhere by Republicans everywhere?
Flip-flop.
And whether this is a flip-flop or not, Barrow just left himself wide open to have it thrown at him.
You might think that this is a lot of ink for one minor misstep. And you'd be right. Except for one thing. This is really symptomatic of why Barrow is going to be in trouble. Because what's logical in DC is just silly back home.
Eeeerbody in the club gettin' tips. Including us.
To be more specific, the band was hacked off (rightfully so, in our opinion) about Barrow's support for a Constitutional amendment that bans burning the U.S. flag.
According to Blake's column, the band was told that the Republicans are making Johnny B hate the 1st Amendment, since redistricting his made his district more conservative.
Also according to Blake, the Congressman (or more accurately, a member of his staff) promised the band a flag that was flown over the Capitol.
Today, Barrow writes in to the ABH to set the record straight.
Sez Barrow:
"I have never knowingly presented a flag to any group or individual who intended to desecrate it, nor would I ever. They are not going to get a flag flown over the U.S. Capitol. Not from me, at any rate."
Our question is this. Why?
Why make an issue out of this at all? Are you really that worried 13 months before the election?
John Barrow has smart folks working for him, and there's no denying that. But sometimes, Barrow's beltway brain trust is just a leeeeeeeeetle too smart for their own good. This is a good example.
Living in the fishbowl that is beltway politics does strange things to a person. There's a certain mindset that folks get into in DC, and part and parcel of that mindset is the unshakeable belief that the folks back in your district are watching every move you make and grading you accordingly.
Not exactly. And that's why the folks up in Barrow's DC headquarters kind of blew it.
Y'see, most folks had already forgotten about this particular story, especially in Athens, where politically, we have much bigger fish to fry right now, politically speaking. (Hey, you guys heard anything about this La Puerta del Sol thing?) So, the thing is, we aren't really paying that much attention to Barrow, and it's pretty much accepted as gospel that he's trying to run to the right, in order to avoid being labeled with the dreaded l-word.
But, by writing in, Barrow (and his communications staff) have turned a one-day story into a minor campaign issue. Left alone, this story doesn't go anywhere. Heck, we're not even sure that Max Burns (Barrow's ostensible opponent next year) would have picked up on it. And, even if ol' Maxie and the RNC did pick up on it, they've got better things to use against Barrow than this. The best thing to do was to let this go, and if you're really worried about it, go make some new news, instead of rehashing the old stuff.
Instead, though, Barrow chose to respond, and in a matter that was more defensive than statesmanlike to boot. As a result, what was a one-day story now has more legs. Granted, if Barrow's folks don't talk about it any more, then chances are the story dies now. Of course, there's always the chance that the Visitations might decide to respond now, and suddenly a story becomes a Story.
Worse though, is that a response actually makes Barrow more vulnerable to attack on the issue, because we've got a news story that says Barrow (via his staff) promised the band a flag, then, one week later, a letter from Barrow denying it. And what's the favorite epithet thrown at Kerry by Bush, and by extension at Democrats everywhere by Republicans everywhere?
Flip-flop.
And whether this is a flip-flop or not, Barrow just left himself wide open to have it thrown at him.
You might think that this is a lot of ink for one minor misstep. And you'd be right. Except for one thing. This is really symptomatic of why Barrow is going to be in trouble. Because what's logical in DC is just silly back home.
Eeeerbody in the club gettin' tips. Including us.
Sunday, October 09, 2005
ABH puts its stank on LPDS
The ABH was all over LPDS like brown on fried rice today. There were three pieces on the issue. In the main editorial, ABH points to how divided the community is on the issue, meanwhile debunking all of the stated rationales for opposition. Next, there was an editorial piece in the business section by Don Nelson, pointing out how foolish it would be to pass up this opportunity to let Bruno work his magic on the east side, and also addressing the weakness of the reasons for opposition. Finally, Blake Aeud’s In the Loop piece paints a vivid picture of the internal struggle of the Commission over the issue, and how it played out last week.
Word has it there was also an ABHer snooping around the 2 p.m. Sunday informational meeting at Pollo Criollo; good chance we'll see additional ABH coverage soon.
All of this bodes well for LPDS, with States and the rest of the opposition looking sillier every day, and the real facts finally getting around.
Word has it there was also an ABHer snooping around the 2 p.m. Sunday informational meeting at Pollo Criollo; good chance we'll see additional ABH coverage soon.
All of this bodes well for LPDS, with States and the rest of the opposition looking sillier every day, and the real facts finally getting around.
Friday, October 07, 2005
Mishmash
Hi kids.
Hey, sorry we took an unannounced day off yesterday. You know how it is with work and all.
Anyway, just a few things to note (or "Note" with a capital n, if you're one of those little snots at ABC News.)
Safe As Houses hits the nail on the head, as far as multi-use pathways go. (You know, they're wider than sidewalks, got room for bikes, Athens should love 'em). Anyhoo, Jmac has been all over this one, like Britney Spears at the WalMart Back to School Sale.
Speaking of Jmac, in the same post, he explores an interesting angle on LPDS (and no, we will not shut up already about that. You've got less than a month, deal with it), that, frankly, we wish we would have picked up on. We'll send you over there to read it, but here's a hint. It involves States McCarter and Harry Sims.
And speaking of La Puerta Del Sol, you should know that there are going to be not one, but two informational meetings coming up this weekend. Both are going to be at Pollo Criollo (try the empanadas, they're delish!). One is today (Friday) at 5:30 p.m., the other is Sunday at 2 p.m. Rumor has it that following the second meeting, the LPDS crew is going to round up some volunteers and take it to the streets over on the east side.
One other piece of LPDS news, or really, it's more like analysis. We'd like to extend a laurel (and hearty handshake) to District 1 Commissioner Charles Carter. Charles never really says much about things like LPDS, but in the meeting Tuesday, he stood up (figuratively) and gave ol' States what fer as far as McCarter's sketchy polling methods. We approve so highly, that we're going to refrain from calling him Foghorn Leghorn for at least a week.
Finally, Georgia Democrats probably won't be challenging the new congressional districts in court, sez the ABH. John Lewis is less than thrilled about that, but as far as political money goes, every dollar we spend on a lawsuit is a dollar that we can't spend on winning races.
Of course the new districts are really going to screw local politico John Barrow. Of course, he wasn't going to win anyway. More on that at some nebulous later date.
Tips.
Hey, sorry we took an unannounced day off yesterday. You know how it is with work and all.
Anyway, just a few things to note (or "Note" with a capital n, if you're one of those little snots at ABC News.)
Safe As Houses hits the nail on the head, as far as multi-use pathways go. (You know, they're wider than sidewalks, got room for bikes, Athens should love 'em). Anyhoo, Jmac has been all over this one, like Britney Spears at the WalMart Back to School Sale.
Speaking of Jmac, in the same post, he explores an interesting angle on LPDS (and no, we will not shut up already about that. You've got less than a month, deal with it), that, frankly, we wish we would have picked up on. We'll send you over there to read it, but here's a hint. It involves States McCarter and Harry Sims.
And speaking of La Puerta Del Sol, you should know that there are going to be not one, but two informational meetings coming up this weekend. Both are going to be at Pollo Criollo (try the empanadas, they're delish!). One is today (Friday) at 5:30 p.m., the other is Sunday at 2 p.m. Rumor has it that following the second meeting, the LPDS crew is going to round up some volunteers and take it to the streets over on the east side.
One other piece of LPDS news, or really, it's more like analysis. We'd like to extend a laurel (and hearty handshake) to District 1 Commissioner Charles Carter. Charles never really says much about things like LPDS, but in the meeting Tuesday, he stood up (figuratively) and gave ol' States what fer as far as McCarter's sketchy polling methods. We approve so highly, that we're going to refrain from calling him Foghorn Leghorn for at least a week.
Finally, Georgia Democrats probably won't be challenging the new congressional districts in court, sez the ABH. John Lewis is less than thrilled about that, but as far as political money goes, every dollar we spend on a lawsuit is a dollar that we can't spend on winning races.
Of course the new districts are really going to screw local politico John Barrow. Of course, he wasn't going to win anyway. More on that at some nebulous later date.
Tips.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)