Lisa Brouillette: So many topics, so little space

First Published: February 19, 2010 in the Opelika-Auburn News

Every month I wonder how to choose the topics for the 400-plus words in my column. It’s always a problem of plenty, not scarcity.

This month, for example, I could focus on the City of Auburn’s recent approvals of land uses, development plans and value “assessments” of the West Pace project. Clearly many are interested in the outcome and consequences of that project.

Or I could remind readers of upcoming CompPlan2030 meetings, at which their input is requested for planning Auburn’s growth and development. Meeting details, maps and other documents are online at http://www.auburnalabama.org/CompPlan2030/default.asp.

De-annexation has been a hot topic in Auburn, with one property owner being allowed to remove his property from the city limits, another being denied the same action.

Our state Senate unanimously approved SB61, this year’s version of the ALFA-supported ‘hog farm bill,’ deceptively titled the “Family Farm Preservation Act.” Thankfully, the bill doesn’t have House approval. Yet.

To help everyone track our legislators’ votes on this and other bills, I could suggest useful Web sites such as Conservation Alabama’s http://www.conservationalabama.org and Alabama Arise’s http://www.arisecitizens.org/.

In addition, all facets of state legislation - text and amendments of bills, roll call votes, etc - can be accessed via the state’s ALISON legislative database (http://alisondb.legislature.state.al.us/acas/ACASLoginFire.asp).

This is a local and statewide election year. As noted recently in this paper, it’s not even clear who will run for election or re-election.

Those are only a few of the current political issues percolating. And I haven’t even begun to comment on local business or the arts & culture scene.

Perhaps I should I direct attention to the numerous outstanding exhibits and programs being offered at the Jule Collins Smith Museum of Fine Art, which rival those of museums in much larger cities. These are offered at no charge, by the way, thanks to the generosity of JCSM’s Business Partners and other sponsoring organizations.

In these tight financial times, an appropriate focus might be the local businesses giving our community a broader selection of products, services and cultural offerings.

Tomorrow [Sat. Feb. 20] there’s an all-day opening celebration of “Mama Mocha’s Coffee Beanery” at The Gnu’s Room. Downtown Auburn and Opelika both have new and expanded restaurants. We have both German and Indian restaurants in our area now.

I’ve not even mentioned Auburn University’s numerous lecture series, the faculty’s discussions of procedural issues such as managing conflicts of interest, or the multiple searches for new deans. Dip into one of these topics. And email me about others in which you’re interested.

Lisa Brouillette is a community activist, editor, and writer. Contact her at placeforum@gmail.com or visit her Web site http://placeforum.org.

Comments Off

Column by Lisa Brouillette: Will 2010 be state’s year for reform?

First published in the Opelika-Auburn News, Jan. 25, 2010

Alabama’s collective version of New Years’ resolutions seems to be calls for reform. Ethics reform. Constitutional reform. Environmental reform. Tax reform, especially as it relates to daily necessity - food.

Every year, the same needs, the same goals, the same optimistic enthusiasm. Every year, too, a disappointing repeat of the same failures to act.

Will we break the cycle in this election year, when typically much is promised and little delivered? Keep in mind nearly three in 10 Alabamians who qualify to vote aren’t even registered. And only slightly more than half of those registered actually vote.

That said, there are opportunities for positive change on both state and local levels.

The Alabama Environmental Management Commission (EMC), ADEM’s governing board, could choose a strong environmental advocate as the new ADEM director.

Also, ADEM could increase fines for permit violations, such as last year’s $502,000 formal administrative penalty for the Mimm’s Trail development on Shell Toomer Parkway. (See case#04-2009-4789 at http://www.epa-echo.gov/echo/.)

State legislation for constitutional reform and removing the tax on food again awaits consideration. For details, see http://www.constitutionalreform.org/, http://www.untaxgroceries.org, or view pending legislation at http://alisondb.legislature.state.al.us/acas/ACASLoginFire.asp.

In my estimation, ethics reform is the most important civic New Years’ goal. This must include tougher open meetings and open records rules.

No matter what laws we have, they mean nothing if citizens don’t have detailed information of our elected and appointed officials’ business, family and financial connections.

Consider this sample of actions in recent years, including criminal proceedings, which highlight current issues and reflect growing public concern.

The Adamsville City Council was alleged to have violated the state’s open meetings law.

Multiple criminal investigations are pending involving Jefferson County and Birmingham officials.

It would take an entire column to list them.

Local columnist and long-time newspaper publisher Paul Davis took decisive action to improve the open meetings policy of the Alabama Department of Mental Health’s advisory board.

The Montgomery County Board of Education is fighting allegations they met in secret via serial meetings of a non-quorum of members.

This newspaper brought public attention to the Auburn City Council’s similar use of serial meetings to reach consensus outside of a public meeting, including by e-mail, fax and phone.

Public officials frequently and intentionally circumvent the intent of the open meetings law by meeting in small groups (i.e., fewer voting members than required to trigger an open public meeting). Such serial e-meetings need to be definitively prohibited.

2010 -will this be Alabama’s new year of reform?

Lisa Brouillette is a community activist, editor, and writer. Contact her at placeforum@gmail.com or visit her Web site http://placeforum.org.

Comments Off

COLUMN BY LISA BROUILLETTE — AU Airport settles ADEM permit violations

First published in the Opelika-Auburn News, Friday, Dec. 18, 2009

Last week Trey Glenn resigned from his position as director of the Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM)., giving rise to thoughts about ADEM’s efficacy on the local level, most recently at AU’s airport expansion site.

Glenn’s attitude and actions at ADEM often disappointed. He squandered multiple opportunities to strengthen ADEM’s environmental regulation and enforcement.

Different leadership could have stimulated stronger and quicker enforcement of the laws protecting Alabama’s natural resources.

That latter element - the extended time over which environmental violations are allowed to continue and repeat - is a point of concern.

A recent local example of this involves our airport, which has been the site of land disturbance and construction.

In late 2006 ADEM first notified airport operator Auburn University of deficiencies in permitting and sediment controls.

AU and ADEM then batted the issue back and forth, with subsequent violations noted, until November of this year.

Finally, at that point, AU and ADEM negotiated a proposed settlement agreement covering AU’s improperly implemented and maintained erosion and sediment controls.  That agreement is now up for public comment. (http://adem.state.al.us/PublicNotice/Dec09/pdfs/12auburn.PDF.)

In the agreement, both AU and ADEM stipulate to multiple deficiencies over multiple years, which resulted in “discharges of sediment and other pollutants in stormwater runoff to a UT [unnamed tributary] to Moores Mill Creek and a UT to Sougahatchee Creek.”

It’s proposed that AU pay a $20,000 fine, with the possibility of up to a further $12,000 penalty. Additionally AU is to “take immediate action to prevent . . . sediment and other pollutants in stormwater leaving [the airport] Facility.”

Certainly the proposed agreement and fines are a step in the right direction. But repeated violations from October 2006 to December 2009?

Alabama deserves better.  Perhaps the next ADEM director will provide just that.

*      *     *

I got a good chuckle from Rep. Mike Hubbard’s comment that questions about his involvement in AU’s athletic broadcasting deals are “100% politics.”

Well, yeah, Mike, it is due to politics - your politics, including your involvement in crafting the laws exempting such contracts from state bid laws.

Folks, “follow the money.”  More on this in future columns and on my website (http://placeforum.org/blog).

#     #    #

Comments Off

Note: Events for the rest of the week will be emailed later today.

MONDAY, DEC. 7, 2009 — Meetings

MONDAY, DEC. 7, noon- AUBURN PLANNING COMMISSION PACKET MEETING (AGENDA DISCUSSION)
Held in the conference room, Development Services Bldg, 171 N. Ross St. Open to all.
Agenda & full packet: www.auburnalabama.org/pc/agenda.asp
Agenda includes:
CITIZENS’ COMMUNICATION
OLD BUSINESS
1. West Pace Village PDD   PUBLIC HEARING  PL-2009-00660
Applicant: J.A. Conner, Jr. for West Pace, LLC and Lynch Properties, Inc.
General Location: North of Shell Toomer Parkway and east of South College Street
Zoning District: Comprehensive Development District (CDD)
Action Requested: Recommendation to City Council to apply the Planned Development District
(PDD) designation to approximately 165.55 acres
2. West Pace Village  PUBLIC HEARING  PL-2009-00670
Applicant: J.A. Conner, Jr. for West Pace, LLC and Lynch Properties, Inc.
General Location: North of Shell Toomer Parkway and east of South College Street
Zoning District: Planned Development District (PDD) [pending approval of Case PL-2009- 00660] with Comprehensive Development District (CDD) underlying
Action Requested: Recommendation to City Council for conditional use approval for outdoor recreational uses, including a park and bicycle/jogging/hiking paths; for institutional uses, including private libraries and museums, and aquariums; for indoor recreational uses, including a skating rink (roller & ice), bowling alleys, billiards, gymnasium, and indoor athletic facilities; for office uses; for commercial and entertainment uses, including an auto accessory store, barbershop/beauty shop, building material sales, clothing stores, copy shop, electronics repair, florists, garden supply, general merchandise stores, health & personal care stores, hotel/motel/condotel, office supplies/stationary/gift stores, package store, pet/pet supply store, restaurant, restaurant-lounge, restaurant- pub, specialty food stores, sporting goods/hobby/book/music stores, tavern, lounge, banks, dry cleaners, grocery stores,professional studios, and  theaters/indoor auditoriums; for road service uses, including ATM’s, auto dealerships, auto repair/paint/body work, convenience/small grocery stores, gasoline/service stations, bank with drive-thru, and fast food restaurant; for a commercial recreational use, specifically an amphitheater; for agricultural support uses, including farm equipment sales/rental/leasing, farm equipment sales/repair, and farm produce sales (permanent); for a nursery use, specifically retail; for a commercial support use, specifically a wholesale distributor; and for a regional shopping center use
CONSENT AGENDA
3. Town Creek, Plat No. 1 PL-2009-00832
Applicant: Jack Johnson for Dr. John Cottier
General Location: Off of Brookside Drive, southeast of the Jule Collins Smith Art Museum and west of Town Creek Park
Zoning District: Development District Housing (DDH)
Action Requested: Final plat approval for a 28-lot conventional residential subdivision
NEW BUSINESS
4. Lundy Chase, Phase III   PUBLIC HEARING PL-2009-00833
Applicant: Blake Rice for Crosswoods Development, LLC
General Location: South of Lundy Chase Subdivision, Phase One and north of Willow Creek Subdivision
Zoning District: Neighborhood Conservation (NC-20)
Action Requested: Preliminary plat approval for a 38-lot conventional residential subdivision
5. C B & T Bank East Alabama  PUBLIC HEARING PL-2009-00817
Applicant: Ronnie Wilson for C B & T Bank East Alabama
General Location: 2579 East University Drive
Zoning District: Comprehensive Development District (CDD)
Action Requested: Recommendation to City Council for conditional use approval for a road service use (bank with drive-through)
6. Hiett Automotive   PUBLIC HEARING PL-2009-00834
Applicant: Tony Hiett for Cynthia Thrash
General Location: 960 Opelika Road
Zoning District: Commercial Conservation (CC)
Action Requested: Recommendation to City Council for conditional use approval for a road service use (automotive sales)
7. 300 N. Donahue Drive    PUBLIC HEARING PL-2009-00802
Applicant: Lindburgh Jackson for Kathy Matthews and LaKeshi Robinson
General Location: 300 North Donahue Drive (adjacent to the CSX Railroad & north of Glenn Avenue)
Zoning District: Redevelopment District (RDD)
Action Requested: Recommendation to City Council for conditional use approval for a performance residential use (duplex)
8. Longleaf Crossing, Phase 5 Waiver  PUBLIC HEARING PL-2009-00844
Applicant: J.A. Conner, Jr., for Tiger Crossing
General Location: At the west end of Longleaf Drive at Cox Road
Zoning District: Planned Development District (PDD) with Comprehensive Development District (CDD) underlying
Action Requested: Waiver to the design speed on a collector street (Longleaf Drive) from 35 mph to 20 mph
OTHER BUSINESS
CHAIRMAN’S COMMUNICATION
STAFF COMMUNICATION
ADJOURNMENT

MONDAY, DEC. 7, 4:00 pm - AUBURN CEMETERIES ADVISORY BOARD
Held at the Dean Road Rec Center. Open to all.

MONDAY, DEC. 7, 7:00 PM — LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF EAST ALABAMA / MEETING & HOLIDAY GATHERING
Held at Piccolo, the jazz bar at the AU Hotel. All are welcome.
Catch up with your League friends by joining them near the fireplace in the new jazz bar at the Auburn University Hotel. The atmosphere will be cozy, the menu options are tasty, and the crowd will definitely be interesting. Invite a friend (or two) and join  a casual evening of holiday cheer, starting at 7.
Piccolo menu:   http://www.auhcc.com/dining/documents/MenuTemplateOpening.pdf

==========================

Thanks for your interest and support.

PLACE Forum
Email: placeforum@gmail.com
Web: http://placeforum.org/blog/
Dec. 7, 2009

Comments Off

Lisa Brouillette: Property de-annexation in Auburn raises eyebrows

Lisa Brouillette
Columnist / The Opelika-Auburn News — Published: November 24, 2009

Cities annex property to exert controls, define service areas and obtain revenues for water and sewer infrastructure.

A recent case did the reverse, though, relinquishing Auburn’s control over a property and raising questions of public interest.

Lee County District 1 Commissioner Mathan Holt and his wife Jill requested the Auburn city council remove their 40-plus acre property on Highway 14 from the city limits.

This seems to run contrary to Auburn’s aggressive annexation policy, which urges annexation to ensure city control over land use and development.

But the council agreed to shift the city’s boundary to exclude the Holts’ land, which includes residential and commercial enterprises. Only council members Sheila Eckman and Gene Dulaney voted no.

It’s seldom done, but a city may legally “reduce its corporate boundaries,” effectively de-annexing property.

It appears the Holt case is only the second “de-annexation” in Auburn.

The first was related to a lawsuit between the city and the property owners, involving the land ultimately de-annexed. And the de-annexation was at the council’s behest, not the property owners’.

Although not explicitly noted as the justification for the Holt de-annexation, the Holt property’s city sewer connection provoked much discussion and some dispute.

Confusion over agreements between the Holts and the city about connecting to the city sewer dates back several years.

However, currently only land within the city limits is allowed to be connected to and be serviced by the city sewer.

So to comply with regulations for city sewer service, only the annexed portion of the Holts could be connected. Also they’d have to pay costly sewer access fees, including for their large RV park.

Holt said he “never purposely violated the law and that there are things that have not been brought out that make his situation unique.”

Which leads one to wonder: What wasn’t brought out and why wasn’t it?

As shown in the council resolution, reduction of a city’s corporate boundary is to be for “the public health and public good of the City.”

Perhaps that other information to which Holt referred would have clarified the public good of de-annexing his property.

As it stands, the only evident benefit is to the Holts.

The city and citizens have lost tax revenue, land use and environmental control over a large property abutting the city limits.

The council plans to craft a policy to cover any future de-annexations. That’s a good idea they should implement right away.

Lisa Brouillette is a community activist, editor and writer. Contact her at placeforum@gmail.com or visit her Web site http://placeforum.org.

Comments Off

Lisa Brouillette: Hard to believe nobody knew store’s stock

First Published: October 16, 2009 in the Opelika-Auburn News

What a ruckus flared about that new business, Kalli’s Love Stuff, on South College Street in Auburn.

I’ll leave to others the question of whether or not the store’s adult novelties and vibrators violate state laws.

I find it difficult to believe no one knew what the store’s contents would be. But I find it equally difficult to believe the uproar over those contents.

Underlying the controversy, believe it or not, is our zoning ordinance.

If a new business conforms to certain general categories, its location is permitted automatically in certain zoning districts.

That means no additional scrutiny for compatibility with its surroundings, no public hearings, no conditional use approvals from the planning commission or city council.

Often this is a good thing, as it allows landlords flexibility in finding suitable locations for business tenants, with little delay.

However it also can allow rapid changes of use, which can be problematic or surprising, as seems to be the case with Kalli’s.

But this is hardly the first time such a change in business type has occurred.

Remember Hooters? Its location, which was in the same shopping center that now houses Kalli’s, originally was approved for an oil change business. Then the plans switched, showing it as an unnamed restaurant, which ultimately became Hooters.

Some might consider that bait-and-switch. Others probably just consider it good business. Either way, it’s allowed under our zoning ordinance.

* * *

Bobby Lowder’s connection with Auburn University popped up in the national news again recently, this time in Fortune Magazine.

Along with a summary of the company’s collapse, the Oct. 12 article on the former Colonial Bancgroup CEO detailed his relationship with Auburn University.

Lowder, a current member of the university’s board of trustees, also still chairs its finance committee.

Makes you wonder what financial advice he’s providing AU, and where it will lead, doesn’t it?

* * *

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution says it will no longer be endorsing political candidates. Instead it will provide “just the facts, ma’am” about those running for public office.

What a shame. What a waste of expertise and experience.

Reporters and editors know more than politicians’ public facades. They know the issues, the context, the background that gives meaning to political action or the lack thereof.

They know the stories that can’t be printed.

Facts are important and should fill the news pages. Editorial pages, however, should brim with informed opinion and, at election time, endorsements.

Lisa Brouillette is a community activist, editor, and writer. Contact her at placeforum@gmail.com or visit her Web site http://placeforum.org.

Comments Off

Column by Lisa Brouillette:

Come join civic discussions … except you

[First published in the Opelika-Auburn News, Friday, Sept. 18, 2009]

At this week’s Auburn City Council meeting, Auburn resident Clara Clothiaux asked a half dozen or so questions of clarification about the proposed West Pace project and its tax district, which were up for vote that night.

The questions were posed clearly, concisely and politely, within the time allotted for citizen communications. They referred to the hundred-plus pages of complicated legal documents and complex details of this major project.

Councilmember Arthur Dowdell’s reaction was to pepper her with questions: Was she at the previous council meeting? Did she hear the West Pace presentation given at that meeting? Why didn’t she ask her questions then? Why was she asking these questions now?

That’s right. He didn’t answer her questions. Instead his remarks implied she didn’t have the right to ask questions about an important issue on the night council was scheduled to vote on it.

Their interaction was relatively brief. But it was long enough to show anyone present how they might be treated if they asked questions of council.

Fortunately Councilmember Dulaney stepped in and assisted Dr. Clothiaux in getting answers to her questions. Those answers, by the way, made the proposed project more understandable to the general public.

This wasn’t the first time a citizen has been challenged publicly by one of our elected officials for exercising the right to ask questions of them. And, sadly, it probably won’t be the last.

But it should be.

I’ve said this before, but clearly it bears repeating.

Anyone who discourages citizens from asking questions and engaging in civic discussion shouldn’t be in public office. It’s that simple.

Our city has made great strides in providing information and documents to its citizens via its website and the public library. This aids citizens in understanding their government and its actions.

And, thankfully, incidents like the one described above happen less frequently now than in the past. But even once is too often.

Let’s keep moving in the right direction. Let’s encourage citizens to air their opinions and ask their questions and, as important, let’s treat them respectfully when they do.

Oh, for the record, not that it should matter, Dr. Clothiaux had attended the previous meeting and reviewed the relevant documents.

And, in an ironic twist, at the same meeting Councilmember Dowdell twice called for new people to come forward and serve on city boards.

Is it possible he doesn’t see the connection between his behavior towards a citizen asking questions and people’s reluctance to come forward and join the civic discussion?

Lisa Brouillette is a community activist, editor, and writer. Contact her at placeforum@gmail.com .

Comments Off

JULY 17, 2009 COLUMN BY LISA BROUILLETTE
First published in the Opelika-Auburn News

WHY CAN’T WE DISAGREE WITHOUT SPEWING HATE?

“The Last Jewish Holocaust Survivor in Lee County Speaks.”  Oh, the thoughts and emotions that sentence evokes.

On the most basic level, it’s merely the topic of next Monday’s Osher Lifelong Learning Institute (OLLI) at Auburn program. (Event info: 334-844-3102, www.olliatauburn.org).

On a deeper level, though, that simple declarative sentence reminds us of the power of free speech and the sacrifices made for it.

Finally, it reminds us the rights of all people must be protected. Not just the rights of those similar to us, or those with whom we agree — the rights of all.

When differing views aren’t tolerated, dialogue becomes monologue. Communication becomes diatribe.  Worst of all, a healthy contrast of ideas becomes an unhealthy attack on individuals.

We’ve all been guilty of this at times.  Over the past few months, though, way too many of us have been guilty of it.

This showed in the recent disputes over the Confederate flag and the talk given by Matthis Chiroux, an Iraq War resister who grew up in Auburn.

Disturbingly harsh and venomous remarks, even threats, cropped up in conversations and the online comments to this paper’s news articles on those subjects.  Must we actually be reminded that free speech does not excuse hate speech?

The paper itself came under fire because it had the audacity to do its job and cover the news by reporting on those stories.

I’m fortunate. I was brought up in a culture of free speech and a free press.  But I don’t take for granted the American right to free expression - public or private, spoken or written.

That’s not surprising, as I’ve lived in places where expressing your views could be dangerous, even life-threatening.

I lived in the Philippines during Ferdinand Marcos’ regime.  In that time and place, whether local or foreign-born, you had to be careful what you said.

Similarly, the need for a free press was unmistakable after experiencing Indonesia’s repressive government censorship.  The impenetrable black ink rolled across great swaths of ‘inappropriate’ newspaper and magazine pages shocked me.

But that was years ago, an ocean away. Not now. Not in my country.

Here, now, free speech is protected by law. Whether it’s protected from intolerance, ignorance and just plain mean-spiritedness remains to be seen.

However we’ve overcome challenges to free speech before.  We’ve tried to address the practical ways free speech might be limited by class, race, lack of job security, etc.  We’ve learned that with free speech comes the responsibility to speak up for those whose voices aren’t being heard.

I’m hopeful we’ll come to our collective senses, that we’ll remember how much we can learn from listening to those who disagree with us.

In the meantime, I remain, respectfully, ‘willing to agreeably disagree.’

Comments Off

Thank God for Alabama’s Jefferson County

June 19, 2009 column: Lisa Brouillette

First published in the Opelika-Auburn News

Instead of ‘Thank God for Mississippi,’ alluding to that state’s tendency to rank even lower than Alabama on many national scales, maybe we should say ‘Thank God for Jefferson County.’

In addition to JeffCo’s serious financial woes - loss of occupational tax, overwhelming sewer bond debt, possible bankruptcy, etc. - Birmingham recently topped the list nationally for health risk from industrial air toxics.  Even worse, those risks were disproportionately borne by the area’s minority and low-income residents.  (Justice in the Air, 2009.  For additional source details, see below.)

Another Alabama example of such economic and racial injustice is the proposal to dump loads of toxic TVA coal ash in rural Perry County’s landfill.  Barbara Evans, of the nonprofit environmental law firm WildLaw, wrote an excellent description of this situation.  She pointed to the heart of the problem: Alabama’s lack of adequate local government controls on landfills and other environmental hazards.

To quote Evans, “It’s Perry County today and your county tomorrow. Rural Alabamians feel like they are under attack. If it isn’t landfills, it’s rock quarries or corporate hog farms.” (Mont. Advertiser, June 16, 2009)

I’m sure that comment hits home, literally, for the determined environmentalists who worked so hard this past legislative session for local authority over quarry siting and permitting.  Efforts of such statewide groups as Conservation Alabama and local group Save Our Saugahatchee pushed this issue closer to passage than ever before, ready for success next year.

Alabama’s archaic state constitution is the problem: it concentrates power in the state legislature and limits local authority.  Constitutional reform legislation failed this year.

But ACCR - Alabama Citizens for Constitutional Reform  - this month showed just how such reform could be accomplished. Over 250 delegates from the 105 Alabama house districts participated in a mock constitutional convention.  Go to ACCR’s website - www.constitutionalreform.org - to see and comment on the delegates’ draft constitution.

You can also comment on an important new Lee County document - its first ever Lee County Master Plan. The plan will guide future government efforts in housing, transportation, planning, recreation, the natural environment, growth, and other quality-of-life issues. If properly drafted and implemented, the Master Plan could help Lee County avoid problems such as Jefferson County’s. For details and to comment, go to www.leeco.us/masterplan/.

Another local example of avoiding mistakes such as JeffCo’s is the Auburn Water Board’s recent difficult decision to increase water rates. That action will keep the utility financially viable and its bond rating high.

Want an entertaining way to support our local economy?  Head to Downtown Auburn tonight for SummerNight! 2009 - an evening of fun, food, music, and art.

#     #     #

References:

STATE OF THE AIR  - American Lung Association - www.stateoftheair.org/ — www.stateoftheair.org/2009/states/alabama/

American Lung Association Releases Annual State of the Air Report - Last month, the American Lung Association released their annual “State of the Air” report, ranking and grading 17 Alabama counties.  The report and rankings were based on the number of days from 2005 to 2007 in which air quality monitors recorded unhealthy air.  Below are some of the results:
* The Birmingham Metro area ranked 5th in the country for pollution from fine particle pollution, or soot in the air.
* Birmingham ranked 20th nationally in ozone pollution.
* Baldwin County received an A for having low particle pollution levels.
* Mobile, Escambia and Dekalb counties all received B’s for low particle pollution levels.
* In the state of Alabama, 12 of 16 counties where ozone levels were checked received F’s for ozone pollution.
To view the entire report, visit the American Lung Association website at http://www.stateoftheair.org. If you want to personally take action and reduce air pollution visit http://www.alabamacleanair.org.

JUSTICE IN THE AIR http://college.usc.edu/geography/ESPE/documents/justice_in_the_air_web.pdf

RE: AIR QUALITY REPORTS FOR ALABAMA
The American Lung Association’s annual State of the Air report (http://www.stateoftheair.org/) found that the Birmingham metro area has surged from 18th to the fifth worst in the country for particle pollution in the air. Birmingham was also listed at 20th in the country for ozone pollution.
Mobile and Baldwin counties received mixed grades from the report, with high scores on particle pollution but the lowest scores on ozone pollution.
A second report entitled Justice in the Air was released at the same time as the State of the Air report. It focused on air pollution in minority and impoverished communities. (http://college.usc.edu/geography/ESPE/documents/justice_air_web.pdf)
Both reports again brought into focus the issue of cumulative risk of air pollution on sensitive populations in Alabama. The Conservation Alabama Foundation continues to work with ADEM to find solutions to high levels toxic air pollution in some Alabama communities.

ALABAMA VOICES: LAX LAWS MAKE STATE DUMPING GROUND - by Barbara Evans, WildLaw (www.wildlaw.org) - June 16, 2009 http://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/article/20090616/OPINION0101/906160304/Alabama-Voices–Lax-laws-make-state-dumping-ground

LEE COUNTY MASTER PLAN - www.leeco.us/masterplan/

Comments Off

Deja vu happening all over again in Auburn

Column by Lisa Brouillette

First Published in the Opelika-Auburn News, May 15, 2009

Summer’s creeping up again and it’s not only the rising heat that’s provoking deja vu. It’s also annual rising anger at our do-little Alabama Legislature.

Recent headlines decry legislative double dipping, clamor for relief from the grocery tax, beg for constitutional and ethics reform. Sound familiar?
It should, because last May’s headlines said the same thing.

Our legislators must have collective amnesia.

They can’t seem to remember their promise to clean up PAC-to-PAC transfers and give us real ethics reform. Shame on them. And shame on us for tolerating their inaction.

Please, folks, mark your election-year calendars now with one simple note: Vote Them Out!

We have the power. We just have to use it.

Speaking of using our collective power, Auburn citizens have the chance this summer to do just that. Not with an election vote, but with participation in Auburn 2030.

Times change and our city’s vision for itself must keep pace.

Hence, Auburn 2030, an update of Auburn 2020, the city’s basic blueprint for it’s future.

This isn’t a nut and bolts regulatory document. It’s a more general “this is where we are, where we want to go, what we want to be” guide. Specific details of how to reach the city’s goals will be filled in by other documents, such as CompPlan 2030, a land use planning document also under review this summer.

Like its predecessors, Auburn 2030 is supposed to draw ideas from diverse segments of the city’s residents. So, step up! Call City Hall, ask to join Auburn 2030, help design Auburn’s future.

Back to deja vu, a quick glance at pending lawsuits brings on a tsunami size dose.

The lawsuit over connecting Scott Land’s commercial project via the residential Indian Hills neighborhood is still working its way through the courts.

Similarly, water service rights for both West Pace, Donahue Ridge and other projects remain tangled in the Auburn Water Board’s legal wrangling with Loachapoka’s Water Authority. And lest we forget, the proposed tax district for West Pace still thrashes in legal limbo.

Other legal issues which still echo from last year: individual and developer bankruptcies and foreclosures, with the added twist of tax delinquencies.

Although one could argue Auburn hasn’t been hit as hard as other parts of the state, we’ve still been hit.

Perhaps it’s not a killing body blow, but it’s certainly a solid jab to the gut.

But thankfully summer also heralds another type of deja vu, a delicious one - the first taste of sun ripened fruits and vegetables at local farm stands and the farmers’ market (which opens May 21). So buy your fill.

It’s a local economic stimulus with no downside.

Lisa Brouillette is a community activist, editor, and writer. Contact her at placeforum@gmail.com

Comments Off

Column by Lisa Brouillette  — April 17, 2009

(first published in the Opelika-Auburn News,  Friday, April 17, 2009)

Why do we continue to re-elect these people?

Let’s just make it official.  We are at the mercy of our state legislators.  If that doesn’t scare you, it’s hard to imagine what could.

As someone noted to me recently, our legislature still operates on the plantation mentality - “Keep ‘em poor and dumb.”

Not only have we ostensibly accepted that notion, we seem to have voluntarily added the word “quiet.”

But upon occasion we citizens of Alabama speak up. We explain and complain. Sometimes we even beg, trying desperately to make ourselves heard, to improve our state.

Mostly, though, like well-behaved girls and boys, we shrug and sigh, accept the status quo, cede our power to the ‘professionals’, go about our daily business. We tsk-tsk about this politician and that, then blindly re-elect the sorry so-and-sos.

Face it. We’ve become willing victims of our legislators’ pitiful, inexcusable, infuriating inaction.  On top of that, we appear unable to force passage of their few deserving, well-crafted bills.

There’s no shortage of sad examples.

To date, Rep. John Knight’s bill to rid Alabama of its regressive grocery tax has failed to pass. Nor has any adequate substitute.

Is this truly the will of the majority of Alabamians?  If so, why don’t we simply take turns slapping the less fortunate upside the head, chastising them for not pulling themselves up by their (nonexistent) bootstraps.

Then, of course, there’s our state’s perennial black eye — weak, ineffective ethics laws coupled with a legislature-dependent, poorly-funded, toothless ethics commission.

Can somebody get stronger ethics bills passed? Let’s hope so. But nobody’s holding their breath over it.

Corruption here’s so easy; you’d think it was legal.  Wait, considering our weak laws, maybe it is!

Not yet driven into a migraine of despair?  Consider the current bill to protect our land and people from damage by quarries.  Oh, that’s right, that’s not passed that yet either.

The people of this state should be rising up in furnace-blasting fury, scorching our legislators’ future political hopes unless they change course, do what’s right.

Why do we continue to re-elect these people?  Do we think so little of ourselves, of our neighbors, that we figure this is all we deserve? Are we that stupid? That naïve? That weak? All of the above?

I’d sure hate to think so. Though, in bleak legislative years like this, it’s hard to argue the point. It’s even harder in election years.

Oh, and about Wednesday’s ‘tea parties’ protesting taxes? The problem is not that government intrudes in our lives, but that too often it does so to enrich the few at the expense of the many.

That is not only unacceptable, it’s un-American.

#     #     #

Comments Off

Of course, no bid contracts a concern

—— column by Lisa Brouillette
[This column was first published in the Opelika-Auburn News - March 21, 2009; alternate title - Of course, no bid contracts attract attention.]

- - - - - - - -

It shouldn’t be a surprise, or considered an affront, that Rep. Mike Hubbard’s no-bid contracts with Auburn University repeatedly come under scrutiny.

Most reasonable people would have questions about no-bid state university contracts awarded to a state legislator or his company. More questions arise when that legislator helps create the law which allows such contracts to escape the bidding process.

Coincidentally, this is an apt time to ponder Hubbard’s contracts. People across the country are celebrating “Sunshine Week,” which focuses on a basic tenet of our democracy - transparency and openness in government.

In practical terms, that means the public must have access to its government’s business: meetings, decisions, influences, budgets, documents, contracts, officials’ finances, archives, etc.

Often overlooked is that transparency serves to build trust in government and public officials. It’s necessary to ensure accountability and to uncover abuses of power, bad decisions,and illegal actions.

And trust in public officials - or the lack thereof - is what underlies the questions about Hubbard’s contracts.

Consider this sobering statistic: In exit polls during the 2006 Congressional elections, “more than 40% of voters indicated that corruption and scandals in government were very important in their voting decisions.” (SecrecyReportCard08, http://www.OpenTheGovernment.org)

The same source indicates that in 2007, $114.2 billion in federal contracts were awarded without any competitive bidding and that from 2000 to 2007, the percent of federal contract dollars awarded under full and open competition fell by almost 25percent.

What amount of state and local government contracts similarly are awarded without a full competitive bidding process? How many are awarded to public officials, their relatives or companies?

Might such contracts be, or be perceived as, another form of the “double-dipping” Alabama citizens are so angry about?

Detailed information about contracts held by public officials and employees isn’t easily available. See for yourself: Alabama’s statement of economic interest (SEI) form, required of public officials, is online at http://ethics.alabama.gov/.

Also, for a copy of a public official’s submitted form, you must fill out a request, pay a fee and wait for the Ethics Commission staff to manually pull that file and photocopy it. After last year’s filing deadline, I was told the backlog of more than 40,000 mailed-in forms would take weeks to be sorted and accessible.

If our legislators would pass ethics reform, many such issues would be resolved, and public trust in government would increase.

An open government is our right, but ensuring it is our responsibility.

Hold your elected officials accountable. Force them to implement stronger ethics laws and ban PAC-to-PAC transfers. Oh, and to limit no-bid contracts.

Postscripts to the column : Also of note, and included on the OpenTheGovernment.org website, are President Obama’s recent executive orders re: transparency and open government.  And thanks to the reader who noticed I’d left out the link to http://www.sunshineweek.org/.

. = = = = = = = = =

Lisa Brouillette is a community activist, editor, and writer. Contact her at placeforum@gmail.com or visit her website http://placeforum.org

Comments Off

by Lisa Brouillette
[First published in the Opelika-Auburn News --  February 20, 2009]

Two of Auburn’s few remaining historic buildings — the Auburn Railroad Depot and the Ogletree-Wright-Ivey House — appear to be in danger of what is sadly but descriptively termed “demolition by neglect.” Both have strong historical, cultural and architectural significance.

The Ogletree-Wright-Ivey House sits at the intersection of Drake Avenue and North Gay Street and is “one of two surviving domestic structures owned and occupied by the original settlers of the village of Auburn.”

The Depot on Mitchum Avenue, in addition to its transportation role, “became a centerpiece of social, business and political culture. It has been the venue for many farewells, goodbyes, invasions, rivalries and celebrations.”

Recently both have been nominated for the Alabama Historical Commission’s “Places in Peril” designation. It is given to historically and/or architecturally significant structures that are in danger of demolition, either by intention or neglect. Such recognition could spur protection and preservation of these important landmarks in our cultural landscape.

Thanks are due to those who researched and nominated these structures. They include local resident and Alabama Historical Commission member Dr. Ralph Draughon Jr., the Auburn Historic Preservation Commission and Auburn Assistant Planning Director Carl Morgan. The Auburn Heritage Association and the Auburn Preservation League also lent their support.

Auburn’s history is still unfolding, heralded in the last few decades by expansion and development.

Unfortunately these factors have hastened the demise of many historic buildings, pressured our neighborhoods, substantially changed our area’s physical landscape, reduced our forestland cover, and loaded our streams with sediment.

The result is an informed public concern about the quality of our city’s growth and development.

A current focus of that concern is West Pace Village on Shell Toomer Parkway. Many regard it with skepticism and concern. I’m one of them.

Auburn City Council members’ recent comments about this project also show clear concerns and a consensus: no financial help from taxpayer dollars unless the project meets high standards secured by enforceable, legally binding agreements.

Further, they say there’ll be no such agreement until the developer presents sufficiently detailed marketing and development plans.

That’s a wise position and one likely to meet with taxpayer agreement.

So far, though, as shown by his actions, it has not met with the developer’s agreement.

His property still isn’t annexed into the city. The requested plans haven’t been presented. The proposed tax district and tax-sharing agreement have expired.

The developer could resolve this and raise his credibility with three simple actions.

Annex into the city. Willingly follow its regulations. Be a good neighbor to adjacent landowners.

We’re waiting, Mr. Developer. The next move is yours.

Lisa Brouillette is a community activist, editor, and writer. Contact her at placeforum@gmail.com or visit her website http://placeforum.org

Comments Off

Auburn faces same issues as last year

Many local issues for 2009 are hold-overs from 2008.

Auburn is still grappling with the West Pace project, a proposed sewer rate increase and the public’s concerns about crime rates. These items may be on next Tuesday’s council agenda.

Lee County is still working on its first-ever comprehensive plan, and will hold town hall meetings in March to gather public comments about that plan.

The overarching hold-over issue, though, is the economy. And opinions about the future of our local economy differ widely.

I’ve heard claims that Auburn and Lee County have a rosy future, especially when compared to the rest of the state, the region, the country. Many who espouse this view are local business owners, politicians, represent business associations, or are involved in local economic development.

They note new businesses have opened and other openings are scheduled in the near future, especially with the expected phase-in of BRAC. They argue that the local real estate market is in good shape. Further, they say many local builders are still making a good living.

One can’t help but wonder, though, whether their analyses are colored by fear that admitting anything negative about the economy would be self-reinforcing, would make the situation worse.

As you’d expect, not everyone agrees with the ‘all is well’ view. Many see a bleaker economic picture.

Interestingly, many with an ‘all-is-not-well’ view also are local business owners; some even are involved in local development. Also included are those who often first feel the brunt of an economic downturn – sub-contractors, manual laborers, part-time workers, students, those on fixed incomes or with few family resources.

As evidence, this group points to the recent businesses that have closed, the jobs lost, the many empty commercial buildings, the vacant and unfinished local subdivisions, low interest rates paid on savings, the plans deferred or cancelled due to economic stresses. They note the severe cut in state education funding and its negative impact on our local economy.

They cite the drop in real estate sales prices, the longer time needed to sell a property, and the slow-down in local construction as both significant and worrying. The increase in number and frequency of local foreclosure proceedings, including those in upscale local subdivisions, also is considered a telling indicator.

Opinions may differ on the degree of severity of the situation, but these issues are real. Our business leaders and elected officials cannot simply chorus that ‘all is well.’ They must acknowledge and address the real problems that are emerging. And they must pay special attention to the more vulnerable among us in this time of change.

Comments Off

FORECLOSURES REALLY BEGINNING TO HIT HOME

The nation’s financial crisis is having local impact.

More than three dozen lots in the Cotswolds subdivision on Richland Road fell victim to foreclosure this month. The lots were owned by the Cotswolds developer’s construction company, which filed bankruptcy earlier this year, and by members of the Cotswolds developer’s other companies.

One of those companies had multiple foreclosures in Wimberly Station. Another local developer had residential foreclosures in Camden Ridge and a commercial lot foreclosure near the mall. Other foreclosures have hit across Lee County.

The Cotswolds situation is perhaps the most noticeable, because of the number of foreclosures in that one project. The project also is in the public eye as its other phases are moving forward.

In addition, the city of Auburn recently called the letters of credit (LOC) posted by the developer of The Cotswolds and the developer of Lundy Chase (also on Richland Road). Those LOC had been used as collateral to cover the city’s financing of the required expansion of Richland Road. (The city received payment in full.)

The Cotswolds development connects to another local issue: water supply. Simply put, the Cotswolds is inside Auburn’s city limits, but falls within the Loachapoka Water Authority’s (LWA) service territory.

Auburn and Loachapoka have been working together for some time to remedy such illogical situations. So far the solution has been an individual agreement covering each project. For example, Auburn would pay Loachapoka and receive the right to serve customers in a specific project.

A more comprehensive solution is in the works wherein Auburn would purchase the right to serve all customers in the portion of LWA’s territory that falls in or near Auburn’s central city limits.

On a related note, the City of Auburn and its Waterworks Board have been covering all bases when it comes to obtaining new sources of water, in case Auburn’s primary water source – Lake Ogletree and its watershed – isn’t sufficient to meet the city’s growing water needs. 

They’re conducting a long term water supply study, evaluating the dam at Lake Ogletree, and updating the current water treatment plant.

Also they are drilling a test well which later may be used for water production, talking with Alabama Power about getting water from the Tallapoosa River, and investigating the quarry at Chewacla as a future water source.

Additionally, Auburn increased the amount of water it contracts to purchase from Opelika. In recent years Auburn has purchased about a third of its water from Opelika.

Also expanding is the city’s need for wastewater treatment and sewers. To handle those costs, sewer rates may rise. For details, see www.auburnalabama.org. 

[http://www.auburnalabama.org/announce/SewerRateWorkshopPresentation.pdf]

Comments Off

LOCAL DREAMS IMPROVE OUR WORLD   — by Lisa Brouillette

First published in the Opelika-Auburn News; November 21, 2008

A long line of local community activists has left an inspirational legacy of legislation, ordinances, organizations and dreams. Yes, dreams. Most good things start with hopes and dreams.

People dreamed of healthy streams. The result? Local organizations Save Our Saugahatchee and Friends of Chewacla Creek. Thanks for those groups go to Wendy Seesock, Cliff Webber, Eric Reutebuch, Zack Sprayberry, Ron and Barbara Estridge, Mary Lou Smith and others.

People imagined publicly accessible local land, conserved for future generations. From those visions grew the Land Trust of East Alabama, the Auburn Greenspace Task Force and Auburn Greenspace Advisory Board. Kudos to Susie Thomas, Roberta Jackel, Jim Hansen, Cheryl Gladden, Gail Solomon, Joe Turnham and their colleagues for their hard work creating these groups.

Louise Kreher envisioned a place where kids could explore nature and learn the value of wildlife. Thanks to her, the Forest Ecology Preserve was born and placed into the capable hands of Margaret Holler and Karni Perez.

Yet others, to fulfill dreams of better government, tackled elected or appointed office. Often they became the eloquent minority: dissenting from the status quo, urging new priorities, new directions.

For their leadership a tip of our collective civic hats should go to David Cicci, Carolyn Carr, Cheryl Cobb, Fenny Dane, Sheila Eckman, Robert Gastaldo, Cheryl Gladden, the late Mary Fortenberry, Roberta Jackel, Gail Langley, Charles Neely, Charlotte Ward and Josie and Bill Walsh, to name just a few.

And let’s not forget those in the local League of Women Voters chapter. How can one even begin to grasp the thoughtful community leadership provided over the years by such League members Ruth Wright, Anne Amacher, Ginnie Bennett, Charlotte Ward, and Sandy Robinson?

What do these people have in common? Many were first propelled into the civic arena by issues critical to their neighborhoods. There are multiple strong neighborhood organizations in our area, many of whose members involve themselves in the broader community.

Think of Keith Campagna and Teresa Vest from the Shell Toomer Parkway area; Art Sullivan from the Cary Woods Neighborhood Watch; Paul Mitchell from Camden Ridge; Evie Ratner, Robin Jaffe, Shannon Hankes, Alice Buchanan and their neighbors in Forest Park Circle; leaders from Indian Hills, Woodland Park, Richland Road. Consider Mike Golden, who for five years led the Willow Creek Neighborhood Association.

I’ve named a handful of local pioneers and leaders, but I’ve left out 10 times more. Together they more than prove Margaret Mead’s comment that we should “never doubt that a small, group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world.”

Lisa Brouillette is a community activist, editor, and writer. Contact her at placeforum@gmail.com or visit her website http://placeforum.org

Comments Off

Missing campaign signs an issue

column By Lisa Brouillette
First published October 17, 2008 in the Opelika-Auburn News.

Has an Obama-Biden campaign sign been stolen from your yard? Dozens of local signs have been snatched —including ours, which was taken along with others on our street at 4:15 Thursday afternoon by someone driving a silver SUV.

This week the Democratic and Republication campaign headquarters, and the police, received reports of multiple thefts. In some cases a single street was hit. In others, the thieves took signs from a multi-block grid of adjacent streets. The number of signs stolen and the different neighborhoods affected paints this criminal activity as not merely a prank, but a coordinated effort.

What must be acknowledged are the more serious aspects of these thefts: their overt racism (Obama signs taken, but not Segall or other signs in the same yards) and their attempt to censor free speech.

Speaking of criminal activities, recent articles in this paper noted increases in burglaries and other crimes, citing the deteriorating economy and drug abuse as underlying reasons. Equally important is our burgeoning population.

Auburn’s previous city manager, David Watkins, designed a plan to address this population growth by strengthening our police and fire departments. The number of full-time police officers was to increase, in line with other similarly sized college towns. Part-time, student firefighter positions were to be replaced with ones for full-time career firefighters.

A particularly good aspect of the plan specified that budget monies be set aside exclusively for equipment replacement. Basically, this earmarked funds to ensure consistent and protected funding for the equipment.

That equipment reserve plan, though approved by the city council in office at the time, was never implemented. The following administration set aside the idea, noting the limits such earmarking places on budgetary flexibility.

However, specific earmarks can protect vital services’ funding from being raided for other purposes. The city council can amend the budget and adjust allocations at their discretion.
Non-earmarked monies are more easily moved from one budget line to cover shortfalls in another.

Such shifting of funds is particularly likely when the economy is weak and budgets are tight, as is the case now. In light of this, perhaps the use of earmarks should be reconsidered.
We must make sure funding keeps pace with our needs for expanded fire and police protection, no matter the economic climate.

Speaking of local growth, particularly as regards infrastructure, it has slowed but not stopped. An example is the recent approval of $2 million-plus in city bonds earmarked to fund work on the Samford Avenue. Extension. As noted in my Jan. 19, 2007 column, that project benefits a number of landowners with whom Mayor Bill Ham has business partnerships. Interestingly, the project costs have substantially increased from original estimates.

Lisa Brouillette is a community activist, editor, and writer. Contact her at placeforum@gmail.com or visit her Web site http://placeforum.org.

Comments Off

Voice your concerns about quarry

COLUMN BY Lisa Brouillette
[first published in the Opelika-Auburn News: Friday, September 19, 2008]

Just when you thought it was safe to go back into the watershed — Martin Marietta is requesting an ADEM permit for yet another quarry in Loachapoka. Yes, another quarry, near to the existing one, dumping into a tributary of Saugahatchee Creek.

Concerned about the negative impacts of this proposed quarry? Request an ADEM public hearing on the air and water quality issues involved. Ask your local and state officials to do the same.

Send your requests before Oct. 2. Contact info and other details are online at http://www.adem.state.al.us/PublicNotice/Sept08/npdes/9martin.pdf and http://placeforum.org.

* * *

The Auburn city council has twice postponed its decision on whether to annex part of Tom Hayley’s residential Donahue Ridge subdivision. Council members cited concerns that the bulk of the project wasn’t included in the annexation request.

That is important because land not annexed remains in the county’s jurisdiction and isn’t subject to Auburn’s zoning and use regulations. Relatively unregulated commercial development could occur on the unannexed sections, adjacent to residential subdivisions that are within the city limits.

Hayley’s West Pace project also appears stalled. The new tax improvement district for the project was approved months ago, but hasn’t yet been created.

Perhaps one reason is the ongoing West Pace LLC lawsuit against the state. The suit is an attempt to force the state to grant the project three access points via state park land, on the access-restricted Shell Toomer Parkway.

A recent failed proposal to settle that lawsuit included a requirement for the city of Auburn to agree to take ownership of the Parkway. It’s unclear if the state had even agreed to the settlement terms, as no state signatures were on the document presented to the city. And the city didn’t approve the idea before the proposal’s deadline.

Considering the current economic slowdown, and the unresolved question of access to the property, one has to wonder about the fate of the West Pace project and the Lynch auto dealership locations there.

Also important, though, is the fate of Shell Toomer Parkway itself. It’s not just a road. It’s something special and unique in Auburn — a legally-designated parkway, a 300-foot wide section of Chewacla State Park, created to protect that area’s natural rural environment.

* * *

Concerned readers asked which subdivisions the city has identified as needing the sewer backflow devices I wrote about last month. Two recent examples are the Clevelands’ Mimms Trail project on Shell Toomer Parkway and Tom Hayley’s Donahue Ridge project on N. Donahue. For info on others, check with the city’s planning staff.

Lisa Brouillette is a community activist, editor, and writer. Contact her at placeforum@gmail.com or visit her website http://placeforum.org.

Comments Off

Politics plays part in planning 

   by Lisa Brouillette

   [First published in the Opelika-Auburn News, Friday, August 15, 2008]

            A few months back, another columnist in this paper made the comment “there is no politics in planning.”  Recent appointments to the Auburn and Lee County planning commissions alone show the reverse is true – the planning process is full of politics.

            Look at the Lee County planning commission nominees.  Most have direct, vested interests in development; some have political ties.  One nominee, for example, is not only a practicing local real estate broker, but also is the exclusive agent for an RV development owned by one of the Lee County commissioner members.   No politics? Do you believe that?

Auburn’s planning commission appointments are equally telling.  Development and political interests abound, as do potential conflicts of interest.  

Under Auburn’s regulations, although the entire city council votes on planning commission appointments, it is the mayor who chooses the nominee. Recently the mayor chose not to nominate an experienced planning commissioner for a second term – although such reappointment generally is a given, especially due to the time needed to master complex planning issues.  Not-so-incidentally, development interests often opposed the strong environmental and “stick to the rules” stance of that commissioner.   

Interestingly, some were told that the commissioner wasn’t reappointed so that a racial minority representative could be appointed instead. Clearly, diversity is important. However, even if that were the motivation, the mayor could have appointed such a minority representative at any time in his many years in office. He directly appoints one planning commission member as his representative and can change that appointment whenever he wants. But he didn’t choose to do so. Instead he chose this course.  

No politics in planning?  No such luck.

▄▄

When you buy a home connected to a sewer, you expect what goes into the sewer to flow in only one direction — away from your house. So it might surprise you that the city of Auburn is approving plans for homes which have ‘potential sewer backflow issues.’ 

In other words, what should flow out might instead flow in.

The city isn’t ignoring these potential backflow problems. However neither is it taking any responsibility for damage caused by them, nor affording future homeowners much protection against them. 

The city’s approval simply requires the plat for each potential problem lot note that: (1) a potential backflow problem exists, (2) that a special device should be installed to avoid the problem, and (3) the city is not responsible for the installation, maintenance or proper use of any such device.

What if you don’t read those fine print notes on the plat before you buy a property, didn’t expect such a thing to be allowed?  Tough luck.

This week’s Auburn planning commission agenda shows two new subdivisions with lots needing such stipulations: the Cleveland’s Mimms Trail project on Shell Toomer, and Tom Hayley’s Donahue Ridge development.  As the saying goes—Buyers, beware.  

 Issues such as this underscore the importance of planning commission appointments.

Comments Off

Lisa Brouillette: It’s summertime, and the money is easy

Yep, it’s summertime, and this year that means Opelika city elections, so you can bet cash is flowing. Campaign contributions, campaign expenses: these can add up to big money. One campaign consultant already has been paid at least $8,000, and many such expenses don’t even become known until the final required reporting after the elections.

Especially interesting to me is the number of campaign contributors from banking, construction, land development, business, etc. Clearly these “growth machine” movers and shakers have financial reasons to help elect those friendly to them and who will protect their vested interests.

It’s your tax dollars these candidates will be spending once elected. Shouldn’t you find out whose dollars they’re spending to get elected?

As you may have noticed, this newspaper has devoted both news stories and online blog entries to campaign finance and the Opelika elections, showing who is giving money to whom, who is being paid for what. It’s great information and I’m looking forward to similar detailed coverage of Auburn’s next elections.

This added media focus on the money – and influence — in campaigns is a help to the average citizen. Even a cursory glance at this info can be illuminating.

But if you’d like to delve deeper, go to the Alabama Secretary of State Web site (http://www.sos.state.al.us/). There’s one section devoted to elections (click on Election Tools, then search) and another for all government records (click on Government Records, then Campaign Finance Records and/or Corporation Records).

Both sections have a wealth of info. One section shows details about each PAC registered in the state. The same PAC shenanigans that occur in Montgomery can happen at the local level too.

In addition, the probate judge’s office in the county courthouse houses campaign finance forms for local office candidates.

A hint: when looking at campaign finance forms and corporate records, look not just for business names, but also for PACs and individuals, and for variations of individuals’ names, such as initials.

In addition, an “individual” contribution often goes hand-in-hand with one from a related business, or you may find donations from important contributors’ relatives or business associates.

Yes, it can be like a jigsaw puzzle, with some pieces buried or obscured. Unfortunately it’s likely to remain that way until we get long-awaited campaign finance and ethics reform in Alabama.

But especially in local elections, you might have valuable information that could help fill in these election finance puzzles.

The media can’t know everyone or all the connections between various people and businesses. So take a minute, read the details of the money trail in local campaigns.

If you know of or see a pertinent connection not reported in the media, let folks know. Tell your friends, send a letter to the editor, contact one of the paper’s columnists or reporters.
Who financed a candidate’s campaign is not the only important information about him or her, but it’s certainly significant information.

Campaigns aren’t the only money-related issues ripe for public scrutiny this summer. It’s also municipal budget time. Auburn budget discussions will be on Monday, July 28 and Monday, Aug. 4, at 5:30 p.m., in the City Meeting Room, 122 Tichenor Avenue. The vote’s in August. (Info will be at http://www.auburnalabama.org/budget/.)

Lisa Brouillette is a community activist, editor, and writer. Contact her at placeforum@gmail.com or visit her Web site http://placeforum.org.

First published in the Opelika-Auburn News, Friday, July 18, 2008.

Comments Off

June 20, 2008 column by Lisa Brouillette: Local watershed SWaMP’ed with success

(first published in the Opelika-Auburn News)

Droughts in the southeast, floods in the heartland, EPA fines totaling over $4 million levied against four major national homebuilders for alleged Clean Water Act violations-recent news on water and water quality issues has been bleak.

Want some good news about our local watershed for contrast? Look at the work of SWaMP - the Saugahatchee Watershed Management Plan.

SWaMP’s goal is “to clean up Saugahatchee Creek and educate others of its value.” As shown on their new website (www.swamp.auburn.edu), SWaMP accomplishes this through a combination of research, education, and practical projects.

For example, SWaMP funded approximately 20% of the Saugahatchee Restoration Project located in Auburn, downstream of the North Donahue Bridge and north of Richland Road.  SWaMP collaborated on the project with the City of Auburn’s Water Resource Management Department (WRM), which planned and executed the restoration.

According to the SWaMP website, an estimated equivalent of 100 dump truck loads of soil had eroded from this site into Saugahatchee Creek and from there to Yates Lake and the Tallapoosa River. The erosion threatened a major sewer line that transports sewage from thousands of homes to an Auburn wastewater treatment plant.

However SWaMP doesn’t just fix existing problems, the group also works proactively to encourage better methods of construction, development and maintenance. Recently they presented a local workshop on low-impact development (LID). This method, proven successful in other areas, incorporates wetland-building and other environmentally friendly techniques.

Local developer Jay Conner, who attended the LID workshop, is already involved in a local LID project -  the Camden Ridge Constructed Wetland project.  This project will help reduce sediment and pollution runoff such as lawn chemicals and fertilizers, pet waste, motor oil, etc. In addition, it will serve as an educational opportunity for the whole community.

SWaMP is providing both funding and technical assistance for the Camden Ridge project. For more details, see the “What can a local wetland do for your subdivision?” link on the SWaMP homepage.

One of SWaMP’s strengths is that it’s comprised of a variety of stakeholders: state and local government officials, university personnel and departments, environmental groups, developers, industries, interested citizens, and others.

It’s particularly heartening to see developers involved with SWaMP.  Many LID methods -greenways, wetland building, erosion control, stream bank restoration, etc. -are best incorporated in the earliest stages of development. They provide aesthetic, environmental and economic benefits.

A SWaMP  project with Opelika Middle School couples stream restoration of Rocky Brook Creek in the municipal park with stream water quality testing by OMS students. At Trinity Christian School, SWaMP funded the installation of a rain harvesting project, in which two 1,700 gallon barrels collect rain from the school’s roof. That system is expected to supply the water for the school’s restrooms and outdoor garden plot.

Also in the planning stages are subdivision pollution-trapping structures, rural stream renovations, and additional school and community outreach projects.

SWaMP obtains its funds through a grant from ADEM and EPA Region 4, and is coordinated through the Auburn University Fisheries Department. AU staff who are instrumental in SWaMP’s success include director Dr. Bill Deutsch and co-coordinators Eric Reutebuch and Wendy Seesock. Opelika and Auburn city staff, including Matt Dunn of Auburn’s WRM department, also are closely involved with SWaMP projects.

#   #   #

Comments Off

Council should treat citizens with respect

[first published Friday, May 16, 2008 in the Opeika-Auburn News as Citizens deserve better treatment at meetings]

At the last few Auburn city council meetings I’ve watched certain elected officials treat citizens not only with ill-disguised boredom, but also with rude and even intimidating comments. They should know it’s not appreciated, nor has it gone unnoticed by the large crowds in attendance at those meetings.

Looking at the written minutes of those meetings, the dismissive and intimidating attitude of the remarks may not be apparent.  But pair the words with the tone of voice, facial expression and body language of the speaker. Add the timing of the comments and to whom they are aimed.  Then it sends the signal that certain citizen comments are not welcome, are barely tolerated. 

That is an inappropriate response to citizens voicing their opinions to their elected officials in a public forum.  Professional behavior and courtesy towards citizens are expected of those elected to public office.

Let me be very clear. I am not referring to any comments made towards me. I’m referring to disrespectful behavior aimed at other citizens, some old, some young, some new to the process, who’ve come to council with a passion or a problem and expect a fair, professional and respectful hearing.

So to those council persons of whom I speak—and you know who you are—stop taking personal offense at criticism or questions aimed at the city and be more respectful of citizens . . . or get off the council.

•    I’m amused by the recent stomping and thrashing, especially by Republicans such as Mike Hubbard, over the ‘double-dipping’ issue. What bad political theater.

There’s no sense in restricting certain classes of persons or professions from holding state office, even if that’s held to be constitutional, as it’s the political equivalent of putting lipstick on a pig.  Ethics violations, conflicts of interest and ‘trading in public office’ (as it’s legally termed) certainly are not limited to two-year college employees or other educators. 

What our state needs —but is unlikely to get— is true ethics reform. Give our state Ethics Commission subpoena power, adequate funding, and autonomy from the state legislature. Then let them deal with all types of unethical behavior by public officials, including one I find particularly noxious: no-bid contracts awarded to officials, their cronies and relatives. 

•           Summer’s nearly upon us, and if you’re like most folks, you’re looking forward to a slower pace and perhaps some time out of town.  If so, then you’ll miss some major city initiatives being implemented or reviewed in the near future.

Next Tuesday the planning commission’s work session will address the topic of traffic studies. Hey, that’s not as dry as it sounds — traffic studies are often used to determine where the traffic from new development is directed, whether or not it goes into existing neighborhoods.

In June, the city’s Integrated Growth Model will be presented. The Auburn city budget will be considered in July & voted on in August.

Water issues are also on the agenda. Being reviewed over summer are a stability study of Lake Ogletree dam, an ‘inundation study’ (i.e., where would the water go if the dam failed), negotiations on the water supply master plan, and repairs and evaluation of the city’s sole water treatment plant.

#   #    #

Comments Off

 APRIL 18, 2008  Column by Lisa Brouillette

Let’s keep downtown Auburn vibrant / Citizen perceptions drive city decisions

I spent an uplifting hour at a meeting this week at city hall.  Yes, you read that right — an uplifting time at a meeting.  But it wasn’t just any city meeting; it was a North Auburn Housing Development Corporation meeting. 

That group’s efforts to provide low-to-moderate income housing in our community are commendable.  One only wishes they had more funds with which to work, more people involved in their efforts, and could build more homes each year.

               Also, while writing this column, I spent an afternoon in Taylor’s Bakery, one of Auburn’s great downtown businesses. From there I watched the large number of cars passing by on College Street, noted the crowds walking along the sidewalks.  The daytime foot traffic of students and business people shifted to include early evening throngs of parents and young kids, perhaps headed out to dinner.  

I thought about the challenges that confront our downtown, particularly the small local businesses. Downtown Auburn is still a lively, vital place. But as a city we’ll have to make an effort to keep it that way.

All around downtown I chatted with the local shoppers, college students, business owners and employees.

            Not surprisingly, considering recent events (Lauren Burk’s death, Wednesday’s stabbing at the Edge apartments), personal safety was a hot topic.  It seemed everyone had a tale to tell, and what I heard about burglaries and assaults – not to mention drugs and underage drinking –would startle you. 

Admittedly my ‘opportunity sample’ was limited, but the clear consensus is that better lighting and more police patrols are needed in Auburn, especially downtown.

            I’ve heard similar concerns about safety from others around Auburn, which is why I find the city’s citizen survey results on that topic so jarring.  (www.auburnalabama.org/survey)

To quote the survey’s summary, “Eighty-five percent (85%) of those surveyed were satisfied with the overall quality of police protection.” 

I checked another part of the survey results — the open-ended question “If you could change one thing about Auburn, what would it be?” Those responses are not included in the survey tabulations, are provided only as supplementary info. 

Interestingly, the “what would you change” answers ran closer to my anecdotal sampling than to the survey’s fixed-response results. 

Those open-ended responses also paint a different picture than the overall survey ratings of citizens’ attitudes toward growth in our area.  They show that issues of traffic, lack of historic preservation, sprawl, and rampant development are of great concern to Auburn’s citizens. 

Why care about this? These tabulations – the citizens’ perceptions — are used by city officials to justify their votes and budget decisions.

One last item about the city survey: keep in mind that the survey reports residents’ perceptions, which may or may not correlate with reality.      

On another topic, did you see the April 13 Birmingham News article about Jefferson County political scandals?  Certain companies with city and county contracts donated large sums to Birmingham Mayor Langford’s personally-controlled charities.            

Among those vendors were Volkert & Associates, which has been an Auburn consultant, and Frazer Lanier, which has been Auburn’s bond counsel and promoted the recent tax improvement district concept.   

I’m not suggesting that similar deals have been struck in Auburn, but these examples underscore the need for transparency in government.

#    #    #

   [first published in the Opelika-Auburn News; April 18, 2008]

Comments Off

developer’s deal leaves questions unanswered

BY LISA BROUILLETTE
First published March 21, 2008 in the Opelika-Auburn News.

The City of Auburn is about to channel $20 million to Tom Hayley, the local developer best known for his commercial developments along South College Street.

This transfer of funds is proposed to be done by means of bonds issued through a new tax improvement district on Hayley’s West Pace, LLC, property.

City officials argue that providing this funding will ensure creation of a high-quality commercial development on par with The Summit in Birmingham or EastChase in Montgomery.

A developer’s track record is an important consideration in such projects. What in Mr. Hayley’s history would lead us to believe he is able to accomplish this? And what will be the repercussions if he doesn’t?

How will the $20 million debt be secured? What will be the term and rate of the bonds? What happens if there’s a default? What if the taxes derived from the district are less than projected?

What types of businesses will be allowed? What if a big-box retailer wants to locate there? What upscale retailers would want to locate in the same center as car dealerships, which are said to be part of the development plan?

What’s the city’s ultimate liability as regards the tax district and its bonds? Why is it estimated to cost $5 million to issue $15 million in bonds?

What chance is there that major upscale retailers will locate at the West Pace development, taking into consideration TigerTown, the other proposed retail developments in Opelika and the current economic slowdown?

Perhaps some answers will be provided at the next city council meeting’s presentation about the proposal. Unfortunately, there is no public hearing scheduled. Why? As was noted by city officials, none is legally required.

Even more disappointing, though, the council vote is said to be scheduled for that same meeting. That timing will limit both public information and public input.

Citizens may speak to the issue during the citizens’ communications segment of the meeting, but that gives them — and the council — almost no time to digest the information, questions or comments presented.

Twenty million dollars — twenty million. Think about it.

—–

Speaking of economic development projects, you may have noticed a recent Opelika-Auburn News column on that topic by Warren McCord. It should be noted that Dr. McCord is chair of Auburn’s Commercial Development Authority, the entity proposing the West Pace tax district deal.

—–

A positive postscript to the recent Shelton Park and Shelton Woods area residents’ concerns about a large apartment complex to be built adjacent to their homes: The neighbors organized, presented a good case to the city council and worked diligently with the developer and city officials.

Happily a compromise was reached which satisfied all — DeKalb Street won’t be connected at the neighborhood’s end, avoiding undue traffic in the neighborhood and reducing the developer’s infrastructure costs, and there will still be adequate access for the project.

Kudos to all concerned. Now let’s hope for a similar positive outcome for the residents of Indian Hills.

Lisa Brouillette is a community activist, editor and writer. Contact her at placeforum@gmail.com or visit her Web site http://placeforum.org.

Comments Off

By Lisa Brouillette — Friday, Feb. 15, 2008

First published in the Opelika-Auburn News,

Indian Hills residents fight for normalcy

It’s déjà-vu, all over again.

After being hit with the construction of Sam’s Club and other commercial parcels right next door, the Indian Hills neighborhood is again fighting to preserve its residential life. Now it’s threatened by Scott Land’s attempt to shove traffic from an Opelika commercial park onto the small street which bisects their neighborhood.

One option, currently on hold, is for Auburn to vacate (release to adjacent property owners) its right-of-way at the end of Indian Hills Road. That could effectively block any road connection to the adjacent commercial park. But first, Auburn officials are said to be looking for a voluntary compromise with Scott Land to reroute its access road.

Of course, as is no surprise, business and personal relationships color the situation. Scott Land owns multiple large tracts of land locally, and the Scott companies have held local government construction contracts.

Additionally, Scott Land is working with Auburn and AU to facilitate access for a new entrance road to the upgraded airport terminal.

For this, Scott Land is requesting a subdivision of one of its parcels adjacent to the airport and AU property. Confirming the deal’s importance to the city, Scott is being represented at this week’s Auburn planning commission meeting not by one of its own staff, as one would expect, but by Auburn’s city engineer.

Tangled relationships, indeed. No wonder regular citizens often feel at a disadvantage in such situations.

Indian Hills isn’t the only neighborhood fighting to preserve its residential nature and avoid traffic problems from nearby development. Shelton Park neighbors are facing similar issues.  Also, neighborhoods on the south side of Auburn will be affected by the proposed creation of a new tax district covering Tom Hayley’s West Pace commercial development.

The most recent version of that tax district provided little buffering for the adjacent residential neighborhoods or protection for the adjacent state park land (aka Shell Toomer Parkway).

Area residents and the Citizens for the Preservation of Shell Toomer Parkway (CPSTP; www.chewacla.net) have worked for years to protect the Parkway, which is part of Chewacla State Park, from encroachment by development and traffic. Now Hayley has filed suit against the state agency which controls the Parkway, because it denied his request to cut into the Parkway for access to his West Pace development.

Protection of our residential neighborhoods shouldn’t be too much to expect, and it shouldn’t rest on the shoulders of those who live there. Yet Auburn residents keep being forced to grapple with problems such as encroachment from commercial development, traffic routed through their quiet streets, not to mention frequent and incompatible rezoning of nearby property.

It’s a fact of growth, we’re told; the city is changing.

Duh. Of course it’s changing.  But we shouldn’t sacrifice our neighborhoods to that change.

Protecting our neighborhoods — in other words, protecting our daily quality of life, our homes and our citizens’ primary investments –  should be as important as facilitating development, should have as high a priority as capturing those elusive sales tax dollars.

For more information on these and other local issues, contact me or visit my website: http://placeforum.org.

                                                        #       #     #

Comments Off

PLANNING LOOPHOLE MUST BE CLOSED

by Lisa Brouillette

Have you ever heard of a relatively obscure planning process called administrative subdivision? Probably not, but it’s important that you do. In Auburn, it occurs when a parcel is divided into no more than four lots. Rather than going before the planning commission, and therefore the public, as is done with most subdivision of land, the administrative subdivision process, as its name indicates, is handled administratively, solely by planning department staff.

The process itself, and its original intent, may be benign. However its recent use is circumventing long-term planning and effectively keeping important land-use changes from public scrutiny. Simply put, it’s become a loophole for developers.

To understand this, one must realize that it’s not easy to keep track of the frequent subdivisions and rezonings in Auburn. One important mechanism for doing so is through the planning commission process – it’s consistent (monthly), publicly available (agenda is on the web, at the library, etc) and allows public review (meetings, public notices, etc).

However administrative subdivisions skip all those steps and go directly to staff review. The public and the planning commission are notified of the staff decisions, but not until well after the fact, when it’s too late to comment.

If these administrative subdivisions dealt only with uncomplicated parcel splitting resulting in little public impact, that’d be okay. For example, it’s fine if a family wants to split its land to give parcels to their children with no development planned or expected, other than family residential use. Similarly, if a developer needs to jiggle a few parcel lines to accommodate minor site difficulties, that wouldn’t present a problem.

But take just one recent example, the former Pace property, a huge parcel bordered by S. College and Shell Toomer Parkway. You may remember it as the land which has been under consideration for a new tax district.

Developer Tom Hayley divided that property through administrative subdivision, into large parcels that will be further subdivided and developed. Subdivision of that property has enormous public consequences; it’s at a major interstate interchange, borders a state parkway, and is clearly planned for intensive commercial development. It should be reviewed in a public process.

I want to be clear. Administrative subdivisions are permitted by Auburn’s zoning ordinance. The staff is doing nothing wrong processing them. But the process needs serious adjustment to avoid unintended consequences such as shown by the example above.

One solution is already at hand – the planning director has the discretion to require any subdivision to be submitted to and reviewed by the planning commission. Sometimes the director so chooses, sometimes not. There need to be clear and consistent standards applied to that decision, especially as regards commercial parcels near neighborhoods.

Another remedy would be to publish the administrative subdivision applications, similar to what is done with planning commission submittals. That way the information is publicly available ahead of decision making.

The planning commission currently is reviewing this process. The ideas presented here have been raised in their discussions, have in fact been raised many times over the years. This time we need not just talk, but action.

[This column was first published in the Opelika Auburn News on Friday, January 18, 2008.]

Comments Off

Lisa Brouillette: Amendment to council agenda staggering

[First published in the Opelika-Auburn News - Friday, December 21, 2007]

Have you followed the Grider brothers’ federal court lawsuit against the City of Auburn, Mayor Bill Ham and others?

It concerns the Griders’ local businesses, which are regulated by Auburn’s alcohol ordinance and related business licenses and fees.

Opelika attorney Davis Whittelsey is representing the Griders and their businesses, and has been to the last two Auburn city council meetings on their behalf.

It’s not just the lawsuit that interests me, it’s a comment of Whittelsey’s that was reported Wednesday in the Opelika-Auburn News. In reference to the ordinances passed at Tuesday’s council meeting, which were amended on-the-fly during the meeting, the paper reports, “Whittelsey contends the last-minute maneuver kept the public from commenting on the amendments.”

Whittelsey “contends?” That wasn’t a contention, it was a fact. When changes to a council item are made during a meeting, as they were to this item on Tuesday, the public is automatically precluded from comment. How can one comment on something one has never seen?

The final language of the amendments wasn’t in the council packet materials available before the meeting; a different version was included there. The amended version was posted online the morning after the meeting – i.e., the morning after the council voted on it.

Obviously council business must be conducted in a timely manner. But special meetings have been called before. Why not this time? Why couldn’t this item have been tabled for a week to allow time for public comment and council reflection? That would have given sufficient time for comment on this contentious issue, yet have finalized the vote prior to the Jan. 2 city license deadline.

These amended ordinances may not be of particular interest to you, may not affect you directly.

But this is hardly the first time the Auburn city council has pushed an item through without allowing the chance for public comment. And I’m afraid it won’t be the last. The next time it might concern an item about which you care deeply. (Remember when this happened with amendments to our erosion and sediment control ordinance? I do.)

This practice won’t change until our public officials’ attitudes change, until the opinions of citizens – all citizens – are welcomed in the process rather than mildly tolerated.

It’s the same sad situation with the lack of ethical clarity on the part of some public officials. The city has been asked multiple times to clarify the conflict of interest standards for elected and appointed officials.

The issue is raised, discussed briefly, and then … nothing. Perhaps mention is made of the state ethics laws, which are weak and vague, but nothing is done to set clear standards of behavior for those on city council or local boards, commissions and authorities.

Business and personal relationships are a fact of life, but they shouldn’t intrude on the handling of public business.

Have you seen instances where you thought a public official acted inappropriately?

Do you see possible conflicts of interest?

Do you have ideas on how to improve the situation?

Let me know.

Lisa Brouillette is a community activist, editor, and writer. Contact her at CommunityWatchForum@hotmail.com

Comments Off

SLICING THE LOCAL RETAIL PIE — by Lisa Brouillette

[first published in the Opelika-Auburn News, Nov. 16, 2007]

Slicing the local retail pie

It’s happened again. A local retail business has closed, blaming competition from major chains moving in on its turf.

Nobody wants to see a local business fail. Ironically, though, some local business owners have been loud supporters of the local government policies and incentives which helped lure their outsized competitors to town.

With the recruitment of each new retailer comes the familiar refrain — the city needs the sales tax dollars, this new business will create “X” number of jobs, their employees will spend “X” number of dollars in Auburn.

There’s some truth in that. But there is a deeper truth—that much of the “new” sales tax is simply the same old sales tax split among different businesses. And although new jobs are created, many of those are low-paying with few career options.

Further, the new retailer often recruits from personnel already trained by and working at existing local businesses. Employee training is costly. If your employees leave before you’ve recouped your investment in them, or demand higher wages to remain, that hurts your business.

So, how many small local businesses must go belly-up before we publicly recognize that the retail pie is only so big, that there are limited consumer dollars to be spent, a finite amount of sales tax to gain? People don’t suddenly have more money to spend just because a new business opens. Our paychecks—and our disposable income—don’t change.

Where are the policies and incentives to help existing local businesses? What solutions do our Chambers of Commerce offer? How can we keep our home-grown businesses healthy and profitable despite chain and mega-store competition?

Often people—including some local business owners—talk about “letting the market decide.” But “the market” isn’t predetermined; it’s affected by many factors, not the least of which is government intervention. Economic development incentives and special tax districts are clear proof of that.

Incidentally, I’ve heard anecdotal evidence that some of the large employers in our region are having difficulty finding sufficiently skilled employees. If that’s the case, unless we experience a major influx of trained workers, poaching of employees from existing local businesses could get even worse.

* * *

Arnold Umbach is retiring from his long-held personal services contract as Auburn’s city attorney. One wonders what criteria will be used to choose his successor. Will Auburn now hire a full-time attorney, instead of one like Umbach who also maintains a separate private legal practice?

Comments Off

COLUMN BY LISA BROUILLETTE
October 19, 2007

Auburn Water Board Evaluates Future Plans

In the midst of this southeastern drought, some startling facts have come to light. So far this year, Auburn is approximately 15 inches below its typical rainfall. In addition, water usage has been higher all this year than average use over the past five years. In fact, water usage has skyrocketed since May.

You might wonder how our watershed can adequately supply us. Well, our watershed isn’t supplying us, not on its own. For years Auburn has purchased a portion of its water from Opelika. And the strategy during this drought has been to limit the amount of water taken from Auburn’s main water source – Lake Ogletree – by purchasing more water from Opelika.

Already this year Auburn has purchased 721 million gallons from Opelika, more than twice what it purchased last year. The increase means about 15% more of Auburn’s water is being purchased rather than produced by our own watershed.

The water board is evaluating several long term opportunities for water resources, including Opelika, Alex City, and the lower Tallapoosa, as well as enhancing production of our own water supply. And it recently approved a ‘drought management plan’ for use in extreme situations. However, according to that plan, our current situation doesn’t call for severe measures. Also, the plan has no enforcement mechanism yet; that must come through the city council.

==============

Recently I was asked by a newcomer to describe the current local issues. That got me to musing that few issues ever get resolved. Perhaps we should call this “government by postponement.”

Auburn Integrated Growth Model – The AIGM, as it’s called, is supposed to help predict growth patterns in Auburn and help guide that development. Phase 1 of this project will be summarized at a joint city council and planning commission meeting next week. Yet we’ve committed tens of millions of dollars to various development projects and related infrastructure (i.e., roads, water lines, sewers) before doing the long-term planning and predictions that this growth model is supposed to accomplish.

Tree protection – How many years have Auburn citizens been clamoring for better protection for our trees, especially our urban trees? Yet we still have no significant or successful method in place for such protection. With each new development more trees, including magnificent older trees, are slashed, bulldozed and torn out of the ground.

Downtown design and redevelopment – First the Triennial Review of the zoning ordinance was to handle downtown issues. After that came the downtown parking study. Then it was the Urban Core Task Force, which only addressed a handful of design issues. Finally came the University Services-2 zoning district proposal, which currently is stalled. We still don’t have meaningful protection of downtown’s ‘sense of place’, nor a traffic/parking solution acceptable to a broad segment of the citizens, or even a sensible development policy that promotes appropriate redevelopment without favoring new development over established and small businesses.

City-wide traffic study – This project, begun in 2005 and supposed to have been completed shortly thereafter, isn’t yet finished. Information from this study has been requested many times—by citizens, planning commissioners, developers and others—in order to better understand or plan a proposed development. But, nope, sorry, it just ain’t done yet.

All these stalled or compromised efforts leave the city in a reactive position or, as some have termed it, “planning by the developers.” Auburn deserves better. Where is the city leadership on these issues?

(First published in the Opelika-Auburn News, Oct. 19, 2007.)

Comments Off

COLUMN BY LISA BROUILLETTE

Sept. 21, 2007 — published in Opelika-Auburn News

NEW TAX PROPOSAL UNDER THE RADAR

The public has spoken: “No more taxes, not even for schools.” You’d think that would be the end of the ‘new tax’ issue for our area, but it’s not, at least not in Auburn.

On this week’s city council agenda was an innocent-sounding resolution: a preliminary agreement between Auburn and local developer West Pace LLC –comprised of Tom Hayley, the Redd Family, et al– covering the former Pace property on Shell Toomer Parkway. But far from being innocent, this resolution is the first step in creation of a new “improvement district” which would allow special additional taxes to be levied in that district.

Interested? If you’re a taxpayer, you should be, because in addition to adding a new tax, the deal includes splitting some current taxes with the developer.

This would be the first such ‘improvement district’ in Auburn, though probably not the last. In fact, rumors are flying about plans for other similar districts.

Ironically, after all the public discussion of the school tax issue, there’s been very little public discussion about the tax consequences of these new districts. Of course, none was invited. Interestingly, even the recent training session given to Council members about improvement districts was closed to the public.

There was no council public hearing for this agreement, nor is there likely to be one when it returns to Council as part of a Development Agreement. Those agreements are created behind closed doors by city staff and come to Council as a done-deal, ready to be voted upon.

Any monies allocated by Council would funnel through the city’s Commercial Development Authority which, like its cousin the Industrial Development Board, typically meets in closed executive session. Also like the IDB, the CDA brings basically finalized agreements to Council for concurrence. Discussions and negotiations, as I said, occur in closed executive session.

The appalling lack of details given the public about this new mechanism for funding development makes it difficult to judge whether it’s a good strategy for the city to pursue. But if it means new taxes, the public certainly deserves to be told all about it.

A postscript to the failure of the school tax increase: Some, including elected officials, were surprised that the measure failed. But many others weren’t surprised at all and in fact expected the measure to fail.

The vote didn’t show a lack of concern for school funding, but rather evidenced a slowdown in the economy and – perhaps more important — a backlash against the mismanagement of growth in our area.

The public is not happy with the impacts of growth, not only on our schools, but also on other public infrastructure such as roads, fire protection and public safety. People don’t want to ante up more taxes, especially when they see multi-million dollar incentive deals given to developers.

Developers benefit immediately from such largesse. But the rest of us pay for years, via tax dollars for more public infrastructure, maintenance and services. Considering this, is it any wonder the school tax measure failed?

# # #

Comments Off

August 17, 2007 column by Lisa Brouillette

(first published in the Opelika-Auburn News)

NOT JUST NICKELS AND DIMES BEING SPENT

Lee County, Opelika and Auburn all are reviewing their budgets this month. And it’s not just nickels and dimes they’re spending, it’s big bucks. Our bucks. Let your representatives know how you do, and don’t, want your money spent.

Impacting Auburn’s bottom line this year is the agreement between the city and Auburn University to use the city’s cash reserves to finance construction at the AU Research Park. Of note also are the millions required for the new AU and city Tennis Center.

Recent approval of an additional $1.8 million for economic development incentives for the Bent Creek retail project brings the total to $8.8 million in Auburn taxpayer dollars, so far, for that one development site. Let’s hope it becomes the sales tax cash-cow city officials have said it will.

Speaking of taxes, with the public relations onslaught from the local school systems, I suppose most of you are aware of the August 28 school tax increase election. It was only last year Auburn officials approved $33 million in funding, supposedly to carry the city school system for the next decade or so. Considering this, some taxpayers are fed up with what they perceive as over-subsidizing schools to the benefit of local developers.

*  *  *  *  *

In a column after last year’s Auburn city election, I made a few suggestions to the newly elected city council. I’ll repeat them now in light of the continued behind-closed-doors business style of city officials.

• Be serious about open government.
• Encourage and then pay attention to citizens’ comments.
• Welcome questions from your council colleagues; bring full discussion of city issues into the public realm.

Citizens deserve no less than this from their government. Too often local officials use the pale defense of “what is legally required” to justify doing only the bare minimum. Folks, bring the discussions and documents public. Let the sun shine.

* * * * *

The response of Auburn’s City Manager to a question raised in my last column, published in this paper, failed to address the central issue: Why did the city of Auburn repeatedly misreport its fire insurance ratings to the public?

Mr. Duggan commented on public safety issues but failed to answer why fire insurance ratings were misreported.  My guess is that doing so would highlight the fact that Auburn’s sprawl outstripped its ability to provide adequate fire protection - an embarrassing admission for some.

* * * * *

There’s only so much room in a newspaper column. If you want to read more about the issues I cover, go to my website: www.placeforum.org.

#    #   #

Comments Off

UPDATE: PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS COLUMN IS FROM JULY 2007.  Auburn’s ISO fire ratings were reviewed at that time, and as of August 2008 have been recalculated by ISO to a 3/9 rating.

AUBURN’S PLAYING SHELL GAME WITH FIRE RATINGS

by Lisa Brouillette

[First published in the Opelika-Auburn News July 20, 2007]

It’s troubling that a possible change in Auburn’s ISO fire protection rating might lead to a rise in fire insurance rates. Just as troubling, however, is that for years the city routinely misrepresented its Insurance Service Office (ISO) ratings.

The city’s actual rating has been a split ISO class 2/9. Some parts of the city are rated Class 2. Others –such as those not within five miles of a fire station– have the next-to-worst rating of ISO Class 9.

But for years, dating back to when Doug Watson was city manager, the city inaccurately reported its ISO rating, showing the entire city as an excellent Class 2 rating. (1=best, 10=worst)

That misleading information was oft-repeated and documented in various city publications. For example, it’s shown in the community profile section of Auburn’s FY 2003-04 and FY 2005-06 budgets, and the Sept 2003 Open Line newsletter.

Then, belatedly, in the community profile section of the FY 2007-08 budget, without public discussion of its previous misrepresentation, the city finally listed its true ISO Class 2/9 split rating.

Interestingly, even those who read the draft FY 2007-08 budget presented to the City Council and to the public wouldn’t have seen this change. The draft budget didn’t include the community profile section with the changed rating.

That section was added later, quietly, in the budget version posted on the city website, just before the city was scheduled to receive results of its Fall 2006 ISO evaluation.

No wonder there is public distrust of information provided by the city.

That ISO evaluation, it should be noted, illustrated that the city’s fire protection services and infrastructure haven’t kept pace with its rapid development and aggressive annexation. In other words, it validated concerns that the city hasn’t adequately addressed the true costs of growth.

Even so, most of our city officials still tell us the costs of growth are being handled just fine, that we needn’t worry. And we’re expected to believe them?

The city has kept a relatively close hold on the actual ISO report and the city’s response to it, though city staff have presented their interpretation of the report. (Full disclosure: In late June I requested copies of the ISO report and the city’s response to it. I’ve received no reply yet, though some other media requests have been answered.)

The ISO report and the city’s response to it belong to the public — not to city officials. This information could have and should have been made readily available to the public and the media, on the city website and in the public library, as soon as it was received by the city.

Why wasn’t it? Why did the current city manager make that choice? Why were the existing ISO ratings misrepresented by the city for so many years?

What else has the city goverment failed to share with its citizens?

Comments Off

Weather and Local Issues Heating Up

by Lisa Brouillette   (first published in Opelika-Auburn News; May 18, 2007)

“Water, water everywhere, and every drop fit to drink” could be the motto of local water conservation groups such as Save Our Saugahatchee (SOS), Friends of Chewacla Creek & Uphapee Watershed (ChewUp), and the AU-based Alabama Water Watch.

These groups don’t just talk, they act. For example, they are involved in proactive statewide efforts to improve water policy and insure a safe, adequate water supply — see details at AlabamaWaterAgenda.com. Considering the scarce rainfall lately, we all undertand the importance of a good water supply.

Members of these groups educate schoolchildren, the general public and government officials on ways to protect our water resources. They also painstakingly gather data on the health and purity (or lack thereof) of our local creeks.

Problems unearthed by their locally-collected data prompted an in-depth ADEM study of specific creeks in Lee County. That study, which documented high levels of what we laypersons might term ‘yucky stuff’ in the water, wasn’t conclusive as to all the sources of the problem pollutants. However, a further ADEM study to locate those sources will be conducted later this year.

Members also helped obtain a recent grant to SWaMP – the Saugahatchee Watershed Management Plan, a partnership between Alabama Water Watch and local governments and agencies. This funding will allow SWaMP to put their good ideas into action locally to reduce erosion and pollution.

Anyone interested in keeping our water clean and clear would do well to join and support these effective local groups. If you aren’t a joining type, consider a donation.

Want an extra punch for your donation? Buy tickets to the SOS fundraising raffle, open through May 28. The enticing prizes – generously donated by the restaurants involved — are dinner for two at either Auburn City Limits or the Yellowhammer Restaurant. For tickets, contact SOS president Wendy Seesock at 334-821-2299.

* * * * * *

A recurring source of local friction is incursion into existing residential neighborhoods by new development, particularly commercial development. This is made worse by the lack of adequate, accurate notification of adjacent owners.

Richland Road is a case in point. Although one developer may remove plans to put retail/commercial smack in the middle of existing, large-lot rural homes, that incompatible use is still possible on another nearby parcel.

On the other side of town, the Sunset Drive neighborhood and other homeowners on Cox Road are again facing massive changes from traffic increases and possible commercial uses near their homes. This is due to planned infrastructure and road expansion, and the development that will encourage. Involved are the connection of Cox Road with the proposed Outer Loop and the West Tech Park interchange, and the extension of Longleaf Drive to Cox Road.

A corollary note: watch Auburn’s mid-biennium adjustment, which will tweak the city’s 2007-08 budget, for large adjustments to accommodate projects not previously budgeted, especially those related to infrastructure, growth and development.

One major positive change on the local horizon: Auburn University will soon install its new president – Jay Gouge. Here’s hoping Dr. Gouge will bring AU the changes and leadership it so desperately needs.

Comments Off

April 20, 2007 column by Lisa Brouillette

(first published in the Opelika-Auburn News, April 20, 2007)

Attorney General’s Opinion Is Just That

[alternate title -- Ethics & Opinions: Where is the Sunshine?]

Openness and transparency in local government clearly was on the mind of a number of Auburn citizens participating in the city’s annual survey.

No specific survey question related to that topic. But the ‘free response’ question, which asked what one thing you’d change about the city, elicited various pleas for more open and transparent city government.

In light of those citizen comments, I read with interest what Auburn council member Dick Phelan said about the Attorney General’s recent opinion re: the council’s possible violation of the Open Meetings Act.

An Attorney General’s opinion is merely that, an opinion, advisory only and without the weight of law. And as observers of Alabama law and politics know, such opinions have been successfully challenged in court.

Mr. Phelan, in reference to his and other council members’ joint action, which prompted the Opelika-Auburn News to seek the AG opinion, stated:  “I was never uncomfortable with what we did from the start.”

Well, that’s a problem. Many in Auburn and across the state were uncomfortable with those actions, as can be seen by reading about the issue in major state newspapers. (See links at http://groups.msn.com/placecoalition.)

That Mr. Phelan sees nothing wrong with the council members’ private deliberation of public business erodes confidence in the supposed ‘openness’ of the council.

*    *    *    *    *

What uproar there’s been over the so-called ‘double-dipping’ of state legislators who concurrently hold positions within the two-year college system.

In this legislative session, two bills - SB 395 and HB 667 - were introduced to “prohibit a state employee, public education employee, or a person who performs services under a personal or professional services contract with the state or certain public education institutions from holding an elected state office.”

But the discussion and these bills miss the point. If stronger ethical constraints and financial disclosure were required for public officials, where and how they earn their income would cease to be such a problem.

Look at the Statement of Financial Interest forms public officials are required to file annually with the State Ethics Commission (www.ethics.alalinc.net/index.cfm).  Those forms are remarkable mostly for what they don’t require to be disclosed.

For example, local and state politicians may have no-bid contracts with state institutions such as Auburn University. But how would the public know, or know whether such contracts represent a conflict of interest? On the current forms, professional or consulting services information needn’t be disclosed, except by gross annual income in broad categories, with no specifics.

Recently Alabama Ethics Commission Director Jim Sumner (March 30; www.aptv.org/FTR/) highlighted inadequacies in our current requirements for public officials.  The Ethics Commission’s work is also hindered because it has no subpoena power, limited funds and fewer employees than ten years ago.

Of course, why would legislators be interested in sufficiently funding an entity whose primary mission is to keep them honest?

#   #   #

Comments Off

March 16, 2007 column by Lisa Brouillette: Let the sun shine on our government

Let the sun shine on our government

Happy Sunshine Week to you!

What? You’ve not received any “Sunshine Week” greeting cards? No “Sunshine Week” bouquets decorated with miniature public documents have been delivered? No invites to “Open Records” parties? Well, don’t let that fool you. Sunshine Week’s commemoration of our open meetings & open records laws deserves all that and more.

Is our public access to information all that important? Oh yes. Without it the newspaper you’re reading right now wouldn’t be able to tell you what your public officials are doing, where and how your tax money is being spent, what crimes are being committed in your neighborhood. You wouldn’t be able to find out who donated to your local politician’s campaign, or who received a lucrative government contract and whether it was granted by an open bid or a hidden back-door deal.

Our open meetings and open records laws apply equally to everyone; they’re not just available to the media. Anyone can use our Sunshine Laws to access public documents and information, to gain entrance to public meetings.

Often our actions speak loudest at the local level, where we have the most chance to influence our government and its policies. And that’s where the average person most often uses our Sunshine Laws.

Next time you read a news account of the city council or walk into a school board meeting, think about what it would be like if the reporter’s words were blacked out, if the meeting room door was barred.

Then send someone a “Sunshine Week” card. Celebrate the laws that keep you from being locked out and in the dark.

* * * * *

Our creeks and wildlife don’t obey political boundaries or jurisdictions. They don’t see lines drawn on a map. Our approaches to protecting them need to take that into account.

Recently three local environmental groups – Save our Saugahatchee (SOS), Friends of Chewacla & Uphapee Creek (ChewUp) and Alabama Water Watch (AWW) – shared data and concerns about the condition of our local creeks.

In itself that’s not surprising, as these groups often combine forces to study and improve our local environment. (To see the results of the water quality monitoring being done by these groups, go to https://aww.auburn.edu/.)

What was surprising, and positive, is that they were joined by representatives from the city of Auburn’s Water Resources Management Dept, the Army Corps of Engineers, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the Alabama Dept of Environmental Management (ADEM). Also attending was Dr. Laurel Gardner, a longtime Auburn resident and veterinarian, who now serves as a member of the Alabama Environmental Management Commission, which oversees ADEM.

How refreshing to hear these folks share information and work towards identifying not just problems, but also solutions. Their efforts should be applauded and encouraged.

# # #

Comments Off

Feb.16, 2007 column by Lisa Brouillette : Column Sure Did Cause A Ruckus

(first published in the Opelika-Auburn News)

COLUMN SURE DID CAUSE A RUCKUS

What a ruckus is raised by stating facts.

In my previous column, I listed some corporations in which Auburn’s mayor and other local developers are partners. I also pointed out that at least four of the mayor’s partners are property owners who will benefit from the city’s $1M plus Samford Avenue Extension project.

Nobody has challenged my facts: the corporate info is public record and landowners clearly benefit when the city builds roads and utilities through their land, thereby opening it up for development.

However at the council meeting following my column, seven council members (Phelan, Dowdell, Worden, Beard, Kelley, Dulaney and Norman) presented a joint statement which said, among other things, “Ms. Brouillette, insinuates that friends of the Mayor benefit from a road extension to the detriment of the public.”

Not true. First, I didn’t insinuate. I said flat out that it was the public’s right to inquire about the mayor’s actions related to city agreements which benefit his business partners. I stand by that statement. Second, I didn’t refer to “friends of the mayor” but to business partners of the mayor.

Gee, fellas, did I strike a nerve?  It sure seems so, as evidenced by your joint public statement - which was created outside of a public meeting and which prompted the Opelika-Auburn News to file a complaint of a possible Open Meetings Act violation.

Is it just the mayor’s business connections you don’t want written about?  Or your own business relationships, which are too numerous to list in this one short column?

As elected officials, your private business becomes the public’s business.  That’s why you are legally required to file your personal financial info with the Ethics Commission and your campaign finance info with the Secretary of State. Those financial details provide the public with the context to judge your actions in office.

*   *  *  *  *  *

Speaking of overlapping interests, did you know the city of Auburn’s Industrial Development Board (IDB) plans to provide interim financing for the first building in AU’s Research Park?  A further twist is that the city’s IDB members include AU’s current provost, a former AU provost, an AU dean, and  two of the mayor’s business associates (Phil Clowdus and E.L. Spencer Jr).

Not much is known yet about the proposed city/AU agreement. There was no discussion when the AU Board of Trustees approved it, as a last-minute agenda addition, at their Feb. 2 meeting.

The city and the university should work together. But AU is involved in legal action with the original developer of the Research Park, which is probably why the city is being asked to step in.

Given the problems which have plagued the AU Research Park, should the city invest further than the $5M Auburn taxpayers already paid for the Park’s infrastructure? Does the city/IDB have so much extra cash it can - or should - loan it to the university? Perhaps that will be discussed at Tuesday’s IDB presentation to Council.

Comments Off

Jan. 19, 2007 column by Lisa Brouillette: Mayor’s hands involved in too much?

(first published in the Opelika-Auburn News)

Mayor’s hands involved in too much?

Asking questions in this town, particularly questions which focus on the actions of Auburn city officials and their connections with local developers, seems to bring on a fury of self-righteous indignation.  Few answers, mind you, but lots of indignation.

A recent recipient of such indignation is Dr. Clara Clothiaux, who publicly expressed her concerns and questions about the role of the mayor in our council/manager form of government.

Clearly she struck a nerve. Her questions and comments were immediately and erroneously termed ‘allegations’ and ‘accusations.’ The strength and tenor of the mayor’s and others’ responses to her queries was way out of proportion to the questions she politely posed.

This is hardly the first time questions have been asked about the mayor’s duties in  our council/manager form of government, which differs greatly from the ’strong mayor’ form found in other cities, including Opelika.

This difference isn’t simply an academic one - it defines who has the administrative power and responsibilities, who is in charge. It’s the reason Auburn pays the big bucks to our city managers, including the $145,000 plus perks we pay our current city manager.

But let’s put aside for a moment the question of clarifying the mayor’s legal powers. There’s an equally important point that many seem to miss.  It’s the tangled web of business and personal relationships connecting the mayor and local developers, especially developers who do business with the city.

The Alabama Secretary of State’s website provides these (and other) details of corporations formed by Mayor Ham and various local developers.

• Mayor Ham and Billy Cleveland, Jimmy Cleveland, Phil Clowdus, Ben Nevins (Forrest Pointe Developers LLC)
• Mayor Ham and  Phil Clowdus, Ben Nevins (Blue Creek Development Inc)
• Mayor Ham and Phil Clowdus (F A & W Inc)
• Mayor Ham and E.L. Spencer, Jr. (Ham is a Director of AuburnBank and its parent corporation, both chaired by E.L. Spencer, Jr. of Spencer Lumber Company)

Why does this matter? Consider the Samford Ave extension project, for which the city will pay $1 million for road & utility installation on land owned by Lipscomb Land Company and East Glenn Investment Property LLC. The East Glenn LLC’s recorded owners are Billy Cleveland, Jimmy Cleveland, William Dyas, Tommy Dyas Jr, Joe Waid, Phil Clowdus, and [Crawford] Ben Nevins.

Do those names sound familiar? Yes, at least four of them have been in companies with Ham.

Certainly it’s reasonable for the public to ask about the mayor’s actions related to that project and how they may benefit him or his business partners.

Simply not voting on such projects and contracts isn’t sufficient. In such situations the mayor should relinquish the gavel and totally withdraw from both private negotiations and Council deliberations.

This issue could have been avoided if Mayor Ham had stayed out of the conversation and deliberation. That would have removed the perception of any conflict of interest.

It’s not the first time these questions have been raised. But maybe, if the public persists, it’ll be the first time they’re fully answered.

#   #   #

Comments Off