Hogan's Talk on the Town

The Blame is YOURS, the Credit is MINE, Thank You!

2011-10-17T06:37:00.007-05:00

As we approach a brand new council meeting Monday, it is my duty to remind you of the things that the majority of the Leeds Council would hope you forgot from the last meeting.

Let's start off with Mayor Eric Patterson criticizing Bass Pro Shops for failing to attract new businesses to Leeds. We would like to remind him there are well over sixty new businesses sitting just north of Bass Pro, in a place called "The Shops of Grand River". The Mayor went on to say that the Bass Pro deal has been nothing but a detriment to this city.

Bass Pro Shops and The Shops of Grand River have been a long awaited positive gleam to the City of Leeds, very much unlike the ILCO stigma that loomed over Leeds when I moved my family here in 1990. Do you remember all the jokes about drinking water in Leeds that made their way around the metro area?

The Mayor is also fond of accusing Councilor Kenneth Washington and the prior administrations of putting the city 91 million dollars in debt. (Why he never levies this charge against Councilor Bartee who sat through part of the previous administration and still resides on the current one, we cannot be sure) He then goes on taking credit for reducing that debt with the recent Bass Pro restructuring, which came about not by any great task of the current administration but through the down-grading of Regions Bank, and the bond owners calling in the bonds as a result.

He loves to talk of the "gun that Bass Pro held to our head" if they were to bankrupt. He fails to mention that even if the Leeds Bass Pro Shops were to fail, this would not put the parent company in default. Only if the entire company, which has an annual revenue of over three and a half billion dollars, were to bankrupt would Leeds be impacted. He does not mention that Bass Pro, in an unprecedented move, guaranteed the bonds. He also fails to mention that in the unlikely event Bass Pro Shops went out of business, the land alone would still be worth millions.

We're not knocking removing the city as a guarantor in the restructuring of the bonds, but what the Mayor does not tell you is that the prior players in the Cooperative District had planned just that, long before the matter ever crossed his plate. The mayor forgets that the City of Leeds had no credit when Bass Pro was structured and John Robinson of Raymond James Company (Investment Experts that assisted in bonds for the city) told the entire current and previous councils just that, on more than one occasion. The mayor throws around ninety one million in debt as if we have nothing to show for it and as though it has something to do with our credit, or should we say lack of credit. We also would like to see him reduce that amount he throws out if the city is no longer responsible for the Bass Pro amount of the ninety one million.

The Mayor also loves to talk about how his administration "saved" the city by changing the Shops of Grand River deal from a revenue bond to a loan guaranteed by the Retirement Systems of Alabama. Once again he fails to tell the whole story, namely that the developer salvaged the project by enticing RSA to fund the deal, after a lawsuit was filed to block the project, including the 950 homes that were planned. The Mayor later appointed several of the people who filed that lawsuit to various city boards. The Mayor also doesn't talk much about how his rezoning prevented those additional homes and high end apartments from being built.

This piece of land that the Shops of Grand River sits on has become "Patterson's Last Stand", though no one in Leeds lived near the property, least of all those who cried against it the loudest. He and his three votes on the Council have been critical of Bass Pro, Daniel Corporation and a prior administration from day one, while spending a small fortune to re-write the Cooperative District Agreement and in the process alienating us from those that had helped us acquire the infrastructure to build those projects and new schools.

The Herald was critical of the prior administration also, for not practicing open government, but they made some prudent decisions. For example, when they broke from Jefferson County and created new schools, they set aside several million dollars through tax increases as a reserve to draw on, if they ever fell short. We have no idea where the money the prior administration left this new one has gone. There are several possibilities we can think of, however: tearing down a National Guard armory, a school road that cost a small fortune, and paying a group of lawyers to learn municipal government on our dime. A firm which has charged the City of Leeds more than any attorney firm in a single administration, ever.

This administration has chosen to take almost One Million dollars in the last council meeting and renovate City Hall. Let's hope we make those first school bond payments as our mayor thinks we need to spend this money right now instead of making sure a reserve is in place to pay for the schools we now enjoy.

While the Mayor and three Councilors see no problem with bragging about our new schools, parks, or other improvements, they have no problem with harshly criticizing the businesses that make those things possible.

So what has this new administration brought to the City of Leeds in the way of new development? I remember a repo boat yard directly across from a multimillion dollar tourist attraction and soon we will have a grocery store that we can not as of yet get a name for. Priceless!

Does it always have to be just enough to get by?

2011-01-02T12:58:00.007-06:00

I had a conversation with a legal member of the Alabama League of Municipalities on how they were advising cities in regard to the Alabama Open Meeting Act 2005-40 in which I was told that if people wanted to know the details of a meeting agenda they could be good citizens and attend the meeting.

WHOAAA

I told the member I was appalled she had made that statement, as it absolutely flies in the face of the spirit and intent of the Alabama Open Meeting law. Why? Because the spirit and intent is defined in a word contained in the name of the law and that word is "OPEN".

Government is hardly being open when an agenda leaves us wondering whether or not an item involves us, or even what the item is talking about in the first place. A citizen does not have to attend a meeting that is not well described to be a "good" citizen, and I hope you are insulted by the very thought of such.

Consider directly asking of your local government that their released agenda items go beyond having just enough to get by and actually let you know what an item on an agenda is really about. Don't buy for one second that by wanting to know what the items mean beforehand, that you are not a good citizen and remember that the entire "spirit" of the open meeting law was to be open, NOT just enough to get by.

Let's look at one of the items in the upcoming Leeds City Council Agenda:

New Business:

a) Resolution 2011-01-01 Relating to Solicitation of Bids for Site Preparation.

WHERE IS THE SITE? What is going to be prepared and why? Is it near my property? Is it near my children's school? How do I know if I need to attend or get in touch with a councilor beforehand based on this very limited information? Do I need to go through the drawn out process of calling city hall to find out? Is there even enough time to find out about this since it was released, given when the meeting will occur? If I attend the meeting will it do any good if I find out I am opposed to this, or will it be too late because the council does not listen to citizens until AFTER they conduct business?

The answer to any of the above questions could be something very positive and utterly harmless, but why couldn't a better description be given in the first place to avoid all this speculation? It could, and in fact many of the current members of the city council promised much better than this when they answered 10 questions and answers that we posed before the election that indeed helped them to get elected. Ask them nicely to fulfill their promises and don't let the discussion at hand turn to something else, they committed to being very open while they were running for office, nothing should change that commitment, including a news publisher they may or may not care for.

Is the council "bad" for leaving us wondering? No, they are not bad people for leaving us hanging, but they are not informative people operating in a spirit of open government or living up to their campaign statements either.
David Hogan

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty. - Thomas Jefferson

So Be IT!

2010-10-17T11:57:00.005-05:00

Have a look at the first item of new business for the Leeds City Council meeting coming up Monday, October 18, 2010:

Ordinance 2010-10-01 Relating to amending section 11-14 of City of Leeds Code of Ordinances

Before we get into this, let first establish that this was delivered via email to us late Friday afternoon. This usually leaves no time at all to contact city hall to ask for a clarification or additional information about an agenda item so people can digest whether or not they need to attend or speak to a council person about the item

So, back to our agenda item above. We can figure out that section 11-14 of the Code of Ordinances is what this item RELATES to. We just have no idea what that ordinance is or what is going to be discussed RELATING to it.

But don't you worry, this council knows what is best, and if you don't like what they do in regard to the item at the meeting, you can speak when it is all over in the public comments section. Of course it's too late for it to make any difference, but this council will endure having to listen to those their actions impact, we've actually seen it. They may roll their eyes, and not look or listen to you, but you might get lucky and get a thank you when you are all done speaking.

This goes hand in hand with this council ignoring our correspondence to them as a news agency and a citizen too, having draft budgets with CONFIDENTIAL marked across them, and giving out budgets to the media and others that do not match what was given out to council members in their packets on the night they approved the budget.

But alas the Herald are just muckrackers and nobody cares anyway. How do we know that? Mainly from the amount of Letters to the Editor we receive, which are few and far between.

The Leeds Herald has spent three years bringing issues front and center and we have never asked anyone to ever agree with us, not once. We have time and time again asked the community to be involved, through their voice or participation in their government.

It's time for a change on our part.

We will cover government meetings as always only we will no longer include written coverage. You can of course listen to it in the audio or through video we provide or go a step better and attend meetings. It is a shame that your government will not give you enough information in an agenda for you to know if you should attend or not.

If citizens want us involved in controversy or specific items of local government concern, then by all means they can write a Letter to the Editor and we'll consider investing the time and investigative reporting to it.

This publication will no longer spend the countless hours we have in the past on bringing issues of local government administration forward, with the lack of support and interest given to us concerning it.

News services are a voice of their communities. We get lots of interaction with sports, organizations, and other topics and that is where we will devote our time and energies.

Now the hate fans we have can run to their local grapevine, gossip table, or favorite electronic tattle-tale method of anonymous negative daily servings, and have a ball. They will no doubt move from saying we are bashing their beloved officials, to a tone that we are turning our back on our responsibilities. We have not said we will not cover local government, only that we will not make it a priority until the community shows they care for us to do so.

We actually have potential advertisers that have told us they simply can not advertise for fear of retribution, because we question local government. Let me be very clear that we have funded this publication without making a profit for three years now and we will continue to do so until either it sustains itself, or we come to the end of our business plan final year which is fast approaching. We will not however, fight all the battles that should be fought through a war of one. If the community is happy with government as usual, so be it, we'll move on to other things.

David Hogan
Publisher

TANSTAAFL

2010-09-02T14:57:00.001-05:00

Folks I'm really not fond of the GUILT method of support, but I can't believe the apathy and lack thereof to many things of value in our town.

Athletic programs are funded at the high school level by businesses, efforts of the team, and the community. Many businesses can't afford to support the programs because the programs ask for high dollar amounts of support. But the programs often have little choice but to ask for large amounts when people will not fund even small dollar items of support.

We asked for $5.46 cents yesterday to get on the Spirit Line and we are very much appreciative of those that responded - which you can count on both hands, and that includes individual members of my family.

So go ahead and start telling me how horrible it is that I said this, and take the attitude that someone else will take care of it, that someone else SHOULD take care of it, that parents should fund all of this.

We will not support the great expense of high school athletics through just the parents, it's simply too expensive, and on a much larger scale than youth sports.

We will not get new band equipment without community support.

We will not get a new library without community support.
We will not get an even better Arts Council, without community support.

We will not get an increase in education programs and advanced curriculum in our schools without community support.

We will not get a Leeds Herald Daily News each and every day without support through advertising. We realize that everyone expects to get their news for free, but it is not free, just like sports, organizations, and other things that actually give a community its character, it costs money, time and dedication.

My HANDLE on chess.net where I take just a few minutes to relax each week is TANSTAAFL - There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch!

The Spirit Line is still active just like yesterday, and we certainly hope to see the list get larger. Thanks for any consideration you can give to it.
David Hogan

Agendas, Not Public Servants

2010-08-04T14:03:00.001-05:00

It's no surprise that with politicians you get their agenda along with everything else. We tried to grill our current Leeds administration at the 2008 elections to find out what the new agendas were for each new candidate.

It was no secret to us that many of the new faces on the council including Mayor Patterson had bad feelings against past developers. However, several things to come after the elections did take us by surprise, especially events of late.

When Mayor Patterson had Charcey Glenn removed from the August 02, 2010 council meeting I was reminded of Patterson stating during the 2008 elections that he wanted to allow people to speak before they voted on items, because he knew speaking after the council meetings allowed nothing more than a way to vent frustrations.

Patterson, Carswell, Earnest, and Bartee, had their agenda and they pushed it through regarding the zoning ordinance. Earnest made mention of people having time to look over the ordinance and yet she made no attempt to address the items that were brought up at the previous council public hearing. She also made no statement at our Town Hall meeting, which she along with all councilors, were invited. A meeting that the city council should have had after they tabled the original motion, if they were truly interested in what the public had to say. They were not interested in what the public had to say, they were interested in their agenda and getting it passed without having to re-notice any changes.

So am I mad at the council? Not at all, I expect this from those that are pushing an agenda without regard to the public. So more power to them, they got their way, they got their ordinance, and they'll get a lot more before it is all over with too. This is the nature of politics.

Patterson told me in the presence of several people at a local restaurant that they were going to pass that zoning ordinance and there were not going to be any changes either. Guess what? He was right.

Patterson actually had some very good points about why to go forward with the ordinance when I spoke with him the week before and I encouraged him to make his views known. It is my understanding he did so though another news agency with a letter to the editor, even though we received no further response and he did not attend our town hall meeting, so I am encouraged he did make his views known, even leaving us out of his process.

No, I'm not mad at the council, they acted right in line with their agenda's, but I am highly disappointed in the apathy and involvement of many that were involved in this process, including the council for the disregard to public hearings including calling for a vote immediately after the hearing without time for reflection of public comments. I will include in my disappointment, those that insist on labeling our publication for trying to show what the ordinance contained and being the only place on the web that had the correct draft available for review.

I encourage all to get involved in your city and not just at the political level either. Volunteer, help out, know what is going on and then when election time comes around you can see the many agendas laid out before you. If a past politician lied to you at the previous election with what they were going to do, you now know, but just remember that you may trade off the devil you got, for one far worse if you do not do your homework.

David Hogan

Multi-Family Dwellings Part V

2009-06-11T17:54:00.034-05:00

We find it strange that at a time in America when communities are embracing SmartGrowth development and trying to leave as little impact on the environment while still growing for the future, that Leeds is taking an approach of low density development.

Of course if you want no development at all this approach works. The question is can we afford no development at all?

We possibly could have before we invested in the new schools, but that ship has sailed to the tune of over $40 million in bonds.

Show me a way to pay for schools without new development or saying to simply tighten our belts and I'll shut up right now and delete everything I have written.

The first payment on the schools is $2.8 million dollars and that is about one fourth (1/4) of our budget. If you can shave that out of our budget then we must be the most wasteful city in America. Not to mention our services need increasing, not decreased.

Cities raise revenue through property owners and business. All the rest is chump change when you are talking millions of dollars. We can become the "speed trap" of America and it won't put a dent into the payment of our schools.

As we've said time and time again - we are already in debt. We will not get out of it without development.

We've heard that this zoning is about stopping developers from making money off the citizens. If that is true our goose is cooked, because developers indeed expect to make money. That is the reason they develop in the first place, along with a desire to truly help communities grow and prosper. Those that don't are the ones not willing to make reasonable changes and alter plans where needed.

We have much bigger problems in Leeds than the number of apartments in an acre when it comes to development.

Are you concerned about any of the following in Leeds:

Empty houses?
Empty shopping centers?
Empty downtown stores?
Empty strip malls?
Empty overgrown lots in the middle of neighborhoods?

There are numerous solutions from infill development to SmartGrowth development and they do not try to control density to a point that it keeps development away.

SmartGrowth development is the new trend across America, so what is it?

From the Environmental Protection Agency and the Northeast Midwest Planing Institute:

Good codes are the foundation upon which great communities are built. They are the framework that regulates where and what type of development may occur. Codes guide everything from permissible land uses, to building densities, locations, and setbacks, to street widths and parking requirements. When done well, codes make it easier for a community to implement its vision. However, when they are out of date or don't line up with the community's vision, codes can actually keep communities from getting the development they want. For example, the standard zoning practice of the past few decades has separated residential, retail, and office uses. Today, however, this zoning stands in the way of communities that want to create vibrant, walkable neighborhoods that mix these uses and give residents the option to walk to the store, walk to work, or own a home business.

Communities are finally discovering an alternative to conventional development patterns that cause suburban sprawl, destroy open lands, siphon vitality from existing communities, and create gridlocked lifestyles.

A major solution to these problems is infill development—the creative recycling of vacant or underutilized lands within cities and suburbs. Every city, town, and suburb has these types of properties. They range from the single vacant lot to surface parking lots to empty shopping malls.

Once considered eyesores, such sites are becoming prized as catalysts that improve solid communities and revitalize those facing problems. Successful infill, for example, addresses traffic issues by creating communities where people live closer to work and school, and where biking, walking, and transit can substitute for auto travel.

Successful infill development can offer these rewards for communities:

• provide housing (both affordable and market rate) near job centers and transit;
• increase the property-tax base;
• preserve open space at the edge of regions;
• provide new residents to support shopping districts and services;
• capitalize on community assets such as parks, infrastructure, and transit; and
• create new community assets such as child-care centers, arts districts, and shopping areas.

Successful infill expresses not what a community will settle for but what it really wants. To be considered successful, it must be financially viable while demonstrating excellent design.

Excellent design refers not to the architectural design of a single building but to the quality of place created by a fabric of well-designed buildings and public spaces. Each element of public and private spaces, from awnings and windows, to benches and sidewalks, to roads and transit stations, needs to be carefully crafted. Excellent design creates places that are safe and attractive, that give people a variety of transportation options, and that encourage private investment and development.

For communities to define and plan for successful infill development, recommended strategies include:

• Build a common vision and create a plan.
• Take action to implement the plan.
• Encourage mixed-use infill development that includes housing.
• Demand quality design.
• Address transportation issues at the community level.

MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA - An example of SmartGrowth development.

Below is taken from the SmartGrowth plan code of Montgomery, Alabama.

1.2 PURPOSE

The purpose of this Code is to enable, encourage, and qualify the implementation of the following policies.

1.2.1 The Region
a. That the region should retain its natural infrastructure and visual character derived from topography, woodlands, farmlands, riparian corridors, and coastlines.
b. That growth strategies should encourage infill and redevelopment in parity with new communities.
c. That development contiguous to urban areas should be structured in the neighborhood pattern and be integrated with the existing urban pattern.
d. That development non-contiguous to urban areas should be organized in the pattern of clusters, traditional neighborhoods or villages, and regional centers.
e. That Affordable Housing should be distributed throughout the region to match job opportunities and to avoid concentrations of poverty.
f. That transportation corridors should be planned and reserved in coordination with land use.
g. That green corridors should be used to define and connect the urbanized areas.
h. That the region should include a framework of transit, pedestrian, and bicycle systems that provide alternatives to the automobile.

1.2.2 The Community
a. That neighborhoods and regional centers should be compact, pedestrian-oriented, and mixed--use.
b. That neighborhoods and regional centers should be the preferred pattern of development and that districts specializing in single-use should be the exception.
c. That ordinary activities of daily living should occur within walking distance of most dwellings, allowing independence to those who do not drive.
d. That interconnected networks of Thoroughfares should be designed to disperse and reduce the length of automobile trips.
e. That within neighborhoods, a range of housing types and price levels should be provided to accommodate diverse ages and incomes.
f. That appropriate building densities and land uses should be provided within walking distance of transit stops.
g. That civic, institutional, and commercial activity should be embedded in downtowns, not isolated in remote single-use complexes.
h. That schools should be sized and located to enable children to walk or bicycle to them.
i. That a range of open space including parks, squares, and playgrounds should be distributed within neighborhoods and urban zones.

1.2.3 The Block and the Building
a. That buildings and landscaping should contribute to the physical definition of Thoroughfares as civic places.
b. That development should adequately accommodate automobiles while respecting the pedestrian and the spatial form of public space.
c. That the design of streets and buildings should reinforce safe environments, but not at the expense of accessibility.
d. That architecture and landscape design should grow from local climate, topography, history, and building practice.
e. That buildings should provide their inhabitants with a clear sense of geography and climate through energy efficient methods.
f. That Civic Buildings and public gathering places should be provided locations that reinforce community identity and support self-government.
g. That Civic Buildings should be distinctive and appropriate to a role more important than the other buildings that constitute the fabric of the city.
h. That the preservation and renewal of historic buildings should be facilitated to affirm the continuity and evolution of society.
i. That the harmonious and orderly evolution of urban areas should be secured through graphic codes that serve as guides for change.

How about we break out that Master Plan and work on that and consider development that has proven to take care of the same problems we have in Leeds instead of just passing an ordinance that addresses apartment density?

Leeds can be all it can be, with a vision that is created by all of us with some proper planning and discussion.

We'll continue the series Monday morning.

Multi-Family Dwellings Part IV

2009-06-10T21:36:00.023-05:00

continued from yesterday.

Yesterday in this series we provided links to the governing laws for zoning and a copy of the Leeds Zoning Ordinance. Let take a peek at the opening of that zoning ordinance book we scanned in.

Note the underlined sections we marked in red above.

Do these two sections of words oppose one another? One desires to keep land from being overcrowded and the other wants to avoid undue concentration of people.

So how can they exist together?

Read on. Note the final statement above about the "character of districts and their peculiar suitability for particular uses..." This is the "tie that binds" the opposing sets of wording and ideals.

A master plan and consideration for the districts and suitability of the land.

Is the proposed ordinance giving consideration of all the varying districts in the City of Leeds? Is it giving consideration and being proposed in accordance with the Master Plan, as all the other ordinances were and stated so in the article above that comes before the actual ordinances?

One could make that argument based on the very R-3 district itself. So there you are. Which leads us to the Master Plan and another question.

Why are we targeting one section of a zoning book over ten years old to control density in multi-dwelling structures and not looking first at our Master Plan?

The Master Plan as outlined in the Code of Alabama is a living document that is to be reviewed, updated, discussed and used to keep the zoning ordinance on track with the plan.

The last two major developments that had apartments or town homes were the "Towns on 78" which was purchased by the new administration for our high school road and the Grand River Project that had the residential development taken off the table. Neither of these happened.

Is there some other development of apartments we are not aware of, that encroach on existing property owners?

Did the nestle of pine trees and dirt bike trails on the north side of I-20 where the Grand River residential phase was to go, have some hidden homes and residents we are not aware of? Do people seriously believe that an area on the north side of I-20 encroaches on the rest of Leeds with an entire section of interstate to separate it from the rest of our city?

Are we actually giving consideration to particular and suitable areas for apartments or simply saying we don't want them ... anywhere?

Many people opposed the Towns on 78 especially those in my neighborhood of Brian Drive. Many in this area were fine with the town homes until they tried to squeeze the boundaries of the area within feet of the back fences of homes on Brian Drive and took out the trees that acted as buffers.

My point is there are justifiable places where many property owners do not want apartments at all, as they do not fit the pattern of the neighborhood; but is a blanket wide ordinance needed to stop such?

Would an alternative to this, be to possibly consider the actual zoning districts and see if they should remain an R-3 district given the current makeup of the area?

I'm not sure, and I'm no expert, but I see the wisdom in a master plan and the need for more rooftops in Leeds to support things like grocery stores we all want, and I fail to see where building apartments in areas that are not inhabited or even close to existing homes, as part of planned, mixed use communities hurt anyone, when done with consideration to the environment and a master plan.

You may possibly get around this limitation of 8 units per gross tract acre through a PUD, PCD, or overlay district, but who knows unless that is given consideration in the Master Plan.

So I return once again to the earlier question; why is this being targeted out of a zoning book that has 160 pages?

Tomorrow, we'll show examples of where high density development works and where it does not, based on examples around the country and right here in Alabama. We'll also show the increasing desire to plan what is known as "SmartGrowth" around the country.

Multi-Family Dwellings Part III

2009-06-09T22:29:00.005-05:00

continued from yesterday

This is going to be a boring albeit highly necessary part of this series as it deals with state and local law.

The zoning ordinance and public hearing to set the number of multi-family dwellings to 8 per gross tract acre carries a recommendation from the Leeds Planning Commission to the Leeds City Council to hold the hearing and adopt the amendment to the ordinance.

In Leeds we have the Planning Commission and the Zoning Board of Adjustments, both which operate under the laws of the State of Alabama as defined in the Code of Alabama, Title 11, Chapter 52 PLANNING, ZONING AND SUBDIVISIONS.

The Code of Alabama is online and in fact Alabama was one of the first states to put their code and constitution online. The online code is lacking in a friendly navigation structure using one of the earlier designs of two frames for viewing. The left frame shows the titles and the right frame shows the corresponding sections.

The problem is the left frame does not update when you choose a title and consequently you will have to use your browser back button on the right frame to navigate the various sections. You’ll catch on after reviewing a few sections. The Code of Alabama is at:

http://www.legislature.state.al.us/CodeofAlabama/1975/coatoc.htm (NOTE: we caution you to continue reading before visiting the site to avoid common pitfalls many make with the Code of Alabama.

Click Title 11 Counties and Municipal Corporations, then click Title 2 PROVISIONS APPLICABLE TO MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS ONLY on the right side, and finally scroll down to Chapter 52 PLANNING, ZONING AND SUBDIVISIONS.

What do you expect? The constitution of Alabama is one of the largest ones in the entire country.

As with all of Alabama code you must be careful in sections about local government to pay attention to the class of municipality. Cities are classed by population and many sections of Alabama law will apply only to certain classes.

The class structure creates another problem with the code in that much of it is written with exceptions. What this means is while there are some sections that deal only with a specific class of municipality, there are more that intermingle all the classes and will note an exception for one or the other. This has many viewers thinking that a section of the code only applies to a certain class, when in fact only the exception mentioned to that class applies and the remainder of the section would apply to all classes.

CONFUSED? Many are, so don’t feel bad. My point is simply that you have to carefully read the sections and if you are prone to pick and choose parts of law to suit you, then you are asking for big trouble with Alabama law.

For the record the City of Leeds is a CLASS 7 Municipality.

Later in this series we’ll make some references to the state zoning laws and feel you should have the tools to review them.

The City of Leeds has a zoning book that has been around for some time and efforts are being made to update it. The city has hired Bob House, a planning consultant, to assist in this effort. House works for Hoover and other cities in planning and zoning matters.

We took the zoning book and scanned in all 160 pages for the benefit of all citizens. But as the commercial goes – WAIT THERE’S MORE. The book does not have all the additions since 1997 as that is when it was signed and attested by Mayor Whitfield.

One of the forms in the back of the book shows the City of Gardendale on it, but most have the City of Leeds. This has lead many to think the ordinance was nothing more than a copy of Gardendale’s zoning ordinance. We have not been able to verify that, but have no doubt that a template from somewhere would have been used in the creation.

The scanned PDF are images only and therefore the file size is large. The original scanned document was over 50mb in size before we optimized the resolution of the pages. The document is now just over 12mb in size and available at:

http://www.leedsalabama.com/pdf/col_zoning_ord.pdf

Now that we’ve laid out some legal governing of zoning and provided the actual zoning ordinance book we’ll turn our attention tomorrow back to the proposal before us and also to the MASTER PLAN you will see mentioned in Alabama code that Planning Commissions are to carry out.

There has been a lot of talk about this Comprehensive Master Plan for Leeds with some asking where it is and some saying we do not have one. In fact we do have one and it was created in 1987 and we verified that with former city inspectors and clerks. We’ll see if City Hall still knows where it is.

More tomorrow.

Multi-Family Dwelling Part II

2009-06-09T06:43:00.009-05:00

continued from the Leeds Herald Monday Edition.

If you are talking about limiting the amount of multi-family dwellings in a gross tract acre with the June 15, 2009 Public Hearing then you are talking about – zoning. Zoning has always fostered controversy since its inception at the turn into the 20th century in America.

In 1916 the City of New York passed the first U.S. zoning laws to restrict the height and setbacks of buildings and stop industry from moving into the Manhattan department store district.

In the mid 1920’s the town of Euclid, Ohio passed a zoning ordinance and Amber Realty sued the town, claiming that "their land was taken in violation of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, without just compensation."

In 1926 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the case, Village of Euclid, Ohio, v. the Amber Realty Company, and found that zoning is constitutional, provided that it is designed to protect the public health, welfare, and safety.

In less than ten years from its inception zoning had made it to the highest court in the land. In less than two years after Euclid the Supreme Court decided against zoning in Nectow v. City of Cambridge for violating the 14th Amendment due process clause.

These two cases formed the basis for an explosion of zoning ordinances that has touched huge cities to small towns all across America with Houston, Texas being one of the major holdout cities to have no zoning ordinances.

With the growing concern of environmental issues being put before the public in the 1970’s zoning laws were coming under fire for creating what was called “urban sprawl” (Haphazard growth or extension outward, especially that resulting from real estate development on the outskirts of a city) which many believe leads to an unnecessary encroachment on wilderness areas, water runoff problems, pollution from more cars driving, loss of land that would otherwise be wilderness or used in farming or ranching, segregated rich and poor citizens and numerous other complaints.

This movement and concern prompted the creation of “Planned Use Development” (PUD) allowing cities to zone a new section of development with mixed uses and to allow single family homes near apartments and offices and grocery stores near residential areas so people can work and shop close to home.

PUD’s are not without their own controversy as developers sometimes overlook the idea of bringing things close to home and simply try to pack more units in a given area without a true plan for the environment and the community.

The City of Leeds was involved with a controversial PUD in the late 90’s with Woodruff Farms being developed by builder Charles Kessler Jr. that carried into the turn of the century as the city, the developer, and nearby land owners all expressed their desires and concerns through the development.

We’ll continue this series tomorrow and invite you to take a look at PUD’s on the Wikipedia web site for further reading and understanding.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_Unit_Development

The original Grand River project plan included PUD's and a newer form of planning known as Planned Community Districts or PCD. These have been placed on the table for later discussion as the current proposal is targeting only the retail aspect of the original three phase project.

Rabies Clinic

2009-05-30T12:01:00.002-05:00

I recently advertised a Jefferson County approved Rabies Clinic in Leeds and we will continue to do so as they occur all through the year.

HOWEVER, I have mixed feelings about the clinic and in no way have a problem with the service offered, it's a valuable one.

What I have a problem with are those that use these clinics as the only source of medical care for their pets. I take advantage of the low cost of the shot myself, but I still believe in getting my dog to a vet for heartworm and other checks.

Consider having your pet checked at least once a year and I know that means money and pets are very resilient, but for most of us they are a part of the family and deserve a little medical TLC.

Thanks

David

Faith in the Mayor - Part II

2009-05-12T20:11:00.006-05:00

Faith in the Mayor - Part II

As noted we are responding to comments from Mayor Patterson in the May 07 edition of The Leeds News.

Fine tune, tweak, do what is best, the days are over. Yes, you would have seen those words in the article by our mayor. A few good words will not get you out of your campaign promises and the only reason this publication endorsed you just before the election.

No matter how much our mayor thanks the "majority" as he put it that supports him, he openly and in writing said the following in our Q & A before the elections: (Mayor's text in italics and our responses are in red)

4. How will you address Leeds Magazine request to be more open with government?

EP:First, I plan to issue a statement as Mayor every month as to what is going on in the city and what I am considering and what are the hot issues in the news and on this website if I am allowed.

LH: Mayor, you left out - until someone questions you. The very article we are commenting on you did not deliver to us, but we received earlier ones until we began questioning what you were doing behind closed doors.

EP:Second, I plan to publish one week before council what issues are coming up at the next council meeting in the news and on this website if allowed.

LH: So much for this one, we'd get excited if we got your agenda earlier than a late Friday afternoon before a Monday meeting. And we would remind you that you knew about a work session all last week and waited until 4 minutes until 5:00 p.m. this past Friday before sending us one with the wrong date. YET we still brought it to your attention and offered to make the correction. When Kevin Fouts emailed us back Saturday noting the mistake we thanked him, and made the correction. Yet, you cancelled this very needed meeting, and one of your councilors told me you said it was my fault for objecting.

EXCUSE ME, if you are going to wait until the last minute to put something out, you leave little time to correct your mistakes and we made no objection, only a request for clarification of which your own staff thanked us for catching. Don't blame others for your own mistake, especially when they would help you from putting them out if you allowed enough time in your notices.

EP:Third, I also plan to hear public comments before we vote on general issues so we have public input instead of hearing comments after the vote which is just a way for people to express their unhappiness because the vote is done.

LH: We're waiting on this one, and since you have proven you have no intention of keeping your promise, please at least, thank those that take the time to address the council. Let me also remind you that several months ago we addressed you in the public comments section of a council meeting, nicely asking you to do this and not bringing up that you had already made a pledge and were not fulfilling it.

This one is the most damning one of all and you have NO EXCUSE for not following through with this one.

EP:I know the government is for the people and not a few. I promise no more secret meetings, backroom deals, inconvenient meeting times and locations, and keeping what we do as a city from the press or the citizens of Leeds.

LH: Until it suits you to do otherwise? You ask for blind faith and trust and thank those that give it to you, yet we asked you for months what were your problems with agreements you were addressing behind closed doors.

You have blamed an audit, which other administrations have been through and produced a budget, but not produced one for your administration, not even a projected one.

You are authorizing millions of dollars to be spent, making decisions that you would not share with the press or anyone but attorney's, and have yet to put out in open council what their monthly fees are.

You and other council members said you would keep attorney fees in check by reviewing their cost on a monthly basis and we have that on audio tape, and I have not heard their fees discussed since then.

We repeatedly asked you to discuss agreements and deals with all parties involved in the Grand River project and the Cooperative District General agreement, yet you had "backroom deals", but stated in your pledge those days are over, and state in your article you are proud of everyone who focused on what needed to be done. What would that be as you were not sharing it with the press or the public?

You've openly proclaimed how great and wonderful "your" attorneys are, and yet the citizens of Leeds did not elect them, and have no idea what they are being paid each month. When we asked you to step in a room with everyone, which you would not do afterwards, you were insistent that if you did, your attorneys must be there. Aren't you an attorney? I thought that was supposed to be an area of knowledge you brought to the table.

There is a time and a place for attorneys, but we wonder if you can make any decisions at all without them. Tout them all you want but until we know the business of the city and the cost of this expert advice, it falls on deaf ears with us. The same will be said of any excuses or justifications you may make for not keeping your word to the citizens of Leeds as noted above.

To the Citizens of Leeds from the Leeds Herald. I sincerely apologize that I ever endorsed our Mayor. I did so based on his own pledges named above, and I most definitely had the wool pulled over my eyes.

Let our above statement serve to further enroll our publication into his comments about "outside factions", as we will continue to hold him accountable and there are many other items to come. If that makes us an "outsider" we'll wear that label as a badge of courage.

This government is for ALL the people, not those that think they know best and ask us to have faith in them, while conducting their business behind closed doors, and ignoring the pledges that got them elected in the first place.

Caught YOU!

2009-04-25T23:48:00.003-05:00

Checking on me were you? And you thought I was going to write something controversial, didn't ya? Nope, gone fishing and I hope you have a nice day until next time.

Proper Procedures - Just amend them to suit your needs.

2009-04-09T00:07:00.010-05:00

As previously noted we spoke with the former government official that implemented the current public records request form at Leeds City Hall. That individual was former City Manager, Donnie Womble and we should also note that we played a part in the creation of that form as well as the IT Director for the City of Leeds at the time.

We are no stranger to this form, in fact we helped design it. We are no stranger to how it was implemented, given out, and the intent of its use. Even with that we still asked former City Manager Donnie Womble, the reason for the implementation.

Womble said, “The purpose of the form was to have a record of the requester, the specific items requested, and their purpose for usage as allowed by Alabama law. We retrieved the information when presented, or if it was an old record, referred them to Helen Veasey who was the custodian of records at the time.”

Womble also noted it provided a record that the City did comply with any request made, to prevent any statements that the city had not complied with the law. Womble also accepted email requests provided the information on the form was present in the email request.

Womble said the law was clear that you were not to hinder the process and the form was nothing more than a record of the request and clarification of what was specifically being asked for so it could be delivered.

We told Womble a poster on al.com in the Leeds forum had stated he implemented the form to keep them from getting zoning records. Womble stated that in the first place he did not retain zoning records, the zoning boards did, and he implemented the form to stop solicitation from companies trying to mine for business data and use the city to do their research for them, along with having a record of what was requested as earlier explained.

We asked Womble if a request such as mine would have been ignored and he said “Of course not”. We also asked if a request for information via email even without the proper information would have simply been ignored. Womble stated they would have sent the scanned form to them in reply, with instructions to call if they needed assistance. Womble said if details are provided by the requester then no ones' time is wasted and the requester is assured of getting what they asked for.

The original "Procedure" was to request information in a proper manner with a form that assisted you in getting the information you desired. I'll be happy to go down to City Hall, although I'm not saying I'll accept this hinderance, and I remind that my email request had all the details and information required by law, and I had requested public information in this manner for years. This is definitely not the intent of the law to use the form as a means of a hinderance, rather than assistance, and especially in ignoring correspondence, of any kind.

David Hogan

It's About What Your Grandmother Taught You.

2009-04-07T00:34:00.015-05:00

Let me dispense quickly with what happened to me in the public comments section of the Monday Night City Council meeting as there are pressing matters that were discussed. While I am highly frustrated with the actions of City Hall toward our media publication, I must keep front and center our intent was to request public information to serve the public interest.

We made several requests for public information of the City of Leeds that went with no response from City Hall. When we brought it up in the public comments section the Mayor responded that we did not follow the proper procedures. I totally disagree and made my point in my comments, but those that addressed me from the Mayor to Councilor Carswell, to one of the city attorneys totally missed a bigger point as they danced around the issue, with everything from previous types of information requested by email to carrier pigeons. I was not impressed with their arguments either as they fly in the face of open government and Alabama law, but that is for another time.

What they missed is that not only was my request for information ignored, I was not even given the courtesy of a reply telling me that I did not follow their procedure. While the mayor admitted he had spoken with other cities concerning my request, not even a small amount of the time he spent doing that, was spent even telling me of his procedures, or anything, as I received no response at all.

Keep in mind that my email request even mentioned if they had objections they had not stated so. Not even the courtesy of a reply, something mothers and grandmothers alike would frown on and in fact many would have whipped you for that kind of slight, yet the mayor said he was not snubbing me...I had not followed proper procedures.

So Mayor, were you ever going to tell me, or are request for public information that serve the public interest something that deserve to be ignored... if they do not meet your procedures? What happened to telling everyone you would not keep things from the media or the public? Could we get a manual on how to interact with you so we are procedurally correct? Or should we just "litigate" that as well, like the way your attorneys were so fond of mentioning during the meeting section about Grand River and the Cooperative District agreement?

The bigger issue was totally missed. I can get the public information no matter the procedure, make no mistake about that, what happened was a clear showing that I was going to be ignored, all the way to the point of having to come before the council to ask why. I did not even get a reply or a procedure in response, or anything at all. If the media is ignored the public is ignored and that is the bigger picture. It certainly flies in the face of the campaign promises we all received.

We'll discuss the council meeting in written details Wednesday in the Herald and provide you for now with the audio link of the entire meeting which lasted for a little over two hours and thirty minutes. And make no mistake, procedure or no procedure, we were most definitely snubbed.

Worth Remembering

2009-04-06T13:42:00.006-05:00

Below are the answers from current council members that participated in our Q and A before the past municipal election. Click for PDF of each council member.

UPDATE (9-27-11) it was recently brought to our attention that the below original links no longer work. These links went to the files on our old web site before we adopted the name of Leeds Herald, the file are now at our leedsherald.com website at the following url:

http://leedsherald.com/wordpress/?p=3735

We have retained the old links below even though they no longer work to show where the pdf files were originally displayed.

Charlotte Earnest Answers

Johnny Kile Answers

Ross Bartee Answers

Kenneth Washington Answers

Eric Patterson Answers

Your right to know..."See I told you to listen to me"...YEA, RIGHT!

2009-04-02T00:38:00.003-05:00

Remember the meeting I told you about that might set things right about Grand River that was to happen yesterday? It did happen, in fact two of them happened. Did they set things right? Not yet. Did they make some progress? It looks like some may have been made and that's encouraging. Did our local government open up and share this with the Leeds Herald? Are you kidding, of course not.

Is the Grand River development the most important thing to our city and to The Leeds Herald? Not even close.

I told the mayor directly that if he could prove this was a bad deal I would back him up 110 percent. Then again we really don't know if it's a good or bad deal, do we?

There are entire segments of the population that currently do not have a voice by their representatives, as they have been kept out of the loop. I'll back that up with numerous meetings concerning Grand River convened without inviting some council members (especially those that asked in open council to be kept in the loop) on a fair and revolving basis, along with not updating ALL council members in brief after these meetings, even the two meetings yesterday.

Do I hope this deal gets worked out? You better believe I do, as a lot is riding on it for the future of Leeds. But that is NOT the most important issue for Leeds at the moment.

The leaders of our city may have the opportunity to ride in on a white stallion and save the city from a terrible deal and save the day. WAIT A MINUTE, didn't we hear that song and dance with the last administration during the Bass Pro Shops final hours?

How many times will that happen in the future for the next administration, and the next, and the one after that to ride in as the knight with shining armour to save the day?

The most important thing that is before all of us in Leeds is that our elected officials grow up and quit thinking their election is a platform to get what they want. Instead, they should try and represent the people, even those with a minority voice, view or opinion. There is a reason they are supposed to be called Public Servants.

The decision to move beyond being just a small town was already made and yet many just can't stand it. A small town can both grow and retain the qualities of a small town atmosphere. That means everyone benefits, not just a selected few.

I said three years ago that we were a town experiencing growing pains and we are. Change is not always embraced and change for the sake of change has no merit either.

I am excited about Leeds even with calling out problems, because people are currently involved at levels greater than any of the twenty years that I have lived here, or at least they want to be. That last statement alone brands me as an "outsider" to many. Home is where you hang your hat and I did not have to be born in the Leeds Hospital, or "bleed" green and white to know every citizen deserves the same rights and privileges.

When you bring everyone up, no matter what their social status, financial status or any other self imposed standard, the whole community wins. We had some players on our State Champion football team that were not born in Leeds. Does that make you feel any less about their wonderful accomplishment? For the sake of all, I hope not. Don't think for one minute that when leather met leather on the gridiron, those players not born here were not ALL about Leeds.

A great community cherishes all members and welcomes new ones with open arms. As Max Ehrmann, in his famous poem the "Desiderata" wrote:

As far as possible, without surrender,
be on good terms with all persons.
Speak your truth quietly and clearly;
and listen to others,
even to the dull and the ignorant; they too have their story...

You are a child of the universe no less than the tree and the stars;
you have a right to be here.

Traffic Blues Solutions

2009-03-28T09:57:00.002-05:00

OK, take a look at the photo and offer your ideas on how to ease traffic congestion at Parkway and Ashville during school drop off and pick up times.

Will it ever stop?

2009-03-26T18:03:00.004-05:00

Just try to get through Leeds around 3:00 p.m. and all I can tell you is...Good Luck! Traffic at the elementary school is legendary in this town.

Now I could beat up on those that won't allow their precious to ride a bus, but they would just beat right back and we'd still have the traffic. Or how about a rule that you can't do it? You know parents have to actually park up and down the streets and walk a block or two? So can anyone tell me a solution?

Come on, even turning cars into the playground in a safe manner would help. Get involved and let's figure this out.

Reply to my post below and let's brainstorm this problem.

Promises, Promises

2009-03-24T08:20:00.003-05:00

How do you handle a broken promise? You sincerely apologize and then begin keeping your promise. You can tone it down and minimize it with reasons and such but if you intend to be seen with integrity you can not walk it backwards.

Campaign Pledges as delivered to our publication by the candidates before the 2008 election:

How will you address Leeds Magazine's request to be more open with government?

Patterson
First, I plan to issue a statement as Mayor every month as to what is going on in the city and what I am considering and what are the hot issues in the news and on this website if I am allowed.

Second, I plan to publish one week before council what issues are coming up at the next council meeting in the news and on this website if allowed.

Third, I also plan to hear public comments before we vote on general issues so we have public input instead of hearing comments after the vote which is just a way for people to express their unhappiness because the vote is done.

I know the government is for the people and not a few. I promise no more secret meetings, backroom deals, inconvenient meeting times and locations, and keeping what we do as a city from the press or the citizens of Leeds.

Washington
It should be transparent; there should never be a hidden agenda. Leeds Magazine should be invited to all city business meetings and should have an agenda for each meeting.

Bartee
I will encourage openness and transparency with the citizens of Leeds. We need to work to plan scheduled and organized meetings with the media. The media should be provided the packets that are given to the Mayor and City Council for council meetings. However, at times, there will be information that will not be made available to the media due to attorney client privilege. I also want to encourage the media to focus as much attention on the positive occurrences in Leeds as they do the negative. I know that at times only "bad news" attracts readers, but these are exciting times in Leeds, and I feel they deserve more media attention. Truly, I have no political bosses or financial interests in Leeds and only want the best for our community. More open communication will only strengthen the relationships in Leeds.

Carswell
Ran unopposed and did not fill out q & a. It should be noted we did not directly ask those running unopposed to do so.

Earnest
Ran unopposed and did fill out q & a.
As a Councilor, I will request and support at least a weekly press conference with the media by the Mayor. If a conference is impossible, a press release concerning any city business happening that week should be prepared. I will encourage council packages to be shared with the media before council meetings unless attorney client information is included. Only that portion would be removed from the packet. As far as the law allows, I will be totally transparent as an elected official.

Kile
If you are open and forthcoming, the media can be a valuable tool for government and the community. We must maintain that trust of open and honest government to the news media as well as the public we serve.

Grand River and the Public

2009-03-19T08:18:00.002-05:00

I found it amusing that on the al.com forum I was called out for POLITICIZING the Grand River project. It was also mentioned that corporate deals could never be finalized if they had to come under public scrutiny. This IS NOT a corporate deal, it is a deal with corporate interest and taxpayer interest. It also very POLITICAL by nature, not by our comments.

The very arguments against the prior bond development deals and stating how bad they were, are all the more reason any issues should be brought forth for public consumption. We've heard the arguments of how bad the past deals were. IF they were so bad why is information on changing, fixing, killing or whatever being held back?

I don't buy the negotiate in private due to the different entities bit, but even if they do, the issues being considered should be front and center and the final vote or action demands by law it is front and center.

Blair on Board of Education

2009-03-17T08:04:00.002-05:00

I'm very glad to see Jamie Blair appointed to the BOE. Blair was one of the very first people to come to me about an elected school board. After his appointment he told me he still believes in an elected school board even with his appointment.

That's a sign of knowing the public matters.

Superintendent Search

2009-03-15T17:04:00.002-05:00

It was actually a hoot when Abernathey and Dutton whipped out their cell phones and begin calling for references for the consulting firms at the Thursday, March 12 BOE work session. We need more of that in government, just plain old getting the job done.

As for the emergency called meeting that was cancelled that leaves everyone wondering.

What do you think?

School Bonds a big step, but just a start

2008-04-28T17:22:00.009-05:00

The school bonds being sold and the funds distributed are just the start of needed growth in our area. These bonds will be initially paid for by the BOE's $11 plus million portion of the Jefferson County's school construction fund the BOE has on hand.

Make no mistake that the BOE's $11 plus million will run out long before the bonds are paid in full. Some will question whether or not we spent the bond money wisely with how the school buildings are being built, as opposed to a renovation of some of the schools. Some will question the locations, others whether we needed new schools or not. But one thing is certain now, the bonds have to be paid for in the near future with funds other than those in the current war chest.

Now stands the Grand River project shining its light at our city. Some will question climbing into another bond scenario, and others will just question for the sake of questioning. That is fine and good, as we should always strive to get our monies worth, but there are some, myself included that are questioning why the city is not plowing onward to answer whatever questions are needed and get the project moving forward before it blows right past us.

Let's stop and think about what has come recently to Leeds. Barber MotorSports, and Bass Pro are great catches to be sure, but they have the luxury of attracting a distant crowd. What I mean by that is most of their generated income will not come from citizens of Leeds, but rather a crowd more than willing to travel from afar to visit their facilities.

Leeds needs rooftops to attract future business as that sustains retail business in a community that is without the luxury of a long travelling clientele. Many residents of Leeds are yelling for a grocery store on the Western side of town and that requires a base of homes that will sustain it.

The GrandRiver project will have the luxury of a retail structure that attracts a travelling crowd, but it also has rooftops and not just cookie cutter homes like many developments. The Daniel Corporation and USX are willing to invest in Leeds beyond what they did at Ross Bridge and we think it is time they are met with open arms and all due speed. Let's also not forget the integrity of these two names throughout the country as they are major players in development and their reputation is on the line investing in any community.

The hesitancy and problems may come from not having a real understanding of what Ross Bridge really is so we can envision Grand River. Leeds Magazine will be visiting Ross Bridge during the upcoming golf tournament not as a golf fan which we are not, but to give you a first hand look at this community.

This is an oppportunity to pay for school debt and much more while growing our tax base at the same time. A community needs young, middle class and old to be a true community that you can really call home for the rest of your life. The homes in Leeds must run the gambit of all needs from those starting out to those in middle ages, to those ready to retire, to have a truly stable base for long term growth.

Like it or not those starting out in the home market usually do not have the added income of the middle and elderly generation to sustain retail growth. We have many starter homes in Leeds and I'm glad they are here, but we need homes that provide a range of diversity beyond starter homes. The housing crisis will run its course and it will get worse in our opinion before it gets better, but this had no effect on those that spent the night in their cars just weeks ago to get lots at Ross Bridge.

One of the items on the April 29 Council meeting is the Financial Advisor the council has said they want to use for this Grand River project. Let's hope they make their decision and move forward so this project does not go elsewhere before we've even had time to give it the consideration it deserves.

David Hogan

BONDS - Bitter with the Sweet

2008-03-23T11:42:00.005-05:00

Bonds do wonderful things for local communities. They are a complicated beast however, with fees that boggle the mind.

Below was taken from the closing statement we requested of City Hall for the Bass Pro Bond closing fees in 2007. They were on our web site for months. This shows the fees related to the 3 bonds of that project.

SERIES 2006-A

Bond Counsel - Haskell Slaughter Young and Rediker $101,400
Underwriter's Counsel - Maynard Cooper and Gale $20,000
Trustee Counsel - Balch & Bingham $4,000
LOC Counsel - Bradley Arant Rose & White $32,000
Trustee Acceptance and Annual - Regions Bank $10,000
Rating Fees - S&P $5,000
Alabama Title $29,959.81
Total Letter of Credit Fee Paid at Closing $345,939.68
Bank LOC $35,000
TOTAL - $583,290.49

SERIES 2006-B

Special Counsel - Weathington & Moore $250,000
Bond Counsel - Haskell Slaughter Young & Rediker $101,400
Underwriter's Counsel - Maynard Cooper & Gale $20,000
Issuer's Counsel - Waldrep Stewark & Kendrick $180,000
Validation Counsel - Greg Morris $150,000
CDA Counsel - Barnes Tucker & Barnes $100,000
Trustee Counsel - Balch & Bingham $4000
LOC Counsel - Bradley Arant Rose & White $70,000
Issuer's Consultant - Redmont Consulting $31,000
Trustee Acceptance and Annual - Regions Bank $10,000
Rating Fees - S&P $5,000
Alabama Title $49,317.19
Total Letter of Credit Fee Paid at Closing $29,369.83
BANK LOC $25,000
TOTAL $1,025,087.02

SERIES 2006-C

Bond Counsel - Haskell Slaughter Young & Rediker $101,400
Underwriter's Counsel - Maynard Cooper & Gale $20,000
CDA Counsel - Barnes Tucker & Barnes $65,000
Trustee Counsel - Balch & Bingham $4000
LOC Counsel - Bradley Arant Rose & White $70,000
Issuer's Consultant - Redmont Consulting $14,000
Trustee Acceptance and Annual - Regions Bank $10,000
Rating Fees - S&P $5,000
Total Letter of Credit Fee Paid at Closing $91,773.01
BANK LOC $25,000
TOTAL $406,173.01

All deserve pay, but the amount charged is what is continuing to be questioned by many.

One example is to take Weathington and Moore fees which spanned 3+ years of work and contrast that to other fees that spanned less than a month.

An argument can be made of all fees of the complexity of the work being done to justify the costs.

How does one justify the amount of ANY of the fees without having something to compare them to? You can look at other similar fees across the country and you will find like numbers. Am I outraged at some of the costs? Of course, but is this the nature of the beast?

That is the extent of my Geraldo investigating. To dig into the real amount of hours spent on any of these bonds would require one to be a "fly on the wall" with a video camera 24/7 through the process.

Making even an attempt to get the fees under control is worthy in my humble opinion. But the nature of the beast simply may not allow it.

SO, do we simply have to take the bitter with the sweet?

Just food for thought.

David

David's Pecan Pie

2006-12-10T20:25:00.000-06:00

David's Pecan Pie

your tongue will slap your brain out trying to get another bite!

You are so lucky to receive this! This is a variant of the standard Karo recipe I have used with compliments for years.

3 medium to large size eggs
1 cup packed light brown sugar
1 cup Karo Light & Dark Corn Syrup mixed 1/2 and 1/2 to make one cup (DO NOT DEVIATE FROM THIS HALF AND HALF MIXTURE OR IT WILL NOT HAVE THIS WONDERFUL TASTE)
2 tablespoons melted butter
1/2 teaspoon ground cinnamon
1 teaspoon vanilla
1 1/2 cups pecans
1 (9-inch) unbaked or frozen deep-dish pie crust

Preheat oven to 350.

Beat eggs slightly with a fork in a medium bowl. Add brown sugar, Karo syrup mixture, butter, cinnamon and vanilla; stir until blended. Stir in pecans. Pour into pie crust.
Bake 50 to 55 minutes or until knife inserted halfway between center and edge comes out clean. Cool on wire rack for at least 30 minutes.