Who could have predicted this outcome last year? Just about anyone that was paying attention to the City Council and City staff. Under the rubric that the city is growing in population at an alarming rate, especially "old people", the City Council has decided to acquiesce to the Fire Chief and take over all Emergency Services, which will "pay for themselves" and improve the response times and medical outcomes. More analysis of these claims will be forthcoming.
The principle issue with the County provided EMS service is that the response time is too long because the initial call comes into the Georgetown call center and then has to be re-entered into the WILCO call system so that an ambulance can be dispatched. With the ability to dispatch its own ambulances, the delay caused by poor communications between Georgetown and WILCO can be eliminated. This is true but at a large cost to the Georgetown taxpayers (the costs will be identified in a later post). What has been missed by our city leaders is that there are much cheaper solutions to the problem of poor communications between different government entities. For example consider the following from readyop.com.
"ReadyOp is an advanced concept for communications between mobile and/or fixed-based personnel across multiple responder agencies within a single or multiple jurisdictions, including law enforcement, EMS, fire, emergency management, schools and universities, hospitals, public works and more. ReadyOp also supports multi-jurisdictional mutual aid plans, allowing public safety agencies from different jurisdictions with different and incompatible communication systems and networks with disparate voice radio systems to communicate and share information seamlessly."
There are likely other companies that have solutions that will enhance overall communications among various departments and agencies at a very nominal cost. It just takes a clear definition of the problem to be solved and due diligence in procuring a solution.
Friday, March 27, 2015
Thursday, March 19, 2015
Deer Feeding Ordinance
It appears the City Council is going to institute an ordinance against feeding deer on your own private property within the City. The second reading of the ordinance will occur at the next Council meeting. In the discussion of the proposed ordinance at the last Council meeting it was disclosed that the decision to charge any citizen with a violation rested entirely and solely with the animal control officer. This seems like significant discretion to be delegating to a single un-elected bureaucrat. Secondly, the discussion at the Council disclosed that the Council expected no enforcement of this ordinance unless there was a complaint lodged against an individual ( We hope you do not live next door to the neighbor from Hell). It was also revealed during the discussion that the animal control officer was currently very busy and if significant number of complaints were generated by this ordinance, more staff would have to be added to the City.
This ordinance seems like a perfect candidate for an automatic "sunset" provision. For example, if at least three complaints and one fine are not generated within the next year, the ordinance would automatically expire. Other parameters could be incorporated as well. Since there is no data for the City of Georgetown that indicates a Public Health and Safety issue with feeding of deer, the ordinance should be removed from the City regulations if a documented issue for the City does not exist. The passage of ordinances sans data, incomplete data, or bogus data, is exactly how the Federal Government operates through the EPA, BLM, and Fish & Wildlife when they intrude on our personal lives and restrict our liberty and freedom.
Contact your City Council person and let them know they should not be passing regulations unless there is good, solid empirical evidence of a problem. But, if they do pass ordinances without solid data, it should include an automatic sunset provision in the absence of solid data.
FIGHT REGULATORY BLOAT!
This ordinance seems like a perfect candidate for an automatic "sunset" provision. For example, if at least three complaints and one fine are not generated within the next year, the ordinance would automatically expire. Other parameters could be incorporated as well. Since there is no data for the City of Georgetown that indicates a Public Health and Safety issue with feeding of deer, the ordinance should be removed from the City regulations if a documented issue for the City does not exist. The passage of ordinances sans data, incomplete data, or bogus data, is exactly how the Federal Government operates through the EPA, BLM, and Fish & Wildlife when they intrude on our personal lives and restrict our liberty and freedom.
Contact your City Council person and let them know they should not be passing regulations unless there is good, solid empirical evidence of a problem. But, if they do pass ordinances without solid data, it should include an automatic sunset provision in the absence of solid data.
FIGHT REGULATORY BLOAT!
Wednesday, March 11, 2015
More on Resolution Against Use of Antibiotics in Agriculture
After last night's Georgetown City Council meeting, it appears the Council is prepared to issue a resolution supporting the ban on non-therapeutic uses of antibiotics in agriculture. It seems that passing such a resolution requires a large dose of hubris on the part of the Council in that they are the representatives of Georgetown and there is no known data that indicates a majority of Georgetown citizens would support such a resolution.
The Council is venturing far outside its area of responsibility and expertise in passing this resolution. This is an area of science that is very unsettled at this time. Even when an area of medical science is considered settled by a majority of scientists and citizens, we find out later that the settled science was wrong. It was not long ago that fat in the diet was considered detrimental to human health. Salt was considered as contributing to high blood pressure. Eating eggs was considered to be bad for our heart for decades. All of these so-called facts are now considered to be erroneous by many scientists today. They are no longer universally accepted as fact.
The latest controversy revolves around the use of statins to reduce blood pressure.
The Council is venturing far outside its area of responsibility and expertise in passing this resolution. This is an area of science that is very unsettled at this time. Even when an area of medical science is considered settled by a majority of scientists and citizens, we find out later that the settled science was wrong. It was not long ago that fat in the diet was considered detrimental to human health. Salt was considered as contributing to high blood pressure. Eating eggs was considered to be bad for our heart for decades. All of these so-called facts are now considered to be erroneous by many scientists today. They are no longer universally accepted as fact.
The latest controversy revolves around the use of statins to reduce blood pressure.
"Dr Kailash Chand, deputy chairman of the British Medical Association, was speaking recently about research which found those who take the cholesterol-lowering drugs are more than twice as likely to develop Parkinson’s disease in later life than those who do not. A study last week showed statin use increases the risk of diabetes by 46 per cent. This has led to calls to end to the widespread use of the (statin) drugs". http://www.express.co.uk/
The point of these examples is not to comment on
the efficacy of these drugs or
changes in life style, but, to point out that we as a society do not know all
the information at a given time and often times our knowledge changes over
time. Surely no one would undertake a regime of statins to marginally
reduce their blood pressure if it were known that their risk for Parkinson's
disease would double and their risk for diabetes would increase by
approximately 50%.
Our City Council is certainly not in a position to have definitive information that will allow them to "take sides" on a highly contentious and unsettled area of science. Furthermore, they don't know how the citizens of Georgetown feel about this issue and there are likely unknown consequences of supporting a ban on non-therapeutic uses of antibiotics in agriculture.
The prudent course for the Council is to stay out of supporting these kinds of resolutions and focus on city governance.
Monday, March 9, 2015
City Discourages Innovation?
The City Council is proposing to amend its ordinance relating to Taxicabs, Buses and other Vehicles for hire to provide for fines to anyone that violates the ordinance. The first reading of this amendment is set for Tuesday, March 10, 2015. Specifically, the amended ordinance establishes the following:
"Each violation of this chapter shall constitute a separate offense and each offense shall be punishable as a Class C misdemeanor and shall each be punishable by a fine not to exceed $500.00 for each day the violation exists".
I am not a lawyer, however, this appears to me as a means of keeping innovative transportation concepts like Uber and Lyft out of Georgetown. Ride sharing seems like a consumer friendly approach to solving some of our transportation problems. These services in other cities have proven to be responsive to customers, economically favorable to customers, and provide great opportunities for students, single mothers and others who want flexible part-time work.
The city should not be erecting regulatory barriers that require more city bureaucracy and financially penalize customers and operators.
Unless and until a pattern of abuse and problems is manifested, the City should not be picking business winners and losers by establishing punitive ordinances. Instead, it should be encouraging innovative transportation concepts that help Georgetown citizens to save both money and time in meeting their transportation needs.
"Each violation of this chapter shall constitute a separate offense and each offense shall be punishable as a Class C misdemeanor and shall each be punishable by a fine not to exceed $500.00 for each day the violation exists".
I am not a lawyer, however, this appears to me as a means of keeping innovative transportation concepts like Uber and Lyft out of Georgetown. Ride sharing seems like a consumer friendly approach to solving some of our transportation problems. These services in other cities have proven to be responsive to customers, economically favorable to customers, and provide great opportunities for students, single mothers and others who want flexible part-time work.
The city should not be erecting regulatory barriers that require more city bureaucracy and financially penalize customers and operators.
Unless and until a pattern of abuse and problems is manifested, the City should not be picking business winners and losers by establishing punitive ordinances. Instead, it should be encouraging innovative transportation concepts that help Georgetown citizens to save both money and time in meeting their transportation needs.
Sunday, March 8, 2015
The City wants to Fine You for Feeding Deer?
Due to the massive public health and safety problem (what?) that deer are causing in Georgetown, our fearless City Council has drafted an ordinance to punish any Georgetown resident that feeds deer on their own property.
At the next Council meeting, Tuesday, March 10, 2015, an ordinance punishing those who feed deer on their private property will be presented to the Council for approval. The revelant description is:
"An Ordinance of the City Council of the City Of Georgetown, Texas Amending Chapter 8.05 of the Code of Ordinances Relating to “The Intentional Feeding of Deer;” Creating an Offense; Providing a Penalty Clause; Repealing Conflicting Ordinances; Providing a Severability Clause; and Establishing an Effective Date".
I wonder if folks will be cited and fined for feeding rabbits and other wildlife? Do I put up a sign at the rabbit feeder that no deer are allowed? This seems unenforceable and a waste of the city resources and adds to the regulation bloat.
Sorry folks, just another solution looking for a problem that our City Council can solve by passing more regulations restricting the liberty and property rights of its citizens. Perhaps we would all be better served if the Council focused on reducing the growth in the city budget and debt instead of passing feckless deer feeding regulations.
Contact your city council person and let them know what your priorities are for them to work on.
(512) 930-3652
At the next Council meeting, Tuesday, March 10, 2015, an ordinance punishing those who feed deer on their private property will be presented to the Council for approval. The revelant description is:
"An Ordinance of the City Council of the City Of Georgetown, Texas Amending Chapter 8.05 of the Code of Ordinances Relating to “The Intentional Feeding of Deer;” Creating an Offense; Providing a Penalty Clause; Repealing Conflicting Ordinances; Providing a Severability Clause; and Establishing an Effective Date".
I wonder if folks will be cited and fined for feeding rabbits and other wildlife? Do I put up a sign at the rabbit feeder that no deer are allowed? This seems unenforceable and a waste of the city resources and adds to the regulation bloat.
Sorry folks, just another solution looking for a problem that our City Council can solve by passing more regulations restricting the liberty and property rights of its citizens. Perhaps we would all be better served if the Council focused on reducing the growth in the city budget and debt instead of passing feckless deer feeding regulations.
Contact your city council person and let them know what your priorities are for them to work on.
(512) 930-3652
Progressives Want to Ban Antibiotics in Agriculture
The City Council is being asked, at Tuesday's March 10 council meeting, to pass a resolution in support of national action on the misuse of antibiotics, as presented by the Southwestern organization Students for Environmental Activism and Knowledge (SEAK).
It is asserted eighty percent of the antibiotics sold in the United States are used in livestock production, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has reported that most of those antibiotics are used irresponsibly. The key elements of the proposed resolution follows:
"NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that on the _____day of ____2014, Georgetown supports a statewide and national ban on non-therapeutic uses of antibiotics in livestock production; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Georgetown supports the Protection of Antibiotics for Medical Treatment Act (PAMTA)/Prevention of Antibiotic Resistance Act (PARA). AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Georgetown will send a letter to our State representatives, Congressional Representative and U.S. Senators calling for a ban on the non-therapeutic use of antibiotics in livestock agriculture and for them to co-sponsor the PAMTA/PARA".
There are many families in Georgetown and surrounding Williamson County that depend on agriculture for their economic well-being, and they would not take kindly to the Georgetown City Council passing and supporting an advocacy that will likely have a negative economic impact on their personal lives.
Furthermore, since the Council represents all the citizens of Georgetown, it seems inappropriate for the Council to support this social engineering effort.
Call your council person before the council meeting at 6pm on Tuesday, March 10, at (512) 930-3652 and tell them to deny this resolution!
It is asserted eighty percent of the antibiotics sold in the United States are used in livestock production, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has reported that most of those antibiotics are used irresponsibly. The key elements of the proposed resolution follows:
"NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that on the _____day of ____2014, Georgetown supports a statewide and national ban on non-therapeutic uses of antibiotics in livestock production; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Georgetown supports the Protection of Antibiotics for Medical Treatment Act (PAMTA)/Prevention of Antibiotic Resistance Act (PARA). AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Georgetown will send a letter to our State representatives, Congressional Representative and U.S. Senators calling for a ban on the non-therapeutic use of antibiotics in livestock agriculture and for them to co-sponsor the PAMTA/PARA".
There are many families in Georgetown and surrounding Williamson County that depend on agriculture for their economic well-being, and they would not take kindly to the Georgetown City Council passing and supporting an advocacy that will likely have a negative economic impact on their personal lives.
Furthermore, since the Council represents all the citizens of Georgetown, it seems inappropriate for the Council to support this social engineering effort.
Call your council person before the council meeting at 6pm on Tuesday, March 10, at (512) 930-3652 and tell them to deny this resolution!
Wednesday, March 4, 2015
TEXAS Property Tax Debt Out of Control
The Texas Public Policy Foundation recently published an article describing the growth in local government debt over the last ten years. (http://www.texaspolicy.com/blog/detail/local-government-debt-headed-in-wrong-direction)
"And the problem is only getting worse.
Since fiscal 2009, the total debt owed by cities, counties, school districts, and special districts has grown from $298.3 billion to $333.1 billion in fiscal 2014. That’s an increase of almost $35 billion over a relatively short period, pushing up the total amount owed by each Texan to near $12,500.
Over a longer time frame, it’s even clearer that local government debt is headed in the wrong direction. According to the Texas Comptroller’s report Your Money and Local Debt, population and inflation grew a combined 53.3 percent from 2001 to 2011. Over that same period, local debt outstanding rose 122.4 percent, outpacing population and inflation by a factor of more than 2-to-1."
The financial burden created by high property taxes also creates disincentives for property investment and it retards job creation by penalizing land development. This causes businesses, both in-state and out-of-state, to restrain growth of their businesses. The worst aspect of property taxes is that an individual can never truly own their property! They will always owe money to the state for the ability to use their own property.
The City of Georgetown needs to set the standard for restraining the growth in property taxes, as clearly the County and local school districts are not!
Monday, March 2, 2015
More Debt Analysis
We have examined the growth of debt in Georgetown over the last 10 years (10.48%). We have observed that the debt payment (9.45%)is also in a strong growth trend. The growth of property tax revenue has enabled the City to continue growing the debt. The City focuses its budgetary effort on controlling the tax rate. This is an intentional miss-direction as the important issue is the amount of money that is extracted from the property owners. Here is a chart showing the revenue produced by the property tax.
Tax revenue of course is the product of assessed value times tax rate. The compound annual growth rate of 9.76% significantly exceeds the population plus inflation rate of 6%. Therefore there is opportunity to reduce the growth of the property tax revenues to be in line with population growth plus inflation. This would also require reducing the growth of debt (currently at 10.48%).
Another measure of debt is the debt per capita. The following chart from the City Debt Overview document shows the debt per capita for the property tax supported debt.
The latest data shows property tax backed debt of approximately $2300 per person. The latest tax information from the Tax Foundation (FY 2011)shows the property tax collections state-wide per capita is $1557. This makes Texas the 15th worst in the nation in terms of property tax burden. So Georgetown is collecting substantially more property tax revenue than the state-wide average which includes school taxes. Not a good place to be!
When the debt load per person for utilities ($72,153,351) is calculated ($1382) the total debt load per person totals $4677 for FY 2014.
Tax revenue of course is the product of assessed value times tax rate. The compound annual growth rate of 9.76% significantly exceeds the population plus inflation rate of 6%. Therefore there is opportunity to reduce the growth of the property tax revenues to be in line with population growth plus inflation. This would also require reducing the growth of debt (currently at 10.48%).
Another measure of debt is the debt per capita. The following chart from the City Debt Overview document shows the debt per capita for the property tax supported debt.
The latest data shows property tax backed debt of approximately $2300 per person. The latest tax information from the Tax Foundation (FY 2011)shows the property tax collections state-wide per capita is $1557. This makes Texas the 15th worst in the nation in terms of property tax burden. So Georgetown is collecting substantially more property tax revenue than the state-wide average which includes school taxes. Not a good place to be!
When the debt load per person for utilities ($72,153,351) is calculated ($1382) the total debt load per person totals $4677 for FY 2014.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)