Category Archives: Planning

The United Methodist Church declares its opposition to the privatization of prisons and jails

We already heard from the Episcopal, Presbyterian, and Catholic churches, against private prisons. Now let’s hear from the United Methodist Church:
Our Lord began his ministry by declaring “release to the captives…” (Luke 4:18 NRSV), and he distinguished those who would receive a blessing at the last judgment by saying, “I was in prison and you visited me.” (Matthew 25:36b NRSV) Jesus also declared that one cannot serve two masters and condemned the idolatry of mammon, or wealth. (Luke 16:13).

Christians, therefore, must have a special concern for those who are captive in any way, especially for those who are imprisoned, and for the human conditions under which persons are incarcerated. Individual Christians and churches must also oppose those policies and practices which reflect greater allegiance to the profit motive than to public safety and to restorative justice for offenders, crime victims, and local communities.

Therefore, The United Methodist Church declares its opposition to the privatization of prisons and jails and to profit making from the punishment of human beings.

ADOPTED 2000

The statement has further practical explanation of why this opposition: Continue reading →

How to get public officials to respond to the citizens?

Leigh Touchton asked me,
Mr. Quarterman, what can we do, do we have to go to the state legislature to get a law passed to force these so-called public officials to answer questions and respond to the citizens?
First of all, my compliments to anyone such as Leigh Touchton who has been doing politics around here longer than me for asking my opinion, because that indicates they are pretty good at it and are probably asking many people their opinions.

My answer: carrots along with sticks, and shine some light! That all builds political capital, which will be needed for elections.

We need many people building a community doing many things. If I knew a simple answer that would change things magically overnight, I’d recommend it, but I don’t. I don’t even know if I know a long answer, but I’m pretty sure that any answer will require a community, because Continue reading →

What does this mean? —Leigh Touchton

This comment from Leigh Touchton came in last night on It’s not over until it’s over. I have added links and pictures. -jsq
I asked VLCIA Board member Roy Copeland afterwards whether this means the biomass incinerator is STILL going to be built? He shrugged and walked away.

Karen Noll asked Allan Ricketts what does this mean, since we all heard Lowndes County Commission Chairman Paulk give us a very different scenario at the last LCC meeting, and his remarks were covered in the Valdosta Daily Times. Mr. Ricketts said he was not aware of Chairman Paulk’s remarks.

Continue reading →

Georgia #3 state that could benefit most from solar electricity

Matthew Croucher wrote 29 November 2010 in asu news, Who would benefit most from solar energy?”
The Top 10 states that would benefit from solar deployment through generating and exporting energy to other states are:
  1. Arizona
  2. Colorado
  3. Georgia
  4. Texas
  5. Hawaii
  6. Arkansas
  7. Wyoming
  8. Alabama (tie)
  9. Missouri (tie)
  10. California
This is according to a study from the W. P. Carey School of Business at Arizona State University, “Optimal Deployment of Solar Index,” published in The Electricity Journal,

This article found on WACE facebook page; thanks for locating it, WACE!

-jsq

Is VBOE allowed to take a position on school consolidation? —Leigh Touchton

This comment from Leigh Touchton, President, Valdosta-Lowndes NAACP, came in Monday on This is not representative of the people:
Tonight I went to the VBOE meeting and delivered the offical NAACP letter stating our branch’s opposition to consolidation. I asked Chairman Warren Lee if he would discuss with VBOE attorney Gary Moser and let me know whether they are “allowed” to take a position on this. The reason I asked this is because one of my friends says that Dr. Cason told her that “they are not allowed” to take a position on this. To my mind, employees might not be able to take a position, but elected officials representing voters ought to clearly state their position on an issue as important as school consolidation.

After the meeting was over

Continue reading →

Rezoning on Old Pine Road again: is anything different this time?

Has anything changed since the contentious Glen Laurel rezoning on Old Pine Road? Maybe yes.

The new case decided yesterday (REZ-2011-05 – Laurel Brooke), was also represented by Bill Nijem, who got up and started speaking for it, and after a bit said:

First let me introduce myself, there are new faces up here. Bill Nijem. I represent the applicant.
Assuming that Commissioners should just know who he is may not sound like a good start, But, as he already said, nobody was speaking against this rezoning. Why is that?

I would like to note when the applicant first submitted this application, it was submitted as planned development, and worked with Mr. Davenport, we did tweak the site plan somewhat, made larger lots, and now it’s R-10.
And that’s what the opponents of the Glen Laurel rezoning asked for. At least a couple of them were present this time. Gretchen talked to them later, and they told her that since this subdivision had what they asked for last time, they had no objections this time.

Bill Nijem even discussed traffic and accidents, which you may recall Continue reading →

Developers refused to budge and Commissioners caved: Glen Laurel

Should the County Commission approve rezoning for a subdivision just because developers say they won’t compromise any more?

Bill Nijem presented Moody and schools nearby and the proposed house price as arguments for the Glen Laurel subdivision, plus county services, which, remember, were put in for them to use. This was after Pine Grove Elementary closed and moved farther away.

Here’s Part 1 of 5: Continue reading →

Put there for us to use —Barbara Herring

Should developers drive the extension of county services, or should there be a planning process that takes other factors into account? The Glen Laurel rezoning case suggests that developers drive the process now.

Speaking for the Glen Laurel subdivision were Bill Nijem and Barbara Herring. She described the original layout as “a very efficient layout”. She said they redesigned it and added a park in the middle and other green space in addition to natural vegetation.

All the neighbors on the outside wouldn’t be able to see into it very well.
She said they also increased the lot sizes, but they did not change the road plan.

Here’s Part 1 of 2: Continue reading →

Density and traffic

A retired Air Force veteran weighed in, asserting that new subdivisions need to be compatible and consistent with homes already in the area, and Glen Laurel would cause a lot of traffic and drive land values down.
In the long run, as far as Lowndes County is concerned, do you feel in your hearts that this is going to enhance Lowndes County as a place to come and live and enjoy?

Here’s Part 1 of 3: Continue reading →

Small lot size means more traffic —Ms. Zaun

A landowner (probably Glynda Faye Zaun) between Old Pine Road and Mulligan Road says if all those little houses are built her property values will decrease, and she’ll be surrounded by 94 little homes that will generate too much traffic.
I am not against growth. Growth is beneficial to every community; I recognize that. But it should be constructed in a way that is beneficial and pleasing to everyone and not just to the developers or the ones who want to make a lot of money quick and then leave.

Here’s Part 1 of 3: Continue reading →