October 19th, 2008
I am gratified to report that last Monday night Commissioner Cynthia Long as acting Chair of CAMPO pulled the agenda item regarding the financing of 290E with a promise to first hold the public hearings required by the covenants. I will post the hearing dates as soon as they are finalized by CAMPO staff.
October 12th, 2008
Just over one year ago, at the height of public outcry over toll roads, the Policy Board of the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (CAMPO) unanimously passed a set of covenants to govern the use of toll revenue collected from the Phase II toll roads. The covenants generally require that toll revenues stay within two miles of the road on which they were generated. The covenants allow for diversion of excess toll revenues from one toll road corridor to other projects only after specific public input and a 2/3 vote of the CAMPO Policy Board. Finally, the covenants require that tolls be reduced and eventually eliminated after the debt for the toll road has been retired and potential improvement projects within the corridor have been exhausted. On Monday, the CAMPO Policy Board will consider overturning some of these covenants, including the public meeting requirements.
The first of the toll roads formerly known as Phase II is 290E, also known as the Manor Expressway. Because the project cannot stand on its own merits from a financing perspective the Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority (CTRMA) is proposing to “backstop” the debt financing of 290E with toll revenue from 183A through the creation of a “system.” In this system comprised of 290E and 183A, toll revenue and resultant debt capacity/obligation for both roads would be commingled and belong to the system, not to the transportation shed in which the user fees were collected. This diversion of revenue is exactly the circumstance the covenants were designed to address.
Under this circumstance the public comment provisions in the covenants should kick in. But, they haven’t. The covenants require that a Statement of Purpose be developed by the CAMPO Policy Board and that public hearings be held both region-wide and within the donor corridor. Instead, the acting chair of CAMPO without consultation with the CAMPO Policy Board has declared a Statement of Purpose and an alternate public comment plan.
The covenants were passed at a time when the reputation and credibility of CAMPO were at an all time low. The public felt that CAMPO withheld information, stifled public input and that decisions were made out of the public eye or with insufficient information. The public comment provisions of the covenants were meant to turn the page on that era. While public meetings take time, money and can become contentious, there was an understanding that citizen participation leads to better government decisions. That unanimous commitment to a fair and open process has been ignored in favor of the acting chair’s alternative.
In addition to the public comment provisions, the covenants require a two-thirds vote of the CAMPO Policy Board to divert toll revenue from one toll project to another outside the transportation corridor. I will not be among that two-thirds majority. The roads in this proposed system are 14 miles apart. The commuters in these two corridors have no significant overlap. One argument made by toll road supporters is that tolls are not really taxes, they are user fees paid by those who use the specific roads. If one believes this argument (I don’t), then why should we create a system where the tolls paid by a driver in northwest Travis County are used to finance a road 14 miles away in eastern Travis County?
We need a comprehensive and integrated regional transportation system including not just roads, but also rail, rapid bus and HOV. We need a broad-based revenue stream as the primary source of funding for that system. The CTRMA has the statutory authority to build that system. But, the organization has no reliable and broad-based revenue stream to create the true “system financing” it begs for. Without that broad-based revenue stream its credit worthiness is stymied and it must continue to borrow from toll payers over here to benefit toll payers over there. To keep this carrousel of toll backed debt spinning the CTRMA concentrates on toll roads to the exclusion of any other mode of transportation even when there is excess revenue in a tolled corridor in which rail, rapid bus and HOV are lacking. The broad-based revenue stream needed by the CTRMA to create a true system has been and should continue to be the gas tax.
It is a fact that paying for road construction through the use of tolls is more expensive than paying for that construction through a gas tax. It is a fact that tolls place a heavier burden on a fraction of those who use our road system while gas taxes spread the burden of our road system among all who use it. CAMPO, the CTRMA and the good folks of Central Texas should tell the Legislature to brace up and stop diversion of the state gas tax; to index the state gas tax; to borrow on the state gas tax and establish a “backstop fund” available to entities like the CTRMA for road projects and transit projects; to allow a local option regional gas tax. Broad-based gas taxes augmented by local tolls and other user fees will build a multi-modal and equitable system. Heavy reliance on local toll revenue will not.
I have pledged to address transportation planning and funding in a comprehensive manner. The CTRMA proposal seeks to work around the failures of our state Department of Transportation and Legislature rewarding their fiscal irresponsibility. We are asked to do more but the Legislature refuses to give local entities optional tools which they can employ. If we continue this band-aid approach, we will never achieve a comprehensive solution and we will continue to be stuck with a one dimensional system financed on the backs of a small portion of the population. I can’t support that approach.
May 28th, 2008
We had our May Coffee Jolt in Wells Branch at Kenny’s Coffee. We had spirited discussions on community involvement in public schools and voting procedures in Travis County. The discussion of public schools was frustrating for me - K-12 public education is not a county function. The revenue source and the authority are (rightly) with the school districts. As citizens (whether or not we’re parents) it is in our best interest to support and strengthen the public school system. Closing struggling schools and diverting dwindling educational funding into the private school system where children have access only to the education their parents can afford only exacerbates an educational caste system that has and continues to weaken our democracy.
In contrast the discussion of voting procedures fit squarely within Travis County authority. We can certainly do more to enfranchise more. We can increase citizen participation as poll workers. We can improve client services to those who participate as poll workers. We can implement procedures and advocate for State law that broaden eligibility and convenience for voters. People on both ends of the political spectrum are mistrustful of our voting systems. Some folks fear wide spread manipulation of electronic voting machines to steal elections. Other folks fear droves of ineligible voters herded to the polls by campaign operatives to steal elections. While both scenarios are possible and rare incidents of abuse have been documented, I believe the “cure” offered by either side have in almost every instance been worse than the disease. I support reasonable safeguards against fraud, but I will err on the side of broadened eligibility and convenience.
March 2nd, 2008
2008 has been an incredibly exciting year to be a Democrat. With such a stellar field of Presidential candidates, it has been particularly difficult deciding who to vote for in this primary. Senators Biden and Dodd and Governor Richardson have political experience and talent that would do honor to our White House. Former Senator John Edwards brings a populist message back to the Party not seen since the days of LBJ. Senator Clinton vigorously pursues issues that all Democrats hold dear. The Democratic Party is enjoying an embarrassment of riches.
Despite the depth of the field, the decision to support Illinois Senator Barack Obama on March 4th has become undeniable clear. First, I support Senator Obama for his public policy priorities. Second, I support Senator Obama because of the manner in which he conducts himself. Third, I support Senator Obama because he embodies a sea change in the way we view ourselves and (hopefully) in the way the world views the U.S.
Senate Legislative Accomplishments:
1. 2007, Sponsored and passed Obama/Feingold Ethics Reform Law: provided enhanced restrictions and transparency into the relationship between politicians and lobbyists. (S.230 from the 110th Congress, became law 9/14/07
2. 2006, Sponsored and passed legislation with Senator Coburn (R-OK), which would provide transparency in the federal budget process. A google-like search engine which will enable people to find out what the government is spending money on and who sponsored it. (S. 2590, became law 9/7/06)
3. 2007, Sponsored and passed legislation with Senator Hagel (R-NE) and Representative Schiff (D-CA), which would require that the President develop and implement a strategy for “ensuring that all nuclear weapons and weapons-usable material at vulnerable sites around the world are secure by 2012”.
4. 2005, Sponsored and passed an amendment to the Department of the Interior appropriations bill that forced the U.S. EPA to outline strategies for dealing with lead-based paint (SA 1061) as required by a law passed seven years earlier. 9 months after passage of this amendment, Obama was successful in forcing EPA to publish their report. He did this by leading an effort to block EPA nominees until the agency complied with the law.
5. 2005, Sponsored and passed legislation creating a tax credit for the installation of E-85 fuel pumps. Inserted an amendment into the Energy Policy Act to fund research for Hybrid and Flex Fuel Vehicles.
6. 2006, Sponsored and passed legislation which began to address the abysmal care provided to wounded veterans at Walter Reed Military Hospital and VA centers around the nation.
7. 2006, Sponsored and passed legislation with Senator Coburn (R-OK) prohibiting the Dept. of Homeland Security from entering into open-ended no-bid contracts for emergency response activities.
8. 2006, Sponsored and passed an amendment to the Homeland Security appropriations bill creating a national family locator system for the aftermath of a disaster.
Illinois Senate Legislative Accomplishments:
1. 1998, Sponsored and passed bi-partisan Ethics reform legislation that enabled making campaign finance reform possible.
2. 1998, Sponsored and passed campaign finance legislation known as the Illinois Gift Ban that prohibited public officials from soliciting or receiving gifts (over $50 in value) from anyone doing business affected by government
3. 2003, Sponsored and passed a bill to assist health care consumers by creating a hospital report card system to rank quality of care.
4. 2004, Sponsored Illinois’ KidCare program raising eligibility level for participation from 185% to 200% of FPL adding 20,000 new eligible kids and 65,000 new eligible adults. By 2007, because of this legislation there were 70,000 new kids and 84,000 new adults enrolled as a result of this legislation.
5. 2003, Sponsored and passed a death penalty overhaul package. Bill created the Capital Punishment Reform Study Committee.
· Empowered judges to rule out a death sentence for people convicted solely on the testimony of a jailhouse informant, accomplice or single witness.
· Empowered Illinois Supreme Court to overturn death sentence that was “fundamentally unjust.”
· Reduced the crimes eligible for death penalty by focusing on “inherently violent” crimes.
· Expanded defendants’ access to genetic evidence used against them.
· Requires juries to consider defendant’s history of abuse or mental illness.
6. 2003, Sponsored and passed legislation requiring law enforcement to videotape interrogations in capital cases.
7. 2003, Sponsored and passed a bill requiring law enforcement to record the race, age and gender of all drivers stopped for traffic violations to analyze for evidence of racial profiling.
9. 2000, Part of a bi-partisan effort to amend the Illinois Tax Act to create an EITC.
10. 2001, Sponsored and passed legislation which would require companies in Illinois to provide 60-days notice before mass layoffs.
11. 2003, Sponsored and passed legislation which created Whistle-Blower Protections in Illinois, which protects employees that cooperate with law enforcement in the investigation of state and federal law.
12. 2003, Sponsored and passed Equal Pay Act in Illinois to give 330,000 more women protection from pay discrimination.
Key components of Obama’s Presidential Platform:
1. Opposed the war in Iraq. Will pursue a foreign policy which allows the United States to re-focus on credible threats and will pursue a strategy which relies on diplomacy as much as military strength.
2. Continue the efforts to secure nuclear stockpiles in former-Soviet republics and continue to work stave off the proliferation of nuclear weapons.
3. Pursue a strategy of diplomacy where we are willing to meet with adversarial nations without pre-condition.
4. Address the gaps in No Child Left Behind to ensure that public education focuses on results, as per the intent of the law, but is also adequately funded to help local districts succeed. In the process address growing drop out rates, expand head-start and early childhood education programs, expand after-school programs, and strengthen teacher retention.
5. Pursue a Cap and Trade system to reduce climate changing greenhouse gas emissions. Reduce CO2 emissions by 80% by 2050.
6. Invest $150 billion over 10 years in clean energy technology research and implementation.
7. Middle class tax relief
8. Renegotiate NAFTA to fight for fair and equal environmental and labor standards.
9. Ensure that the right to organize is never infringed upon. Ensure that striking workers are protected according to the law. Raise the minimum wage and index it so it keeps pace with inflation.
10. Regulate finance industry to ensure that the predatory credit industry doesn’t destroy the livelihood of working Americans.
11. Address pro-credit corporate changes in credit, bankruptcy and other laws during the Bush administration. Ensure that these industries are truly competitive and transparent.
12. Balance the budget, adopt PAYGO and reform tax code to stop rewards to companies that hurt the American economy by exporting jobs.
13. Cut pork-barrel spending and create greater transparency in the federal budget process.
14. Work for comprehensive immigration reform along the lines of the McCain (before he disavowed it)/Kennedy legislation from 2007.
15. Expand health care coverage, mandate for children’s health insurance, focus on Health IT efforts to increase efficiency and quality of care, pursue mental health parity, expand Medicaid and SCHIP.
March 2nd, 2008
An editorial decision has been made at the Austin American Statesman to no longer run the Election Day polling information in the print version of the paper. Editor Rich Oppel, in his Blog post explaining the change, points out that, “The Internet has fundamentally changed how people access lists and other data. We … have migrated many listings, including … polling places, to the Internet, leaving more room in our print columns for active news and enterprise coverage.” Although I consider information regarding participation in our democratic process to be more akin to “active news” than “lists and other data,” I do recognize that most people now access both active news data on the web.
I am however concerned for those without comfort with or access to the Internet. If participation in Travis County’s Internet jury service procedure is any indication, roughly 10% of registered voters in Travis County are not utilizing the Internet to perform their civic duty. Nationally, the percentage of the population that does not regularly utilize the Internet may be as high as 20%.[1] The populations least likely to utilize the Internet are people over the age of 65, minorities, and the poor.[2] Since I suspect that the margins of victory in the races next Tuesday are likely to be smaller than 10% and that people who are not young, wealthy and white will be participating in record numbers, Travis County has purchased advertising space in the Austin American Statesman and has established a phone bank at the County Clerk’s Office to provide polling locations and other voting information to the widest possible audience.
In the future, Travis County may wish to explore which vectors for voter information are most likely to reach the populations least likely to have Internet service. If the Austin American Statesman as our only major daily of general circulation is not likely to reach that demographic (whether as a public service announcement or in the form of a paid advertisement), then state law should be changed alleviating counties of the statutory obligation to run voter information in such newspapers.
[1] Mediamark Research, Inc., New York Cyberstats, Fall 2006, www.mriplus.com/pocketpeice.
[2] Pew Internet and American Life Project Surveys from 2000 to 20006, www.pewInternet.org.
December 14th, 2007
Do Americans need more money in their pockets (i.e. a tax cut) or do we just need to stop buying so much crap. This country faces serious challenges in the next decade. We face declining revenue due in part to reckless tax cuts as well as increased interest payments on all our outstanding debt to foreign creditors. As a nation, we have failed to offset this decline in revenue. This is primarily because our political leaders lack the courage to stand up to the various interest groups who fight tooth and nail for their piece of the pie (AARP, NEA, and Chamber of Commerce, I am looking at you). This is all occurring at a time when we face an increasing demand for our social safety net programs. Programs like Medicare, which will be placed under incredible financial strain with the impending baby boomer mass retirement. Other programs like Medicaid and SCHIP will also feel the squeeze due to the swelling ranks of Americans who lack health insurance. All of this reckless finance is occurring while the United States is pouring grotesque sums of money into the black hole that is the United States military. All so that we can prop up a dysfunctional regime in Baghdad under the guise of security.
This incredibly myopic view completely ignores that for the [false] perception of physical security (from those crazy Jihadists) we have triple mortgaged and then refinanced our economic security. The United States used to be the largest creditor in the world, but we are now the largest debtor. We borrow $800 million annually from Japan, South Korea, and even more disturbingly, China.
What is the solution? Well, Rudy Giuliani would tell you that everything could be solved with a few well placed corporate tax cuts. I am dubious. Fred Thompson would say that the solution is to simply tell baby boomers that the Medicare benefit that they had banked on will be unavailable because we can’t afford it (everyone burn your bras!). Ron Paul would say that the United States needs to close all bases around the world, adopt an isolationist foreign policy and then with the savings we will be able to shore up domestic programs. As ridiculous as all those solutions are, and they are, it is nothing compared to what is coming from the donkeys. Arguably this election cycle is idiot-proof for the Democrats. There has almost never been a more sure bet then 2008. Anyone who has watched any of the Republican debates knows that this crew of mental midgets doesn’t stand a chance on policy mostly because they willfully and proudly disdain public policy. Public policy, to the Republican presidential candidates, as synonymous with “Washington insiders thinking they know how to use your hard earned money better than you.”
This brings me to the point of this blog posting. Perhaps the Republicans are right! No, I have not fallen down and hit my head. I am quite alright. I am standing on one foot, touching my nose and saying the alphabet backwards. What I mean is, maybe Americans hate the idea of working hard only to turn around and pay a tax for that hard work. The taxation of income was first enacted in the United States in July 1861. Congress passed a 3% tax on all net income above $600 a year (about USD 10,000 today). In 1894 a tax act was found to be unconstitutional and the collection of income taxes was halted. This event led to the ratification of the 16th Amendment to the Constitution in 1913. But I digress.
It has become the stated practice to place the largest portion of our taxation on production. Perhaps we should shift away from that paradigm. Why do we tax something like hard work that we want to promote? Perhaps in a time when our planet faces serious challenges from over consumption of goods and production it is time to instead place the tax burden on consumers. There are a number of ways to do this and they should all be discussed out in the open without fear of hateful vitriol and assertions of being a “tax and spend pinko.”
One potential shift would be to implement a Value Added Tax (or VAT) like many European countries successfully have. The VAT is levied on the added value that results from each exchange. A traditional sales tax is levied on the total value of the exchange. A VAT is neutral with respect to the number of passages that there are between the producer and the final consumer. This would be very effective in making the supply chain of many products more efficient (eliminating endlessly inefficient layers and middlemen). It is an indirect tax, in that the tax is collected from someone other than the person who actually bears the cost of the tax (namely the seller rather than the consumer).
Another approach is the much hyped carbon tax. A carbon tax is a tax on sources of carbon dioxide emissions. It is an example of a pollution tax. This type of consumption tax has two key aspects that make it an attractive alternative. First it creates an incentive for consumers to purchase products or utilities which are carbon neutral. Second, this tax targets a “bad” rather than a “good” (such as income).
The solution that I envision would probably include both. We could either severely cut the income tax and implement these tax alternatives to offset the revenue loss, or we could eliminate the income tax altogether and make the consumption tax the major method of collecting revenue for government services. It should be said that Mike Huckabee has proposed eliminating the federal income tax with a national sales tax and has been laughed out of the room. The press coverage has portrayed this idea as a sign of insanity.
This isn’t a perfect solution there should be debate about whether this approach is too regressive, but in the end the goal of these taxes is to bring to light the amount of consumption we engage in as a society and the extent to which that consumption is destroying our environment.
Our leaders need to have the courage to speak truthfully and openly about the very serious economic challenges that we face. That will not happen until the American people realize that we are collectively (rich and poor alike) sitting in a boat, drifting towards a huge waterfall and our reticence about even discussing tax policy is akin to throwing the oars overboard. If we don’t, at the very least, have the conversation we are doomed to second tier status. Then this country, which has for over a century stood as an example of entrepreneurial “can-do” spirit will cease to exist and will be replaced by a nation that panders to the lowest common denominator, debates triviality, and preys on fear to achieve power.
I am not optimistic.
December 5th, 2007
The NIMBY Death of an East Side Drug Treatment Program
I believe that the first line of representative democracy occurs at the neighborhood level. Neighborhood associations, churches, and local interest groups provide the vital links in the chain of representation between the individual and his or her government be it local, state or federal government. This chain of representation is oiled by communication and reasoned dialogue. I believe that communication and reason produce action in the public interest and prevent the policy paralysis of personal interest. Today however, that belief was tested.
Today was the culmination of three months of communication and reason for the location of a drug treatment center located on East 11th street just east of I-35. The center was to provide individual and group therapy for those convicted of felony drug and alcohol related crimes. No individuals with additional mental health or violent records were to be served. The center was to be located within a building owned by the Ebenezer Baptist Church. The congregation was an enthusiastic supporter of the program. One neighborhood association, however, was adamantly opposed. They feared increased drug crime and eroding safety for their children due to the center. When presented with data showing the probability of reduced crime due to the center, they turned to fears of increased traffic and parking problems. When presented with commitments for upper limits on the daily numbers of clients to be served and adequate parking arrangements for staff and clients, they turned to accusations that the public input process had been inadequate despite nearly three months of meetings, phone calls, e-mails, surveys and Q&A. They did not argue that the service was not needed by our community. They simply did not want this service provided in their neighborhood.
One tactic used in their argument against the location was particularly disturbing – the tactic of “villainizing.” Not all but most of the residents used this tactic to varying degrees. One target was the government itself through accusations that the process had not been adequate or that commitments would not be kept. But more troubling was the villainizing of the clients expected to be served. Implied in the fears expressed was that people with drug and alcohol addictions are evil. In my personal and professional experience, drug and alcohol addiction is an equal opportunity affliction. Those who are addicted to drink or drugs are not by definition violent, pedophilic or homeless. In fact, just as we are all sinners, I suggest that most of us are drug or alcohol felons. Who among us has not driven while “buzzed”? Who among us has not “experimented” with illegal drugs? Who among us has not “borrowed” a prescription pain killer? And, who among us does not know and love someone who has?
Compassion. Reason. Action. This holiday season let’s spread those gifts around.
November 9th, 2007
Married Student Housing in UT’s Brackenridge Tract along Lake Austin Blvd.
Married student housing deserves our support. This is affordable, family friendly housing at its best - mixed race, multi-cultural, multi-generational, close to good schools, groceries, recreation and transit. This is just the kind of mixed-income inner city development we claim to crave. Additionally, the married student housing attracts the best graduate students from around the world to our university, to our city, to our public schools and to our neighborhood.
The support that is coalescing around the married student housing is a beautiful example of people with a voice rallying around people with little voice. The graduate students’ need our voices because:
One example of the remarkable effects the married student housing has had on our community can be seen in the success of Mathews Elementary School.
Mathews’ school slogan is “We Educate the World.” By retaining and expanding the married student housing, University of Texas can continue to boast the same.
November 2nd, 2007
A quick word on the CAMPO vote (but by no means the only or last):
The toll roads as proposed by TxDOT warrant and have my continued opposition. Monday night we heard eloquent statements from four other board members regarding the serious inefficiencies and inequities presented by the plan as proposed. Knowing that TxDOT will not give us the funding necessary to build the road infrastructure we need unless tolls are used as leverage, it is imperative that we as a board face these inequities head-on and do everything we can to blunt their effects. That’s what the amendments that I offered are designed to do. In the face of a 14 to 5 loss, I lent my vote to the toll road plan Monday night to get those amendments passed. The margin by which they passed was the result of months of negotiation in which my vote was my only bargaining chip. Implementation of those amendments will take years of continued negotiation and our constant push for tax equity, local control and transportation policies that move people rather than money. I am gambling that a 15 to 4 loss with a heavily amended toll plan is better policy and better politics than a 14 to 5 loss with the TxDOT plan as proposed. Here are the differences:TxDOT Plan as proposed:
• TxDOT is in control of the toll road operations
• No guarantee that toll roads wouldn’t be sold to private interests
• Toll revenue intended to be used anywhere in the CAMPO region for any transportation project
• No plan for free access to toll roads by high occupancy vehicles
• No guarantee of maintenance and improvement of the non-tolled options around the toll way
• Toll tax to continue irrespective of whether or when the construction debt is retired
• No provision for removing the toll tax should gas tax revenue be increasedToll Plan as amended:
• CTRMA is in control of the toll road operations
• Prohibition on selling toll roads to private interests
• Toll revenue can only be used in the corridor from which it was generated except under rare circumstances requiring a 2/3 vote of the CAMPO Policy Board
• Guaranteed and immediate free access to toll roads by high occupancy vehicles
• Guaranteed maintenance and improvement of the non-tolled options around the toll way
• Toll tax to be removed when the debt from building the road is retired
• Toll tax to be removed if gas tax revenue or any other revenue preferable to toll tax becomes available
August 23rd, 2007
Critics say RGK Ranch will bring more traffic to already dangerous highway.
By Marty Toohey
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
“I do not believe the county commissioners made a decision today that is in the best interests of their constituency,” said Karen Huber, who lives near the project and is one of its most vocal critics.
Gerald Daugherty, the county commissioner whose precinct includes RGK Ranch, said Huber’s line of thinking is illegal and would not get Texas 71 fixed any faster.
“Our goal should be fixing the road,” Daugherty said.
Critics raised other concerns about RGK Ranch. The Hill Country Alliance, a coalition of neighbors who are upset about the pace of Hill Country development, said the subdivision should be rejected because it was not required to follow some of the county’s current environmental rules.
It did not have to because plans for RGK Ranch were submitted before those rules came into effect two years ago.
But Greg Kozmetsky, whose family owns the RGK property, wrote in a letter Friday to the county commissioners that the project should satisfy everyone’s concerns and would voluntarily meet or exceed most of the county’s rules, such as covering no more than 20 percent of the property with roads, houses or other substances that block water from soaking into the ground.
“I believe critics of the plan haven’t really criticized the plan,” Kozmetsky wrote, “but the fact we have one.”
During the final weeks of discussion, Commissioner Sarah Eckhardt persuaded the Kozmetsky family to sign a contract requiring RGK Ranch to follow most of the county’s requirements.
Eckhardt said the county could not require more of the Kozmetskys, especially when they were willing to compromise.
She added, however, that because the county’s rules are not strict enough, she was left “to make another decision that leaves a bad taste in my mouth.”
mtoohey@statesman.com; 445-3673
