Pension Problems

Across the country businesses are failing. In some cases the straw that broke, or is breaking, the proverbial camel's financial back is their defined benefit pension plan. Do a Google search and see how many references pop up regarding pension plans and company failures.

I've written about Fayette County's vote to enact a defined benefit plan for their 600 plus employees before and most are aware of the problems the county is dropping into our laps. At a time when everyone else in the country is scrambling to try and fix their nightmare plans, at a time when tax revenues are down and everyone is trying to figure out how to afford to buy groceries, our "leaders" are giving away our future.

Sure, it'll start out fine, but the guys who are mortgaging the future of our county will have moved on by the time the fiasco hits our pocketbooks. The employees who sat on the committee that studied the feasibility of implementing a defined benefit plan will be retired and living off our tax dollars.

Every time I mention a DB plan to a financial planner and even to those who sell the product, they are horrified that our county will soon have that type plan. When I show them the comments made by Interim (still?) County Manager Jack Krakeel and Commissioner Jack Smith, they laugh. Everyone says exactly the same things they've said and everyone of the plans ultimately causes a huge financial burden on those paying for the plan.

The County has a wonderful plan in place that takes good care of the employees, especially those who are wise with their planning.

Why am I ranting about this one again? Well, the County is getting ready to finalize which plan they'll put into place AND I just received the following communication:

Isakson, Chambliss Urge Delta Air Lines, Pilots’ Union to Reconsider Termination of Retired Pilots’ Pensions

U.S. Senators Johnny Isakson, R-Ga., and Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., today sent
a letter to Delta Air Lines CEO Richard Anderson and Captain Lee Moak, Chairman
of the Delta Air Lines Master Executive Council, urging them to reconsider a
proposal to make a voluntary contribution to the Pension Benefit Guaranty
Corporation for the benefit of retired Delta pilots and to work toward finding a
solution that protects the earned benefits of employees and retirees alike.

The text of the letter is below:

Dear Mr.
Anderson and Captain Moak:

As you know, we worked tirelessly on behalf of the Delta employees, retirees, and their families to pass into law provisions allowing airlines to spread their pension plan funding over a more manageable schedule. We did this to protect the 91,000 Delta Air Lines pensioners and family members in Georgia from losing their pensions and to help protect American taxpayers from having to pay for those airline pensions.

We understand that over 5,500 retired Delta pilots have had their retirement plan terminated and turned over to the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC). Our understanding is that a majority of retired Delta pilots receive only a small percentage of the monthly retirement benefit they earned while employees of Delta. We are also told that a number of retired pilots receive zero benefit from the PBGC, and many more get a monthly PBGC payment that equals half or less than half of their Social Security benefit check. Finally, we are told that Delta will be assuming the pension liabilities for over 30,000 Northwest employees and retirees.

A group representing thousands of retired pilots recently sent a proposal to you, Mr. Anderson, asking Delta to make a voluntary contribution to the PBGC that would partially correct this issue. They also raised the issue at the September 25, 2008 shareholders meeting. As proponents of legislation designed to save these pensions, we were disappointed to hear that the response from Delta at that meeting was that this was considered a closed issue.

We urge you both to reconsider your positions, and to work towards finding a solution that protects the earned benefits of all employees and retirees. We appreciate your attention to this matter, stand ready to assist you in any way possible, and look forward to your response.

Sincerely,
Johnny Isakson

United States Senator
Saxby Chambliss
United States Senator

If a tree falls in the forest…

The County Commission held a number of meetings where they discussed the switch to a defined benefit (db) retirement program for county employees. Unfortunately for taxpayers, they held every single discussion during their daytime Wednesday “workshop” meetings. No public comment is allowed during those meeting. And, it is impossible for 99.999% of the public to attend. They may as well have been standing in a forest with no one around.

In addition to my formerly expressed concerns regarding the certain tax increases down the road to pay for the db program, I’m very concerned about the process used to arrive at the switch. I mentioned two concerns in my opening paragraph. Here are a few more:

Unbiased Committee?
A committee was appointed by the Commissioners comprised of county employees and one citizen. The lone citizen was an attorney who is friends with and/or has done business with some of the Commissioners and/or Interim County Manager.

Wouldn’t it have been advisable to have a committee that had a few people with expertise in the area being studied? All but one person on the committee stands to benefit when the db plan is implemented. I know all of the folks on the committee, they’re good people overall. I don’t doubt for a minute that most of them went in trying to be objective and they all did their best. But if the commissioners intended to study the issue fairly they could easily have found a few in the community in the insurance and/or financial arena willing to serve on the committee.

Fair Study?
The “retirement study committee” looked at one thing: defined benefit retirement. They didn’t consider any other options. They didn’t study the current system to see if it could be tweaked. If they did look at any of the other options it certainly wasn’t what they were tasked with looking at and they didn’t report on it during the daytime workshop meetings that I attended or taped in absence.

Additionally, unless I missed something, they didn’t invite a variety of experts to advise them on the study. They used so-called experts who could very well end up getting the county’s db program business. Seems kind of like getting a used car salesman to advise you on which car to buy. What are the chances the salesman is going to steer you to a car on another lot? Chances are he’ll point you to the one where he makes the highest commission. Duh.

If you truly want a fair, objective study, you look at all sides. Governments across the country are squirming as they try to find ways to get out of db programs. I wonder if anyone from Henry County (db in the hole), Peachtree City (db in the hole), Atlanta (already moved away from the db program where possible, but in the hole with those that are left)… GM, Delta Air Lines, the list goes on and on and on, stopped by to share their concerns with the study group?

Public Input
I went back and looked at how the defined benefit issue was listed on the agenda. The September 5th daytime meeting lists it as a report from the “Retirement Study Committee.” I doubt that would hit anyone’s radar screen as a topic of critical importance.

On the October 3rd daytime workshop meeting agenda it was listed in this manner, “Steve Vaughn of Government Employee Benefits Corporation of Georgia (GEBCorp) will present the Board with Additional Information regarding the findings of the Retirement Study Group.”

A “Retirement Study Group.” How’s the average citizen to know what that entails by going on-line and looking at agendas? And, even if they do figure it out, are they then expected to take time off from work to come to a meeting? One where they can’t even voice their opinions?

They voted to go forward with the db program in this Wednesday's workshop meeting. How was it listed on the agenda? Try this and see if you thought there would be a vote on the issue: "Further discussion of the retirement study committee decision tree and critical elements for the Board's decision making process with respect to a retirement plan. This items has been addressed at the September 5, 2007 Workshop Meeting, the October 2, 2007 Workshop Meeting and the November 7, 2007 Workshop Meeting."

Anything in that lead you to believe they were going to do anything other than discuss it again?

Lest you waste time scratching your head over that question, here's how it was listed on the Nov. 7th agenda (where it was simply discussed and not voted on): "Presentation of retirement study committee decision tree and critical elements for the Board’s decision making process with respect to a retirement plan. This item has been addressed both at the September 5, 2007 Workshop Meeting and at the October 3, 2007 Workshop Meeting."

An evening meeting with public comment would have gone a long way toward making the process seem open. However, without any of the documentation or access to the findings of the “study committee” there’s not much anyone could say of substance. One former County Commission Chairman went before the Board with questions. He was ignored, then disparaged at this Wednesday’s meeting for not being at previous meetings. You know, the meetings held during business hours where public comment isn’t allowed?

Unbeknownst to the Commissioners, he did have access to some of the material. The Fayette Front Page films and/or audio records meetings and provides it either on-line or will give a copy to anyone requesting it for a nominal fee. He was aware of at least some of the rosy-scenario information provided by the “study committee” and the GEBCorp “consultants”. He asked legitimate questions that taxpayers should have answered since they are, for all practical purposes, being shut out of the process and will be footing the bill.

A lot of things get done in the meetings being held during normal business hours. A lot of critical decisions are made in those daytime meetings --- without the ability for public input and often times without public knowledge until after the fact.

The original intent of a daytime meeting was to allow those who couldn’t make an evening meeting the opportunity to be able to address the Board and to have access to their Commissioners. By mutual consent, past Board’s have avoided making any high priority decisions or discussing controversial issues during the daytime meetings because they WANTED public input. They wanted open government.

Unfortunately, things have changed. The switch was the brainchild of Commissioner Herb Frady. He made it sound good. It’s a workshop, not called a meeting. At the same time they changed the intent of the Wednesday meeting, the commissioners made a few token changes regarding public input during the evening meetings. Then they started making key decisions without listing the item on the agenda. Then they started making decisions during the Wednesday meetings. Then they started setting up handpicked committees which meet behind closed doors, shutting out the press and the public.

If a tree falls in a forest and no one hears, does it make a sound? Our Commissioners are meeting at times when no one can hear. And yes, they are making a huge sound. Unfortunately, it’s a sound that will reverberate for years to come as we dig into our pockets to pay for the decisions they’re making.

The Tax Hike Cometh…

Oops, goofed, the tax hike has already cometh… However, if you think the County’s tax increase this year is something, wait until the County Commission votes to implement defined benefits for county employees!

The County seems hell bent on doing what every other large business has been forced to dump if they planned to stay in business. Companies across the nation have found it impossible to fund the kind of retirement program the County wants to put in place. They’ve gone into bankruptcy; they’ve run to the government to help, they’ve closed their doors.

And it’s not just private companies (like IBM, General Motors, Delta Air Lines, etc.) who’ve had huge problems with trying to pay the bill for defined benefit type retirement. Counties and cities are having to go back to taxpayers to fund bloated defined benefit programs.

At a time when so many are crashing and burning in large part due to defined benefits, the County is looking to grab onto the golden tether and ride the horse straight into our pockets. Yep, that’s where all this is going to end up, with taxpayers having to pony up the funds to cover benefits for employees who’ve long since moved on to other jobs, states, countries...

Right now, it looks like the county is getting ready to commit to a defined benefit system that is raising taxes across the state and beyond.

Who’s giving them advice on this plan? From everything I’ve seen at the meetings and heard from others in the know, the company that will ultimately get the business is providing all the studies, data and info. Oh, and a committee of employees who are getting close to retirement and one outside attorney who has absolutely no knowledge of retirement systems and said so during his first briefing to the Commission.

I’ve talked to umpteen insurance types, financial wizards and the like about defined benefits. Every single one, no exception, basically said “RUN” in the other direction if someone starts talking defined benefits. I’ve been on the Internet searching for someone who says something good about a defined benefit program. The only folks saying they like it either work for or are affiliated with someone who’s also selling benefit programs. Find a think tank who says it’s a good idea… find an independent financial wizard who says it’s a good business decisions… If it’s a bad business decision doesn’t it stand to reason that it’s a bad decision for the government to expect us to fund this type retirement?

Here’s my prediction based on the information that abounds on this issue: We’ll be fine for a few years. All will be rosy and everyone will sing merry songs and give glowing reports. Then the County will have a wave of retirements. They’ll scramble a bit to cover the unfunded liability. It’ll grow. And grow. By the time the next change of command on the Board of Commissioners the county will be in a deep hole with no way to dig itself out. There will be some major scrambling to try and figure out how in the world to pay benefits for those who only worked for the county for five, six and seven years. They’ll do without some recreation, they’ll do without some needed road improvements, they’ll cut back here, cut back there… and raise our taxes ‘cause there ultimately won’t be any other way to cover the tab that will grow exponentially as more and more hit retirement age.

I worked for the government for 14 years. I had both a defined benefit retirement and a 401K plan. I didn’t appreciate it while I was there, but boy I love it now. I understand why everyone would want a defined benefit retirement plan. It’s there for a lifetime if you don’t cash it out. However, my 401K would do the same thing. In fact, I rather like it better. When I die, my husband or my kids will get whatever I didn’t use. The defined benefit? It doesn’t belong to me. It belongs to the government. They’ll give the money I paid into it to someone else.

One of the reasons for moving to a defined benefit system that is touted is that it makes the county government competitive. Well gee, I guess it’ll make ‘em even more attractive now that every other company in the world is ditching their defined benefit. I would argue that for most of us it’s things like salary, health, location, and the job itself that attract us. Until most hit their 40s or 50s they’re not thinking much about retirement. If they are the type that does, many would be happier (or as happy) with a 401K or the system the County currently has. Who wouldn’t like to own their own future? Who doesn’t like the idea of the company matching their contributions? Managed correctly a 457 or 401 can out-perform many retirement systems and it doesn’t go away the day you die.

We need to make sure county employees aren’t stuck out in the cold when they retire. We can’t expect them to live on Social Security alone. A good percentage of county employees are socking money away for their future under the current program. Some aren’t. Some of those are young and aren’t yet thinking of that day in the future when they’ll retire. Some have spouses who are making sufficient money that they’ve opted to take every penny of their salary. Some who aren’t contributing to the current retirement program won’t want to pay their portion of the defined benefit program either if it means a decrease in their take-home pay.

[[[[Just in case you're wondering what the difference is between a defined benefit retirement plan and a defined contribution plan like the County currently offers here's easy to remember definitions: defined benefit: controlled by others and they tell you what you'll get; defined contribution : you own it, and put your own funds into it. Usually companies do a match with a defined contribution plan]]]]]

Define Best Qualified...

As promised, a little (or maybe a lot) about the ones who got away… or were turned away… or didn’t make it… whatever. I’m going to delve a little into the qualifications of the top three contenders for Fayette County’s new in-house attorney.

Wandering around on Google I found tons of information on two of the three top candidates for position. Per Interim County Manager Jack Krakeel a total of 23 applied for the position. Six made it to the top tier and were interviewed by the Commissioners. Three were selected as finalists (sounds like a beauty pageant doesn’t it?). The top three were Scott Bennett (who they ultimately selected), Gary Moore and Gia Compton.

It was a piece of cake to find out info on both Gary Moore and Gia Compton. Couldn’t find a negative word anywhere about either. When Googling Gia’s name I came up with a lot of references to adoption and child advocacy representation. She’s currently the City Attorney for Greenville in Meriwether County and lives in Conyers. I saw a reference to her holding the position as an attorney with the State Department of Health and a listing for her under “Divorce” attorneys. Overall the impression I had after glancing through some blog postings she made and the issues she chose to focus on was of a very nice lady.

I didn’t see much that would have put her into the top three though. However, it’s only a Google search. IF (big if) I found everything of importance out about Compton it really makes me wonder about the other 20 whose names will not be released per the Commission’s ruling. They must have been pretty sorry.

When I googled Gary Moore I found tons of information. Again, not one bad word. He has at least 32 years of experience, including serving as the attorney for Glynn County. His background is in civil rights, constitutional law (bet he wouldn’t make the mistake of banning recorders at public meetings!), developmental law, business and commercial law, property, government law, real estate transactions, workers compensation, etc., etc. He was the attorney for City of Darian and the Darian Downtown Development Authority. The list of companies and accomplishments was long.

You have to wonder how an attorney with only six years experience beat someone like Gary Moore out for the job. I’m not privy to the criteria for the interviews or the qualifications for the job. Could be they offered Moore the job and he didn’t like the salary. Although he had to have some idea of what the salary range was when he applied… Could be some deep dark secret appeared after he cleared the pack of 23 and then the pack of six. Nah, the Sheriff was on the vetting committee, surely a background check was done on the top tier at least. They had a tax guy on the committee, too, so it’s doubtful he had a problem with his taxes…

So, why did they choose Eric Maxwell’s attorney? What is it about a six-year attorney with virtually no positive history to be found when Googled? I checked Lexus-Nexus, the Georgia Bar and FindLaw. He’s pretty much an invisible entity.

So, why did they choose Eric Maxwell’s attorney? There were a total of 23 who applied for the position. Their names are to be forever hidden (unless one of them reads this blog and contacts me ). How come an attorney with minimal experience in the areas that matter when representing the county beats out 22 others who thought they met the criteria?

How did Eric Maxwell’s attorney make it to the top of the heap? When asked, the Commissioners parroted “best-qualified” and had nice things to say about Bennett’s personality. Best qualified? Google “Gary Moore” and look at his qualifications. You can read my previous blog for more on Scott Bennett’s qualifications. Compare the two. Tell me who’s best qualified!

So, how did the Board choose Eric Maxwell’s attorney? Maxwell led the charge to get rid of Bill McNally, the previous attorney. Seems like if the goal was to save costs they’d want to hire someone with at least a token amount of comparable experience. McNally has the reputation as the best County Attorney in the State so it’s not possible to come close to his level of expertise, especially when you toss in the rest of his firm who had a wide assortment of experience.

With the new in-house attorney it’s a given they’ll be hiring more help soon and that they’ll be using outside counsel to help him out. Not sure if you watched the video, but I did catch the fact that Chairman Jack Smith said Bennett was asked to be the new county attorney and to “establish the legal department”. How long do you think a “legal department” will be comprised of just one attorney and a legal secretary?

Maxwell made a big deal out of keeping out of the process of choosing an attorney at the Board Retreat in Callaway Gardens Resort earlier this year. So how’d we end up with his attorney?

A quick look at the new County Attorney... and the Commissioners who hired him

I’ve been out doing some basic research on the county’s new attorney. He’s coming with baggage.

In case you haven’t seen the Fox 5 investigative report or read the story on the Fayette Front Page or read my previous blog… our newly hired Commission attorney told his previous bosses they could stop the public from filming open council meetings (and other meetings). The Council had COPS waiting to stop one group when they showed up with a camera. BIG mistake since the guy with the camera used to work (or does work?) for Fox News…

How does any attorney advise elected officials to keep citizens from exercising their clear right to audio or video record public meetings? There’s no gray area in the law. It flat out says anyone can do it. That’s basic 101 law. According to news stories the Mayor of McDonough (who was out of town during the fiasco) even told them they couldn’t ban cameras, etc.

Our new attorney, Bennett, admitted he was wrong when the you-know-what hit the fan. Of course, you may want to excuse his blooper. I mean, he only received his J.D. Degree from Georgia State University College of Law in May of 2000. He qualified to practice about a year later on April 9, 2001. It’s not like he has a lot of experience with those kinds of things.

Yep, our commissioners chose an attorney who has six years experience to advise them on issues that could cost taxpayers millions of dollars. But not to worry, I’m sure he’s going to be getting a lot of outside help on matters. It’s gonna be interesting to see how much all that outside help is going to ultimately cost. I’m betting the first year it’ll be rather light ‘cause the Commissioners will KNOW we’ll be looking at the numbers. But you just watch. The amount we pay for outside legal experience is going to grow and grow.

OK, I could easily get sidetracked. Let me get back to Mr. Bennett’s experience…

What’s he been doing for six years? For one thing, he’s been suing to get sign ordinances thrown out so companies and individuals could have more signs. Specifically he’s been suing in part to get OUR sign ordinances tossed out. Now maybe YOU want to have signs like they do in Clayton County, Dekalb County and Atlanta (the cities Bennett practiced in prior to hiring on with the City of McDonough)… but I don’t think the vast majority of the people living in this county want more billboards and rows of cluttered signs up and down the roadways.

Yes, I understand that if our current County Commission doesn’t want more signs then the new attorney won’t get to dabble in that area. However (yeah, there’s always a however or two or three in my blogs), we already know one commissioner on the board has sued the county wanting unlimited signs on his own property (and since you can’t do for one what you do for all usually, that means everyone would have been able to stop mowing their grass and put in a carpet of signs). Did I mention that the commissioner (Eric Maxwell) who sued used Scott Bennett as his attorney when he sued? Hmmm… I’ll let you draw your own conclusions, the dots are too easy to connect.

Experience. Or lack thereof. We know Mr. Bennett can dispense bad advice and he likes to sue for signs. What else has our new attorney been doing for the past six years?

Since 2004 he’s worked for the City of McDonough in Henry County. There’s some crossover experience there. He’s been providing legal advice (stop filming our meetings!!!), preparing ordinances and contracts, reviewing zonings and other things that give him some experience (3 years) in areas the County Commission will deal with.

He’s also been working for a city that is currently exploding in growth. There has been a lot of bitter fighting going on between those who want to manage growth and those who don’t in McDonough. The Mayor Pro-Tem Brown was in the news recently for voting on rezonings for folks who invested in his restaurant. One who invested $25,000 also gave Brown an additional $9,000 loan. He says he was advised by the City Attorney that it was OK to vote for his buddy’s rezonings (for higher, much higher, density by the way) SIX times in 2004. I’m not sure if it was OUR new attorney (who started in 2004) who did the advising or if it was the previous city attorney yet. I have some calls and emails out and will get back to you on that one…

Prior to working with pro-growth McDonough, he worked for Webb & Porter (Atlanta), area of practice First Amendment Litigation for a little less than a year (i.e., suing for signs).

He worked for the DeKalb County Law Department representing the Development Department, Planning Department, reviewed contracts, defended general litigation, etc. for about two years. Although he was just one of the group of attorneys working with DeKalb he probably did learn quite a bit as DeKalb is another county that is bulging at its boundaries and overrun with signs…

Before working in DeKalb he drafted complaints and similar, defended depositions, prepared ordinances, prosecuted municipal court dockets, etc., etc. for Fincher & Hecht in Morrow (Clayton County). I haven’t looked it up, but I’m 99% sure that the Hecht in Fincher & Hecht is Greg Hecht who ran for a couple of Democratic offices in recent years. He worked with them from May 2000 to November 2001. He didn’t pass the Bar until April of 2001 so I’d imagine he was just learning the ropes and wasn’t able to represent anyone in court until he passed the Bar. But then again, maybe law works like medical field… Doctors have Physician’s Assistants who do everything they do pretty much, the doctor just signs off on everything.

I know that throughout this blog I’ve implied that Bennett may be a pro-growth, sign-loving attorney. I don’t know that he is. Could be he’s just a hired gun who does what he’s directed to do like many attorneys. I can only make judgements at this point based on the fact that he’s made the choices to be where he’s been. He chose to litigate for tossing out sign ordinances. He chose higher density counties. He chose the field he’s in. He gave at least one major piece of very bad advice that any first year attorney would know was wrong.

I’m more concerned about our County Commission’s abilities and choices than I am Scott Bennett’s at this juncture. Eric Maxwell said he was removing himself from the process because of the political nature of the situation when the Commissioners started the process. However, when it’s all said and done the Commission walked lock-step and chose Maxwell’s attorney. Maxwell didn’t disclose his relationship with Bennett. And he voted to hire him on Friday. Worst case scenario he should have recused himself after disclosing his association with the guy. The County Commission chose a guy who fights to break the back of tough sign ordinances. They chose a guy with only six years experience.

My next blog is going to be about the other two “top-three” candidates the County Commission interviewed and rejected. The Commissioners talked to a total of six and from those six they selected the top three. The top six were vetted by a committee who looked at a pool of twenty-some-odd candidates. How’d Eric Maxwell’s sign-suing six-years experienced attorney get to the top of that heap? How’d he beat out a guy with 32 years experience? Hmmm…

Highland Hills / Shenadoah: What's the motivation?

Recently, without notifying the neighbors who originally asked for a solution to their problem of speeders in their quiet neighborhood, Commissioner Herb Frady tried to reverse two previous Board decisions.

For details on the situation, please read the articles with Highland Hills in the title on www.FayetteFrontPage.com.

The School Board received a few complaints from the neighbors in Shenandoah Estates regarding the added time for their children's bus trip. They sent a letter to the County Commission letting them know about the concerns.

Chairman Jack Smith had his Administrative Assistant contact the School Board to ask if they were requesting any action. They said NO, they were just letting them know about the situation. Copies of the letters have been requested, received and will shortly be on the Fayette Forum.

Here's the note Smith attached to the top of the letter from the School Board, which he distributed to all the Commissioners:

"John DeCotis advises that this letter is for information purposes only and that no action is being requested of the Board of Commissioners at this time."

I called and talked to DeCotis, and I talked to Smith. DeCotis did NOT ask for any action by the Board, he was just letting them know there had been some concerns expressed by some in Shenandoah about the additional time.

So, why did Commissioner Frady feel the need to bring it up? I can speculate until all the cows in the fields of Georgia come home, but there's no way I can know why.

Frady was on the losing end of the last vote. When he brought this vote up he didn't inform Smith that he was bringing it up and he didn't have it added to the agenda so the public would know it was coming up for consideration. Why?

Incorrect facts were stated by Frady and Horgan to justify changing the past TWO separate votes of the previous Boards. Why?

The buses are picking up students. The intersection has not been improved. Speeders will be able to cut through the neighborhood if the decisions are reversed. The area is being maintained by the County and is not overgrown. Students are NOT waiting for the school bus at the area in question. There is not an additional cut-through.

I'm glad it's going to be on the agenda and I'm glad Smith stopped the vote from going forward so the neighborhoods can be there.

I think it's a done deal already, three of the Commissioners have already said they were ready to vote. All stated reasons based on incorrect information.

The neighbors in Highland Hills are going to have a tough time on this one. There are just under 40 homes in Highland Hills --- there are close to 80 in Shenandoah Estates. They're fighting not just an uphill battle, they're fighting a battle like the Spartans fought in the movie 300.

Hopefully the Commissioners will check their facts and will base their decisions not on who yells the loudest, but on those facts.