Laying Down the Law (Pun Intended)

Rabun County Commissioner Mary Elizabeth Law, with the full support of her fellow commissioners, laid down an ultimatum last night, to the members of the CVB, Chamber of Commerce and EDA. The decision?

Either the three groups compromise and come up with a solution, or the commissioners give it to an unaffiliated group.

There are two issues here, which i'll address seperately.

The first, is that this is a tact endorsement of the Convention and Visitors Bureau. By refusing to decide, the Commissioners are essentially deciding in favor of the CVB. The reason I say that, is because what has been described as a "compromise", namely the proposal that the CVB recieve funds, and than contract with the Chamber of Commerce, is the official position of the CVB. the Economic Development Authority has already agreed to that "Compromise" . The only group which hasn't agreed is the chamber of commerce, because they fail to see why County funds should pass through another organization's hands before ending up paying for their welcome center. Sources in the Chamber say that the move would put the Chamber into the position of taking orders from the CVB regarding how they run their own property.

If the Board of Commissioners wish to use the Convention and Vistors Bureau as their agent for determining how hotel motel money is spent, as a unofficial whip hand to keep organizations in line, when it regards to promoting tourism, that's fine. I can see the logic in such a move. But don't act like you're seeking a consensus, because on the issue there is no reasonable consensus. Forcing a "compromise" which isn't a compromise at all, simply allows the commissioners to say at a later date, "Stop bickering, you all agreed to this," even though in truth the decision was forced upon them.

The second issue, is that the Commissioners had already made their decision before their meeting even began. I know this because I watched, as between the work session and the regular meeting, the commissioners discussed who would make the official statement (Law), what language would be used (The term unanimous), and who would make the official motion (Vice-Chairman Virgil Kilby).

I appreciate that the commissioners, because of open meeting laws, don't get to discuss amongst themselves as much as they think is necessary, and I understand that they wish to present a united front. But deciding what will happen before hand is an insult to the representatives who step before the commissioners to make their case. EDA Chairman Jeff Fulp, and Chamber representative Frank Wheeler both made their case before Commissioners, unaware that the decision had already been made. If I was either one of those gentlemen I would be embarassed beyond measure, to know that I was stating my case to a jury which already has the verdict.

As I've observed the commissioners over the past 8 or 9 months, I've had alot of respect for them. I think they are all sensible, cautious people, which is appropriate to the gravity of their office. While I've disagreed with decisions I've always respected the method in which they were made, and the reasoning behind it.