How the questionnaires were scored:
Each answer was awarded a score on a scale of 0 to 2, based on the level of agreement with Grow Green's position on that issue, for a maximum score of 8 points.

Water
Scientific research shows that in order to protect water quality, all streams should be protected by undisturbed buffers of at least 50 feet in width. During the last legislative session, several bills were introduced that would have decreased the width of some stream buffers. Will you support such legislation if it is introduced again? Why or why not?

In the coming years, few issues will be more important to our state and region than the protection and management of our water resources. I remember years ago when Dr. J.W. Fanning was warning civic and government officials of the impending crisis caused by contamination of the water in our streams and rivers. We have seen his warnings come to fruition in recent years. I have consistently heeded Dr. Fanning’s advice and actively worked to protect this precious natural resource.

As an ex-officio member of the Oconee Rivers Greenway Commission since its inception in 1992, I have been working to bring attention to this critical issue. The Greenway Commission has consistently lobbied for protection of our stream buffers. Accordingly, I would oppose any efforts to reduce the width of our stream buffers.

My legislative plan shows the broad approach I will take on water protection once in the General Assembly. I will join with sensible legislators and organizations to promote the development of a comprehensive statewide water management plan (similar to the 16-county Metropolitan North Georgia Water Planning District to the west of District 115) . This type of legislation would allow the coordination of water resource protection with land use planning. It would also examine measures that would provide incentives for business and private participation in responsible water planning throughout Athens, northeast Georgia, and the state.

Georgians need to realize that our environment is a great asset and not a liability. Athens continually has to tell businesses that we would love to have them, but cannot afford to because of the water they would require. It would be very unfortunate if Athens turned down these businesses only to squander our water resources so we can put human waste next to our streams. As a State Representative, I will fight back any legislation such as Senate Bill 510, which would have allowed septic tanks to be placed within stream buffer zones. Currently, stream buffers are at 25 feet for rivers and streams, 50 feet for trout streams, and 150 feet for drinking water supply watersheds. Not only will I work to make sure that current stream buffers are not violated, I will advocate to increase all stream buffers to at least 50 feet in width. Had it been left to the Republican controlled legislature, SB 510 would be a reality today. However, Democrats in the legislature were able to kill SB 510 on the last day of the 2006 session. This is proof positive that Democrats have been and can be effective on environmental issues. It was not Republicans or the lone independent in the legislature who was responsible for SB 510’s failure.

As a founding partner of Lancaster & McKillip, I am proud that we are able to employ a fulltime attorney, Jenny Culler, who is able to work on pro bono environmental cases. Just the other day, I noticed that McNutts Creek was being polluted by a development crew. I was able to draw this to the attention of Ms. Culler and Dick Field and we were able to get a work stoppage to prevent this type of carelessness with our waterways.

I do not support any legislative efforts which would further reduce existing stream buffers. As a former member of the Sierra Club and a longtime member of the Audubon Society, I appreciate the role of the buffer in facilitating the protection of water quality and aquatic habitats. Riparian buffers are seasonally utilized by at least 60% of Georgia’s bird species and provide important travel corridors for migratory birds, especially our neotropical migrants, whose numbers are in sharp decline.

However, stream buffers are only one of many pressing water-resource challenges on the state level. Others which must be faced during the next term include water supply for agricultural uses, statewide conservation and disposal of wastewater treatment effluent. Most importantly, the individual elected to this position will be integrally involved in the review, ratification and implementation of a comprehensive water management plan in 2008 to establish a blueprint for our future.

Inverse Condemnation
During the last legislative session, several bills were introduced that would have required local governments to pay landowners if environmental or zoning regulations reduced the potential value of their property. These bills were modeled on Oregon’s Measure 37. Will you support such legislation if it is introduced again? Why or why not?

I support rational and responsive local land management and land regulation solutions, which are a necessary tool to protect homeowners, neighborhoods and businesses. I believe that state law provides an adequate vehicle to compensate property owners, while taking into account legitimate local land use regulations that promote the health, safety and welfare of the community.

I would oppose legislation that significantly limits the power of a mayor or county commission to make responsible decisions on a local level.

This legislation is clearly an attempt to undermine planning and zoning laws. Obviously, planning and zoning laws are important governmental tools that can be used to encourage smart growth. Athens in particular is an example of how zoning can be used effectively to prevent sprawl. I will oppose legislation that undermines smart growth or encourages unscrupulous development.

Too often, measures proposed under the auspice of private property rights are nothing more than a Trojan horse for unrestricted growth. We have to remember that while sometimes planning and zoning laws result in the restriction of an individuals use of property, planning and zoning also restricts what neighboring individuals can do as well. Would this measure provide that landowners pay local governments if property values increase as a result of planning and zoning laws? Of course not, because this is a veiled attempt to undermine planning and zoning laws so a small group of developers can benefit handsomely at the expense of the general public.

SR 1040 was introduced and did not pass in 2006. As that bill provides no definition of “unreasonably burdensome” and seeks to elevate vagueness and ambiguity to constitutional amendment status, I do not support that legislation. However, “the rights of persons and the rights of property are the objects for the protection of which Government was instituted”*. So, legislation of this nature does frame the debate and the issues surrounding inverse condemnation, a concept related to eminent domain.

Inverse condemnation (sometimes referred to as a “regulatory taking”) is the taking of property by a government agency which so greatly damages land use to be the functional equivalent of a condemnation of the whole property. Thus, the concept is best understood as deprivation of property rights by excessive regulations which:

(1) Do not advance a legitimate police power purpose or

(2) While having a legitimate purpose, do not reasonably effectuate that purpose or

(3) While advancing and effectuating the purpose, deprive the owner of all economic use of the property.

*A quote attributable to James Madison, who also reminded us that “the personal right to acquire property, which is a natural right, gives to property when acquired, a right to protection as a social right.”

* A quote attributable to James Madison, who also reminded us that “the personal right to acquire property, which is a natural right, gives to property when acquired, a right to protection as a social right.”

Energy
Georgia’s heavy dependence on fossil fuel – coal and oil – has implications for our environment, public health, economy, and national security. What, if any, policies would you support to reduce Georgia’s reliance on fossil fuels?

While many energy policy implications, namely national security implications, are not affected by state decisions, there are various issues where our state can contribute to sustainable, sensible alternative energy exploration.

It is well known in our community that I have for years been an advocate for alternative modes of transportation that are both energy efficient and environmentally cleaner. I think my efforts on behalf of the new multi-modal transportation center that accommodates pedestrian, bus, bicycle, car, and commuter rail capacity speaks to my commitment in this area. Additionally, efforts to promote the use of carpooling in Atlanta are proving effective and I look forward to exploring how we can extend that to other communities in the state.

Experts agree that Georgia is to biomass what the Middle East is to oil. These abundant natural resources coupled with the bio-fuels research programs at the University of Georgia position Athens to be a leader in the transition of the nation away from a petro-economy. Legislative initiatives should include:

● To secure funding for all bio-fuel and alternative fuel projects at the University of Georgia and to develop strategic partnerships with the private sector to accelerate and transform the potential from theory to practice

● To utilize and expand the RDC structure to partner Athens-Clarke County with other counties in the region for the future construction and operation of state-of-the-art bio-refineries

● To expand tax and other incentives to promote serious and sustainable development and utilization of alternative fuel sources in Georgia

Transportation
As Athens-Clarke County grapples with its poverty problem, the need for increased public transportation service has become evident. Other states provide much more funding for transit than Georgia does. The Georgia Transit Association has proposed changes to Georgia law that would improve state funding for transit, including a one-quarter-of-one-percent sales tax for metropolitan transit authorities outside of Atlanta; a state transportation infrastructure fee on fuel purchases; and making state funds available for operating expenses for transit systems. Will you support these initiatives? Why or why not?

One of the defining factors of the upcoming 2007-2008 session of the General Assembly will be how the state addresses the financing of Georgia’s expanding transportation system. It is in Athens’ best interest to have a representative with a long and effective history of contributing to our state’s transportation solutions.

The funding of local transportation has reached a critical stage, especially here in Athens. I believe that we must explore all potential sources of revenue because many of the traditional sources that support and maintain our local transit system are in decline. For example, as we implement alternative energy solutions, the amount of funding created from fuels taxes will decline. This will put a strain on the financing mechanism for many transportation projects. For this reason, long-term solutions must be explored as we look at every available funding option.

Not only does Georgia not provide as much funding for transportation as other states do, but Athens does not provide as much funding as other cities in Georgia do. In Athens, this manifests itself as a problem because even essential services such as night routes have to be considered a luxury when the transportation budget makes up such a small percentage of the overall budget. I could not agree more with Mayor Davison’s decision to fund night routes in Athens even if it means I have to pay $5 or $6 more in taxes. After all, I believe it is detrimental to a city and a state when a large segment of society is unable to commute to work, school, and businesses after a certain hour. I certainly agree with the Georgia Transit Association’s proposal to allow for a ¼ of one percent tax to increase transportation funds. Ultimately, I believe that this is an area where local governments should have the authority to solve local problems. While this legislation did not pass last session, there has been some interest on both sides of the aisle to support this proposal since it does follow the Republican maxim of local control.

I believe that a Transportation Infrastructure Fee coupled with a Transportation Infrastructure Fee income tax credit can be an effective way to raise necessary funds for transportation in Georgia.

I support a balanced approach to transportation that includes both mass transit and roads. I do generally support the concept of expanding mass transit to Athens-Clarke County so as to connect our citizens to economic opportunity available in Atlanta, and specifically, I support a commuter train between Athens and Atlanta.

Rail transit investments typically redistribute growth along the rail corridor, particularly in town centers and in areas surrounding the station. Thus, not only would better transit assist citizens in providing transportation to a livable wage, commuter rail would enhance efforts to increase economic development and create jobs for Athens-Clarke County.