Wednesday, November 1, 2000

To all my friends in Fayette County, our time has arrived. We are approaching a moment of truth.

I have done my very best to keep you informed by doing the research and attending the meetings. I have pushed hard to see a number of ordinances through at the municipal level including a restrictive big box ordinance. I have also pushed very on hard on preserving our quality of life and our high standard of education. I prepared the argument (preamble) for the Education First in Fayette initiative and I recently created a sample policy statement for the County Commission to consider that would protect our educational system and quality of life.

Now I am asking for your assistance. We all need to be in attendance for this Thursday's Peachtree City Council meeting! With one vote the City Council is going to guarantee that we have three big boxes in Peachtree City.

The concern is that all the City Council members with the exception of Dan Tennant favor the City Attorney's suggestion of exempting several big box developers in the proposed restrictive big box ordinance. As you are probably aware, the chief partner in the City Attorney's law firm has a financial business relationship with one of the exempted big box developers. The canon of ethics for the legal profession suggests that interests or relationships cannot be segregated within a law firm.

At the last council meeting, Developmental Services Director Jim Williams stated, "The first thing that I want to mention is on the [newly added] 'now therefore' clause and at the suggestion of the City Attorney we have added a last clause in there which exempts the two major areas where we have projects where some kind of planning consideration for potentially big box uses."

Attorney Doug Dillard (representing Pathway, RAM Development and Home Depot): "We realize that the ordinance accepts these properties, the Huddleston property on [Highway] 54 which is the Home Depot, Wal-Mart site and then the Kedron Village site on Highway 74 owned by Pathways."

Mr. Dillard, who previously handed the council members some documents, continued that, "In the event that particular [developer exemption] paragraph is pulled out of the adoption of this ordinance, to protect us in the event that you do adopt an ordinance which we think the public purpose for which is not clear. We realize that there is a lot of discussion and debate about big box uses and that kind of thing but your [city council] duty as you well know is that there has got to be a clear public purpose served by any legislative act by you. We think that there are some facial defects with this particular ordinance in that regard."

The public purpose of the restrictive big box ordinance is extremely clear in that it deals with the negative impacts that traffic, crime and predatory damage to the local economy associated with big box retailers.

It is interesting to note that Mr. Dillard would have no problems with the "facial defects" and the "public purpose" if his clients gain the exemption.

City Attorney Rick Lindsey stated, "There's a line of Georgia Supreme Court cases that would prevent us from going in when someone has vested rights. The question becomes when are rights vested? And Georgia law does not provide a bright line test such as the issuance of a building permit or some other type of permit. It looks at kind of a balancing test between what has the landowner, land developer spent and relied upon, what has he/she or it done versus the interest of the community controlling zoning and whatnot. I think that we'd have a heck of an argument to make to say that the properties that have spent, and if the numbers [provided by Doug Dillard] are correct and I am sure that they are somewhat exaggerated, maybe not greatly exaggerated, but $1.37 million if that's not a vesting of rights. But that would be their argument. It would be extremely difficult and trying to force something that doesn't fit, in my opinion, jeopardizes the entire ordinance."

Judging by Lindsey's statement, I would say that he is asking for the exemption without really knowing all the facts. Show everyone the documents from 1994 and 1996 that proves that Pathway has vested interest. How about doing the same with the Wal-Mart? Why don't we have the "real" numbers at City Hall? The law is extremely vague regarding vested rights and the City Attorney is simply asking us to throw in the towel when it is not necessary. The Home Depot store is the only store that has a real chance a proving a vested interest.

Mayor Lenox stated, "I have a heck of a problem determining what's the difference in the impact between the shopping center with a whole bunch of little stores and this mix that totals 200,000 square feet and one big store that totals 200,000 square feet." The mayor needs to drive to Snellville, Ga., and the other areas where big box stores are devastating the local economy and quality of life. Fayetteville is also beginning to experience the same trend with the crime and their local economy.

"Fayette County's median new home price rose nearly 20 percent to $233,900, both the highest median price and the highest appreciation rate in the Atlanta market" (AJC, Oct. 29). In addition, our school system ranks among the best in the state and our quality of life is second to none. So the question is, why would we want to do anything that has a proven track record causing damage to cities of our size?

Your help is needed, so please respond. You may obtain a copy of the restrictive big box ordinance by contacting Betsy Tyler at City Hall at 770-487-5731.

The voter registration list for Peachtree City was used as a mailing list to send about 15,000 letters I composed along with a response postcard. The letter addresses some serious concerns over the pending restrictive big box ordinance that requires that you act by returning the postcard back to me. If you check the box at the bottom of the postcard, your name will be placed in a local newspaper ad that will list all the people in opposition to the exemptions for big box developers in the proposed ordinance.

The most important thing is that you attend Thursday's council meeting because once these changes are made we cannot buy them back.

Steve Brown

Peachtree City

Back to Opinion Home Page | Back to the top of the page