Wednesday, May 23, 2001
|
Wednesday, May 23, 2001 |
| Tennant: 'Denial
ain't a river in Egypt, King Bob'
It just gets more and more amazing as time goes on... Two weeks ago, I reported to the citizens of Peachtree City via a city council meeting, and subsequently through The Citizen in a letter to the editor, that there had been inappropriate expenditures of public funds authorized by Mayor Bob Lenox as they related to the severance package of former City Clerk Nancy Faulkner. Not to be outdone, of course, Lenox himself wrote a letter to the editor in last week's paper which basically denied my assertions. Well, Lenox can deny an abuse of power and the inappropriate spending of public funds until the cows come home, and he can point the finger at everybody except himself, but it doesn't change the facts or the truth. Denial ain't a river in Egypt, King Bob. The good news is that I sponsored legislation to keep this kind of stuff from ever happening again. Even Lenox voted for it, because he knew he had to or face the wrath of an already wary citizenry. Council members Carol Fritz and Steve Rapson used good judgment, as usual, and supported the measure, and I am sure Mrs. Annie McMenamin would have done so if she were present, but she was out of town for that meeting. The bad news is that Bob Lenox just cannot, for once, admit he was wrong and accept responsibility for some very shady behavior and poor decision making. As I read King Bob's letter, I was reminded of two of Bill Clinton's famous quotes: "I did not inhale" (translation: I did it but won't admit it) and, "Now listen to me...I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinski" (translation: denial with a good dose of the best defense is a good offense). Lenox's enormous ego just won't permit a humble apology. One of the many ironies in this story is that I am writing this letter publicly. Of course, if King Bob had voted to support my suggestion to televise council meetings, you could have seen the antics for yourself, and I could save the wear and tear on my keyboard and fingers. But Lenox felt it was more important to spend that $25,000 expense instead on a grand and generous severance package for Ms. Faulkner (someone I admire and respect I do NOT blame Faulkner for this fiasco). Or maybe King Bob thought it made more sense to spend $25,000 on efforts to force annexation of the West Side down the throats of the vast majority of our citizens who didn't want it. Of course, who are we to question the King's judgment? So why did Lenox feel compelled to be the hypocrite he is and write a letter of his own to the paper? Well, let me give you a few reasons. Bob Lenox does not like me. Now, rest assured, I could not care less how Bob Lenox feels about me, but understand why it is I somehow grate on the guy's nerves. The king did not like it when I ran against his developer buddy as a write-in candidate for council in 1995 and nearly won. He did not like it when I criticized his famous, "If you don't vote, you don't count," comment. He did not like it when after he asserted "This is my meeting!", referring to a city council meeting, I reminded him it was NOT his meeting; it was the people's meeting. He did not like it when I stood up in defense of Steve Brown and his right to be heard before his elected representatives after Lenox denied him the right to do so. (We managed to change that law, too, so feel free to speak up at a council meeting if you have been publicly lambasted the way Steve was.) He did not like it when I fought the annexation of the West Side Village and its dense population consequences and won. He did not like it when I voted against Wal-Mart on an already overburdened Ga. Highway 54 West. He did not like it when I successfully urged council not to reappoint his buddy to a fifth six-year term on the Development Authority, but rather give others a chance to serve. And he most certainly did not like it when I starkly and accurately pointed out he exceeded his authority and bypassed express council consent in the recent city clerk golden parachute debacle. The King runs his own multimillion dollar company and is used to having absolute control and doing things his way. I don't begrudge the guy for that; this is America, the land of opportunity. But it is also America, the land of the free where government derives its authority from the consent of the governed. In this most recent display or ultra-arrogance with the Faulkner package, consent is not implied by silence. King Bob hates that. As to the mayor's letter last week, three quick responses: 1. What was the urgency to go ahead and sign an agreement to provide Ms. Faulkner over $30,000 in cash and benefits rather than wait for express council approval, and why would Lenox inappropriately poll council members by memo to respond to an act that should have been public in the first place? If this sounds like an open meetings violation to you, too, don't feel like the Lone Ranger. 2. For Lenox to imply that anything I ever said to Ms. Faulkner somehow handicapped the city's negotiating power in reaching the severance agreement is "patently absurd," to use the King's language. More than that, it was inaccurate, unfair, groundless, and probably libelous. Although I made reference to former Fayetteville City Manager Mike Bryant's sexual harassment difficulties to Ms. Faulkner in good-natured jest, Ms. Faulkner has repeatedly denied there was ever any kind of sexual harassment on my part. (I will humbly tell you that it was stupid and probably inappropriate for me to have made any remark to Nancy about Mr. Bryant's troubles.) Lenox would have just loved to pin such a charge on me, but there was simply no accuracy in making such a charge. And think about it for a moment: If I were in the slightest bit "guilty" of any kind of sexual harassment with Faulkner, do you think I would have led the effort to deny her an overly generous taxpayer-funded severance package? I may have been born at night, but it wasn't last night. 3. As to the mayor's diatribe about my dealings with other council members, it is certainly true that while I have not always seen eye to eye with some members in the past, I do think all members of council except King Bob vote with their conscience and with the best interests of their constituency in mind. Council members Fritz, McMenamin and Rapson spend a lot of time and effort to try to do the right thing and serve the citizens of Peachtree City well, as did Dr. Bob Brooks for many years. They each have a very difficult yet thankless job, so go thank each of them the next time you see them. Lame duck Lenox, in my opinion, votes in the best interest of Bob Lenox and his developer buddies, and routinely exploits every opportunity to manipulate things in his own favor. Give the devil his due, though, the guy is brilliant and very articulate. But as for me, I'd trade a high IQ for a high moral standard any day of the week. I thank the good Lord every night that my pastor, Chuck Hodges, and not King Bob swore me into office in January 2000. I am equally thankful we will not have to worry about Mayor Lenox taking any oath in January 2002.
Dan Tennant
|
||