Wednesday, June 13, 2001

I flew into town from my vacation for the June 7 Peachtree City Council meeting. On the agenda under the heading of "New Agenda Items" was listed, "Discuss status of Home Depot/Wal-Mart projects." Do you think it happened?

It was disturbing to learn that the big box agenda item had been removed from the agenda for discussion. You ask why? No explanation was given. I find it astounding that the City Council cannot simply state the obvious and make a public statement regarding the big box developer not conforming to our ordinances.

It appears that the city is processing the projects through the computerized traffic model again (possibly using old traffic data) and that the city attorney is trying to convince the council to let the developer keep riding the nonconformance wave.

Councilman Steve Rapson asked the developer's attorney why his client failed to obtain the development permits in the specified amount of time. The attorney did not know. Rapson also asked why his client had not paid the long overdue debt (around $26,000). The attorney did not know.

The developer's attorney did express to Rapson that his client was eager to proceed and that the developer would gladly repay the city for all traffic improvements funded with taxpayer dollars that he was deemed responsible for with the previous, expired traffic determination if he gets his permits.

In case you are new to this drama, the developer stated at the Home Depot hearing in December of 1999 that he was ready to start right away, and he failed to sign the developer's agreement with the city for a year. He has failed to obtain development permits at all. That was just the beginning.

Why on earth would the city council unanimously approve traffic improvements at our expense that could possibly aid the developer in gaining a second approval? Why not procure a definitive opinion on the big box situation first?

A very big secret that has been withheld from the general public is the fact that the impact fee well is drying up and that the financial projections for the city show red ink at the end of FY 2003. We are about to be working with deficit budgets. Mayor Bob Lenox's final two years are amounting to a record setting-spending spree.

Councilman Rapson aptly pointed out at the meeting that the $2 million tennis center expansion should probably go before the voters in the bond referendum like the proposed civic center and others. Mayor Lenox strongly stated that the tennis center expansion was part of "the plan" so it was going to be done and the citizens were not going to get a vote on the project.

Keep in mind that this is the same mayor that wanted to add 1,750 homes in a West Side annexation that would have created enough children to create at least three new schools. When asked about the burden on the educational system and the taxpayers, he stated that it was not his problem. Will the tennis center expansion benefit the taxpayers?

Where are the hard numbers on the dollars generated by the tennis center? If an economic benefit exists, the Development Authority needs to pull out some hard figures and start hitting the public relations trail.

In a republic we select representatives to vote in a manner consistent with our beliefs and principles. In matters like the big box situation and the tennis center we would like to think that we have a voice in the process. Unfortunately, we do not.

We would like to think that the things that most of us hold dear would be protected. Let's appeal for some advocacy in our local government.

Steve Brown

Peachtree City

Steve_ptc@juno.com

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