Wednesday, February 27, 2002
|
Wednesday, February 27, 2002 |
|
Moratorium misguided, damaged PTC reputation Some weeks ago, a gentleman wrote into your paper and asked, "Where is Gary Rower?" As a former candidate for mayor of Peachtree City, I have spent the last 90 days living under a self-imposed gag order. Being publicly silent does not in any way mean I have been inactive or unaware. Now, I find myself in a position of government watchdog. The gag order has been rescinded. During my campaign for mayor, I tried to present my views on the issues facing our community. In an effort to continue that tradition, I would like to discuss the now "invalid" building moratorium. While you may have been led to believe that some of those elected last fall had been discussing this issue for months, I personally spent 11 weeks attending functions with the other candidates and never once did I hear any moratorium mentioned. You were not told that this type moratorium was for emergency situations only. What emergency? You were told many of the developers in the community supported this moratorium, yet each developer's representative publicly denied supporting the moratorium at the council meeting. This moratorium went ahead against the advice of staff, attorneys, the Chamber of Commerce, the Development Authority and countless individuals who spoke against it, in a standing-room-only crowd. In the past six weeks, our community has been sued and lost; the attorney's fees and/or Peachtree City's insurance premium increases will follow. Peachtree City's reputation as a pro-business community has been devastated. New business inquiries, which normally number four to five per week, have dropped to zero. Commercial real estate brokers report potential clients abandoning Peachtree City. A city at residential build-out must attract new business and industry to increase the tax base, otherwise the taxpayers will bear the burden for any and all needs faced by the city. We cannot attract new businesses and industry to our community by claiming to support economic development and then hanging a sign at the city limits that says, "Closed for business." Your reputation, like your integrity, takes a lifetime to build and but a moment to destroy. This moratorium was that moment. Superior Court Judge English has ruled the moratorium "invalid." The mayor's reaction was to appeal the judge's decision. Appeal against the advice of the city attorney (who is reported to have refused to appeal the case) and against the advice of the staff. The mayor wanted to go to the city's insurance company, to have them appeal for us, though the appeal process would take longer than the time remaining on the moratorium. (All this would cost the taxpayers more in legal fees.) Eventually, the remainder of the council understood the facts and abandoned the mayor, who succumbed to the pressure and abandoned the appeal. Our community and we, the taxpayers, are left to pay the bills for this misguided folly. Our Development Authority and the business community are left to try and restore our reputation. Before you say, don't be negative, offer a better solution, here are my views on how this should have been handled, without a moratorium while retaining our integrity. Before council would have organized any committee, we would have met with local businesses, the Development Authority and the Chamber of Commerce to get their input. Then, and only then, would we have organized committees to review those items that needed to be addressed. We would have set a realistic time frame for completion. Following review and assuming adoption by the council, we would have established an effective date for the new ordinances giving sufficient time for review and implementation. This would have preserved our reputation while allowing business to continue. It would have accomplished all it was intended to accomplish in the spirit of cooperation and fairness. Additionally, it would give fair notice for upcoming changes for those businesses choosing to become part of our community. Finally, it would not have placed unreasonable time pressures on volunteer committee members and staff to try and rewrite four decades of Peachtree City progress in 90 days or less. Gary Rower Peachtree City
|
||