Wednesday, June 12, 2002
|
Wednesday, June 12, 2002 |
|
Column on authority flap short on fairness, balance Your recent editorial ("medieval struggle emerges in PTC") was rich in rhetoric and analogy, but lacked the thoroughness of fair and balanced content. It begs comparison to the tactics employed by Bill Clinton's famous mouthpiece, James Carville, who always generated a smokescreen of innuendo about individuals, rather than a fabricated analogy filled with only enough data to support a foregone conclusion. The members of the Development Authority are indeed honorable people who represent the wide range of skills and talent necessary for the effective administration of their responsibilities. Contrary to your charge of "uaccountable power and unelected privilege," each member must undergo a rigorous interview process before being appointed to a term of six years by the City Council. They are not appointed for life, as you imply with the statement "Nobody ... can touch the authority." They receive no compensation for this period of service, even though they devote hundreds of hours of their personal time for the good of the community. At the expiration of their respective six-year term of office, they must go through the application process again for a subsequent appointment. The common denominator among members of the Development Authority is that they are local leaders who have achieved significant success in their respective businesses and careers. Each of them knows that Peachtree City is the premier example of what can go right in a community when leaders make good long term decisions. As a group, they are not "grasping for power." The only "power" they exercise is that which is granted to them by the state legislature. Your editorial casts an air of suspicion over a group of outstanding individuals, without a single piece of evidence to support it. You impugn the collective integrity of the authority, without making a specific charge. I guess an old newspaper adage, "why let a few facts get in the way of a good story," applies in this case. Your editorial deliberately implied that "public tax money" in question was coming out of the pockets of Peachtree City residents. To the contrary, the hotel occupancy tax is levied on those individuals who visit here for personal or business reasons. The tax was specifically created (and later increased) to fund several Peachtree City authorities, and certain other programs, so that an additional tax burden would not be placed on local residents. Your column leaves the reader with the impression that exactly the opposite happened. In your scenario, we are led to believe that the authorities somehow created themselves, appointed their own members and then raided the public treasury to fund the activities of a few select individuals. Nothing could be further from the truth. The tussle is indeed over tax money and power, but the only one I hear "screaming bloody murder" is the new mayor, who has yet to realize that the city treasury is not his exclusive domain. His decision to publicly berate tow highly regarded women, state Representative Kathy Cox and Mayor pro tem Annie McMenamin, embarrassed the whole community. We can only hope that after his disastrous debut, the mayor will come to realize that positive leadership, consensus and inclusion are essential ingredients for effective government. The residents of Peachtree City do not appreciate the public spectacle, needless conflict and adverse publicity we have had to endure since he took office. In closing, the next time you are looking for an outstanding example of "taxation without representation," contact any one of the visitors who actually pay the hotel occupancy tax. Joe Henebry Peachtree City
|
||