Wednesday, January 22, 2003

[Editor's note: The following was received from Peachtree City Hall last week. It is reproduced in its entirety. The letters to the right and below reference this document.]

This is a response to the letter to the editor entitled, "Road shortfall is solely Mayor Brown's fault" and printed in the Wednesday, Jan. 15 edition of The Citizen.

Since former Mayor Bob Lenox authored the letter, the city feels compelled to respond since Mr. Lenox's comments might be perceived as valid based on his status as a former elected official.

When we closed in the "line of credit/borrowing arrangement" with GMA [Georgia Municipal Association] that we believe is being referred to in the letter, all $4.5 million of the loan proceeds were allocated to specific capital projects in the five-year PIP (public improvement plan), none of which were road projects (with the exception of $100,000 for Ga. Highway 54 utilities relocation which was only half of what was required).

During Mayor Brown's administration, approximately $635,000 of the $4.5 million GMA loan proceeds was diverted away from other projects and approximately $539,000 allocated for road projects, particularly for Ga. Highway 54 West and the Huddleston/Dividend intersection.

There was never a "balance of nearly a million dollars" of loan proceeds from this loan that were "held in reserve for crucial road projects" as stated in the letter.

There was never any discussion, e-mail or other form of communication regarding the allocation of $4.5 million.

Since all of the loan proceeds were originally allocated to projects, and there never was a reserve fund set aside for roads, we therefore could not have diverted funds from a (nonexistent) contingency fund to use for other projects, such as land purchase.

The land purchase at the intersection of Hwy. 54 and Wynnmeade Parkway referred to in the letter was financed through a completely separate GM loan and did not involve diversion of any existing loan proceeds away from road or any other projects.

The land acquisition of the Wynnmeade Parkway parcel had been discussed in executive session for a month and was approved in the public meeting by a 5-0 vote to insure that we protect the vital Hwy. 54 traffic corridor.

The Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) plan was approved by the Lenox administration which included the multiuse path bridge requiring the land purchase.

To date, Peachtree City is the only jurisdiction that has actually invested in the TDK Extension project and these funds came out of the council contingency (fund).

The project was first placed on the Public Improvement Plan for 2004 during the most recent budgeting process.

We invite all citizens to come review the records at City Hall and see that the former mayor never had the TDK Extension project in the budget or the Public Improvement Project during his 10-year tenure.

Brown, Rapson response as 'city' was improper

[A]bout the newspaper article in The Citizen in which the headline of the front page read "City Disputes Lenox Claims": I was justifiably upset, and I remain upset this morning having slept on it.

After further inquiry, it is clear that the two of you [Mayor Steve Brown and Councilman Steve Rapson] were responsible for sending the press release in which "the city" disputed Mr. Lenox's claims in his letter to the editor.

I spoke to Betsy Tyler last night, and she informed me she had nothing to do with the letter, despite the fact she is the city's public information officer and the press release went out to the newspaper via fax ostensibly on her letterhead.

I have also spoken to [council members] Annie McMenamin and Murray Weed, and we are all equally upset that none of us were consulted in this maneuver. We are also upset that the two of you took it upon yourselves to issue a press release to respond to a letter to the editor.

It is not appropriate for "the city" to respond to any letter to the editor. Such a letter is by definition an opinion, and is up for the reader to make his or her own judgment about its content and validity. The fact the letter in question was from former Mayor Bob Lenox is wholly inconsequential, and the content of Mr. Lenox's opinion is also irrelevant.

Mr. Lenox could have claimed the moon is made of green cheese or that the end of the world is at hand. In fact, he wrote about his version of the spending of city funds and Mr. Brown's influence in the matter. In any case, the city has absolutely no business responding to any claims to any letter to the editor.

Understand that I am NOT siding with the former mayor's response. As you know, I voted along with both of you to spend the money for the "tot lot," for which the former mayor is highly critical. This is a very important matter of principle. The point is that we (the city) should NEVER issue any kind of press release to respond to any letter to the editor. It is unheard of and it makes an erroneous implication of complicity with the entire council.

I am still at a loss to understand how a city "feels" anything, let alone "compelled to respond". Exactly who is the city? In this case, it appears the city is a minority of council members, namely you two.

If either or both of you feel "compelled" to respond, I ask that you do it on your own time in your own words without implying it is an official press release from council, which it was not.

What we hope to announce after our vote next Thursday to announce the TDK agreement with the county is an example of an appropriate such news release, where all five members of council are aware of such a release and agree to its content.

This is very serious matter, and a very dangerous precedent has been set. It is my understanding and belief that city personnel were used on city time to help craft this "response" and I have grave concerns about the misuse of city employee's time in the matter.

I strongly suggest each of you issue a public apology to the three of us and the rest of our citizens. And I more strongly suggest you do not employ this method of communication again.

Dan Tennant

Mayor Pro Tem