Logsdon: No debate with Brown

Tue, 11/15/2005 - 5:05pm
By: John Munford

Peachtree City mayoral candidate Harold Logsdon has rebuffed an invitation to debate opponent Steve Brown, his opponent in the Dec. 6 runoff election.

Logsdon said between the four live candidate forums, various essays published in the newspaper and both candidates’ Web sites, the issues are already out there. Logsdon said he is more interested in meeting city residents in the days leading up to the runoff election than meeting with Brown.

“I don’t see any merit to it,” Logsdon said of the debate challenge. “All of the information is out there.”

Brown counters that Logsdon hasn’t been specific enough about his various plans to address the city’s problems, though he credits his opponent for outlining the various problems well.

“How’s he going to fix it? He doesn’t say,” Brown said, adding that the debate, scheduled for 7:30 p.m. at McIntosh High School, will still go on even if Logsdon doesn’t participate. “How can you do $12 million in projects and roll back taxes 5 percent?”

The debate will be handled by the school’s Young Democrats and Young Republicans clubs, and the public is invited to attend.

Judging by results of the Nov. 8 general election, Brown has a good bit of ground to gain. Despite Brown being the incumbent, Logsdon nearly doubled Brown’s vote tally, getting 41.9 percent of the vote compared to Brown’s 21.7 percent. Two other candidates in the race, Dan Tennant and Phil Boswell, have already endorsed Logsdon.

Brown said that he was hoping to get more families to turn out at the polls.

“The average families I work for, 60-70 hours a week, they didn’t show up at the polls of the general election,” Brown said.

Brown and Logsdon will face a crucial obstacle to overcome: voter apathy. The runoff election requires voters to go to the polls for a second time, and that can be too much hassle for some.

Brown and Logsdon agreed that low voter turnout could dramatically affect the results of the runoff election. Brown said his campaign is having families meet with other families, extolling the necessity of voting Dec. 6 in the runoff.

Logsdon said he feels that the general election results showed that Peachtree City residents want a change in leadership, as nearly 80 percent of voters selected a candidate other than Brown.

Traditionally incumbents fare well in elections, particularly runoff elections. But this is not your typical election. The city’s six living former mayors, joined by the wife of deceased mayor Howard Morgan, took out a full-page ad days before the general election asking voters to elect anyone but Brown, charging that he “used his office primarily to savagely attack anyone and everyone who has had the temerity to criticize him or to even disagree with him, including all of us.”

Brown drew criticism after campaigning against the county’s transportation Special Purposes Local Option Sales Tax (which was approved by Fayette voters last year) and rebuffing the Fayette County Chamber of Commerce as a “special interest group.” Several Fayette County Commissioners have said Brown is difficult to work with and one, Peter Pfeifer, joined the fray with several recent letters to the editor critical of Brown.

Brown has framed himself as the only mayoral candidate not beholden to the special interests of local developers. Though the job is only part-time, Brown is decidedly a full-time mayor who has spent numerous hours at City Hall and proclaims he will meet with any interested group in the city so long as the date doesn’t conflict with a prior scheduled engagement.

Brown took office in 2001, and he argues that the city’s rising property taxes were largely due to the new staffers and pay raises approved in 2000 by the City Council. He also said part of the tax increases were necessary to pay for the city’s library expansion, which was approved by voters in a referendum.

When Brown was elected, he had the “gadfly” reputation for writing numerous letters to the editor, challenging then-Mayor Bob Lenox and the City Council on a number of issues. Since then, the tables have been turned and Lenox has been a frequent critic of Brown’s tactics as mayor.

While some critics allege Brown has made it more difficult to work with neighboring jurisdictions, he is one of the driving forces behind the Highway 74 Alliance, a group consisting of various local government representatives seeking improvements to the interchange of Ga. Highway 74 and Interstate 85, which with more development nearby will begin to affect Peachtree City residents who commute through Tyrone and Fairburn to Atlanta.

Brown also touts the city’s handling of the controversy with the Development Authority of Peachtree City, which racked up more than $1.5 million in debt while running the city’s tennis center and amphitheater. The authority relinquished its agreement to operate the facilities for the city, and they are now under control of the city’s Tourism Association.

The association, however, has not yet been able to operate the tennis center in the black, with a projected shortfall this coming fiscal year of nearly $94,000.

Logsdon has campaigned on improving the city’s relations with the business community and state and local governments in addition to financial accountability; he formerly worked in the audits department for BellSouth and is now a financial planner.

login to post comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
ArmyMAJretired's picture
Submitted by ArmyMAJretired on Wed, 11/16/2005 - 2:14pm.

It sure looks like Harold is afraid he may lose some advantage, rather than give the voters some specifics. It is easy to hide in a field of 5 candidates, not easy when speaking face to face with an opponent.

I do not know who I will vote for, I did not vote for Brown originally and when I went to Logsdon's website I still couldn't tell what his plans were.

He does seem to be developer friendly and I do not want a Bob Lennox light.

A debate would help me decide. Right now he has lost my vote.


birdman's picture
Submitted by birdman on Wed, 11/16/2005 - 2:22pm.

As someone who has military leadership experience, how could you need a debate AFTER THE FACT to determine who to vote for? Did you not research the candidates before the general election? A debate is unnecessary and will only allow more "stumping." Do you really think it will allow you to ask the questions that YOU want answered? Of course not. If you don't know where Logsden stands, then do your duty as a citizen and find out. Email him or call him. To "loose respect" because he has chosen not to debate only shows that you are really a Brown supporter and trying to discredit Logsdon, or simply too lazy to do your duty. By now we all know about the candidates. We, who are INFORMED voters, did our research in time for the general election. Perhaps you should have spent time to inform yourself of all the candidates prior to the GENERAL ELECTION.


ArmyMAJretired's picture
Submitted by ArmyMAJretired on Wed, 11/16/2005 - 2:28pm.

Always throwing rocks.

1. I did not vote for Brown or Logsdon, so I'll let you guess which of the other candidates I voted for.

2. Now that I have until December 6th, each candidate has to win my vote.

Gee, get a life. Are you going to blast the close to 30% that did not vote for either finalists or just the one's that don't drink your Koolaid pal?


birdman's picture
Submitted by birdman on Wed, 11/16/2005 - 2:31pm.

Since you "lost all respect for Logsdon," there aren't alot of choices left. So I guess we all know who you will vote for. Certainly your right. As for me, I have a life and would like it improved. I am tired of a bipolar nut case running the city into the ground, so based on choices left, I guess you can figure out who I'll be voting for. Certainly my right.


ArmyMAJretired's picture
Submitted by ArmyMAJretired on Wed, 11/16/2005 - 2:37pm.

"Right now he has lost my vote." I may still vote for him, but as the old commercial said, "Where's the beef?" What is his plan for his first 100 days? What are his top 10 agenda items and his plan to achieve them?

Convince me to vote for him and I will.


birdman's picture
Submitted by birdman on Wed, 11/16/2005 - 2:51pm.

Ok, now that's a fair question. I suggest you read his website and ask him specific questions. But while we are at it, what is Brown's plan for the future? More lawsuits? Go ahead, read his website. There is no vision. He doesn't talk about the future, EVER! Read his latest appeal for votes. All he does is attack, attack, attack. And the people under attack? Former mayors and anyone else who he hates. As an Army Major you should be astute at reading signs. Have you noticed how he always talks about "HIS" council? About "HIS" citizens? His tone has always been as the "king" talking down to his subjects. He has used the press to publicly accuse so many. Most recently is his tirade regarding the property the police station is on. He publicly accused former city planner Jim Williams of intentionally withholding information regarding waste. In fact the property "perked" clean. The waste was on a part of the property that was never to be used. Brown wanted to suddenly build on it and "uncovered" yet another "crime." When confronted with the information he still refused to change his allegations.
Logsden may not be a "perfect" mayor, but he does at least see the issues we will face in the future. Brown only lives in the past. Like Capt. Queeg he is so full of his perceived past "accomplishments" of rooting out crime, that he wants to recreate them and refuses to go forward.
If you want to vote based on upcoming issues, you need to look at Logsden. Brown doesn't see beyond Bob Lenox, and Bob Lenox is long gone.


ArmyMAJretired's picture
Submitted by ArmyMAJretired on Wed, 11/16/2005 - 3:03pm.

I have been to Harold's web site, specifically the "Campaign Issues" page and can not find any reference to his plan to have the city pay for the bad loan of the development authority. That seems fiscally irresponsible, I would rather the money go to his fire safety initiatve rather than cover the butts of former development authority members, who just so happened to be on the board of directors of the bank!

To be fair, I am highly upset at Brown for the $ 800,000 land purchase also. I honestly don't know who would be the lesser of two evils and that is sad.

As I look at the many Logsdon supporters, I see many Old Guard cronies and that concerns me.


Submitted by Reality Bytes on Wed, 11/16/2005 - 5:33pm.

OK, Development Authority and land purchases aside, please....

What did this "old guard" do, anyway? The developers created a utopian existence from farmland, marketed it like it was the greatest thing since sliced bread, and got all of us to move here, thereby bringing profit not only to themselves but to those of us who are here in this beautiful place.

Isn't that what they were SUPPOSED to do?

Do you really know the history of this City? Do you know that it was on the verge of bankruptcy several times over, only to be saved by FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS who provided much-needed capital just to get the town by? No, I'm not talking about the Development Authority, I'm talking about Equitable.

None of us would be in Peachtree City if it wasn't for the banks that bailed out Garden Cities Corporation (I'm sure my dates are off, someone please correct me).

This is not Atlanta and Bill Campbell; this is not New York City in the late 70s....stop trying to make this "crisis" into a crisis.....it's called business. Please don't use those rose colored glasses and idealistic concepts you have to evaluate how things work in the "real world". Yes, it's cold, yes, it's cruel, but it's dollars and cents. In the grand analysis, the development authority, the tennis center, and these "irregularities" don't mean squat.

Communism would've been great had it not been for people. Wonderful socialist concepts have failed because of MORAL corruption in the name of a principle or a cult of personality. Sometimes you can't afford the things you want, so you borrow. Did ANY of this money come from the pockets of the ordinary taxpayer? NO. It came from a hotel/motel tax generated by people who visit this town and stay for a day or two, for a conference or a quickie. How the money is allocated, at the end of the day, is for accountants and lobbyists to debate, not to be the pivot of someone's grandiosely megalomanic platform.

So let's stop pretending that we live in Pleasantville. Growth and prosperity take people who can negotiate and listen and work to gain and keep businesses in town. Temper this with sound fiscal analysis and understanding of the bigger picture - I just don't see that with the current leader. I can see it with Harold Logsdon. Does he have every single answer laid out? Absolutely not. I don't believe Mr. Brown does either. So, right or wrong, I prefer a change.

Submitted by fayetteobservers on Wed, 11/16/2005 - 10:53am.

Why won't PTC Mayor canidate Harold Logsdon accept the invitation of the high school students to attend a debate with Mayor Steve Brown at McIntosh?

Doesn't that send a horrible message to our young people ?

Since there is no expense to the debate and since the moderator is a third party (i.e., the McIntosh Young Democrats and Young Republicans) what would the harm be in participating?

Submitted by fran sheldon on Wed, 11/16/2005 - 2:07pm.

I think that a debate moderated by our young people is a great idea. I hope that Mr. Logsdon will reconsider and appear.

Can someone please tell what room will be used for the debate at McIntosh High School ?

Thank you,

Mrs. Fran Sheldon

Submitted by Reality Bytes on Wed, 11/16/2005 - 5:46pm.

This is only a joke...

I think the room reserved is room 104 - Janitor Closet "A".

THIS WAS ONLY A JOKE.

nuk's picture
Submitted by nuk on Wed, 11/16/2005 - 11:32am.

I really don't care about any message to our young people because until they start voting they don't count. We have a political system that will never be changed if people don't care enough to vote. Fine by me, it means my vote counts MORE.

As far as the here and now, why should Logsdon debate Brown? The vast amount of political history in this country dictates that a clear front-runner has nothing to gain by a debate and everything to lose. Why give your 2nd place opponent any chance. Besides, the debate would be "Hi, I'm Harold Logsdon and not Steve Brown" That's the #1 issue in the race.
NUK


Submitted by Joe Swanson on Wed, 11/16/2005 - 12:28pm.

Just as with the DAPC illegalities, we have another instance of disregard/ignorance of history. You obviously do not read history (except for Bob Lenox: "If you don't vote you don't count").

First, there is no legal duty to vote. Your only duties as an American are to pay taxes, serve in the Armed Forces if inducted and to appear for witness and jury duty in courts of law. And not chosing to vote (as some religious faiths prohibit) does not disenfranchise any American.

You are wrong that most candidates in history do not debate. Most good, patriotic candidates willingly debate. The seminal debates in American history were between presidential candidates Stephen Douglas and Abraham Lincoln in 1860. Debates continued as the only medium in a non-radio and television America. In 1960, Nixon debated Kennedy, ignoring advice similar to what you would give Logsdon. Since 1976 (with Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter) the debates have become a tradition. No presidential candidate would dream of hiding from a debate. Even more shocking that you "don't care about any message to our young people".

Great Americans debate; they offer the public discourse and debate. It reaffirms openness in government. That it is a government of the people, by the people and for the people. Small minded politicians are run by politicial hacks. Wallow in your opinions but read history before you generalize improperly.

nuk's picture
Submitted by nuk on Wed, 11/16/2005 - 6:09pm.

Thanks, but my private school education covered History much better than what passes for education in the last few decades.

There is indeed no legal duty to vote, duh! Thanks for clearing that up. I was wondering why no one was being arrested for not voting.

You talk about the great tradition of presidential debates. The issue of the here and now is a mayoral contest in a city of 35,000 or so residents. I'm sure nationally and internationally all eyes are not fixed on whether Logsdon or Brown wins, nor the ramifications of a victory by either. Apples, oranges.

There is indeed a very long tradition of front-running candidates for various offices refusing to debate. Senators, Reps, Governors, Mayors, etcetera. When you have a nice lead, there is no need to debate. Why? Because the ONLY thing that matters on Election Day is the results and the political wisdom of not debating when you are the front-runner is proven true.

Young people? They don't vote so why would a politician spend too much time listening to them? You think there would be a 21 year old drinking age in almost every US state if *young adults* voted? Let's put it this way: politicians cater to senior citizens not because they feel like being nice to old people; they cater to them because old people VOTE in the highest numbers of any group and will move heaven and earth to get to the polling place and vote. Therefore, politicians listen to them. People that vote get listened to while the deepest-thinker who spends hours daily pondering the major issues of our time but doesn't vote gets totally ignored. Simple system.

NUK


Submitted by pattiadams on Wed, 11/16/2005 - 11:25am.

I can't answer that first question for you, but perhaps you could contact the Logsdon campaign.

Second question: The message I see is that the Mayor has orchestrated this debate on the night of the City Council Meeting, forcing cancellation of the meeting due to lack of a quorum. Is that the message we are talking about? That is aweful.

I see this as an expense.

I expect the trailing Candidate to propose a debate, since that's what trailers do. I just think he's shooting himself in the foot with his timing. It makes him look like he is self serving at the expense of the City, which he touts as contrary to his theme.

nuk's picture
Submitted by nuk on Wed, 11/16/2005 - 11:34am.

The City's business is put on-hold so the Mayor can grandstand. This pattern has been the same for 4 years now and I would think/hope most people can see that sham by now.
NUK


Im awake's picture
Submitted by Im awake on Wed, 11/16/2005 - 6:54pm.

In 1960, Nixon debated Kennedy, ignoring advice similar to what you would give Logsdon.

Uh, didnt Nixon loose in that election? Hmmm should have taken the advice not to debate. Honestly Brown was good humor(for a while atleast), but never anyone to really take seriously. The last runoff I like alot of folks decided I was too busy to vote. I figured how bad could it be, he is just a mayor of a small town. OK I see how bad it could be. How much money of "his citizens" was wasted on the lawsuits he was able to get the city into?
I dont much care what logsden does he cannot even if he tries be worse than what we had the last 4 years. As far as setting an example for the youngsters, well lets face it they really need to take a look at themselves. Honestly young publicans/democrats, please start paying taxes for real then decide how you will vote. Shouldnt they be out trying to get each other pregnant? Beside showing these poor youngsters how to be a winner is a good example. The old saying it's not wheather you win or loose blah blah blah blah is crap. It is about winning this is politics.


Submitted by Joe Swanson on Wed, 11/16/2005 - 8:40pm.

Nixon lost to Kennedy. I have never been a fan of Kennedy.

Nixon disregarded advice not to do the advice.

Interestingly, the main reason Nixon lost the election was because he lost the debates. And the main reason he lost the debates was--- he refused to wear makeup. Television was in its infancy. Makeup then (and now) is necessary to be telegenic. Maybe Nixon was homophobic. But Kennedy came off as youthful and energetic. Nixon came off as dark and sinister.

WatchDog's picture
Submitted by WatchDog on Wed, 11/16/2005 - 8:57pm.

Make sure you have lots of Cover Girl makeup on Thursday night when
you go debate yourself (that doesn't sound too good) because you never know when you might transcend into Caroline Fritz again, and we wouldn't want you to lose your glow, now would we?

By the way, you are neither youthful nor energetic, and Harold is light and happy.

Bon Voyage Dental Boy!


Submitted by Reality Bytes on Wed, 11/16/2005 - 8:45pm.

What in the sam hill are you trying to say, Steve-o?

It goes to show you - to look pretty to others you might have to hide what you really are. Hmmmmm.....cuts both ways, I'm sure, but Mr. Glamour Shots (look at the mayor's website) certainly looks good on TV - he's had a lot of practice.

I think it's time to get someone whose goal ISN'T to be on at 5, 6 and 11.

Good try, though...keep it up and one day you can blog with the big boys!

Submitted by pandora on Wed, 11/16/2005 - 9:01pm.

I hear Steve/Joe isn't really big on taking advice -- of course, he won't read that moral into his little story. All he needs to know is there is not enough makeup - unless he can come up with a full Logsdon mask.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.