"Wonder what the excuse will be this time for public notice so short that the newspapers won’t have time to run the story. Keeping the public in the dark is pitiful."

Gee... maybe this sentence explains it:

"City officials learned of this deadline Tuesday, and Pathway officials refused the city's request to postpone the deadline to a later date, Meeker noted. The matter was originally planned to be on the City Council agenda for its first meeting in January, said city spokesperson Betsy Tyler."

Your "conspiracy theory" would be a little more credible if you had at least read the article.
Maybe you ought to at least blame the people who won't postpone the deadline. Nah... then you might suggest that the Mayor and Council aren't "on the take." Say... by the way... exactly WHAT is it the Mayor and Council "get" out of this supposed illegal support of the developers? A trip to the Caribbean? A new house paid for by the development company? Money in an offshore account? What is possibly worth the risk of jail? Oh, they won't go to jail... NO ONE... Not YOU... Not Brown... NO ONE will file charges will you? And why not? Because you are full of unsubstantiated crap... that's why.
How about instead of constantly slinging mud, you actually attend meetings, talk to city officials, and use a reasonable, adult, and legitimate argument to put together a coherent discussion as to the pro or con of this vote.
Oh, by the way, that's why Logsden won, not the "massive developer money." Brown was nothing but a hot air "conspiracist" who launched diatribes against everyone. So we voted him out. You want reasonable and accountable government? Then why don't you be reasonable and accountable yourself? By the way, ask Brown if he received and $8,000 donation to his campaign from John Weiland last year. Ever wonder why the biggest developer in the Southeast supported his re-election?

Wow, the Birdman is working overtime on the next Direct PAC mudsling propaganda campaign.

Birdman said (post above), "Brown was nothing but a hot air "conspiracist" who launched diatribes against everyone. So we voted him out. You want reasonable and accountable government? Then why don't you be reasonable and accountable yourself? By the way, ask Brown if he received and $8,000 donation to his campaign from John Weiland last year. Ever wonder why the biggest developer in the Southeast supported his re-election?"

Well, Birdman, is TDK going to be the great traffic reliever the Direct PAC and the developer lead Chamber of Commerce said it would? I was at the City Council meeting where they gave the traffic engineering numbers, and they were horrible. In order to mitigate the traffic from TDK, Councilwoman Rutherford said, "Basically, you just pave Peachtree City" (AJC Dec. 14, 2006).

He said "$8,000," gee whiz, the maximum campaign contribution was $2,000 so you had better revise the spin on this one. I received $0 from John Wieland or any of his employees. The records are on file at City Hall for public disclosure.

As for Mayor Logsdon being bribed by developers, I doubt that is the case. However, his negotiating a huge land deal that involved one of his largest campaign contributors (Doug Mitchell/Pathway) put him in an ethical gray zone.

Does the mayor have an alliance with the development community? Yes. Birdman's Direct PAC, with a heavy developer influence, backed Mayor Logsdon. Group VI's Rex Green also worked the channels for the mayor, Pathway too. Do I agree with Mayor Logsdon's priorities? No.

The deliberate lying on the subject of campaign contributions in order to deceive the public needs to stop Birdman, someone new to town might believe you. It is pretty clear the developer influenced undercurrent from our last election is spawning some real problems for our future quality of life.

You know Steve not everyone in PTC is a DirectPac member. Oh... not everyone in PTC is a Developer either. But Steve, I read your letter to the editor from Oct. 5,2005. Could you at least explain why your council funded the project? Could you explain your quote that:

"Our current council was the only one that actually programmed funds in the city’s budget for TDK. “Rapson said he had always been in favor of TDK, but highways 54 and 74 took precedence. No funds were committed to TDK extension until this Council approved the 2003 budget, which included capital funding for FY 2004 (October 2003), bringing the total to $825,000 on the table. Brown said there was not a person on Council against TDK,” (Council Minutes, Jan. 2, 2003)."

Now before you get wrapped around the pole, this was a direct cut and paste from your letter. Could you at least explain why you didn't use your position and your council to kill this project?

Oh and Steve, try not to accuse me of anything, I'm only interested in your reasoning. As for the donation? I was only asking about something I heard. Thanks for clearing it up. As for people believing what I may say (truthful or not), you're right. After all, they believe everything you say.

Say, why did you work so hard with Wieland to annex that property?

Doesn't that man-child Brown realize there is no Direct PAC anymore? They banded together for one reason - to get rid of him and put adult leadership back in PTC, Mission Accomplished! Now they don't exisit.

And yes, even our less-than-perfect Mayor and his divided council is 100 times better than Brown, Rapson and Weed (and Tennant).

Did John Wieland really give him $8,000? That wasn't a very good investment was it?
meow

Hay birdman, did you bother to read the posting date and time of this "NEW" article?

Had you bothered, you would have seen that the replies that you're complaining about were written in reply to what the article said yesterday.

Gee... maybe this sentence explains it:

birdman didn't read the date and time.

Yeah, I see the article was written on Thu the morning of the meeting. So complain to the Citizen. But if YOU read the article it said the City learned of the deadline Tues....Well let me simply quote the article:

"City officials learned of this deadline Tuesday, and Pathway officials refused the city's request to postpone the deadline to a later date,..."

Seems that the word was put out by Wed. since the Citizen article was posted at !0:04 am. At least it was put out before the meeting.

Now I want you to try and remember a number of years ago when your favored Steve Brown was Mayor. An item was introduced into a meeting that spent $850,000 on 5 acres of land. It was introduced at the meeting (a surprise to many since there was no paper announcement), discussed and voted on in less than 1 hour. Now wouldn't it be somewhat prudent to publish well ahead of time a non-budgeted expenditure of taxpayers money of that magnitude? Wouldn't it be prudent for the Mayor to at least allow citizens time to gather their thoughts in support or opposition? Instead it was those of us who attended and we had only minutes to consider the ramifications and make our points known.

May I also remind you of Brown's surprise appointment of a "Special Prosecutor" to investigate the Development Authority? That was a non-agenda item, introduced at the beginning of a meeting when Brown changed the agenda to move Council Topics to the beginning instead of the end, at a time when he knew the City Attorney would be late, and after his discussing this with Rapson, Weed, and Tenent, completely surprising Councilwoman McMenamin. Gee, that's "Open Meetings" at it's best. Oh, by the way, the $50,000 expense turned up nothing. Oh and Rapson violated the Ethics laws and his hearing cost us well over $27,000. He was found guilty by a group appointed by the council. They tried to exonerate him but the law was so clear Lenox was able to beat a $27,000 lawyer. Good Job!

So as you attack this Council and praise your buddy Brown, maybe you should consider his handling of so many issues. This is about honesty in our government. Brown was rejected for his behavior. Logsden may or may not be doing the right thing (that is a debate we seem to avoid for pure crap accusations), but Brown was very divisive to this city (and still is). Even all the good he did was lost in his horrible attacks on too many people and his constant "adjusting" of his "beliefs."

If you object to a council issue, do what real adults do, attend the meeting, present your issues in a reasonable and factual manner, and people will listen. If the only objection you can come up with is that the council is made up of "bribe taking developer puppets," well, as you can see it only "pisses" us off.
Try being adult. You'd be surprise how effective it is.

They will not give us an excuse, johenry what have you been smoking? I am in town this week and will show up at the meeting. You all need to be there too. We need to get the word out and pack the council chambers.
Yes what is the hurry? Why not hold off until the next council meeting to vote? Does the mayor get a bigger Christmas present if the deal is done before Christmas. Hmm... interesting thought....
Is the Mayor working over his 12 hours a week on this deal?

Next election? Are you kidding? Who's gonna remember this when Judi and Stuart are up for reelection in 2 years?

And who is going to run for office against them? You? No, I didn't think so. Maybe Cele Eifert or Susan Brown will step up to the plate.

Next election will get maybe 20% turnout and it could be settled by 200 votes. Incumbents win when there is low turnout. So what are you going to do?
meow

I will be here and I will speak out on what I know happened. I will say what this Council has done, or not done, to stop this tragedy. I was raised in the South by parents who taught me to shut up and listen and speak up when needed.

Mudcat, your cynicism screams with apathy and that plays into the hands of the incumbents. The recent national elections are a great example. When people have issues that hits close to home change is needed.

I expect in two years TDK will be an issue then as it is now.

Don't forget, when you speak tomorrow night, let us all know your CITIZEN screen name.

Hide behind your anonymity and bash the system!

All I have to say is the majority wanted this - they voted Logsdon in.

Oh well...

It is unfortunate:
- idontknow who you are, so why do you expect new2ptc to give his identity? If you look back through my blogs you can find my identity research my dear idontknow research.
- the majority voted in the current administration, they did not listen to reason; they were over whelmed by the amount of activity going on around this candidate Logsdon. It is amazing that over $70,000 was spent on a $12,000 a year job. Now we all know why.
But that is history... we need to move forward and try to fix it in the next election anybody but Stu or Judy.
Grass roots campaigns no developer support, but it may be too late, the developers and the banks are getting what they paid for in one year. Amazing, amazing that is all I can say.

Huh? Sandysue?
Tom Reese paid for what exactly? Logsdon and the others can't do anything to help the Reese project. They have no vote to approve or reject it. The issue is simply a choice to build TDK extension which was touted as a relief for the traffice at 54/74 long before Reese ever came along OR to vote not to build (or fund) it which does nothing but make the 54/74 traffic worse and quicker.

Voting for or against TDK extension is not that big deal. It is certainly not something any thinking person will remember in the next election - any opposition candidate who raises that issue will be asked (by me and others) So, what would you have done instead? What possible answer can they give?
meow