Speaking as a Vet, a former Boy Scout leader whose son is an Eagle, one who started and headed a 4-H program that produced 2 Master 4-H'ers and won state and international titles in their field and a businessman I have seen nothing from Logsdon that warrants my vote.

His silence on key issues such as Stormwater is deafening.

His statements about avoiding the debate as regards the youth organizing were anti-excellence in youth.

I do believe I am pro-family and I don't see anything inspiring in Logsdon to date.

Also as a vet, retired officer, former soccer coach, former baseball coach, school mentor, proud father of a son who is flying front line fighters for the US Navy, Brown's assault on the PARENTS of PTC SPEAKS VOLUMES. His assertion that HE is the ONLY reason that there are youth programs and recreational programs speaks volumes for his deliusional view. He has totally disregarded ALL of us who worked for YEARS to build this family friendly community. I am NOT anti-family! His characterization of such is despicable! You should also be incensed at this assertion. It is beyond all reason. It is insulting to the entire community.

The stormwater issue is FEDERALY MANDATED! It began due to Federal Mandates and will be completed due to Federal Mandate. Exactly WHAT stand do you expect? That Harold Logsden will abide by a Federally mandated program? Where is the issue? Brown WANTS you to believe it was his idea, it wasn't. He wants you to believe only he can accomplish it, anyone can. It is a non-issue because it is a federal requirement. In fact it will more appropriatly be accomplished by City Staff, NOT an egomaniacal mayor.

Brown has strongly supported youth programs. But he didn't start them. They already existed. And they are good programs. That is why they are NOT an issue. What do you want Logsden to say? That long running youth programs are good and will continue? The ONLY reason you think he would "disband" all youth programs and "turn them out to the streets to form gangs" is because Brown has made that suggestion. We all moved here for the quality family life. What makes you think ANYONE would do anything to destroy that? Every mayor, past or present has been strong supporters of our youth. Logsden will be no different. Brown simply wants to deflect the real issues and prey on the fears of the uninformed.

I am pro-family also. That is why I am so insulted by Brown's attempt to characterize me and others as "anti-family." He is simply hurting the character of the city with these insulting accusations. That isn't pro-family, it's pro-Brown!

If you are really interested in the future of the city you should look for a mayor who will stop constant character assasination. You should look for a mayor who respects ALL the citizens and not just the "yes" citizens. You should look for a mayor who will allow City Staff to do it's job. Logsden is that person. Brown has proven over his four years that he is a vindictive, slandering, egomaniac who is determined to push his own agenda.

You may be surprised to find out that there really aren't more than 3000 "developers" in this city as Brown has stated (those who voted for Logsden). Have you ever asked Brown exactly what all these "developers" are after? What they stand to gain? And don't say the 960 acres. Remember BROWN is the one who tried to do the BIGGEST Developer, John Wieland, a favor and annex his property.

Birdman, I respect your involvements.

But your assumptions of what a gracious mayor Logsdon would be are unfounded. A gracious and citizen conscience mayoral candidate would not play hide the answers until elected.

That assumption about him is a blind assumption due to your dislike for Brown.

There are several ways Stormwater can be handled.

Water, sewage and such are Utilities. Stormwater is a different form of these functions but still is a utility type function.

Most people do not understand utilities and see them as too expensive for such simple things as waste treatment and drinking water.

They don't have a clue how complex utilities are. And expensive to run.

Since this issue has come up I have lost count on how many friends and such I have had to explain the stormwater and utility issues to. Once they understood it they realized the Stormwater Utility was the way to go.

Utility means the monies do not get co-mingled with General Tax funds thus cannot get diverted to more popular issues by a Council vote.

Every indication I have seen from Logsdon is that is exactly where he wants it.

Putting it in the General Fund allows politicians, with positions such as Dan Tennant have expressed, to meet the minimum standards of Federal and State law and not meet the full needs of the citizens by constant "needful" and "better use" of the General Fund Monies.

Do you know anywhere around that trusts their sewage and drinking water to General Fund allotments by politicians?

So, you are showing ignorance of the full scope and realities of this issues, with a statement Logsdon has to do something therefore no issue.

If Logsdon, which every indication is, wants that issue part of the General Fund, there are most assuredly issues of control and performance.

Plus, a Utility qualifies for loan and other programs that a General Tax Fund does not. So better financial control and benefits.

Either way, Logsdon cannot deal with Stormwater and maintain or lower current costs to the citizens. Impossible on a 9.1 million dollar issue.

As for youth I have not seen one positive statement on the issue from him. So how do you know he as pro-family as you think.

You don't really know squat about what Logsdon would do.

Better question would be who created the storm water? Developers did and didn't make proper provisions.

Some parts of the stormwater systems were created by developers.

But got news for you. The vast majority was created by PTC either directly or under PTC direct control.

See all those catch areas by the roads? Stormwater and city controlled and owned. Those retention and detention ponds throughout PTC? PTC owned for the most part.

How about the ditches running through and near Communities? Either owned by PTC or on PTC easements.

As for provisions? What in the world does that mean?

The normal used corrugated steel pipes have lives of 20-25 years. Then the CITY has to replace THEIR pipes.

Ditches almost never service one community or business area. Each can service miles of such. Thus city property.

Pipes can run for miles underground collecting water of roads. City property with life spans.

Pipes running underground in communities? City Property.

So yes, developers made a lot of errors in the past that must be fixed. But PTC allowed them to get away with it.

Now State and Federal Laws have clamped down on them. And many are whining blue streaks and seeking ways to get stronger requirements removed.

Is that what you want to happen to Stormwater issues? Relaxed back to where developers and City let things get by to be paid for later by others?

You really need to learn what this is all about before you start making pronouncements. We are the others who are paying for the relaxed standards of the past.

Even if installed perfectly the oldest parts are falling apart now and have to be replaces at PTC expense.

Think of it as a time line. Oldest parts of the time need repair and/or updating now. Each years more segments enter that critical age and need repair and/or update.

Now go 25 years forward after the current needs are met. Now you have the repaired/updated segments again needing repair/updating. But not them alone but as well everything newly built at the time of the first repair/update.

It never gets less. It will always get more. And thus we need the Utility with people specialized in that area as they are on water and sewage now.

Way to many people are not understanding this issue at all!

Ok, you are correct that I am not well versed in Stormwater Management. But I will say that I am not simply blinded by hatred for Brown. From conversations with Logsden and with a number of people who have met him, he is a reasonable and conscientious man. To assume that he will automatically be horrible is to not have met with him. I know, I know, people have left emails that he hasn't answered. Well, same goes for Brown. Respect the fact that these two are being innundated at the present time. But I believe that Logsden will become well versed in Stormwater Management. He is not a hipshot type leader like Brown. He has been in significant leadership positions before. But what we don't need is someone who is a self proclaimed "expert" like Brown dictating every issue. The key to proper leadership is proper delegation. The mayor and council need to utilize all the experts and consider all alternatives before acting. Brown tries to do it all himself and "bulldog" his "plan." A good example is when he first became mayor he appointed a variety of committees to "study" ALL PTC regulations and advise the council on re-writes etc. The ONE constant to ALL committees was that Brown was a member. A friend of mine sat on the "Landscaping Committee" and told me Brown tried to monopolize the meetings and push his views. That is hardly how "advisory committees" are organized. They are supposed to be independent of those they are advising. My fear is that Brown will do the same thing with Stormwater. Push his "vision" and not listen to those who really know.

Thank-you on the concession. I like people who can do that, knowing it is hard to do.

I don't have any intention of hoping Logsdon gets elected, gets up to speed and then sees the wisdom of the Stormwater Utility.

He has been campaigning for a year. He should know by now.

There is just too much at risk.

He did promise to maintain or cut tax levels. How did he do that without already knowing about such a major cost as Stormwater?

To assume he is one great guy is a mistake many did with Clinton. The man could sweet talk like a pro.

I hope you can see where I am coming from in my logic.

I don't know Logsdon and that is the problem. He is stealth and I don't like that one bit.

I do imagine Brown has not answered everything emailed to him. But I do know where he stands on key issues. I don't know where Logsdon stands except on that debt issue.

Why won't he just tell us?

Using Stormwater as an example Brown never played the expert when he toured our area with us. He constantly deferred to the engineers and such.

Same at the Public Meeting. The main speaker was the engineer. He conducted the meeting, not Brown.

I also met with the engineer. One sharp guy there.

There is a superb plan in place with support mapping and such way beyond Brown's knowledge in the area. He said he was not the expert.

So why did he come? To see for himself. And I will fault no one for that.

I understand Stormwater. I understand the Utility. So Brown did not hoodwink me. I talked to him and pointed things out and he listened.

I also agree on delegation. I have done it in all positions of authority I have held and am a firm believer in it. He who leads least leads best.

Now the Bubble Burster. By city law Brown IS a member or every committee.

And that is fully in keeping with many Association Declarations and By-Laws.

But I will grant you there is a need to listen more and speak less except if in an area of real expertise.

I think Brown really gets excited by being part of it all. That he really cares.

Unfortunately that can result in a lot of speaking first and thinking later. Compounded by mistakes in trying to correct the errors.

Bottom line is I have no incentive to vote for Logsdon. He has told me nothing on what matters the most.

I appreciate your points. But from another perspective I have seen Brown split this city apart with his vitriolic attacks and accusations. He has too many convinced that this place was a bleak dark hotbed of corruption prior to his arrival. He has levied constant accusations against too many people (including me). I can never forgive him for that. I admit that the Stormwater issue is huge, but it isn't the only issue. There is a lot more riding on this than one issue. I also believe that Logsden is an honest and sincere person. To assume he will destroy the city with stormwater is a bit overblown. He is not like Brown. He doesn't want to change PTC in his own image. I know I will not convince you, but with experts (you seem to truly be one) around who can offer advice I suspect Logsden will take it all into account and lead the city in the right direction. Plus this isn't only upto the mayor. A good mayor (and I think Logsden will be one) will utilize his staff and council and the right direction will be the one we take. That is the difference I see between them. Brown is a "my way or the highway" type. Logsden has been in serious leadeship positions and will consider all input.
I hate the term "we agree to disagree," but I will say that one of us will be proven right.

I wish us both luck.

When the rhetoric dies you say some good stuff. (I mean that as a compliment)

True. Stormwater is not the only issue. But dig deeper at your own pace and you will find it is probably the number one issue in reality.

You will never hear me say Brown is the perfect mayor on many issues.

But like it or not, he has gotten some pretty important stuff into work. Things that went untouched for years.

And like it or not, Logsdon has said nothing for you to genuinely know what kind of leader he would be, what direction he would go and if he would help PTC or not.

There is no good reason for Logsdon to remain silent unless he has nothing or import to say. Thus letting other assume good a competence about him to get him elected.

You will find the Logsdon of your mind is the Logsdon of reality.

He could sway voters away from Brown by just being honest and tell us what we need to know. But apparently he feels we need to know nothing.

Isn't stuff like that what you feel Brown has done to make you mad?

Actually it is what Brown says that has made me mad. Don't know if you followed his "career" prior to becoming mayor. I did. He spent about 3 years publicly attacking Lenox and the council. In fact he was so slanderous that he had a suit filed against him. He actually won the election on being opposed to Home Depot and Wal Mart (as well as annexation). We have beaten annexation to death, but as to the Big Boxes he actually stated he would rather fight them in court than give in. Of course that wasn't the case when he was mayor and Target became an issue. He simply wimply voted no with no real enthusiasm. He knew it would pass so he covered his behind. But what he didn't tell the voters in 2001 was that Home Depot and Wal Mart area was always zoned for that use. If the city went to court they would lose around $5 million and all architectural control. But Brown spouted off enought to win the election. And before you count the "mandate" he claimed, the runoff was about 12 percent of the voters and he got 60 percent. 20000 voters then 12 percent is about 2400. 60 percent is 1440. That is about 7 percent of the voters. SOME MANDATE!
Now the shoe is on the other foot and he is pointing out the low turnout etc. as an excuse. Actually a 40 percent turnout for a small local election is quite high. And 80 percent voted against him. That explains his desperation.

Anyway, what makes me mad is the lies, deceit, foolish spending, bad mouthing citizens and other govt. entities, driving business away, etc. Not his "silence." His silence would be appreciated. I am tired of his constant tirades in the paper. I'm tired of his verbal attacks on a number of citizens then quoting scripture and professing his "love" for us. I am tired of his constant refences to us as "his" citizens, "his" council, "his" city. It is our city and our council. He works for all of us. Too bad he doesn't respect that.

I can understand the anger. So don't go having a shock heart attack on me.

I am not blind.

But, I will not let myself look at this emotionally.

When I look at the ethical aspects both these guys disappoint me greatly.

I have to look at what they will do. Brown has already committed himself on issues I hold important on the course I want.

Logsdon has said nothing. Utterly nothing.

If he wants to get votes from people like me that is a really wrong thing to do.

I am not defending Brown. So let that go.

But it is a fact Target and so on were coming in here regardless of how the vote went.

I have looked at the history of these companies when they want to be somewhere. They get there by state court every time costing the community a fortune trying to fight them.

What youth programs? Only thing I know is sports--mostly soccer and some basebsall. Doesn't do much for entertaining and social get togethers for teen-agers.