Investq, since you enjoy "cut and paste", I'll use your technique:

"Logsdon has no stated positions," according to investq. Please go visit haroldlogsdon.org, in fact click here to go to it.

No positions, eh? What would improving fire coverage on the Southside of town be considered? What would keeping funding for infrastructure and cart paths a priority be considered? What would putting a focus on senior housing and reducing tax burden be considered? What would constant budget analysis, review and making tough decisions on things that may have to be cut be considered?

Positions. Details, while lovely, are at best guesses until he gets into office and actually starts working with the staff, the council and the ENTIRE population.

So, just because you don't get it in the format you think it should be in doesn't mean it isn't out there.

Second point - "Our quality of life is very high. We don’t need to make any big changes; we just need to avoid any big mistakes."

It takes 20 minutes to travel from Willowbend Road to Planterra Way on Highway 54 at 4:00 in the afternoon. There is only one entrance to subdivisions that house thousands of people on the west side. And the mayor wants to dicker with "senior housing" and getting it "his way" instead of doing everything he can to expedite the development of alternate transportation systems in the area. "Steve Brown improved this city"...my eye.

Steve Brown's leadership style can lead us to mistakes, continued litigation, and a poor environment for growth. I have heard (and I'm sure it's unconfirmed) the Tourism Association is having trouble getting sponsors for the Amphitheater and Tennis Center. If we break it down to its essential elements, who put them in the position they're now in? Who led the charge to get the Development Authority out of the venue management business via a slash and burn mentality? Steve Brown.

Investq, thanks for stopping by. Join PTC Guy and Cal Beverly on the online "logic tour" you're trying to spin folks with. Maybe someone will listen to you on another forum, because your approach is quite tiresome. I have seen the last four years, and I don't like it. Let's get someone else in.

If you agree with me on this blog, let your voice be heard. Post today!

I'd like to just add that when I challenged Brown on his stances in 2001, particularly annexation, PTC Guy, one of Brown's staunchest supporters answered that election is for 2005 and sometimes "things change." Talk about a "cop out!" He is one who constantly calls for "specifics." But when Brown, who was actually not specific in 2001, failed miserably in "sticking to message," the supporters simply say "well, things changed." Not sufficient. As you pointed out, Logsden has laid out specific goals. Like any good incoming leader, he wants to evaluate the situation, look at all alternatives, utilize all resources including staff and council, then devise a workable and efficient solution. I would be unhappy with a mayor, who is part time, who is part of an elected council, to promise to "cut this" and "cut that" with no input of our OTHER representatives. Logsden has clearly delineated the issues and goals. His specifics will come with careful study and review. Unlike Brown who acts as a "goverment of one."

Logsden will be a tremendous improvement.

Mr. ignoranceisbliss idontknow and live on past elelction issues birdman.

OK, birdman, you are going to clean item X on Saturday.

Friday a tree falls on it, crushing it. Do you still clean it on Saturday or do you change your plans and promises?

idontknow, since when did actually telling someone what you would do if your elected them become a bad thing?

Good morning! PTC Guy - thanks for reading, surmising you've got all the answers and belittling those who have opposing opinions.

Please click the text here for a reply to your comments.

Logsdon does say things. Just not the things you want him to say. Oh, well. Choose who you will.

As for me, my choice is Logsdon. I hope there will be many others who will also make that same choice.

Good luck to you - may the better man win.

I will look into it.

That is so insightful.

Rick, is that you?

Get sleep, the quality is going down. Come back refreshed.

Quality is just fine.

Something happens to change issues you change as the issues change.

We all do that. So going back 4 years is not very helpful for issues now.

And pleading not having an actual answer, which has substance, is good, is lacking at best.

I'm just extremely confused by whatever it is PTC Guy is trying to say in this last post.

PTC Guy, tell ya what - I'll stop if you do. Let's let some other folks have a go at this.

We've said all we need to say, and the rest comes out on Election Day.

Ooh, a bit poetic, isn't it?

The comments she made were directed at the PTC Guy comment.

Steve Brown began his campaign for mayor on the premise of fighting against the "establishment", which in his view were all of the existing members of City Council and especially the Mayor. His assertion was that these people have been corrupt and are cheating the people of Peachtree City.
Some thirty years ago, a group of people, more than likely composed of several evil delvelopers had an idea to create a city that would be ideal to raise a family and would be filled with amenities that all could enjoy. Since that time, Peachtree City has grown into to the place that it is today, a "Top Ten Place to Live".
Steve Brown had absolutely nothing to do with the evolvement of our city. It was a fantastic place to live, long before he moved here and before he soiled the position of Mayor.
It is truly sad that time and again the people who devoted their time and efforts to help form Peachtree City are cursed as being the "evil people". If you live in Peachtree City and enjoy what we have, you need to take every chance you get, through whatever chanel is available to you, and thank the people who were here before you. People who served in political office, people who volunteered their time to the various committess and authorities and even the developers who built your houses.
The problems facing our city are not because of what is happening within our borders but because of all of the growth around us. Imagine what the traffic at 54/74 would be like if people were not driving to and from Coweta county. The congestion would be almost non-existent.
A couple other points about Steve Brown and his so-called committment to families. Was he thinking about families when he was the lone vote to allow rezoning of the Lutheran church property, even though the entire planning commission and the planning director said that overall it was bad for the city and the surrounding neighborhoods. Exactly whose families was he thinking about. He claims not to be influenced by special interest groups but the only people in favor of that rezoning were the 200 or so church members. Isn't a group of 200 out of 38,000 considered a special interest group?
Steve Brown has been a disgrace to the City. Had he taken a few moments to reflect about the city he moved to, he would have taken the time to work with the men who preceded him and shown them the respect they are each due, rather than call them criminals.

Tell that to those who went through years of increasing stormwater damage and issues that Brown's actively backing the Stormwater Utility is nothing.

Or those who support the widening and repair of the Golf Cart Paths.

Or those who back not paying Development Authority debt unless it can be show PTC actually signed on.

Tell them how much they should be honoring those who just turned blind eyes in the past.

And explain how you can justify putting the founders of PTC into the same category as these mayors who did these things?

On the Lutheran Church it was denied because it was felt to violate codes and ordinances. Which, by the way, I understand are now under scrutiny largely stemming from this issue.

If a Walgreens there would be negative to all of PTC then why were the restaurants and the Eckerd allowed to build across the street?

Stormwater issues did not come from things building around us outside our borders. Nor did the Golf Cart or Tennis Center.

Sorry, you logic just does not add up here.

You apparently don't know this, but the stormwater regulations were not the brainchild of Steve Brown. They are FEDERALLY MANDATED, based on the percentage of impervious surface within the city. There were several options when trying to address how to deal with the impending regulations. The reason no one else had to address the problems was because there were no regulations in place. And, it was not known that the regulations would be forthcoming until about 4 years ago. One option was to incorporate the the stormwater compliance into the wastewater authority. Another was to create a utility within the city. There is no one on the city staff, currently, who has any experience with a stormwater utility. I will use a disclaimer that I do not know the qualifications of the current City Engineer. But I know that the former engineer had no experience. In fact the entire plan was subcontracted to an engineering company in Fayetteville.
And, you are wrong about the Walgreens, it was turned down because 4 of the 5 council members voted against it. The city is under no legal obligation to rezone that property. The church is free to sell the property to whomever they choose but it will still be zoned as the same. A restaurant and Eckerds were allowed to build across the street because that land was always zoned COMMERCIAL.
Let me ask you this, do you think Peachtree City citizens are happier with the quality of the Tennis Center and Amphitheater now or before Steve and his crusade?
You need to do more research before blindly listening to what Steve has tried to pass off as his own ideas.

Just curious, it seems that you are in disagreement with almost 100% of posts on this board that disagree with Brown. That would put you in line with about 20% of the voters in this town. I've never seen anybody be in lockstep with a candidate.

Thank goodness that next Tuesday, all this talk about Brown will be over for a while.

Mudcat, I think you got it wrong, 4000 vote, 500 for Brown (400 had minds to change) and 3500 for Harold Logsdon

Check the numbers. Total vote was just over 7,000. We have over 21,000 registered voters. No one can claim a mandate with such complacency. The run off will be lucky to draw 3,500, or about 10% of our total population. No matter who gets in, this is no 'landslide'. It shows that with originally 6 candidates, none appealed to PTC voters enough to get them to vote. Sad! If Harold does not answer questions before the election, wonder what he will say after, if elected? Back to the days of the 'closed door deals'.

Wait for the votes.

No one know how many of those who voted before will vote again or how many first timers will vote.

Nor do you know how those who voted neither Brown or Logsdon will vote. To assume they will always vote anti-Brown is wishful thinking.

And happily I report, there are some Logsdon voters who have are switching.

Careful now, the Brownies are out in force. If anyone thinks this is a lock they are nuts. Brown with his buddies including Cal have totally distracted the issues. He may just pull this out. People need to get out and vote. TAKE NOTHING FOR GRANTED!!! Large turnout...new mayor. Small turnout...four more years.

GET THE VOTE OUT!

You're much too optimistic little kitty. There will be nowhere near that turnout and it will be much closer. Brown has his group of brownnosers who will all vote - and there are at least 1200 of them - why they follow him I don't know, I just know they exist. Odd that they don't give him money, but they'll vote - count on it. Harold will win for sure, but by a much narrower margin that you predict.

You deride Cal for stating the truth and then call such as myself a brownnoser.

Well, this brownnoser has some issue he is tired of not seeing fixed for 19 years, which are getting worse.

Brown, like him or not, has fixes in work. Logsdon will not even acknowledge the studies and development.

This "brownnoser" is voting for Brown due to issue substance, not personalities. Logsdon is an empty suite on issues.

I read Cal's OPINION which doesn't make it fact nor truth, it's just his opinion. I'll also add that most candidates that Cal endorses do not win as Cal is not in tune with the voters of PTC. Matter of fact, DIRECTPAC endorsements seem to be much more likely in determining who wins or not.

If people believe Cal's opinions to be factual or *the truth*, my guess is that his candidates would be winning rather than losing elections.

NUK

Logsdon, not Cal, is what proves the case against Logsdon.

And most all I know have no love of DirectPac or developers in general.

They hate DIRECTPAC. That means exactly what? How come Stuart KourSomething, Judi-Ann Rutherford and Boone all won Council seats after being endorsed by DIRECTPAC?

NUK