The Question for Brown YET AGAIN (third time)

Ok, just logged on. I have asked repeatedly about your stand on annexation in 2001 and you have yet to answer it. So here goes:

In 2001 you stated on your website:

"The bottom line on annexation: Council Members can be swayed by special interests. I want to give the power of annexation to the citizens. I want to change the charter so that all annexation requests must be voted on by referendum at the next scheduled general election. If the people want the annexation, they will vote for it.The bottom line on annexation: Council Members can be swayed by special interests. I want to give the power of annexation to the citizens. I want to change the charter so that all annexation requests must be voted on by referendum at the next scheduled general election. If the people want the annexation, they will vote for it."

Now finally, after 4 years, you tell us that the law precludes annexaton being put to a vote. Former Councilwoman Carol Fritz told me directly that she had advised you of that fact PRIOR to the 2001 election. Yet you still maintained a vote as your stance. Even if you deny that you were told, why did you not know that a vote couldn't be held? Here are your words regarding your background:

"Steve is known as someone who diligently researches problems in an effort to find positive solutions for the obstacles facing our city. He has spent thousands of his own dollars buying textbooks, buying site maps, and attending land planning classes. He has spent countless hours researching on the Internet, speaking with state and national experts and reviewing decades of government meeting minutes....He was one of only three Non-Planning Officials accepted in the inaugural Atlanta Regional Commission’s Community Planning Academy....He has attended several development conferences and has read numerous books on issues that effect our city like big box retail, planning, zoning and takings law."

Impressive claims in 2001. Are you trying to suggest that in all of your readings, classes, discussions with officials, research, and memberships on committees that you didn't take the time to SEE if a major promise was even legal? And you question Logsdens camapaign?

So please, for the third time, could you answer how something so important to your campaign was so poorly researched by you?

Brown can't answer

Submitted by H. Hamster on Fri, 12/02/2005 - 9:53am.

Birdman, you'll get a long answer, but you won't get an honest one or a complete one. The simple fact is Brown has changed his position. Why is the real question.

login to post comments

Gee!

Submitted by PTC Guy on Fri, 12/02/2005 - 11:02am.

I thought this election was for 2005.

As if people and circumstance never change positions or relevance in life.

login to post comments

Goes to "honesty"

Submitted by birdman on Fri, 12/02/2005 - 3:07pm.

It simply goes to a matter of honesty and integrity. It's one thing to be elected into office and find out that the circumstances are such that positions must be changed and it is another to flat out claim a particular stance in order to get votes. Gee, interesting. Your major complaint on Logsden is lack of specific solutions. Yet you are saying that Brown simply changed positions. Brown gave a specific solution on annexation. One that was illegal and he knew it. Plausible deniability doesn't work. The annexation issue was HUGE in 2001. If he will lie about that, then lie about his "change," then what else will he lie about? Let's guess...hmmm...just about anything I guess. His "specific" solutions sound good on the campaign trail, but his history shows how little he will actually stick to them.
This election IS for 2005! But he was elected in 2001 for a number of reasons. Those who voted for him then were fooled. They won't be fooled again. That's why 80% voted for other candidates. NOT because we are all "developers." They know ALL his rhetoric is nothing but hot air designed to get votes. For example, Do you really think Logsden will stop funding youth sports? Do you EVEN KNOW how much the city actually funds youth sports? When I left the PTCYSA in 1998 the only funding they received was for fields. In fact it wasn't funding, it was simply that the city maintained the fields. So exactly HOW much is Steve...oops...Cal suggesting that Logsden will "stop" funding? Great fear tactic. No substance.
Fool me once...shame on you...Fool me twice...I'm a Brown voter.

login to post comments