Have you actually emailed Harold Logsdon (our next mayor) or are you just parroting what others have said? Did you sign your email with your real name or use an alias? If you did email him with a legitimate question and sign the email he will answer you.

Logsdon does not answser exact questions.

Calling Dana, myself and others liars, who have repeatedly told you that, is your problem, not ours.

Signing a name is a truly lame added effort to escape the truth. He does not answer those either.

Can someone please identify who the developers of Peachtree City are that everyone keeps referencing Harold Logsdon has the support of?

Can you be specific? Everyone here loves specifics, so please elaborate. Name names of individuals and corporations who have contributed to his campaign and how much they have given.

To help you, here is a list of all those who contributed $101 or more to the Logsdon campaign, as reported in thecitizen.com
-------------------------------------------
Hollis and Joyce Harris $2,000.00
Scott Bradshaw $1,000.00
Harold and Ann Logsdon (candidate) $1,000.00
Michael and Carol Brady $1,000.00
Friends of Tom Farr $610.82
Robert and Gail Stephens $500.00
Bill and Angelyn Warren $500.00
Walter Thomas $500.00
James Tyndall $500.00
Pete and Lyn Cunningham $500.00
Maria Curley $500.00
Heather and William Downing $500.00
William Flynn $500.00
Mike Gribble $500.00
Nelson and Brenda Jones $500.00
Lacy&Snyder LLP $500.00
James and Phyllis Osbourne $500.00
Pfeifer Building Company, Inc $500.00
Ed Potts $500.00
Southern Instruments Inc. $500.00
Y Knot Sports Bar, Inc $500.00
Heather and David Downing $410.00
Bill Sanford $400.00
Harold Logsdon (in-kind) $310.00
Ralph Cook $250.00
Michael Hofrichter $250.00
Sam Allen $250.00
Jim Deitz $250.00
Michael Hofrichter (2nd contribution) $250.00
Greg Johnson $250.00
Lou Pailer $250.00
Kelly W. Richardson $250.00
Richard Schlosser $250.00
James and Sandra Saxton $200.00
Carl and Lauren Ryals $200.00
Deborah and William Butler $200.00
Linley and Bradford Holland $200.00
Steven and Shirley Good $150.00
Michael McGowan $150.00
Steven and Shirley Good (2nd contribution)$150.00
Donna and Kenneth Groover $150.00
Marvin and Norma Hilliard $150.00
Bill and Debbie Butler $150.00
Y-Knot Sports Bar $150.00
Brandon Barfield $100.00
Chuck Watkins $100.00
Tim Barfield $100.00
Robert Brooks $100.00
Fred Brown $100.00
Joseph Cahoon $100.00
Robert and Nancy Choate $100.00
Cobb Farms $100.00
Ann Cobb $100.00
Gene Comfort $100.00
Roy Craig Evans $100.00
Floy Farr $100.00
Carl and Virginia Floyd $100.00
David Fowler $100.00
Chong Gayle $100.00
Mike Glenn $100.00
Tom and Bonnie Hundley $100.00
Judith Kim $100.00
David and Yvonne Kohout $100.00
Ylannis Koukoutsis $100.00
George Laporte $100.00
Michael McElroy $100.00
Paige McElroy $100.00
Joseph and Mary Morris, Sr. $100.00
Ken Pender $100.00
Mack Rea $100.00
Ron and Shirley Ryan $100.00
Iola Snow $100.00
John and Mary Staas $100.00
Stony Brook Homeowners Association $40.00
---------------------------------------------
I assume these are a few of the "developers" you are referring to:

Pathway Communities
The current incarnation of the the original "developers" of Peachtree City, who currently only have one subdivision they are marketing left in the City (the Peninsula)?

Corporate Officers of Pathway Communities:
Doug Mitchell, CEO
Elizabeth Thibo, CFO
M Margaret Sullivan, Corporate Secretary

Combined Contributions (over $101) to Logsdon Campaign by Corporate Officers: $0
---------------------------------------------
Peachtree Brokerage Group
A subsidiary of Pathway Communities, who are marketing 3 acres of commercial parcels and the remaining industrial parcels to bring in increased tax base to town?

As a subsidiary of Pathways, the corporate officers may be the same. They are an LLC, and do not have their officers listed on the Secretary of State website
---------------------------------------------
John Wieland Homes and Neighborhoods
The point group interested in the proposed annexation of lands in the West Village to build a large community of homes?

Corporate Officers of John Wieland Homes and Neighborhoods:
Terrence Russell, CEO
Doug Ray, CFO
Susan Wieland, Corporate Secretary

Combined Contributions (over $101) to Logsdon Campaign by Corporate Officers: $0
---------------------------------------------
Group VI
The largest marketer of existing commercial properties next to Peachtree Brokerage, who are trying to keep and bring in new business tenants into properties otherwise left vacant?

Corporate Officers of Group VI:
Incorporated as Limited Liability Corporations, their officers are not listed. Their agents, however, are:
James I Pace, Jr.
Ronald Williamson

Combined Contributions (over $101) to Logsdon Campaign by Agents: $0
---------------------------------------------
If you say DIRECT PAC or Friends of Tom Farr, can you name specific individuals and what level of financial support you are aware of? Again, I provide the chart for your review above, but I'm sure you have "heard" something from somebody.

I know I said I would go away, but I just can't stand here and continue letting these half-truths stand without someone saying something. "Facts" get thrown around here, and if you really look at them all, most of them aren't exactly how things actually happened, or happen.

If you are any of the people mentioned as contributors above and you are "lurking" online, would you mind logging in and letting everyone here know why you donated to Logsdon and why you support him?

It can be said that there are MANY who put their money where their mouth is. I doubt many of these people are "developers". I note some are builders, and I do see ONE former mayor and ONE of the founders of Peachtree City. I also see some very common people have donated too.

And, as I have pointed out several times without anyone taking me to task, the development authority member who blew the whistle on the fiscal irresponsibility and management problems at the Authority. Scott Bradshaw supports Harold Logsdon. What does this tell you, oh undecided voter?

Steve - the people spoke on Election Day. They'll speak again on Tuesday. They want you gone. We tried to warn you.

It tells me nothing.

...that should tell you all you need to know. I would think if Mr. Bradshaw was truly behind the Mayor's actions, he would be an ardent supporter of the reelection campaign. He put his money where his mouth was and supported HAROLD LOGSDON.

The schoolyard bully of our forum appears to be unable to formulate a fact-based response to an overwhelming onslaught of "evidence".

PTC Guy, I'm sorry - I thought I'd just go away. But you kept on with your broken record. I think there are a plethora of people who can give you both personal accounts of the incumbent and "what he does".

If you think the world of Peachtree City revolves around Steve Brown with his 13 points of power, you are sadly mistaken. You quote portions of the charter with no understanding of the true nature of City government. You use semantics to attempt to vilify Mr. Logsdon because he doesn't tell you what you want to hear, and yet you manipulate or obfuscate contrary arguments, repeating what the incumbent "stands" on the "issues" are. And you have a utilize a duplicitous writing style to consider yourself an "expert" on the true issues of Peachtree City.

Guess what, kids. The west side will be developed, either in Peachtree City, Tyrone or Fayette County. It WILL have an effect on our traffic, our public safety, and our schools.

Traffic will improve, believe it or not. TDK Boulevard WILL BE BUILT. 54 WILL BE WIDENED. 74 WILL BE WIDENED on the South side (no one talks about that one, and it's not Steve Brown you can thank for that, say hi to Mitch Seabaugh and your state legislature).

The stormwater management program WILL go on in a utility. Mr. PTC Guy states "sources" he knows that say Logsdon will delay the process and takes TWO WORDS from a website he's read to justify his statements.

Mr. Logsdon takes a cautious approach to avoid making promises he can't keep. He doesn't say he's going to lower taxes, he says he's going to HELP lower the tax BURDEN. This can be done by supporting building a stronger Peachtree City Development Authority to focus on improving economic development. If they could just get out of that dang lawsuit....wait a minute! We could say "mea culpa", there were PROBLEMS with the previous authorities and we could move forward.

Instead, with the incumbent, we'll stick our feet in and fight, fight, fight and pay MORE in lawyers' fees than we would have if we just cut a check right then and there. And we MIGHT have to use hotel/motel tax to fund this "bailout", since the State Legislature says we can do that now....hey, that wouldn't have an effect on the everyday taxpayer!

Please read EVERYTHING. ALL THE WORDS. It will help you understand the WHOLE picture, not just want the incumbent wants to scare you with.

You don't know why Bradshaw backs Logsdon. You are guessing.

Never said Brown was perfect. But he beats Logsdon on the issues.

Easy to do when Logsdon takes no actual meaningful positions. You can whirl, twirl and spin all you want but that remains the fact. If 'I will look into it' is good enough for you, so be it. Not good enough for me.

Ramble on about not understanding the Charter. Ramble on. Let the folks read the charter for themselves and decide.

And please tell me how you know the Stormwater Utility is backed by Logsdon? Yes, I see the little semantical ploy you are playing here.

And cautious approach on Stormwater? Really? Lying about nothing being done so far is cautious? Telling us it will take years is cautious?

And lower the tax burden does not mean lower taxes? Since when?

To lower the costs of government does not lower the tax burden. Lowering taxes lowers tax burden.

And burning up motel/hotel tax income that could be used elsewhere to lower taxes on the citizens does not lower the tax burden either.

Go back to the drawing board and try again. These attempts did not work.

To lower the costs of government does not lower the tax burden. Lowering taxes lowers tax burden.

I bring in 5 new industries into town. They pay $200,000 in taxes a year. This is $1,000,000 a year. 20% of that is $200,000 for the City. Let's be generous and take out 15% of that for "infrastructure costs" they require that reduce the amount of taxes the City gets in aggregate. That leaves $170,000 per year.

The average tax bill on a $300,000 home (City gross portion) is about $1,100 (look up your house tax bill on www.fayettecountytaxcomm.com.

I can eliminate the tax burden of 154 $300,000 houses by getting 5 industries at $200,000 a year in taxes (that's about what Cooper Lighting and Cooper Wiring are paying, from my previous blogs - read them again, they're fun and educational!). We have a great deal of our industrial park still as trees and grass. Imagine if we could get BUSINESSES to come in there! What a shocker!

I know, I'm "stupid" and "foolish", but even Mr. Current Mayor's trying to do this (he's courting Japanese and Danish businesses, yet neither of them have come running). Increasing business helps residential tax burdens.

Please, go ahead and tell me I'm wrong, and give me the proof that refutes it.

Or are you and coolmartita still saying "poor idontknow"? Feeling pity for me....awwwwww.

Penny wise and pound foolish.

And you miss in your example that adding those entities increase the cost burdens of maintenance and so on.

Further, to get those industries in today's realities requires you to give a tax break for x amount of years.

So tax burdens increase.

Then the employees need homes which puts greater burdens on the infrastructure as well.

And it does nothing to offset annual growth in maintenance requirements on existing city responsibilities.

So, your formula is a bit incomplete. And assumes Logsdon is superman.

Bottom line is Logsdon is not going to reduce taxes we pay.

Guess you missed the 15% I took out off the top for "infrastructure".

I would guess that those working in industries would not be able to afford Peachtree City and would live in Coweta County or Meriwether or other counties. Oh yes, traffic. Good thing that four lane is coming in, and that TDK Boulevard too.

Tax incentives? Probably, but the state would be the one to push those, followed by the County. So you might be right....or MAYBE Cooper Lighting/Wiring already HAS it's tax breaks, since I took it from one of their bills?

Assumes Logsdon is superman - no, just the man who will go to the Fayette County Development Authority and say "what can we do to help you?". Go to the Peachtree City Development Authority and say "what can we do to help you?". Stop placing blame on the previous administration for the "dire" plight we're in. Go to the development community and say "what can we do to help you?". Exactly what he says he'll do.

Wow - a position of Logsdon's. I'm sure it's just not clear enough to appease you.

AND THE NEXT TOPIC - Referendums for cart paths (other needed infrastructure projects)...maybe the people WANT to pay for these things? A transportation authority to issue revenue bonds....a CART PATH REGISTRATION FEE FOR THOSE WHO USE THEM, not an entire tax on the whole population!

(oh no, we don't want to PAY for these amenities! Just let us have these special things, but don't bill us for them - we just expect them).

Think outside your retention pond.

Cities do tax breaks all the time.

And true on the living here. Which puts an extra burden on our roads.

What can we do to help you = more spent tax money. I guess you love all foreign aid as well.

No tax on me if you do golf carts. I don't own one. Besides, I believe there is a registration fee now on carts, isn't there?

I am all for paying what we get. The Utility is not free, averages about $4.00 a month, in example.

I have my check book ready.

I believe in being smart and looking for advantages.

In 5 years I have cut $7.700.00 of waste from our HOA budget, but our monthly assessment has not gone down.

Why? Because water and other costs have gone up.

So, yea, I think I have a pretty good handle on understanding these things.

Agreed. Maybe Logsdon can find a way to reduce the cost of maintenance equipment. Maybe he can find better contracts for financial services. Maybe he will cut non-essential projects (Teen Court, etc.).

Maybe he'll do none of these things. Maybe he'll come in and get the finance director to explain they've done all these things, and there's no way around it.

Maybe it'll snow tomorrow. Tomorrow - that's the thing. The issues you feel important today may radically change tomorrow. Prior to September 11, were you worried about terrorism on domestic air travel? Maybe not. Then something happened, and everything changed.

Promises, by either candidate, are at best a starting point for discussion. In the larger analysis, and after outside factors (and I don't mean developers) come into play, positions will shift.

It's the VALUES I find important, not the issues. Brown and Logsdon both want some of the same things - improved infrastructure, better public safety, responsible development.

You can call anybody to fix your computer. Who will you call back the 2nd time - the guy who did it right and called you a nasty name or the guy who did it right and was polite and good to you?

Understand there are many in this town who have received mayoral "tech support" from a "Nick Burns - Your Company's Computer Guy" (Saturday Night Live reference for those who don't know). Now they want someone else to try it.

That's my point, in a nutshell. PTC Guy, I still like you; I hope you still like me. Pizza may still be in our future.

I have said myself on some of the things you guys have attacked Brown over might very well be explained by some of the things in your list warranting a change of position.

So, if not usable for Brown not usable for Logsdon. Or if usable then for both.

The point with Logsdon is he said he would do it. And he cannot.

But what really bugs me is he says that while taking zero positions or important issue.

Either he has answers to the issues or he should not be promising taxes as absolutes.

As for values, I like those. But Logsdon has already lied and is reflecting values of not feeling an obligation to tell me facts while wanting my vote.

Those are also value issues.

That is why with politicians I look for firm defined stands. The how it will be done.

Sorry to use Stormwater, but that one is so clear cut. It is there full presented and the man cannot even take a position on it.

Sorry, your computer issue is wrong. It is the guy who did it right and was nasty or the guy that came and said I will look into it later that applies here.

Logsdon has done nothing and said nothing to have any judgment of right for him.

And no. I don't like Brown for coming out and touring with me on a problem issue. I vote for him because he said it will get fixed and he backed what will get it fixed.

Logsdon does not even have the courtesy to answer me.

Pizza could be there. It is so much better to discuss as we have here than argue.

(depeche mode reference)

Values, issues, agendas, opinions. They're all our own. We try to find other people with ideas common to us, and we side with them.

On Tuesday, we'll use all those and what we've seen and heard to decide who will be the head of the government, a much larger machine, for the next four years.

Good luck to you. May the better man win.

Agree.

The cart path fee as it stands is $10, paid once. Not a real revenue generator.

My point (which you will gladly jump all over me for) is Logsdon never said "lower taxes". You took his statements and inferred what you wanted, but we're beating a dead horse. You say he does, I say he doesn't. We both read the same sentence and walk away with different impressions. There ARE alternatives to review.

If it lowering taxes can't be done, then it can't be done. The only politician of local reknown recently who stuck to his promises entirely is Murray Weed. He is moving on to other things, now, as he's had enough of the local scene. Almost everyone will amend their positions in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

I know Brown is looking into some re designations on the paths that allow State and Federal funding. Hopeful but not sure there.

Lowering tax burden means lowering my taxes. Logsdon says keep as is or even lower.

If my taxes do not go down my tax burden does not go down.

So, if my property value goes up and the Millage Rate goes down I am not paying lower taxes. They adjusted it maintain the current tax burden.

Lowering cost is a good thing for sure. But it does not mean lower taxes.

...there are other outside influences again. Your assessment is one. The quality of your neighborhood is another.

And let's repeat Logsdon's WHOLE sentence:
I want to use my experience in financial planning and business
operations to help better manage our budget and reduce the tax burden for our citizens.

We'll read this sentence two different ways. ...help better manage and (help) reduce. That is a legitimate way to look at the sentence.

As we well know, inflection in the written word is difficult to impossible to replicate without emphasis marks. So...neither ONE of us knows for sure. But I discount it as a campaign promise all the same - just like Brown's mandate for a referendum on annexation. It's posturing. Both candidates do it, and I do not believe you can tell me different.

An incumbent has a campaign advantage by default - four years of "prior experience". Any newcomer has to overcome this. By looking at the general election, Logsdon did just that. So now we get a finer toothed comb, but the overriding principles still remain. Both sides will say whatever they need to say to get elected.

You look at the last four years and see mostly good with some bad. I look at the last four years and see BAD with the good being done in spite of the BAD.

So, we'll repeat and repeat...ya dig? And no one has specified to me, you included, PTC Guy, what "developers" Logsdon has supporting him. That question is one of the major points that is thrown out by both the incumbent and his supporters. Prove who is supporting Logsdon, and at what level.

The list of campaign contributors is still in my blog. Please justify your statement, or my normal critique applies - you are a blatant propagandist whose opinion may be discounted without a basis in fact.

Good luck to you, Hal. May the better man win.