So, then the staff should proceed with their scheduled January date to recommend approval of the Stormwater to the Council? Along with some other recommends on other infrastructure in the pipe, if I remember correctly?

Trying to get a clear view on where you want things.

Staff says it is good plus financing has been worked out to the best known options equals proceed?

As for priorities, always a must. Just wish we had a few less at the same time.

Not sure I understand your post but here goes. Yes, the staff are very highly paid professionals. If they know what they are doing, then they certainly need to make their recommendations to the council and the council, after satisfying all questions should vote accordingly on the recommendations. To expect an elected individual from the citizenry to have enough all around knowledge to plan something as large as stormwater is not just unreasonable, but dangerous. That was always Brown's problem. He saw himself as the ultimate authority on all things. But in reality he was only a novice. Problem was if staff recommended something different than what he wanted then he would bully all for his "plan." So, if the stormwater program has been thoroughly studied, the financing mechanism is the best plan, and the professional staff can make that case, then by all means proceed.

Come on PTC Guy, we have an elected council and mayor made up of citizens, not professional politicians. It is up to staff to make the case. It is up to the "citizen government" to be convinced. Do you not trust our city staff? And if not, who can you blame but Brown who hired them? I happen to have no real reason not to trust them. They have always seemed totally professional at all the meetings I have attended. But I am sure if Mayor (elect) Logsden has any questions he will ask and be fully informed before casting his 1 out of 5 vote (as I am sure the 4 councilmembers will do).

Yeesh! Stop being paranoid! It wasn't trick question.

You answered me.

The Stormwater was developed by an engineering firm working in relationship with the Staff Engineering Department.

They did do great work.

The Staff is ready to present it in January for approval.

So, you agree it should be approved and keep moving on schedule.

As for financing, what engineering presented seemed a good route to me.

There are track records where this way has been used elsewhere and they have been successful.

Now, the cart paths and TRAFFIC!

PTC Guy, I wasn't being paranoid. Your post made it sound that you expect Mayor (elect) Logsden to come in and totally assume all resonsibility for every project, a major objection to Brown. I can not talk for Logsden or any of the other votes on the council. What I was trying to point out is that our elected officials are really only citizens. Although they bring in certain experience levels, what they are really elected to do is oversee the government. I have great faith in the City Staff. If they are not the experts I believe them to be then they need replacing. However what I was pointing out is that if the incoming council is presented with a stormwater package, and the staff makes the same case to them as it appears to have made to you, then I suspect it will be passed. That is how it works. The professionals convince the elected citizens that it is in the best interest of the city. The elected citizens then, as our representatives, vote yea or nay. Has worked well for 200 years.
I only say this because in Brown's case he saw himself AS the "expert." This meant that too many things were instituted or passed under his "plan" regardless of the recommendations of the experts. And with his meddling in day to day operations he created an environment at city hall that it would be "Brown's way or the highway." Just ask all the former city staff that he purged.
Anyway, I am pleased that you are happy with the stormwater proposal. I say that in all honesty. It is obvious that this is an issue that is HUGE to you and you are thoroughly familiar with it. As a citizen you have done a great job in bringing this to our attention here. I suspect you have or will do the same to our council (isn't it nice that it's again "our" and not "Brown's" council). That's how it should go. We, the citizens, express our opinion to the council. The council weighs our opinion, the staff recommendations, and all other options then acts. Not like "King Brown."

So, thanks for your input. I suspect the new council will do the right thing based on all information presented. That's why I voted for them and I fully support them. If they act in a manner in which I object, I will certainly let them know (no surprise there). But if I do I can now expect not to be called names in the paper by the "mayor."

I am really past discussing Brown since he lost. Irrelevant now.

OK. I take you at your word that Logsdon should listen to the endorsements of the Staff and go with them.

If he bucks them, even if the Utility is still passed, I expect to hear you say he is out of line.

Ok, I agree, Brown is so "last year." I only refer to him because he has set up an expectation that the mayor solely runs the city. Logsden is but one voice (albeit a strong one) on a council of 5. If he votes against the Utility, I will evaluate his reasoning. If I agree with him I will support his decision along with the rest of the council. If I disagree I will state so. "Out of line" is rather harsh. You are convinced that this program is the best. You are not on the council. Did you run? If not, why not? I'm certainly not trying to insult you but if we all think differently on each issue. I expect my elected representatives, ALL of them, to evaluate each issue on it's merit. If they do so and I feel that their evaluation is incorrect, I will state so. But to be honest I am very uniformed of this issue. I will not call any council member "out of line" because he or she disagrees with me. I actually never said any of those I oppossed were "out of line" except regarding individual attacks. I simply expressed my concerns and questions then worked hard for people whom I felt better represented me and my vision and goals.

Let's give the new council a chance. It is a great breath of fresh air here. Even the President gets 100 days. Can we at least wait until they take office before we demand predetermined decisions?

Again, I take your word for it.

But consider this, your position before was to go with the recommends of the Staff because they are the pros here. The Mayors are not.

Now I am seeing a qualifier that Logsdon will examine and make up his own mind regardless of the Staff and you will examine HIS reasoning for not going with Staff recommends but going another course?

Sorry, that is shades of Brown to me. Exactly what you guys were jumping all over Brown for doing.

If Brown was not suppose to do that then neither is Logsdon.

Here is how I see it. I am not privy to all the information. I have not studied it nor will I probably devote the time to study it. I will attend meetings and listen to the presentations. Prior to the presentations council certainly has been given extended briefings and hard copy presentations. They have all the information and base their votes accordingly. I am not putting on a qualifier but what you said was that if Logsden didn't accept the current plan that I would speak out. Not true. What I am trying to tell you is that I don't speak for any of our representatives. They vote based on the information. If there is something that Logsden or any other councilmember disagrees with and they vote no, that will not elicit a major attack by me. I will listen to their reasoning. If it appears to me that they are headed in a wrong direction, I will send them an email or send a letter to the editor. But it seems preposterous to expect Logsden to automatically accept the current program just because YOU think it is best. As I said, I trust our staff. But we have the council for a reason. They aren't just a rubber stamp. They are there to ensure that our interests our best protected.
My objections with Brown were not that he "made up his own mind," but that he demanded everyone else go along with him. If they didn't he would viciously attack them in public. That was "conduct unbecoming." He did many good things. I also agreed with him on many issues. And, by the way, I gave him credit for those. But his vicious abuse of the paper, media, state of the city address, etc. to attack his opponents was unacceptable. His "flying solo" and micromanagement were also unacceptable.
So as you said, enough of Brown. I expect Logsden, et. al. to represent me. I think they will and although I won't always agree, I will at least give them some time to get into the job before I "demand" a vote. In fact, I will never "demand" a vote. I will only listen to their reasons and if I still disagree, I will let them know.

As for your comment:
"Now I am seeing a qualifier that Logsdon will examine and make up his own mind regardless of the Staff and you will examine HIS reasoning for not going with Staff recommends but going another course?"
That isn't what I said. I said if he hears staff recommendations and votes no, that is NOT "regardless of Staff," but that staff hasn't made their arguement to his satisfaction. Otherwise council would only be a rubber stamp and therefore not necessary. If staff can't make their case then I expect the council to vote accordingly. That could by a "yea" or a "nay," depending on the issue.

I don't think so.

I was lectured by you guys that the Staff were the Pros, not the Mayor.

The Staff needed to run day to day. Not the Mayor.

The Mayor was a Weak Mayor.

So, unless the Staff did a major screw up, which might indicate they needed replaced, their recommends should go forward.

I was chastised for saying the Mayor had oversight responsibility and more power than you guys were claiming.

And if Staff has not made their argument to his satisfaction, that implies expertise on the Mayor's part superior to the Staff.

Really, if the Staff are the pros and the Mayor is not, per your old argument, the the Mayor can never be in the position to call something good or bad.

Just getting to the issue that you are now supporting the postion I was taking that was so heavily criticized before.

I agree that if something is bad it should not be passed. But if it is good it should.

But I found the shifting of standards and position here a bit ironic.

With that said let us keep an eye on the Council. I hope and wish there is no need to and I will not assume bad intentions or lackings from any of them.

I wonder how many will show at the first meeting? Wouldn't it be a ride to have Lenox and Brown both there? (he says with eyes rolling up into his head}.

I have a strong feeling that the Brown Tourism Association comprised of city staff and council will get a very long look. If anything, maybe they'll change the name:) I'm sure people all across the USA are thinking of making PTC their next vacation stop and being tourists here. Geez.

NUK

That one bugs me too.

I do believe we need something like a PTC Promotional Group or whatever sounds meaningful.

Come Live, Play and Work in the Jewel of Georgia!