Plunkett: Have to observe rights, too

Tue, 09/16/2008 - 3:52pm
By: Letters to the ...

Mr. Black, thank you for your letter. I just want to point out a couple of facts. I was elected to represent the people of PTC and as much as I don’t always like it personally, sometimes those “people” own commercial pieces of property and they have rights, too.

Second, not all of us went to China, and that was a 5-0 vote in favor of the variance. It was the right thing to do.

Third, the complex on Crosstown was approved in 1999 or 2000 and has been on the books for a number of years. There was absolutely nothing this council could have done to stop it. In fact, we never even had a look at the plans on an agenda. They were “people” who owned commercial property and exercised their rights.

I do not believe any decisions are or should be based on golf or socializing, and I am sorry you feel that way.

My personal opinion is that your council, regardless of whether I agree with them individually, believes they are acting in the best interest of PTC. I respect their right to disagree with me on the way it should be done, but I have had no evidence that they are doing anything without the best intentions.

I will also tell you that I remain convinced that PTC is a great place and will only be better if the citizens have productive dialogue with their elective officials.

Cyndi Plunkett

Post 4, City Council

Peachtree City, Ga.

login to post comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
sniffles5's picture
Submitted by sniffles5 on Thu, 09/18/2008 - 8:19am.

Of all the politicians in Fayette county, Cyndi Plunkett might be the most dysfunctional. I suspect a psychoanalyst would have a field day attempting to discern her motivations.

She's between a rock (Logsdon and his stooge Boone) and a hard place (Haddix and Sturbaum). It seems that she is continually trying to please everyone, and in the end pleases no one (except developers).

Her schtick is rather simple: she always begins by wringing her hands and bemoaning what a tough decision she has to make. She always initially pays lip service to the greater good of Peachtree City, and makes a big show out of needing more time to consider her options. Yet in followup or subsequent meetings, when the tough decision has to be made, she inevitably sides with the Logsdon/developers faction.

Perhaps she thinks her public caterwauling and lip service will insulate her from criticism...and to an extent, it does. Logsdon and Boone seem to have no problem whatsoever about thumbing their collective noses at the public. I suspect Plunkett would like to do that as well, but lacks a tough political hide when it comes to criticism.

In any event, she is an exceptionally poor public servant, in my opinion.


Submitted by Arf on Wed, 09/17/2008 - 11:06am.

Cyndi

I am one of your “people.” I’ve seen you in action and heard you speak and my impression was generally that you seemed to have the best interest of “the little people” at heart. Conversely, I’ve been continually confused by your voting record. Time after time after time, you are the “swing” vote that allows the developers to run rampant over PTC in ways that make absolutely no sense. Time after time after time, I hear and read comments from “the little people” about all of the atrocities. Complaints are everywhere, but honest, positive recommendations and suggestions have also been forwarded time after time after time. All of the “little people” input just seems to fall on deaf ears.

This is the first time that I have seen you respond to citizen comment, but just where do you stand?

You mentioned that commercial ventures are also owned by “people,” and that is true. But, the people who own commercial property have chosen to buy it for personal gain and should not be given carte blanche, plus ridiculous concessions in order to use their property. The “little people” homeowners chose to buy also, and it used to be worth it, but we don’t seem to get concessions because there are rules. We are restricted as to what and where we can build on our properties, and are restricted also as to what we can do. We “little people” can’t even get away slightly overgrown grass or certain kinds of fencing without hearing from the yard police. This may be the way it should be, but why can a commercial developer get exemptions from the rules?

I am totally amazed at what has happened near the 54/74 intersection. I am totally amazed that you have continued to support the incredibly ludicrous commercial development in that area and have voted time after time after time to perpetuate the shopping centers that can only add to the vacancies, the gridlock and the influx of those who don’t live here to come here for whatever reason. The Wieland annexation and build up is also very questionable. Who’s going to live in those homes? Is there really enough demand? And what happens to our already suffering infrastructure? Someone else recently called Highway 74 the “downtown connector.” Isn’t that the truth? And where oh where are all of those people constantly driving up and down Highway 54 coming and going to?

I have lived in PTC for over 20 years. Two of my current council members want to protect the quality of life in the place that I call home. They defend the privileges of coming and going without traffic hassles and poor service and they promote controlled and intelligent growth along with the safety and security that most people want in their hometown. Two other council members definitely seem to be in the pocket of the developers who want to destroy the intitial plans of PTC by overrunning everything. One council member straddles the fence, but time after time after time falls over to what I consider “the dark side.” So, where do you really stand?

Submitted by Bonkers on Wed, 09/17/2008 - 5:02am.

Yeah, and AIG and Freddy and Fannie purchases aren't Socialism!!!!!

Better to have bought out the Oil Companies, our Infrastructure needs, and our Health Systems, Isn't it amazing that Wall Street problems are "unique" but the small guy is not! None of them!

One form of Socialism is a good as another!

And if you think Council is always acting in my best interest only, you are certainly deficient at something!

That sounds like something Bush would say---before he bought 100,000 acres in Paraguay, with all the country's water under it!

We ran out of Mayors, Councils, and such long ago who ONLY had my benefit in mind.

Submitted by Doug on Tue, 09/16/2008 - 10:23pm.

You sold city property to the big box developer so he could build a retail garbage pile on highway 54/34. Where was the "people" in that decision?

It sounds like you approve of the mayor's pay-off trip to China too.

Submitted by Spyglass on Wed, 09/17/2008 - 11:12am.

The property you speak of was already approved for 150,000 square feet. Are you seriously implying that the additional 25,000 square feet is going to impact your way of life? That is if the development is even built.

bad_ptc's picture
Submitted by bad_ptc on Wed, 09/17/2008 - 6:43pm.

”The property you speak of was already approved for 150,000 square feet. Are you seriously implying that the additional 25,000 square feet is going to impact your way of life? “

The property was NOT zoned for three, thank you Cindy, regional draw BIG BOX type stores.

As per the developer he needs BIG BOX stores so he can draw customers from areas outside of PTC.

Had the developer been held to the existing and legally enforceable ordinances, contrary to Plunkett’s remarks, the traffic impact of that development would have been negligible at best.

City Council Minutes, February 7 2008, Page 2
“Plunkett asked for a copy of the conditions Lindsey provided a copy of the conditions to Council Plunkett and Sturbaurn read the conditions which included the following:”

“13. There will be no internal road connection to MacDuff Parkway or Planterra
Way.

That condition is in direct conflict with the Hwy. 54 West Overlay District. A document that the developer himself helped write.

Not only did the three stooges ignore the Hwy. 54 West Overlay District, a document that the city spent tens of thousands of dollars to create, they directed the City Planer David Rast to remove that stipulation from all city documents.

13. cont: “CCD will be requesting an approval from the Georgia Department of Transportation for the installation of a traffic signal at the development entrance.”

Hell, the developer flat out lied about the stop light. The city council knew he lied about it, thanks to Mr. Haddix, and they approved the SUP anyway.

GDOT had already denied the traffic light as it wouldn’t conform to GDOT standards.

City Council Minutes, June 19 2008, Page 3
“Boone asked what the probability was of getting the signal approved Lindsey said they were hearing from DOT that they were going to get approval.”

DOT: light not possible on 54W
Thu, 07/03/2008 - 1:49pm, By: John Munford
“The proposed traffic light would be too close to the existing traffic lights at Planterra Way and at MacDuff Parkway, a DOT spokesperson said last week. The state’s guidelines require a minimum of 1,000 feet of distance between stoplights and the traffic light sought by Capital City Development doesn’t meet those guidelines, said Kimberly Larson of DOT.”

Either Lindsey is lying or the DOT spokesperson is lying. Any bets?

Cyndi and the ‘other’ two didn’t give a damn about public safety or adhering to existing city ordinances.

All they see are $’s from developers for their next run for office.

Funny that Logsdon and McMullen have started a “construction” business. I wonder where they’re getting the money to buy and renovate these houses. Maybe Logsdon and McMullen will hire Cyndi to do some work for them.

The bottom line is history has shown that Logsdon, Boone and Plunkett would sell their respective mothers if they thought they could make a “short term” profit.

I can’t wait for the next elections when we’ll be able to “DIVORCE” ourselves from Cindy.


Submitted by skyspy on Thu, 09/18/2008 - 8:20am.

I bet Lindsey is the one lying. What do I win?

Submitted by Spyglass on Thu, 09/18/2008 - 8:00am.

That seems to be what you are saying.

Seems to be what you are saying about the City Council in general. I guess you think that three are in it for the money from the developers, and two are in it for the money from homeowners.

Everything is not a conspiracy.

I was almost positive that the property was already zoned for up to 150,000s square feet of development. Maybe not in 5 30,000 square feet increments, but 150,000 is still a LOT of development.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.