Dan Tennant

Tue, 10/18/2005 - 5:49pm
By: Candidates Forum

After considerable thought, discussions with friends and family, and prayerful reflection, I decided to enter the race for mayor. I did so because I believe I have the necessary experience, drive, and dedication to serve as an effective leader for Peachtree City.

I am happily married to Robin Tennant, and we have four sons. We are members of the Peachtree City United Methodist Church. My college degree is in business management, and I have 25 years experience in the business world, 21 with the same firm.

I have four years experience as an elected city councilman in effectively dealing with people, problems, local governments, and the business community. My record is one of fiscal conservatism with a clearly defined effort to look out for what is best for average families, and I am prepared to hit the ground running with an energized spirit to “rebuild the bridges” of trust and communication in Peachtree City.

If elected, I understand that it will be my job to lead the city council in making wise, prudent decisions that are made with the best interests of Peachtree City families in mind.

I will then step aside and allow the city manager to perform his task of implementing policy decisions, thereby eliminating the current mayoral quagmire of micro management that pervades City Hall, which has halted progress, created morale problems, and created gross inefficiencies in city management.

My top priorities are 1) to reel in the excessive spending and corresponding taxation that has grown out of control in recent years; 2) to assure public safety is Priority One by providing necessary resources for police and fire departments to keep us safe; and 3) to prevent the further deterioration of our special lifestyle by working to halt annexation attempts.

I also believe that we must look into all options to resolve the conflict with the Development Authority debt, since city-owned facilities were directly improved with some portion of the debt.

This process must be one based on cooperation and mutual respect. I believe a reasonable compromise can be reached in a negotiated settlement, and that all options, including the sale of the tennis center to a private concern, are on the table for discussion.

I encourage you to visit my Web site, www.TennantforMayor.com, and contact me with any specific question you might have.

I humbly ask for your vote.

Respectfully,

Dan Tennant

login to post comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Submitted by dkinser on Wed, 10/19/2005 - 9:16am.

What Mr. Tennant has said is the classic political promise. I want to reduce taxes, increase public safety (which requires tax money), and stop all annexations. And as typical, most of this cannot be done without impacting our quality of life.

Let's take a look at this. First off the reduction of taxes, or as Mr. Tennant put it "to reel in the excessive spending and corresponding taxation that has grown out of control in recent years"

The lifestyle that has become synonomous with Peachtree City places a heavy burden on the City Management. This burden can only be met with a steady revenue stream. That revenue comes in the form of taxes. Reducing them will result in a lower lifestyle in Peachtree City or other city services.

Inflation is a fact of life. Nobody can buy today with yesterday's income. The cost of operating the city has gone up as has our costs for gasoline and healthcare.

Increasing the public safety, which I personally agree with; will again result in a higher cost to the city. Where will this money come from if you plan on reducing taxes? Cart path maintenance, recreational facilities, green space, or road maintenance? Something would have to be cut.

As for annexation. If done in a correct manner, annexation can and should add value to the city. It provides new money to the city which can prolong tax increases. Locking the borders will simply result in yet higher taxes or a lowering of our lifestyle to meet increasing costs.

An argument that I frequently hear as an opposition to annexation is the "Master Plan". Well I find it interesting that this master plan can be adhered to when deemed necessary, but ignored in other areas. Classic example is that the master plan expected Peachtree City to build out at roughly 80,000 citizens. We haven't achieved 40,000 yet due to deviations in the density. Now don't get me wrong, do I want Peachtree City having 80,000 people, no.

Another area was the development of the Wal-Mart and Home Depot tracts. The prior administration trashed the master plan with that development.

I was told by a County Commissioner that a house in Peachtree City needed to be appraised at $240,000.00 to be considered tax positive. Simply stated, the cost to the city to provide services at a house less than that appraised value is greater than the tax revenue generated.

The houses that would be built by John Wieland Homes would be selling around $500,000.00 which places them in the tax positive group. That is new money that the city doesn't have today and as a result, they have been forced to raise taxes.

It is time for Peachtree City to annex more property which should help to stabalize your taxes.

Dana Kinser

Submitted by Greg T. Madison on Fri, 10/21/2005 - 1:38pm.

You are completly misunderstanding what Dan is saying. For example when he was on the city council there was a proposed tax increase that went all the way into double digits. So Dan (doing what he promised) proposed a counter offer which in return got the tax increase down to a more proper singel digit tax increase.....And then you discuss the developement of Wal-Mart well correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't it Dan who opposed the development until 54 was widend(wish we would have listened to him then)......

Comment viewing options

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