I dealt with that issue in a prior post with this link:

Link

Please read it. Way too long to keep reposting. And it covers many other areas as well.

A quick answer is paragraph 14 only authorized CCD to put in the signal permit request under the terms of the Agreement. And only a permit request put in by CCD, under the Agreement terms cannot be opposed.

This is by PTC, not CCD.

Three on Council know we can oppose it. Boone says we have to sign. Logsdon tip toed around it with we should sign since we agreed, never saying we legally had to sign it. The old Tennis Center argument of it being the right thing to do.

Who negotiated it? Well, I was in City Hall on one day when CCD and City Hall were negotiating it. Logsdon said he had nothing to do with the negotiations, but I can say, for fact, I saw him entering the room and closing the door behind him. Interpret that for yourself as to what it does or could mean.

Nothing is being returned to Meeker. The follow ups Cyndi wants are from GDOT and engineering. Our agreeing to go with a tabling was to allow a new engineering report with better criterion and answers to be developed, by engineering. Engineering, not legal issues.

The U-turn numbers, in example, cannot possibly be right because it assumes people will U-turn to shop there. Dealt with in the link.

No legal opinion by Meeker is going to be given publicly, as it may be needed for court if CCD sues over a rejection by Council.

Having dealt with legal documents over the years, Sturbuam, Plunkett and I all recognized what is being said, on our own.

I generated the challenge to the Staff claim we could not say no to the permit request, not Meeker. Sturbaum, who still deals with contracts, everyday, concurred with my opinion, upon review. Plunkett, a lawyer, knows my position is valid, thus her debate on voting for or against the permit.

Hope that helps. But please read the link materials.

Don Haddix
PTC Councilman
Post 1
donhaddix.com

Like me, Cindy Plunkett lives in Wilksmoor. Like me, she surely must have problems getting to and from her home. Maybe the horrible traffic congestion isn't so bad at 7 p.m. when she goes to council meeting, but surely there are other times that she leaves the house and notices. The ONLY way in and out of Wilksmoor is MacDuff Parkway and anyone who ever tries to get home by going through the 74/54 intersection has to realize that it's already totally unreasonable and unrealistic. Also like me, Cindy must be realizing that her property value is going down not only because of the economy, but also because it is frustrating to live in the area because of the traffic. That bottleneck in our front yards is a main topic of conversation in my neighborhood and more than one said that they are seriously considering moving to a quieter, less congested traffic area. I like where I live and the only problem that I have with the area comes when I get out on highway 54. So even if Cindy isn't concerned about the "quality of life" in PTC or what her citizens think, I would think that from a personal standpoint she'd be concerned about her property values and her commutes. No?

Thanks, Don Haddix. I think you said you live elsewhere, but can also feel the traffic backed up to the Wyndham some nights. I'm usually sitting there 1/4 a mile from my home and looking at the next 20 or so minutes to get there. I'm glad you are aware of what's around you both professionally and personally.

Contact the GDOT by email to let your concerns be known. They must think the people want this stupid light...

until there are more ways to get back and forth across the Fayette/Coweta line, traffic will get worse. Think about it, from Rockaway all the way to Tyrone/Palmetto, there only 3 ways across, and one of them is a State Highway right through the middle of our town.

Until we fix this problem, it really doesn't matter what we do.

and are we to assume, from this, that you are in favor of building the still-questionable TDK Extension? Keep the faith.

Democracy is not a spectator sport.

But I do realize why Hwy 54 is SO crowded at times. It's not rocket science.

I am sure you are well aware that while there is, in fact, a lot of east/west traffic, there is also a huge amount that comes this way to access 74 to head north and south.

We need the Fischers Road widening and extension to take that traffic away from 74 altogether.

Then the traffic heading to US 85 to Atlanta, or to South GA 85, will not need to use 74 at all. They can use Fischers.

This is really a side issue to the light, but seems to be thrown in as saying go ahead and grant the light, because it really does not matter in the full arena of traffic issues. It was an argument used by Logsdon as well.

It does matter. While not complete answers, all of them together do add up to significant improvements and avoidance of needlessly making the traffic problems even worse in a much shorter period of time.

That is all I have to say on the issue.

Don Haddix
PTC Councilman
Post 1
donhaddix.com

it is forest/trees sort of issue. While the light is a small part of a very big picture, that big picture is made up of all sorts of little parts. We have to be ever vigilant as to the overall direction of these sorts of things. This has been the problem recently, we have lost sight of the overall view of what we want this part of our county (or our entire county) to look like. Give in here, compromise there, and we end up where we are. Keep the faith.

Democracy is not a spectator sport

Logsdon, Boone and Plunkett offices are up for election in 2009. Others terms go to 2011.

Please clarify something for me. Who on Council are you opposing when you say all?

Sturbuam and I were not on Council for the Goodwill store. But we did do citizen contacts opposing it. So, how are we accountable?

We did not start the police station repair issues, but fought against the final vote as a waste of money. The other three supported it, 3-2 vote.

By the way, I also, as a citizen, opposed Lenox building the station on a landfill site.

We oppose more retail, as we have way too many empty stores now. And too many or not, we oppose Big Boxes and oversized commercial sites.

On the CCD site it was a 3-2 vote on road abandonment, SUP and currently is a 2-2-1 split on the traffic light. We had zero say in what went into the Development Agreement.

I proposed a moratorium on commercial, to allow us to build in better protections of buffering, set-backs, etc. It was defeated 2-3 because the claim was it sent the wrong message to retail developers.

So, now, changes are having to be done while builders can submit plans. I am getting resistance from Logsdon.

But we have gotten more controls added and changes to a list, of other ordinances, that allowed the bad looks and mix master approach you are against.

We were not on when the CSX bridge issue began and when it went wrong. So, all we can try to do now is fix it as economically as possible.

The trash service issue was Logsdon and the City Manager wanting mandatory recycling with one provider. The rest of us wanted mandatory recycling service provided, no trash police, but via free market. It will be all providers must provide recycling along with trash, and must add catch pans to their vehicles for leakage.

If I remember correctly, you were very angry we didn't go with a single provider for trash and recycling.

So, please clarify, since I suspect it is really the recycling issue for Sturbuam and me, not the whole list.

Don Haddix
PTC Councilman
Post 1
donhaddix.com

in my humble opinion. Coming on these blogs with all these things is not the way I would like to see the City ran.

Indeed it is not the best way.

But, we have a 3-2 split with diametrically opposed views on issues such as this. So we will strongly debate these issues.

I tried to get an open forum on the City Site to allow citizen input, better information and opinion flow from Council and such, so there would be no need for blogging.

Three on Council opposed. So, only the Mayor has a public forum via the Update, where he expresses his opinions and and idea. No place for opposition positions allowed.

That leaves the opposition with only the blogs and letters to the editor for any meaningful communications. Otherwise, people ask Doug and me where are our voices on the issues?

But the majority on Council opposes even that, resulting in the infamous lecture on the Dais where we were told to fall in line and support the majority position and forget our campaign promises.

So far, Doug and I have received a lot of communications, via blog, email, personal contact, etc. Almost everyone appreciates our attempts to keep the public informed.

If you have a better way, please let me know what it is. All suggestions welcome. No sarcasm or any such thing intended in saying this. Improvements are welcome.

But we will not go silent, as we made very clear after the Dais incident.

Don Haddix
PTC Councilman
Post 1
donhaddix.com

Actually not a better idea - instead it is the same idea, only with better timing.

After January 1 when people are focused on something other than Christmas and Obama, reintroduce the open forum idea on the city's website. Combine that with proposing webcasts of the city council meetings, maybe even some realtime comments posted from bloggers during the actual meeting and get some publicity about the upcoming vote by council to approve the new system.

Best thing that could happen is that it would fail and the public would be outraged that city council is being secretive. Then the public would discover that 3 seats are up for election this coming November and possibly some open government candidates would emerge.

In other words - make it a campaign issue. The incumbents would probably hold firm against it, but all it takes is one of them who wants to continue on council to vote the other way. Can't lose ether way.

I am also getting tired of the constant mention of the 3-2 votes. I think a voting block of 2 or 3 or any number is completely wrong. Just vote on the issues and if history reveals a lot of 3-2 votes, fine. The newspaper will report it. You (and Doug) don't need to beat that horse to death. It sounds so juvenile. Besides, if you get new candidates in there soon, you may find yourself in the majority - and an instant target of the minority.

Some interesting thoughts there, Morgan.

Only one issue I will address. That being Doug and I are not a voting block, in the sense we always vote the same, because we do not. Or that we begin and end with the same thoughts on issues that we do vote together on.

So, you are right. If everyone on Council began and ended an issue on exactly the same page, you get a bad product. Variables should be brought up, discussed and merged, to give the best product possible.

But, when groups hold fundamentally different values and views, you are going to get the appearance of voting as a block.

Might shock you, but Logsdon does have a preference for 5-0 votes, with the majority opinion dictating the vote. Said it more than once. That is the true definition of block voting, I believe.

On the 3-2 issue, if the papers start reporting the actual votes on all the big issues, as well as the differing opinions, instead of mainly quoting Logsdon and Plunkett, I will knock off the 3-2 stuff, but will think twice before saying it in any case.

Unfortunately, that does not happen a lot. And some papers are worse than others. Read the coverage of this issue in 'Today in Peachtree City' and let me know how it came across to you on who did and said what.

Don Haddix
PTC Councilman
Post 1
donhaddix.com

But the constant talk of a 3/2 split on everything is not the way I would approach it.

That said, I do like knowing your stance on the issues.

I was opposed to the single-provider garbage proposal and yours was the only voice of reason in that discussion. And you are correct that the "three" up for election next year are the folks I am talking about above. Your policy positions on the issues I outlined above have been in keeping with the best interests of Peachtree City and you are the only member of the council that consistently communicates (and listens carefully) with the citizens of Peachtree City. Thank you for all you do on our behalf. Now, lets get to work on identifying candidates for Logsdon, Boone and Plunkett's jobs!

That cleared up my confusion just fine.

Thank you for your kind comments. Yours, Dondol's and all the others Doug and I have received are greatly appreciated. They keep us well grounded in the PTC citizens realities.

Doug works hard for PTC as well. Just he has a full time job, so I have a lot more time to devote to vocalizing on these issues, here and elsewhere.

Doug listens and speaks out in other arenas, a lot. No reason for us to duplicate efforts when there is so much to get done.

Thanks again.

Don Haddix
PTC Councilman
Post 1
donhaddix.com

You and Doug have my support and you can rest assured that I will be voting against the Evil Three! I have been a resident of PTC for 20 years and the last 4 years have been the worst that I have seen as far as elected officials. Right now Steve Brown looks like a prince compared to Logsdon.

Now just why in the Hell do I have to press 1 for English?

Thank you and much apprecated.

Don Haddix
PTC Councilman
Post 1
donhaddix.com