PTC mayoral candidates answer questions at forum

Wed, 10/07/2009 - 3:59pm
By: John Munford

The following is a summary of the most pertinent questions and answers fielded by Peachtree City's mayoral candidates during Tuesday night's candidate forum hosted by the Peachtree City Rotary Club.

Q: Do you support the proposed SPLOST?

Don Haddix: Supports the SPLOST. Without it, the city will need to find about $2.25 million to fund road and golf cart path improvements. If SPLOST is not approved, the city will need to raise property taxes at least 1 and a quarter mills or start taking out of city’s reserve funds.

Cyndi Plunkett: As an elected official I’m not supposed to be a proponent for or against SPLOST. It does provide $22 million in revenue including for golf cart maintenance and paying off bonds to free up money in the general fund. Somewhere between 40-50 percent of the money comes from people that don’t live in Peachtree City or Fayette County.

Scott Rowland: Supports SPLOST. Everyone who comes in from out of town helps to pay for it, even those who come to use the city’s cart path system.

Q: How can the city help rehabilitate older areas in its villages and is it not the responsibility of the owners?

Haddix: Code enforcement helps by finding deteriorated and substandard buildings; the owner can be required to repair and upgrade them. If a whole area is deteriorated a developer could buy up blocks of land and redeveloping per city ordinances without changing to higher density.

Plunkett: Government can play a role because we provide zoning, code enforcement, rules that set the standards. Ultimately the responsibility is up to the private property owner. The development authority is working with business associations for shopping centers so they can communicate problems to us. City can look at creating a tax assessment district; city officials discussed using it at the Peachtree Crossing shopping center. Government’s role is to keep city safe and amenity areas enticing to bring quality businesses into the community.

Rowland: It is the business owners responsibility to keep building up to code; same for residential housing. City needs to get baby Kroger area filled to keep that shopping center viable. Tax incentives for new businesses need cooperation with county and state officials.

Q: Do you think the city needs to build a teen recreational center?

Plunkett: It is not financially feasible due to the substantial cost. But the city has partnered with the community, and The Bridge recreation center welcomes all PTC youth to its programs.

Rowland: There is much here for kids to do, and it’s not the right time for the city to build a youth recreation center. City has a skateboard park, 90 miles of cart paths.

Haddix: Current economics don’t make a teen center possible. But the development authority is looking for some more businesses that are youth oriented. A recreation center is just not in the budget.

Q: Revenues are down. Do you see PTC meeting the demands of the city without raising taxes? What is your philosophy on raising taxes?

Rowland: With our current budget we are dipping into reserves, so the city is not currently meeting the citizen’s demands. Now is not the time to raise taxes. We have many seniors on fixed incomes who should not be taxed out of their homes.

Plunkett: Of this year’s $26 million budget we had a $2.6 million shortfall. Biggest hit was sales tax revenues being down between 12 and 20 percent lower than normal. We did take some money out of reserves, about $450,000, but that number may turn out to be lower. The $9.6 million in reserves is your taxpayer dollars. How can I raise your taxes when I was holding $9.6 million of your dollars?

Haddix: This year we are going into reserves. There is ikely going to be more than $450,000 taken from reserves due to continued slip in sales taxes. If doing tax increases, citizen support is needed. Proposing town hall meetings and another survey on the issue to find out exactly what citizens want to do for budget cuts. It impacts everyone from services to amenities.

Q: What are your funding priorities for the city budget?

Plunkett: Since in office we’ve put in 27 new public safety officers. Public safety is a priority though she has long been a supporter of recreation as well. Surveys are great and a town hall meeting is a good idea to hear what citizens have to say. I would look for citizen input and make the tough decisions we have to make.

Rowland: The last survey is not representative of the city as a whole because there were too few respondents. If you’re getting 10-25 percent back that’s probably not representative as a whole. There is a need to get to know citizens, communicate with them via phone calls, emails.

Haddix: First tier priorities are fire, police and code enforcement. Second tier is golf cart paths because they are a transportation system. Third tier is recreation. They are all important and need to be met. On the survey, 10-25 percent is better than zero percent; I also answer emails.

Q: Do you agree with city’s request to add an extra stop light for development on Ga. Highway 54 West?

Rowland: No. That’s actually what brought me here tonight. I don’t think our city streets or recreation facilities are for sale. When that leads to bigger big boxes, that’s not what we need in our city.

Plunkett: The city did not request a traffic light to be put there. The city asked whether a traffic light would be required there. That’s a big difference. DOT said warrants require a traffic light there. We wanted the developer to pay for it. Nobody wants a traffic light but we’re going to have one.

Haddix: The city requested the light. I sat on the council and voted against it. Big boxes cost us in money, and they hurt us in traffic and crime. A secondary road was denied. I voted against the road abandonment, I voted against the special use permit and I voted against the light.

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 PTCGOIL on Fri, 10/09/2009 - 6:14pm.

Can anyone clarify for me some things on this new fee? I don't think my facts are straight and am trying to understand this.

The city expects to collect around $40,000. annually from the trash companies via the new fee we (residents) pay to the trash companies. This money then goes to Keep Peachtree City Beautiful. A volunteer organization. One quarter of this ($10,000.) is going to the leader of this non-profit organization as salary. One person. I thought it was a volunteer organization.

I read an old article from naturallyfayette from March 12th this year that this group was going to get $1,000. a year from PTC. (I don't know from where-budget?) Now, it's getting 40k a year from the city thru trash companies that is billed to us and paid by us.
I just saw the next PTC Council mtg. agenda for 10/15/09 that lists and item for a vehicle lease for Keep Peachtree City Beautiful. Don't know any specifics. Who does? What will the cost be? This will be in addition to the 1k the city is already paying and the 40k we residents who have trash service are paying?
Also, what is the connection to the recycling center on McIntosh Trail? And the one on Rockaway Rd? When the road widening starts on Hwy 74 South, Rockaway Rd. gets closed and rerouted, am I correct?

And at the same time the recycling center there will close for good? Where will residents take yard waste then? And how does this all tie in with the curbside recycling that is now available at home from these trash companies? Where does all that go? Does the city get income from any of these recycled items we put curbside or bring to Rockaway Rd. or to McIntosh Trail?

I know KPTCB is helping to keep litter in check now with fewer Public Works employees, and are benefiting us with good publicity being the only one in Ga., but I thought it was volunteers doing this.

Anyone able to fill me in here?

bad_ptc's picture
Submitted by bad_ptc on Fri, 10/09/2009 - 7:10pm.

PTCGOIL, go to this PTC Council Meeting Minutes April 16-2009 page 5.

Additionally, look here for the actual submitted budget for KPTCB. Page 208 of 230 shows the break down.

Click the "PDF" link in the upper right corner to see the whole package.

Submitted by PTCGOIL on Fri, 10/09/2009 - 7:36pm.

I'm not looking for meeting minutes or budgets for KPTCB.

I have questions that go beyond that. Obviously, I have misstated some of this to the chagrin of at least one person. There seem to be at least 2 people out here who have answers.

bad_ptc's picture
Submitted by bad_ptc on Fri, 10/09/2009 - 10:11pm.

Please ask your questions and I will endeavor to provide you with answers to what I can find.

Submitted by PTCGOIL on Fri, 10/09/2009 - 11:12pm.

By answering any of the approx. 12 questions in my first post. Thanks.

Don Haddix's picture
Submitted by Don Haddix on Fri, 10/09/2009 - 6:54pm.

Please contact Al as suggested. A number of things you heard are inaccurate.

Don Haddix
Candidate for Mayor

Submitted by PTCGOIL on Fri, 10/09/2009 - 7:59pm.

What questions, in my post, are not accurate?

Don Haddix's picture
Submitted by Don Haddix on Fri, 10/09/2009 - 8:23pm.

Things like Al, the head of KPTCB getting 10,000 pay. He is a volunteer, gets paid nothing, as do the other volunteers that work with him. A city employee at the Rockaway road facility gets paid.

Al arranged a no charge recycling agreement with a company who puts containers at McIntosh and Rockaway.

Currently we get nothing from recycling because there is no market. If the market comes back part of Al's agreement was profit sharing and this company keeps the service.

He oversees people assigned to community service hours picking up trash on the trails and elsewhere.

The dollar is charged on the trash service and visible so people think about recycling and littering. That is their funding now, except for what they get in donations. Otherwise it would have been hidden in the budget under Public Works. The amount we spend on trash pick up is ridiculous when just not littering would end it easily.

When Rockaway gets redirected it was said it would close, then some said it would not. I think it will actually end up closing, so while the majority has talked about closing it for good if it gets shut down that is not acceptable. We cannot just transfer recycling to the County.

What the companies are doing with curbside now I do not now. Al's company is storing it against the market coming back.

Al can give you greater numbers and clarity on volunteer hours, community service hours and so forth. That is why I said ask Al before.

I hope that helps clear up some of the questions. Al is saving the city a lot of money.

Don Haddix
Candidate for Mayor

Submitted by PTCGOIL on Sat, 10/10/2009 - 9:37am.

Why would a city employee working at Rockaway get 10 thousand from KPTCB? Isn't that employee already paid by PTC?

My questions have to do with a tax on trash. It's a simple question. Why is the city collecting this tax money from us? After all these years of trash pickup in PTC, why is there now a tax? What has changed?

I have more questions, but I will try to ask them more simply.

Don Haddix's picture
Submitted by Don Haddix on Sat, 10/10/2009 - 10:24am.

For the misunderstanding. Yes, he is a PTC employee. We voted to authorize the job and pay.

He is there and often Al or someone else from KPTCB is there to help.

Many who cannot pay fines, etc, are sentenced to community hours with KPTCB. They assign and oversee jobs. That saves taxpayer money.

We decided to provide a truck to them that otherwise would have gotten nothing on excess supply, etc disposal. Even with the mileage, etc, it was good enough for KPTCB work. So it goes to them for %500 since by law it must be sold for value, not just donate. Good deal for them and for PTC.

They buy recycling stands, etc, and place them in key areas and keep them emptied. Again if the city did that it would by a paid employee.

Bottom line is the $40,000 pays for supplies, materials and such that we would still have paid for if by city employees, but we save the costs of salaries associated with placing, maintenance, oversight and other labor and administrative costs.

Financially the taxpayer comes out ahead.

Taxpayers have been paying for recycling for many, many years. We have lived here over 22 years and been recycling at PTC owned recycling centers the whole time. As well we have been paying for liter and related costs the whole time.

The costs, especially on litter, have been escalating for years. This lowers those costs to the taxpayer. Taxpayers have been paying a hauling fee on recycling and other bins from the centers. This takes away the costs on every bin under Al's agreement with the service.

So this is lowering the cost of service delivery that has been going one for decades. These are not new areas of service, just changes in how the job gets done and at what cost.

Anyone who thinks the issue of paying for recycling and litter pick up by taxpayers is new is greatly mistaken. It has been there and has been getting more costly every year.

These are efforts to reduce the costs, get people to stop littering and get the job done better.

Don Haddix
Candidate for Mayor

Submitted by PTCGOIL on Sat, 10/10/2009 - 10:32am.

So, why is Betsy Tyler telling people that Al Yougel is the recipient of the 10K?

Don Haddix's picture
Submitted by Don Haddix on Sat, 10/10/2009 - 10:53am.

I cannot answer about Betsy as to what she answered on what question per the context she thought it was asked.

Please contact Al. This is getting to non specific on which 10k is being talked about. He has all the numbers right there. I don't.

There was recently a donation received by Al that was turned over to another group to perform services for PTC.

I am not on Council now so I cannot march into City Hall and just talk to anyone I want.

I don't want to give an answer thinking I am talking about one set of monies when it could be something totally unrelated.

Not trying to dodge. But neither do I want to give an inaccurate number or statement.

Al is a decent and honest guy. He will clear it up.

Don Haddix
Candidate for Mayor

Submitted by PTCGOIL on Sat, 10/10/2009 - 11:24am.

I appreciate your answers. I realize you don't have access that you have had before. Hopefully, we will change that on Nov.3rd.

I disagree strongly with the tax. However, I am appreciative that you were able to get this listed separately on the trash bills and in the budget. Obviously, there was a void created with fewer public works. I realize the community service oversight and litter pickup are of benefit to all of us. I AM appreciative of the volunteer hours put in. May seem like I'm not, but I am.

I still question why the trash companies are the middleman here. They are not the end recipients of the tax. This money is going to one organization. KPTCB. Which has no connection to any of the trash companies, does it? I also feel this 10k is excessive. Who is the actual recipient of it? If this is an all volunteer, non-profit corp., (it IS a corp., not an agency-big difference) then why is 10k going to one person? I will continue to look for detailed answers. Do I realize ALL of this 40k is less than the 23 public works firings? Yes, I do.

I believe very shortly we will ALL be without the Rockaway facility. None of this addresses where all the yard waste will go when that closes. I assume another big cost to us coming up.

Don Haddix's picture
Submitted by Don Haddix on Sat, 10/10/2009 - 11:58am.

To be honest the Landscaping crews were not keeping up with it, they did have other duties to perform, and this was a cost cutting measure to boot.

The trash is the middleman for the very simple reason I could think of no other way to put it before the public in an consistent manner. Nor could anyone else. No more complicated than that.

Like I said ask Al on the 10K. Unless something has changed since I voted on these matters no one at KPTCB is getting a 10K salary. We authorized a p/t city employee be hired to work at the recycling center at Rockaway for something like 10K if I remember correctly.

Back when the Police Station repair was an issue the proposal was to buy the WASA property behind the Police Station and put it there. My opinion was the repair was not going to work, not to mention the building was already too small and poorly built, so move the Police Station and use the current site, which most assuredly was built on a dump/landfill, as the recycling center. The building could be remodeled to meet many needs suitable for such a site, and add bins.

So I will be frankly honest, we have some very large costs potentially facing us due to those 3-2 votes. If the station amazingly does not fail again, that still leave us with over a million for a new recycling center. If it fails more like $10 million

What was the majority answer on recycling? Dump recycling on the County facility, which is not near PTC at all. But that would have resulted in a lot more costs picking up illegal dumping and dealing with oil and other chemicals on roads, in the sewer system and so forth. As well it would leave no where for law abiding citizens to dispose of many items, such as yard waste.

Sure, you can pay the trash companies extra for yard waste pickup and some other things. But not everything.

So this is a lot more complex an issue than some realize.

Don Haddix
Candidate for Mayor

bad_ptc's picture
Submitted by bad_ptc on Sat, 10/10/2009 - 12:25am.

As a PTC councilman that voted for this tax, I expected you to be able to answer/justify why $40,000 in taxes are being diverted to a 'private' firm.

Yes, please just call it a tax as that is what it is.

I see from the PTC city council minutes that no outside funding was sought. Mrs. Plunkett basically said that we're too rich to receive any form of state/federal aid in this matter and to just 'suck it up'.

Why you, the city council, didn't require KPTCB to provide any proof that no other sources of funding were readily available is beyond me.

As of this evening there are NO plastic recycling bins at SMHS or RSMS. Are they the only schools that don't have plastic recycling or are you unaware?

For $40,000/year I expect you to find out!

I would ask you why the PTC city council decided to fund a $40,000/year project while not assuring the citizens that all other funding efforts had been exhausted first.

Just how much money do you think were going to give you?

This is clearly an example of piss-pore management on the part of the city council.

Don't take this the wrong way, I'm all for recycling but I stand opposed to taxing the citizens of PTC because the city staff and council have agreed that if a project is perceived as 'revenue neutral, ie. the city won't have to account for it on the budget, all is good. All that means is PTC gets away with taxing the citizens with 'clean hands'.

This is one of many examples as to why I oppose the SPLOST.

It appears that as long as our elected officials can 'wash their hands' of any perceived tax increase, they'll take it. This endeavor was purposely rigged to look like the citizens are being 'taxed' by the trash company’s and not the city.

This is the kind of crap I had thought you were supposed to be protecting us from.

Have I misplaced my faith?

Don Haddix's picture
Submitted by Don Haddix on Sat, 10/10/2009 - 9:32am.

The funding was given to KPTCB because it was a volunteer organization. They save us money by overseeing such as those doing community service, which otherwise would require a Public Works employee to do, on a salary. They have been cleaning up the Lexington dumping grounds, cart paths, parks, and more. All jobs that otherwise would, and were, being done by Public Works employees at a much greater cost than $40,000 a year.

We pay the recycling company nothing to provide containers at Rockaway and McIntosh.

The $1 fee/tax goes to them to offset overhead and such costs. It is not right to have volunteers, working for no pay, funding their own overhead to benefit PTC.

Outside funds were sought by some of us prior to the vote. None to get. As with many grants and such we do not meet the criterion. We are too 'well heeled,' as I am tired of hearing from different agencies.

We pay the worker at Rockaway because it is a City owned facility. Thus we have the burden of liability, etc, and we have to have a legal presence there. Not a volunteer, which would have been provided, but a legal city presence. That was researched as well.

We save money by using KPTCB. If we did not use them we would be paying 100% out of tax revenues. Because you would not see it on a trash bill does not mean it would not have been there, because it would and it would have been more than $4 a year.

I am responsible for the $1 showing on the bill. My stated reason was the taxpayers need to see the cost, not hide it in the City Budget. That is transparency.

The city generates trash that the taxpayers were paying to have hauled away. This relieves some of those costs, but I cannot give you an exact offset.

As the landfills become full and unavailable, haul distances increase, meaning the costs to the City and you, privately, go up. So everything we can do to delay or stop that from happening translates into savings.

We have to do something to get people to stop littering, which equals tax dollars spent on something totally avoidable and incomprehensible to me. We have to do something to lower costs of trash, which this program does.

If and when the recycling market comes back the city will actually get a share of the profit from the sale of the recyclables from this agreement. How is that a bad thing?

Because something is not in the minutes does not mean it didn't happen. Several other people and myself worked with KPTCB for months before that meeting to find the most money and economical ways to deal with litter, trash and recycling. Mandatory curbside single provider was not an answer and would have done zero on litter.

What I am telling you is that you would be paying more without this program, just would not have seen it because it would have been a line item within the Public Works budget which you would probably have never seen or been aware of.

As for the SPLOST, I don't like what the County wants in some areas at all. But at the same time it is an issue of who pays for our paths and streets? Do we put it all on the backs of the home owners only or do we disperse the costs as widely as possible? Complex question.

We most assuredly need tax and other reforms, but unfortunately the State and Feds have such an ironclad control of how we are allowed to pay for things so the City's options are very restricted.

So please tell me what alternative would have been cheaper and at least as productive in this arena? If there is a better way I would embrace it.

If I wanted to hide things I sure would not be going to add a forum/bulletin board to the City website, televise meetings and be hold Town Hall. These ideas totally scared the current majority.

I have fought for the citizen and you know that. It will not end and the next Council will be seeking input from the citizens for better ideas all the time. It will not be a Royal Council as we have seen too many of in the past.

You might find Comcast/Chamber of Commerce Forum interesting.

I hope the greater Sunshine will help avoid issues of not understanding what is going on at City Hall or with elected representatives. I know I do a ton of research, work and other things that the citizens never become aware of because that informational avenue has never been allowed before.

Edit to add a question I missed: PTC has nothing to do with bins at SMHS or RSMS or any other school because they are County. Bins there are by organizations and such associated with each school.

Don Haddix
Candidate for Mayor

Submitted by PTCGOIL on Fri, 10/09/2009 - 9:08pm.

I do believe some fact checking is in order.

City Hall might be giving out wrong information about the 10k to one person here, if what you state above is true. Or, you might have been misled. I don't know which.

Don Haddix's picture
Submitted by Don Haddix on Fri, 10/09/2009 - 6:54pm.

Weird, the post duped.

Don Haddix
Candidate for Mayor

Submitted by idk_revisited on Fri, 10/09/2009 - 6:47pm.

Here it is
If that doesn't work, please feel free to call 770-632-3195 and ask for Al Yougel. He can tell you everything you want to know.

If that still doesn't work, I hear you can get answers at this address, especially here as well.

I guess if that doesn't work, continue to post blindly on this blog and hope that an answer appears from thin air.

Submitted by PTCGOIL on Fri, 10/09/2009 - 7:08pm.

Thanks for the info. Your sarcasm is duly noted.

Seems someone(s) is (are) a wee bit defensive about this. If you read my post, I'm asking for clarification and did not claim to know all the facts.

DarkMadam's picture
Submitted by DarkMadam on Sat, 10/10/2009 - 9:45am.

I am not sure that you won't get an attitude from him as well. There was a PTC Council meeting back in February (I think that was the month) of this year where Al with KPTCB felt that hanging a sign on the podium that the citizens stand at to speak to the Mayor and Council, that had the word "whining" circled in red with a line running diagonally through it (meaning NO whining) was appropriate. This was a huge signal to me that he was not the person to take any questions to. Now this is a fact and John Munford from the citizen can verify! By the way.... None on the council (this includes Ms. Plunkett or Mr. Haddix) felt was inappropiate enough to have removed!

Submitted by PTCGOIL on Sat, 10/10/2009 - 10:26am.

I don't know why a non city employee, non council member would be allowed to do this. Makes no sense.

My answers I am looking for, since the city is collecting this money from us, using the trash companies for billing, will come from city officials.

Thanks for the comment.

grassroots's picture
Submitted by grassroots on Fri, 10/09/2009 - 12:44am.

SPLOST is the only tax we have control over. Vote NO ON SPLOST. Go To:
and vote to to see opinion poll results.

Submitted by Angry Taxpayer on Thu, 10/08/2009 - 12:57pm.

Should we rename PTC's Red Light District (West 54) in "honor" of Plunkett, Boone, and Logsdon?

bad_ptc's picture
Submitted by bad_ptc on Wed, 10/07/2009 - 9:11pm.

Let’s review shall we?

Plunkett: "The city did not request a traffic light to be put there."

I have to ask you Mrs. Plunkett; don’t you just hate it when there’s documented proof that you ‘attempted to deceive’ the folks that attended the debate? Note: I was going to use the word ‘lied’ but ‘lied’ is a strong word so I’ll stick with ‘attempted to deceive’ instead.

Old Agenda Items:
City Council Minutes, February 5 2009, Page 8

12-08-12 Consider Signing DOT Signal Application for Line Creek Signal.
"City Engineer Dave Borkowski gave an overview of what had happened with the signal application. He said that staff still recommended the Mayor sign the application which would be forwarded to the Department of Transportation DOT office in Thomaston. It still had to go to the Atlanta office for final approval."

"Boone moved to approve the DOT signal application for the Line Creek signal Plunkett seconded the motion."

PTC OK's new 54W light on 3-2 vote

"Peachtree City will apply for a new traffic light on Ga. Highway 54 West to serve a new shopping center."

"A vote of the City Council tonight was split 3-2 in favor of seeking the light, which would be located at Line Creek Drive in between existing lights at Planterra Way and MacDuff Parkway."

"Voting for the motion were Mayor Harold Logsdon and council members Steve Boone and Cyndi Plunkett. Voting no were Don Haddix and Doug Sturbaum."

GADoT letter to PTC. July 9, 2008

Now we can move on to Mr. Boone’s and Mrs. Plunkett’s unwavering support of the PTC Land Use Plan, NOT!

Development Agreement between Capital City Development Partners, LLC and the city of Peachtree City.

“There shall be no internal road connection between the Property and Planterra Way. By agreeing to this condition, the City recognizes this is a modification to the approved SR 54 West Master Plan. The City shall adopt a modification to this plan eliminating this requirement.

It appears that Mr. Boone and Mrs. Plunkett support PTC’s “Land Use Plan” right up to the point that it gets in their way. Then they simply ELIMINATE the parts of it they don’t like.
By the way, there was NO public debate and/or public input regarding this ELIMINATION.

Now I think I know where they got the idea to ELIMINATE the 23 city employees.

Land Use Plan and Annexations

Cal had a few nice things to say about Mr. Boone’s and Mrs. Plunkett’s dreams for PTC. Full article

“Let’s hope PTC voters will remember who voted for the most growth as well as the densest growth within PTC in the past 15 years: Mayor Harold Logsdon, council members Stephen Boone, Cyndi Plunkett and Stuart Kourajian.”

“Will these four — Logsdon, Boone, Plunkett and Kourajian — be known in coming decades as the ones who lost Peachtree City?”

“I think the only legacy left to consider is how much more of Peachtree City’s heritage of careful planning will they end up trashing.”

PTC Council votes themselves a raise. (John, you left this one out of your article)

Mrs. Plunkett said something to the effect that, “it’s only about a $1.00/hour”.
Really? A standard work year is 2,080 hours. Mrs. Plunkett is only a “part time” council woman, none of them do it full time, so for the sake of argument let’s just say that she dedicates 1,000 hours/year to being a council woman. That’s $12.00/hour.

Could this be sign, think Bill Engvall, why the current council can’t balance a budget?


Cyndi Plunkett: “As an elected official I’m not supposed to be a proponent for or against SPLOST.

PTC Council backs new SPLOST

“The Peachtree City Council is officially backing the need for a new six-year one percent sales tax to fund a variety of projects from street resurfacing to debt retirement.”

“Council unanimously passed a resolution supporting the Special Purpose Local Option Sales Tax being placed for voters’ consideration on the ballot this November when municipal elections are held.“

So does this mean that Mrs. Plunkett just forgot how or why she voted the way she did?

At least Mr. Boone can remember what he voted for some two months ago.

I could go on and on about how Mr. Boone and Mrs. Plunkett have enhanced the quality of life for all of us here in PTC but there is only so much room on the internet.

A while back I was told that Mrs. Plunkett’s true profession was that of a divorce lawyer. If that’s true then I hope she doesn’t take offence if ‘we the citizens of PTC’ divorce ourselves from her and Mr. Boone in November. On second thought I don’t care if they're offended or not.

P.S. Vote NO on SPLOST. If the PTC city council can’t balance a 26 MILLION dollar budget now, why on earth should we hand them an additional 22 MILLION and tell them to keep on trucken? I wonder if the FCBoE is perhaps coaching them.

matt.barnes's picture
Submitted by matt.barnes on Thu, 10/08/2009 - 3:30pm.

Plunkett obviously does not have a problem stretching the truth in order to get votes. What scares me is that there are a lot of people who are going to vote in this election who have not payed any attention the last few years. These people are not going to understand what a snake in the grass she is.

Hoosier Fan's picture
Submitted by Hoosier Fan on Thu, 10/08/2009 - 3:53pm.

Candidate Plunkett presented herself very well Tuesday evening. She came across as knowledgeable, polished, professional, and experienced. However, her voting record over the last few years has been very disappointing. Another four years of her as mayor could very well damage PTC beyond recognition.

Unfortunately, many voters will make their decision based on her polish and not the substance of her four years on the city counsel.

mudcat's picture
Submitted by mudcat on Thu, 10/08/2009 - 6:26pm.

She did present herself well and he coaches desrve kudos.

I'm rethinking my all-female voting strategy and leaning away from Cyndi towards Scott. Don just wants it too bad and that is always a bad sign.

Other than that - vote for the ladies!!!

Submitted by Spyglass on Sat, 10/10/2009 - 7:55am.

cinches his vote for me. You've got to love it.

hutch866's picture
Submitted by hutch866 on Thu, 10/08/2009 - 7:23am.

In one of your last great hindsight letters you stated"Fayetteville has the most entrenched, developer-friendly council in the county, demonstrated by their unconditional support of the $50 million SPLOST developer windfall called the West Fayetteville Bypass or the Developer FREEway. Honestly, there are alternatives on the ballot and the change would do you good if you decide to vote." Now look up in bad's post above and tell me how Fayetteville is different then PTC, I'm pretty sure we haven't sold any streets to commercial developers yet. Like I said before, clean up your own backyard before crying about ours.

I yam what I yam....Popeye

DarkMadam's picture
Submitted by DarkMadam on Thu, 10/08/2009 - 6:50am.

You did such a great job here!

Robert W. Morgan's picture
Submitted by Robert W. Morgan on Thu, 10/08/2009 - 7:03am.

It is difficult to revise history when every word is recorded at council meetings. The accommodations this council has made for Doug McMurrain is totally beyond belief. We need to have a completely fresh group of people leading us.

The land use plan is sacred and property rights exist only under a property's current zoning and land use. Therefore rezoning and annexation and of course selling land to developers and getting them traffic lights should all be forbidden. Any candidate who can swear to live by the 2 preceding sentences is fine with me. An anti-big box mindset would help as well.

That's Scott, Shelby and Les for sure, probably Kim.

Submitted by David Craig on Thu, 10/08/2009 - 1:43pm.

I am the only candidate that has publicly stated, No annexations & No rezoning industrial space to residential. Please review the comments from Monday night’s forum and you will see that others support annexation (Publix’s shopping center Hwy 54 East). Let’s stop growing our wonderful city and keep Peachtree City first!

David Craig – Candidate Council Seat Post 1

Submitted by StopCallulaHills on Fri, 10/09/2009 - 12:59am.

Dear Mr. Craig, Your statement that you are the only one to publicly state no to rezoning industrial to residentail is wrong. Since you jumped into the race at the last minute you clearly haven't been paying attention. Mr. Imker has been hammering away at this issue and is probably the only reason Ms. Plunkett decided to tell her handlers with the pro Callua Hills block that they shouldn't bring it to a vote because they wouldn't win. She had to decide the damage to her possible election to mayor and decided, finally, to do the right thing. But that was only after Imker bashed, bashed and bashed some more back in June and July. But you weren't there to help. So don't go saying things like you just did when you'ld be taken to the mat for sure when Imker debates you.

Submitted by David Craig on Sat, 10/17/2009 - 2:01pm.

I appluad Mr. Imker's stance on this project and the effort he put into helping stop the project. However, I do stand by my comment since it included both No Rezoning & No Annexations. Mr. Imker's webstate has comments that show he would consider annexing land, so my comment is acurate and I stand behind it.
David Craig

Submitted by TomCat on Wed, 10/07/2009 - 5:56pm.

A "gold microphone award" to you John for accurate summaries of candidate comments for those not able to attend last night's forum. The full house indicates a higher level of interest (or distress) than previous election years. Let's hope that next week's forums are attended in a similar fashion.

Hey, PTC get informed....then get out and vote!! Your future depends on it!

"The Cat is loose...."

Comment viewing options

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