Opinion — Voters pull plug on Plunkett

Cal Beverly's picture

Can you spell r-e-p-u-d-i-a-t-i-o-n?

That’s the resounding verdict of the voters of Peachtree City to the two incumbent City Council members running for another four-year term.

Incumbent Steve Boone was trounced in a three-way race. Four-year council member Cyndi Plunkett came in second at a thousand votes behind Don Haddix, who resigned his Post 1 seat this summer to replace the failed Mayor Harold Logsdon.

Both Haddix and newcomer Scott Rowland ran strong anti-incumbent campaigns against Plunkett, especially her controversial votes for enabling the continued destruction of the city’s west side by selling two city streets to a developer. That sale allowed a larger big box next to Planterra Ridge subdivision. Plunkett also voted to put yet another traffic light on the snarled Ga. Highway 54 West.

The combined Haddix-Rowland vote against Plunkett’s positions was 4,271 to 1,752, or 71 percent to 29 percent.

That’s how you spell “repudiation.”

Mrs. Plunkett should do the honorable thing and suspend her campaign in the face of such an overwhelming vote of no-confidence in her.

Anti-incumbent fervor fueled almost every other candidate in the four races. Except for Les Dyer in Post 4, who was a little wishy-washy on big boxes and annexation, all other candidates said, “Stop the madness!”

Too bad Mayor Harold Logsdon passed up a reelection bid. That might have given him a clue about the almost certain outcome of his statewide political ambitions.

Haddix won every city precinct in the mayoral race, with his best showing in Flat Creek (54 percent in voting at The Gathering Place) and Braelinn (50 percent at Braelinn Elementary School), giving him an outright majority of the three-way vote. His worst showing was in Kedron (40.4 percent at PTC Christian Church) and Shakerag West (40.55 percent at the PTC Library).

Plunkett’s best showing was in McIntosh (37 percent at Holy Trinity Catholic Church), Kedron (33.51 percent) and Willowbend (31 percent at PTC First Baptist Church). She was even beaten by the third-place finisher, rookie Scott Rowland, in five of the 12 city precincts.

Plunkett failed to carry even one precinct in the entire city in a three-person race, and she is a four-year incumbent council member, well-known to city residents.

I suspect that is her main problem: Her votes on controversial issues are well-known and came back to haunt her in a race in which she had about a 4-to-1 financing advantage over Haddix.

Plunkett exhorted her supporters to “make history” by electing a woman to the city’s top spot. So how did the other women do in their races?

They came in first in their races, with one winning outright.

Vanessa Fleisch rolled over Les Dyer in every precinct in the two-person Post 4 race, with the closest being Shakerag West (library): Fleisch with 51 percent and Dyer with 49 percent.

In Post 3, Kim Learnard won every precinct over second-place finisher Bob Walsh and out-of-the-running incumbent Steve Boone. Learnard went over 50 percent in four precincts: Shakerag West at 59 percent, McIntosh at 53 percent, Fielding Ridge (voting at Kedron Fieldhouse) at 52.7 percent and Willowbend at 51.4 percent. Learnard and Plunkett both did well in McIntosh and Willowbend.

Boone came in third in all 12 voting locations, a thorough drubbing for a sitting council member. The best he managed was 22 percent at Flat Creek.

In the four-person race for the final two years on Don Haddix’s term in Post 1, Beth Pullias lost three precincts — Flat Creek, Braelinn and Camp Creek (voting at PTC United Methodist Church) — to Eric Imker.

Pullias’s best precincts were Shakerag East (same as Learnard) at 37.4 percent, McIntosh (same as Plunkett and Learnard) at 35.7 percent and Willowbend (same as Plunkett and Learnard) at 30.5 percent.

In total, top vote-getters at McIntosh (Holy Trinity Catholic) and Willowbend (First Baptist) precincts were female, so in at least those two precincts, Plunkett may have seen her exhortation realized.

And did ALL candidates get the message from the anti-SPLOST landslide?

The message? NO NEW TAXES!

Candidates and incumbents, ignore that message at your electoral peril.

login to post comments | Cal Beverly's blog

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Submitted by Howard Beale on Tue, 11/10/2009 - 3:35pm.

A vote for Don Haddix is a vote for Cal Beverly. If you like this website, the way Beverly does business and how the citizen represents our community, vote for Don Haddix.

I hope Beverly asked Haddix about this ringing endorsement before he published it. I seem to remember Beverly coming out just as strongly for Steve Brown, Nicole File, Peter Pfeifer, Bob Fuhrman, Greg Dunn, etc.

And for those who wonder why 99 percent of political candidates don't muddy themselves on this childish website, let's go back a year and see what the 2008 candidates for sheriff had to say:

“The candidates for the Office of Sheriff of Fayette County have discussed your invitation to participate in the online candidate forum being hosted by The Citizen. Unfortunately, we have decided unanimously not to participate in this forum, in this format.

“While we have chosen not to participate in this forum, please understand that we are not opposed to discussing our positions on issues or responding to citizens’ questions involving the sheriff’s election. Citizens with legitimate questions or concerns may attend any of the published candidate forums or contact us via email or telephone information, which is published on our individual websites.

“The blogs on the online edition of The Citizen contain many slanderous and baseless attacks on the character of each candidate for office. Many things are reported as fact when, in fact, they are little more than rumor or biased personal opinions transparently disguised as fact.

“We are more than willing to discuss issues related to our campaigns in an open forum where a sense of responsibility on the part of the questioners in important.

“In several threads from various posts online about each of the candidates for sheriff, there have been countless attacks that are completely outlandish, untruthful and defamatory to say the least. We believe that participating in a forum of this type will only invite more of these type comments and be unproductive.

“Besides, we are all busy campaigning for office and responding to baseless anonymous attacks would consume an enormous amount of time which we feel would be better spent on more constructive business.

Barry Babb
Wayne Hannah
Thomas Mindar
David Simmons”

I agree with Haddix on several issues; I just can't bring myself to vote for someone who messes around in the bile of Beverly's website. I bet that if Haddix had never opened an account on thecitizen.com and just stuck with his own perfectly satisfactory website (ptc post exchange), he would have taken the mayor's seat without a runoff. Mr. Haddix, your buddy-buddy relationship (implied or otherwise) with Cal Beverly and your willingness to spend time messing around in these childish comment threads are the biggest drawbacks of your candidacy. It's costing you votes.

Robert W. Morgan's picture
Submitted by Robert W. Morgan on Wed, 11/11/2009 - 8:09am.

Not sure I agree that Haddix should abstain from blogging entirely, but the sheriff candidates position causes one to at least consider taking the high road. Haddix is trying to respond to everything himself while it appears Cyndi has paid and volunteer bloggers. They are both into the attack mode and blame game and that's not attractive, but I guess it is all they each have in the absence of real campaign issues - discredit the other. Sad and ugly.

TinCan's picture
Submitted by TinCan on Wed, 11/11/2009 - 4:07pm.

In my opinion you usually make sense in your posts, but I have to wonder about your statement that Cindi "appears" to have paid bloggers. Have the invoices been posted somewhere that I missed? BTW, I'm not campaigning for either candidate here. Although I do have bit of a problem with ol' 3-2's attack blogs.

Submitted by AtHomeGym on Tue, 11/10/2009 - 4:08pm.

if you think this is a childish web site? Just like to dabble, huh? Maybe stir the pot a tad? And just so you know, I don't live in PTC and don't really care who the Mayor is or will be, but I think Cal Beverly can support whoever he wants--just like you.

ahavah_lachaim's picture
Submitted by ahavah_lachaim on Tue, 11/10/2009 - 6:58pm.

Mr. Beverly is certainly permitted to support whomever he chooses for mayor; i don't believe anyone on this site is disputing that fact. It is his treatment of other candidates, and his penchant for spreading falsity that aggravates and, to be frank, angers citizens/blog readers.


"Despite treason after treason, and sabotage after sabotage, God's empire of light never falls into total eclipse. Satan wages a futile war."

Hoosier Fan's picture
Submitted by Hoosier Fan on Sun, 11/08/2009 - 5:26pm.

A lot can happen between now and the December 1 runoff.

None of the PTC races are out of reach. All registered voters need to educate themselves on the issues and vote on December 1.

Don't start printing the "Dewey Defeats Truman" headlines too soon!

Submitted by Bonkers on Mon, 11/09/2009 - 7:01am.

I think Haddix should win due to the count, also.

But it is possible that the Haddix voters the first time will not vote as much, and others will vote another way!

Don't know if anyone can vote the second time or just the initial voters! I would assume that one could vote when they want to, except for the stupid primary rules as democrats or republicans.

Submitted by PTCGOIL on Sun, 11/08/2009 - 2:13pm.

Beautifullll Sunday afternoon. Need a traffic cop on the cart paths around Lake Peachtree, it's that busy!

Mr. Imker is standing outside the door to the library with his issues golf cart meeting the voters.

Whether you vote for him or not, gotta love the golf cart campaign he has going. He was at Battery Park with it yesterday. Where else in this wonderful country do people campaign on golf carts? Give him an A for effort!

Submitted by Kim Westwood on Sun, 11/08/2009 - 11:19am.


I feel compelled to respond to your editorial. My name is Kim Westwood and I have been assisting with Cyndi Plunkett's campaign. I volunteered to help Cyndi because I was one of the many, many people in town who encouraged her to run for Mayor. I volunteered to help her not because we are friends but because I believe in her.

I have attended City Council meetings for almost two years and I came to appreciate how Cyndi conducted herself. In my opinion, the other City Council members came to the dias with a firm stand. An agenda. Don Haddix, always angry... Doug following almost silently. Mayor Logsdon and Steve Boone usually arrived with their minds made up as well. Cyndi attended the meetings with her convictions strong but with her mind open. Perhaps it is her training as an attorney and a mediator. She sits on the dias and asks questions of the staff. She gathers information from them and listens to the opinions of the citizens. She then makes wise, fact-based decisions.

I admit I was surprised at the numbers last Tuesday. They made me realize that there is a disconnect somewhere in the community. I believe that the disconnect between who Cyndi is and how she is preceived is the result of the triumvirate of Steve Brown, Cal Beverly and Don Haddix. I am so concerned that this community will allow the anger and self-serving interests of a few control an election through the power of the press and the internet.

I met with Steve Brown in his office when he was Mayor. I wanted to discuss ways I could volunteer in the community. I would like to describe that meeting. Mr. Brown invited me into his office, closed the door and then explained why he had to close the door for privacy. He told me about his many enemies who lurked in City Hall. He told me that he suspected someone on the staff of leaking things to his enemies. He actually told me her name! He told me he felt very persecuted. I left the meeting (with barely speaking of my intended purpose) wondering, "Why would he - a total stranger - speak to me of these things?"

So what I remember of the years that Steve Brown was in office is a feeling of distrust and paranoia. I got the feeling that no one wanted to deal with Steve Brown. And I could see why.

And now this triumvirate is back with a new face - that of Don Haddix? Peachtree City MUST know that a vote for Don Haddix is a vote for Steve Brown. Since this is an editorial, and according to what seems to be the rules of this newspaper, actual facts are not required.... I have HEARD that Steve and Don meet at least weekly to map out the direction they want the City to take.

Having said this, I must now quote one of Cyndi's favorite sayings: "We can disagree without being disagreeable."

This letter has a positive purpose: I want Cyndi's friends and supporters to have a voice in a forum that most of us are afraid to join. Anyone with dissenting opinions from the Triumvirate gets verbally abused. But - If we band together - HERE - on "their" turf.... hopefully we can let Cyndi know that WE KNOW WHO SHE IS. She is a true representative of this City, able to play well with others, who won't portray negativity and paranoia. Thank you, Cyndi, for being willing to put yourself and your family through this abuse, for having the courage to stand up to these bullies. We believe in you, and we thank you for wanting to protect this City and all that makes it our home.

SIGNED, Kim Westwood

yellowjax1212's picture
Submitted by yellowjax1212 on Sun, 11/08/2009 - 8:07pm.

You are wading into dangerous waters on this blog. There are a few that will carry on a civil debate but most of them seem so filled with anger and vitriol that they will spend all of their energy trying to destroy anyone who is not in lock step with them.
You have already stepped on some toes by speaking of the triumvirate (it didn't take Don long to respond and attempt to disarm your post).
I don't agree with all the decisions that Cyndi has made during her tenure on the council but do believe that she is the best candidate for the job(polish and manners are important for this job).

YES - Don Haddix is an angry man who has attempted to perfect one word NO. He is the type to see conspiracy in everything he looks at and loves voice his opinions about them to anyone who will listen. These actions will lead to closed doors at the State Level (something very important even though there are many who only want to live with the confines of the Peachtree City city limits). We will get zero cooperation from State Legislators - just like under Steve Brown.

YES - Steve Brown is trying to get his revenge for his embarrassing dismissal four years ago by influencing this election any way he can. He does not want to be remembered as perhaps the worst mayor in the history of Peachtree City (a legacy that he so desperately wants to hand on Harold Logsdon). Would anyone care to compare the number of Big Box stores that came in under his watch as compared to Harold and this council?

YES - Cal Beverley has overstepped his role as local publisher of Citizen with his constant berating and insinuations of illegalities amongst this council. I know that it is an age old tradition of the local press to endorse candidates but Cal has made it a practice of trashing other candidates (local citizens who had decided that they want to commit many hours of their lives to service of PTC - for very little, if any pay)that he in some case he has never even met in person or spoken to at all. And he regularly chooses to do this with huge front page spreads that should be contained within the editorial section of the paper. Hey, it's his paper, he can do what he want's (even if his goal is to be the political "Puppetmaster" of Fayette County) buy perhaps he should change the name of the rag to "Cal Beverley's Citizen - All the news that Cal feels is fit to print in order to advance his agenda.

Submitted by totellthetruth on Mon, 11/09/2009 - 10:55pm.

I think we have a case of the pot calling the kettle black!
I think you are the angry one.

Oh you are spewing lies and trying to scare people...are you a spin dr. for Plunkett?

You don't really make a good case for your friend cyndi...try the facts yellow, the facts speak loud and clear as to cyndi's voting record.

Time and again, Plunkett sold the city out...even after hearing from the citizens she still disregarded us and sold us out...

It is now our turn to send cyndi packing!

yellowjax1212's picture
Submitted by yellowjax1212 on Tue, 11/10/2009 - 12:44pm.

Angry? No.
Concerned for the future of PTC, YES!
If you knew me, you would know I don't have an angry bone in my body. In fact as I sit hear and read the blogs I have a huge smile on my face. It is so much fun to watch all the Haddix supporters spin into a lather and the veins in their heads pop out anytime someone disagrees with their candidate.
BUT don't accuse me of spewing lies (spewing is such a fun word) and spreading fear, I'll leave that for your side.
Please read all of my post carefully. If you find anything I have said to be a lie I will stand on my head and print a full retraction.
By the way, I wish I was working for Plunkett as a spin doctor. I hear doctors make real good money and the Plunkett is paying her Big City campaign team hugh bucks.

ahavah_lachaim's picture
Submitted by ahavah_lachaim on Tue, 11/10/2009 - 7:02pm.

I think all bloggers who intentionally stir up controversy or consistently bash other bloggers or even absent parties should be required to stand on his or her head and issue an apology. Perhaps that would cut down on the amount of unnecessary rudeness within this forum.


"Despite treason after treason, and sabotage after sabotage, God's empire of light never falls into total eclipse. Satan wages a futile war."

Robert W. Morgan's picture
Submitted by Robert W. Morgan on Mon, 11/09/2009 - 6:30am.

Looks like Kim is going to different city council meetings than those I have attended.

On the big 3, you nailed it.

Haddix has already won if you look at the votes carefully as Cal has done. I do grow weary of him telling us how to vote and his pronouncements, but he certainly has this one right.

On Brown, you hear very little about the big boxes under him vs. Logsdon and of course you are correct. The whole downhill slide west of 74 (ironically at Planterra's front door) started under Brown, not Logsdon or even Lenox. Of course the actual blame for all that goes back to Joel Cowan's well-founded distrust of Doug Mitchell and Mitchell's petty jealousy of Cowan. Brown tried to fish those waters with his stupid attempt to discredit Cowan as the true founder of PTC, but missed the mark and had few real facts. Certainly he is trying everything to distract from his own poor performance, but that's going to be very difficult for him. Facts are facts.

Next time he opens his mouth on the front page of Cal's Citizen, we need to start viewing him as our very own Barry Obama - clueless, marching to some different drummer than the average citizen and blaming everything on his predecessor - although Brown is able to take it a step further and also blames Logsdon and of course the mysterious "enemies" within city hall. Earth to Brown you were not important enough to have enemies. You were viewed as an immature clown. I was there and know that for a fact.

Locke's picture
Submitted by Locke on Sun, 11/08/2009 - 11:44pm.

Dangerous waters indeed.

Don is "an angry man", who "has attempted to perfect one word NO", who sees "conspiracy in everything", who will get "zero cooperation from State Legislators".

Steve Brown is "trying to get his revenge" supposedly for his "embarrassing dismissal four the worst mayor in the history of Peachtree City".

Let me say that I agree with you completely that there are bloggers here that "seem so filled with anger and vitriol that they will spend all of their energy trying to destroy anyone who is not in lock step with them".

Frankly, describing Don Haddix as angry is not necessarily a negative from my point of view. I must admit that I have been somewhat nonplussed by the infuriating decisions that have been made by the city too. When I moved here a long, long time ago, there was an implied contract between the city and county officials, whose responsibility to the citizens was to uphold the land use plan; and the citizens here who had decided what kind of community they wanted to live in and who tried to achieve aspects of that goal through the land use plan. That was back when the politicians represented the citizens and most of the citizens knew the background of what was going on and what was being decided and planned.

Every single No vote by Mr. Haddix has been a No to proposed changes in that land use plan. I moved here because I thought this was a place where the elected officials were in agreement with the citizen's vision of a small community in Georgia that could rate in the top ten places to live in the United States. I believe that we achieved that, partially, but an important part, because we spent years studying and building the city/county development plan. It is very irritating to watch the politicians in our extraordinary community act in such ordinary ways and kow-tow to every developer who wanders into the county.

What I want is someone who understands; and is in agreement with, the forty years ago vision for the community; who recognizes that the implementation of that plan has been a major factor in our success; and who will start from that viewpoint when considering request for changing that plan.

You have to admit that doesn't describe your candidate.

It is one thing to show a man that he is in an error, and another to put him in possession of the truth. John Locke

yellowjax1212's picture
Submitted by yellowjax1212 on Mon, 11/09/2009 - 9:49am.

Thank you Locke for your well-balanced response.

I was, somewhat tongue-in-cheek, making a point about the radical behavior of most of those on this blog. Everything is black and white when in reality there are many shades of gray.

I guess you are right about Plunkett being my candidate but it is more of a vote against Don and his ill-fated NO to everything policy.

As far as the 40 year plan goes, I would have to ask which plan? There have been several through the years. In fact the first plan was for a much larger population with a much greater mix of incomes and housing types. AND the current plan is very close to being built out.

I do concede that Don will most likely win the runoff ( but odder things ave happened) and if so, I wish him all the best and I hope that I am 100% wrong in my assessment of his character. PTC needs leaders that will unify the citizens.

REMEMBER - Zero Growth or negative growth + shrinking tax revenues = higher property taxes for all of us.

Don Haddix's picture
Submitted by Don Haddix on Mon, 11/09/2009 - 10:17am.

The key to growth now is not slapping up more homes and retail space. It is adding good paying employers.

I have been working on that since 2007. DAPC is unified and there is strong cooperation between them, Sturbaum and myself.

The division on Council will disappear. Sturbaum, Fleisch and all four of the remaining Post candidates are already talking with me and I am working on unity.

None of us are anti business. I owned and run a business for 20 years.

The key is gaining customer base and promoting our businesses. That is something I began pushing as well in 2008. DAPC is on it, been pushing Tourism to get behind it and pushed the unified cooperation of committees, authorities, etc last year.

With the exception of those who just want to keep making PTC larger and larger and building just to build I have not been getting the complaints from citizens Plunkett, Logsdon and Boone have.

No, I am not Mr. Grumpy. I actually get along with Staff and citizens far better than Plunkett does. She, Boone and Logsdon got the tons of complaints in emails, etc, over the last two years. Not me.

Any day you want to sit down and just chat, just ask. No, I don't divulged blogger names, of which I know a good number.

Don Haddix
Candidate for Mayor

yellowjax1212's picture
Submitted by yellowjax1212 on Mon, 11/09/2009 - 8:47pm.

Ahh, no thanks on the sit down. Don't see much need in a pow wow with a politician in an election cycle. I have witnessed you in official and casual gatherings and frankly I'm not too impressed with the way you carry yourself and the things you say with strangers around.

Tell me this though. How is DPAC gonna have any effectiveness with no budget (I know that wasn't your call)? Are you going to give them something to work with?

And what are you going to tell the tax payers when you have to raise their property taxes?

The economy is in a slow recovery at best
Tax revenues are down - and will be for sometime
No SPLOST fund to work with (you did support the SPLOST didn't you)

AND - Don't you find it funny that when someone casts a cloud over Cal's paper, the post that had been so prominently displayed on the front page seems to vanish into the depths of the Cal's Blog section, far from the eyes of the general readers?

bad_ptc's picture
Submitted by bad_ptc on Tue, 11/10/2009 - 1:06am.

How has Mrs. Plunkett answered these same questions?

Have you asked her these same question or are you accepting her 'bought and paid for' sanitized answers?

Just curious.

Those that live in glass houses and all....

Why hasn't Mrs. Plunkett answered a single question posed to her on this blog? Is she claiming ignorance as to it's existence or is she claiming that all bloggers are ignorant? Which is it?

Perhaps her high dollar political consultants have advised her NOT to answer anyone via a written response? (Don't give anybody anything they can hold against you.)

Her silence is defining!

That you don't accept Mr. Haddix's responses as true/complete you must admit he responds; something Mrs. Plunkett has FAILED to do.

What say you?

yellowjax1212's picture
Submitted by yellowjax1212 on Tue, 11/10/2009 - 9:55am.

I say, good point Bad.
I ask Don some tough questions on these blogs mainly because he lives here. You can always find him in the safe haven of the Citizen.
Credit where credit is due - Don always responds. He doesn't always answer the questions but he does respond. His responses do nearly always contain some form of negative character assassination toward his opponents. That's the main thing that turned me away from Don in the first place. While he was a member of Council, he spent way to much time on the blogs airing dirty laundry (never with any real proof) of the failure of the "Gang of Three". This was all in preparation for his run for Mayor and I felt he was taking unfair advantage of his position. When he resigned the post (per State law) I felt he could conduct his campaign any way he likes and I told him so in a blog post. The constant negativity still rubs me the wrong way but that's his call.

As far as Plunkett answering questions on this blog? Really? Do you think anyone in their right mind would wade into these crocodile infested blogs? This is Don's home field. Cal has seen to it that he has all the advantages (Cal's endorsement and his constant besmirchment of anyone who dares to disagree). And the bloggers here would feast on half truth and insinuations.

Although I would love to hear some of those answers. You will turn old and gray before you see her response on here.

Submitted by MYTMITE on Tue, 11/10/2009 - 11:14am.

I don't remember you being on this site til you started your campaign against Mr. Haddix and his run for Mayor. Why do you feel that by coming on this blog Mr. Haddix was taking unfair advantage of his position? Any other candidate could post as well. Mr. Imker and Mr. Rowland has used the opportunity. My feeling is Ms. Plunkett feels she does not need to be in contact with the everyday people of PTC. She has never responded to e-mails sent to her for this same reason, I suppose. As has been shown here--if Mr. Haddix answers a question he is putting himself out there too much, if he does not respond he is evading an answer. As often happens in life, you are damned if you do and damned if you don't. At least he has the courage to put himself out there and take the chance on making a mistake.

It has become very evident since the election that there has been a concerted effort by some bloggers (some very new to the site) to constantly denigrate Mr. Haddix--to the extent of answering themselves back and forth. This is not lost on the rest of us. In fact, it may be accomplishing just the opposite of what they are hoping for. Most bloggers on here are pretty intelligent and informed and therefore can see right though this tactic. So, I would say--keep it up it may do Mr. Haddix more good than those high paid PR people others are using.

yellowjax1212's picture
Submitted by yellowjax1212 on Tue, 11/10/2009 - 12:14pm.

They say the memory is the first thing to go...
I have been a pretty regular blogger on the Citizen for 3 years - ask Cal, he's got the records.
My point was Don was using the blogs to campaign (veiled in an informative post) before the campaign began and he was still a member of council. Probably doesn't break any laws but it's not the right thing to do. Information flow is great but when you feel led to tack on "oh by the way, you guys should see the dirty underhanded things the rest of the council is up to" it's just not right. Doug Sturbaum supports Don and almost every decision made but you don't see him trashing everything and everyone in his way. Doug's a good man. We are still a small town I would hope that we had some manners but i guess I am wrong.
Not sure of what evil tactics you are accusing me of but I thought the blog was a place for opinions and friendly debate, I guess I am wrong again.

Speaking of tactics though, what's with the constant reference from you Haddix supporters about the "high price PR people" that Plunkett is using. I had no idea that she was not running her own campaign. Just because she chooses not to come on the blog and spar with you Negative Naybobs (thanks Spiro Agnew) you assume she is hiding something.

Submitted by MYTMITE on Tue, 11/10/2009 - 2:50pm.

I was losing my mind--my mind is intact. I said unless my memory failed me and I guess it did. Evidently, I never read your previous blogs or forgot about them. Mea Culpa. I believe it is on record that Ms. Plunkett has spent a sizable amount on advisors, or whatever they are called. Speak of namecalling--since we do not agree with you or are thinking of backing another candidate than your choice we are suddenly Negative Nabobs--and I do believe (again if my memory does not fail me) the quote was "Nattering Nabobs of Negativity" and Spiro Agnew was referring to reporters. As for manners, are they only supposed to be used by one side? What do you call name calling but bad manners? I think you are entiltled to your opinion re: candidates and the upcoming election and I know I am entiltled to mine. So we will continute to disagree.

bad_ptc's picture
Submitted by bad_ptc on Tue, 11/10/2009 - 10:14am.

"His responses do nearly always contain some form of negative character assassination toward his opponents."

I can't argue with statement.

I've expressed to Mr. Haddix that he should tone it down a little as I don't see a benefit in being negative.

The voting records of the candidates is all I needed to make a decision on this race.

Submitted by cdl305 on Tue, 11/10/2009 - 12:27am.

I do not believe Mr. Haddix is an angry man - just an incapable politician. Two years ago, I voted for Mr. Haddix as I wanted to see some change. Unfortunately, it can in the form of obstinance, unprofessional public displays, either in blogs or the poorly chosen commments and mannerisms in publc meetings. Suggesting that he gets along with staff better than Mrs Plunkett is actually an example of the blantent unsupported statements that seem prevalent with him. Mr. Sturnbaum was often in disagreement with the majority, but yet I have never seen the nasty blogs, misrepresentations and negative comments made towards the fellow council members. While I do not expect politicians to agree on all matters, I do expect there to be some type of convergence of the mind, and Mr. Haddix has always failed to effect change among the council, demonstrating an ineptness in leadership. It appears it is his way or no way - yes, the sign of a true leader.

Keep it mind, the winner may receive the majority of the votes (2800 of 5500 vs 36,000 residents), but majority of the minority is still a minority - it is not a mandate.

yellowjax1212's picture
Submitted by yellowjax1212 on Tue, 11/10/2009 - 12:20pm.

Amen! Doug Sturbaum for Mayor!

Submitted by MYTMITE on Tue, 11/10/2009 - 11:40am.

the site. I think you have raised some points that have obvious answers. You say you expected some "convergence of the mind,and Mr. Haddix has always failed to effect change amoung the council, demonstrating an ineptness in leadership." Please tell me how, when you having a council of five members and an apparent voting bloc of 3 on almost every vote--how do you effect change? How do you demonstrate leadership? Maybe his obstinance was because he was against the changes that this voting bloc of three was bring about-- was detrimental to our community. I would be frustrated if I were on a council where you had three people who always voted together regardless of the circumstances--in effect making the other two votes void. If his way is what is best for the citizens of PTC, then I say-it is probably better that he decided his way or no way. No one has ever come forward to refute the statements Mr. Haddix has made. And I do not believe it is because those people have decided to "take the high road" but rather that they do not have a reply. For the very reasons that you say you have decided to vote against Mr. Haddix, I am giving him my vote.

Don Haddix's picture
Submitted by Don Haddix on Mon, 11/09/2009 - 9:20pm.

After the election is over.

Let me know after December 1.

Don Haddix
Candidate for Mayor

yellowjax1212's picture
Submitted by yellowjax1212 on Tue, 11/10/2009 - 9:57am.

With any luck I can get a sit down with Mayor Plunkett after Dec. 1st.

Submitted by PTC Observer on Mon, 11/09/2009 - 10:37pm.

Mr. Haddix,

It is clear, at least to me, that you will be elected mayor on December 1st. The problem is that you haven't come clean on what you will do now that you don't have SPLOST. Unless you are more creative than your postings suggest, you know you will have to raise property taxes.

Since you know you will likely be elected you see no need to answer questions like:

What will you do to balance the city's budget during the first 100 days following your election?

What will be your priorities and how will you fund them?

I know that you will simply say that you have answered these types of questions in the past, but as far as I can tell you have not. If you have answered them, then use the copy and paste feature on your word processor.

What say you Mr. Haddix? Ready to tell us what you will do?

Submitted by Spyglass on Tue, 11/10/2009 - 8:38am.

I've asked the same thing...the question now is, HOW MUCH?

"Mr. Haddix,

It is clear, at least to me, that you will be elected mayor on December 1st. The problem is that you haven't come clean on what you will do now that you don't have SPLOST. Unless you are more creative than your postings suggest, you know you will have to raise property taxes. "

Submitted by RD Clark on Mon, 11/09/2009 - 3:07pm.

Mr. Haddix,

My guy is out of the race and I am trying to decide between the two remaining candidates. You say you get along "far better" with the staff than Cyndi Plunkett does. Can the staff comment on that? Have any of them come out in support of you?

Submitted by MYTMITE on Mon, 11/09/2009 - 3:28pm.

I can just see all staff in the different city offices raising their hands and commenting on the fact that they get along better with one candidate than another before a run-off election. If you are not self-employed or retired, and only one of your bosses could keep their position, would you be willing to go on a public forum and state that you liked or got along better with one than the other? Really doubt it. I also do not think that any employee in their right mind who wanted to continue working in the same position would publicly come out for one candidate over the other. Not necessarily because they would lose their position if their candidate lost but because if their candidate did in fact lose and they had to work with the person they had campaigned against it would be an awkward position. Just a guess, but I think you knew the answer to this one before you posed it. Awaiting your questions for Ms. Plunkett regarding her plans etc.

Submitted by Bonkers on Mon, 11/09/2009 - 4:14pm.

Well Hillary seems to work well with President Obama and she ran AGAINST him!
Just goes to prove professionalism instead of bureaucracy.

Submitted by RD Clark on Mon, 11/09/2009 - 3:49pm.

Haddix Post: "I actually get along with Staff and citizens far better than Plunkett does."

You caught me. I guess I DID know the answer to that question.
I just wanted to point out how unfair it is of Mr. Haddix to speak for a group of people (the staff) who are not permitted to speak for themselves. Is that how he plans to represent PTC?

Next: a question for Ms. Plunkett. I promise.

Submitted by totellthetruth on Mon, 11/09/2009 - 4:18pm.

I don't recall over the last 3 weeks that you have been a blogger here, ever asking Ms. Plunkett a question.

In fact, I have witnessed you attack Mr. Haddix. You are no former Rowland supporter...so don't think you are fooling anyone except yourself.

How unfair was it of you to attack Haddix before the election?Did you speak for yourself when you were doing that? I recall you implying that you represented a group of people that just wanted answers. Is it fair to speak for all of them?

RD people on this blog have you figured out. You are either a "pot stirrer" or some two-bit hack trying to smudge Haddix.
Get a grip and a clue!

Don Haddix's picture
Submitted by Don Haddix on Sun, 11/08/2009 - 8:33pm.

Fact is I already have some better relationships at State Level than does Plunkett.

In fact I have been certified as a State Annexation Arbitrator with DCA. Plunkett has no comparable credentials.

You are speaking from assumption, not fact.

Make of that as you will.

Don Haddix
Candidate for Mayor

yellowjax1212's picture
Submitted by yellowjax1212 on Sun, 11/08/2009 - 8:45pm.

You, Steve and Cal have been speaking from assumption during this campaign and your short time on the council.

Make of that what you will.

Sounds to me like the pot calling the kettle black don't it Don?

The Wedge's picture
Submitted by The Wedge on Sun, 11/08/2009 - 9:10pm.

Are you suggesting that he is meeting and colluding with these people? It sounds like you are the type of marketing person that throws everything against a wall to see what sticks. Are you planning on developing a property outside of PTC and petitioning for sewer and annexation? Sounds like it. Is that why you are funding Plunkett?

yellowjax1212's picture
Submitted by yellowjax1212 on Mon, 11/09/2009 - 9:21am.

You prove my point precisely Wedge.

Anytime someone blogs anything against your opinion you guys jump in with some cockamamie conspiracy theory.

However, you seemed to have gotten this on right.

I AM - A major developer looking to build on a few thousand acres adjacent to PTC and will need annexation into the sewer and water system.

I DID - Donate about a million dollars to Plunkett's campaign because that's how you get things done around here.

Give me a break Wedge - GET A LIFE>

Hoosier Fan's picture
Submitted by Hoosier Fan on Sun, 11/08/2009 - 5:38pm.

To the campaign forum where the citizens get to ask the questions and the candidates can’t hide behind their carefully crafted campaign materials.

Are you ready to step up to the plate on behalf of your candidate and field the questions she dodged at the two forums? I think there are a fair number of regulars on this website that would love to get some straight answers from Ms Plunkett (or one of her surrogates) on the issues.

-- We’d like to know why her campaign materials paint a picture that is inconsistent with her voting record?
-- Why did she try to misrepresent her voting record on the 54 West traffic signal at the first forum?
-- Can the citizens of PTC vote for her on December 1 with any confidence that she will have the integrity to actually do what she said she would do in her campaign materials?

We’re ready if you and Ms Plunkett are willing.

Submitted by MYTMITE on Sun, 11/08/2009 - 12:57pm.

Plunkett and the citizens of Peachtree City. Time after time she has voted a bloc that favored developers and went against what the every- day people of Peachtree wanted and still want. No one is denying she is a nice person--a good quality but certainly does not qualify her to be mayor. It seems you are the one out with the tar brush, trying to tarnish Mr. Haddix by spreading rumors about meetings with Steve Brown. The voters listened and voted--in spite of the fact that Ms. Plunkett was the one with the glossy campaign--with the most money backing her. To me it sounds like you are trying to muddy the waters. Perhaps it is time for Ms. Plunkett to put the qualities you mention to use practicing law. It has been made plain that the people of Peachtree City are ready for a new start---and feel we can have that with Don Haddix as mayor. He has shown the people time after time that he has the welfare of the community at heart. Not always true of CYndi and her votes.
Good try, but no cigar.

Don Haddix's picture
Submitted by Don Haddix on Sun, 11/08/2009 - 12:22pm.

Instead of making false accusations against me and false claims Cyndi came to meetings not knowing her vote ahead of time how about dealing with her voting record?

This bait and switch approach has been the norm for two years against the minority. I won't miss it.

Don Haddix
Candidate for Mayor

Submitted by Spyglass on Sun, 11/08/2009 - 7:04pm.

with Steve Brown or not? Inquiring minds want to know. You accuse the letter writer of false accusations, is this one of them?

Don Haddix's picture
Submitted by Don Haddix on Sun, 11/08/2009 - 7:40pm.

It is one of the false accusations.

Since I declared in January one rumor was started immediately I am Steve's surrogate. When that failed then the one I was going to hire him as City Manager. When that one failed now it is we are a team plotting policy and more. Even to the point that I have been seen at his house ever day when, in fact, I have never been to his house.

In my two years in office neither Steve or I have approached the other to try to set up any meetings or tell the other what to do.

I respect Steve but we have really strong differences on a number of issues. He has the welfare of PTC at heart and knows I do. We agree to disagree.

The real issue here is Plunkett will not step up to the plate and actually say something meaningful or even own up to her record. Instead there are these kinds of tactics.

Don Haddix
Candidate for Mayor

Submitted by Spyglass on Sun, 11/08/2009 - 8:18pm.

I'll take you at your word.

Cyclist's picture
Submitted by Cyclist on Sun, 11/08/2009 - 7:43pm.

Good luck buddy!!
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

Submitted by MYTMITE on Sun, 11/08/2009 - 7:36pm.

stand right next to Don and after he answers if he has been meeting with Steve Brown she can tell us if she has been meeting with developers, builders and Fayette County politicos or any of their representatives. All fair in love,war and politics, evidently. Or what I really should say is fair is fair.

Submitted by Spyglass on Sun, 11/08/2009 - 8:20pm.

would actually be a benefit for the Mayor. Developers do have a right to develop their property, contingent on zoning criteria, etc being met. Why not work together to come up with the best plan available for all parties. One that actually has the citizens interests at heart.

The Wedge's picture
Submitted by The Wedge on Sun, 11/08/2009 - 9:21pm.

Mayorial candidate A, City Council Candidate A and B have a meeting with the ACME company. ACME company is considering developing property to the north of PTC. The company wants to emplace high density and mixed use housing. This company is already having secretive meetings with the county commissioners as well. ACME company, during this "meeting" gets an agreement-the company will funnel money to these candidates' campaigns (through a couple filable donations and many more below the filing threshold)and these candidates promise to vote in accordance with the ACME company's positions and goals. How was this meeting any more than a meeting of self-interests-not the citizens' interests?

Submitted by Spyglass on Mon, 11/09/2009 - 6:12am.

fit the land use plan that PTC currently has? Some folks just have a hard time not going with the worst possible scenario in any case.

And since when did I imply/say that said meetings should be "secretive"?

Submitted by PTCGOIL on Sun, 11/08/2009 - 11:51am.

You wanna talk about a triumvirate? How about having to sit every other week for years and listen to Harry, Cyndi, and Steve all vote yes on every pro developer request. You obviously mistake concern and genuine dismay on Mr. Haddix's face for anger. He is not an angry man. Although, sitting through countless 3-2 votes would not put a smile on anyone's face.

No one is questioning Cyndi being a nice person. She just doesn't follow the wishes of what the VOTERS want. It's as simple as that. Abuse, bullies, verbally abused, dissenting opinions????? Isn't that the life OF an attorney? She's a big girl, she can take it.

And just get over Steve Brown, will you? He is NOT running for office and is a non-issue in this race. Sounds like a little paranoia here, too. Cyndi's RECORD is the issue, and she knows that when you don't follow what your voters want, you lose the race.

Yes, Kim, there IS a disconnect in the community, and we voters are going to fix that Dec. 1st.

Submitted by RD Clark on Sun, 11/08/2009 - 12:16am.

I am so surprised that no one has written in to stand up for Ms. Plunkett. I must admit, I have heard that some of her friends have attempted to register with The Citizen and are unable to get on this forum. Interesting....

Submitted by MYTMITE on Sun, 11/08/2009 - 1:05pm.

Evidently there is no truth to the fact that friends of Cyndi have not been able to register with TheCitizen. Your Sunday 11/08/09 12:16 am blog was posted (which I am answering) as were several others that have appeared over the past several weeks. It seems that now that it appears that Ms. Plunkett can't win any other way, some are out to spread rumor and inuendo--speak of dirty politics! Let's hope that most of the citizens of our city can see through this as they have seen through Cyndi's latest efforts to spread a smokescreen that would cover what her voting record shows--loud and clear.

Submitted by Bonkers on Sun, 11/08/2009 - 11:53am.

We voted for Ms. Plunkett, not so much for her personality or service on the council, but because we didn't want the other candidates!

One can not let a vote or two (west side) make up your mind totally, but one of the candidates has zero experience at anything and is unknowing; the other wants the job too badly!

We need someone of maturity, self-made, and with no agenda., or close friends of town officials.

Too bad Haddix isn't that person, but whatta ya gonna do?

Wonder if Mr. Hudson of the Braves would be interested next time?

JeffC's picture
Submitted by JeffC on Sun, 11/08/2009 - 9:48am.

If Cal lets me blog here it kinda shows the forum is open to opposing opinions. When I find myself in agreement with him, I have to pause and double check my reasoning.

matt.barnes's picture
Submitted by matt.barnes on Sun, 11/08/2009 - 9:44am.

So... What is your defense of Cyndi?

Submitted by flip212 on Sun, 11/08/2009 - 8:43am.

The folks have spoken loud and clear Cyndi…you ruined your chances of becoming the first female Mayor buy aligning yourself with the other council losers…let us begin healing the damage you and the rest of your “former” council members have done to our city…SUSPEND YOUR CAMPAIGN and let Mr. Haddix begin focusing his attention on undoing the wrongs of the past 4 years.

tortugaocho's picture
Submitted by tortugaocho on Sun, 11/08/2009 - 11:09am.

Logsdon's Statewide Run for Political Rags to Riches mirrors many other mundance local pols who evaded their pasts. Agreed Flip--- lots of wrongdoings but over a longer period than 4 years. Logsdon was just the latest "Feed at the Trough". No one statewide will have a clue how he did stuff like the illegal million dollar good ole boy bailout at the Tennis Center. And, special interest money will spot him a mile a way as an easy mark. If elected he'll be like Tommy Irvin--- broke when he got elected state wide and rich when he leaves.

The Wedge's picture
Submitted by The Wedge on Sun, 11/08/2009 - 8:01am.

Your implication is that the Citizen is eliminating or disallowing the registration of Plunkett supportters. what a bunch of unmitigated Barbara Streisand. If there was a robust registration, then Bonkers wouldn't have six logins and different names. Get a clue, vote for your candidate if you want to. Support her on this blog. Don't write fiction and expect to be taken seriously.

Submitted by totellthetruth on Sun, 11/08/2009 - 2:20pm.

I get the "Barbara Streisand" innuendo, I just thought you got your Babbsy's confused.

Submitted by Imker on Fri, 11/06/2009 - 11:43pm.

I'd like to briefly discuss the election returns Tuesday eve through Wed morning. The TV stations picked up the numbers from the Fayette County Elections office correctly. But the information also said at 7:15PM that 100% of the precincts had reported and that I was way behind. I knew right away this was in error. By 9:45PM Tues eve the "near final" (without the last mail in ballots) results were posted showing I was only 1% percent behind first place. However, the TV stations did not update the results. Why should they, they had 100% and didn't need to go back and check.
I brought this to the attention of the elections office. A lot of punting to the state level elections office about software et al is going on right now. Meanwhile some of my constituents had thought I was out of the race based on the continuing wrong numbers, even into Wednesday morning, shown on the TV broadcasts. Some even took down their signs. I’ve been trying to get the word out that I'm in it and in it close.

Submitted by jackyldo on Sat, 11/07/2009 - 8:06am.

Imagine how Truman felt when he saw the headlines.
This is a pretty immature post and if you are the candidate and not some CHRPR who has hijacked your identity,, I'm switching my vote, to someone who sounds like they might really do the job.

mudcat's picture
Submitted by mudcat on Sat, 11/07/2009 - 6:22am.

Thanks for input. I'll go with the chick, the one who doesn't whine.

SPQR's picture
Submitted by SPQR on Sat, 11/07/2009 - 7:57am.

At least it's rational whining

The Wedge's picture
Submitted by The Wedge on Sat, 11/07/2009 - 7:51am.

You act like a shrew. I did not have a real dog in the Post 1 fight, i was decently comfortable with whomever was elected. No more. I will do my best to influence people to vote for Imker. I am so tired of your asinine commentary on these races. Good luck Imker, I do not know you, but I will vote for you.

Comment viewing options

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