Who needs W. F’ville Bypass?

Tue, 01/12/2010 - 5:28pm
By: John Munford

Examination of tracts along bypass route reveals new information: See MAP here.

Several opponents of the west Fayetteville bypass have alleged that the $29.7 million project is a “developers’ road.”

Some opponents have even charged that the bypass was a county commission gift to land speculators to enable development of large parcels of land along the second phase of the road, which travels through central Fayette County.

The Citizen has embarked upon a detailed study of all the large tracts of undeveloped land along the second phase of the bypass. (See the detailed map of the bypass and adjacent tracts on Page A8.)

The results showed that every undeveloped tract over 50 acres along the bypass route has frontage along an existing county road or state highway, making significant residential development possible even if the bypass second phase were never to be built.

Thus, while the bypass may eventually facilitate more access to new development, the road is not critically needed for such development to take place due to existing roads that are already in place.

Nearly all of those undeveloped tracts are zoned for subdivisions with a two-acre minimum lot size, though several are zoned agricultural residential, which has five-acre minimum lot sizes.

The second phase of the bypass is still in the early pre-construction stages as land acquisition has not yet begun in earnest. Once complete, it will stretch from Sandy Creek and Tillman Roads all the way to Ga. Highway 92 north at Westbridge Road.

Once all three phases of the bypass are complete, motorists traveling up Ga. Highway 85 south will be able to avoid downtown Fayetteville and use Hwy. 92 to take several rural roads into Fulton County to reach Ga. Highway 138 and ultimately, Interstate 85.

Despite criticism from bypass opponents including the West Fayetteville Bypass Coalition, County Commission Chairman Jack Smith insists the project remains necessary even as the economy has practically halted residential growth in surrounding counties, including Fayette.

Smith said the bypass is a way to help control the growth that comes Fayette’s way, as motorists drive through Fayetteville from Spalding and Coweta counties as they travel to Hartsfield Jackson International Airport and beyond for work.

Smith said Fayetteville’s traffic “is pretty significant” judging by what he has observed in the community.

“A great deal of traffic is created outside our boundaries and we must deal with it or be choked by it,” Smith said.

Smith said most residents he speaks with understand the need for the bypass. He pointed out that curb cuts on the two-lane road will be restricted in order to maintain the road’s goal of keeping traffic moving.

The county commission has ordered staff to develop an access management plan to accomplish that goal. That document is expected to be ready sometime in the first quarter of 2010.

“They will design that access plan so we will not have multiple intersections on this road that would create traffic impediments — which is the very thing we are trying to get rid of to move people through the county,” Smith said.

Meanwhile, with the latest Special Purpose Local Option Sales Tax defeated, elected officials in Peachtree City have been calling for the county to cancel the bypass and funnel the funds to Fayette’s cities to make up for the lack of revenue that will begin the end of March when the current transportation SPLOST ceases to be collected.

Smith said the county cannot divert funds to the cities because it is bound by law to address only those projects that are on the SPLOST referendum. The county is bound to follow the voters’ wishes, he added.

“If we don’t complete the projects then the money can’t be divvied up among governments and spent for something else,” Smith said. “The voters said, ‘You are only going to spend money for this purpose.’”

Smith added that the SPLOST funds cannot be spent for general government services other than allowed by the SPLOST language.

“So if the SPLOST said this must be used for roads, you can’t hire public works people with it,” Smith said.

The SPLOST resolution approved by the previous county commission in 2003 includes a list of projects for specific roads in Peachtree City, Fayetteville, Tyrone and the county. The only more general reference to a few road projects to give any flexibility were contained in the county’s 2003 Comprehensive Transportation Plan, in which the west Fayetteville bypass was listed as a project.

A bid to replace the expiring transportation SPLOST with another which focused on debt repayment with some transportation projects failed miserably at the polls in November.

Smith, in a wide-ranging interview about the bypass last month, also answered another criticism of the West Fayetteville Bypass Coalition, that the county is “not caring about the environment” by proceeding with its bypass plans without preparing an environmental impact statement.

Smith counters that the environmental documents can’t be prepared “until you set the actual route of the road.”

“We are exactly where our advisors and experts tell us we are supposed to be,” Smith said. “And it’s easy to understand that you can’t determine the environmental impact if you don’t know where it’s going.”

Critics have also alleged the bypass is a “road to nowhere” because it doesn’t bring motorists very close to the Interstate. Smith was asked the status of any improvements to Ga. Highway 92 to allow access to I-85.

Smith replied that the Federal Highway Administration, which controls access to interstate highways, is the agency that will make such a decision. The FHA previously has denied proposals to create a full “diamond” exchange at Hwy. 92 and I-85 and also a trimmed down concept of allowing just one northbound access ramp and one southbound “on-ramp” to primarily serve commuters, Smith said.

Currently there is talk of creating an access road stretching from Ga. Highway 74 to Hwy. 92, with Hwy. 74 losing its direct I-85 access. Instead, vehicles on Hwy. 74 would be routed down the access road parallel to the Interstate before accessing an Interstate ramp at an improved Hwy. 92 interchange.

“That’s the current thinking simply because there is nothing else we can get approval or even discussion with the Federal Transportation Administration,” Smith said.

The goal for the bypass has been to impact as few property owners and homeowners as possible while keeping in mind environmental issues and making sure “it does not cost an exorbitant amount of money to construct,” Smith said.

Smith noted that the commission initially intended for the bypass to have enough right-of-way to allow it to be widened to four lanes in the future. But after the county’s transportation consultant said there was more bang for the buck in expanding turn lanes at intersections, it made more sense to ditch the future four-laning of the bypass, Smith said.

Meanwhile, the first phase of the bypass, stretching from Ga. Highway 54 and Huiet Road to Sandy Creek and Tillman roads, is an estimated three months behind its completion date due to the tremendous amount of rain the county has received.

“If it rains today, you can’t do anything today and also the next three to five days because the ground has to dry out before you can compact, pave, gravel, or do anything. If the ground isn’t dry enough you just have to wait for it to be dry,” Smith said.

The road is being paid for using part of a 1-cent special purpose local option sales tax approved in a 2004 referendum put forward by a county commission that included only one current commissioner — Herb Frady.

The other three commissioners who approved the bypass plan subsequently lost reelection bids, even though all of them were generally considered to favor “slow growth” and strict conformance to current land use policies.

Other than Frady, none of the other four currently serving commissioners was in office when the bypass plan was proposed and approved for inclusion in the successful 2004 SPLOST.

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 ginga1414 on Thu, 01/14/2010 - 2:21pm.

Save Fayette, since you were at the planning meetings, I don't suppose that Jack Smith happened to mention that the county's consulting firms also work for the Atlanta Regional Commission.

When it comes to the Well/Bucket lady, you need to leave her out of this. She is a very nice sweet person and she has no hidden agendas. Her only interest is to save her property and help her neighbors save their property. In fact, she had no intention of going public with the fact that Eric Maxwell belittled and insulted her at the open house meeting and the only reason she did was because she was pressed to do so. It takes a whole lot to get this lady riled but Eric Maxwell had her up against a wall and we were all so proud of the fact that she didn't let his smart mouth intimidate her. She asked him if the road was going through his property and when he said, "No," she said, "Well, if it was, then you would know how I feel, and I absolutely didn't appreciate what you said to me." This lady has been fighting the WFB in one way or another for the last 25 years. She could write a book on the matter. She could tell you about dirty dealings connected to the WFB that would curl your hair and make it stand on end. Leave the well/bucket lady out of this little slinging contest.

When it comes to the builders/developers having access to their property along the WFB , there is a very large land owner (hundreds of acres) who can access his property on Lee's Mill Rd., however if the road goes through it will run along side his property for over a quarter of a mile. Don't you think that would facilitate his developing that property quite a bit? If folks want to build on or develop their property they should follow the proper course to do so. However, they shouldn't be facilitated by running over a neighbor's property.

Submitted by ginga1414 on Thu, 01/14/2010 - 9:22am.

If building the road makes sense to Save Fayette, then MARTA in Fayette County must make sense to Save Fayette. If they build the Bypass it will ultimately end up on West Bridge Road which is 1/4 mile from a MARTA bus line. It has been known for quite some time that some of our county officials are great backers of having MARTA come into Fayette County. Our Commission chairman not only sits on the Board of Fayette County Commissioners, he also sits on the Board of The Atlanta Regional Commission. We all know how much the ARC and MARTA have been pushing to have the floodgates open up into Fayette County and all
suburban counties. I know this to be a fact because my father was the Chief Traffic Engineer for the Atlanta Transit Co. and MARTA from the inception. If the floodgates are opened into Fayette County they will never be closed.

Think about it. Is that progress or is that destruction? If they build the Bypass, Fayette County will be 1/4 mile from the floodgates. What is 1/4 of a mile in the big picture? Not much. When they built the Pavilion they opened the gates just a crack and look what that caused.

When they built Rivers Elementary School they were anticipating the construction of all those houses. Then the real estate market went bust. Just look at the oh so pricey Waterlace subdivision at the MOUTH of Phase I of the Bypass. Can't you just connect the dots, Save Fayette? Then if you follow the map, you will see almost two thousand more acres of developer land that crawls along the Bypass Route. Follow that map all the way up West Bridge Road and there you have MARTA and the Atlanta Regional Commission and Jack Smith. It isn't hard. I bet they could even teach follow the dots at River's Elementary School if they had any students. Think about it! Think about the floodgates from........

suggarfoot's picture
Submitted by suggarfoot on Thu, 01/14/2010 - 10:46am.

I lived in Dekalb and you get behind a Marta buss and you will tear your hair out. And if you have a Marta station, you will have Marta busses feeding into it.

As fare the bypass. People are strapped. We don't have anymore money for taxes. What is so hard for them to understand about that? Give the dammed money back to the taxpayers or use it for something else!

Submitted by Spyglass on Thu, 01/14/2010 - 9:43am.

Why not reply to the comment you are addressing....it makes it much easier to follow the blogs. Or not..your choice.

suggarfoot's picture
Submitted by suggarfoot on Thu, 01/14/2010 - 7:44am.

have played into this. We the taxpayers and our money, have been handed over on a silver platter. This article deserves a repeat.

BoE’s Smith fails test of openness on business, land connections
By Steve Brown

Whenever a governmental entity is given large amounts of cash through bonds, SPLOST or any other means, it is vitally important that public scrutiny be encouraged as a method of insuring financial accountability. Financial accountability and sound decision-making have been deficient at times at the Fayette County Board of Education.

I have often found it interesting to watch grown adults say they are willing to pay hundreds of dollars in additional taxes, and yet they do not have a clue whether the current dollars are being spent wisely or not.

FCBOE Chairwoman Terri Smith generates a great deal of concern in relation to her private interests and her sworn responsibility to the FCBOE. I was immediately suspicious when Ms. Smith threatened legal action when someone questioned the actions of the board. This tactic is not used unless there is something to hide.

Ms. Smith’s official state of Georgia financial disclosure statement, required by law, produced a lot of red flags. In section two, Ms. Smith had to list any fiduciary position she holds with any profit or non-profit entity. She submitted, “No fiduciary positions in any business entity.”

But contrary to her claims, Ms. Smith appears, in the Georgia Secretary of State records, as the secretary of a corporation named James W. Smith, Inc. (doing business as “Action Plumbing”). In addition, she appears as the registered agent for TCG Holdings, LLC, TCG Investments, LLC, and TCG Residential Development, LLC. These corporations are connected to her husband.

Ms. Smith stated on her financial disclosure that she held “no direct ownership interests in any business entity.”

Section five of the financial disclosure form asks for a listing of the spouse’s direct ownership interests in real property. The reply from Ms. Smith was, “My husband had no ownership interests with a fair market value in excess of $10,000.”

A quick look at the public records in Fayette County reveals TCG Holdings, LLC has 32 properties with a combined value of nearly $5,881,330 in land and $6,216,090 in buildings — a total of more than $12 million.

Another of the spouse’s business interests, listed in Section 8 (known business or investment of spouse) on the form, is listed as JW Smith Properties, LLC and the public records show one property valued at $92,240.

Another Smith interest, Triax Investments, LLC, shows three properties with a land value of $233,410 and a building valued at $586,750.

One corporation, SISBRO Investments Corporation (est. 1997), has Ms. Smith’s husband listed as CEO, CFO and secretary. (Is that direct ownership interest?) The records show three properties with a total market value of $841,200.

Unfortunately, SISBRO Investments Corp. was not disclosed at all on Ms. Smith’s state form.

I had some interested parties tell me Ms. Smith and/or her husband’s business interests were generating business dealings with the FCBOE while Ms. Smith was an elected member of the FCBOE.

The Aug. 5, 2002, FCBOE meeting minutes shows the board went into executive session (a closed-door portion of a meeting with no one from the outside present) “... for the purpose of discussing the future acquisition of real estate.”

When they returned from the closed-door session, a motion was made “that the Board of Education authorize the sale of the surplused property located in the Tyrone Industrial Park to TCG Holdings, LLC for the price of $51,000 per acre.”

At this point, you have got to be shaking your head, thinking they went into the session to discuss the “acquisition of real estate,” and they came back and voted on “the sale of surplused property” to a Smith-owned corporation of which Ms. Smith is the registered agent.

To make matters worse, there is absolutely no indication in the minutes that Ms. Smith refrained from attending the closed-door session where the offer from her husband’s business was considered by FCBOE members.

Subsection 5 of the FCBOE’s ethics code says, ”To resist every temptation and outside pressure to use the position as a school board member to benefit himself/herself or any other individual or agency apart from the total interest of the school district.” So what is going on?

Later I was given access to a letter, dated May 22, 2003, from the same TCG Holdings, LLC to the director of the FCBOE’s land acquisition department. The letter stated that TCG Holdings, LLC owned property near FCBOE schools sites in Tyrone.

The school owned a private sewer system to service the schools and TCG Holdings, LLC wanted to hook into the school’s system in order to maximize a proposed development on their land.

I have heard of one other instance where a Smith-owned entity attempted to purchase FCBOE land, but I could not find any documentation.

Of course, the process is very imbalanced when an entity wanting to purchase land has an official on the inside with knowledge of privileged information.

Because of what I have seen, I believe a federal investigator – who is immune from local and state pressure – should be brought in to conduct a formal investigation of the FCBOE land dealings and a possible conflict in relationships with developers and contractors.

FCBOE member Janet Smola takes the lead on many FCBOE fiscal matters. This is distressing when you review her past actions.

Ms. Smola, in the midst of an uncertain 2003 economy, demanded the FCBOE initiate a building project ($1.56 million) at a local high school which was not on the list of approved bond projects or the FCBOE’s long-range improvement list.

Despite recommendations from the school facilities staff and finance staff asking members not to act, the projects were approved without targeted funding. They were going to “find the money somewhere down the road.”

This started a risky tendency of dodging in and out of the lines between doing what the voters asked them to do and using bond funds for what the voters did not ask them to do. Along the way, they failed to fund some of the valid needs cited in the bond referendums.

A month later, the newspaper headline read, “Fayette Board of Education borrows $8.5 million to meet September payroll,” (The Citizen, Sept. 17, 2003). Ms. Smola asked the FCBOE comptroller, “Why can’t we dip into the reserves?” The comptroller replied the reserves were down to a paltry $2 million.

The FCBOE was creating expensive non-bond related expenditures and they had no idea where they stood financially. Not keeping adequate reserves became a bad habit.

Recently, Ms. Smola and the FCBOE approved teacher pay raises with the promise of state funding. Unfortunately, they approved and signed the contracts prior to receiving the funds. The state cut the funds and the FCBOE failed to make the raises contingent upon receiving the money.

The cuts should not have come as a surprise because Ms. Smola has repeatedly complained about the state cutting back for the last five years.

There should be immediate pay reductions to recoup the unsupported raises. Top administrative staff who received plentiful raises over the years should also see cuts.

It was not surprising to see the local Board of Realtors writing a big check to the pro-E-SPLOST political action committee. The developers, home builders and real estate agents have the most to gain with many of the new school sites located in undeveloped areas instead of a sensible location near current population centers.

Again, everyone wants great schools, but a lack of financially accountability does not yield a great school.

The emotional push from the small band of E-SPLOST advocates does more to shield the truth than to show us the light. They cry out, “It is for the children!”

I believe it is more important to say we want to achieve maximum quality educational instruction, including the arts programs, in a law-abiding manner and keep promises made to the voters while utilizing our tax dollars in the most efficient way possible.

As for the timing of the SPLOST announcement, the most recent 2004 bond referendum was announced with plenty of time for discussion. In fact, Board Chairman Smith at that time said, “I wouldn’t want to put off having the tax initiative [2004 bonds] on the ballot this time around just because I’m up for reelection,” (“Key only BoE member to face contest,” The Citizen, May 5, 2004). Of course, she was running unopposed.

We know this year, facing opposition in the primary, there was not a peep from Ms. Smith about any kind of tax initiative until her election was sealed in the primary race. In fact, she even refused to answer questions from the newspaper prior to the primary election. Suspect?

We know the bond promises exempting senior citizens from paying the bond debt service will be trashed with the SPLOST. In addition, we also know the FCBOE has exhibited a lack of financial accountability with some of their land and construction deals.

We know FCBOE used scare tactics, threatening the jobs of paraprofessionals and arts faculty, and SPLOST funds cannot be used for salaries.

Superintendent DeCotis stated at the Fayette Chamber of Commerce (businesses do not pay SPLOST tax, we homeowners do) forum, “The ESPLOST would cover items in the operating budget that would free up funds in the general fund to allow us to remain a special school system” (Fayette Daily News, Oct. 3, “Realtors support E-SPLOST).

However, many of the items found in the SPLOST proposal were not part of the recently approved budget affecting the general fund.

We know there is not one construction or renovation project listed in the proposed SPLOST that cannot wait two years until the balloon payments are made on the bonds.

We know the FCBOE knew full well the contract for the student computers’ lease was going to expire in 2008 and 2009, and they had no finance plan in place to fill the void. Instead of using the 2004 bonds to fund computers as promised, the FCBOE built two new elementary schools that were unnecessary.

We know the FCBOE funded staff levels last year to handle 700 more students than we actually had on the rolls. So the FCBOE should not take credit for staffing cuts when they were overstaffed from the start.

In addition, we know our state QBE funding is heading in the wrong direction because we have more facilities than we have students to fill them.

We know the FCBOE structured, for some reason, the early bond debt to have an expensive balloon payment for the last two years (2008 and 2009), so we are really talking about financial tension for only two years. Thus, the FCBOE is attempting to make things appear worse than reality.

You have to question the FCBOE’s $1,000 per computer estimate regarding the purchase of 5,700 units. With quantity discounts and manufacturer’s school pricing, many in the corporate world are scratching their heads trying to understand why we are negotiating such a dreadful deal.

[Steve Brown is the former mayor of Peachtree City. He can be reached at stevebrownptc@ureach.com.]

Steve Brown's blog

suggarfoot's picture
Submitted by suggarfoot on Thu, 01/14/2010 - 7:57am.

Look at a map where these new schools were built....

where the bypass is going.....

look at the ties to development that Steve Brown has bulls-eyed for you......

.....look where your money went.....

.....what is wrong with a federal investigation?

Submitted by ginga1414 on Wed, 01/13/2010 - 5:12pm.

First it is a Bypass. Then, it is a Parkway. At one point, it was four lanes. Later it was changed to two lanes with turning lanes. They had a well publicized meeting to approve the "Final Route" of the Bypass. And, now, believe it or not, Jack Smith says they don't know where the road is going. They said they wouldn't pursue the purchase of property until the Federal 404 Permit was in hand, the next thing we know they have purchased one of the homes they intended to bulldoze for the road. Who knows what they are going to say next? Is it any wonder that the folks along the West Fayetteville Bypass don't trust what our commissioners tell us. More importantly, is it any wonder we don't trust them?

Submitted by AtHomeGym on Wed, 01/13/2010 - 5:16pm.

My real empathy is for those good citizens who will be forced by their own county government to move for highly questionable reasons.

Submitted by jevank on Wed, 01/13/2010 - 5:21pm.

How about "WTF Bypass" lol

matt.barnes's picture
Submitted by matt.barnes on Wed, 01/13/2010 - 5:52pm.

It will be a sad and funny day when we start using Text abreviations as road names. ROFL PKWY.

Submitted by Spyglass on Wed, 01/13/2010 - 2:50pm.

Certainly not bad traffic, I've seen MUCH worse in every other metro county. Will it save time? I doubt it... The only thing it will do is hurt business's along the main route...I've seen it happen in small towns all over the Country. Don't build it.

grassroots's picture
Submitted by grassroots on Wed, 01/13/2010 - 12:52pm.

Don't Forget Phase One. They're dozing two blocks across the south side of HWY 54, and for what? See why at www.splostpoll.com
and why there are empty schools and empty promises but pockets full of money.
Also the original route voted in the 2oo4 SPLOST ended at Sandy Creek. The WFBC has the proof and will post it next week along with more questions.

Robert W. Morgan's picture
Submitted by Robert W. Morgan on Wed, 01/13/2010 - 7:29am.

I can't see anyway anyone could call this a developer road if these are the only significant parcels of any size that can be developed - and it seems they can be developed without the road. A "Developer road" would create density, commercial corners and a reason to extend sewer. There is none of that here.

Nevertheless, developer road or not, it is a colossal waste of taxpayer money and will do nothing other than to attract some people passing through the county who should be using the interstate instead.

So why are we building this thing? Just because we have some SPLOST money? Come on people, wake up and act like leaders. We didn't elect you to do stupid things like this.

suggarfoot's picture
Submitted by suggarfoot on Wed, 01/13/2010 - 1:01pm.

Pardon my simplicity, but since times are bad, they voted this bypass years ago, needs and ideas have changed etc. Can't they just pass a law for this one time, because of extenuating circumstances, (a recession) that we use this money for something else? I mean, didn't we, as a county make the laws? can't we as a county...remake... our own laws for the good of the taxpayers?

It seems so feudal to go forward with this.

Submitted by Doug on Wed, 01/13/2010 - 8:29am.

How can this deadend road be justified? If I'm not mistaken, that is also where the school board built the empty school.

Jack Smith and his buddies are going to get crushed in their next election. Their arrogance with our tax dollars is disgusting.

Gene61's picture
Submitted by Gene61 on Wed, 01/13/2010 - 12:49am.

I don't think we need this project. As for the cost keeps changing, you ever known any government so called cost quotes be the final figure?

Is this something we really need in this county, another project with exploding cost?

Submitted by ginga1414 on Tue, 01/12/2010 - 8:53pm.

If Jack Smith doesn't know where the West Fayetteville Bypass is going, why did the County hold an open house meeting to show the FINAL ROUTE for the WFB. Jack Smith was present at that meeting. If The County doesn't know where the Bypass is going, why did all the folks whose property is going to be impacted by the Bypass receive a notice in the mail from the County with a map showing where the Bypass would cross each and every piece of property? And why did the county buy a house on Janice Drive that was to be condemned for the West Fayetteville Bypass if it didn't know where the WFB was going?

Also, every time we hear how much the county is going to spend on the WFB, the amount changes. Why is that?

How can our County build a many multi-million dollar road just because Jack Smith says, "Fayetteville's traffic is pretty significant judging by what he has observed in the community?" Where are the traffic studies? Are we building roads now on a whim?

Finally, there was NO reference to the West Fayetteville Bypass on, around, or anywhere near the 2004 SPLOST Ballot. The voters of Fayette County had no way of knowing what they were voting for other than "Road, Street, and Bridge Purposes!" In order to know what they were voting for on the 2004 SPLOST Ballot, voters would have had to know that the 2004 SPLOST Resolution included Exhibit A and Exhibit B. Exhibit B was actually the Transportation Section of the County's Comprehensive Land Use Plan which included the West Fayetteville Bypass. Fayette County voters would have had to go to the County offices and ask for Exhibit B. However, they would have had to know to ask for Exhibit B before they could have even suspected that Exhibit B contained some reference to the West Fayetteville Bypass and the 2004 SPLOST Ballot. We know that to be true because when we
tried to find Exhibit B, the Elections office didn't have it, and directed us to another office.

As far as environmental studies go, this monstrosity crosses 8 wetland areas and must be approved by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. Jack Smith was present when the commissioners approved the final WFB route, yet he now says that the county can't conduct environmental impact studies for lack of knowing where the road will be. Sounds to me like something's dead up the creek.

Submitted by yada yada yada on Wed, 01/13/2010 - 8:53am.

Jack Smith needs to go !!!! He is up for re-election this year and I bet they will come out of the woodwork to run against him. Greg Dunn is looking better all the time. Anyone but Jack Smith has my vote.

Submitted by Save Fayette on Thu, 01/14/2010 - 12:48am.

You must be out of your mind and clueless. Greg Dunn! He was the one who put the SPLOST together with that Well’s lady and there sides kick Peter Pan. Did you not read the story! You must be in that FACRAP group
that has recycled elected officials that will not go away, like Harold Boss Hog, who cost this county over $100,000 of dollars for his lying about where he lived and made the county have a special election. Face it people even in a down turn economy there still has to be progress. I personally think a bypass or what ever you want to call it, and avoid the traffic in Fayetteville is a great idea. Did you not go to any of the planning meeting with the experts about the transportation plan for Fayette Co.? Well I did and I think it makes since!! Build the Road!!!

ptctaxpayer's picture
Submitted by ptctaxpayer on Thu, 01/14/2010 - 8:52am.

Spend education dollars to help "Save Fayette"'s education. That's where the money needs to go. Look at that post. LOL. ".. it makes since..." Huh? And the best--- "even in a down turn economy there still has to be progress."--- that's sounds like Obama talking about job creation. And it is not Well's lady it is Wells lady. Are you the guy who has been lettering the county's road signs-- like "Landfield" or the entrance to that strip mall across the hospital or on 54 "Sharpsbrug"... Whoas......

We ain't got the spare money for the road to nowhere. SPLOST money? Hang on to it or give it back; don't spend it if the road to nowhere is all you got. We ain't got the money for the future maintenance. This road does not connect to any interstate or any major state road. We have a glut of empty houses and a glut of empty commercial and retail. All this road will do is dump 500 more Wieland Section 8 houses on the market and benefit Jack's pals at the chamber. This is a pork project. Save the money and get "Save Fayette" a tutor.

Comment viewing options

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