Properly trained lawyers are taught to contest laws with which they disagree in a civilized and legal way.

Let's say you are threatened with a citation for violating an ordinance you consider unconstitutional. Do you go ahead and defy the ordinance, get the citation, and then fight it?

That's risky because you might lose, and then you are stuck with the conviction and the penalty. (That's what happened to a Mormon who was challenging a federal law against polygamy, in a US Supreme Court case the name of which I don't remember, and he ended up with a prison sentence for something like eight years.)

The really right thing to do is to file a lawsuit asking for a "declaratory judgment." That's the tool to use by people who don't want to be too confrontational and wish to receive the court's guidance as to what they can do before they get themselves in a bind.

Lawyers are taught the same thing about police arrests. Do you fight the cop and punch him in the nose because you think he is trying to make an illegal arrest? Or do you temporarily submit and get it sorted out later?

It is not disgraceful to go to court. It's the civilized way to resolve disagreements. What is disgraceful is how much it costs to go to court and how long it takes to get results. That's why so many people are up in arms about lawsuits. What's frivolous is not the lawsuit itself but the circus-like system to resolve them.

It should never have been passed to begin with. It was an obvious attempt to keep people from opposing more than one of you at any given time. What was the sixth commissioner doing when this was discussed? Besides charging you $200.00 an hour.

This election is the perfect example of how wrong your sign ordinance was. Under your law one could not show support for Eric and Jack. One would have to choose only one to support. Who would ever believe that to be constitutional. Good thing is next election all we'll have to oppose is the weasel.

weasel!!!!!!!! Eric Maxwell did the more honorable thing and sued the board to knock down an unconstitutional ordinance(the board knew it was unconstitutional all along)and protect the first amendment rights that are guaranteed you and I under the U S Constitution. Only a fool would suggest that anyone should surrender their rights under the constitution and obey a silly sign ordinance.

Violating a sign ordinance or wasting hundreds of thousands of dollars of taxpayers monies on frivolous lawsuits and audits?

Violating a sign ordinance or outing an undercover law enforcement officer and endangering his family?

Violating a sign ordinance or nit picking the sheriffs office over a few thousand dollars of spending while wasting millions on a park in the Northern part of the county that most Fayette County citizens will not use instead of improving the existing parks for a whole lot less money?

Violating a sign ordinance or......I could go on but you get my point.

As far as Maxwell goes the sign ordinance is nothing compared to the campaign ethics charges he was hit with. Whatever happened on that anyways? Good home cookin got it swept under the rug?

I'm telling you folks. Skip Eric Dunn and Greg Maxwell. It won't make a bit of difference as to what happens 6 - 10 years out. The damage has been done and our future is obvious. Look at Clayton County and look into the future.

Vote for either the Duck or Muddle. I like Muddles plan. Rolling back the years and starting over on a few issues.

When you (tonto707) addressed my comment, I think you missed my point. It is the principle involved. The fact is that an ordinance was in place (as far as I know, not initiated by this commimssion)and it was violated. As I said, when we disagree with a law/ordinance we have the right to challenge it, but there is a process to follow to do this. I would guess that the reason the commission was working on changing this ordinance was because they realized it wasn't consitutional. Mr. Maxwell could not be patient,nor did he follow the process. To me, this was an unnecessary and frivolous law suit on his part.

Your Marshals intiated the case by writing Eric a ticket.

How can a law suit be considered frivolous when the courts ruled the ordinance was unconstitutional? It means he was right.

You wouldn't know a frivolous law suit if it jumped up and bit you in the... well wait a minute, they did didn't they. All of them jumped and and bit all of you in the Dunn.

didn't miss your point at all. Fact is, the sign ordinance in place at the time was indeed one produced by the three amigos. The county attorney knew or should have known it was unconstitutional, and so should the board of commissioners.

The greater principle here is recognizing the illegality of the ordinance and taking measures to have it struck down.

By the way, courts are the surest and most expedient means of addressing this kind of issue. Knowing the three amigos, I can assure you they would have never volunteered to do the right thing and change the sign ordinance.

I wasn't paying much attention when the whole sign ordinance thing went down. I did know the ordinance was the work of Greg, Peter and Janet. Now I see they knew it was probably unconstitutional, hadn't acted on it and had a lawyer/judge arrested for doing it. Holy cow.

Who made the arrest? It had to be Dunn's private police force - the Marshals - right?

Many of you are wrong about the sign ordinance(s), yet write as “Authorities”.

The “Old” Ordinance (from one of your posts, “the work of Greg, Peter and Janet (?)”) was written by a previous Commission and was “authored” by HERB! The rest of us were simply trying to uphold a County Ordinance, while we researched and fixed the previous Ordinance. We did.

Also, the Marshall’s do NOT “Arrest” or “Sue” anyone over a violation of the Sign Ordinance. They issue a citation, which gives the person 10 days to come into compliance or to justify their apparent violation. If that is ignored, the person gets a “Ticket”.

We “settled” with Eric because we had CHANGED the Ordinance! If his real motive was to change the Ordinance, it could have been done WITHOUT Eric’s Lawsuit!

Again:

1. “Old Ordinance” was HERB”S.
2. Ordinance FIXED by “Dunn, Wells & Peter”.
3. Nobody was “Arrested”.
4. Suing you was NOT NECESSARY.

Let’s discuss real differences and issues, NOT silly made up stuff.

Peter

You sold out respect for yourself to Greg Dunn and Linda Wells. If you think a law suit about an unconstitutional ordinance was not necessary what did you think about the Commission's law suit to gain control of the drug seizure money. That was federal law you were challenging Peter.

What about Greg's public comments about recouping the money in law suits by making the Sheriff allow the Commission to do his purchasing? That was a public statement made by Dunn last week when you know a judge ruled months ago that the Commission doesn't have that power. So that money will not be recouped as Dunn "assured" us it would last week. I don't believe that would have recouped money anyway it was just a power thing.

You've tied yourself to them like an anchor and the rope is around your ankle. That is what wasn't necassary. You could have remained yourself.

The sign ordinance is a minor issue in what will be a huge election for Fayette County tomorrow. I'm curious to see how you will conduct yourself over the next two years.

I posted that before I read all the way through. I see that's been covered.

Eric Maxwell is not in with anyone. As stated in a Blog lastnight it explains the so called controversial contributions, I guess you act before you educate yourself....Maybe you should read before you POST!!! Get the facts!!!

Dr Mathew J Autera.

Maxwell was not the first candidate to use a billboard in a Fayette campaign! Get your facts straight! Eric Maxwell is not a developer! No developer gave him money! I guess his legal office is a "development" huh? I guess Mat Autera's health office is a "development" Huh? His 10 acres of hunting land, again a "development" Huh? Give me a break!!! These are lies from a desperate candidate who knows he is soon to be exited from office. But please, for Fayette County's sake, stop drinking the Koolaid given free at Dunn polital rallies!

Just maybe Maxwell is a friend to his clients as well as a lawyer?

Wow! What a novel concept.

-----------------------------
Keeping it real and to the core of the issue, not the peripherals.

What is "ranker"?

I suppose it would be one who ranks. Maybe the guy who says "you rank higher than he does, would be a ranker?"
However "rancor" is bitterness toward someone or thing, I think. Don't
know which he means. I think he means number two, however.

If you only know the extent of the actions taken by the county to avoid the public ranker which has developed on the issues between Dunn and Randle.

Yea. Right. That is why they did the frivolous lawsuits instead of going by the audits and law.

Our Tax money is ours not the Sheriff’s.

Drug bust money didn't come from the tax payers.

All elected officials have a responsibility to account for taxpayers’ money. We just can’t say oh they are nice people – forget asking them to account for our tax dollars.

There were audits. There are audits annually.

You may have overlooked the fact fiduciary responsibility for Georgia Counties by law rests with the Elected County Commissioners – In our case all (5) of them!!!

Not all the money. Such as drug bust money.

Remember be careful what you pray for. You may in fact get it.

Stopping Dunn and Wells from wasting time and money from the County and Sheriff's office is what I want.

And stopping their power grabs that are long standing State and Federal laws.

As for me I will be sadden if you are right since it will be the result of the anonymous free form exchange of misinformation, slander, rumor, and character assassination.

Getting rid of Dunn and Wells will end their slander, rumor and character assinations.

They have been caught on the Sheriff and Maxwell, to start with.

I bet you never visited the county offices to discuss with Dunn or any one else on staff -- what the facts were or actually looked at the exchange of letters.

I don't need to. I have seen their accusations against the Sheriff, Maxwell and some business owners. They lied.

-----------------------------
Keeping it real and to the core of the issue, not the peripherals.

I've read all of the letters Greg Dunn sent to Sheriff Johnson. There was no action to avoid public ranker, public ranker was the intent with every letter Dunn sent.

Our tax money is not yours, that is the point. What right did you have to spend our tax dollars on your power struggles. "All elected officials have a responsibility to account for taxpayers' money." Exactly. Tuesday Dunn and Wells will be held accountable for the tax dollars they spent unnecessarily. We recognize your fiduciary responsibility but you did not.

The anonymous free form exchange of misinformation was invented by Cal Beverly and Janet Dunn. Both loved the concept until the rest of us caught on to it.