Wednesday, October 23, 2013

One Last Time to See and Meet Dunwoody Council Candidates Together



Sunday, October 27th, 2013
7:00-9:00pm
Kingsley Swim and Racquet Club – Club House

2325 N Peachtree Way, Dunwoody, GA 30338
Doors open at 6:40pm, Question Submissions Taken Until 7pm

Are you a young family raising your children here in the city of Dunwoody? Do you find yourself commenting on things that you love and brainstorming directions you would like to see our city go? Perhaps you have questions about the future of schools, park systems, ball fields, walk-able cities, street safety, city aesthetics, commutability, and more…
 
Come join your fellow Dunwoody families at the City Council Candidate Q&A Session.  Meet the candidates and take the opportunity to ask them questions about things that are most meaningful to you and your family.

This event is meant to be positive, vision-based, and forward thinking.  Its intent is to highlight the questions families have about our city's future and the positive and actionable steps the candidates, if elected, would take to address these questions and concerns.

Families Ask the Questions & The Candidates Share Their Answers

·       Coverage by the Dunwoody Crier
·       Special guest: State Legislator and Dunwoody resident, Tom Taylor
·       Moderator: Kathy Howe
·       All city council candidates from all three districts have been invited to attend the event.

Supported by Young Families of Dunwoody:
Shawn and Ben Bard, Dona and Gabriel Cardenas, Erika and Laurence Harris, Amy and Scott Hatmaker, Nancy and Stan Jester, Lyndsey and Richard Pearson, Audra and Ben Weiss, Bridgette and Aaron Uhde, Jennifer Westrick, KaLyn Davis and Evan Wetstone

Find “Young Families of Dunwoody” on Face Book for event information.

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

http://www.thecrier.net/talk_back_to_the_crier/article_abcdc328-3ab7-11e3-ae42-0019bb2963f4.html#user-comment-area

I am extremely discouraged to read two of the Crier "Letters" linked above. Specifically, both Mr. Kane and Ms. Anderson's opinions fall more than a few cards short of a full deck.

Ladies first, I'll start with Ms. Anderson.

A number of comments, recommendations, and thoughtful discussion surrounded the topic of City Manager powers, in several Charter Commission meetings. Commissioners heard specious allegations that 'a strong City Manager' was created to deal with an even more powerful CH2MHill contemplated to manage Dunwoody. Since CH2MHill management never happened, Dunwoody was supposedly left with a super-sized City Manager.

The only problem is that tall tale is 'all hat and no cattle.'

First, it is very odd that these serious charges came up at the absolute end of the Charter Review process. In other words, given the gravity of these allegations, why would both Brian and Tammy Anderson present their points of view in the last hour, of the last day, that Public Comments would be accepted? If true, these charges would have come up in the first meetings, when Commissioners were discussing the 'Powers' section of the Charter.

The Anderson's failed to provide one specific example of 'unlimited power' or any abuses, when asked repeatedly by Commissioners. Not one single example of anything. I was unimpressed, yet unsurprised; sour grapes and politics at work. You see we now learn that the former and fired City Attorney is acting as a political adviser to Clean Sweep candidates.

Onto the next topic, Mr. Kane's opinion on our newest Corporate 'Good Neighbor, State Farm.' How many communities were not selected to host one of three national Operation Centers in the US? This man is actually complaining about a major new JOB creator?

Dunwoody is proud to have this game-changing development. Mr. Kane's comments are bitter, steeped in negativity, and cannot reflect the views of fellow DHA Board Members.

Folks, Dunwoody is blessed to have important strategic business centers locating here. We have few real problems, and plenty of knowledgeable people that truly care about Dunwoody's future.

When you vote on November 5, do not allow misinformation and sour grape flavored 'tall tales' of a few affect your decisions.

Max

GaryRayBetz said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
GaryRayBetz said...

Certainly not a world view that I want to embrace - these extreme Tea Party folks living their lives with a solipsistic blindness, most aptly described by that astute purveyor of the communal polity, Russell Brand, when he summarized the motives of Margaret Thatcher, that she ruled by deliberately engendering the idea that "there is no such thing as society", that we are all alone on our journey through life, solitary atoms of consciousness.

And though I do believe that it is a waste, such a waste, this inner-life of mine, that one day, I shall close my eyes and everything that I ever thought or felt will vanish and be gone forever, but I then think that is perhaps why life is so very beautiful, it being so temporal, and why those times when I do share witticisms and laughter with another and we laugh heartily, soulfully, that's the celestial harmony, right there baby, and what I shall leave here, and I don't feel so alone that when I do close my eyes, it's not going to go away, least not all of it.

But I'm thinking, as it has become painfully obvious that I cannot win a seat via a write-in campaign, and with my concept of community being that of everyone sitting round a colossal fire-ring, drinking bottles of Guinness, passing fifths of Jameson's, and taking hits off an Aesculapian bong will never be accepted, that the incumbent council members and the man with that fascinatingly great name - Heyward Wescott, that has to have come out of an Anthony Trollope Victorian era novel, are the most community oriented candidates, striving for the general good.

The citizens of Dunwoody would be fools to not reelect them and not newly elect the Wayward one. Or if you want to just consider financial reasoning - spite fences really don't do anything for the property values, at all.

Rob Augustine - Dunwoody said...

Posted in two parts....Part 1

I too attended this forum. Listening to the City Council candidates Sunday evening, I must say that I was surprised by the lack of knowledge and lack of prior community involvement of several of the candidates. It is questionable how their ideas would even work for the City at all. Their lack of knowledge arises primarily from the fact that they have not been engaged in any activities, until now, involving the City. I do not understand how an informed electorate could support this group of self-named sweepers.

While these sweeper candidates adhere to a "party line" and are consistent in criticisms, they offer no evidence that they could do a better job or even understand what is going on in the City. To me, being on City Council requires people who have been engaged in various community efforts over some period of time. People who have proven they can work effectively for the future of our City.

More troubling than the lack of engagement in civic activities though is the sweepers amazing ignorance of so many topics. They criticize the fact that the City of Dunwoody, like all other governments in Georgia, has a fee for things like hot water heater installation or water meter installation. Well, every local or county government has this. Why? To be sure that the work is done by a proper installer and that it is inspected for completeness and correctness. To attack these fees, which cover the cost of the inspection, is ludicrous. I can just hear these same people complaining when someone's gas water heater has a gas leak and resulting damage, or the backflow valve on a water line is not installed correctly, thus affecting the water supply. These are important areas that require inspection. The user fees pay for that. All local cities have these. It is silly for the sweepers to attack such small fees as some kind of excessive or improper tax.

Continued in Part 2 below.

Rob Augustine - Dunwoody said...

Part 2 ... continued from above

These incorrect views carry over to bigger issues like zoning and impact fees. These sweepers will have us tied up in litigation over pre-approved zonings that are already on the books from past County decisions, or in their naive idea of unfairly charging impact fees to some, but not all which is required for them to be constitutional and uniform. These sweepers are really a train wreck waiting to happen. And criticizing the City for meticulously evaluating, writing, and adopting a City zoning code that implements new and better zoning standards is also ridiculous. The sweepers offer no alternatives; only their silly criticism.

Then you have these sweepers telling us we haven't listened to people or haven't planned things. Where were these sweepers at all the zoning code rewrite meetings? Right, they were not there. Where were these sweepers at all the planning meetings, the citizen participation efforts, and all the other discussions to develop master plans for the City? Right, they were not there at all. They were off working is their excuse. Well so was everyone else who has found the time to participate in these projects and in helping the City over the years. So the sweepers excuse is no excuse - it's just them dodging.

Finally, I could not help but think that these non-participating and inexperienced sweepers were part of an orchestrated and deliberate plan to wreck our City government. This was evident based on the same language and same stances being urged by these sweepers. They must have a political party they belong to or some organization headed up by someone who is pulling some strings. Apparently from several accounts, our former city attorney is leading this effort. It seems to me this is a very real danger for the City and its future.

The sweepers would be a regression to uninformed and more costly governance. The sweepers are an attack on sound City programs by sweepers who never bothered to be involved in the process at all. The sweepers lead an effort to mislead the citizens by claiming even the most fundamental and widely practiced governmental functions are somehow wrong.

I am confident the voters in this City will see through the sweeper facade and vote for our other candidates who have demonstrated their knowledge of and involvement in these important matters that will greatly affect us citizens.

It is clear to me that our City Council members Shortal and Thompson and the actively involved and dedicated candidate Heyward Wescott all have the experience and knowledge our City needs. They have done well and we should elect them.

Rob Augustine

GaryRayBetz said...

Hey, Rick, how about reminding me, and anyone else as densely uninformed as me, the official election date, and what time the polls open? I need to ensure I stay sober on election day eve. Thank-you!

Additionally below is my corrected version of my previous comment. The earlier one included errors.

Certainly not a world view that I want to embrace - these extreme Tea Party folks living their lives with a solipsistic blindness, most aptly described by that astute purveyor of the communal polity, Russell Brand, when he summarized the motives of Margaret Thatcher, that she ruled by deliberately engendering the idea that "there is no such thing as society", that we are all alone on our journey through life, solitary atoms of consciousness.

And though I do believe that it is a waste, such a waste, this inner-life of mine, that one day, I shall close my eyes and everything that I ever thought or felt will vanish and be gone forever, but I then think that is perhaps why life is so very beautiful, it being so temporal, and why those times when I do share witticisms and laughter with another and we laugh heartily, soulfully, that's the celestial harmony, right there baby, and what I shall leave here, and I don't feel so alone that when I do close my eyes, it's not going to go away, least not all of it.

But I'm thinking, as it has become painfully obvious that I cannot win a seat via a write-in campaign, and with my concept of community being that of everyone sitting round a colossal fire-ring, drinking bottles of Guinness, passing fifths of Jameson's, and taking hits off an Aesculapian bong will never be accepted, that the incumbent council members and the man with that fascinatingly great name - Heyward Wescott, that has to have come out of an Anthony Trollope Victorian era novel, are the most community oriented candidates, striving for the general good.

The citizens of Dunwoody would be fools to not reelect them and not newly elect the Wayward one. Or if you want to just consider financial reasoning - spite fences really don't do anything for the property values, at all.