Is that a City Councilman now shilling for the passage of the bonds. He is not speaking as a private citizen since he is identified in the story as a councilman. Get right next to Danny Ross who advocates from the City Council chamber during a meeting. Isn't that a direct violation ofthe law that their own City attorney warned them about. Let's ask Rob he seems to have all the answers.
John, You have been an exemplary member of city council - my favorite council member! I appreciate everything you do concerning transparency. You go above and beyond. However, are you satisfied with the transparency concerning the purchase of the 42 acres? The city intends to make, perhaps, it's largest purchase in the next 50-years, and the citizens have no prior knowledge. No chance at all to give its input. Is this right? Are you satisfied with this? I know little about the workings of government compared to you, but from what I do know, this doesn't seem to pass the smell test of transparency. Would you please help me understand. Thanks for all you do. Bob
The following by another commentator shows that this land purchase for parks by city council is sensible:
"So let's see... 1. The City of Dunwoody is proposing a bond issue (a customary and legal method for municipalities to raise funds which the residents of Dunwoody must approve)... 2. ...to purchase property in a consentual transaction (as compared to an eminent domain process whereby the municipality exercises a right to force the sale of property)... 3. ...from two private corporations (who have every legal right to sell the properties at the time and price of their choosing)... 4. ...in a transaction that will honor all existing leases until their termination (as compared to exercising a probable clause in those leases that would allow for early termination of leases should the property be sold)... 5. ...to build a park and recreation center (that is consistent with a land use plan developed by and approved by the residents of Dunwoody). Where exactly is the issue?"
Just some sensible thoughts from someone else about this worthwhile effort by city council. Rob Augustine.
Only one problem. The City Manager, acting as agent of the city, does not have now (nor will until AFTER the referendum) to enter into agreements regarding the purchasing of property for these uses.
It's an outright overstepping of boundaries for him to have done so; moreover, it's a violation of the prohibition of any council member speaking for or against the bonds.
That's the problem Rob. The "deal" maybe completely legit; it just doesn't pass the integrity test.
Yes, city council was adequately transparent. Legally, land acquisitions are handled in private executive session by local governments as allowed by state law. This is necessary to complete a transaction and make the best contract. City council here went further and disclosed and provided details of the agreement. Some of you guys act like there's a foreign government down at city hall. It's ridiculous.
The process of completing this contract is being handled by the city attorney, city manager, etc. It is legal. The contractural terms satisfy legal requirements. The process is "legit" as stated. And being legit is what we want. You have no reasonable basis for questioning the integrity of city council, city manager, or city attorney. It's just ludicrous for you to do so.
Finally, council members are perfectly free to speak their personal opinion about favoring the parks bond referendum. In all the years I've been involved in these matters I've never seen such absurd statements challenging free speech.
Calling this "shilling" or "reprehensible" etc. Is outrageous and offensive. I cannot believe the statements being made.
Rob, I appreciate your response, but I think you are missing the point of my question. It is not whether council acted within the law (quite frankly I don't know), but did it live up to the transparency that it has preached since we became a city. We all complained for years about DeKalb County making decisions without public input (you may remember Vernon Jones), I don't want our city council to act in the same manner. In this instance, whether legal or not, it did. Without question. The council waited until the very last minute to put it on the agenda, not allowing the public to have its voice heard (this has nothing to do with private executive session). I didn't like it when Vernon Jones did it, I don't like it when our own council does it. We, as citizens of Dunwoody, deserve better. Respectfully, Bob
since we're in to quoting other bloggers, let me offer a thought mentioned on another blog: "Councilman Ross said 50% of the calls to the Dunwoody police were from the PCID, when are we going to make an offer to buy Perimeter Mall and flatten it for parks?"
If the City wanted to buy Perimeter Mall for umpteen million dollars, you're saying we could enter into a contract to do that on the Q-T, perfectly legitimate, and you'd be happy with that, too?
There is a difference between buying vacant properties and occupied properties. Following your logic, I presume the City is quietly proceeding with offering purchase agreements on the two or three houses at the corner of Tilly Mill, N.Peachtree, and Peeler that will be needed to improve the intersection.
If the City can acquire these properties, without eminent domain, then citizen input won't be required.
That's not "foreign government" that's more akin to benevolent dictatorship, Rob.
And, don't make me quote John Rawls to you, either.
Well, why did I think you were going to disagree with what I said?
I support our city council. Their actions on the parks is very desirable and will benefit Dunwoody. We should all support the parks bonds and VOTE YES ON NOVEMBER 8th.
Click your ruby slippers together as much as you want Rob, it still ain't gonna happen. Dunwoody is too occupied by "smart" people to vote yes on these bonds.
"Michael D. Higgins, a veteran left-wing politician, poet and human rights activist, was declared the winner Saturday of Ireland's presidential election with nearly 57 percent of votes, and pledged to lift the spirits of a struggling nation."
Perhaps now Dunwoody knows exactly where it can pluck up its own poet to lead them from the current mobocracy and entropy...
Yes, write in Gary Ray Betz for Dunwoody Mayor, agus beidh sé ina lá mór i Dunwoody!!!
Council already is planning the bond victory celebration. Will be combined with the start of the fund for those people being moved to a better place and better life. Mayor has promised help to those being "displaced"
Fund name is
Dunwoody Comprehensive Relocation Assistance Program
also known as D CRAP
The compassionate mayor who apologized for the Dunwoody Community and all Council members who voted for the bond issue are each committed to give mega-bucks. But of whose money? Theirs?
And I haven't seen anyone ask yet what the COST of the "relocation assistance" will be? That, plus all the other expenses (like demolition of the apartments) which have not been openly discussed, other than Warren's admission of this fact when questioned at Council meeting, is giving me hallucinations of my checkbook dancing around dollar signs $$$$$$$$$$....
@GaryRayBetz, please don't think that my comments were that of contemptible criticism! It was only with admiration that I wrote.
I just had to comment as lately your posts on this site and those on your own blog are all over the place in opinion and tone. It's almost though you have become a nihilist or more aptly - a solipsist, that if you closed your eyes the world would disappear.
My substance abuse analogy was only to describe my experience of your random raillery. In fact to continue on that posit, it's as though you lost your mind. Like you dropped a tab of acid that had dropped acid itself, and then that acid tab went and snatched up your brain, but after it came down, forgot where it placed it.
So, it was with the sincerest veneration that I commented on your doings, as I think it simply incredible that anyone with a vacant vertex could be so expressive. :)
@GaryRayBetz, please don't think that my comments were that of contemptible criticism. It was only with admiration that I wrote.
I just had to comment as lately your posts on this site and on your own blog are all over the place in opinion and tone. It's almost though you have become a nihilist or more aptly - a solipsist, that if you closed your eyes the world would disappear.
My substance abuse analogy was only to describe my experience of your random raillery. In fact to continue on that vein, it's as though you lost your mind. Like you dropped a tab of acid that had dropped acid itself, and then that acid tab went and snatched up your brain, but after it came down, forgot where it placed it.
So, it was only with the sincerest veneration that I commented on your doings, as I think it simply incredible that anyone with a vacant vertex could be so expressive. :)
So, WiseAcre, perhaps I have indeed lost my mind, and that is why I view the world in a blanched dulcet aura now, but how is that any concern of yours?
Listen, I don't know you from Adam, but I do know who you are, and I would suggest that instead of making a pastime of pestering this poor old soul, you work on finishing that degree in literature, as I'm sure there is a position at Walmart awaiting you.
Rob will never get it. His head is...well never mind. Never have I heard someone so blindly support an issue and a proedure that was so obviously flawed. Flaws be damned, we need ball fields.
At least we can thank Russ Limbaugh for exposing what every ring-wing Republican thinks of every woman (which could be your wife, grandchild, or daughter) who uses contraception - a slut.
Kind of like a Jeffrey Wigand moment, only for Republicans this time not the tobacco industry - a full documentation of what everyone already knew was a Republican platform.
Russ Limbaugh in his full moronic glory:
"What does it say about the college co-ed [Sandra] Fluke, who goes before a congressional committee and essentially says she must be paid to have sex?" Rush Limbaugh asked. "What does that make her? It makes her a slut, right? It makes her a prostitute. She wants to be paid to have sex. She's having so much sex she can't afford the contraception. She wants you and me and the taxpayers to pay her to have sex."
"Limbaugh concluded his sexist rant by insisting that if women want their contraception covered, they should post pornographic videos of themselves online. "So Miss Fluke and the rest of you feminazis, here's the deal," he said. "If we are going to pay for your contraceptives and thus pay for you to have sex, we want something. We want you to post the videos online so we can all watch."
25 comments:
Vote YES FOR PARKS BONDS.
Thank you City Council for an excellent Parks plan which deserves our support and vote on November 8th.
Rob Augustine
Is that a City Councilman now shilling for the passage of the bonds.
He is not speaking as a private citizen since he is identified in the story as a councilman. Get right next to Danny Ross who advocates from the City Council chamber during a meeting.
Isn't that a direct violation ofthe law that their own City attorney warned them about.
Let's ask Rob he seems to have all the answers.
John,
You have been an exemplary member of city council - my favorite council member! I appreciate everything you do concerning transparency. You go above and beyond.
However, are you satisfied with the transparency concerning the purchase of the 42 acres?
The city intends to make, perhaps, it's largest purchase in the next 50-years, and the citizens have no prior knowledge. No chance at all to give its input. Is this right? Are you satisfied with this?
I know little about the workings of government compared to you, but from what I do know, this doesn't seem to pass the smell test of transparency.
Would you please help me understand.
Thanks for all you do.
Bob
The following by another commentator shows that this land purchase for parks by city council is sensible:
"So let's see... 1. The City of Dunwoody is proposing a bond issue (a customary and legal method for municipalities to raise funds which the residents of Dunwoody must approve)... 2. ...to purchase property in a consentual transaction (as compared to an eminent domain process whereby the municipality exercises a right to force the sale of property)... 3. ...from two private corporations (who have every legal right to sell the properties at the time and price of their choosing)... 4. ...in a transaction that will honor all existing leases until their termination (as compared to exercising a probable clause in those leases that would allow for early termination of leases should the property be sold)... 5. ...to build a park and recreation center (that is consistent with a land use plan developed by and approved by the residents of Dunwoody). Where exactly is the issue?"
Just some sensible thoughts from someone else about this worthwhile effort by city council. Rob Augustine.
Rob,
Simple question for you. Do you believe council was adequately transparent was the taxpaying citizens in this matter?
Thx,
Bob
Rob:
Only one problem. The City Manager, acting as agent of the city, does not have now (nor will until AFTER the referendum) to enter into agreements regarding the purchasing of property for these uses.
It's an outright overstepping of boundaries for him to have done so; moreover, it's a violation of the prohibition of any council member speaking for or against the bonds.
That's the problem Rob. The "deal" maybe completely legit; it just doesn't pass the integrity test.
Chip
Yes, city council was adequately transparent. Legally, land acquisitions are handled in private executive session by local governments as allowed by state law. This is necessary to complete a transaction and make the best contract. City council here went further and disclosed and provided details of the agreement. Some of you guys act like there's a foreign government down at city hall. It's ridiculous.
The process of completing this contract is being handled by the city attorney, city manager, etc. It is legal. The contractural terms satisfy legal requirements. The process is "legit" as stated. And being legit is what we want. You have no reasonable basis for questioning the integrity of city council, city manager, or city attorney. It's just ludicrous for you to do so.
Finally, council members are perfectly free to speak their personal opinion about favoring the parks bond referendum. In all the years I've been involved in these matters I've never seen such absurd statements challenging free speech.
Calling this "shilling" or "reprehensible" etc. Is outrageous and offensive. I cannot believe the statements being made.
Rob Augustine
That first paragraph was response to Bob Fiscella. Other two paragraphs for Chip. Just so you don't think I'm lumping you in with Chip, Bob F. /Rob
Tech won. Stanford just won. 3 OT's. Dawgs won. Good day. Good night.
Rob,
I appreciate your response, but I think you are missing the point of my question.
It is not whether council acted within the law (quite frankly I don't know), but did it live up to the transparency that it has preached since we became a city.
We all complained for years about DeKalb County making decisions without public input (you may remember Vernon Jones), I don't want our city council to act in the same manner. In this instance, whether legal or not, it did. Without question.
The council waited until the very last minute to put it on the agenda, not allowing the public to have its voice heard (this has nothing to do with private executive session).
I didn't like it when Vernon Jones did it, I don't like it when our own council does it.
We, as citizens of Dunwoody, deserve better.
Respectfully,
Bob
Rob:
since we're in to quoting other bloggers, let me offer a thought mentioned on another blog:
"Councilman Ross said 50% of the calls to the Dunwoody police were from the PCID, when are we going to make an offer to buy Perimeter Mall and flatten it for parks?"
If the City wanted to buy Perimeter Mall for umpteen million dollars, you're saying we could enter into a contract to do that on the Q-T, perfectly legitimate, and you'd be happy with that, too?
There is a difference between buying vacant properties and occupied properties. Following your logic, I presume the City is quietly proceeding with offering purchase agreements on the two or three houses at the corner of Tilly Mill, N.Peachtree, and Peeler that will be needed to improve the intersection.
If the City can acquire these properties, without eminent domain, then citizen input won't be required.
That's not "foreign government" that's more akin to benevolent dictatorship, Rob.
And, don't make me quote John Rawls to you, either.
Well, why did I think you were going to disagree with what I said?
I support our city council. Their actions on the parks is very desirable and will benefit Dunwoody. We should all support the parks bonds and VOTE YES ON NOVEMBER 8th.
Click your ruby slippers together as much as you want Rob, it still ain't gonna happen. Dunwoody is too occupied by "smart" people to vote yes on these bonds.
Lá iontach in Éirinn!
"Michael D. Higgins, a veteran left-wing politician, poet and human rights activist, was declared the winner Saturday of Ireland's presidential election with nearly 57 percent of votes, and pledged to lift the spirits of a struggling nation."
Perhaps now Dunwoody knows exactly where it can pluck up its own poet to lead them from the current mobocracy and entropy...
Yes, write in Gary Ray Betz for Dunwoody Mayor, agus beidh sé ina lá mór i Dunwoody!!!
It would appear that somebody needs to get back in touch with his AA sponsor.
Hey, WiseAcre, not that I've ever been referred to as Gary "Germane" Ray, but just how pertinent was that comment?
And if you are attempting to quell my unsanctioned and unceremonious mayoral campaign, please know that I adhere to the adage -
"I'd rather be damn'd than ignored!"
So, please do keep up the rattling and the prattling - no skin off my big fat butt!
Council already is planning the bond victory celebration. Will be combined with the start of the fund for those people being moved to a better place and better life. Mayor has promised help to those being "displaced"
Fund name is
Dunwoody Comprehensive Relocation Assistance Program
also known as D CRAP
The compassionate mayor who apologized for the Dunwoody Community and all Council members who voted for the bond issue are each committed to give mega-bucks. But of whose money? Theirs?
And I haven't seen anyone ask yet what the COST of the "relocation assistance" will be? That, plus all the other expenses (like demolition of the apartments) which have not been openly discussed, other than Warren's admission of this fact when questioned at Council meeting, is giving me hallucinations of my checkbook dancing around dollar signs $$$$$$$$$$....
@GaryRayBetz, please don't think that my comments were that of contemptible criticism! It was only with admiration that I wrote.
I just had to comment as lately your posts on this site and those on your own blog are all over the place in opinion and tone. It's almost though you have become a nihilist or more aptly - a solipsist, that if you closed your eyes the world would disappear.
My substance abuse analogy was only to describe my experience of your random raillery. In fact to continue on that posit, it's as though you lost your mind. Like you dropped a tab of acid that had dropped acid itself, and then that acid tab went and snatched up your brain, but after it came down, forgot where it placed it.
So, it was with the sincerest veneration that I commented on your doings, as I think it simply incredible that anyone with a vacant vertex could be so expressive. :)
@GaryRayBetz, please don't think that my comments were that of contemptible criticism. It was only with admiration that I wrote.
I just had to comment as lately your posts on this site and on your own blog are all over the place in opinion and tone. It's almost though you have become a nihilist or more aptly - a solipsist, that if you closed your eyes the world would disappear.
My substance abuse analogy was only to describe my experience of your random raillery. In fact to continue on that vein, it's as though you lost your mind. Like you dropped a tab of acid that had dropped acid itself, and then that acid tab went and snatched up your brain, but after it came down, forgot where it placed it.
So, it was only with the sincerest veneration that I commented on your doings, as I think it simply incredible that anyone with a vacant vertex could be so expressive. :)
So, WiseAcre, perhaps I have indeed lost my mind, and that is why I view the world in a blanched dulcet aura now, but how is that any concern of yours?
Listen, I don't know you from Adam, but I do know who you are, and I would suggest that instead of making a pastime of pestering this poor old soul, you work on finishing that degree in literature, as I'm sure there is a position at Walmart awaiting you.
Rob will never get it. His head is...well never mind.
Never have I heard someone so blindly support an issue and a proedure that was so obviously flawed.
Flaws be damned, we need ball fields.
http://www.dunwoodyfarmerbob.com/2011/11/sailing-into-wind.html
At least we can thank Russ Limbaugh for exposing what every ring-wing Republican thinks of every woman (which could be your wife, grandchild, or daughter) who uses contraception - a slut.
Kind of like a Jeffrey Wigand moment, only for Republicans this time not the tobacco industry - a full documentation of what everyone already knew was a Republican platform.
Russ Limbaugh in his full moronic glory:
"What does it say about the college co-ed [Sandra] Fluke, who goes before a congressional committee and essentially says she must be paid to have sex?" Rush Limbaugh asked. "What does that make her? It makes her a slut, right? It makes her a prostitute. She wants to be paid to have sex. She's having so much sex she can't afford the contraception. She wants you and me and the taxpayers to pay her to have sex."
"Limbaugh concluded his sexist rant by insisting that if women want their contraception covered, they should post pornographic videos of themselves online. "So Miss Fluke and the rest of you feminazis, here's the deal," he said. "If we are going to pay for your contraceptives and thus pay for you to have sex, we want something. We want you to post the videos online so we can all watch."
Post a Comment