Jump to content
I don't think it should be a re-opening, I think it should be a GRAND reopening. Let's see what we can do.
Anyone who wonders why there is such divisiveness on the Snellville City Council need only review the video from last night's meeting. Consider that the questions asked by Kelly Kautz and Mike Sabbagh were obvious attempts to discredit the Veterans Memorial and the people who are working so hard to make it a reality. For Kautz and Sabbagh, it would have been a political misstep to vote against the Memorial as such a vote would have been an insult to the people the Memorial is honoring. Consequently, they attempted to cloak what I can describe only as trite and stupid questions, as points of legitimate concern. As an example, after Memorial committee members Chad Smith and Bob McCann explained the Memorial will be built with brick and stone that matches those used on City Hall and the Senior Center, Sabbagh asked how long they expected the monument to be standing. The only two reasons I can think of to ask such a question is ignorance or a deliberate attempt to discredit the volunteers who have designed the monument (or both).
The design of the monument has been public for almost a year, so Sabbagh certainly had time to research the durability of brick and stone, and raise any questions he may have had. Instead, he chose a public meeting to ask those questions in an apparent attempt to embarrass members of the Memorial Committee and members of Council who openly support them. Ironically, judging by the giggles from the audience, it appears that the only person Sabbagh embarrassed is himself. However, in so doing, he simply drove another wedge into an already divided Council.
All the laws that can be implemented won't change one basic fact-- "Throughout history, and across all national boundaries, whether possession of a firearm is legal or illegal, one fact stands out-- criminals ALWAYS have guns." (Excerpted from- http://cuttothe-chase.com/2013/04/03/criminals-always-have-guns/)
Kevin- You're correct, changing an ordinance doesn't take very long. Doing the research necessary to assure that such ordinances are in compliance with state and federal requirements is an entirely different matter. If you would like to offer your assistance in wading through the pile of federal and state documents that must be evaluated before changing our ordinance, please contact me. And perhaps you can also uncover the source of "under the table money" that you think exists. I'm sure the district attorney's office has an interest in such matters.
Snillville City Council, Post 1
On current tax bills, storm water fees are broken out as "assessments", however, they are included with taxes within "Grand total Due This Billing" on the bottom line. That can and has caused some confusion amongst taxpayers, but the larger problem is restriction of citizen rights. Since HB 159 hasn't yet become law, its financial impact is a matter of conjecture. But financial considerations should not take precedence over citizen rights and options. Under the current system, a resident has no recourse if any of the services included on his or her tax bill are substandard. If the taxpayer elects to withhold payment as a means of encouraging disputed issues to be resolved, a lien will be placed against the subject property.
Citizens should have the ability to hold service providers accountable, even if those providers are contracted by or administered by government entities. HB 159 will ensure that they do.
Thanks for the thoughts. I believe the citizens of Snellville are far more deserving of your sympathies than I am. When I decided to run for City Council, I knew that we would have to deal with shameless grandstanding and political posturing if Kautz became mayor. I didn't anticipate the depth of what I consider to be a bottomless cesspool of lies and deceptive practices. However, I did sign up to serve the citizens of Snellville, and if that requires dealing with the carnival I think Kautz has created, so be it; we're still getting good things done for the city.It is unfortunate, however, that members of Council have to spend so much time dealing with needless and counter-productive drama when we could be devoting that time to positive activities.
In addition to bringing a food donation to the Christmas Tree lighting, you can also make a donation to the CoOp through "Give Hunger the Boot" collection bins at O'Charley's and Texas Roadhouse in Snellville. When you donate at O'Charley's, you'll receive a free appetizer. Texas Roadhouse also has a special Give Hunger the Boot promotion to benefit the Southeast CoOp.
Just so there is no confusion (a few folks here appear to have problems with reading comprehension) I am a member of the Snellville City Council, and I Tom Witts is not only a fellow council member, but also a friend.
I attended the "press conference" because I wanted to support Tom. I knew there was no basis for the allegations because Tom had fully discussed the issue on a number of occasions in the past, But when a "hired gun' comes to town, you don't know what's going to happen. That thought proved to be very prophetic. The "hired gun" turned out to be a circus side show act that relied on a BB gun that fired blanks.
From what I could see, George Anderson is a doddering old man who is sorely in need of money. He has no other visible source of income, his wife is no longer employed, and he has stated that he earns about $4,000 a month filing ethics complaints. Frankly, after listening to him prattle on about the speaker of the house, the current and former governor, the Georgia legislature, the buffet at the Carl Vinson Institute and a host of other irrelevant subjects, I'm surprised-- not only that anyone would hire him, but that he found his way from Rome to Snellville.
So what we have is a pathetic attempt by what appears to be a financially challenged "investigator" to discredit an honorable, forthright person. Which brings up the question, "Who hired him?" Connect the dots- the only people in attendance other than Witts supporters were Emmett Clower, Robert Jenkins and Wayne Odum, a couple of reporters, and two spectators who seemed to be there to gather information for a third party.
I invite anyone who is having difficulty connecting the dots to contact me. Once you see the documentation, the picture immediately becomes very clear. I'm not talking about smoke and mirror statements, pre-packaged conclusions or the ramblings of a semi-lucid "investigator" who has clearly been off his medication for too long-- I'm talking about videos, police reports and e-mails that are public record. When you review factual documentation, the dots almost connect themselves. And the picture they create shows three stooges up front and a fourth lurking in the shadows.
The core problems with the Briscoe Field privatization effort are that the true projected economic impact isn't known, the true projected environmental impact isn't known and the true feelings of a majority of the citizens isn't known. That hasn't stopped people on both sides of the issue from acting as if they had all the answers. The fact that they don't, won't stop chatter about privatization. If nothing else, every campaign season for the next few years, at least one candidate will claim, "My opponent plans to privatize the airport".
The BOC did the right thing by voting against privatization because they didn't have enough valid information to even consider voting in favor of it. But until airport privatization is competently researched and the information formally presented, and the issue is decided by the voters, my bet is that this political football is going to be kicked around for quite a few years.
I see some SWILs are at work here, attempting to discredit an outstanding attorney with proven integrity while hiding behind a veneer of made up names. For those of you who are ethically unenlightened, on the off chance that a conflict should arise, Mr. Powell would recuse himself from the issue and the city would be served by another attorney. If "MissDaisyCook" is truly concerned about Mr/ Powell's choice of fiduciary duty, I suggest she or he contact me, and I'll arrange a meeting with Mr. Powell so that he/she can discuss his/her concerns in person.
As a member of the Snellville City Council, I have a bit of perspective on what seems to be the never-ending saga of "Adventures in City Attorney Land". Mr. Powell served the best interests of Snellville's citizens in the past, and I have no doubt that he will do so in the future. Mr. Powell is not the issue here, rather it's the turmoil caused when the music stops and the game being played is "Musical City Attorneys".
Last login: Wednesday, December 4, 2013