patching...
Welcome back, Patch Blogger!

Should BrookhavenYES Officials Seek Public Office?

Patch wants to know your opinion.

 


During Monday night's live chat with BrookhavenYES, an item came up for discussion that has been a frequent topic for debate.

During the chat, BrookhavenYES president J. Max Davis was repeatedly asked about his political future, if any, should cityhood pass on July 31. While he said he has not decided to run for mayor or any public office, he also clarified that BrookhavenYES board members can seek municipal office if they choose.

On Tuesday, Davis clarified the matter further for Patch.

"Nothing in our BrookhavenYES by-laws says we cannot run," he said. "We just can't politic while board members or use our board position in any way to promote or even talk about a personal run for office. The only people barred from running are current members of the Georgia legislature."

So, if Brookhaven cityhood passes, any of the officers or board members of BrookhavenYES could run for city council or mayor.

Does this affect your opinion on the pros and cons of cityhood? Do you believe BrookhavenYES officials should be allowed to run for office, or should each member of the organization's leadership agree to recuse themselves from seeking an elective position?

Take our Patch poll and post your comments.

  • If cityhood passes, should BrookhavenYES officials recuse themselves from seeking municipal office?

    (Voting has been closed for this question)
    • Yes. I'd feel better about cityhood if they did.
        34 (22%)
    • No. They're the leaders of this effort, and should be allowed to serve if they want.
        33 (22%)
    • I don't care. I'm voting NO on July 31.
        82 (55%)
    Total votes: 149
  • Your vote will only count once. This is not a scientific poll. View Results Vote!
About this column: News and information about politics in our community. Related Topics: Brookhaven Incorporation

Grieg Ericsson

7:24 am on Wednesday, June 27, 2012

Tim,
Every new city that has formed in the recent past we have seen the Yes leaders run and obtain public office. The question is not should they. The question is WHEN will they fess up to all of us that their plans have been from day one to create their empire and run it?! What a mess they have put us in. Whew. I have never seen a larger divide created in our community. It's really sad.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Eddie E.

8:05 am on Wednesday, June 27, 2012

Roger,
No intention of moving, or voting for any misguided municipalization attempts.

Comment_arrow

GuruLikeDrucker

7:32 am on Thursday, June 28, 2012

Eddie E. Fortunately for us you don't live in the proposed city limits and you wont be voting on this issue.

Comment_arrow

Eddie E.

8:37 am on Thursday, June 28, 2012

Guru,
Proof that you are wrong about more than just the Opposed City!

Comment_arrow

don Gabacho

10:26 am on Thursday, June 28, 2012

"Nothing in our BrookhavenYES by-laws says we cannot run"...The only people barred from running are current members of the Georgia legislature." ----J. Max Davis

Incredible! It is BrookhavenYes' "By-Laws" that rules!

"The only people barred to run by BrookhavenYes' rules," "members of the Georgia legislature, are those who should have been barred from being members of BrookhavenYes to begin with. In regard to BrookhavenYes member-lawyers (be they consgressman also or not), isn't it high time to find out just what the "rules" of the Georgia Bar Association must be?

Greg Trinkle

7:56 am on Wednesday, June 27, 2012

I don't have an issue with them running for office (It is kind of expected
If the city comes to pass, I think the first law/charter on the books should prevent any of the 5 elected officials from personally benefitting from any of the “City Services contracted out to private companies.”
This doesn’t just mean recues oneself from voting on the specific service being bid on by one's own company. This city is not to be formed so that our elected officals can make a mint off it from their own private business interests. If you are an elected offical, you are not doing business with the city.
If you want to do business with the city, you don't run for office.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Enuff Govt Already

8:05 am on Wednesday, June 27, 2012

The former city atty for our model city comes to mind.

Comment_arrow

Eddie E.

8:10 am on Wednesday, June 27, 2012

Now if we only knew who the C4ND contributors were, we could get a good clear idea of who WOULD benefit handily from an accidental city (and intended to do so from the beginning).

Thomas T Telford

9:10 am on Wednesday, June 27, 2012

Unfortunately, there seems to be far more opportunity out there than ability....We should remember that good fortune often happens when opportunity meets with preparation.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Eddie E.

11:37 am on Wednesday, June 27, 2012

Thomas,
The 'opportunity' is for the prospective contractors and would be kings to soak the uninformed citizens.

The 'preparation' is limited to the snake-oil sales job.

Eric Hovdesven

1:44 pm on Wednesday, June 27, 2012

While I have absolutely no problems with the Yes leaders running and winning positions I think its a mistake to assume we will have the same experience as other cities. After all this is the first incorporation that's had well financed and organized opposition.

As you no folks say this ain't Dunwoody.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Thomas T Telford

1:53 pm on Wednesday, June 27, 2012

Eric,
You are correct. Please read this. Agree or not, some very good writing and some good points.

http://nonewcity.org/2012/06/05/step-5-admitting-to-ourselves-and-others-that-we-are-not-dunwoody/

Comment_arrow

Eric Hovdesven

2:04 pm on Wednesday, June 27, 2012

Ha! Thomas you call that good writing its such emotional drivel with little relevance to the main points for or against Cityhood.

This page was one of the things that pushed me off the fence in favor of Brookhaven.

YES YES YES
-Everyone knows the City of Brookhaven will not be Dunwoody.
-Everyone knows we have a higher ratio of residential to commercial - but this doesn't necessarily undermine fiscal viability, especially now that the state law was changed to assure HOST equalization payments to Brookhaven.
-Everyone knows that we have a higher poverty rate than Dunwoody. But the CVI used formulas that estimated many of the revenues based on unincorporated DeKalb which has a higher poverty rate than the proposed city of Brookhaven, so this means if anything revenues are understated.
- And yes everyone knows we are far more diverse than Dunwoody but I happen to think that's a great thing and if that's a problem for you then I feel sorry for you.

Comment_arrow

Eric Hovdesven

2:09 pm on Wednesday, June 27, 2012

But the one thing the blog forgot to mention is that we are like Dunwoody in that the proposed city of Brookhaven shares a border with Dunwoody, is in DeKalb like Dunwoody, is proposing the same services as Dunwoody, is the same geographic size as Dunwoody, has a slightly larger but similar population as Dunwoody and as a slightly lower but similar amount of lane miles as the city of Dunwoody and used the same institution, CVI, to do its feasibility study.

So what does that mean? Well Thomas, it means the Dunwoody experience offers a valuable lesson for our city and it validates the analysis the CVI study did.

I'll let others twist the Peachtree Corners experience.

Comment_arrow

Thomas T Telford

2:24 pm on Wednesday, June 27, 2012

Eric,
Just your opinion. I thought it was good. I am sure if it were pro city you would sing a different tune. OK. Whatever. One minute you make sense, the next you don't. Waste of time. Do you have a job, sir? Here is a link the BrookhavenYes leadership may find useful. http://goo.gl/yyzuN

Comment_arrow

HamBurger

3:01 pm on Wednesday, June 27, 2012

Gee . . . I hope “m”, “not”, “Roger That” etc, (Mr. Clayton) sees your link, I think he could use it . . .

Please pass the yellow mustard!

Comment_arrow

Eric Hovdesven

3:05 pm on Wednesday, June 27, 2012

Sorry sir Telford guess I was disappointed that a Scottish civil engineer wouldn't immediately recognize superfluous language and emotion and the lack of substance and meaningful relevance of that blog. As I said everyone knows Brookhaven isn't Dunwoody. In fact I know many people who over the years moved inside 285 for that very reason!

Now your link about summer jobs did make me chuckle. That did have some cleverness to it.

Comment_arrow

Dean

3:46 pm on Wednesday, June 27, 2012

That blog post is jut more of the same from the no no crowd...Slinging more FearUncertaintyandDoubt...with little to no fact.

Comment_arrow

Grieg Ericsson

4:31 pm on Wednesday, June 27, 2012

Sir Dean,
If you took the time to read carefully, you will see that there is backup for the points in that article - in that article. You love the use of FUD. Funny how it always top of mind for you. Are we a bit insecure? Appears so. And here's a link just for you.:)
Please pay close attention to it. It will help you understand your FUD fetish.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2dffSFujyg

Comment_arrow

HamBurger

6:39 pm on Wednesday, June 27, 2012

Mr. Grieg, what a great video!

Dean, Dean, the F. U. D machine!

Would you like some more thin sliced onions?

Comment_arrow

Eddie E.

8:24 am on Thursday, June 28, 2012

Dean,
As stated before:
I fear nothing.
I am certain this is a stupid and vain idea.
I doubt the supporters of the Opposed City will stop whining when the are trounced.

not one of 60

3:44 pm on Wednesday, June 27, 2012

Commissioner Rader also states, "the loss of revenue can hurt the county financially, causing a problem for the South DeKalb residents, who cannot afford to lose the revenue. Unfortunately, the residents of South DeKalb cannot vote, which is unfortunate because the loss of revenue will affect them also.”

TRANSLATION #2: RADAR WON'T GET ANY DEVELOPER CAMPAINGN CASH! No money! No power. No Zoning! No power! No Sembler. Such a LOSER! Even Dekalb's North Comm suck...

Reply
Comment_arrow

Eddie E.

5:16 pm on Wednesday, June 27, 2012

Of course I doubt Commissioner Rader is disturbed.

He can read a poll as good as anyone else.

Comment_arrow

City Yes

5:23 pm on Wednesday, June 27, 2012

Eddie - If you think the polls on the Patch are correct, I've got some Florida swamp land to sell you. You can vote on Patch polls as many times as you like - it is an unscientific poll. I am sure you and Hamburger spend most of your day clicking that no button. I guess it beats the alternative things you can do with your hands since you clearly have too much time on them.....

Comment_arrow

Eddie E.

8:19 am on Thursday, June 28, 2012

Opposed City Yes,
You know full well what I am talking about.
I just hope you guys heads don't explode when you see just HOW BADLY you lose.

Comment_arrow

not one of 60

9:33 am on Thursday, June 28, 2012

Corrupt elections...no suprise in Dekalb!

Comment_arrow

Grieg Ericsson

10:56 am on Thursday, June 28, 2012

Clayton,
Is BrookhavenYes planning a corrupt election?

Comment_arrow

not one of 60

11:09 am on Thursday, June 28, 2012

Dekalb County controls the Worker Bee minion counters!

Expecting, corruption there, YES.

What I am for is in independent outsider evaluation of the vote. Can you stand the heat of honesty: you NO loser's cannot!

HamBurger

7:51 pm on Wednesday, June 27, 2012

Looks like Peachtree Corners has some continuing issues . . . This is my favorite comment:

"Start up costs were not included in the CVI," said Mason which he pointed out explained part of the increase in the budget. Other items including setting aside money for legal expenses, were another of many items not figured in to the CVI study. "Everybody sues a new city," said Mason in explaining the $131,000 for legal fees outlined in the budget.

http://peachtreecorners.patch.com/articles/city-council-budget-meeting

Surely, in the absence of Rep. Mike Jacobs, Mr. Eric has an answer for this FUBAR . . . Or, as our beloved Mr. Dean would say, FUD . . .

Rep Jacobs, where are you?

Special hamburger anyone?

Reply
Comment_arrow

not one of 60

8:37 pm on Wednesday, June 27, 2012

Peactree corners is a slum suburb as in most people don't want the old McMansion model anymore. They want live work play, Buford hwy will redevelop nicely with light rail divided landscape medians and much greater tax base! Loves the mighty dollar!

Comment_arrow

Eric Hovdesven

12:25 am on Thursday, June 28, 2012

CVI has a legal budget and start up cost for the City of Brookhaven. And a $100,000 call center for a city that was supposed to have a $800,000 start up cost? or a $30,000 moving expense and $25,000 401k contribution for a city manager of a $800,000 city? sounds like that city should have a part time temp for city manager.

Come on what's going on in PC can't be used to discredit the CVI for Brookhaven. Though it is proof to not put too high a millage rate in the Charter because the first folks in will soak it up. Sort of like the school board.

Comment_arrow

Eddie E.

8:22 am on Thursday, June 28, 2012

Eric,
Odd that you didn't assign a figure for the 'legal budget'.
It would barely pay for a city attorney and would be absorbed with the first (of many likely) challenges.
Another example of grand, misplaced hubris.
Let's get to August first so the entire Opposed City will just be a bad memory.

Comment_arrow

HamBurger

8:31 am on Thursday, June 28, 2012

Mr. Eric, the point is there seems to be a colossal disconnect between:

1 – The Peachtree Corners Vinson study.
2 – The expectations of the citizens.
3 – The desires of the PC YES/elected officials.

The results are that the Peachtree Corners citizenry is infuriated with what is little more than a glorified HOA gone awry.

Not that the Vinson study for Brookhaven matters as it relates to HB 636, but it is not a complete, updated study. The folks foisting this new city idea upon us are playing their hand very close the vest just like they have since its inception. Additionally, we have absolutely no knowledge of just who will be running for elected office to guide this new city until it is passed. Let’s not kid ourselves, there seems to be a lot of folks all over that are not interested in this new city.

And, where is Rep. Mike Jacobs? He has been curiously absent in recent weeks.

Man! What a wonderful day for special hamburgers!

Comment_arrow

Grieg Ericsson

9:01 am on Thursday, June 28, 2012

Eric,
Get some sleep bro. :)

Comment_arrow

not one of 60

11:10 am on Thursday, June 28, 2012

Sorry but less money for you NOers to mis-use! Roger...Greg et al!

Grieg Ericsson

8:18 am on Thursday, June 28, 2012

Clayton,
PLEASE DO ride your bike down the center of Peachtree.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Eddie E.

8:23 am on Thursday, June 28, 2012

I'm having flashbacks of Lester Maddox on the Capitol steps.

Comment_arrow

HamBurger

8:51 am on Thursday, June 28, 2012

Little known fact, Neal Boortz was his speech writer . . .

Clayton, don’t forget your helmet!

Pass the yellow mustard!

Comment_arrow

Grieg Ericsson

9:50 am on Thursday, June 28, 2012

Clayton,
Just in case you are confused, we live in DeKalb County. Not Fulton County. FYI.

Comment_arrow

not one of 60

11:06 am on Thursday, June 28, 2012

All counties should divide sales taxes equitably amongst its users...IDOIT! Or would you rather all of the Brookhaven tax money FLOW South...dumb da dumb dumb dumb!

Leave a comment