When a lawyer cannot make a case they pound the table. This seems to be in the hopes that the loudest, perhaps even the most outrageous will win. Hell, it worked once for Trump, maybe it will work for you.
With the parks referendum we are back to the same place we were with the citihood referendum. On the one side are those insisting that we just must have this money but offering fairly weak transparency. Yes, the city has a "vision" and a "master plan" but have not given a detailed, prioritized list of exactly what they intend to spend this money on. And it is all or none, take it or leave it. To be fair, all of their masterplans include the need for consultants to help them come up with an operational plan: the one that is actually executed. So when you need outside help to plan how to plan don't expect much of the master plan beyond statements of "wouldn't this be cool" and "yes, this is gonna cost lots of money, but it's for the future, for your kids and grandkids." Honestly they may still be paying off the debt (Pew slots us all into 18 year generations, and just wait, someone will use the phrase "generational opportunity" if they haven't already). Because the case for "give us $60M today which will cost you $90M+ over time and a 53% tax increase" is not universally compelling they've fallen back on the tried and true: demean your opposition.
 |
| DONT should really be DON'T |
There are some problems with this. It suggests that any criticism of their desires must come from some crusty curmudgeons, nattering nabobs of negativity. If that's true this may backfire as it might piss them off enough to come down from the balcony and vote. Not your way. It ignores the possibility that nabobs may see the similarity between the most recent eSPLOST and this referendum. Lack of specificity, an implicit "you must trust us" vibe, and the ever popular "it's for the children." Combine this with the structural similarities between the school system and the city and it is hard not to throw up just a little bit in your mouth when you hear these proposals. Memory and juxtaposition is a bitch. And worst is the false implication that if you're against this referendum then you are against parks. This is a deception, a lie. It is also a tactic. And not one befitting the kind of intelligent discourse voters in Dunwoody deserve.
Posts
