This is an interesting thing in today's America and like most other things it is divisive, or perhaps simply reflects baseline divisiveness in society. It is even more interesting here in Dunwoody.
Before the city referendum was passed Dunwoody had an identity. And it was a good one. So good that nearby locations adopted "Dunwoody" in their name to add a certain cachet otherwise missing. There are still quite a few subdivisions and apartments in neighboring cities carrying a Dunwoody label. This character was comfortable, convenient within the community and accessible to things like work and entertainment without the annoyance of those being on top of you. It was suburban. Largely single family with an enthusiastic support for that place identity. People wanted to move here, to live here for the location, the convenience and the inherent stability. But it was suburban.
Then the city rolled in. With it came bureaucrats who run the city and elected officials who have no operational responsibility, capability or accountability, and who are prohibited by law from attempting to exert or influence any of these. The bureaucrats, often not from here and many not living here, are driven by their own priorities or the priorities of outside influences by way of funding from other government entities and grants. If there is a grant, or state or federal funding to do something then that is what they will do, without any regard for the wishes of the folks who sought Dunwoody out as THE place they wanted to live because of THE place that it was. The promises made before the city was chartered have been washed away by organizational greed.
It isn't clear if city hall is its own echo chamber (it probably is), or if they are cult-like in following the Shining PATH Foundation (seem to be), or if they just thought the voters had dumbed-down (or just gotten wiser), but their vague, flimsy excuse of a funding referendum went down. Hard. And they seem clueless and their acolytes have resorted to divisive pejoratives in [anti]social media. Perhaps, if they are smarter than everyone else, as they seem to believe, they can gain an understanding of their failure by studying an article on the left's failure to comprehend rural Americans, a demographic upon whom they liberally heap their pejoratives. They might find, and should ponder, things like this:
...consider how rural voters' choices are frequently rooted in values and place-based identities that place a strong emphasis on self-reliance, local control and a profound sense of injustice regarding the lack of recognition for rural contributions to society.
[emphasis added, and perhaps read "rural" as "Dunwoodians"]. What has baffled the left is that rural voters are choosing those who have demonstrated they will send less outside money to rural areas because the left has little comprehension of or toleration for self-reliance and local control. They don't understand why they cannot simply buy these peoples' votes. Here in Dunwoody those in operational control of the city cannot fathom why we would turn away outsiders' money if all we have to do to get it is, well, whatever these outsiders want us to do. That is because city hall no longer understands that the voters who supported this city wanted self-reliance and freedom from outside control, and that is what they were promised. A promise that has been broken.
Posts
