Adult Supervision

It is hard to know whether to laugh or cry. The city has done it again. Implicitly acknowledging that city hall is lacking in core competencies council has unanimously voted to spend $117,500 on consultants to tell the city manager what to do about dysfunctional police command. Seems the city's army of bureaucrats can't get their heads around this so hiring someone with the sense god gave a pigeon to "sit" on a statue makes a silly, Dunwoody kinda sense. 

But the real kick in the crotch is where they got the money. Turns out unassigned monies from the general fund. WTF! Is this a bucket of mad money? And if they have money lying around why, why, did they have up the millage rate on top of the never ending tax increases? WTF are we really paying for? Bureaucrats who self-assess their abilities at levels that require expensive outside help? And they told us this city was going to be fiscally prudent and well managed. What. A. Whopper.

Family Feud...

...you know, as in "Survey Says." Recently someone at City Taj Mahal kicked off just that. Who exactly did this or pushed for it is unknown, about as unknown as details on who actually completed the survey. Online surveys are built like that. And here is a real shocker: the survey says everyone wants the Village Overlay gutted and they really want the area to look like Canton Street in Roswell. Georgia. Just like the mayor has always waxed poetic about. Now it may be that a lot of respondents actually live in Roswell and like it. Maybe a few folk filled out the survey many, many times. Online surveys are built like that. Now if the City really wants to know what we think there would be a referendum on the upcoming ballot. Don't hold your breath.

So the mayor loves Roswell and yet, doesn't live there. Seems fixable.

Nonetheless there is much this city can learn from our neighbor to the north. First would be signs and code enforcement. Up north, you better get your sign approved, apply that sticker, or you are going to get fined. Hefty fine at that. Oh, and this is not just a do as I say, pretty please, these folks really will come to your home or place of business and write you a citation. They also have traffic enforcement. And not just right on Canton Street, but even in the neighborhoods where people live and kids play. Not only do they enforce truck zones they are notorious for keeping a lid on infractions as minor as rolling thru a stop sign. Don't even think about that illegal u-turn. Oh, and those construction sites and trucks? Thinking about tracking some mud on that city's streets, well, think again. Do that and you are going to get a very large fine. So what happens when ordinances are actually enforced? People obey the law. And the city is a nicer place.

So maybe instead of taking dictation from developers who insist on reworking the overlay to look like Canton Street maybe the mayor and council could focus on the important things that actually make a real city. If they focused on that then perhaps what follows wouldn't be just superficial appearances.

Red Capers and Bulls' Spit

First they ignore you,
Then they laugh at you,
Then they fight you,
Then you win.
--Mahatma Gandhi*

Given what's been posted lately on some of the well respected Dunwoody blogs it would appear that Dunwoody's very own Red Shirts are well into the third phase and we're still a few weeks from the polls. They could go all the way.

The original source of the Red Shirts' discomfiture was the feeling that they were ignored which in their minds fell far short of the promise of small government and local control. Or perhaps they didn't realize that even with local control that real power rests with the self-chosen few. They didn't spend much time in the High School cafeteria did they?

Then they started making appearances at Council during the public comment sessions. You know--engage the system. They were snickered at by Council and generally derided on blogs and in the local print media. They did get in some of their own digs but when decorum is shattered by snide comments and giggles from Council it is not a fair fight. But then again incumbency never fights fair.

Now the Red Shirts are being excoriated in the blogosphere for using what appear to be exactly the same tactics used by Dunwoody Yes! and Citizens for Dunwoody back in the pre-referendum days. Anyone who attended those so-called forums and information sessions know they were as fair and balanced as a homecoming pep rally. Citihood proponents hardly displayed any mental agility as they were preaching to the choir and since when did witty repartee replace thoughtful statesmanship as a qualification for governance? And we'll not here rehash the withholding of key information by the pro-city groups prior to the referendum. But in today's blog-bashings what is of particular note is the suggestion that the Red Shirts are copying off each other's crib notes when in fact it is the Red Letter bloggers who write in lockjaw lock step as was often the case in the march to citihood. Perhaps great minds do think alike or perhaps it is a form of high-brow humour. Or maybe some folks just never outgrew the High School cafeteria.

That is indeed the common thread running thru our revolutionary days of change and into our new found love of the status quo--it has always been about the status quo. There has always been a power structure in Dunwoody and now that the City is incorporated this power has been extended beyond mere watchdog to conduit for elected City officials and singular platform for successful candidacy. The Red Shirts neglected to genuflect before them and receive the broad sword's tap on their shoulder.

The blogosphere's reaction indicates the Red Shirts are perceived as a legitimate threat to this long established status quo but it is yet to be seen if they will make it to the end of the path described by Gandhi. This time.

* Mahatma Gandhi, born 2 Oct 1869.

Hoisted on His Own Petard

Reports from a recent council meeting indicate the basis for the vote to defer the vote to dismiss the City Attorney, was, according to the Mayor, "because we have not received the report yet, we as a group decided to defer until we could review it".

Were that we, the mere citizens of Dunwoody, afforded that courtesy prior to the cityhood referendum. As you may or may not remember there were several "Task Forces" chartered to draft reports and plans for key areas of city operation. To be very clear, none of these were released to the public prior to the vote. We did not get to read nor review these reports, but instead were sent to the polls with much conjecture, ballyhoo and hype.

The responsible party for maintaining this cloak of secrecy? That would be "Citizens For Dunwoody". And who is a corporate officer of that non-profit? Well that would be Captain Petard, who seems to play a star role in yet another yet to be released report. At least those determining his fate will have the luxury of reviewing this report prior to their vote.

Some folks get all the luck.

Brookford Ashaven

The staged formation of Dunwoody hit its high point early in the first scene with the orgasmic screams of "yes, Yes, YES!" from our yellowed-tagged evangelists caught up in an artificial, but no less frenzied Pon Farr. By the end of the first act of their convoluted adaptation, the lust was sated, and the muddled second act punished the audience with the antics of two parties who found themselves in a permanent, but ungratifying union they neither liked nor respected. While scenes offered great tragic theatre, the outcome for Dunwoody has become much like a tattoo, a painful, increasingly embarrassing, but permanent reminder of a temporary feeling.

The audience seated to the south end of our theatre of the absurd, perhaps more mature or simply less hedonistic, have little enthusiasm for our prurient display of the political quickie, back alley knee knocker or our pimped out political prostitutes. They seem to have a less than favorable view of the brothel franchises,  "Citizens for where ever" and "over here YES!" that stage our plays.

Though plagued by similar sounding troupes, they hope to put on a different play, one where long after the memory of that first night mellows to a soft patina, a meaningful relationship grows, demonstrating the enduring value of gratification rather than celebrating the fleeting satisfaction of an animalistic urge. They are not inclined to stage "Oh! Calcutta!" but are more interested in an adaptation of "Fiddler on the Roof".

And yes, the representatives of their troupes make out nicely whether the play is a raging success or miserable flop. But to the thespians' credit, the prospective partners in this adaptation are less concerned about sex or wedding scenes and more about the marriage, seeking a union based on mutual respect and trust, eschewing any hasty union resulting from an intoxicating lust. They seem to understand that weltschmerz besets everyone, if they should live so long, and know time is required to build the kind of relationship that endures. Their play will not peak in Scene One, Act One.

If the folks up in Dunwoody would quit humming "Jack and Jill" and just listen, they would hear soft, sincere lyrics from the south:

"Golda? Do you love me?"

Good for Tevia. And good for Golda.

Brookhaven: Dunwoody Deja Vu

In two key regards Brookhaven is heading down the path recently paved by Dunwoody.

First is standard operating procedure for any powerful interest that wants to get their way: schedule a public vote at an inconvenient time, say the first Tuesday after the last new moon before the summer solstice. This provides the special interest with maximum benefit not just from ordinary public apathy, but also from summer distractions, vacations and outside activities. Expect them to push for a mid-summer vote where they can expect eighty percent approval from a very small turnout. And like Dunwoody, this will be done in a PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION YEAR, when fall voter turnout will be at a four year peak.  Were they patriotic supporters of this country's democratic principals the referendum would be on the general ballot, but they are more than willing to subvert our ideals to gain even a minor advantage.

The second was honed if not formulated by the Citizens for Dunwoody: form a private non-profit to run various "Task Force" efforts. These task forces were simply brilliant. They engaged people who wanted to think of themselves as  "part of the movement" and by appealing to their inflated sense of self-importance, kept them harmlessly engaged in the cause. Since the organization is PRIVATE so are all the meetings and reports. All the real shakers and movers have to do is round up the busy-bodies, teach them a secret handshake and give them some busy-work. At that point the "Task Forcers" will go press the flesh, saying asinine things like "trust me, I know, I'm on a the Task Force and the county has it all screwed up--the City will do much better". This isn't just marketing, it is prosthelytizing as it is not a matter of fact, but rather an article of faith.

It is not too late nor too early for reasoning folks in Brookhaven to take action. They should make two non-negotiable demands:

1. put the cityhood referendum on the 2012 general election ballot
2. operate the Task Forces under the legal constraints of Georgia's Open Meeting Laws and publish Task Force reports no later than six weeks before the referendum

You will be given some reasons why this just cannot happen. Any attempt to justify an "early vote" is unadulterated crap. Period. They will attempt to deflect the task force issue by using the "private corporation" shield, but as with Dunwoody, should the Brookhaven referendum pass, the Governor's office will establish an operational committee for the city between passage and first day of operation. You are only asking that the Governor's office start before the referendum.

If Mikey cannot pull these two simple things off, then perhaps his city isn't ready for prime time.

Jilly Bob

Shrill Jill, meet Farmer Bob.

Farmer Bob, meet Shrill Jill.

What Shrill Jill and Farmer Bob have in common is they ran right up against the Dunwoody Cabal and have been excoriated for it.

In the case of Shrill Jill we had a harsh voice advocating that the Cabal "make haste slowly" and advising their zombie followers of the need for and availability of more information and greater details. She was right, but she was crushed, and was figuratively "run out of town on a rail".

Farmer Bob encountered his field of Bouncing Bettys with the Parks Bonds. Though originally a supporter of the bonds he did a one eighty upon learning that an important Cabal objective was the removal of five hundred undesirable families from our community, and more importantly, to the Cabal anyway, the removal of the lower caste's children from "our" schools.

Neither Jill nor Bob were unequivocally opposed to the proposition at hand, but rather objected to the means by which the Cabal executed their plan. In the first case the objection centered around lack of transparency and inadequate disclosure of facts and estimates, and insufficient vetting of plans. In the latter case, while some objected to the lack of transparency, Farmer Bob took his stand against the plans of a powerful few to purge our community of those they unilaterally deemed unfit while sugarcoating a heinous act as "something for all our residents". While he has been credited with defeating the bonds (he didn't, the voters did) he has been vilified and subjected to ad hominem attacks in comments on local blogs.

At the polls the outcomes could hardly be more different with cityhood winning by a landslide and the Parks Bonds failing by a two to one margin. So is this the beginning of the end for the Cabal? Probably not as the Dunwoody power structure is as well established as it is incestuous. Until we have an election where candidates truly feel that a track record with DHA, Dunwoody Yes! or Citizens for Dunwoody is as much a negative as a positive, the Cabal is alive and thriving.

The Five Percent Solution

There is an old bromide along the lines of "the first solution to pollution is dilution", but when the matter at hand is socio-economic there is no acceptable solution but to separate the effluent from the affluent. Fortunately, commonly accepted practices, particularly zoning, create a physical and economic moat around the affluent and also serve tof encapsulate the effluent thereby reducing the cost of extraction and elimination.

Such is the case with Dunwoody, which proposes to eliminate a particularly odious demographic from the fringes of the relatively recently christened city. As it turns out, a majority of Dunwoody's poor, its Hispanic population, lives in a very small area. This just happens to be exactly the same location where Dunwoody leaders intend to build the city's premier recreational facility, thereby clearing up that demographic blemish.

While the demographics are well supported by our most recent census, this is not news. The maps below, based on Y2K data show 'twas always thus. Consequently this is not a recent infestation to be eradicated, nor is it likely that the City Founders, the smartest of the smart, did not know this prior to these recent plans or even before formulating plans for cityhood.

The above map shows where the white folk live. Not surprisingly, the darker green coincides with a higher percentage of whites in the population from its lowest in the area under discussion to above 95% in the area furthest from the Hispanic fringe.

The above map shows only the Hispanics and more clearly demonstrates how the city plans to eviscerate the existing community to prevent any northward spread and slow if not reverse the westward spread.

Below the bull's eye on both maps sits an apartment complex housing 2500 residents, of which approximately 580 are students in the Dunwoody cluster of DeKalb County Schools. These residents represent approximately five percent of the City's population.

Of course it isn't just about race or ethnicity, it is every bit as much about relative income and poverty. As one moves east or south from the border with Sandy Springs one sees a drop-off in home values and household income identical to the map of "white folk" distribution. A similar map of poverty is identical to the map of Hispanic demographics. The correlations between poverty and crime, or poverty and poor educational outcomes will neither be questioned nor belabored here, but simply accepted as a fact underpinning the motives of many including the most outspoken supporters of destroying these homes.

The plan includes razing the homes of some of the poorest in Dunwoody. Without the availability of the targeted apartment homes, these people will remain poor, but they will not remain in Dunwoody. Nor will their children, poor and less equipped to keep up with their whiter and brighter neighbors to the west and north, remain a burden to the Dunwoody cluster.

Supporters claim this is about parks and recreation as Dunwoody is currently one city-owned diamond short of their desired minimum of three. And while it is not the purpose of this post to question motive or intent, there is a point worth pondering. "If you wanted to eliminate the poor, especially poor Hispanics, in Dunwoody, what would you do differently?"

More Dunwoody Than You

A recent dissin' contest on an other Dunwoody blog (not to be confused with The Other Dunwoody blog), poses a few good points to ponder.

First, is it really a good idea to allow comments on blog posts? That trail of not-so-witty repartee certainly seems to support the "No Comment" decision for this blog. These comments devolved, as they so often do, into ad hominem attacks, the most interesting being the "I've been here longer than you" machismo oneupmanship. It's like our own quaint little derivative of Godwin's Law--sooner or later in any discussion about Dunwoody, someone will be accused of "not being here long enough to have an opinion that matters". At least not as much as the accuser. It is as if there is some great manhood demonstrated by how long it has been since that last April morn you wrote your name in the snow in your own backyard.

And this happens frequently here in our little burg. You often read on blog comments or even letters to the Fan Rag about "I've been in Dunwoody for twenty years" or "We moved here in 1985 when Deerfield East was still a horse farm." You know, shit like that.

But what makes this more interesting than an otherwise childish "Oh Yeah? Yeah!" schoolyard belly-buckin' is the topic. Namely parks, and our impending, looming, over one hundred million dollar commitment to long term debt. As usual, this boils down to "You Are For Parks" or "You Are Against Parks" as you cannot be "for parks, but against monstrous debt". Ya gotta pick.

And it is just this black and white nature, particularly on the part of the "I Am For Parks" loudmouth, who also played the "Dunwoody Resident Seniority" card, that generates the belly-laughs. OK, fine. So...you've been here since before the Lester Maddox clan(sic) sold their gas station at the corner of Chamblee Dunwoody and Mount Vernon. Good for you. DID YOU MOVE HERE FOR THE PARKS? D'oh?!? If parks were and are so gosh-darn important to you, why didn't you move to a PLACE THAT HAD THEM way back when?

Ain't really about parks is it?

Not that it matters, but blog comments would be of much greater value if you guys would whip 'em out, agree on which is longer, and move on. After all, it's not the length, it's what you do with it.

Clubhouse?

Listed below are the scheduled locations of the Citizen's for Dunwoody sponsored "Buy Our Parks Plan" Testimonial and Revival Meeting. Can we have an "amen"? Amen!

See anything interesting in this list???

Mill Glenn Clubhouse
Dunwoody Homeowners Association Board MeetingBranches Clubhouse
Dunwoody North Clubhouse
Dunwoody United Methodist Men’s Group
City Hall
Fountainbleau Clubhouse
Kingsley Clubhouse
Kingswood United Methodist Church
Georgia Perimeter College Auditorium
Georgetown Clubhouse
Dunwoody United Methodist (room 257)
Congregation Beth Shalom
City Hall

You are probably wondering just what are these things called "Clubhouse", what are they for and how did they get there? Did the county do this to us with lame zoning? Malicious intent? Did someone developer sneak them in?

Not really. As it turns out these buildings, often with large, general purpose rooms, are associated with community Recreational Facilities!!! Facilities with playgrounds. And swimming pools. Sometimes large ones. Deep too. And many a clubhouse is right beside tennis courts, some with as many as eight nets. Often there are lights and sometimes folks are actually, we hope you're sittin' down, sometimes folks actually play tennis at night! Now that's uptown. And there appear to be quite a few of these Recreational Facilities hidden away in our little village. Though only a few show up on the Glad-Hand Tax Tour, most long-time Dunwoody residents know many are missing from this list.

That would mean that there are several, if not dozens, of recreational options available to folks in Dunwoody, paid for by the very folks who enjoy these facilities, without one dime in public debt or other subsidies.

Wow! What a system. Folks "pay to play" and it doesn't cost everyone else anything.

This really is a Smart City.

Making Parks Work

The PR campaign in support of the Parks Referendum has started in earnest and it has turned ugly with ad hominem attacks. Not against The Other Dunwoody, that's just too easy, but against another Citizen of Dunwoody who is a noted contributor to the city as well as the greater community. Since our pollyannish cheerleader squad has not a clue how to participate in a reasonable, adult debate that might arrive at a workable solution, it is incumbent upon The Other Dunwoody to cut to the chase and offer the solution.

The center of controversy is around the gap between the intent, to purchase land for parks, and the language and content of the referendum and the supporting legislative documents (laws/ordinances). These documents are presumed to be legislative mandates of this council guiding the operations of current and future city personnel and councils with regard to this thirty year commitment to purchase land for parks. The fixes are rather straightforward: the language of the referendum must be changed and it must be supported by city legislation and these documents MUST meet these criteria:

• The language must require that this bond money be used for the purchase of land for Parks and only Parks and any land acquired directly or indirectly by use of these funds are dedicated in perpetuity to Parks. Think of it as the Taxpayers of Dunwoody donating land to the City with a deed restriction. 
• This money cannot be used to acquire any property with even the threat of imminent domain, let alone the actual process of imminent domain. Any city employee caught attempting to use the threat of imminent domain in conjunction with the use of these funds shall be subject to felony charges. They might even lose their job.
• This money cannot be used to purchase "rights of first refusal", "options to buy" or "easements". It can only be used to buy property with the full rights of the existing owner--pre-existing easements apply. This money cannot be used as a tool to cajole us into taking on more debt at a later time.
• Any and all money collected by these new taxes must be put in escrow and used only for the purpose of paying the principle and interest on the bonds. Nothing else. No ribbon cutting ceremonies. No promotional events. No investing and spending the interest else where. Debt reduction only. And when the debt is paid, any remaining funds are returned to the taxpayers in direct proportion to their contribution to that year's tax.
• Any future referendum with language that would alter in any way the use of property acquired under this referendum or the use of remaining funds must be approved by two thirds of the registered voters in Dunwoody. See in perpetuity.
• Any future changes to these laws and ordinances enacted to define and control the process of acquiring land for parks must be approved by 100% of the City Council seats. Not the majority of a quorum. No "abstainers". If a seat is vacant, it must be filled before the vote. One Hundred Percent. Six "yeses". Signed by the Mayor. No "ifs", "ands" or "buts". Again, see in perpetuity.
• And here's the "deadly embrace": these changes must be complete with all laws and ordinances enacted seven days prior to the vote on the referendum. Fourteen days it should be, but we know you're in a hurry (we've already discussed why).

These are non-negotiable.

Fix it and you just might get to go on that "Shopping Spree". You can even buy those apartments filled with "People You Just Don't Like". Can't get it done or done "in time"? Well, just maybe the timing isn't right and you can get your act together for next year. It seems that might even be a presidential election year.

One Lump? Or Two?

With tax for two and two for tax,
Just us to tax and tax on all we own!

During the upcoming elections Citizens of Dunwoody will be presented with parks referenda:

1. a $33 Million indebtedness to buy "parks"
2. a $33 Million indebtedness to operate "parks"

Even if you believe the City of Dunwoody should own and operate just as much in the way of parks, by whatever measure, as your favorite place, where sadly you do not currently reside, surely you can see how this is a bit like getting a loan to buy a car and then another loan to put spinners on it and gas it up. Most sane folks would question whether you need a car, and even if you do, can you really afford it. Again, were sanity in charge, the answer would be a resounding NO!

It appears, in our Smart City, sanity is sadly lacking. Even still we can dismiss the latter of these proposals as over-reaching, either out of simple and pure greed, or as an attempt to position what they really want as a "compromise". In any event it is too absurd for even the most fascist purveyor of "tax you for me, me, me", but that still leaves this notion of "investing in parks". 

That referendum and the associated operational procedures have been criticized by many, most observing that it is crafted as if by novices, who are new to this whole 'guvmint thang', and who don't really know what they're doing or how to do it. Well...that just happens to be the case. That said, when it was pointed out by many, but in particular a well-know local developer, that it is a good idea to appraise property before purchase, or, and here's a real shocker, that you get two independent appraisals, language to that effect was, however reluctantly, added.  But this lip-flapping about details and wording ignores serious structural problems and almost makes approval seem a foregone conclusion. 

The Other Dunwoody has already made the case that Dunwoody does not need additional parks and with recent suggestions of converting undesirables' apartments into "City Parks" it is increasingly clear this is about something other than "playsets fer the kiddies". This is not a need, it is a proven greed and will start a never-ending addiction. It's pretty clear that we don't need these "parks" and the ultimate price we will pay is outrageous.

In spite of all that, there is the distinct possibility that one or both of these will pass, and without any substantive, structural changes that constrain how and for what the money will be used. There will be no language to ensure it is for parks, and parks only, nor that surplus funds will be used only to pay down the debts with the tax expiring when the debt is repaid. And quite frankly, would you believe these politicians, or those to come after, any more than those who lied about the GA-400 tolls? Probably not.

So just who is pushing this? Well that would be the "Citizens for Dunwoody, Inc." who when advocating for city-hood sat on task force reports until after that referendum passed. As  their website indicates (note the lack of posted referenda, calendar of events, or opportunity to comment) this organization is not one dedicated to open and honest discourse. In the past a well-informed "Smart" electorate did not suit their purpose, so again they are supporting a PR barrage to push this thing through.

Who are these folks? As it happens, the CFO and Secretary is none other than our very own City Attorney who has influence over the language, if not the content of these documents. This Smart City would be better served if a highly compensated employee fixed the vagueness and closed the loopholes in these documents rather than supporting an organization that appears hell-bent on glossing over these problems with non-binding speeches at PR sessions.

And the credibility of this process would be better if informational sessions were run by the League of Women voters. There are enough sessions scheduled for the Mayor and members of Council to each make two presentations and field questions from the community. Bring the city manager to each and every one. Let us hear what the architects of this proposal have to say. Then our paid staff can focus on ensuring that the referenda are properly updated to reflect any newly identified weaknesses resulting from these public reviews.

If they cannot or will not address these issues before the vote, we can deal with it the day of the vote.

Imported Apartheid

"Liberalism flourishes where it is not challenged."

Though many may not know it, Georgia was on the losing side of the war between the states. This ignorance is not due to a failed education or a tragic accident, but is simply due to the fact that many folks, particularly those in Dunwoody (and we know how smart they are), ain't from around here.

These relative newcomers are not steeped in Southern Tradition and may not be aware that Civil Rights legislation, which never saw strong support from Southern States, nonetheless imposes certain restrictions and provides for direct supervision by alleged adults in Washington. A significant part of the Civil Rights legislative initiative was to counteract decades of minority voter disenfranchisement by a dominant white power structure.

As one might suspect, the South had no epiphany and did not rise up saying "we must change our ways for they are wrong!" Instead, it was outsiders, generally liberal elites, with no other concern for the South but that they get their house in order, who by force of law saw to it that the South was not left to its own devices with regards to the ballot box. This is true to this day.

One would expect this to have nothing to do with Dunwoody. After all the Justice Department signed off on the referendum vote. But now a civil rights icon, Rev. Joseph Lowery, has filed suit against Dunwoody and all the other new cities claiming they violate the Constitution and should be dissolved.  The basis of the claim is that by creating these cities a white power structure has segregated itself from a larger, more diverse community and thereby disenfranchises the now relatively few minority voters that are within the new city limits.

The Justice Department pre-approval probably means the referendum vote, odious as it was, passes judicial muster. But there are some interesting circumstances unique to Dunwoody. In an effort to ensure victory, the vote was held in July. Of an election year. A presidential election year. With a (later to be proven successful) black candidate. Perhaps the courts, should they examine the voter demographics in July and November, would find an alarming disparity in the demographics of voter turnout. Again, probably not enough to win the day.

A more significant issue is how Dunwoody's voter districts are laid out with regards to demographics. Dunwoody's minority community is largely confined to the apartments in the southern part of town. Dunwoody's three voting districts are eastern, western and a middle district effectively carving the minority community into three easily managed chunks. Every reader knows why our great white leaders did not create a southern, northern and middle district. That surely would have led to a minority voice on City Council.

Those readers from north of the Mason Dixon are surely thinking: "this is just those redneck cracker racists doing it again", but the origins of this white power structure is quite interesting. At the same time the South was being rehabilitated by the North, Northerners were migrating South for love of sun and money. Mostly money. Did they bring with them their great Northern Enlightenment? Most assuredly. NOT! We can tell by the fact that upon moving South they did not integrate themselves into the existing community, but rather segregated themselves in largely undeveloped areas to the North of town. Yes, enlightenment is a wonderful thing. In the abstract.

Dunwoody was one of these places. Farmland transformed into a bedroom community, filled with happy outsiders eager to create a community just like the one they left. White. And white they expected to stay as the mere cost of entry -- housing prices -- kept most undesirables at bay.

But the rest of the region, DeKalb in particular, was not frozen in time. As Dunwoody grew larger, richer and whiter, DeKalb grew darker. The tipping point occurred when the last white county CEO, from the Dunwoody area, was replaced by the first of a continuing series of black leaders. These new leaders took a more favorable view of developer plans to build apartments in Dunwoody which provided access to some of DeKalb's best schools. Even to those who could never purchase a home in the area--more often than not, people of color.

And that is what local control was really all about and it is what fueled the drive to form this city. But at the end of the day, the desire to maintain a segregated lifestyle is to the City of Dunwoody what slavery was to the Civil War. It is just that noble.

And the irony of relocated, "enlightened Yankees" creating neo-segregation in the South should be lost on no one.

Re-Refer Madness

In the event you're new to Dunwoody, or simply consider politics as much fun as changing any other soiled diaper then you may not know the back story to the Republican contest to fill Dan Weber's State Senate seat. It was the legislative Dynamic Duo of Dan Weber and Fran Millar (Senate and House respectively) who through any means necessary brought about the referendum for, and advocated the creation of, the City of Dunwoody. Now Dan is done, ready to scurry off to St. Simons, or Emelia Island or where ever else politicians past their use-by date are warehoused.

Fran is viewed by many, especially Fran, as the heir-apparent to fill Dan's seat. Unfortunately, word did not make it to James Sibold, who opposes Brother Fran in the Republican Primary. The Dunwoody Fan magazine has spared no ink in defense of sometimes columnist, who's overbearing zeal to balkanize our little part of DeKalb receives unending praise. Meanwhile Sibold is depicted as either not supporting the cityhood movement, or as one to be counted amongst those advising consideration and caution. Mentioning his name alongside that of "Shrill Jill" Chambers is clearly intended to rouse the rabble, though truth be told, Shrill Jill proved once again that it isn't what you say, but how you say it.

So the local media have painted a scene wherein a vote for Fran is a vote for Dunwoody, and a vote for James is a vote against. This characterization is nothing short of re-referendum on cityhood. But this time around there are some differences.

Unlike the first time, citizens have access to information and the city has a track record, whilst in the first go round the Citizens for Dunwoody conveniently neglected to publish task force reports before the vote. And though this is not an election year with the kind of voter draw one gets from personalities like Obama, Hillary and Palin, at least it will not be scheduled solely to manipulate the outcome.

Dunwoody fans like to point out that over eighty percent of those who voted (on July 15th in a presidential election year) favored cityhood. They neglect to point out that even with intense prosthelytizing they could barely entice forty percent of registered voters to the polls, so they only garnered a third of the registered voters' approval. Of course a high turnout wasn't the goal, else the referendum would have been coincident with the primary or better still the general election. The goal was to motivate most if not all of those in favor of cityhood with emotional pleas and frenzied hype to vote early and often. While a very high percentage of these voters did visit the polls, it is unlikely their numbers have swelled since the city was formed. As it turns out, there is an increasing level of buyer's remorse in Dunwoody.

Nonetheless, barring nightmare scenarios (like a candidate coming out in favor of late term abortion) we should enjoy a Republican primary synonymous with re-approving Dunwoody. And regardless of whether we get the single issue zealot or the thoughtful moderate we will likely be represented in the State Senate by a Republican that sits comfortably to the right of center.

Millar Distances Himself

Oh, yesterday's over my shoulder
So I can't look back for too long
There's just too much to see waiting in front of me
And I know that I just can't go wrong

That's right Fran, you just can't go wrong, so it must be us. Or that's his story and he's stickin' to it.

In the latest release of the Dunwoody Fan Magazine, Fran opines that we, the voters, (OK, 35% of the registered voters) were simply brilliant in voting for cityhood based on his advice and the advice of shills for CH2M Hill and the wannabe politicos running the Citizens for Dunwoody, but not so smart when it came to electing a mayor and council. Turns out it turned out the way these things generally turn out: it didn't pass the smell test then and now by golly, as the sweet perfume of his salesmanship dissipates, it is really raising a stink. Seems folks, not just The Other Dunwoody, have begun pointing out to their fine Rep that this cityhood thing is not at all what he said it would be. In fact, it is beginning to look like this is a scam of Madoff proportions.

So what's a successful politician to do? That's right. Duck and cover. "Please remember that the City Council chose to go in a different direction of governance than anticipated by most people." Not exactly a mea culpa, but Fran does acknowledge things aren't going well: "I see attempts for no-bid contracts and possibly hiring employees and vendors primarily because someone worked with them before." Sounds like Fran is seeing what we in The Other Dunwoody have seen all along--more of the same old cronyism in politics, except this time it's the frat boys and not the good old boys.

And after all, just what was "anticipated by most people"? Well that would be what they were sold/told by the leaders who brought this upon us. After shenanigans to get SB82 through the house and a manipulative referendum in mid-July scheduled well before publishing Task Force reports and in a presidential election year no less, Millar lays the blame at the feet of other politicians and the voters that supported them. How quickly he went from "we did it the right way" to they went another way.

Well, "Please don't blame me when you go to the polls" may not cut it this time. When a building advertised as glorious, innovative and safe collapses on top of folks the architect and engineer should expect to be held responsible. And that's just what...wait...what's that sound? Is it? Can it be? Yes! It is! It's Fran! Fran jammin' to Boofay...

With these changes in platitudes, changes in attitudes
Nothing remains quite the same
With all of my running and all of my cunning
If I couldn't laugh I just would go insane
[everybody!]
If we couldn't laugh we just would go insane
If they weren't all crazy they would go insane

TOD

A Momentus Day

December 1st marks the end of the 2008 Hurricane Season. It offers a time to reflect on the pre-season predictions and assess the accuracy of the experts. As sometimes happens, the predictions didn't quite meet with reality.

But December 1st is also the first day in the existence of the City of Dunwoody. This also offers the opportunity to reflect on where we are and how we got here, the end of our first season of Dunwoody.

Given that Dunwoody doesn't even officially start until Monday December 1st this might seem difficult, but...Dunwoody's Mayor and City Council have been in operation since being sworn in and prior to that operated under the auspices of the Governor's office and prior to that these very same folks who comprise the fledging government of Dunwoody operated the wholly political and quasi-governmental Citizens for Dunwoody and Dunwoody Yes! organizations. And as Dr. Phil likes to say "the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior". This gives a significant body of work to evaluate.

To make the job more manageable, let's look at some key metrics: No Taxation without Representation, Service Value, Integrity, and Transparency.

Taxation: D. This covers not only the taxation of various businesses operating within Dunwoody which likely have little say in city operations, but also the imposition of the Franchise Fee Tax which negatively affects everyone who lives in and uses utilities in Dunwoody, but more importantly represents a tax levied by Dunwoody on Georgians who live outside Dunwoody. Remember the primal scream of cityhood? No Taxation Without Representation!

Service Value: C. This is one political hot potato. On the plus side: a city hall not in the city because it is cheaper; and dodging the CH2M bullet, but on the minus side: tacit acknowledgment that the CVI study was bogus; serious, allegedly surprising, startup cash flow problems; insufficient funds for promised police staffing; and no immediate prospects for park or road improvements.

Integrity: F. There is just no other way to say it: the citizens of Dunwoody have been lied to from the beginning. A now suspect Carl Vinson Study produced under the direction of cityhood proponents. Task Force reports withheld until after the referendum. The Citizens for Dunwoody and Dunwoody Yes! operating outside public view and review as was their legal right, but since they were influencing events affecting us all there was a moral imperative to operate openly. A moral imperative they diligently ignored.

Transparency: F. You probably cannot have integrity without transparency, at least in government, and when the first official meeting of the City Council results in the first official open records request, you get a pretty good idea how committed the Mayor and Council will be to their pledges of transparent and open government. One might accept them as technological novices but for the fact that someone associated with CfD and DY! demonstrated an amazing ability to put up (and tear down) websites and post Shrill Jill videos when it suited their purpose.

So there you have it. On the issues that matter most to most of us, Taxes, Services, Integrity and Transparency, this city earned a first term grade of D-, far short of their original promises. Maybe next year there will be a hurricane Dunwoody that meets predictions.

TOD

Consultant Ethics 101

Professional, ethical consultants have two qualities:

1. Area expertise--they are exceptionally accomplished in an area important to their clients where the client is not sufficiently capable.
2. Objectivity--the consultant receives no benefit due to the client's decision and this is most commonly expressed as vendor-independence.

Area expertise is table stakes, you cannot even sit in on the game without it. No statement of ethics from any professional organization tolerates consulting outside one's area of expertise. Not the Institute of Management Consultants, not the Project Management Institute, nor any state licensing agency for whom it may actually be a criminal offense. And consultants are expected to be expert, not just above average or merely capable. These extraordinary, exceptional individuals acquire their skills from academic research and/or outstanding performance in their area of expertise. They are few and far between.

Objectivity is absolutely critical--a consultant must not be influenced by a client's preconceptions and more importantly must not even appear to be influenced by or biased towards a particular vendor. A quick google search for "consultant ethics vendor-independence" reveals that many professional consulting organizations agree. Without this independence, objectivity is compromised and no matter how knowledgeable the expert, the relationship becomes deal brokering, not an objective advice in the client's best interest.

Why do we, The Other Dunwoody, care? Well, it turns out we have our own self-professed consultant who lives in neighboring Sandy Springs. None other than Oliver Porter, the citymaker. But who is Oliver Porter and what is his field, what makes him an expert, acceptable as a consultant? We know this from the City of Sandy Springs:

Oliver W. Porter, Sandy Springs, GA - Porter is a former vice president of sales at AT&T. He is the founder of the Combined Health Appeal of America and served as the group's chief executive officer and past national chairman. He served as a board member with the Committee for Sandy Springs and as the past chairman of the National Kidney Foundation. Porter earned a bachelor's degree in civil engineering from the University of South Carolina, a master's degree in business administration from Georgia State University, and completed graduate level executive programs at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School, Williams College, and the University of Illinois.

He is a businessman, more specifically, a salesman. Prior to his position with Sandy Springs he held no elected municipal position, had no municipal job with fiduciary responsibility or oversight of services. Not even dog catcher. He has no degree in urban planning nor in municipal management. No law degree, no studies of state or local law.

This is not the background of someone exceptionally knowledgeable in municipal operations and the legal, political and financial contexts in which a city exists.

So much for expertise, now how about objectivity?

Mr. Porter has been involved in the creation of new cities in our region, including his participation as an unpaid consultant and lobbyist for the City of Dunwoody. In all cases except Dunwoody where the decision is yet to be made, these cities have all chosen to outsource services to one company: CH2M Hill. In the case of Dunwoody an RFP was issued which surely Mr. Porter had a hand in and here's the real surprise: there was no other acceptable respondent but CH2M!

This could be no more than coincidence. Or perhaps there really is no other capable vendor but CH2M.

But this strange set of coincidences isn't all there is. It turns out that Mr. Porter is also an author who is "boutique publishing" a book espousing the benefits of city service outsourcing. So how does someone market a book without the services of traditional publishers? Glad you asked.

You could set up a web site, perhaps even a blog. You could work with academic institutions presenting seminars and workshops or even offering full semester, for-credit classes.

Or, you could co-market your book with a favorite vendor.

• Starting in 2006, CH2M Hill began promoting Mr. Porter's book.
• In 2007, CH2M/OMI gave away copies Mr. Porter's book at the International City/County Management Association Annual Conference.
• This collaboration continued into 2008 as Mr. Porter and CH2M made combined presentations to Toyo University.

Mr. Porter is probably not actually on the CH2M payroll, and CH2M is perfectly entitled to buy any book they want and give them to anyone they want, but this smells more like quid pro quo than a string of coincidences.

This tag team has been working very closely with the Citizens for Dunwoody with CH2M donating money to CfD and our consultant sitting side by side Rob Augustine and Tom Taylor at the League of Women Voters' debate where they:

"defended the studies as prudent, the estimated $18 million budget as fiscally conservative, and the proposed service levels as a 25 to 30% improvement over what DeKalb currently provides."

We now know these statements have no connection with reality, are not supported by sound judgment and would never have been supported by a professional consultant who is truly an expert in these matters.

Doesn't Dunwoody deserve better than a profit motivated corporation with an increasingly spotty track record shilled by a connected consultant?

The Other Dunwoody does.

TOD

And the Winners Are

Lest they forget, The Other Dunwoody has compiled a list of interesting campaign statements and quotes collected from the candidate web sites and from their published responses at the Dunwoody Home Owners Association.

Mayor

Ken Wright

• Citizens for Dunwoody - president

City Council

Dennis Shortal

• Dunwoody Yes! - co-chair and treasurer [TOD: Note, the required disclosure report was not filed on time].
• "A small, responsive and efficient city government."
• "Keep taxes low and have a balanced budget with a contingency fund"

Bosner

• Dunwoody Yes! - Board member.
• Citizens for Dunwoody - fund-raising and database.
  
• "I pledge to never support the creation of a new apartment complex during my tenure on the city council. [TOD: Note Dr. Bosner is running for a 1 year term]"
• "I pledge to use each and every taxpayer dollar wisely..."

Pankey

• Citizens for Dunwoody - courts task force.
• "I am a fiscal conservative, and will work to deliver enhanced and expanded services without a tax increase or major hike in service fees."

Tom Taylor

• Citizens for Dunwoody - vice president, police task force.
• Dunwoody Action Committee - president.

Robert Wittenstein

• Citizens for Dunwoody - executive board, charter task force.
• "I am a strong advocate of small and transparent government."
• "We need to hold the line on taxes and prove to the voters that we can deliver superior quality government..."
• "We need open and transparent government ..."

Danny Ross

• Citizens for Dunwoody - ethics task force.
• "...promise to serve all the stakeholders of Dunwoody in a fiscally conservative, transparent, efficient and professional manner."
• "...a tax and spending plan which allows our community to live within its means..."

John Heneghan

• Citizens for Dunwoody - Transportation, boundaries and mapping.
• Fights for open government and electronically available records.
• Fiscally conservative, the city needs to start slow until revenues are proven.
• "I promise that I will do everything in my power to have every important government document published to the web to keep the citizens informed."
• "I promise to be especially fiscally conservative the first year and always work to obtain a balanced budget to keep tax increases at bay."
• "Transparency in Government breeds self-corrective behavior..."

Observations

• Regardless of the outcome of the Bosner-Pankey run off there will be no member of the new city government that has not been involved in the shadow government that preceded the referendum.
• Only three of the six member city council have listed transparency as a significant issue and only one has a proven track record of supporting transparency.
• Some candidates, including the two top dogs from CfD, ran on a platform of "How Great I Art" without any meaningful policy or mission statement.
• All claim some measure of business experience to bolster their fiscal acumen, yet none of the CfD entourage noticed that some budgeted revenue won't come in until the end of the fiscal year.
  
• Five of six council members pledge to hold down taxes in spite of the fact that the Carl Vinson Study clearly states that each and every household, and each and every business, will pay out more money after the city than before.
  

If you believe your neighbor can never be a run of the mill politician simply because they live nearby, if you believe outcome is more important than the integrity of process, if you like the transparency of CfD and the timeliness of their Task Force Reports, then you're going to love the new City of Dunwoody.

TOD

A Foundation of Lies

"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State."

Joseph Goebbels.

It appears Dunwoody's Powers-That-Be are losing their ability to shield The Other Dunwoody from their lies. And make no mistake, we have been lied to and it is becoming inescapable that it was done with malice and forethought.

The reports from the Citizens for Dunwoody's clandestine Task Forces have been presented to the political elites: the candidates for city council. Not only were they not created with public review or provided to the citizens before the referendum, they are still withheld from Dunwoody's citizens. Apparently they are available on a need to know basis and mere citizen-taxpayers simply don't need to know.

We can gather some interesting insights from Sunday's AJC Metro article, "Dunwoody candidates see preview of operations proposals":

• As the title clearly states, this information was presented exclusively to candidates. Given that it is already too late to negatively impact the referendum, how bad can it really be? Apparently pretty bad.


• "The reports are only recommendations and are not binding. But they likely will carry significant weight with new council members, who will have little time to prepare for cityhood after Sept. 16..." Obviously these reports were intentionally delayed, forcing the newly formed council to accept these recommendations without serious debate or plausible alternatives. Someone has a vested interest in this outcome. Who is it and what do they get?


• This is all clearly intentional. When a constituent questioned Fran Millar, a prime mover behind the Dunwoody movement, about cityhood being sought "the right way", he responded:
  
  

  "[...]by delaying this one year to try to get the best data for people to make a decision (unlike Milton, Johns Creek) I do think it was the right way. Are there assumptions that might be wrong-probably. However it will be better than DeKalb in the long run if we elect responsible people and you can throw them out if they do not do a good job-unlike DeKalb."
  

  
  Well, it seems these folks had an extra year and still could not pull together their reports in a timely fashion, even for presentation to decision makers. It is a sad state of affairs when incompetence is the most palatable explanation.


• Then there is Chem2Hill and an apparently cozy relationship with some members of these clandestine task forces: "The company was selected over another bidder by a panel appointed by Citizens for Dunwoody Inc., the group that headed the task force effort." So there was an RFP issued, bids were taken and a winner selected. All on our behalf, but without our knowledge or permission.

• The company seems quite sure of it's future business with Dunwoody, Inc.: "the company already has selected the staff that will work for Dunwoody if the council selects the firm. The company also has a building that initially would be used as a City Hall." Initiative or a done deal--which do you think it is?

• Finally, one of our fine candidates for City Council, a past task force commandant, is recommending a police budget that is 20% over that in the Vinson study--the only detailed information provided before the referendum. Of course, we, The Other Dunwoody, are not allowed to know why and for what purpose the budget ballooned.

This is the kind of "behind closed doors" good old boy politics, deception and fiscal irresponsibility we've come to expect from the county. Dunwoody was supposed to do better.

TOD

Magic Pews at DUMC!

Magic pews have been reported at Dunwoody United Methodist Church.

These seats are reserved for, if not created by, the few, the elite, the 'Founders of Dunwoody'. There have been reports of an eery light shining forth and a faint odor, something between lilac, Old Spice and an extinguished match. After these events the occupants of the magic pews are reported to speak in tongues, often appearing to have more than one. Their voices are sonorous, with glowing words carrying no intelligible meaning. Ironically they rarely sing the hymns during the service but merely mouth the words.

Those close to the matter report a self-righteous glow emanating from those who, in brief moments of rapture, claim to hear a booming voice of moral authority tell them that their end justifies any means and that the Golden Rule is for ordinary schmucks, not the chosen, or even self-appointed, few.

Officials at DUMC refused to comment, except to say that flash photography is not allowed during church services. Nonetheless many in the congregation have reported frequent Sunday sightings as well as occasional midweek occurrences.

While a vast majority of events have been reported at DUMC, the phenomena is not unique to the Methodists. There are reports of sightings at local Catholic churches as well as the First Baptist Bank of Dunwoody. While the diocese refused to comment on specific incidents, they indicated this is a matter for the Vatican as it is unclear whether this warrants exorcism or beatification. No two officials of the local Baptist organizations provided a consistent response.

Reports from the local Jewish community are far less frequent, comprising mostly unsubstantiated rumors of charred bushes in and around synagogue parking lots. While some consider these divine signs, others dismiss them as results of the ongoing drought. A local rabbi mostly deflected questions on the matter. "So, you're looking for self-righteous politicians?" "And you're having trouble finding them?"

Not surprisingly, there have been no reports of sightings from the Unitarians.

Speaking off the record, on the QT and strictly hush-hush, several ecclesiastical authorities cautioned against ordinary lay persons attempting to occupy these special seats--if of course they really exist. It is their considered opinion that the ordinary, good people of their flock are of fine character and high moral integrity and thus ill-equipped for these positions. They fear lay persons would surely be struck dead, or worse yet become like one of the usual occupants of these magic pews.

TOD