Planning the Plan

A local retired US military officer who served in WWII and was involved in planning the D-Day invasion retained possession of his copy of those plans. As one might imagine these plans evolved over time as better G-2 became available and open issues were resolved. The Allies managed this development by issuing update packets containing revised pages and additional pages to plan holders who were instructed to remove and destroy updated pages. This particular officer never got around to destroying the superceded pages and consequently maintained not only a completed set of plans, but a historical trail of the creation of those plans.

He had the Plan of the Plan. 

While today's endeavors pale in comparison to That Day, we, through our public officials, do make plans that affect our daily lives.These plans evolve, and as they evolve the document that we commonly call "The Plan" goes through many drafts. Just as it is fascinating to see the development of a historical document it is even more revealing to see the progression of plans and other documents created on our behalf by our public servants.

We have one such work in progress before us today: the KPMG audit of DeKalb County Schools' finances. It would be very revealing to compare and contrast the currently available draft document with the final document to see what additional items surface, what items are changed and which are eliminated. It would be even more revealing to acquire copies of all correspondence between the System and KPMG related to this effort since it is very likely that many updates will be driven by those in the System responsible for "damage control".

A "Reasonable Man" would suggest that all documents, especially something as important as a financial audit, should be proactively made public. Though it briefly was posted online that was only after it had been "leaked" and it was subsequently removed. This is unacceptable. Government organizations, DeKalb Schools, the County and the City, must maintain full, proactive disclosure of all documents and communications related to the people's business. And let's be clear, they should be doing nothing but the people's business.

One final observation: KPMG seems to think they own all distribution rights for a work product that we, the taxpayers, purchased and perhaps, by contract, they do. If this is indeed the case then our public servants should never again be party to a contract with such anti-transparency clauses and if that means KPMG walks away from our money then so be it.

DCSS BOE : No Investigation Needed

The current silliness between SACS/AdvancED/Elgart the DeKalb County School System revolves around a letter from Elgart to Atkinson regarding alleged micromanaging by the Board. This devolved into a three ring circus around the official response to the letter and now SACS intends to do an onsite investigation.

This is totally unnecessary.

The charge at hand is "does the DeKalb Board overstep its bounds and micromanage the DeKalb County Schools"? The answer, and evidence is also at hand.

The shouting table-pounding "spokesperson" for the system claimed this was a purely administrative situation no different than any other situation resulting from any other letter that Atkinson might receive so of course it was handled behind closed doors. This is unadulterated crap. Fact is, Atkinson does not bring every opportunity to respond to a comment or criticism from "any other source" to the board for approval of "process". And, the fact that the Board unanimously approved the plan suggests the plan had probably been pre-approved. How often does any Superintendent so quickly receive unanimous approval of anything? Nonetheless, in most cases the Board has no input on how a response is crafted nor any editorial approval before sending.

Not the case with Elgart's letter.

A "task force" was created--purely administrative mind you lest they run afoul of open meetings laws by having it be a Board sanctioned committee. However the task force itself included members of the Board. Not enough to make it official Board business (see aforementioned open meetings laws) but only an idiot believes this does not constitute "undue influence". And the results were cleared with each Board member, but only on a one-on-one basis to again adhere to the letter, but violate the intent of the law.

Herr Doktor "Do Nothing" took the personal initiative to craft an editorial explaining how this was all within the letter of the law but did little more than confirm that the goal of the DCSS was to legally subvert the intent of the law. And it must be noted they are quite skilled at it.

This fiasco is a surprisingly open, but all too common display of exactly how the Board micromanages and how the Superintendent is complicit. What more does SACS need?

Parkway: The Real Problem

In a recent update a City Councilman hinted at a very real problem surfacing in the Parkway kerfuffle.

"... the City ran the risk of blacklisting from future grants if we cancelled the plan completely."

This is a clear statement that we are driven by an ambition to spend other people's money--by way of grants. We at The Other Dunwoody will not entertain the claptrap about how we pay the taxes that fund these grants, or "getting our share", or how if we don't get the grant someone else will. We will simply suggest you research "The Tragedy of the Commons" and start taking some ownership of America and not just your back yard.

This selfishness also blinds us to the key point underpinning this repavement project. Somehow we got backed into a corner and are now presented only with a Hobson's choice.

Now if this situation was created by, at the request of and with the approval of Council 1.0 in an open and transparent manner, then all is well and good and the time for carping and complaining is over. It is now time to act on the plan. If Council 1.0 instituted the plan, began execution and passed the baton to Council 2.0, it is incumbent upon the current Council to take that baton and run with it, not throw it down and whine.

But the carping and complaining remains ceaseless, even on Council, making one question whether Council 1.0 was very involved in the actions that precipitated the "future grant poison pill". If not, then who did this?

The obvious place to look, if you are not the Police Department, would be at those closest to the action: the bureaucrats down at City Hall. Did someone at City Hall take the steps constituting an irrevocable commitment? If so, who did this? Did they have standing authorization to make million dollar commitments on behalf of City taxpayers? If so, this should be fixed immediately.

If this was some deal based on bureaucratic "initiative", as many suspect with Project Renaissance, then Council needs to act, first to terminate the offending bureaucrats and then to amend the process to prevent future disasters.

Brookhaven Yes! To Run New City

It should come as no surprise, but the folks operating under the label "Brookhaven Yes!" will indeed be running the new city. As reported in the AJC they have established many a Task Force to assess various aspects of how the City will be run. But before you ask, the answer is: No, you cannot have access to any documents or meetings until and unless they bloody well feel like it.

You see, all that transparency stuff like open records requests and open meetings only applies to government operations, and Brookhaven Yes! isn't a government. Yet.

There are a few rays of hope. First, by not opening these meetings to the public and following the requirements that will soon be applied to the real city the members of this group who are running for political office may take a serious hit. Mistrust seems a significant factor in politics these days.

And the Governor, though he has yet to act and may be stalling, will appoint a commission to coordinate the efforts of city formation. At that point there will be a legitimate government entity involved and to the extent that entity does anything it will be subject to open meeting and records law. Or it will be subject to legal action.

To date these advocacy non-profits have been hiding behind their corporate shields. That is about to change.

Magic Carpet or Titanic Iceberg?

Concerning Dunwoody's Special Investigator's Report, which is it? A political "Magic Carpet" under which the real dirt is being swept or just the tip of the Iceberg regarding what has really been going on down at Smart City Hall? And what should we suppose has been going on? Well, that is hard to tell given the City is not very transparent in its operations. Certainly there are many questions deserving of answers.

But first a simple observation. There is no living, breathing, mysterious Sasquatch called "The City", but there are living, breathing people who individually take action on behalf of the collective entity called "The City". And they are, to greater and lesser degrees, individual players who are individually responsible for their individual actions on behalf of the collective. Recent events bear that out. When those actions are aligned with the good of the community and the goals established by our elected officials they deserve credit in proportion to their initiative and responsibility. Recent events bear that out as well. But in all matters they should be accountable and to that end the Citizens OF Dunwoody deserve transparency. We deserve answers.

Who initiated contact with Wieland and who specifically, City and Wieland were involved in the initial and following negotiations? Was this kicked off in a country club locker-room after a round of golf? During a rousing game of checkers at the local hardware store? Over coffee at the gas station or local BBQ joint? Via an open and transparent bidding process, because someone, yet to be named, at City Hall had an original, innovative idea? Was the City Attorney engaged to assess the legal propriety of these negotiations? Would it have mattered?

And who is it at City Hall that "suggests" changes to the developer, like "ditch the siding these need to be all-brick"? Who with the developer is suggesting that the City retain the flood plain property leaving only the juicy bits for lucrative development? How was it the plan went from detached construction to attached housing? Who, on both sides, is involved in these negotiations, and when and where have they and are they taking place? Who, on both sides, negotiates and approves the plan? Who is shaking hands over these agreements?

Where are the email and phone records, the meeting calendars and topics of discussion? Who attended the plenary meetings or was engaged in these conversations? What was the timing, especially with regards to the failure of the Parks Bonds and passage of the TAD? Was this always in the works or is it a reaction to voters shouting down the previous plans from City Hall? Who is driving these efforts?

And what about the folks selling the Shallowford/Emory hospital site? Who are these people and how did that ball get rolling? Before the Parks Bonds went down in flames, they seemed all but assured of a windfall sale of two properties in a very tough market as they were also the owners of the Peachford property slated (for what this is worth) to become a road to nowhere. How did THAT deal happen? What about the discussions leading to the plan with the bond contingencies? And was connectivity the real motivation for the City's Peachford purchase, or was it to secure an option on the hospital property post vote? Even if only by a "gentleman's agreement". Are we really to believe these two transactions were independent "arm's length" negotiations, only to concoct a plan where sale and purchase are so intertwined as to be indistinguishable? Is anyone in Dunwoody that naive? Who exactly are these folks--faces and names? Again, real names of real people who really sign legal, binding documents and the names of those who pay them to do so.

Now that the deals are done and we have skin in the game it seems imminently reasonable for the City to proactively publish on the City Website all the records related to these negotiations. Full disclosure, nothing less.

Which Hunt?

Those who see the Mayor's Special Investigator as a waste of time and money are correct. We need no reports nor polygraphs (regardless of who buys them) nor blather about who told tales out of school nor cries of "witch hunt". Nor do we need further delay for we have two uncontested facts that are more than sufficient to drive the decision that must be made:

• City Council entered into executive session, with the City Attorney in attendance, to discuss selling City owned property
• In his current line of reasoning the City Attorney asserts that SELLING property was not in fact covered by any exclusion to the State's Open Meetings law

It requires neither the smartest of the smart in our Smart City nor any intellectual gymnastics to connect these two dots with the only straight line between them. The City Attorney, by action or inaction, supported Council in discussing disposal of City property which he now asserts was an illegal act. It no longer even matters which of these two assertions is true, nor which would survive scrutiny in a court of law, because the issue at hand is much simpler.

We pay for a full-time City Attorney to provide SOUND legal advice, day in and day out. Dunwoody is not well served by counsel that offers no better guidance than the flip of a coin. This is the heart of the matter. We deserve better and we should expect the Mayor and Council to ensure that we get the best legal counsel for our hard earned tax dollars.

If the Mayor and Council do not believe that the voters, taxpayers and citizens of Dunwoody deserve better than what they are now receiving then we need more than one change at City Hall.

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.

Brookhaven: Learn from Dunwoody

Brookhaven is well along in fulfilling its destiny as the next city to incorporate in DeKalb and there is much to be learned from its slightly older sister to the north.

First, it is inevitable, don't fight it. You don't have to blindly embrace it, but fighting will be like swimming in quicksand, but with a peanut gallery rooting for the sand. In the end you're going down and all you will succeed in accomplishing is adding your name to the list that includes "Shrill Jill" and "Farmer Bob". But again, you don't have to just sit in the corner, eat your cookies and drink your milk. You can think. You can analyze. And...if you are very careful, you can criticize.

Your CVI study is complete. In terms of content this is relatively insignificant, but as a milestone it means that the dominant power structure is in place. Just check out the assumptions underpinning the foregone conclusion that "shows Brookhaven would be viable". Then pull that string. Who insisted on these assumptions? Is it the same group that paid for the study? Just who are these people--not a group--real, flesh and blood, money makin', power-hungry people? Who the hell are they? They need to be outed. Early.

These are the folks who will run your city for the first few to several years. And they will run it to their benefit, not the benefit of the Citizens of Brookhaven (see, now doesn't that just sound right?). They will be pulling the strings of council and mayor, but even before, it is these, the few, the empowered, that will draft your ordinances, set the rules that dominate your life, and unlike the benign neglect of DeKalb, these folks will see to it that you toe the line. Or else. If you're in a HOA and hate it, think of this as a HOA on steroids, with the power to tax, condemn, and compel with an armed force. If you're in a HOA and just love it, then you're probably one of the assholes that will be running the city anyway.

When it comes time to vote, not for the referendum--that will be rigged, but for mayor and council, you might want to pretend it is the second or third election, not the first. By the time you get to the third election you will have become thoroughly disillusioned with all the pompous asses that promote themselves as having been some kind of great contributor to the cityhood movement or who played patty-fingers with other power-hungry frat boys in one of the unavoidable string of "non-profits" that foisted this city upon you. Those are the people you'll certainly vote against then. Cut to the chase. Vote against them now.

And you might just want to look at the financials. See, the proponents of cityhood are gonna tell you how "we can have the same or better services for even less money". Maybe. And they love to point out the elimination of the bifurcated "Special Services Tax District" which covers two of the much ballyhooed "3-P's" of new DeKalb Cities: Police and Parks. Fact is, these have to be paid for, and you will have your own overhead to cover down at the newly minted city hall. Expect "parks bonds" to be floated within three years of incorporation. Expect a police force that is twice as large as you will be sold on pre-referendum and a never-ending stream of budget increases backed by little more than flag waving.

As you dig down into the revenue side you'll see a big chunk o' cash: franchise fees. Turns out the county gets virtually none of this money as it is not incorporated but your newly incorporated Brookhaven will, so any financial comparison that ignores this disparity is intellectually bankrupt. Now much of this money comes from folks in unincorporated areas of the state, including yourselves at this point, but it largely/only goes to cities. Some folks, often those in unincorporated areas, find this morally reprehensible. But, as has been pointed out by leaders in Dunwoody, this money is necessary to support the city, and in your case it helps eliminate that SSTD assessment. So it's OK, right? After all, you've been on the downside of this great moral divide and now it is your turn to reap the rewards. This is how "situation ethics" works. All you need to bring to the table is a very flexible moral spine and an equally firm sense of self righteousness.

But wait! There's more!

You're gonna start this city, so you're gonna need "City Services". One thing Dunwoody did right (really, you finally read it here) was to ignore the siren song of the "Shills for CH2M Hill" who were advocates of Whole Hog "P Three Uh Oh", otherwise known as "privatization". Clearly many services should not add head count to the city payroll with its generous benefit package--and yes, you will find one of the first things enacted will be generous benefits. If you have a janitor, electrician, HVAC tech, mechanic, or even an IT guy, on city payroll then you're an idiot. By the same token, you'll probably NOT want to contract for police services. But there is much grey in between. Fortunately there is a simple rule to follow in deciding whether to outsource or not: if you can envision requesting information under the Open Records Act, then you want that function in-house. Otherwise, you're screwed. Well, you're probably screwed anyway, but if they can throw up the "sorry, private business information" roadblock, then you're screwed, glued and tattooed.

And finally, don't let your guard down. You're gonna have yet another set of politicians that require constant watching and frequent changing. Buck up. You gotta do both every chance you get.

Sanity Reigns

It must be the weather, but sanity reigned at a recent "Smart" City Council meeting. Specifically, the tax intended to fund the effort to buy the Georgia Music Hall of Fame was rejected. It is interesting to note that the Mayor is earning quite the reputation as an advocate of increasing taxes as he is now two for two.

The best objections were based on principles and trust. One Councilor, you can probably guess which one, noted that the Convention Bureau had not followed the requirements of transparency. Such shenanigans are always suspect. Another Councilor questioned the veracity of those who claimed "we will drop the tax if we do not get the GMHoF" by probing whether the real plan was to immediately borrow against the allegedly "potential" future taxes. Very likely that is exactly the plan. Behind closed doors, naturally.

The lame justification of a tax increase is smarmy, but 100% unadulterated Dunwoody, and is based on belief that it is righteous to tax everyone but ourselves. As if any tax we don't pay really isn't a tax...maybe that's the way smarter folks see it.

As for the GMHoF...the Dunwoody proposal, even just as a document, was by far the worst of the bunch, a rather sad sandwich of souse between stale white bread. Starting with a chorus of "listen to us, we're smart" it ends with a crescendo reprise of "how great we art". But in the middle we find little of substance and what is there is rather unappetizing: no recognition of the importance of certification and conservancy, no explanation of the synergies with existing music venues (there are none and no plans for any), the rich heritage of artistic incubation (we have none), just a feeble appeal to greed with a plan to pick into children's pockets with field trips.  This earned Dunwoody a well-deserved last place.

If Dunwoody were serious about music we would already have our version of Chastain Park Amphitheatre, perhaps smaller, perhaps "on the lawn", perhaps at Brook Run, maybe even in conjunction with Perimeter College. Or perhaps even a bandstand in the village--even if only used for the Fourth of July parade. But this is Dunwoody. The public outcry regarding traffic, late night noise and lights would be deafening. And heaven forbid it require trimming a tree. Fact is Dunwoody voters want a sleepy little burgh, and when we want to see a show we'll go to Alpharetta, Sandy Springs, Vinings or Gwinnett. Maybe even the Fox.

This scam was always about getting OPM into Perimeter Center. Fine. Let them acquire the land,  and pony up the dollars, and build their "music center", and update the proposal. If successful, PCID will be to music what Helen is to alpine villages.

MLK in Dunwoody

The game is afoot and Dunwoody has responded by incorporating yet another "non-profit" in an attempt to snag the Georgia Music Hall of Fame. As some may know, the GMHF has fallen on hard times and being the opportunists we are, Dunwoody is ready to pounce. The bid is in. It is stacked with two résumés for each and every member of the newly minted non-profit--a tactic clearly intended to demonstrate their incredible abilities to make a profit, yet it nonetheless makes a compelling case for relocating the irreplaceable GMHF assets from an AAM certified facility in Macon to the stock room behind an expansive gift shop in Perimeter Mall.

But they've run into a wee little problem. The tale that follows was recounted to The Other Dunwoody by a meeting attendee who cannot be named because they are not authorized to speak on behalf of the "no-pro". As it turns out, only one person is allowed to speak for the no-pro, and he speaks too much.

The meeting, held recently at an undisclosed location, was dominated by The Grand Poohbah, designated speaker, and the Purveyor of Bloated Non-Profit Salaries, also serving as Treasurer, who enjoyed the ill fate of reporting the bad news to Pooh.

"Pooh, I just got off the phone with the head of GMHF and they have a problem with the Dunwoody relo."

"Look, Purv, I thought I had this locked down. This isn't more whining about their precious artifacts being stored in...what did they call it...yeah, a "smash and grab" shopping center? Or is it that AAM certification crap again?"

"Well, those two are still on the table. Sort of."

"What do you mean 'sort of'?"

"It's like this Pooh: it seems, outside of Dunwoody proper, and you know what I mean by proper, there are lots of African Americans in Georgia. It should come as no surprise that this is reflected in the demographics of both the inductees and attendees of the GMHF."

"So? Just because Dunwoody is in Georgia, doesn't mean there's Georgians in Dunwoody. It's always been that way. Plus, this is the 'Town in Beige' not 'Somewhere Under a Rainbow'.  And we didn't paint the Farmhouse WHITE because the paint was cheaper!"

"Yeah, Pooh. I know...I know. But it's different now. Things have changed since you moved here. Now we want something from The Other Georgia and well, they want something from us. They won't even consider our bid without it."

"OK Purv. What the hell is it? Do they want more money under the table? Is this just another shakedown? Haven't  we paid them enough already?"

Purv, in a voice tinged with fear, whispered his response. "Dammit Pooh. I told you about that kinda talk. You keep it up, folks are gonna find out and you'll have us all in trouble. And NO, that's not what it is. It's even worse."

"What could be worse?"

"I'll tell you what. Turns out they've looked over every map of Dunwoody and come to find out, we don't have a street named after Martin Luther King. Not a one. Nowhere. And they'll not have the GMHF in a city without one."

"Alright Purv! I've had enough of your practical jokes and you've wasted enough of all our time. Especially mine! And who else was in on this prank? I want names. NOW!"

"Look Pooh, this is no joke. And they're not negotiating on this. There is no wiggle room. None whatsoever. Fer crissakes they're even ON Martin Luther King Boulevard in Macon. This is serious. We've gotta find a street to rename and push it through Council ASAP or Athens is gonna win with that silly 'we're the most musical city in Georgia' bullshit. And Athens has a Martin Luther King Parkway."

"OK. Fine. Let's pick a street. How about Jett Ferry? Get it? Jett?"

"Yeah, Pooh, I get it. And even if you weren't trying to be funny, you know what kind of people live on Jett Ferry. Can you see them sending out Christmas cards with an MLK return address? How about Ashford-Dunwoody? That's where it will be located and it's a silly name anyway." 

"Negatory, Purv. I've got plans for renaming that road." Nods of approval all around the room. "How about over by Winter's Chapel? Those folks won't complain, half of 'em don't even speak English. Or Tilly Mill? You gonna tell me there's folks wantin' to rename it 'Golda Lox Lane' or something?"

Purv ended the uncomfortable silence, responding in a firm, controlled voice. "Pooh, this is serious and if you can't be, then it's you who's wasting time. We gotta come up with a street and it can't be so obvious we shoved it in a corner. Get with the program."

Pooh, not acknowledging the prior offense and with more than a little anger in his voice retorted: "Don't talk to me like that Purv. I'll have your ass if you do. So what street would you pick since you're so smart? You think you're gonna rename Mount Vernon or Chamblee Dunwoody, or even Dunwoody Road?"

"Dunwoody Road is out. You can't even begin to imagine the hell we'd catch from that asshole blogger on that one." As Purv pours over an expensive GIS map of Dunwoody, he stops, looks up and says, "I've got it. This is perfect."

"Ok, so what is it?"

"Nandina!"

"Nandina? Where, or what, the hell is Nandina?"

"Nandina. It's that short piece of pavement between Mount Vernon and Chamblee Dunwoody that all those assholes use as a cut-through."

"You mean the jerks who expect the whole world to stop so they can make a left turn?"

"Those are they.  This is perfect. It's in lovely downtown Dunwoody. Folks on both major roads will see the signs and know how inclusive we are. It's close enough to the Farmhouse to be a place of honor, but independent enough that it will not evoke antebellum images."

"Purv, stop with the gibberish and speak English." Pooh leans over the map and smiles. "Ya know what? You're absolutely right, Nandina is perfect. With a name like that it can't be related to a founding father. Sounds Mexican so no Dunwoodians will object...can you imagine the uproar if we renamed a cul de sac called 'Brickleberry Lane'?"

"You can NOT name a dead end street after Martin Luther King!"

"Right. With Nandina we only have to change two signs. Not as good as one, but still not bad. And think of the money we save, when...er...if we change it back. You're a genius! But there's only one other thing."

"What's that."

"Everybody has to know it was my idea."

"WHAT!!???" It's MY idea."

"Look, Purv, you signed an IPR agreement. All ideas belong to me. That's just the way it is."

Purv, obviously annoyed, said "Fine. We're still not done Mister Idea Man. What are you gonna call it: Boulevard, Street, Road, or Lane? Or maybe you think it would be a good idea to call it 'Alley'?"

"You're about to cross a line you don't wanna cross there Purv. Anyway, I don't need to make that choice. Though I'm sure they'd rubber-stamp the idea, it's nice to throw the Council a bone every now and then. This is one of those times. Let them pick, then they're committed to it too. Now, unknot yer shorts and get the ball rollin'. We need an official Memo From The Staff signed by 5K. We need it inside the hour, so get moving. When you get that done, get those biddies over at 'Lemonade Days' started on the renaming ceremony. I'll be busy writing my speech."

There you have it Dear Readers. Martin Luther King Jr. is coming to Dunwoody and we have the Georgia Music Hall of Fame to thank for it.

It's the Law

Georgia Law requires open meetings:

TITLE 50. STATE GOVERNMENT
CHAPTER 14. OPEN AND PUBLIC MEETINGS

O.C.G.A. § 50-14-1 (2007)

§ 50-14-1. Meetings to be open to public; limitation on action to contest agency action; recording; notice of time and place; access to minutes; telecommunications conferences

Any actions taken in defiance of these open meeting laws are not binding:

(b) Except as otherwise provided by law, all meetings as defined in subsection (a) of this Code section shall be open to the public. Any resolution, rule, regulation, ordinance, or other official action of an agency adopted, taken, or made at a meeting which is not open to the public as required by this chapter shall not be binding.

That includes zoning, the stick with which the city intends to beat back school overcrowding and traffic congestion.

Also the public must be given timely notice with adequate details:

(d) Every agency shall prescribe the time, place, and dates of regular meetings of the agency. Such information shall be available to the general public and a notice containing such information shall be posted and maintained in a conspicuous place available to the public at the regular meeting place of the agency. Meetings shall be held in accordance with a regular schedule, but nothing in this subsection shall preclude an agency from canceling or postponing any regularly scheduled meeting. Whenever any meeting required to be open to the public is to be held at a time or place other than at the time and place prescribed for regular meetings, the agency shall give due notice thereof. "Due notice" shall be the posting of a written notice for at least 24 hours at the place of regular meetings and giving of written or oral notice at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting to the legal organ in which notices of sheriff's sales are published in the county where regular meetings are held...

(e)(1) Prior to any meeting, the agency holding such meeting shall make available an agenda of all matters expected to come before the agency at such meeting. The agenda shall be available upon request and shall be posted at the meeting site, as far in advance of the meeting as reasonably possible, but shall not be required to be available more than two weeks prior to the meeting and shall be posted, at a minimum, at some time during the two-week period immediately prior to the meeting.

(e)(2) A summary of the subjects acted on and those members present at a meeting of any agency shall be written and made available to the public for inspection within two business days of the adjournment of a meeting of any agency. The minutes of a meeting of any agency shall be promptly recorded and such records shall be open to public inspection once approved as official by the agency, but in no case later than immediately following the next regular meeting of the agency...

One councilman understands the importance of adhering to the letter and spirit of Georgia's Open Meeting laws but also provides us with a telling observation:

"Come this evening at 7 p.m. when five of us are sworn in, we will then be subject to open meetings and everything from that point on will be discussed in the open."

This suggests that much has already been discussed behind closed doors---confirming what we already know from watching the Citizens for Dunwoody.

It is time for these Citizens for Dunwoody who are now officially in charge to realize they are no longer operating a private corporation where secrecy is allowed and that they are now beholding to all the Citizens of Dunwoody including those of us in The Other Dunwoody.

For all our sakes let us hope these leopards can change their spots. If they don't their decisions will not hold up in the court of public opinion and may not survive challenge in Georgia State Courts.

TOD