Becoming George

Not THAT George. This isn't about George Sand, even though that book is on the TOD Book Club reading list. This is about the other George, George Orwell, and his prophetic work, Nineteen Eighty-Four, though off the mark by 42 years. But we made it.

The BBR editorialist has been sucked into the doublethink by way of newspeak. Case in point is his use of the word safety and a rather bold statement regarding police officers preventing crime. By and large, and as previously observed, police do not actually prevent crime, they respond once a crime has been [allegedly] committed. Even when "keeping the peace" at protests and rallies, the police are restricted from action unless and until someone actually crosses a line. 

Some might argue that a police presence discourages, perhaps prevents, criminal behavior. But no one really believes that, especially the police, or the department would deploy officers in ways dramatically different to their clearly preferred protocol. Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon may be a thing, but the separation between police and actually preventing crime is far, far greater.

That's why use of the word safety in this context is clearly newspeak attempting to create and enforce a perception unassociated with reality. But, one might further argue that these new surveillance systems, being enhanced with AI, can now predict with some level of accuracy, that some one might be, or might soon be, engaged in unacceptable activities, allowing the police to apprehend the individual prior to the actual commission of a crime. That might qualify as safety, unless of course you're apprehended when that AI mischaracterizes your behavior.

If you have ever wondered, as so very few of you have, how it came to be that so many sensible Germans were seduced to the dark side in the 1930's, now you know.

Bring Back The Magic*

Nothing can tear you apart

If you keep living straight from the heart

Though you know that you're gonna hurt some

The magic will come

If you keep living straight from the heart

You will know when to stop and to start

Once you see that no one really wins

Then the magic begins

Bring back the magic

Don't make life so tragic

Bring back the magic

Don't make life so tragic

This magic doesn't work. Not even in Margeritaville, and certainly not at Dunwoody City Hall. It seems that one former councilman did not get the memo. Neither did the Blue Bag Rag as they have been spending ink letting him vent his disappointment and frustration. 

This is quite baffling. This councilman was a vocal supporter of forming a city, certainly had access to the proposed city charter (everyone did), and also must have known that the neighbors we could elect to council or to be mayor would be powerless. It is there in black and white. Given this, how in the world can "local control" exist? Is he, or anyone else for that matter, at all surprised at this bloated, self-serving bureaucracy, with its insatiable greed for outside money? If he wants the city to "do the right thing" he surely understands that for them the "right thing" comes with lots of money. All he needs to do is scrounge up a grant. 

But this is getting a bit tiresome, like watching and listening to Ernest Angley: entertaining at first; amusing at its best; but mostly unbelievable as all faith healings are. There is no pentecostal politician, certainly not a former politician, who is going to lay hands on these bureaucrats, yell "Heal!" and suddenly they become righteous, faithful or even honest servants of the citizens of Dunwoody. 

He made a deal with the devil and took the road paved with mere intentions. Welcome to hell.

* Apologies to ParrotHeads everywhere.

EFF-ing Flock

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) focuses on privacy and liberty in the internet age and has taken aim at Flock and their ubiquitous cameras. In the first case, they saw, and reported on mission creep. This included a case directly contradicting Flock's statements that their technology "is not used to enforce traffic violations" even though a Georgia State Trooper ticketed a motorcyclist for holding a phone with the notation on the ticket that it was captured on a specific Flock camera. 

Obviously, Flock do nothing to actually ensure their system does not do what they say it cannot do. 

In a follow up a month later, EFF reports that due to lack of judicial supervision cops have expanded their [mis]use from specific violations to whatever the hell tickles their fancy. They suggest that lack of a warrant requirement has created a culture of off-label, unrestricted access to sensitive location information. PoPos' justification, provided by Flock, is to point out all the high-stakes crimes these cameras assist in, despite the facts proving the technology's more common use in very low-level investigations. Buford City Schools is using this technology for residency verification, which on the surface seems, well, lazy. BCS claims they are so good that they are subjected high levels of residency fraud but have failed to clearly explain how this happens and why Flock's technology is such a godsend. Lest you think the cesspool is restricted to Georgia, this is happening across the country. Governments, predominantly law enforcement agencies, are now doing searches as pre-employment background searches.  Now that these eyes now have ears, the technology is being brought to bear on noise complaints, including our very own DeKalb County PD. 

Across the board, the justifications range from cherry-picked examples to the downright silly, insulting the intelligence of any subjected to this blather. Like you. These are obfuscations deflecting attention from their end-around on due process. It may not be illegal (yet), maybe not even unethical, but it is clearly immoral, and this mission creep is only going to get creepier. 

Is It Enough?

In a recent discussion regarding the Flock contract, Mother Mayor opines:

"These changes don't feel insignificant to me. And, again, I support this technology, but ... we need to own the data, we need to control how it's retained and we need to control how it's accessed, and it feels like this latest round of changes just suck that right away from us."

Wow Mother Mayor, want to apply that kind of logic to the proposed changes to the city charter that open up a very wide avenue for unrestricted tax increases without the burden of putting that to the citizens of Dunwoody? See, you may not think so, but quite a few citizens, and taxpayers, in this city would say that these changes don't feel insignificant either. Yet you're out there on social media promoting and defending these changes with rather dismissive comments regarding how "this clears up some contradictions in the charter about assessments." Pray tell, what exactly are these contradictions?

The proposed changes clearly state that no referendum is required nor is any limit imposed for Special Tax Districts, general obligation bonds, and (heaven forbid) revenue bonds. Anyone who has been watching the shenanigans at city hall will expect a flurry of "Special" Tax Districts being created.

King John offers his $0.02:

Heneghan opinion - I believe this modification sidesteps the Charter requirement of a maximum ad valorem tax rate of 3.04 mills by not counting taxes for Special Tax Districts, general obligation bonds, and revenue bonds. 

One of the constant chants coming from the pro-Dunwoody crowd was "Local Control!" Said it loud. Said it proud. But how do we, the people, exert Local Control? If you would actually read the city charter, you might be called on, some day, to fess up to the fact that our elected officials are virtually powerless. That's why when there is an issue and someone invokes "Mayor Deutsch" your response, if there is one, is to tell them which city bureaucrat to email and to please cc the mayor. Why? Because you are prohibited from doing exactly what you told them to do. We elect folks who cannot tell anyone, except the City Manager (when he's around), to do, or even look into, anything. Nada. And both city managers have made it clear to our elected officials that he only has to keep four of them happy. Not ecstatic, just not pissed. 

So the only way, we the people, can exert Local Control is thru the ballot box--voting on referendums. You undermine that, you take that away, you are clearly stating that we the people should be subjugated, that we should be held powerless, and subject to the whims of unelected bureaucrats. You have made it very clear where you stand on the issue of real Local Control.

But here's is the closing question: is there any level of taxation where the Mayor, or these unelected bureaucrats would say is enough and any more is just too much?

Stretching Credulity

We wouldn't be here were it not for a period of mass insanity, or just an intense wave of polyannishness, quite a while ago, but here we are. And where is that?

Destruction from within.

The bureaucrats, and at least one elected official, trying to figure out how to walk away from foundational commitments to fiscal prudence, and modify the city charter to allow them to up taxes when they want, however much they want. 

One elected official has espoused the view that these changes are a "back door" tax increase, while another asserts it is a full frontal assault. Perhaps they are both right. It is a back door if by that you mean that bureaucrats can raise taxes without putting that to a citizens' vote. This is what is being proposed in the case of special tax districts, capital bonds and "revenue bonds" which sound a lot like payday loans and probably as responsible. Another perspective is this is being writ large in black and white, so there is no back door to it at all, this is pushing the ballot box out of the way by force. 

This does raise some questions, especially for those who "fell for it" back in the day. Is this what you were promised to get your vote? Didn't think so. And what about those special task districts? What do you think will happen there? Very likely you will see a growing number of them, not necessarily restricted to commercial districts. Imagine this: some bureaucrats decide that if folks in residential areas want cops to ticket speeders in their neighborhood, well, then, they'll call that a special tax district, jack up the taxes, and then maybe, just maybe, actually write some tickets. Or, maybe not. After all that is what they promised to do to get your vote. And, money is fungible, so they'll just be displacing the other tax revenues to their playthings. 

This has gotten out of [our] control.

The only voice of reason, the only ounce of integrity at city hall comes from King John. You would do well to listen to him.

What Changed?

A recent front page article in the Blue Bag Rag, which really shouldn't have been published, simply reveals the state of stupidity at city hall. It's ostensibly about Flock O' Cameras, but it is so full of nonsense one can only suggest that you "lift the pants, it's too late to save the shoes." 

Where to start?

Oh, let's start with the money. Where does this article say it comes from? Well, it is claimed to be PCID funded, the same PCID that back in the day was quite proud of getting 19 dollars of OPM for every dollar they ponied up. So...yep...outsider money to do what outsiders tell you to do. Sounds like city hall has a pretty loopy definition of "local control." But...wait for it...later the article mentions concerns about a private company using public money to surveil the public. Where the hell were these concerns in the first place? If city hall's greed overcame these concerns back then, why not now?

What changed with the Flock agreement, when, and why wasn't it noticed until now? With the army of money sponges we have at city hall, when they actually come to the office, why did we not have a single bureaucrat to monitor the T&C's, and changes thereunto, for outsourced responsibilities? Maybe we should fire a great number of useless bureaucrats and find someone who can bird-dog outsourcing contracts. Sounds like a win-win.

Then there is the big constitutional so what? You're in public, on public infrastructure, with a vehicle identification that, by law, must be visible. As a federal court has pointed out this violates no constitutional right, even if it were the government doing it themselves. Now, if a private company were to do this, constitutional rights don't apply because those rights protect us from the government, not from each other. 

And then we get to the real issue, or at least part of it, the issue that has the Blue Bellies running this shit show clutching their pearls: ICE. Mentioned ICE twice in this rather short article. First that ICE seems to have accessed some data from the Sandy Springs' (our big sister) Flock O' Cameras followed later by reported assurances from Flock that they don't do that. Heaven forbid that ICE should use every resource available to do their job. Maybe Dunwoody considers itself to be the gold standard of governance, one that ICE should emulate: just don't do your job. Don't even try.

It is a curiosity that city hall doesn't want to get criminals off our streets. And you only need pull the thread a bit before the whole sweater of "undocumented immigrants" unravels. Do they have a driver's license? Acquired by what means? Falsified statements and documents? And you want motor-voter, don't you?

Then you gotta bottom-line it. Are these spend-then-tax Blue Bellies really only pissed because they, well really PCID, are paying and ICE is free-loading? Well, as far as we know that may be the case, because no one seems to have asked if ICE is paying for Flock data services. Maybe if ICE went down to city hall and said "let's make a deal" and threw some money their way, they'd be cool...like ICE. That's how we got interstate lanes in folks' front yard. OPM and other people's agenda. City hall's definition of local control: we take their money and we control it.

You Gotta Wonder

You gotta wonder how many folks in Kingsley were around when the citihood movement spun up.

You gotta wonder how many of those folks were involved with Dunwoody Yes! or Citizens for Dunwoody. 

You gotta wonder how many of those folks voted yes on the referendum.

You gotta wonder how many of those folks actually read the city charter before they voted. 

You gotta wonder how many have ever read the city charter.

You gotta wonder how many are surprised how things have turned out at city hall.

You gotta wonder how many still think benign neglect of DeKalb was worse than Dunwoody's willful negligence.

You gotta wonder how these folks took the decision to hire a lawyer.

And finally...

You gotta wonder where DHA has disappeared to.

Be Prepared

For promises broken. 

Not like they haven't been already, but if you read the Blue Bag Rag you noticed Mother Mayor getting front page ink to let you know what's coming, even though they've already crossed more lines than Trump. We no longer have the city manager reporting to council. No, no. Not his idea of fun? Beneath him? Regardless, the city charter calls for the city manager, and the city manager alone, to show up. In fact, the city charter has no notion of a "department" of city manager and one of the few things council can actually do to rein in this madness is to eliminate that "department." Immediately.

Without delving into the dick-pic fiasco, the city police department is objectively inferior to what we had as unincorporated DeKalb. Well, if one of your key performance indicators is "cops show up in our neighborhoods to enforce laws" but maybe that's not your KPI. Is yours PR stunts like coffee with a cop? Really? 

Then there's the bloat. Mapping all the bureaucratic entities this city has spun up would be a full time job and it is one of the many jobs the city isn't going to do. Because that kind of transparency is unflattering.

So Mother Mayor has been sent out to grease the already slippery slope. Who's pulling those strings? In any event they are about to run, not walk, away from every founding principle, every promise made. All to gorge themselves on greed. Will enough ever be enough?

SSD

Remember those? Dunwoody spent a bucket-load of money on server hardware, including adoption of Solid State Drives, notably more expensive than their spinning platter competitors. 

So what happened?

Well, now we hear that the city migrated most systems to the cloud, cited as one of the reasons they won an award. An award of suspicious value coming from what by all appearances is a lobbying organization, but that doesn't mean the cloud comment is untrue. But it raises a few questions. Did they decommission these [expensive] servers? If not, what are they being used for? If so, is this just another example of our spend-thrift government run amok?

So while they pat themselves on the back we're left to wonder if we will ever see fiscal responsibility return to city hall.

Laugh Or Cry

When administrative governments want to do something, it doesn't matter what, that they know their subjects will not approve, they do two things. First they hire consultants to tell their subjects, from an outside "expert" perspective that what the government wants is better than what these subjects might prefer. Then, as if by magic, some organization will pop up that hands out "awards" to governments who follow the herd, as if any award means they are doing the right thing, even when they are not. 

Dunwoody recently garnered kudos from  the Center for Digital Government calling out Flock drones and the "Real-Time Crime Center." It is the Flock technology that is of particular interest. Throughout the country. 

Flock cameras caught on because Blue Belly governments, who got spanked on their "defund the police policy" have found they can use this technology to diminish the police. Are Dunwoody police enforcing traffic laws in your neighborhood? If it cannot be done by technology, particularly cameras, it isn't going to happen. Blue Bellies like it that way. Some complain about a surveillance state invoking images from Orwell's 1984. This is dismissed with the wave of a hand. 

Then it got interesting. It was just fine when the targets of surveillance technology was regular Americans for the purpose of keeping them in line. And generating revenue with next-to-no effort. Cha-ching. Come to find out, Flock shares data with the feds, which was fine with local Blue Bellies when the feds were adequately blue too. That changed. CBP (who already had covert cameras of their own) and ICE tapped into the Flock system to do their job which includes controlling the border and giving free foreign vacations to interlopers. Blue Bellies are livid and are pulling Flock cameras. 

Ponder that for a moment. 

So, the Blue Bellies are all in with surveillance of their subjects for imposing their will on their subjects, but should the feds step in to impose their legal mandate on folks here without any legal authorization whatsoever, the Blue Bellies are livid. What are they saying? That their priority is to oppress the regular American while protecting folks who should be somewhere other than here. How dystopian is that?

George Orwell, a complex man of contradictions, was an atheist who attended Anglican Church and is buried in an Anglican churchyard. So one has to wonder, is he laughing in hell or crying in heaven?

Political Integrity

Is there such a thing, and if so what does it look like? Well a very vocal founding father hopes it [still] exists, but the fear in the electorate is it either does not, or integrity has a far different meaning in political circles than in the electorate. Vox pater would have today's politicians honor yesteryear's political promises.

Has that ever happened?

He again mentions local control, but let's not beat that equus mortuus into a grease spot. It is Thanksgiving after all. What he sees is the use of home rule in a nearby Porterdale being used by their unelected bureaucrats to raise the millage rate without ballot box approval fearing that the unelected bureaucrats at Dunwoody city hall will follow suit. 

That's exactly what they will do, and he knows it. 

The mayor is running a PR campaign to do exactly this, which means her bosses at city hall have told her to get out there and campaign. She is laying the groundwork. When they jack up the millage rate, it should come as a surprise to no one who doesn't have their head in the sand. 

Caveat Emptor

One of the city's foundering fathers is at it again, pondering if we've brought DeKalb into Dunwoody and if so, how? Well, the answer to the first part is "unequivocally no!" because what we have here and now is actually much worse than DeKalb. This pondering founderer would likely disagree and offers up some original intention:

"We wanted accountability, efficiency, ethics and local control." [emphasis added]

That's where the "how" comes in.

Did he read the legislation behind the referendum before he (most assuredly) voted yes? If so, can he please explain how he justified his approval of this deeply flawed city charter? The founding fathers of this country, having recently broken away from a king they despised, were keenly aware of human shortcomings and took steps to ensure that should someone missing the character and moral compass of the founders ascend to the presidency that it would not go badly. What they did not foresee was a self-serving administrative state that would grow without bound. This city's founders ignored the wisdom of  our forefathers regarding unchecked power and they have no excuse regarding a self-serving administrative state since that is exactly what they were railing against when proposing the city in the first place. 

Can someone please explain the surprise?

The city charter is modeled more after DCSD operations than DeKalb County where the CEO has real responsibilities and accountabilities, and as recently proved by Michael Thurmond, we can indeed elect someone who can make a difference. A positive difference. That is not the case with Dunwoody. And anyone who has read the charter before or after the referendum knows that. So what is it? Did all those cheerleaders for citihood, even our foundering fathers NOT read the charter before they promoted and voted? How can there now be surprise at what has happened? Did they not anticipate an ever growing bureaucratic, self-serving government? After all, it is all there in the city charter.

This was self-inflicted.

Victory Lap

One of the folks who circulated an online petition against the monstrous apartment complex proposed for the Life South property, a proposal endorsed by city bureaucrats, has done a victory lap. 

Just what was the victory?

To hear them tell it, that would be the rejection of the oft-modified proposal. That's it.

No strategic changes by folks who should care, and DHA should, but probably isn't amongst them. Nothing that takes note of the "ask for the stars to get the moon" approach often adopted by these developers. Nothing to address the fact that the city's Confederacy of Dunces who promoted and recommended approval of this fuster cluck had no elected official representing the electorate. 

Maybe these committees, or whatever the hell they are, should have at least one citizen representative from each district in the city. None of these citizens should serve in any other capacity in the city or the city adjacents: the large number of authorities, councils, committees... whatever they've thrown up as a "we didn't do it, they did" CYA. It should have at least one elected official from council or a first term mayor. In other words someone accountable at the ballot box. Otherwise we'll continue with what we have, a sham rubber-stamping whatever it is these unelected bureaucrats want, and they want what outsiders have told them to want. And maybe it is time for a Citizens Oversight Group to ride herd on this goat rodeo. 

Until meaningful, enforceable changes are made, there has been no victory.

Pay Your Own Way

Atlanta is in a bit of a bind with their policies directing funds to minority businesses as the current federal administration sees that as discrimination. The AJC is on top of the issue and has dropped a few nuggets.

Wow. They are facing some serious belt-tightening if they cannot feed at the federal trough. But, as the AJC reports, this affects more than just Atlanta, and some folks have banded together for some lawfare, seeking strength in numbers

And that one little phrase tells an enormous truth about what is wrong in America, particularly urban America: "their federal funds." That sense of entitlement is so pervasive, so much a part of every fiber of their existence that they are casual about it. "Of course it's OUR federal funds. Whose did you think it was?" Apparently some silly blokes thought it was federal funds, which makes it more about everyone and not just the urbanities. 

You have to wonder if the bureaucrats at our beige palace aspire to staking a claim on federal funds, no matter what the cost to the community. 

Surprise! SURPRISE!

Seems like a bunch of founders [successfully] came out in opposition to the phallic 55+ apartments the city bureaucrats planned for the Life South site. This has led some of these founders to do their very best Gomer impersonation expressing surprise at how all these city bureaucrats could be so out of touch with the folks who actually live in Dunwoody, many of whom voted for the city that cuts their paychecks. 

Really Gomers? Surprise? These are the same folks who [should have?] wrote the city charter that included an impenetrable firewall between our elected officials and the bureaucrats who are then free to treat this city like their very own playground. Yet now the Gomers are surprised that this is exactly what happened. Surely these statesmen at least read the charter, and mayhap understood it. If they were trying to make a mockery of democracy what would they have done differently?

Let's just say that their surprise and shock seems a bit disingenuous.

Like A Cold Sore That Won't Go Away

Dominium, so aptly named, is persistent if nothing else and is acting with Trumpian sense of entitlement and ownership of facts: "no one under age 55 will be able to live there,"  where "there" is an incredibly out of place high-rise apartment on Ashford Dunwoody. Like Trump, who has his own facts, he has a reality problem with Congress. Seems the 104th passed something called HOPA (Housing for Older Persons Act) which explicitly defines the rules for 55+, including the 80/20 rule and that only one resident need be that old.  This is an actual "act of Congress" that Mr. Dominium has no control over, so despite his protests, the actual fact is that, by law, folks under 55 can, and very likely will, live in these apartments. Otherwise, honestly (that's a stretch) why would anyone build three bedroom apartments? 

The fact that this man's proposal is so inappropriate that even advocates of urbanization are against it is concerning. What is more concerning is the bureaucrats at city hall that are actively advocating for this proposal. The folks are on our payroll, and they have not a single clue about, and even less consideration for the people living in this city. They don't know us. They don't care to. They don't work for us. So who do they work for? And what is the power these outsiders have over city hall bureaucrats?

Maybe it is time for a "power down reset," rebooting this operation with lots of new faces. 

Rolling Out The Red Carpet

This city put out the welcome mat for developers on day one, after all we had a Developers' Authority before we had a city hall. Now the city is rolling out the red carpet for developers wanting to build apartments. Hundreds, soon thousands of apartments since incorporation. 

And the folks that run this city want even more.

It is as if they are cold-calling any and all commercial property owners suggesting they do a tear-down and re-build converting these properties to huge apartment developments. Irony? Absolutely. Remember that one of the things the Dunwoody Yes! folks claimed would change was the zoning backdoor that let commercial property owners build apartments without a zoning review. Now this city is encouraging exactly that.

Since this city is so good at collaboration, how about they collaborate with the school system. Maybe they could work together to convert one of these commercial properties into a school for the students already in all those apartments this city has encouraged. You know, give these families a sense of place, a neighborhood school around which to build community. Is that because they don't care about the folks living in apartments any more than they care about those living in our neighborhoods? Is it because all they care about is making a place for developers?

Retirement Age

Ah, the "retirement age." So many meanings. Is it the period of time we are now entering where significant numbers will age out of work, to be followed by a dip in the size of the next generation to age out? Is it how old you must be to start collecting Social Security? Is it when you start "aging in place" whatever the hell that is?

Well, aging in place is the easiest to answer: it is a marketing ploy used by developers to force high density where it isn't wanted and doesn't belong. Think: the Life South property. This tactic is nothing new. We've been treated to "live-work-play" and "transit oriented development" and "mixed use," all marketing slogans used by developers to take our community where they want it to go---profits for themselves. Now we have the mantra of "age in place" and "affordable housing" to convince folks that hundreds of apartments should be built where none are needed. And they apparently have the shakers and movers at city hall, including the city manager, in their pocket. The DHA? Not so much. 

The plan is simple, use these marketing tactics to push the development over the line. Pressure has been applied, "deferral is denial" in an attempt to force a hasty decision, though this has been walked back. A good mantra for those in the approval chain would be "make haste slowly" but that isn't likely to resonate with city hall. The actuality differs from the marketing promo. By quite a bit. First, the plan calls for a 55+ community of affordable apartments, whatever that means, with the implication this will have no impact on schools. After all how many 55+ have kids in schools? Well, that there is a fork in the road. Turns out, the rules for 55+ are pretty loosey goosey. Only one of the renting adults needs to be over 55, the other could be significantly younger and might well have school age children. Then there is the 80/20 rule, which says that up to 20% of the units could be rented to anyone of any age, which explains the developer's plan for three bedroom units. Even then there is the issue of enforcement. With resident owned 55+ units there is a HOA which is responsible for enforcing residency rules and is granted some means to effectuate enforcement. These are rentals, managed by a for-profit management firm whose primary objective is maximize profit by way of maximizing occupancy, a clear disincentive to enforcing the 80/20 rule. And will the city do anything? Hell no, they don't enforce sign ordinances or issue traffic citations. They're sure as hell not going to get involved here, and it isn't clear where they would even get the data needed to monitor residents' age. Same for DHA. 

Now if the developers were really committed to building something for that age-in-place crowd, they'd make it a 62+ development. Here we're talking a bit higher bar for the residents as both adults, assuming two, must be 62 or older. Even better, and easier to monitor, all residents must be 62+ and there is no 80/20 rule. Enforcement is stricter and it is much easier to implement oversight, And, at 62, you're getting pretty close to retirement age, or at least the minimum age to take Social Security. For now. You're not likely at this age to have school age children so there is no reason, no rationalization for three-bedroom units, allowing for more units in total. For developers isn't more better? Also, this is the time of life where many people are making the transition from work to fixed income. 

No one should be surprised if the developer pushes back on any suggestion that their age-in-place profit-taking scheme be compromised with a 62+ requirement. But here's the thing to watch for: how does the city manager react to such a suggestion?

Look! Up In The Sky!

It's not a bird. It's not a plane. And it certainly isn't Superman. It's some guy in a T-shirt and underwear standing on the fifth floor balcony looking down at your kids playing in your back yard. At least that is what the city's bureaucrats have in store for you. Yes, if you live near by the village they're going have their developer buddies build hundreds of rental overlooks ideal for destroying whatever privacy you thought you had.

Is this what you voted for when you said "yes" to creating a city? No? Then consider that next time you get a chance to vote. 

What? When?

Some of the city's founding fathers have become outspoken of late, decrying the dumpster fire they set alight. No, they're not apologizing, they are chastising the bureaucrats running this shit-show. Well, someone should. And there is much to worry about as well described elsewhere. 

But it raises questions. Where are the other founders? Not just the locals currently playing but the two big hitters. Where are Fran and Dan? Are they proud of what's going on? Supportive? Is this what they intended? And let's be clear, this is intentional, just look at the city charter.

In this section we get:

Who knew? That's a serious question, not a joke. Which of these founders was responsible for this? Who approved of it? Which ones even read the charter before they went out selling it to the voters? Did they really not know that a vote for this city was the last meaningful vote allowed in this city? Do they not understand that this clause means that none of the clowns we elect can do anything, unless you consider a chit chat with the Top Bureaucrat "doing something"?

There is a small ray of hope in section 2.12 subsection a:

The council can eliminate bloat by excising it bit by bit. Well, to be honest, not THIS council, but there is hope that one can be elected that might wield the sword. The only other option is to fire the city manager, something with increasing appeal.