Vote for Steve Allen = Vote for Mayor Haddix
(To Steve Allen, running against Incumbent Eric Imker, Peachtree City Council, Post 1)
I have read both of your "Letters to the Editor" in The Citizen announcing your candidacy. The only consistent theme you seem to have is that you disagree with anything Imker does or wants to do that is in opposition of Peachtree City's Mayor, Don Haddix. In your original announcement for running (Steve Allen: Why I'm Running Against Eric Imker for City Council, The Citizen, 9/13/11), three of your six bullet points specifically state Imker's opposition to the Mayor as your reasoning for opposing him, and at least one other bullet (DAPC) has the same implication written all over it. In the comments on these blogs to your letter, several people surmised that Haddix actually penned it.
You may have been convinced by Haddix that he has a swell of support and you could ride his coattails to victory. I suggest you watch the citizen response portion of the censure and read the editorials over the past few months in the papers. Even councilman-elect George Dienhart admitted in a recent editorial that the mayor is a loose cannon and is not re-electable (Peachtree City Needs Positive Leadership, Fayette County News, 7/23/11).
"I don’t believe he is re-electable at this point. To continue to draw attention to the Mayor’s PR activities will only serve to highlight a governmental loose cannon to businesses that want to make Peachtree City their home. Let the electorate do its job. Let the voters fire the mayor when his term is up." George goes on to say, "When Mayor Haddix causes controversy, the business’ that are considering a move to our city may start to look elsewhere."
Tell me Steve, how do your ideas of sustaining existing business and attracting new companies to Peachtree City align with the counter-productive activities and perception of our mayor? If new revenue growth through existing and new business is truly your goal, it can only be done in step with opposition to Haddix's continued dismantlement of our city's reputation and aggravation to the people and groups whose job it is to bring in that new business. Either you want new business for our city and therefore, denounce the activities of the mayor that prevent it, or you support the Mayor and his actions and accept the fact that, along with that support, goes the opportunity to attract new business. You can't have it both ways.
You continue to call Eric down on the tax issue, so let's get a look at the best unbiased view we have going right now, the editor of this paper, Mr. Cal Beverly. I happen to respect Cal and what he writes, you may feel differently. Cal says what he means, doesn't mince words, and never seems to let the local politicians sway his opinion. So what did Cal say about Imker and his taking on the Mayor on the budget and tax issues?
"I disagree with Mayor Don Haddix that furloughs should be off the table in Peachtree City. He says the city is not like a private business, mainly because there are “citizen demands.”
"Four cheers to Councilman Eric Imker for pointing out the obvious: The emperor has no clothes. The money ain’t there, and it likely ain’t gonna be there for several years to come. Mr. Imker, you are absolutely right to confront the status quo in local government."
"I agree completely with Mr. Imker: It’s time to deal with reality. Private sector taxpayers are a lot worse off than almost all government employees at all levels."
Steve, you say the things you think the people want to hear, like running the government like a business, yet you denounce the one guy who has been trying to do just that (Imker) while swooning at the mere thought of the Mayor who states that the city cannot be run like a private business. You need to make a decision Steve and we as the citizens of the city are waiting to hear it. Either firmly distance yourself from the Mayor by calling him on his actions and run on a promise to oppose the shenanigan he continues with that are running this city in the ground or go ahead and get your election signs printed with a picture on the front of you and Donnie holding hands. Which is it going to be?
Finally let me say this, as I know you read these blogs (you admitted as much in your email to me). Why do you think that most of the "citizens" who respond in support of the mayor here hide behind their monikers and never validate who they are, while most of those who oppose the mayor and/or support Eric Imker don't mind showing their real names? Is it possible that all of these supporters that come out of the woodwork privately on these blogs may be one in the same? Perhaps Haddix himself? His wife? I'm just asking. Remember, these people can't use their multiple monikers at the voting booth.