Some Candidates Are Descendents Of No City Brookhaven

In this new entry into The Forum, a neighbor says Brookhaven needs elected officials who will start the city on the road to prosperity.

Is Yes and No about Brookhaven over? For most anyway, it's time to build a prosperous Brookhaven; time to let go of the old DeKalb status quo. However, some candidates are direct descendants of No, who have not completed the evolution into Brookhaven.

Phase 1: Nobody Vote

The No City leaders and DeKalb County government would have been happiest if nobody but the legislature had voted on Brookhaven.

From January through March they tried to deny your voice in choosing your local government by blocking the very opportunity to vote. They attempted to convince your state government to move against HB 636 which called for the referendum to incorporate Brookhaven within DeKalb County. They presented a
campaign of misinformation and doubt to the legislators. They delivered petitions to the governor. And they even coordinated with your own elected DeKalb officials and DeKalb's highly-paid county lawyer/lobbyist, trying to kill the bill before it reached you, the residents.

Thankfully, the state legislature saw through their selfish campaign. The 'Brookhaven bill' passed both the House and the Senate overwhelmingly and the referendum was set for July 31.

Phase 2: Everyone Vote No

Simultaneously, the No City leaders were publically spreading their negative anti-Brookhaven message.

Various versions of Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt appeared on yard signs, in negative flyers and in unfounded accusations on blogs. They attacked anyone and everyone who dared suggest a City of Brookhaven could serve its residents better and more efficiently than DeKalb County status quo provides.

From February through July, they bombarded you with their desperate message of doom, a message built on half truths and misrepresentations. Thousands of their yard signs implored, 'No New City' and 'No City Brookhaven.'

They dressed their anti-Brookhaven opinion and half truths to look like a newspaper and threw it into your yards. Employees at DeKalb County, the very entity that taxes us so steeply, provided their list of "Items To Support Brookhaven Opposition" via email.

Phase 3: Vote for someone who voted No

After July 31, their seven-month barrage of doubt and dire predictions for our new city went quiet and their no-city web site went away. However, two of the No City naysayers, Sandy Murray and Jim Eyre, are trying to sway your vote once again.

Sandy Murray and Jim Eyre both were heavily involved with the No-City efforts, fighting Brookhaven incorporation every step of the way. They told you a city is a bad idea; the city can't be a success; the city can't have lower tax; the city can't afford police; the city will be broke; the city is another layer; the city will be divided; blah, blah, blah...

And now they are telling you to trust them to build our new city by electing them to be among our first representatives for Brookhaven's fledgling years. Why would we want to do that; to take a step backwards in the evolution of our new city?

This is not to say people who did not support Brookhaven can't change to become productive city supporters. Of course people learn and change over time. There is room enough for differing opinions in Brookhaven. But this first election is too critical to take a chance on any candidate who so ardently tried to
prevent Brookhaven. Especially in the presence of so many qualified Brookhaven supporters and believers.

Opportunity for Brookhaven to Thrive

We have an exciting opportunity in our city of Brookhaven.  Five elected local officials (mayor plus four city council members) will represent the citizens, overseeing a city manager with a small staff, who in turn will hire the public safety (police) department. Most other city services will be provided by private companies who will be contracted through annual open competitive bidding.

The elected officials will be our neighbors, living among us with the consequences their decisions. The employees of the contracted providers will be accountable to us every day for their performance. It will be an efficient model following the successful examples of Sandy Springs, Johns Creek, Dunwoody and Milton. The mayors and city council members of those cities embrace and understand the new reality of the public-private city model.

Indeed, officials from each of those cities are ready to share their experience and advice as we build Brookhaven.

For best results vote for those who believe and support your right to vote. We need five public servants known to be ready to leave the old status quo; known to relish the opportunity and the challenge of building Brookhaven from the referendum up. A mayor and city council should be of people who know the facts and who we know already believe in Brookhaven. Not people who fought your right to vote.

Choose candidates who clearly understand that we need collaborative effort to start Brookhaven properly in the modern model for lasting success. That is why I voted early for J. Max Davis for Mayor and Rebecca Chase Williams for City Council District 1.

See you 'round the city,

Clayton Conarro

John Q Public November 05, 2012 at 11:19 AM
Phil. Such the clairvoyant. And so full of wisdom. Thank GOD himself you are here in Brookhaven with us.
HamBurger November 05, 2012 at 12:34 PM
Mr. Ferdinand, how quickly we forget the Brookhaven Yes (and sister Brookhaven Ballot Committee) mailers and robo calls . . . Please pass the yellow mustard!
Mark Graffagnino November 05, 2012 at 01:41 PM
Phil is exactly right. There was another reason for not waiting until 2013- if we had then the NO strategy would have morphed from "what's the rush" to "the CVI study is out of date and needs to be redone". And raising another $30,000 for a CVI study was not going to happen. You will remember that they even tried that "study is out of date" tactic when the study was 9 months old. And frankly, if someone was not engaged enough to get educated about cityhood in the 9 months between the study and the vote, with all the various meetings held around town, forums, op-ed pieces, etc., then they were not going to be engaged whether it was 2 years or 5 years until the vote.
Frisco November 05, 2012 at 03:31 PM
Swami, your analysis is interesting, I am glad to see you have done your homework. I hope that the people of Brookhaven look at the candidates qualifications very closely and don't base their decision to vote for a candidate based on the number of yard signs they have placed. I think the yard signs have gotten out of hand and should be on the agenda for our new officials to address.
don Gabacho November 05, 2012 at 07:06 PM
""Fear Mongering ways of a Yeser"--Brookhaven4u As in fear and loathing in Zombieland. It has been amazing how he and other B'Yes Sirs have gone to protect the MxGov, and not Brookhaven, much less Georgia and the USA, in even the episode of this cityhood. To even threaten others with Mx's so-called police (including stateside): Ex: Under the subject "Police Chief Hopefuls Need Not Apply...Yet " don Gabacho 1:37 pm on Wednesday, October 3, 2012 "'JD Clockadale, the commission member who co-chairs the police committee said,...'” Welcome to corporatist governance." Phil 2:03 pm on Wednesday, October 3, 2012 don Gabacho--Maybe you need to turn things around and move back to Mexico to keep an eye on THEM. Instead of THEM keeping an eye on you. THEY will never suspect that you would be that clever. Make sure you keep the light timer on so they think you are still in the house. Welcome to corporatise governance, por favor.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »