Johns Creek City Council and Post 4

Friends,
Adam Thomas seems to find it necessary to suggest things about Chris Coughlin that simply do not hold up under scrutiny.  Even though the “tax promise” mentioned was made during a campaign that was NOT for the seat Chris currently holds, he still has not broken that tax promise.

The above states that Chris Coughlin pushed for a millage rate of 4.3. That was lower than the millage rate in the motion that was being debated. That would have been a tax cut.


How often does one see a incumbent chastised for offering an amendment to lower tax rates and then have that used against him?  This could be a first.  But it gets better.  


Chris never voted for a millage rate over 4 to be implemented in Johns Creek.  He did support an amendment to the motion to lower the rate from the roll back rate.  But if that passed, that did not mean that Chris would have then voted to set the millage rate at that level.  


His flyer is deceptive at the very least.  Council Members should offer amendments to motions to drive the conversation, even if ultimately they will not support it.  That is how you hear the debate on the principles and positions. 

 
It’s a shame he has to try and paint a picture that suggests something that is simply not true about Coughlin. 

 
So, are the statements made on Mr. Thomas’ flyer campaign flyer promises he will live up to?


Do you really think Thomas will have a budget where every expenditure will be justified?   Prior to implementation of this budget?  Has he actually watched the budget process?


Unless he redefines what audit means, the answer would be no.  

Let’s combine that with his argument that critical projects have been delayed and defunded.  We know that many of these projects have shown little to no value to Johns Creek. 

But they were “promised”  with TSPLOST.  Should not an elected official challenge wasteful spending on behalf of the residents?  Absolutely.


And to answer his question?


Yes Chris Coughlin represents me. And I will be voting for him because he has represented me, challenged bad ideas pushed by the majority, improved our traffic flow on 141, and worked on many other issues to improved our quality of life.

Vaping Crisis? Or Common Sense Crisis?

Nothing gets politicians or wanna be politicians more excited than a new crisis. And fortunately, as we head into the fall election cycle, we have one in Johns Creek.

Vaping is a choice, made by individuals, whom we give the right to drive vehicles that weigh thousands of pounds at high speeds that can kill instantly. We also give those individuals the right to terminate a pregnancy, go swimming, ride bicycles, and choose the foods that they consume.

The scope of this vaping “crisis” pales in comparison to a real crisis. First and foremost, the individuals can manage their own risk by stopping. As a parent, you can help by informing your children of their risks.

In 2017, 2,734 teenagers were killed in traffic accidents. That is 7.5 per day.

In 2019, there have been 26 vaping deaths reported(adults and teenagers). That works out to 0.09 deaths per day.

The death rate for traffic accidents for teens is 83 times higher than the death rate for all vaping deaths over the last twelve months.

One would think if the media and the politicians were interested in saving lives, then focus on that item which could save the most lives. However they never seem able to do that.

It’s about sensationalism and emotionalism.

We do not need sensationalism and emotionalism in elected officials. It generates knee jerk reactions to situations we would not even need to address if the individuals affected just took responsibility for their own actions.

And in this instance, it’s the same individuals we are willing to give a driver’s license to.

Logic needs to rule the day when it comes to public policy making and not emotion.

Freedom of Speech: It’s Not “Freedom From Speech You Dislike”

I keep asking myself why this topic keeps coming up.  Certainly it was not the “Anything But Coughlin” signs.  Coughlin is more than prepared to respond to such things.

Ask yourselves what is worse-anonymous speech or people in positions of authority who use these positions in an attempt to bully people into silence?  Here’s a hint-anonymous speech is protected in the State of Georgia(more below).

How many people have come to me and told me that the Mayor of our City has made one disparaging remark after another about me.  That’s his prerogative of course.  People who know me know better.  And when he tells people that know me these sorts of things, do you think those that know me and know my principles actually believe it? 

There is the time after the John Bradberry-Vicki Horton Runoff debate two years ago where the Mayor of our City sought me out in a crowded room to make the comment to me that follows:

“I look forward to making your life a living hell the next four years”. 

Free speech? Something else?

I’ll let you decide.  

Then candidate and now Council Member Bradberry knows not only what was said to me, but stated to me that the Mayor came to him after I left the building and asked  “Did your friend tell you what I said?”

Council Member Zaprowski, near the height of the “anonymous troll hunt”  was approached by me to talk to his friend and supporter Tom Warren about repeatedly accusing me of posting under fake Facebook names.  Did knowing a name make a difference?

He took a pass and told me to speak to him myself. 

The Johns Creek Post had a series of IP addresses with pseudonyms from some of the individuals screaming the loudest about anonymous comments.  

Here’s an idea:  Lay out an unemotional argument on the merits of what you have been challenged on and post where you choose and leave it at that.

Our residents are smart.  Very smart.  They will cut through the nonsense and the BS and they won’t need your help to figure it out.  

These are the very reasons some in our community choose to remain anonymous within our community while making comments.  Who wants to be bullied?  Who wants to be questioned about why they have a certain candidate’s sign in their yard?  Who wants to be pushed for an endorsement?

Just to make it clear, protected free speech does include the use of false identification to avoid social ostracism, to prevent discrimination and harassment and to protect privacy.

Please see ACLU VS. Miller:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_Liberties_Union_v._Miller

The Georgia General Assembly passed legislation that eliminated rights to privacy when using the internet in the State of Georgia. Governor Zell Miller signed the legislation into law in April 1996. Several internet based groups that guaranteed privacy to their users sought to have the law overturned on constitutional grounds, and enlisted the support of civil liberties groups such as the ACLU.[1]

Decision

After the plaintiff could prove likelihood of success of merits, substantial threat of irreparable injury, balance of hardships, and the promotion of the public interest, the court awarded the plaintiff with a preliminary injunction. Thus the defendant was enjoined from enforcing the newly passed act and was forced to revoke it. This act was found to be unconstitutional and in violation of the Bill of Rights.[2]

Either get the Constitution changed or find another venue to address your issues over anonymous posters.  This issue has already been resolved in the State of Georgia. 

It is in the best interest of the Public overall, and your constituents, that they always have the freedom and the right to post anonymously.  

It’s time to lead by example rather than by intimidation.

There is no better place than to start with this Council today.

Why wait?

Ernest Moosa

Gateway Marker Designs Speak For Themselves

On Friday September 27th, the City Council received the preliminary drawings for proposed Gateway Markers for the City of Johns Creek. The City Council was getting an early peak for the drawing and voting was to start this week from the residents. In less than 91 minutes from receiving the drawings forwarded by the Mayor, Council Members began to react.

Last April I wrote about how this effort was a complete waste of taxpayer monies. I also wrote the following(was I wrong?):

A government cannot define us. An artist will not define us. Gateway Markers will not define us. We do not need outsiders to come in and tell us who we are.
Government can identify us but it will never define us. The moment we let government define us is the moment we have lost who we are. We should be defining government instead.

Is this a good use of taxpayer dollars? I’ll let you decide for yourself.

The Council reacted negatively and these drawings were withdrawn from Public View. While they were supposed to be presented and voting begin on September 30,2019, it appears that changes will now be made before presenting to the public for consideration.

How much this will cost or what the revisions are remains to be seen.