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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Yes, you read that correctly. People read words and phrases and never think of the meanings of the words. Notice carefully my liberal friends. We were meant to be a loose collection of states.
Each state would set their parameters for functioning. And if you did not like it, you could move to a state you did like.
Simple, clear and concise.
It’s NOT the United Citizens of America
There are those among us that want the President of these United States to be elected by popular vote. But that is NOT the basis for which we formed this nation. A popularity test is no way to run a country. Why even bother with state borders if you like that concept?
The ONLY way to get the smaller of the 13 colonies to go along with forming “a more perfect Union”(notice it does not say perfect) was to insure it was NOT going to be majority rule.
All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression.
A Constitutional Republic
That is what we are and what we must strive to be. The smallest of minorities, the individual, MUST have there rights protected. And those rights are enumerated in the US Constitution
To allow the majority to strip away those rights would be a grave mistake. You would effectively be owned by the majority.
“Being on the side of the majority is often a sign that you are wrong, or the most unlikely to be right.”
― Mokokoma Mokhonoana
You Were Lied To In School
How many times were you told that you lived in a democracy? You do not. You live in a Constitutional Republic.
When you live in a democracy without the protections of a Constitution you are owned by the majority. Whichever side makes the most persuasive arguments wins.
Think about that.
“Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.”
― George Carlin
The More People Vote The Better The Outcome
Nothing could be further from the truth. The more people that vote the more average the outcome will be. Guaranteed.
Imagine a society where everyone was required to vote. We are frequently told that “Every Vote Counts”. Yes it might be counted, but it will also lead to worse outcomes and not better.
Voters are not experts on every topic. It’s likely most people cast votes for individuals based on name recognition only . Is that what you want to decide issues that will affect your life, your income, your safety, and your freedom? Name recognition?
Please do not rely on campaign signs, mailers, or newspaper articles to pick your candidate. Go or watch just a few public debates or forums. See what they say, how they say it and if they know what they are talking about.
I voted for individuals currently on the Johns Creek City Council that I was and am still appalled at their arrogance, ignorance and general lack of respect for their constituents..
And I based my vote on their campaign mailers. I’ll never vote blindly for a candidate again.
At the most recent City Council Meeting, Mayor Bodker and a majority of the Council were ready to pursue reducing the lane widths on 141 as a the stated primary purpose of achieving a safer 141. The logic behind this move was clearly not thought out and was not in the best interest of the majority of residents.
Several Council Members professed a desire to lower the speed limit to 45 from 55 MPH. Why? Some residents have complained over the years of speeding along 141.
How Bad Is the Problem?
No one has defined the number of speeders or the speed at which is triggering the complaint. So Council Members seem to be deciding to take a course of action based on emotions (We gotta do something!) rather than factual data.
Should the Majority of Drivers Be Penalized for the Ultra-Minority?
That’s the question these Council Members need to ask. Assume for a minute that there are 500 drivers exceeding 65 MPH daily along 141 That sounds terrible doesn’t it?
Not really. That is approximately 1% of the average number of vehicles on 141.
Should 99% of the drivers lose the opportunity to travel safely on 141 at 55 MPH because of the 1% who do not?
Think about other aspects of you life where there are those that follow the law and those that do not. Is the 1% threshold the level at which you are willing to lose your rights to do something? Hopefully the answer is no.
What Can Be Done?
Police Chief Densmore stated that officers could not issue citations unless a vehicle was traveling faster than 65 MPH. Council Members nodded their heads as this confirmed to them this was way too fast for a highway traveling through a residential community.
While Johns Creek has always been a residential community and has always had this parameter on 141, I found that argument to be weak at best.
Today, Johns Creek has more than 80 police officers, up sharply from 5 years ago.
Yet five years ago, we would see police officers along the 141 corridor parked on the sides of the road. With more officers today, we see less police vehicles, which is likely at the root of this problem.
Police presence alters driver behavior We all know that. Drivers see a police vehicle and they instantly check their speed. It’s the nature of most drivers.
Officers do not have to be present all the time. Drivers remember where they have seen officers in the past. Who does not slow down on State Bridge Road where they have seen officers numerous times in the past?
Police presence works.
Fairer, Easier Solution
This is the fairest and easiest solution. Were the speed limits lowered to 45 mph, we’d still have to have officers out there present to enforce the speed limits. If we did not, they we’d have the same situation we have today.
The choice is clear. We can legislate and penalize the majority for the 1%, or we can encourage a greater presence of police vehicles, which will accomplish the desired affect of drivers driving more safely along 141.
Johns Creek has used the “safety” for the pursuit of many solutions in Johns Creek in search of justifications. But should there be a litmus test when using these claims as justification in the implementation of policy changes, decisions and home inspections.
Residents have seen expensive traffic circles implemented at intersections that have functioned for decades as two or four way stops. The reason cited? Safety.
Residents replacing a hot water heater in their homes now need an inspection. Safety again.
The fourth fire station was justified as a safety issue, despite questions and observations that a Fast Response Unit might actually provide better outcomes for residents of Johns Creek.
Traffic intersections where you used to be able to turn left when there was a safe opportunity to do so now prohibit you from making a left turn unless you have a flashing yellow or green arrow. The reason cited? Safety.
We have U-Turns being eliminated at 141 and State Bridge southbound citing safety, while the other three legs of the intersection all still allow U-Turns. And a crossover just north of that intersection? U-Turns are allowed and despite the safety issue, will continue to be allowed for the benefit of the businesses.
The U-Turn crossover as you head south on 141 to make the U-Turn to head north is clearly more dangerous for drivers, especially young drivers as they leave the school in the afternoons. However, for the benefit of the businesses this is apparently a risk we can tolerate.
Somehow, at 141 and State Bridge, with a traffic light giving the drivers the right of way, the failure to yield the right of way by State Bridge Westbound drivers taking a right, is enough to get that U-Turn eliminated. Does that make sense?
I Can’t Drive 55
Now we have the lanes on 141 being narrowed from 12 feet to 11 feet AND the speed limit being lowered from 55 to 45 all in the name of safety.
This leads me to the following question:
What Can’t The City Of Johns Creek Do For Safety?
That’s not really the question to be honest. We would ask that if our duly elected officials were action the ones with oversight in making these decisions. But they are not. So here is the question we need to ask:
Are There Limits to What A Staff Member Can Do Using Safety As A Justification?
What’s process anyway? The residents here have elected a City Council to represent them. Can the City Council change this decision? If so how?
For starters, I’d demand actual data on 141 with traffic accidents to determine if we are actually implementing a solution solving a problem.
How many rear end collisions on 141 were reported for the last 36 months?
How many annual miles were driven on 141 for the last 36 months?
What is the ratio of rear end collisions to miles driven?
Is this higher or lower than the national average?
Is this higher or lower than the average for surrounding areas?
How many of the rear end collisions on 141 were in areas where the posted speed limit was 55 and how many were in areas where the posted speed limit was 45?
How many additional minutes of travel will be added daily to commuters traveling the 141 corridor in Johns Creek by lowering the speed limit? (if just 4 miles of 55 MPH road is reduced to 45 MPH, each vehicle will have one extra minute of travel or 24% longer)
During non-rush hours, adding 1 minute of travel to 15,000 vehicles daily equals 15,000 minutes of time. That is 250 hours per day lost. That is 1250 hours per week lost. Or 65,000 hours per year.
Apparently the majority on the City Council has forgotten that the Convention Visitor’s Bureau is NOT a charitable organization and their funds are dollars fleeced collected in taxes on individuals who generally have no say in the matter if they need a hotel room(none of us really have a say in the matter do we?)
City Council Treats CVB Dollars as Gift
Instead we see Council Members fawning over the “hard work” of the CVB to spend the tax dollars as if they have either earned the money themselves or that they have raised it in donations.
Adding insults to injuries were many comments made to justify shifting funds away from one project and to the Gateway Markers. Wasn’t Johns Creek supposed to “be the EXCEPTION? Instead we are working overtime to do what everyone else is doing. We are establishing and operating every aspect of government all the other cities around us have implemented. Rather than challenge ourselves and ask “Is this really necessary any longer” we continue to keep collecting the tax dollars and doling them out on projects and causes that any rational person would not claim is fundamentally boosting tourism.
Working overtime is not an understatement as this issue has been addressed for many valuable hours. Think about that. What might all the costs be so far between staff hours, emails, work session meetings, council meetings and behind the scene conversations? If time is money, we should consider how much time is allocated for these issues. Better yet we should eliminate this from being an issue in the first place. Eliminate the Hotel/Motel tax.
Johns Creek had revenues of 88.6 million dollars in 2018(source:CAFR Johns Creek).
The dollars the CVB has to spend is less than 1/3 of 1% of the annual revenues for Johns Creek and yet it has consumed so much time of the seven council members for the last 6 months.
What’s Wrong With Giving Tax Dollars to a Volunteer Group to Spend as they See Fit?
Everything of course. Taxes take money by force. As a taxpayer you have no choice. Want a hotel room in Johns Creek? You’ll pay the tax.
Ironically, we all know that tax dollars are wasted at the local, state and federal levels. Yet no one with the power to actually do something about that waste does so when they have the chance. We do now. Eliminate the Hotel/Motel tax.
I’ll be blunt. Having an “expert” decide what we are missing is Gateway Markers is a farce. It’s always puzzled me why in a City with the highly educated residents we have, we seek opinions and hire people outside of Johns Creek. Why not spend the money we collect locally and boost our own economy?
We have a manufactured “problem” that government must now fix. And rest assured, the consultant was going to find something. Somehow more than 80,000 of us live in Johns Creek and yet the issue is that some people do not know where the City Lines are located. And that is what ails us?
Who knows where Brookhaven ends and Buckhead starts at every entrance? Vinings and Smyrna? Suwanee and Duluth? Does that really drive your dining decisions? Your business decisions? Your choice of doctor?
These are “political” boundaries. They are not OUR boundaries. You cannot force people to self-identify because of your arbitrary legal boundaries.
Have you considered that during the Comprehensive Land Use Plan process, we constantly heard about the different Character Areas. Residents do not know where one ends and one begins. Yet somehow we know who we are.
Or do we? Are we mere sheep waiting for the City Government to tell us who we are and what we represent? Are you? Not me.
I’m reminded of all the drug commercials on TV. I did not even know I had a problem until I saw the commercial. Now I need to call the doctor to find out how to resolve my newfound issue. Yet before that commercial, I was perfectly content.
That’s how it works when you give “experts” lots of money to come in and tell you what you are missing. If you don’t already know, then you must not be missing it.
While the CVB has been asleep at the cash box, businesses in South Forsyth are calling themselves Johns Creek. There’s even a body shop three miles into Forsyth County calling itself a Johns Creek business(perhaps a Gateway Marker there is a good idea?)
“It’s a compliment”, Council Member Bradberry said when asked about it. And he is right.
Bradberry asked about return on investment for the three items that “CVB” wants to spend money(our tax dollars) on. They were:
The Wall That Heals
The River Corridor Greenway
While Bradberry did not get any answer that one could use, other Council Members saw the benefit. There was no return on investment cited other than it was something we were missing and needed.
Bradberry said “It would be great if people knew they were in Johns Creek because the streets were cleaner, the medians were beautiful and the traffic lights and intersections were such that traffic was better, and that is how you knew you were in Johns Creek- that we did it better than our neighboring cities”.
Bradberry is correct. That is leadership by example. Not leadership by Gateway Markers.
Bradberry’s desires are basic government functions. Nothing is stopping this Council from doing this today. Not money. Not time. Even Mayor Bodker seemed to acknowledge we were not doing as good as we once did.
Council Member Zaprowski believes it would be nice to have a Gateway Marker to help people find his business when giving directions. Seriously? Your patients do not use Waze for navigation? Google Maps? After all, Johns Creek is a Partner City. And we do have signs announcing Johns Creek is a partner with Waze at all of our entrances.
Zaprowski gets the award for the strangest logic of the evening. He was against Gateway Markers but voting for it and for the Greenway but was voting against it.
This City Council really needs to grow up. Wasting hours and hours on this is beyond ridiculous. For example, after six months of fiscal year 2019 we have $1,000,000 more in revenues and $1,000,000 less in expenses. That’s $2,000,000 that only one Council Member asked about. Council Member Endres asked several questions while the City Manager gave brief and less than helpful generic responses. This is the same Council that could not see fit to cut property taxes despite the overwhelming evidence presented by Council Member Endres that we were actually increasing taxes.
The same City Council that will spend dozens of hours debating BS “feel-good gotta do something” projects seem to be blind to the multi-million dollar issues.
It needs to quit treating tax dollars as charitable contributions and the CVB as a benefactor. It needs to address the real issues.
Of course that is really hard work. And it is certainly more mundane. The truth is that they will spend less time debating the millage rate this summer than they have spent on Gateway Markers.
This Council would rather dream and fantasize on pie in the sky concepts rather than follow through with the major issues that are most important to the majority of residents within Johns Creek. At the last meeting they bumped the Police Chief and Public Safety for Gateway Markers. Think about that!
“Be the Exception”-how long before we get rid of that slogan and adopt a new one:
Same as Everyone Else
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.
The sooner the majority on this Council gets that concept, the better off we will all be.
And if you are waiting for the proposal from the CVB so that you can see what we are, then you are part of the problem.
This problem is NOT going away, unfortunately. Next year will have even more dollars to allocate. And as long as they get tax dollars, we will face this issue.
End the Hotel/Motel tax. It’s a minute amount of our budget. And it’s a waste of time and resources to continue to debate these issues.
If they are worth doing, then do them out of the General Budget, and be accountable.
Do that and we can be exceptional.
The very last thing we should want to see in the fall are Gateway Markers this City Council is compelled to approve because they are now to far down the road to say no.
Everything that is wrong with Government can be seen in this Process
One has to look no further than the debate on Gateway Markers and the desire of some Council Members to give the “volunteers” what they want when it comes to spending taxpayer monies to understand what is wrong with government.
“They gave it great consideration and they came back with the same recommendation and added further data to it, so to me it’s supporting the people we ask to work on a volunteer basis for the city.” -Council Member Steve Broadbent
What about the actual taxpayers Council Member Broadbent? The ones that are forced to work for government? Have you considered what it takes to actually earn the monies you are suggesting being spent on “Gateway Markers”?
A total of $508,900 was collected in fiscal year 2018 by the Hotel/Motel tax. Council Members forget that this money had to be earned before it could be collected and then spent by volunteers on frivolous endeavors through the Convention Visitors Bureau(CVB).
IT IS NOT FREE MONEY
At 7% that represents revenues of 7.27 million dollars in hotel/motel sales to collect.
If you divide the $508,900 by an average hourly wage of $25 per hour, that equals 20,356 hours of labor. This is not volunteer labor, but effectively forced labor to support these endeavors such as painted pedestrian tunnels(A cultural attraction according to the CVB), gateway markers and kiosks in hotels that effectively do the same thing as Yelp and Google(only worse-you cannot carry it with you).
While the entire amount proposed to be spent on Gateway Markers is much less, the issue is the same.
Assume we spent $50,000 on Gateway Markers, that would represent 2,000 hours of labor at a minimum. Let’s weigh that against the time of “volunteers” in making these decisions.
Certainly the bar should be much higher on how this money should be spent other than “volunteers worked hard.” Certainly the money should be spent in a way that shows a real return on the investment by the taxpayers that paid it, even more so than the volunteers that offered to spend it?
If Council Member Broadbent and others feel that being a volunteer qualifies you to spend taxpayer money(and this is what we are talking about), then I would like to volunteer to decide how to spend some of the budget surpluses generated by this City each and every year.
And I would bring you a list of proposals AND return on investments that are specific and quantifiable, not pie in the sky “we should do it because some marketing people said so”.
What should concern you the tax payer is that if they are this frivolous with tax payer dollars on this issue what keeps them from being frivolous with spending on other issues?
The answer is they spend frivolously very often, rarely demanding a real return on investment for taxpayers(have you seen the lights along Kimball Bridge). Instead, it’s about optics. It’s about feeling good. It’s not about real returns.
Council Member Zaprowski wants to pursue the Gateway Markers now. He seeks it so much that he is willing to push aside a greenway along the river which would benefit all residents. Would residents benefit from Gateway Markers? Of course not. A greenway? Absolutely.
Just look at the activity in Roswell along the river or in Sandy Springs along the river. Is there any question that it attracts people and provides health benefits to boot? How can someone even question which would be best for Johns Creek in the long term?
The residents of Johns Creek have given this Council what it sought in past elections: A Parks Bond and a TSPLOST Tax. More and more money. Before you ever do this again, you need to ask yourself if you can trust them with millions if they are willing to waste thousands.
Residents have made it clear we want to get traffic moving. Yet we have spent more time on this issue and seen more passion from Broadbent and Zaprowski on Gateway Markers than we have seen on getting traffic moving. It took months and months to get the traffic signals back on the agenda. And somehow the CVB and Gateway Markers are so important, this Council seems to have to address the issues again and again until the CVB gets what they want. Is this Council here just to give the CVB what they want?
I challenge this Council to demand a real return on investment on these tax dollars. Do not simply go along to appease the CVB. If that was what was intended, then the CVB would NOT need Council approval to spend these funds.
I ask each of you the following questions:
How much do you expect business to be boosted by a Gateway Marker in Johns Creek?
How are you going to measure this return on investment?
Which of you has chosen to do business in a city because of a Gateway Marker?
Which of you does not know when you enter or leave the City of Johns Creek?
Isn’t it time we quit spending money just because we have it? And since we cannot really spend it on something worthwhile, we will just spend it just to spend it.
I’ll be blunt. The hotel motel tax should be eliminated. The CVB should be disbanded. This City Council needs to work on the REAL Issues.
We do not need outsiders to come in and define us. We do not need Gateway Markers to “reflect” who we are.
We know who we are. Unfortunately, this City Council seems hellbent on redefining who we are. Maybe it’s this City Council does not like who we are. Or maybe this Council does not know who we are. They certainly seem out of sync with the majority within Johns Creek.
More importantly, they seem unwilling to say NO to bad ideas.
If we are going to put up a Gateway Marker, I’d suggest Dollars flowing into a paper shredder and pennies coming out of the bottom.
Wasting taxpayer money is no way to run a City. And rewarding “volunteers” for bad decisions should never happen.
Gwinnett County has the opportunity to join MARTA with the promise that the majority of tax dollars will be spent in Gwinnett. But is it too late to save MARTA?
MARTA ridership was below forecast for all of 2018 for buses and rail passengers. Will forecasting be any better with the addition of Gwinnett County?
The 3% Solution
So far MARTA is a 3% solution to the Metro Atlanta Urban population. If you assume that each MARTA patron takes a trip to and from their destinations, only 3% of the population uses MARTA on a daily basis.
That begs the question: How much more shall the 97% continue to vote and support the 3% solution?
MARTA has evolved into a two purpose system. The first is to get lower cost workers to employment areas.
The second is to transport those with private vehicles to both sporting events and the airport, where the hassles of drive times and parking fees can be avoided.
Will Gwinnett County voters be willing to commit large sums of money going forward forever for these purposes?
Or will they be wise enough to realize that MARTA just isn’t SMARTA?
For those that are supporting this push for MARTA, I have just one question:
Outside of the airport and sporting events, will you be using MARTA for your daily trips around your town, or are you hoping that your neighbor will be doing so?