Fraternal Order of Police again stands by Black; council again deletes audience participation
Tuesday November 27, 2007 7:44:58am
For the second time in about a month, the Fort Oglethorpe City Council struck several agenda items that one council member wanted and refused to allow public comments on issues involving the police department.
This time it was about the suspension of Police Chief Larry C. Black, who had a room filled with more than 50 people supporting him at the Fort Oglethorpe City Council meeting Monday night.
Black was suspended on Nov. 13 without pay for not following Interim City Manager and City Attorney Ron Goulart’s instructions to investigate a complaint involving a seat belt citation and for distributing a memo that criticized the mayor and a council member, Goulart said.
Black appealed the suspension on Nov. 19, and Goulart said he would reevaluate the case within 10 days as required under city code. Council Member Harold Silcox said Black should be able to appeal to the council rather than to the same person who suspended him.
Yet Goulart, as well as council members Jane Moye, Steve Brandon and Louis Hamm, said neither the charter nor the personnel manual allows the council to consider the matter. They struck down three items Silcox had placed on the agenda to allow the council to consider reimbursing Black for lost money and expunging his record.
The chief could appeal if he were fired or received a reduction in pay among other things but not for a simple disciplinary action, according to city code.
“His salary has not been cut,” Moye said, “and that is the reason we cannot reasonably (hear his appeal).”
Silcox said that because the suspension was without pay, the council could hear the appeal.
“If $3,000 is not a reduction in pay, I don’t know what is,” he said.
Monday was Black’s first day back at work. He attended the council meeting but did not speak, following a long-standing policy in which city employees are not allowed to speak with the news media without permission from the city manager.
On Oct. 22, Council Member Richard Egeland asked for Black to be allowed to address the council about another matter for which he had received public criticism, but the council voted to strike that from the agenda, following Goulart’s advice to keep the matter internal.
Stricken agenda items
* Schedule a date, within seven days, a time for the mayor and council to hear Police Chief Larry C. Black’s appeal of his suspension.
* Reimburse Black for all money lost as a result of the suspension without pay on Nov. 13.
* Expunge the suspension-without-pay action of Nov. 13 by the city manager from Black’s personnel records.
Comments cut
Despite a strong citizen presence and requests from at least one audience member to address the council, the council voted to adjourn before hearing anyone’s comments. The council left the room in spite of Fort Oglethorpe resident Earl Townsend’s pleas to be heard and a room full of people shouting in his defense.
He and Freddie Roden, president of the Fraternal Order of Police Baxter Shavers Lodge. No. 99 in Catoosa County spoke to the crowds without the benefit of a microphone after the meeting adjourned.
“… I do believe that I will represent the vast majority of our citizens,” Townsend said, reading to the audience from a prepared statement. “The city manager/attorney has raised the issue of incompetency by his action of suspending Chief Black. I would say to you that he has pointed out his own incompetency by airing out in public a personnel issue, which no competent manager would ever do about one of his employees.
“This raises the issue of a lawsuit by this employee as well as others, and places this city in some financial jeopardy.”
Roden said he was upset that Goulart had not responded to a letter he sent on behalf of the Fraternal Order of Police asking for Black to be reinstated with back pay and allowed to conduct his own investigations in the future. He said the organization has been professional at all times.
“We would have appreciated it had we been responded to in the same manner,” he said.
Goulart handled the seat belt complaint rather than allowing Black to do so. Goulart has said that was only because Black refused to do it himself.
Goulart left the building shortly after the meeting adjourned along with the rest of the council. Silcox stayed around to talk for several minutes, and council member Richard Egeland did not attend the meeting at all.
Egeland has been a key vote in support of Black.
Much to Mayor Judd Burkhart’s chagrin, the audience frequently applauded Council Member Harold Silcox’s efforts at giving the chief a chance to speak up for himself and attempted to shout down Burkhart and the other council members’ efforts to block Silcox.
City manager ad
Also at the meeting, the council voted 3-1 to postpone further advertisements for a city manager until the council meets again to fine-tune the wording.
Silcox said the council had unanimously agreed to advertise at the last meeting, but did not vote on the matter. The ads in local newspapers and with the Georgia Municipal Association would have totaled more than $4,000, officials said. The city charter requires a council vote on matters more than $1,000.
Silcox, who went ahead and placed the ads, said his fellow council members should have brought up that fact at the last meeting rather than rescinding their earlier agreement to go ahead with the advertisement.
“They said last council meeting to go ahead and advertise,” he said. “And it costs money to advertise. I thought they knew that.”
Fire truck purchase
Silcox was also the lone opposition to buying a fire truck for nearly $500,000 with a special-purpose local-option sales tax. The rest of the council voted for the measure, saying they wanted the savings of more than $40,000 they would incur by purchasing the truck at the same time as the county government is purchasing a truck.
Silcox questioned whether it made sense for Fort Oglethorpe to make the purchase if the county is going to consolidate with the volunteer department stationed in the city, essentially forcing Fort Oglethorpe out of the driver’s seat in funding negotiations.
“One month is not going to hurt us to wait to address this with the new council,” he said. “We’ve got enough equipment right now…Bring this back in January.”
Mayor Burkhart said, “If the next council wants to rescind our decision on the first of January, that’s up to them.”
This time it was about the suspension of Police Chief Larry C. Black, who had a room filled with more than 50 people supporting him at the Fort Oglethorpe City Council meeting Monday night.
Black was suspended on Nov. 13 without pay for not following Interim City Manager and City Attorney Ron Goulart’s instructions to investigate a complaint involving a seat belt citation and for distributing a memo that criticized the mayor and a council member, Goulart said.
Black appealed the suspension on Nov. 19, and Goulart said he would reevaluate the case within 10 days as required under city code. Council Member Harold Silcox said Black should be able to appeal to the council rather than to the same person who suspended him.
Yet Goulart, as well as council members Jane Moye, Steve Brandon and Louis Hamm, said neither the charter nor the personnel manual allows the council to consider the matter. They struck down three items Silcox had placed on the agenda to allow the council to consider reimbursing Black for lost money and expunging his record.
The chief could appeal if he were fired or received a reduction in pay among other things but not for a simple disciplinary action, according to city code.
“His salary has not been cut,” Moye said, “and that is the reason we cannot reasonably (hear his appeal).”
Silcox said that because the suspension was without pay, the council could hear the appeal.
“If $3,000 is not a reduction in pay, I don’t know what is,” he said.
Monday was Black’s first day back at work. He attended the council meeting but did not speak, following a long-standing policy in which city employees are not allowed to speak with the news media without permission from the city manager.
On Oct. 22, Council Member Richard Egeland asked for Black to be allowed to address the council about another matter for which he had received public criticism, but the council voted to strike that from the agenda, following Goulart’s advice to keep the matter internal.
Stricken agenda items
* Schedule a date, within seven days, a time for the mayor and council to hear Police Chief Larry C. Black’s appeal of his suspension.
* Reimburse Black for all money lost as a result of the suspension without pay on Nov. 13.
* Expunge the suspension-without-pay action of Nov. 13 by the city manager from Black’s personnel records.
Comments cut
Despite a strong citizen presence and requests from at least one audience member to address the council, the council voted to adjourn before hearing anyone’s comments. The council left the room in spite of Fort Oglethorpe resident Earl Townsend’s pleas to be heard and a room full of people shouting in his defense.
He and Freddie Roden, president of the Fraternal Order of Police Baxter Shavers Lodge. No. 99 in Catoosa County spoke to the crowds without the benefit of a microphone after the meeting adjourned.
“… I do believe that I will represent the vast majority of our citizens,” Townsend said, reading to the audience from a prepared statement. “The city manager/attorney has raised the issue of incompetency by his action of suspending Chief Black. I would say to you that he has pointed out his own incompetency by airing out in public a personnel issue, which no competent manager would ever do about one of his employees.
“This raises the issue of a lawsuit by this employee as well as others, and places this city in some financial jeopardy.”
Roden said he was upset that Goulart had not responded to a letter he sent on behalf of the Fraternal Order of Police asking for Black to be reinstated with back pay and allowed to conduct his own investigations in the future. He said the organization has been professional at all times.
“We would have appreciated it had we been responded to in the same manner,” he said.
Goulart handled the seat belt complaint rather than allowing Black to do so. Goulart has said that was only because Black refused to do it himself.
Goulart left the building shortly after the meeting adjourned along with the rest of the council. Silcox stayed around to talk for several minutes, and council member Richard Egeland did not attend the meeting at all.
Egeland has been a key vote in support of Black.
Much to Mayor Judd Burkhart’s chagrin, the audience frequently applauded Council Member Harold Silcox’s efforts at giving the chief a chance to speak up for himself and attempted to shout down Burkhart and the other council members’ efforts to block Silcox.
City manager ad
Also at the meeting, the council voted 3-1 to postpone further advertisements for a city manager until the council meets again to fine-tune the wording.
Silcox said the council had unanimously agreed to advertise at the last meeting, but did not vote on the matter. The ads in local newspapers and with the Georgia Municipal Association would have totaled more than $4,000, officials said. The city charter requires a council vote on matters more than $1,000.
Silcox, who went ahead and placed the ads, said his fellow council members should have brought up that fact at the last meeting rather than rescinding their earlier agreement to go ahead with the advertisement.
“They said last council meeting to go ahead and advertise,” he said. “And it costs money to advertise. I thought they knew that.”
Fire truck purchase
Silcox was also the lone opposition to buying a fire truck for nearly $500,000 with a special-purpose local-option sales tax. The rest of the council voted for the measure, saying they wanted the savings of more than $40,000 they would incur by purchasing the truck at the same time as the county government is purchasing a truck.
Silcox questioned whether it made sense for Fort Oglethorpe to make the purchase if the county is going to consolidate with the volunteer department stationed in the city, essentially forcing Fort Oglethorpe out of the driver’s seat in funding negotiations.
“One month is not going to hurt us to wait to address this with the new council,” he said. “We’ve got enough equipment right now…Bring this back in January.”
Mayor Burkhart said, “If the next council wants to rescind our decision on the first of January, that’s up to them.”
Post a comment: You must be logged in order to comment.
Comments: 1608 Joined: 03/14/2007 |
12/08/2007 12:34:32 AM
wow hoosier, yeah big surprise....maybe the city attorney should review the decision, LOL. I can't stand little peabrains who try to ruin good cops' careers. Especially because of some fine gentleman who got a seatbelt ticket. I still think that the Attorney General should look into 1) a non-elected official and non-sworn law enforcement officer and Non-judicial official making decisions as to what current charges against someone stand and which ones are dropped.......2) a non-elected official using his power and influence to a) influence the enforcement decisions made by sworn officers and b) punish those who write tickets to the "wrong people" |
Comments: 402 Joined: 11/14/2007 |
12/07/2007 08:04:24 PM
Rome, if I recall correctly, I believe that the City Manager reviewed and upheld his previous decision regarding Chief Black: suspension without pay. WOW....that was a real shocker!? insert eyeroll here.I must admit that I am somewhat surprised that City Manager/Attorney Goulart didn't have the decency to respond in kind to Mr. Roden, a local Fraternal Order of Police president. All Mr. Roden asked for was fairness in the decision regarding Chief Black. However, Mr. Goulart has himself on such a high pedestal and holds himself in such high regard that he is apparently oblivious to how foolish he looks to most folks. One can only hope for 3 city council votes to make him 'go away' in January. |
Comments: 1608 Joined: 03/14/2007 |
12/07/2007 04:49:25 PM
Has the 10 days expired now? and if so, what was the outcome of the City manager reviewing the City Manager's decision? |
Comments: 1353 Joined: 07/13/2007 |
12/04/2007 01:00:51 PM
ringgoldone:I'm sure "something" will happen with that...But we've been having all this craziness BETWEEN council meetings too. I'm hoping for a quiet Holiday Season in FO. -But that's probably pretty unrealistic of me. |
Comments: 627 Joined: 07/24/2006 |
12/04/2007 12:28:45 PM
No council meeting this week - wait until next Monday for more headlines. |
Comments: 1353 Joined: 07/13/2007 |
12/04/2007 11:06:31 AM
Catvoter...while I understand your point, your propsition would affect those of us who live here that would stand to suffer loss from the money brought into the city. I'm just as aggrivated about the circumstances as anyone...and I truly hope that things will change when the new elected officials take office. But the residents of FO should not have to suffer for the bad decisions of elected officials any more than we already are. Remember there are those of us who have to live here that would have to pay more taxes than we already do if revenue starts to drop in the drastic way that you are suggesting.I don't have much confidence in anyone who holds office in this town...but if we can just wait and see if things get better before we start boycotting entire towns then perhaps the wait will be worth it. All we can do at this point is hope and pray. On a lighter note...so far FO seems to have avoided being the subject of controversial headlines this week. I know it's only Tuesday...but usually the week starts out with something crazy going on. Maybe we'll have a quiet week yet. |
Comments: 100 Joined: 08/10/2007 |
12/03/2007 06:08:28 PM
The best thing to do for us non-FO residents is to stay out of Fort Oglethorpe. Don't drive there, don't eat or drink there, don't shop there.There are too many City officials and officers that are trying to make their point and have their own agendas. Trouble everywhere. Even the City Judges are probably going to be making a point by fining everyone heavy to justify themselves. Wait until after the New Year, new Mayor, new Council shows what they plan to do. If Larry Black is fired, expect the worst. FO will have more crime because of the leadership vacuum. Best to stay out of FO. The added 2% tax in TN doesn't mean much anyway. If you bought a total of $1,000 in all your Christmas present shopping, the added 2% TN tax would only add a total of $20. Boycott FO until they regain their senses. |
Comments: 129 Joined: 08/17/2007 |
11/30/2007 07:37:08 PM
Moye offered to help me with a problem. I called her when I needed her help, and not only did she refuse, she couldn't remember the conversation, and even said that she could not, as a member of a the city council testify in court. She said that no member of the city council could be subpoenaed - under any circumstances. Shortly after she had been called to testify in her own case. She obviously couldn't tell the same story twice. Good riddance! |
Comments: 1353 Joined: 07/13/2007 |
11/28/2007 11:05:03 AM
Thanks for the advice rome.Rabbit...I'm just tired of the circus. I'm irritated because rather than admitting that things have been handled badly, they choose to act as if it is not there, shifting the blame somewhere else. For instance, WHY was that paper that belonged to Hogue EVER signed? Why wasn't proper procedure followed, as they insist on following at the meetings? Why, if Moye was not at all negative, did she, at the end of her commercial say, "We need someone who will promote the city- NOT DEMOTE IT!" then make a sour face and walk away....If she took the "high road" as you claim, then why did she make that statement. Was she talking about her opponent? No she had no reason to say that abut Sharrock. She was quite vividly referring to Egland, I'm sure. No "High Road" there. And if Burkhart were such a "high road" person, then perhaps his body language at the meeting would not at all be in question. It's just all really sickening. And I don't know about the "sassy milk show" as you call it...but the CCN reported that Judd said that he might be interested in becoming a judge, though he would have to wait a full year before he could. I, myself, am trying to figure out what the motive would be to get Goulart in as Manager, when he may possibly be fired at the beginning of the year...unless they are sure that there would not be enough votes to get rid of him? |
Comments: 37 Joined: 10/30/2007 |
11/27/2007 08:07:32 PM
Asif - I cannot disagree with anything you said. Well, maybe... but nonetheless I agree. |
Comments: 19 Joined: 11/15/2007 |
11/27/2007 07:36:12 PM
Let me tell you why I am concerned for Mr. Brandon.I don't go to his church, never have. Now as a man of God, he should be concerned that he is getting God's word out, not talking about city issues, fires and letting his work for God suffer. And by all indications, it is!!!! I heard someone say the other day, that all this consumes the man, that he seems upset with things lately. I don't want to see him fall!!! There are people out there that love for men of God to fail. I speak these things as fact not opinions. Let the others duke it out, but don't sacrifice your principals! I have been praying for the man for a long time. No, I don't know his heart, but I see his actions, don't think he would like it if he stepped back and saw himself sometimes. It is easy to get caught up in all this and really not know who is right. You have to look at facts! The current mayor and goulart have an agenda! Brandon is better than them. I hope he sees that. That is all I will say. I live in Catoosa county, not Fort Oglethorpe, this publicity affects everyone in the North Georgia area. Again, I will Pray for these men . God needs to come on the scene here and get these men straight and Ft O will continue to be a good place to shop, visit and live. |
Comments: 1608 Joined: 03/14/2007 |
11/27/2007 07:30:27 PM
If you'd like to do something; the FOP should contact the State Chapter of the FOP and ask them to investigate and then have them as the state organization (and lobbying organization) contact the governor and the attorney general's office in reference to the city manager/attorney possibly peddling his influence and power by lobbying the court and the police department to either not enforce the law or selectively enforce it. For a city manager to be attempting to sway the department on specific cases, and when not getting his way punishing sworn law enforcement officers, and then bandying about his power and threats against a court which has a Judge that the city also pays his salary could be illegal. It could possibly be Intimidation of a court officer O.C.G.A. 16-10-97. If by misrepresenting the facts of the seatbelt case (ridiculous that it has come this far) the good city manager attempted to prevent the communication to the judge relating to the commission or possible commission of the crime, he could be guilty of Influencing witnesses, o.c.g.a. 16-10-93. Had he kept it a personnel matter, he probably could've swayed his belly around.....but once he enters the misdemeanor investigation of the crime of seatbelt violation 40-8-76.1 (ridiculous I know once again) and punishes the Chief and then influences the court, he may be on thin ice. Should he be attempting to obstruct or hinder the local law enforcement from performing their duties, he could be guilty of 16-10-24, obstructing or hindering law enforcement officers. You guys should quit trying to deal with these backwoods, polyester suited wanna be Boss Hogg's in Hazzard County and go outside their little world. |
Comments: 37 Joined: 10/30/2007 |
11/27/2007 06:30:45 PM
Asif - I do feel the same way about Judd's body language. But I will say, all of the ugly comments being made from the 'citizens' as the meeting was underway - at almost anything and everything Judd, Brandon, or Hamm did, were equally as rude. (Again I would like a headcount to see how many were there, excluding minors, and how many actually live in the city.) Judd did ask for the motion to adjourn. It was Silcox who made it. As some of the real citizens left the meeting, they were heckled by the peanut gallery. Now that really makes someone want to live in our city and attend the meetings.I keep hearing how Brandon and Hamm and Moye are Judd's puppets. If that is the case, why isn't Black already gone? Why isn't "their boy" Goulart already city manager? Look, I am not happy at some of the actions of individual council members either. But I don't think everything each of them do is orchestrated by the puppet master Burkhart. Brandon and his church have no bearing on the council. If you don't like his church or his dogma, then don't attend. I don't see what that has to do with him having the same views as Judd, or Silcox or Cobb for that matter. Grace - Moye and Burkhart took the higher route in their campaigning by pointing out what they had done, and what they would continue to support. I don't see anything wrong with that. In fact, you would think that would appeal to voters. Egeland's ads were negative against Jane and Judd. He didn't mention his opponent at all, nor did he tout what he had done and what he would do in the future, except buck Jane and Judd if re-elected. Cobb ran on honesty and integrity and stopping all of the firing and turmoil in the city. Negative, but with a ring of truth (though I am reminded he was on the council for 4 years prior to Brandon and Hamm and had a hand in some of the firings and turmoil in the past). Again, where are these comments about the current council coming from? Mainly from the callers and host of the Sassy Goat Milk show. On Judy O's show last week it was said that A) Judd wanted to be sessions court judge (which he can't be), B) Judd wanted to be city manager (which he can't be), C) Goulart wanted to be city manager. Which is it? The rumor mill needs to get their stories straight. Are things going right with the city right now? No. But I wish everyone would quit looking for the devil to appear every time a rabid comment is made on Judy's show. Maybe they should look at the callers and see what is in their heart?!? Lastly, as for sour grapes, where was Egeland? |
Comments: 1353 Joined: 07/13/2007 |
11/27/2007 04:17:46 PM
ringgoldone, now, that's a thought. |
Comments: 1353 Joined: 07/13/2007 |
11/27/2007 04:14:20 PM
What did "Judd & Jane" do wrong??? Well, let's start with the campaign ads where they want credit for all of the things they've done right...Did you see the mailouts, the infomercial? Boy, they've done alot of "good" things (tho I question whether some were really necessary) to brag about, yet when something "bad" happens, we always hear things like, "The mayor doesn't even have a vote." or "He's only part time, he doesn't really have that much power, you can't blame it all on him." Or "One councilmember cannot make ALL the decisions." These cop-out blame-shifting phrases always come into play as a defense when no one can come up with a good enough excuse for the stupid things they do. Everyone wants to the credit as long as it's good, but no one wants to be held accountable for making poor choices.So, tell me again, where did that "open mic" policy go? They weren't on the agenda huh? When has that ever mattered before? Why was Botts able to speak without being on the agenda? I believe that it was JUDD who called for a motion to adjourn - he DOES moderate, you know. asif, I'm with you. I didn't like what I saw either. |
Comments: 19 Joined: 11/15/2007 |
11/27/2007 03:11:09 PM
Leaving the meeting the way they did was WRONG!!! Brandon is Judds puppet... he knows he is making wrong decisions. He has lost so much respect as a preacher. Ask how many members he has at his church? ask why his church has not grown in the last 5 years? He is a likable fellow and it is not too late to get his act together. As for Judd, his body language last night was the same as saying " you that didn't vote for me, are scum!, so I won't allow you to talk. He is finished! this will follow him wherever he goes. It is all about taking his last month in control and CONTROLLING , not running the city. It is a shame. I hope someone will tell Brandon to take a good look at what this is costing him, mostly his reputation. I will pray for this whole bunch. It don't have to be like this. Sad! Sad! Sad!AsIF |
Comments: 627 Joined: 07/24/2006 |
11/27/2007 02:57:29 PM
Problem has been (at every level) is that the professionals end up being control by someone - or several someones. Perhaps we could make the offices part-time and voluntary (like when this country was founded). Then, our elected officials would have to contribute to the economy like the rest of us. Might keep them in touch with reality. |
Comments: 37 Joined: 10/30/2007 |
11/27/2007 01:40:38 PM
I would like to hear someone say what Judd or Jane did wrong. As they have stated, the charter does not allow them to hear Black's appeal. Is that the best thing? No. But what can they do about it? Nothing, save change the charter.Twice last night Silcox went off track and tried to make the rest of the council out to be idiots. On the first item, the issue of the ad for city manager, it was discussed in the work session and Harold didn't want any part of it. During open session, he went on a tirade how seemingly the mayor and others were trying to stop him from running the ad. Trying to slow down the process. He had to be reminded by Moye, Burkhart and Brandon that neither he nor the city manager had the authority spend the money required for an ad of that size. The council wanted to discuss it in the work session. Since Harold didn't want to, we now have to wait 2 more weeks. Secondly, he complained (and rightly so) that Black shouldn't have to have his appeal heard by Goulart, the same person who reprimanded him. HOWEVER, it was brought to Harold's attention before the open session as well as in open session that Black cannot have his appeal heard by the council. He wanted to argue about it and imply that Goulart, or Burkhart were doing something shady. Will the real slim shady please stand up... please stand up... By the way, Earl Townsend is an idiot. He asked the Cobb be made interim city manager until the 1st of the year. The charter states that an elected official cannot hold city employment for 1 year after his term has ended. Likewise, a city employee cannot be in public office. You can argue that Cobb's term hasn't started yet, but we all know it would be a conflict of interest. Lastly, if you notice, it was HAROLD SILCOX who made the motion to adjourn the meeting since there were no citizen's comments on the agenda. |
Comments: 1353 Joined: 07/13/2007 |
11/27/2007 12:31:31 PM
ringgoldone:>>I think every elected office should be one term and out - can't run again for any office. We need to be rid of professional politicans.<< I'm not sure how well that one would work out. Considering the fact experience gained during the course of that term would not be able to benefit in another term to come. I see nothing wrong with "professional" politicians, if they were to do their job well - the problem is finding enough that will do their job well at the same time...at least in this city anyway. |
Comments: 627 Joined: 07/24/2006 |
11/27/2007 12:12:28 PM
If someone stabbed me in the back like Cobb did Silcox, I don't think I would be supporting him no matter how bad things currently are.I think every elected office should be one term and out - can't run again for any office. We need to be rid of professional politicans. |
Comments: 1353 Joined: 07/13/2007 |
11/27/2007 11:10:45 AM
---Step right up folks, it's the greatest show on earth!ringgoldone, why do you think that cobb has something over the head of silcox...perhaps silcox just does not agree with the current situations and how they've been handled. I don't like it, and Cobb certainly doesn't have anything on me! regardless of how you keep trying to connect everything to cobb, I don't see how the current situation has anything to do with him. You give him much more power than he has....he's not even in office yet. Are you so against cobb that you do not wish for the current regime to be held accountable for thier ignorant actions? And "let's be clear" if only a minority of voters have spoken to allow Cobb in office, then even a smaller "minority" voted him out 2 years ago. That means that LESS than "roughly 20% of the city" was behind "sending him home." So, to be fair - you can't say that the voice of ALL the citiezens of Ft. O were heard in either election. |
Comments: 627 Joined: 07/24/2006 |
11/27/2007 10:30:11 AM
Let's be clear - a minority of voters have spoken. Far from a mandate. 20 percent (roughly) of the city is behind the new regime. And it was just 2 years ago that Cobb was sent home because Fort O voters didn't like his politics. He hasn't changed and time will prove it.The overwhelming majority of voters (not just in Fort O) have been led to believe their vote doesn't count. Perhaps it is time to push for metro government in Catoosa County so we can do away with small town, ego-driven politics. It would be a sure way to save our tax dollars. Speaking of tax dollars, since when does a town of 8,000 need a police chief with a salary/benefits of $100K+? One other thing - what is Cobb holding over Silcox's head? Back when Harold's wife Pat lost to Ken Marks for the District 1 Commission seat, Harold told a group of us that Pat lost because Ronnie Cobb told people in Fort O they couldn't vote for Pat because he (Harold) was on the Fort O council - conflict of interest. |
Comments: 13 Joined: 08/10/2007 |
11/27/2007 10:02:45 AM
It should be apparent to all but the very stupid that the outgoing regime is losing the public relations war for the hearts and minds of the voters over the attempted discrediting of Police Chief Larry Black. The fact is, the public sees what is really happening and despite using the instrumentalities of government to shut off public discussion,they are simply making themselves look even more ham handed and foolish. Voters should keep this total lack of class in mind when they attempt to run for any office in the future.Now. That is the future. What about the here and now ? Well, the proper strategy is to realize that time is on the side of the police chief and the department : Judd Burkhart's days in office are numbered ,Larry Black's are not. Burkhart has to leave office in January,you will still be there doing your job. What this rejected council and mayor has done,the next council and mayor can un-do.They would be well advised to study the election results and realize that voters demanded a new direction and an end to the bad soap opera going on for the last several years. Judd, the clock is ticking. The day you leave office,you better take a picture,because we voters will never trust you with public office again. Tick tock... |
<< < Prev - Next > >>
Login
| Password: |
Newest Users
Popular Blogs
What makes me mad in Catoosa County is...
The Watercooler
Matters of Faith
2008 Beijing Olympics
Candidates for Walker County clerk of Superior Court
What makes me mad in Walker County is...
Disappearance of Theresa Parker, 911 dispatcher in Walker County
LaFayette man arrested on federal pornography charges
What makes me mad in Floyd County is...
Catoosa fire meeting heats up
Recent Blogs
And the winner is; Lakeview Fort Oglethorpe High School, Governor’s Cup No. 2
Jeff O’Bryant: Bush bailed, people nailed
LaFayette Rotary holds mock election
Democrats charge Catoosa Chamber debate was partisan
Handgun found in restroom at Ridgeland High
Jeannie Babb Taylor: Got melamine? Formula-fed infants are at risk both at home and abroad
New policy requires Walker County students to make up time for bomb threats
Naman Crowe: The Russia/Georgia Conflict and America
Jeannie Babb Taylor: Palin pros and cons
Northwestern, Coosa Valley tech colleges will merge services
Comments: 627
Joined: 07/24/2006
Doesn't the City Council only hire or fire the City Manager? Isn't it up to the City Manager to fire Black, if that indeed happens?