As a watchdog in Sugar Hill, I serve the public by freely providing access to public business and right-to-know information. I also share my take on that information as an advocate for small government, taxpayers, and citizen oversight of local government.
There's nothing I need or want from the government except to listen to the public and stop wasting money. I see the seat on City Council as a means to that end, not the end itself. That's why my candidacy looks different than that of other candidates for public office.
There's a lot of talk among the current political machine of Sugar Hill about "VISION." Enough so that people looking to be part of that machine feel compelled to echo that talking point. And honestly, it's not just Sugar Hill. That's a trend throughout government these days.
The Government of the City of Sugar Hill is:
- Collecting and spending other people's money on things they and their associates personally like, for the good of a few instead of the greater good.
- Refusing to allow the greater public any say-so about projects or initiatives on which they spend the public's money.
- Actively withholding information about what they're doing.
- Making mistakes and poor decisions, and throwing money at correcting mistakes without engaging in healthy self-examination to prevent future problems.
I'll say it now. That is not vision. It is wrong.
It's what goes on in the federal and state governments that working-class, grassroots individuals all along the political spectrum say they don't like. It's a large part of what earns the US Congress its typical dismally low approval ratings.
It establishes the City of Sugar Hill as a part of the problem you see at the federal and state level. It establishes it as a place where some people can easily get ahead in business or politics at the expense of others.
That's attractive to some people. Do we want to attract people who are just looking to build and participate in a crony system, though?
Have you ever known of an honest and ethical crony system?
But, that's what you get when you only ask elected officials, appointees, employees about their vision for the City.
They should also be asking you.
I have a drive and passion for cleaning things up in Sugar Hill, so everyone who has already made Sugar Hill home has a voice in the government and a fair shot for their family and business dreams.
I want the City of Sugar Hill to stand on a solid foundation with an honest and transparent government with residents as the primary focus.
THAT is my vision.
I'm not here to work for special interests. I'm here to work for you.
I'm not here to dream up new ways to spend your money; I'm here to save it.
Since I first ran for office in 2019, I have had four core areas that the City of Sugar Hill Government needs to improve.
- Transparency
- Accountability
- Common-Sense Growth
- Fiscal Responsibility
For each area, I have had some basic suggestions for improvement. These ideas have been out there for two and a half years now, with no action from anyone in this government.
Transparency
- More information should be included on the City's website.
- Meetings should be recorded and placed online, or preferably, streamed so residents can at least view them remotely.
- Information about public meetings and hearings should be announced via the website AND official social media channels.
- Documents for the meetings should be placed online with the agenda, well in advance of the meetings so the public can review them beforehand.
Accountability
- Actively encourage the public to attend more public meetings. Publicize these meetings the way we promote events and shows, via the official social media channels.
- Host regular Town Hall events.
- Host meet-and-greet events with the entire Mayor and Council.
Common-Sense Growth
- Allow the private sector to drive growth organically, rather than having the government actively and aggressively drive the growth.
Fiscal Responsibility
- Stop forcing taxpayers to invest in projects that should not involve the government, such as apartments, shopping plazas, and office spaces.
- Spend the least amount possible to get the job done right.
Even though I haven't been in office, I've taken personal responsibility for increasing transparency in Sugar Hill through my watchdog project. I work by myself and at my own expense to video discussions, file Open Records requests, and inform the public. I dig down past the empty platitudes and silly marketing fluff to let you know what's really going on and how your money is being spent.
I do what the Sugar Hill Government should be doing.
I do what the North Gwinnett Voice should be doing.
I do what the Gwinnett Daily Post should be doing.
I'm doing for you what these cronies will never do without a stronger push from you.
Growth. That's the number one issue I hear Sugar Hill residents talking about now. My Facebook and blog posts about it get more traffic than anything else I write about. People who don't even support me express concern about the rapidly increasing amount and concentration of high-density rental housing in the area.
I've presented the idea of having some discussions with our attorneys about lawsuits and how we might tighten up Sugar Hill ordinances to prevent them.
I've talked about controlling spending so we're not in the position of being desperate for revenue.
On the other hand, some local governments give expensive tax incentives for these developments, forcing taxpayers to help fund developments they don't want. I am looking into how much of that we've already done in Sugar Hill. That's your business, and it's being hidden from the public. And unless someone can give me a concrete and compelling financial reason why that is good for the taxpayers, I want the practice to stop.
I suspect Sugar Hill is fast-tracking planning and zoning requests. And, the way hearings are conducted by the Planning Commission and the City Council needs a lot of work. Currently, the Planning Commission hearings are an incompetent and embarrassing mess. Furthermore, in both Planning Commission and City Council hearings, the City makes it abundantly clear that it is more interested in hearing from the developers and friends that they ask to speak to support projects than the people who come in to speak against them.
Simple organizational tactics would go a long way toward straightening out the mess.
Use a sign-in sheet at hearings so "for" and "against" speakers can see how many other people are there to speak on their side. Call speakers up from the sign-in sheet during the hearing and alternate between "for" and "against" speakers. Eliminate the practice of always allowing the "for" side to get the last word. Heck, do a football-style coin toss if you have to. The "for" side often has a lawyer speaking for it. The "against" side usually does not. If the project is so good and the lawyers are worth what the developers pay them, they should be able to make their case without necessarily needing the last word.
And there you go.
I have laid out a plan for addressing the high-density growth in a way that would allow the City of Sugar Hill to take into consideration the concerns and objections of residents and do a better job of acting on them.
No elected official has done that. No other candidate has done that.
They're all still desperately trying to call it a "vision" and faulting you for not getting how great it is.
To them, the "vision" matters more than you do. You have to wonder why that is.
In every election, one criticism levied at me by the crony crew of Sugar Hill is that my election would somehow be bad for business. It's a senseless criticism unless a business is currently getting or seeking special treatment from the government. I want the City to support businesses equitably, not hand out favors.
There are 936 businesses in Sugar Hill. If you listen to the elected officials and our Marketing and Economic Development departments, you'd think there were about 14. They don't even do a good job of promoting all of the businesses in Downtown!
In 2020, the City spent $451,274 on its "Economic Development Department", which seemed to focus almost exclusively on the E-Center part of Downtown and the old Community Center. Part of that money came from taxes and fees collected from the other 922 businesses. It doesn't seem quite fair to them.
I understand that taxpayers have a higher stake in the success of the E-Center businesses because we're in debt for the facility that houses them and desperately need that initiative not to fail. But, it was wrong for the City to put taxpayers in that position.
Also, if the government rents out business space the way many private businesses do, it should seek a return on the investment the way private businesses do. In the 2.5 years that I've been watching and listening to them, I've never heard any indication that they view it that way. I've also never seen a breakdown of what that facility costs us versus how much it makes. If they have one and it's favorable, we probably would have seen it by now.
In the end, they were thinking more about this "vision" than the broader economic landscape and the people affected by it.
There's not much we can do about that now, but it doesn't make sense to let the same people who made questionable decisions keep making all the decisions.
We need a fresh perspective from someone looking to help ALL the businesses in town, not just a few. We also need someone on the City Council to force the City to take a more pragmatic, business-oriented view of the E-Center.
It's becoming more and more obvious that the "vision" for Sugar Hill presented by the people in the government system is not working for everyone. It's more and more obvious that it's not intended to.
It's long past time that we had some balance in this community and on the Sugar Hill City Council instead of selfish, unchecked power.
A vote for me is a vote for that balance.