Saturday, Dec. 3, 2016    Login | Register        

PTC lacks a strategic plan for repairing roads, paths

On the fiscal side of Peachtree City, a lot has happened, some of it can be confusing, so it is good to see it pulled together for a “Big Picture” overview. All the numbers provided on the budget, streets and paths are from official city documents.

Infrastructure, meaning building, facility, etc., repairs are being paid for via Facility Authority bond debt. Homeowners pay for the debt via their property tax bills. The city pays for the debt just like you pay for credit card, mortgage and other loans, with ongoing payments of principle plus interest.

The money from the bond is either already spent or soon to be spent. But it does not cover all the repairs we need. So, we will be needing more money in the near future while still paying for the current bond.

On stormwater, the money from the initial stormwater bond of 2008 is spent, but we are still paying for the debt. Recently, line items from the budget were transferred to stormwater, more stormwater debt was taken on and the stormwater fee was increased to over 230 percent of last year.

So, we are currently paying for the 2008 debt plus the new debt via property tax.

In about 3 years we will be looking for new funding for stormwater, having spent the recent money from the new loan. That means another fee increase and more debt while still paying for 2008 and the current debt at the same time.

On the property tax total millage rate, the rate in 2010, paid in 2009, was 5.553. In 2011, paid in 2010, it was 6.783. In 2013, paid in 2012, it was 7.178. That is an increase of 1.63 mills.

The total millage rate for 2018, under the current budget approach, is projected to be 7.690. That is a total increase of 2.14 mills from 2010 to 2018.

The budget model projects increases in home values of 2 percent per year beginning in 2014. There is no rollback on the millage rate included, meaning your tax bill will increase even if the millage rate does not increase.

Moving on the streets and paths, it is a good idea to first get a basic understanding about asphalt and where our streets and paths stand on needing maintenance.

Asphalt is given a “condition rating.” Condition rating is a term for a numerical “grade” given to the present condition of the asphalt.

[A grade of] 100 means newly laid or resurfaced. As time goes by asphalt wears and breaks down due to traffic, environment, etc. The deterioration accelerates as the road gets older because the asphalt loses strength, flexibility and other attributes

The life of a street, in Peachtree City, is about 10 to 15 years. The target rating for resurfacing is below 80. Using numbers from GDOT, etc., asphalt deteriorates at an average rate of about 2.5 points per year.

The last evaluation for Peachtree City was done in 2012.

With that said, in 2012 we had 251 streets, totaling $6,624,369, and 103 paths, totaling $2,971,080, below 80. We had 8 tunnel and bridges need maintenance totaling $2,600,000. That is a total of $12,195,449 of maintenance as of 2012.

Currently we have no funding source for this maintenance.

That brings us to the 2-year SPLOST proposal that will be on the ballot this year. If passed, Peachtree City is expected to get $14,600,000 over two years. Staff intends to spend it over five years.

Staff proposes to spend $2.6 million on bridges and tunnels, $2.5 million on paths, $2 million on new paths and $7.5 million on streets.

At the end of the 5 years, we are looking at unfunded work on 11 paths rated 70s, 187 paths rated 80 to 89 and 264 streets with ratings of 80 to 89, as of 2012.

Remember the deterioration Rate of 2.5 per year means many of those will then be 12.5 points lower in rating, as in 60s and 70s. Projects now in the 90s will be in the 80s.

The cost of the SPLOST is about $200 per year, $400 total for the two years, for an average household. That is an average of $80 per household per year over the 5-year period the money would be spent.

To summarize, you are looking at future new taxes and fees via another facilities bond, stormwater bond, millage rate increase and increased property tax due to rising home values. There is a potential SPLOST. You are also looking at spending continuing to exceed revenue and a shrinking reserve.

As a business operates on a business plan, cities operate on comprehensive strategic planning. We have no such planning to prioritize needs over nice to haves. No plan to bring services into alignment with what citizens have told us they really want and prioritize. No economic development plan. No caps on spending.

We desperately need a comprehensive strategic plan.

This is where we stand via the course we are on to 2018 and beyond.

Don Haddix, mayor
Peachtree City, Ga.



I agree we need to fund our roads and paths. Not happy that it is not covered and we depend on the passage of a splost (which by the way, I will not be approving on my ballot)

So, Mr. Mayor. You laid out the problem, now provide a few solutions for us to consider.

Don Haddix's picture

Rather than to keep repeating the layout, I will create a presentation on my website and give a link to it.

The SPLOST is a band-aid. It does nothing to cure the problems I laid out in our Budget. It just delays solving them.

Just wanting to say I am not avoiding your question, just have been busy with City and BOH issues.

I will comment on the idea of a Public Safety Director cutting costs. The research I have done to date states quite the opposite. It adds a person to the Chain of Command and usually causes conflicts with the structure.

But, as I said elsewhere, it is a subject open to further discussion from both sides until enough data is found to make a sound decision. We definitely are not there at this time.

I also addressed using a ZBB and gave a link to the pros and cons. It is also far from a proven solution.

As well, the Charter requires the City Manager to produce a proposed Budget from which Council proceed.

We hire people skilled in certain disciplines to advise us and present proposals for each area of the City. The notion that Council has that knowledge in and of itself is absurd.

The proposal also fails to include the essential element of citizen involvement. There also is no required Comprehensive Strategic Plan from which to work.

As you can see, the proposal is there will be five individuals, not skilled in the individual departments, base on personal opinion, assigning spending caps. A true recipe for failure.

In ZBB's, a Plan is created, Council approves it, and departments create Budget proposals within the guidelines set. Then Council reviews, question, etc. and finally a Budget is approved.

As I said, I will create the summary for how we need to proceed and give you a link when finished.

<strong><em>Peachtree City Mayor</em></strong>

<cite><strong>Don Haddix
Peachtree City Mayor</strong></cite>

NUK_1's picture

If you had spent your whole term with this kind of thoughtfulness and reasoning and none of your usual bluster, I'd be on your bandwagon.

The PSD position is an intriguing concept, but this is also an election year. I don't think too many people running for office are going to say that it will actually save money because one or even two "chiefs" might get dumped in the process. If things are left as they stand right now and a PSD added......well, that's just another layer of mgt and another 100K+ salary no one wants to add, at least I hope no one thinks that would be a prudent idea. So yeah, I get where the PSD is coming from and it likely means some reorganization AFTER the election, which I would be fine with myself. Let O'Connor run the FD as he's doing now, get rid of Skip (finally) and let someone from within take charge of the PD and report to the PSD like O'Connor would.

I've operated in my work life under "normal" budgeting and zero-based budgeting and didn't see that much difference actually. What's the first thing as a person in charge of budgeting looks at when it comes time to prepare the next year(s) budget? WHAT THEY SPENT LAST YEAR AND WHY. Then, you go from there. In a political arena, this becomes who can "sell" their budget the best and, like all monetary things, what one(dept) gets, the other doesn't. It's a finite pie with dept heads fighting over the slices and it can come down to who is more persuasive. In this case, like you stated quite correctly, you are dealing with Councilmembers who are NOT experts on each department. This is an idea that needs more study before adopting, I agree.

I'm not opposed to ZBB, but I also don't whole-heatedly endorse the concept either.

Unfortunately no one, business or city operates in a vaccum time capsule.
You need to go back 4 years to see where we were.... Facing a multi million deficit that was somewhat if not totally ignored.

Is the Glass Half Empty or Half Full? Who were the players that resolved the budget crisis who are now being called TAX AND SPENDERS?

Please, PTC has come a long way and no thanks to our mayor. Is there more work to be done, absolutely but let's leave this to a newly elected mayor and council.

Voters need to focus on all the facts and what has happened over the past 4 years.

Don Haddix's picture

You want facts? Here are some.

Yes, we hear the repeated mantra of facing a $22 million deficit in 2010. Fact is now we have $15 million in existing debt and another $20 million needed for paths and roads.

That is a current problem of $35 million without getting into Stormwater etc.

Are we better off? No.

Nor did the infrastructure repair push begin with Fleisch. It began with Doug Sturbaum and me in 2008.

Nor did the 3 give us the AAA bond rating. We achieved it in 2008.

Nor is Rec the salvation of PTC. Tournaments cost far more than they bring in.

That brings up how the H/M is being spent. It is being spent on the fields and financing a County wide sports effort solely by the CVB. They have hired a tournament specialist, expenses included, proposed a pay increase for the CVB director higher than what the city employees received and a $5,000.00 bonus. The want to pay grants to those who recruit tournaments here. They also want to restrict field uses to tournaments only on weekends, etc, no citizen usage.

As I said before and now has been confirmed by sources in the economic field, the main sources of H/M tax is not from visitors, but from our industried and businesses. So it is a tax on PTC residents and it is being felt.

I had pushed for usage numbers of Rec by residency instead of lump numbers. Only about 7,000 PTC citizens use our Rec. About 1,500 are into organized sports.

This is the kind of thinking you believe is good for PTC? I do not.

All of these kinds of issues are accounted for in a Comprehensive Strategic Plan. It is no wonder the majority does not want one since it goes against their priorities, etc.

So, most assuredly, voters need to focus on the facts, records and agendas.

<strong><em>Peachtree City Mayor</em></strong>
The Comprehensive Strategic Plan Proposal
Is in the Updates Forum

<cite><strong>Don Haddix
Peachtree City Mayor</strong></cite>

Mr. Mayor

Its easy to point the finger...where are your real solutions.!
You never offer anything real or concrete and you take credit for things that don't belong to you.

Meanwhie you have had 6 years and burned through 2 city councils and you have offered the citizens NOTHING but talk and inaccurate facts supported by bluster and sheer bullshit.

Your proposals are vague! Step up with more than some big words.
Your comments are "absent/present" = NOTHING.

You never put anyting firm on the table, you never have which is the difference between a politician and a leader. You claim that $10M of SPLOST will last 5 years for road and carts, yet the last SPLOST of $8M lasted from 2006 to 2013, 7 years.

Scare tactics+no real proposal.

Rec Guy has you pegged! You save for maintanence! Not complicated.

Time for a new mayor.


PTC Recreation and Special Events Department requires all sports associations which use city facilities - football, softball, little league, big league, indoor hockey, soccer, swimming, lacrosse, basketball, & BMX (sorry if I left anyone off the list) to report information on participants by residency and to pay facility use fees (field use fees) established by City Council. The fees are $15 for PTC, $25 for Fayette County, and $50 for out of county residents (per season). You were present at the council meeting last May when the fees were raised. The additional revenue generated from field use fees covers 50% of the annual recreation budget and is in addition to the $39.00 allocation, per resident, collected through our annual property tax bills.

The participation numbers quoted in your statement above are grossly understated. Our largest sports organization has over 2,800 registrants per year and 67-70% are PTC residents. Once you add in all of the other groups, the number is well above 3000 for youth sports alone.

I totally agree with your position on the CVB and outside tournaments/running events etc.. Since the CVB is funded through hotel/motel taxes, they are going to do everything in their power to put “head on beds” regardless of the cost or impact on other city services and residents. PTC should put its residents at the top of the priority list. We don’t need movie tours and lavish tourist centers.

One last comment, please stop issuing debt to pay for the past 10yrs of neglect. You can’t borrow your way out of debt. PTC wasted $515k on renovating the old rec building for seniors to play cards, $667k for the bubble to support the swim teams, and yet more money to fix the library roof. Over 45% of the bond issue to just 3 projects. PTC needs vision, focus, and strong leadership. Infrastructure just doesn’t wear out overnight. It’s not complicated; you have to save funds to replace items, which wear out.

Don Haddix's picture

There is nothing wrong with my facts. They come from Staff.

I am the one who pushed for users to be reported by residency. It use to be just the total number of users only, which has no value when looking at Budgeting and fees.

I also have been part of setting the fee structure and levels from 2008 on. Remember, it use to be PTC and everyone else, just 2 fees. I pushed for the 3 level.

You referenced one sport, I will reference another, BMX. Only about 10% are PTC residents.

I actually went through the association spreadsheets and ran totals. About 1,500 live in PTC, including adults.

We do not charge property tax per capita, but per household. The cost is more like $114 per household, whether they use Rec or not. The majority do not, so they are paying for no service to them.

On the CVB, that is another areas under scrutiny.

By State Law and their incorporation papers, "heads in bed" is not their goal. Their goal is bringing conventions, tourism, etc to PTC. Heads in beds is a consequence of the goal, but not the goal itself.

Contrary to what some think, the hotels do not pay the H/M tax. They are only the collection agency for the City. The CVB works for the City, not the Hotels.

The CVB is a valuable asset to PTC as long as it fulfills it mission.

We are in absolute agreement the residents of PTC are job one. Selling homes, etc is not the purpose of anyone on Council or Staff.

On debt, taxes, etc, we have to find another way, thus the Comprehensive Strategic Plan. On the Needs Assessment Committee Survey, there is so much anger about debt 90% said no more without voter approval.

As I said before, to do change takes a 3 votes. I am ready and Staff is ready, but will whoever gets elected to the Council Posts also be ready?

<strong><em>Peachtree City Mayor</em></strong>
The Comprehensive Strategic Plan Proposal
Is in the Updates Forum

<cite><strong>Don Haddix
Peachtree City Mayor</strong></cite>

Hopefully you will not win.

I do not live here for what we do not have.

Best of luck in the future.

Robert W. Morgan's picture

So, 3 of the votes are likely to be familiar faces - Imker and Kim for sure and either Vanessa, George or Harold as mayor. The 2 new faces King or the Rec Guy (either of which will try and undo the damage done to Rec programs by your administration) and Terry Ernst will likely be independent thinkers and align themselves with Kim and Erica on good ideas and oppose them on bad ideas - not sure where they stand on chickens (but no roosters, but time will tell). Of course the 2 new councilmen could find themselves on the wrong side of a 3-2 vote and the test of their character will be if they constantly whine about it or move on with governing the city.

So, that leaves it up to the new mayor to exert some leadership by actually leading in a positive manner without all the tension and personal attacks (yes I know one is coming very soon, I wonder who it will be). I'm starting to think that it really doesn't matter whether it is Vanessa, George or Harold - all are fine people who I think have the city's best interests above their own and don't seem to be ego-driven or unhinged - George seriously needs a new photo, but he only looks crazy - he doesn't act crazy.

Of course you can call any of them out for name-calling or criticism as you see fit. Just know that every time you do that is the same as if one of our real former mayors endorsed them.

Only 10 more Tuesday's to go.

Live free or die!

Is your fundamental argument against properly funding recreation is because everyone in PTC doesn't use it? If so the argument is not sound. I have resided in PTC for 29 years and I have never used the roads in Stoney Brook Plantation, but I still pay for them. I could reasonably argue I have not utilized the vast majority of PTC's infrastructure, so why should I have to pay for it?

At the recommendation of the Rec Dept, City Council increased field use fees so the amount paid Fayette County (non PTC) and out of county participants would be comparable to the amounts contributed by a PTC resident through their tax bill. The total contribution to PTC's general fund is at least $125-150k per year. How's that compare to the Gathering place, newly remolded Rec Admin building, or library?

People choose to live in Peachtree City because of: excellent schools, the path system, saftey, amenities, and recreational opportunities.

As for the "heads on beds", I have a hard time taking your comments seriously. The goal of CVB/Sport Tourism/Conventions is to create tax revenue for PTC. CVB funding is from the tax, so more tax=more funding. Isn't that how they justify their existence? Reading back through City Council minutes on the CVB, I noticed where Vansssa Fleisch thanked the CVB for bringing LAX tournament to BSC the summer. Really? The same tournaments have been using BSC each June for the past 4 years. The LAX association brought the tournament PTC, not CVB. They has absolutely nothing to do with it. CVB is only looking to take credit for it. Bottom line.

Don Haddix's picture

Rec Guy. I never said a word about not properly funding Rec. That is exactly my goal.

I represent 35,000 people in PTC. Rec is a non essential, by choice, service while roads are essential service. You many mot use roads A thru M but do use Roads N thru Z. Everyone pays for all roads because roads and paths serve everyone in the Community. Many do not use any Rec at all.

Sorry, but Rec is not nor never has been a primary reason people locate here. Paths, schools, safety and sense of neighborhood are.

On the CVB, read the State Law at DCA, etc. Everything I listed is for revenue production to the City from sales tax, H/M etc. It is not just about H/M.

Your arguments show how badly we need a Comprehensive Strategic Plan. There are a lot of people who will dispute your arguments. We cannot keep on viewing funding in a parsed approach.

<cite><strong>Don Haddix
Peachtree City Mayor</strong></cite>

We need a Mayor with an inkling of leadership qualities.

mudcat's picture

Your point is so obvious that a real candidate for public office becomes his own worst enemy by arguing idiotically with the very same people he expects to vote for him. The first explanation is he has no campaign manager and no supporters giving him advice.

But another explanation is that some shadowy blogger just hijacked his photo and name and spews out stuff to make Haddix look stupid. Do you think this is Harold Logsdon's ultimate payback for the part-drunk comments? Or could George be working behind the scenes to weaken Hadddix. Come to think of it, that Ryan guy who is running is a computer person - he could pull it off. It makes as much sense as the first explanation.

I left Vanessa out of my speculation because she would never stoop so low. See you at her fireworks party tomorrow.

I appreciate your time in responding. I understand my arguments may be be faulty, but I don't view recreation as non essential. In my opinion, the path system is PTC's largest "recreational" activity. It can be labeled as a alternative transportation system (i.e. same category as a road), however, it's used for way more than just getting from one place to another - walking, biking, rollerblading, jogging, skateboarding etc.. Is it essential? No. I can still get to work and the grocery store without it. The difference is, its more popular than other "recreation" and therefore not considered for elimination or special user fees. If City Council passed a $15 user fee to every resident who who used the path system, it would be political suicide.

Regardless of our different perspectives, the fact remains, recreational funding has been under attack for years and when it does become available it is squandered on projects with no economic value like the Gathering Place, remodel of the former recreation building, and the pool bubble.

PTC needs a plan, fiscal responsibility, and strong leadership. We don't need more statistically irrelevant surveys or special committees of select individual to determine a course for the city to follow. The fact that our city's leaders have to rely on these types of gimmicks just shows how far out of touch they are with the needs/desires of the average citizen.

Don Haddix's picture

Discussion is healthy.

Non essential simply means a city can keep functioning without it. In no way does it means unwanted or without value.

The paths are not Rec, they are in fact legally roads. In fact, they are the only roads some can drive on for medical or other reasons. So they are essential.

Add in biking on city street, in example, does not make them Rec. Rec is a secondary usage. Rec, in turn, is not transportation. So, roads are versatile.

On the cart fees, they are what they are because State Law caps what can be charged. Otherwise the fee would indeed be annual.

Another strange law is we cannot safety inspect carts. Remember those that caught on fire?

The Gathering Place is Rec, just different from what you view as Rec. Many who use it say the fields are too costly.

As for the pool, don't get me started on that money pit. I wanted to make it summer only and get rid of the Bubble. But, to not get stuck with extreme liability I had to vote for it on the condition the foundation was replaced. Remember my warning and what was found under it?

The majority of PTC wants Rec to be self supporting, not on their dime. They are not concerned with providing Rec for non PTC residents.

As for the survey, it was statistically significant. You can claim otherwise all day, but it was.

How are leaders supposed to formally know what the citizens want without asking in some meaningful way? Think of what you are saying.

I have lived here 26 years and I believe I am very in touch and understanding of what PTC wants. I believe the survey and One PTC nailed it correctly.

A TON of people talk to me from all interest backgrounds, pro and anti police, fire, and yes, Rec. There is no singularly shared opinion.

That is the reality in PTC. We will never have answers that please everyone.

Fleisch, Learnard, Dienhart and Imker do not rely on anything but their personal opinions. How is that working out?

<strong><em>Peachtree City Mayor</em></strong>
The Comprehensive Strategic Plan Proposal
Is in the Updates Forum

<cite><strong>Don Haddix
Peachtree City Mayor</strong></cite>

Please correct me if I am wrong, but the pool foundation issue was either related to updated codes that we had to adhere to, lack of as-built documentation, or poor installation and inspections.

Which directs me to the recently replaced library roof.

Now that it is complete, do we have all the necessary documents and possibly a bond for the roof?

Who is now in charge of documenting the information should we need this in the future?

Hopefully, we have personnel unlike the water dept that provide regular service, visual checks, and maintenance.

Can you tell us how all of this is managed and improved under your watch.

Don Haddix's picture

The pool issue began when we were shown drawings of the foundation.

Having been raised with a Dad who was in the construction trade as a supervisor, I immediately saw it was poorly installed and would not last.

What that means is they didn't set forms, just dug rough trenches and poured concrete into it. It was thin in places, narrow in places and overall was a pour no competent company would ever had done.

That got the ball rolling with nothing to do with codes at that stage of the game. Fleisch, Learnard and Imker said they were going to vote proceed, even though the contracted company said on the old foundation there would be no liability or warranty from.

Amazing, to say the least.

Doug and I agreed to vote for it if the foundation were replaced. We were stunned they would even give a moments thought to proceeding as is.

When the foundation was ripped out, electrical and other code violations were discovered, just as I warned and feared.

The lack of documentation was never a legal issue, but it was a major frustration to Doug, Staff and me.

So, it began as my observations based on knowledge and experience and then code and other legal issues became the driving force.

On the roof, you better believe we have the documents. I am so tired of old construction lacking records and generating financial and other issues time after time.

Staff is also frustrated and we now have new procedures in place to track all these things, along with maintenance schedules, records etc.

Records are maintained within each department and at City Hall with administration.

This is another example of hows things use to be done that will not be done that way in the future.

Also ended is the policy of low bid getting the job. Utter nonsense way to do business. Low bid can give you a bad product that will haunt you in the future.

Others on Council, especially Dienhart and Imker, go for low bids. I always want to ensure we get the product we are seeking, even it if it costs more.

So, under my watch, we no longer automatically approve low bids, we do not go with minimal standards for construction and repair, we inspect their work every step of the way, we keep records and we get warranties.

PTC has wasted incredible amounts of money on poor construct requiring expansive repairs. The PD is a disaster of a building that has consumed more money in repairs over 11 years than it cost to build. We have some big issues with City Hall and I wonder when the next issue with the Library will be found. Those issues came about under Lenox, Brown and Logsdon.

There is no excuse for things having been done that way in the past.

<cite><strong>Don Haddix
Peachtree City Mayor</strong></cite>

You seem to be saying only pay for what you use?

I don't use the Senior Center, but I see the benefit for the City. Same with other things we offer. Why live here if you do not want to contribute to the betterment of PTC?

Don Haddix's picture

There is a percentage benefit to PTC for each facility. A proper percentage is not an issue, but the bulk of the cost falling on the property owners is.

Review or learn the law of marginal return when looking at services. It applies to Rec. In example, the pool does not sell homes or add value to homes.

You do not seem to want to admit our Rec services are out of alignment with what the citizens want. Our demographics have changed significantly but the mind set of some is still a decade or more old.

We need a Plan, which we have never had. The opinions of 5 elected does not automatically mean agreement with the voters. Really, they don't agree with each other!

If you believe you are correct, you should also believe the Plan will support your thinking. So should Rec Guy and a couple of others.

<strong><em>Peachtree City Mayor</em></strong>
The Comprehensive Strategic Plan Proposal
Is in the Updates Forum

<cite><strong>Don Haddix
Peachtree City Mayor</strong></cite>

Your comment "Fleisch, Learnard, Dienhart and Imker do not rely on anything but their personal opinions. How is that working out?"

Please no campaigning to me. Based on behaviors exhibited at the City Council meetings I have attended, none of you are the right choice for PTC's leadership. As to your comments on surveys, governments have operated for hundreds of years without having to choose their direction through responses to a survey. We can argue about statistically significant sample sizes and sigma levels all day, but it wont change my opinion. Only one result is achieved from polls and surveys, and it is a middle of the road consensus which allows politicians to make decisions on how many people they can anger and still get re elected. We need leaders who are not afraid to make tough decisions which lead us in the right direction.

Rec Guy
Not running for Mayor

The truth is it's irrelevant... because it's not true. I am a Dienhart supporter. I have had multiple conversations with him, and he is not one to act without careful consideration and research. The mayor is leading you down a path that he is using to "stretch the truth" about his competition. His insistance on arguing tells me (and almost everyone else) that this city needs a new direction. One that doesnt lead to us getting sued every 15 minutes, and one that outlines a budgeting process that Dienhart laid out. Even if it does require a change to our city laws. Mayor Dienhart will be the leader that this city has sorely lacked for at least the last 8 years.

Thanks for the support.

Don Haddix's picture

It wasn't a campaign comment, it was a statement of fact and history. So, the question of how is it working out is relevant into seeing your point of view on their approach.

You didn't answer the question. You diverted to rhetoric that avoided the issue completely.

I could also toss in how has that hundred of years of not listening worked out?

On the survey, a professor declared the survey significant. So, if you have a difference, it would be with him.

Bottom line here is I have fought uphill battles for change in the City. Those changes have improved efficient at the Fred, Tennis Center, City Hall and more. They have saved around $1 million a year of taxpayer money.

Just as you are doing now there were citizens expressing the same arguments on every one of these changes. Where are they now? Not complaining.

So, yes, I have and will continue to make the tough decisions even when faced with strong resistance.

I think we have reached the point of agreeing to disagree. But, it has been a good conversation.

<strong><em>Peachtree City Mayor</em></strong>
The Comprehensive Strategic Plan Proposal
Is in the Updates Forum

<cite><strong>Don Haddix
Peachtree City Mayor</strong></cite>

Your <strong>[[[EDITED]]]</strong> for Rec is well known throughout the city.
It's a far third in budget items. Cutting more Rec is not going to save the city.
You are picking fly <strong>[[[EDITED & BANNED for violation of terms of service]]]</strong> out of pepper which defines your 6 years in office.

The Splost buys 8 to 10 years for maintenance and repairs and if the city cuts $2 million in operating budget each year and sets up a reserve for maintenance then there will be $20 million in 10 years plus $2 million a year there after.

Do we need a committee to cut $2 million or $3 million a year?
Maybe just leadership that forces department heads to tighten up, cut, and take other cost saving measures.
Most people who budget put 5-10% fluff in their budgets.

Demand 5% from every department head and if no personnel are proposed to be cut, you didn't cut deep enough!


My hope is that the Core Infrastructure SPLOST will pass. This would spread the pain to out of county shoppers, while shoring up our reserves in order to "out-grow" our problems. For this to work, we will need to elect people that will impose fiscal discipline on our budget.

That being said, we need to have a plan b. The most logical plan b would be a series of cuts, that would possibly still need to be followed by a millage increase.

I have outlined my platform elsewhere. I'll just talk about the relevant parts here. One is hiring a public service director. This would lead to efficiencies in the Public Service departments- we would eliminate duplicate elements of management and infrastructure. That's the smaller of the two pieces.

The biggest part would be rolling out zero based budgeting. City council would set the budget and staff would spend accordingly. Now, staff comes to us with a budget and justifies why they need the total amount of the budget. We then set the millage according. This is backwards. We have the estimates of our intake- that's the magic number we must budget towards.

There is a plan.

Do we have a Public Service department? Is that a new one? I thought that was your department. Maybe Betsy's on a busy day?

Or do you mean Public Works department? Do you mean you want to dump Mark Caspar now and King & Ernst & Imker are going to dump Chief Skip?

There is your plan?

We would roll all public safety employees into a department of public safety. Sorry I was unclear on that.

is what you meant. Thank you.

Please don't discuss employees like they are dice. They deserve better. This is not a game to them.

Don Haddix's picture

As promised, I created an outline of the a plan to achieve a Comprehensive Stategic Plan, You can find it <a href="">HERE</a>

The above article shows the current path we are on is a failure.

I have a solid Plan that is what we need. The City Manager also wants a Comprehensive Strategic Plan and has said so at Budget Workshops and Council Meetings.

For any variation of a ZBB to work, it is also needed. <a href="">HERE</a> is a good document from GFOA, whose HQ is in Chicago, on ZBB. They have over 17,500 member states, counties, provinces and cities in the US and Canada.

What has been lacking to achieve a Plan? A Council Majority who understands their personal opinions are not a solution. My reelection with two supporting votes is what is needed to make it happen.

<strong><em>Peachtree City Mayor</em></strong>

<cite><strong>Don Haddix
Peachtree City Mayor</strong></cite>

Your re-election - Are you kidding me. Who the hell would vote for you. You have done nothing but damage the reputation of the city. Trying to be nice now, and speaking with some intelligence isn't going to get you re-elected. Very little can be done for you at this point. I pray you find peace in your life, but you will never get my vote. EVER!!

Robert W. Morgan's picture

You are approaching this exactly the right way - no confrontational arguments with a man who won't be part of the solution,now or next year. He can be very infuriating and look what happened to poor Larry #13 or #14 below- the dreaded ((((EDITED AND BANNED))).

Calm is best, not voting for him even better.
Only 10 more Tuesday's and the sun will shine on our wonderful community.

Live free or die!

You have about a day to convince two lackeys to run for council. At least Mr. Brown was smart enough to recruit his a year in advance.

PTC Observer's picture

I am afraid this is not a draft of a a plan but a process. You do know the difference between a plan and a process don't you?

Get cracking on that draft plan for us Mr. Haddix, present it to us in a cogent and well thought out way. It is possible you know, some people can actually do this. Really. I'm not kidding you.

NUK_1's picture

As PTCO stated correctly, that's a process of adopting some kind of unknown plan. It also yet again revolves around "Survey Says!" instead of sticking your damn neck out and saying "THIS is what I envision and advocate, and if you like that, support me with your vote."

Had way enough of this Mayor and November is getting a lot closer.


I have been on the board for one of the youth sports associations and I can tell you the Mayor's numbers are tortured at best.

He is correct that currently only a portion of the city uses the facilities. BUT he neglects to consider how many residents have used these facilities over time. For example, my neighbors four children all played soccer at BSC, three of them are now in college and off the rec rolls. But I would count them as using the facilities over time. When we consider how many residents (or children) have ever used the facilities well that number grows.

But what the Mayor and Mrs. Fleich miss is that these excellent youth sports organizations and the related facilities are one of the pillars that make PTC one of the top places to live in the US.

Take Care

NUK_1's picture

Neil, Rec Guy and Spyglass all have it right: these amenities are what makes PTC great, not what we do NOT have(except for high crime). Especially Recreation which gives a lot of opportunities for pre-teens and teenagers to do something constructive instead of "hanging out" somewhere or spending 16hrs a day in their parents' basement in front of an Xbox or the Internet.

You can cut and gut but pretty soon you destroy the reason why so many people want to live in PTC. The Mayor's crusade on Recreation has been on-going for a while and makes no sense to me. Deinhart ready to declare war over how poorly the contracted median-mowers and landscaping folks have made PTC look below average at best DOES make sense to me.

We know, we know, it might cost a little more. We can live with that if you have a real plan and explain it instead of a) throwing money around or b)blaming everyone else besides yourself because they don't desire to survey everyone or form committees to figure out whatever....I'm looking directly at Haddix on that.

Landscaping is important, not just in relationship to property tax values, but also to businesses looking to relocate here. The city needs to get its mojo back, and fixing this is part of that process.

PTC Observer's picture

Instead of wringing your hands about not having a strategic plan, and since you are an advocate of such a plan, and since you have run a business, and since you seem to have a lot of time on your hands, why don't you sit down and write up a draft of a strategic plan.

You're a strategic thinker are you?

Get cracking Mr. Haddix, time is short. You only have until November to get this done, it can be your legacy to the city. It will make interesting reading, it will be both enlightening and entertaining. Make sure you use spell check and include plenty of Excel spreadsheets with pivot tables and minitabs.

Anxiously waiting, I remain PTCO

Ad space area 4 internal

Sponsored Content