From: Kim Learnard <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, October 20, 2023 12:01 PM
To: Clint Holland <[email protected]>
Subject: Council Member responsibilities [Editor’s note: bold-face type for emphasis not in original document]
Mr. Holland, I am reaching out today with three goals. First, I wish to document factual information that was shared in our Council meeting last night so there will be no more confusion going forward.
Second, this is to try — for what I hope is the last time — to help you understand the role of City Council members in Peachtree City.
Finally, I sincerely hope that after reading this you will decide to work to regain the shattered trust of your fellow City Council members.
First, as Council Members we have a responsibility to learn and share factual information. We have resources at our fingertips that most Peachtree City citizens do not have, and we owe it to our citizens to speak the truth.
If you don’t know something, ask Bob, myself, Yasmin, or another Council Member. There is no excuse for a City Council member to write the ignorant blather (apartments, urbanization, LCI, tennis center) that you documented in your recent Letter to the Editor.
What you put on display for all to see is that either you don’t know the truth or you have total disregard for the truth. Either is reprehensible.
This brings me to my second point, and I have already verbalized this to you very clearly: We as Council members do not post Letters to the Editor in The Citizen.
Posting in that forum is a public display of division and partisanship. You will notice that I do not post in The Citizen, even as your pals bully me on a weekly basis.
In any given week, one or two vile, disgusting liars use The Citizen as a platform to make false and outrageous accusations about me, lie shamelessly about me and our City, and put on public display the kind of anger and negativity that would make any family or business considering moving to Peachtree City turn elsewhere.
The fact that you have not refuted, or corrected, or set the record straight, or defended your own City Council team speaks volumes about your lack of professionalism.
If you have legitimate information to share, bring it to Bob and Yasmin to discuss the best way to use city communications channels to share that information.
And if it isn’t legitimate enough for them to share through city channels, it doesn’t belong in print. You are supposed to be showing our citizens that you are part of a team and that we are unified in reaching the goals of the city as our only priority.
Now for the factual information as I shared last night. I sincerely hope you understand it and will promote the facts instead of misinformation…
Apartments: Other than senior living at Somerby and Hearthside, no apartments have been built in more than 20 years. No apartments are planned. No apartment proposals are in the pipeline. Nobody on Council and nobody running for Council wants more apartments in Peachtree City.
Two years ago, I enumerated the number of apartments in Peachtree City at 1760 units; that’s approximately 14 percent of our households. The national average is 15 percent. You might say we are at equilibrium. No apartments are coming to Peachtree City.
LCI: Livable Centers Initiative is a joint project between a municipality and the ARC. Municipalities favor LCI’s because the ARC has vast resources, and because it means federal dollars can be leveraged for the project.
Three years ago, long before I took office as Mayor, the previous Council entered into an LCI agreement to do a Marketing study of the 54West corridor and beyond. The study was done, but nothing moved forward after that and the project died on the vine in 2020. To be clear, the LCI ended in 2020. Three years ago. That’s two years before I took office as Mayor.
Tennis Center: The Peachtree City Tennis Center is a jewel in the crown of our recreation facilities and it is renowned throughout the southeast US as a quality facility. We host several college and pro events ever year, drawing thousands of visitors who stay in our hotels, and shop and dine here.
We are currently spending thousands of dollars to address deferred maintenance, and upgrade the facility floors, lighting, and bathroom facilities. We have fixed the flooding problem and turned the lower level of the main building into nice offices, where we could move some of our Administrative staff. We continue to invest in improvements. The tennis center is here to stay. It is not going anywhere and it is not at risk.
Urbanization: Peachtree City is a master planned community with a very responsible Comprehensive Plan. The last Comp Plan Update was done in 2022, led by a citizen committee. The hysterics surrounding allegations of “urbanization” are intentionally misleading. We all moved here for the villages, the paths, the greenspace and the careful planning, and that’s the way it’s going to stay.
Huddleston Road: I have actually seen the email from a PTC citizen to the Planterra HOA claiming “the city government is discussing the possibility of building multi-family housing complexes on Huddleston Road.”
We are not and that is a bald faced lie. As we polled on Council last night, none of us wants residential on Huddleston Road and none of us will entertain any conversations about residential on Huddleston Road.
That being said, we will soon run sewer, stormwater and new golf cart path to support the existing businesses and industries on that corridor and make the entire area safer.
Again, Clint, I sincerely hope you will work to regain the shattered trust of your team.
Kim Learnard, Mayor
Peachtree City, Ga.
EDITOR’S NOTE: In a letter to The Citizen in November 2021 from then-candidate Kim Learnard, she wrote, “I am endorsed by three current City Council members and a long list of community leaders across the political spectrum.” Read it here: https://thecitizen.com/2021/11/28/letter-from-kim-learnard-mayoral-election-not-about-partisan-division/
On Oct 17 Clint Holland pens a letter to the editor to endorse a candidate for City Council citing her past history and her position on past issues. Holland’s letter does not criticize the position the Council took on any of these issues or the position of any member, but rather simply state what Candidate Brown’s position to them was. This letter of endorsement is citing and attesting to the candidates stated positions match her historical actions. Nothing more, nothing Less.
On Oct 19, the Mayor from her throne on the dais lists each of the topics mentioned in the endorsement as if to contest them but goes on to essentially states that for each of the positions stated in the endorsement that her and the others councilmembers position also match those Holland claims of the candidate. Is this a glowing endorsement of Holland’s candidate by the mayor?
On Oct 20 she pens a private letter a to Holland chastising and berating him as if he is some errant child.
She states “Mr. Holland, I am reaching out today with three goals. First, I wish to document factual information that was shared in our Council meeting last night so there will be no more confusion going forward.” The only confusion I see is the mayor views the endorsement as being a personal attack upon herself, when there is NO MENTION of anybody else’s positions other than that of the candidate and where she stood on a set of issues.
Further down she states “This brings me to my second point, and I have already verbalized this to you very clearly: We as Council members do not post Letters to the Editor in The Citizen.” Excuse me, your highness, Where else would you make a public endorsements? Perhaps the dais is where you prefer to ridicule and belittle those that support a candidate you seem to oppose instead?
She then goes on to say “f you don’t know something, ask Bob, myself, Yasmin, or another Council Member. There is no excuse for a City Council member to write the ignorant blather (apartments, urbanization, LCI, tennis center) that you documented in your recent Letter to the Editor.” Ignorate blatter? This endorsement was a testament to the candidates observed comments and actions on issues previously before the commission. If they come up again, the public will have a better understanding of what her true positions are.
Based on her furor, it’s almost as if the mayor was running as for post 2 instead of her proxy who appears to hold a contradictory position to that of candidate Brown, but has been reluctant to make those positions public to the detriment of her campaign.
I encourage everyone reading this letter to go back and reread the letter to the editor that the mayor is complaining about above, and look for ANY reference to the actions, the character or their position of any member on the commission. Now ask yourself why has the mayor gone so unhinged over a simple endorsement. Holland doesn’t even go as far as criticizing the opponent to the candidate he endorsed.
The mayor handled this matter exactly how it should be handled. She went privately to the source and articulated her concerns. Remember, “Praise in public, scorn in private.”
Those of you who have replied here stating that the Mayor was outing Holland publicly need to reread the article… she didn’t send this to The Citizen; it was private correspondence. The same goes for those who pointed out the bold text as bad form – following the article title is “Editor’s note: bold-face type for emphasis not in original document.”
Then we have the comment “Council members aren’t there to be on a team, they are there to serve their constituents.” I would argue that working as a team is the best quality council can have to effectively serve the constituents.
If you have kept an eye on local government over the last several decades, you will recollect that the most ineffective and self-destructive periods we have been through as a city came when council could not work as a team. I won’t mention any names but every time Don Haddix, Eric Imker and/or Steve Brown have been involved in the past, council struggled.
When it gets to the point that council members resort to bullying their colleagues through social media and letters to the editor as a means for getting a leg up, centricity and civility are lost and council looks more like a dozen monkeys trying to simultaneously eat the same banana than a group of professionals working together for the good of the community (see I cleaned that whole monkey analogy up for you to stay within the family audience guidelines).
Wow, srsly, Wow! “I won’t mention any names” followed 3 words later by 3 names?
So, if the mayor and all but one Council member are on board with a bad idea you want the last member to join them so they’re working as a team? Let’s all march off the cliff together, we don’t want any holdouts!
I care less about whether they disagree openly about things than about whether they make the right decisions about PTC.
Readers, keep in mind that there are some commenting on here and other articles who do not live here.
Council members aren’t there to be on a team, they are there to serve their constituents. There is a fair amount of concern in PTC that our town will be changed for the worse in pursuit of more development or a more cosmopolitan style – the mayor’s email reads like “we aren’t currently discussing that out loud”.
Unless there is a rule against it, “We as Council members do not post Letters to the Editor in The Citizen” seems off base.
Agreed!
Esteban
I agree. Too many words and explanations. No means no. Wagner’s letter says the plan is updated every 5 years. Therefore, those running will have an opportunity to influence the plan.
I’ve finally figured out The Citizen is just an echo chamber (“Agreed!”). Mayor and Council need to be a team because they were elected by a plurality of citizens to represent our collective interests: share facts, review them, make decisions, and disagree agreeably. If a member of a football team decided to go to a local journalist and share non-factual information or simply badmouth the coach or his teammates, he’d definitely be called out for not being a team player, but you think it is OK because this is a government entity. Second, having a policy and using common sense are two different things- again to share non-factual information and badmouth is really poor form. After many council votes, each member has an opportunity to make comments. My opinion is a council member may want to publish deeper thoughts or more explanation on why he voted a certain way or a need he sees in Peachtree City and how he’s working to fill it. The point is to keep it FACTUAL and POSITIVE. Before businesses and people move to a municipality, they check it out. If it looks like city government is so dysfunctional that council members feel a need to badmouth each other in the press, would you want to move there? This has been an ongoing tradition in PTC politics that needs to stop. (I’m really tired of the LCI trope. The LCI is so dead I’m putting it in my yard as a Halloween decoration.)
Any comment on the voter lists that Holland and S Brown and others have acquired with SS#’s and DOB along with other info on close to 4K Fayette voters?
Mrs. Mayor chastises Mr. Holland, (and rightly so) for posting comments but signed her name, representing PTC, to anti gun letter with no notice to the citizens of PTC?
Seems a bit of a double standard to me.
Exactly what I was thinking
The Good: seeing the mayor commit to opposing high density housing and apartments is excellent. So are her assurances that the Livable Centers Initiative is dead, and that “the villages, the paths, the greenspace and the careful planning, (are) the way it’s going to stay”.
The Bad: sending an email to a “team member” with the haughty tone and bold text (equal to ALL CAPS shouting) is not mayoral, and would do nothing to bridge any divide if I were on the receiving end.
The mayor chooses not to use her own voice in The Citizen to counter the “disinformation” she says that she sees here every week. Her choice, but then why whine about it?
The Ugly: requiring Holland to only go through city employees to get his message out in order to be a “team member” is controlling behavior to the max.
And why does she want to deny Holland the ability to post Letters To The Editor? He’s still a resident / citizen, and he has a right to inform and opine.
Ironically, not long ago the mayor took it upon herself to use her position to sign on to a controversial state petition to take away gun ownership rights without the knowledge of her “team”. Was that a “public display of division and partisanship”, to use her words?
The mayor also repeatedly uses “team” as a hammer, even going so far as to claim that trust between Holland and all of the other council members is “shattered”. If this is true, why were they not co-signers to the e-mail?
The mayor’s final bold text point, Huddleston Road, seemingly has nothing to do with Holland. The mayor blasts an email (not from Holland) that alleges there is a plan for multi-family housing on Huddleston, and she puts that to rest. Fair enough. But there is no connection to Mr Holland that she provides, so why does she put that on him?
Last bit of ugliness – the mayor could not deny that the Livable Centers Initiative had a plan to convert the Tennis Center (and Drake Field) to multi-family buildings / apartments, because it was proposed in 2020. See (https://thecitizen.com/2020/11/01/lci-meeting-insult-to-peachtree-city-residents/) Instead, she carefully distances herself from the LCI plan and cites its demise.
In his Letter To The Editor, Holland only mentions the LCI in support of Suzanne Brown, whom he credits for being part of the community pushback against converting city property to mixed use / apartments that was in the LCI planning. See https://thecitizen.com/2023/10/17/letter-councilman-holland-endorses-suzanne-brown-for-peachtree-city-council-post-2/ The mayor does not refer specifically to anything incorrect or misleading that Holland wrote.
After reading the mayor’s email, my takeaway is that she is angry, and wants Mr Holland to know where his place is on “the team”. But I am left still wondering what untruth he said or wrote that spurred this all in the first place.
Hi My.02 I dont see where the mayor says she opposes Apartments/ other forms of Multi-Family. She says
“No apartments are planned. No apartment proposals are in the pipeline. Nobody on Council and nobody running for Council wants more apartments in Peachtree City.”
1. This doesn’t mean if something were later proposed she might see some hidden wisdom. No means no which isn’t said just not yet before we vote.
2. Moore’s own words indicate she is open to the multi-use to stop us from being a laughing stock which I am grateful as other communities laugh them selves to gridlock. We’re their and we’re no laughing.
Having followed politics too long, this feels very much like I was against apartments before I was for them…. to get …
There is smoke. I am just following the breadcrumbs.
Very well said. This should be in the Letters to the Editor section. Particularly after the last one, which is a great tribute to the Straw Man.
I agree with the Mayor here.
Boy how some forget… https://thecitizen.com/2020/11/01/lci-meeting-insult-to-peachtree-city-residents/
Happy Festivus to all during the ‘airing of the grievances’. A wrestling match will follow.
But seriously I’m glad to see that Kim does not support any additional apartments for or urbanization of Peachtree City. That’s a relief to me. But to be on the safe side I plan to vote for the candidates who specifically and strongly stated in their platforms that they oppose any possible future plans to do so and who want to stick to the PTC master plan.
It’s sad that there is so much mistrust and misinformation floating around. I don’t want our local politics to go the way of our national politics. It’ll only hurt our community.
GMAN she said no apartments are planned or in the pipeline. She did not say she opposes them. She also said no candidate supports them although her minion Moore was quoted in another article saying she supported.
Thanks. But she did say ‘ Nobody on Council and nobody running for Council wants more apartments in Peachtree City.’ I assume that meant her too. I agree with you on candidate Moore, hence my ‘but to be on the safe side ‘ comment.
It’s obvious that facts are irrelevant to the ideologues who post on the Citizen website. Once the mayor (or president or racial minority or even the dog catcher) has been deemed to be anathema, they invent or marshal evidence to substantiate nefarious intent. And since any contrary evidence is disregarded, they merely double down rather than face the cognitive dissonance required to question themselves.
It is little wonder that most decent people shy away from politics.
Well said.
I’m starting to feel like our mayor serves her own interests. Such was the case when the voice of our residents sent 70+ emails to council to refresh lake usage rules. Prior to that, another survey was run with another 50 voices which she dismissed and specifically ordered code enforecement to prohibit non fishing packaged low power electric motors from the lake. All while knowing that the lake association had provisions for high power electric marine motors that did not exist at the time. Why did she do this? Seemingly to support her neighbors and board member affiliation with the lake association. We changed for electrication on the paths, but single rider, limited weight and speed electricnsurf boards will never happen on lake peachtree as they would reveal what we have always known; that vested lake rights are non exclusive and they are being protected by those in power at the tax payers expense.
I’m with the mayor. Clint was out of line. Facts matter. Not sure why this email is getting posted publicly. Seems like Clint needs to take the L on this.
What facts?
Everything the mayor stated is supported in the public record. What are you on about?
Not sure what facts you’re talking about that Mr. Holland. Please tell me where he was “out of line.”
The letter to the editor rehashing old, settled local politics while endorsing a candidate implying they will solve these non-issues. Maybe more to it, I didn’t see the last city council meeting.
Well she just showed her true colors, reprimanding a councilman in the public eye. Maybe trying to get people to not pay attention to who he endorses for the city council?? We definitely know Mayor Kim does not want Suzanne Brown to win because she will be outnumbered. Clint Holland is a good man and wants the best for the city.
I don’t think she did this in the public eye. This is an email from the mayor to Clint and posted by “The Citizen”. It’s not clear, but seems Clint sent it to Cal Beverly who posted it? Weird for sure.
Not the public eye, but a reprint of an email from the mayor to Mr. Holland. With a specific FOIA request someone could probably obtain the email, but given the email is from the 20th and was published on the 20th, it seems Mr. Holland may have given it to The Citizen himself. I don’t think I’d publish an email of someone taking me to task for not being factual.
She sounds like a lot of fun to work with “as a team.”
Agreed!
odoylerules, I’m just curious- I noticed you commented on this article and also on Cathy Vaught’s article (running for City Council Post 2 in Fayettville). Do you live in PTC or Fayetteville?
Have lived in both. Currently just a county resident and a lurker on this site.
Do you live in Fayette Co.?
Odoylerules seems to have already said that he live in the county.
I’m curious why that’s so important to you. He may have family of friends who live here.
I appreciate this letter from our Honorable Mayor. She brings up good points; one among them is for Councilmembers to maintain truthfulness and decorum when addressing City issues. Looking at the City Council as one team does bring about a certain sense of security in government.
However, as always my brain wanders deeper when chewing on what I read. Are we officially filtering public information through Bob and Yasmin? Can a Councilmember not speak the way he chooses about what he chooses?
You may be on to something with this brain wandering thing. Keep wandering.
Do you think reprimanding your team member in the public eye is good decorum?
Private email made public by someone. Again an FOIA request could probably obtain it, but not with the speed this one made it into The Citizen.
Who is Mayor Kim endorsing in our upcoming election? Who could it be?
Well done, Kim. I’m tired of folks who have been consuming a steady diet of lies and misinformation for years on a national level (and eating it with a big smile, I might add) and then bringing that junk to the local scene. It is well past time to address lies and misinformation with verifiable truth. It won’t shut them up, but it is nice for others to see people stand up against the onslaught of garbage.