So it was the cities' attorney

who most likely sought and received the secrecy covering. That's our best

guess, because no one is talking, least of all the judge. This city attorney

firm in particular has a history of recommending closed meetings. The

infamous Georgia Utilities acquisition in the mid-1990s with closed joint

meetings of Peachtree City Council and Water and Sewer Authority comes

to mind. The county attorney could have objected, but there is no record

that anybody objected to the secrecy.

And that is my point somebody

ought to have objected, on the public's behalf, before the secret negotiations

ever got underway. The order could have been appealed, at least on procedural

grounds, but none of the parties bothered. Apparently nobody objected

not the attorneys involved, not the governing bodies involved leaving

one to reasonably infer that all parties preferred to negotiate about

our tax dollars out of public view. That the procedure also seems to violate

clear Georgia statutory law about open meetings is the cause of our court

action.

Perhaps Mr. Cate is a trusting

soul who prefers secrecy in local government. We think most Fayette citizens

would rather have open representative government than taxation by judicial

fiat.]

Back

to Opinion Home Page | Back

to the top of the page