During the June 7, 2001, council

meeting there was no mention of another version of these contracts. There

was no mention of an e-mail. I have checked my records and I do not have

a copy of an e-mail that was apparently sent the day before the council

meeting.

A copy of the e-mail, as I

have read in the papers, was also supposed to have been placed on the

dais the evening of the council meeting. I did not receive that copy,

either. However, I do have copies of the five items which were placed

on the dais that evening. I can tell you what they are, because I keep

everything.

But here's the point whether

a revised contract existed or not is irrelevant because the minutes and

transcript clearly reflect the fact that neither the former mayor nor

council members ever mentioned the subject of another amended contract.

Furthermore, the city attorney

did not mention any proposed changes to the contracts and in fact referred

to the contracts "in the council book" that specifically do

not include these changes. In the recorded minutes of that meeting, the

city attorney clarifies my motion by saying, "But I would like for

your motion, Steve, is that you authorize the mayor [Lenox] to sign an

agreement that is substantially similar to the two that are before Council

in the book."

The contracts in the council

book are clearly and specifically referenced. No one made any mention

at all of an amended contract sent the day before or of any other version.

Was there an e-mail? Yes! I have just recently seen a copy of this e-mail

that has been referenced for the past month. The city attorney did, in

fact, send the city manager changes to the airport contract. However,

neither I nor [Councilman] Dan Tennant received this e-mail nor was there

any mention or reference of this e-mail during the meeting.

There was no clarification,

discussion or debate concerning any other contractual revisions concerning

the contracts found in the council meeting books. I can assure you that

my motion, and my intent, was to approve the contracts in the council

meeting book and the City Council voted unanimously to do so. All of this

is recorded quite clearly in the minutes from that meeting. I voted on

what was before me.

What is important is that the

signed contracts are substantially different from those that council authorized

the former mayor to sign. You don't have to take my word for it, since

all of what I'm saying is public record. I encourage anyone to review

the actions that took place during the public City Council meeting. Review

the official City Council approved minutes and the verbatim minutes. This

was a very long council meeting and there was plenty of opportunity for

someone, anyone, to mention that another version of the contracts existed.

The council books are prepared

Hall on Friday evenings to pick up my copy and spend the weekend reviewing

the information. It is common practice during council meetings for council

members to clarify which version of a memo, report or contract is the

most current version. Again, you can review minutes of other meetings

to verify this.

As for me, I have a duty, an

ethical duty, as an elected official, to report on matters that I believe

are not true or activities that are prohibited by law. Three weeks ago,

I voted to appoint a special investigator to determine if the city's contracts

with the Airport [Authority] and Development Authority are legal because

I do not believe the contracts that were signed were the contracts authorized

to be signed by council. I do not believe that the motion I made was honored.

I chose to vote to table the

amendments to the intergovernmental contracts indefinitely and to appoint

a special counsel to investigate the legality of the contracts. It is

my sincere belief that I had no choice but to vote on the matter. I made

the motion and I am the only person who can verify the intent of my motion.

The citizens deserve to have an unbiased investigation to determine whether

or not the city is legally bound by what is now a 50-year contract with

the [two] authorities.

This action did not void the

existing contracts, or place blame, or accuse anyone of an illegal act

it simply investigates the legality of the contracts. This is a fact-finding

process.

If these contracts are found

to be valid, then political justice has prevailed. If these contracts

are found to not be valid, then the remaining council members will come

to terms with new contracts for the authorities. I will again be abstaining

from matters dealing with the Development Authority. Either way it is

in the best interests of Peachtree City residents to settle this matter

once and for all.

I was elected in November to

represent the citizens of Peachtree City. My duty to represent the citizens

supersedes the fact that my wife has filed a lawsuit against the Development

Authority.

Anytime someone files a lawsuit

it is a very difficult decision. This is new ground for us. I assure you

that my wife did not reach this conclusion lightly. Now it is in the hands

of the court. However, the legality of the contracts in question has absolutely

no bearing whatsoever on her lawsuit. Let us not forget that this action

occurred eight months prior to my wife even filing her lawsuit.

This is a morality question,

deciding what's right and what's wrong and making a judgment call. I made

a judgment call. It's up to the citizens to decide whether they agree

or disagree with my call.

There simply is no "conspiracy

theory." At least not one of which I am a part. Maybe I'm just new

to the political arena, but I'd truly like to believe this is an honest

mistake simply because all the players were not on "the same page."

However, somewhere along the

line some of the people involved have lost the ability to respond in a

civil and respectful manner. Hurling ethical insults, when the real issue

is a bona fide disagreement on the worthiness or validity of a contract,

does little to further the public interest. Such accusations undermine

public confidence in elected officials and generate ill will in the ongoing

relationships between everyone involved.

I was elected to serve the

citizens of Peachtree City and I will continue to do my best to see that

your interests are represented.

Steve Rapson

Councilman

Peachtree City