Another question I can't seem

to understand is why these secret conversations don't violate the Open

Meeting laws? When his actions were presented to the County Solicitor,

the County Solicitor determined that no violation had occurred. Mayor

Brown proudly announced this result during a City Council meeting.

What he failed to mention,

as pointed out in the article in The Citizen, the County Solicitor said

that he didn't "technically" violate the law, but did use a

"loophole" to initiate these secret talks. This is hardly the

"exoneration" that Mayor Brown so proudly indicated he had received.

It is quite distressing that a mayor who so loudly cried for open government

would seek out a loophole to hold secret discussions.

When asked by the Citizen about

this issue, Mayor Brown stated,

"I've got every right

to call a council member and discuss anything I want to." Well, that

may be true (at least technically), but it is NOT what he promised us

in his campaign. In fact if I remember correctly, that is exactly what

Mayor Brown constantly complained about regarding the previous administration!

And I seriously doubt that

the citizens of Peachtree City want this type of government. At the very

least, I know that I want ALL of my elected representatives included in

ALL city proposals! I certainly don't want someone like Mayor Brown deciding

which council member should and which council member shouldn't be included

in conversations regarding any city policy.

Bottom line, it is high time

that Mayor Brown start working toward keeping his campaign pledges. Any

campaign pledge! Even just a simple one, like "listening to the people."

The question is, will Cal Beverly

hold Mayor Brown publicly accountable for his failure to govern openly,

failure to adhere to his campaign promises, and his arrogant interference

with the democratic process as vigorously as he did the previous administration?

Jim Stinson

Peachtree City

[The editor replies: Reader

Stinson may not be aware that The Citizen currently has a pending lawsuit

against Peachtree City as well as Fayetteville, Tyrone and Fayette County

for what we believe to be open meetings violations of a slightly more

weighty variety. We won our request for a temporary injunction. The hearing

for a permanent injunction against the four governmental entities is set

for next month. We are aware of no other person, group or newspaper that

has simultaneously sued four of the five governing bodies in the county

for open meetings violations.

As an aside, does reader Stinson

honestly believe that his favored previous administration conducted no

such one-on-one intra-Council discussions? Under the previous mayor, the

entire Council met in closed session with the entire Water and Sewer Authority,

an exercise of secrecy unparalleled to this day.

One wonders how government

could operate without ongoing personal interactions, often not including

every member of every board. Do Democrats caucus with Republicans on any

local boards across the state? Do factions on boards and councils caucus

with each other? One thinks not. And is that against the law? No, not

under any reading of the statute. And as one who has been holding elected

officials' feet to the open meetings fire for 30 years, I think one is

disingenuous to suggest otherwise.]