What am I talking about? Well,

this is the situation. The Peachtree City Council has approved the formation

of a non-profit organization to oversee the amphitheater and tennis center.

This non-profit organization's governing body consists of the city

manager, city finance director, two city council members and one recreational

member.

This governing body will supervise

the current candidate council member Rutherford, if elected, that works

at the amphitheater. The city manager and finance director will work for

the current candidate council member Rutherford, if elected, and in turn

supervise this current candidate for council: Rutherford if elected as

an employee of the amphitheater.

How would you like to be the

amphitheater director, knowing that one of your employees was a city council

member and held your career in their hands? Every move that you make as

amphitheater director would be scrutinized. How would you like to be the

city manager or the city finance director and report to a city council

member that is also a nonprofit organization employee that you supervise?

In both of these cases would

you not be concerned about your careers knowing that any decision you

make related to the amphitheater could potentially affect your career

because in essence you are making a decision on the potential council

member Rutherford's livelihood?

Where are our ethics? Why do

we want to knowingly enter into these conflicts? Have we not had enough?

Councilman Rapson can finally vote on venue issues, now that his spouse

is no longer on the Amphitheater's board. Why would we want to create

a situation for a new city council member, where she would ethically need

to refrain from voting on multiple issues? Voters of Peachtree City, you

need to know your facts before going to the polls on Nov. 25. Let us prevent

these types of ethical issues when we go to the polls.

John Nieber

Peachtree City, Ga.