Comments on: State of the City, people-watching edition

By: rob downs

rob downs — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 14:58:52 +0000

They are ALL to blame. City Council, Shirley, and Chief Pennington. Instead of working together to get us out of this mess, they are too busy casting blame and not focused on going forward.

We are to blame too. I don’t recall there being anyone (other than Shirley) up in arms about the tax decrease. We, as residents of Atlanta, need to be more vigilant about the decisions our elected officials make and their impact.

By: lrummel

lrummel — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 22:35:03 +0000

are you really surprised? A comment like that from the mayor who defended Michael Vick as “an asset to the community.” And when I wrote her an email saying that Michael Vick was NO asset to MY community her response was “you have a right to your opinion and I have mine…”

Childish? You bet.

By: S. Dekalb Voter

S. Dekalb Voter — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 22:33:23 +0000

So let me get this straight – Shirley asks to raise taxes for public safety, the council decides to LOWER taxes

(http://www.ajc.com/hotjobs/content/metro/atlanta/stories/2008/06/27/atlanta_tax_rate_defeated.html?cxntlid=inform_artr)

and then Shirley gets blamed for public safety cuts? You got to be kidding me. What municipality in their right mind is lowering taxes? Can anybody name one?

And you want Norwood to run Atlanta for the next four years. It seems like she puts politics ahead of common sense if this is any indication of her judgment.

By: J. Mack

J. Mack — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 21:56:42 +0000

S. Dekalb – there’s no anger toward Mary Norwood – or City Council for that matter because they did not specifically approve those cuts. Council passed a balanced budget – Franklin decides what gets cut.

By: S. Dekalb Voter

S. Dekalb Voter — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 21:41:41 +0000

Why is there no anger toward Mary Norwood for the public safety cuts? Norwood voted unanimously with the rest of the council against a $30 per year increase in property taxes to ensure the city’s public safety budget was fully funded. The entire council should be ashamed. They were playing politics with people’s lives. The one city official who isn’t running for re-election supported the increase – Shirley Franklin.

By: Bridget Jones' Granny Panties

Bridget Jones' Granny Panties — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 20:55:08 +0000

Hope all the local politicos who COULD have made an appearance at the vigil don’t get too hungover on all that Peach Buzz-style schmooze they were swilling this morning at the Did-I-Take-The-Train-Or-Did-I-Take-The-Ford “Omni.” Norwood, on the other hand, just took a serious PR step forward in her ‘09 bid for mayor.

By: rptrcub

rptrcub — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 20:47:16 +0000

If she wants to get kudos, then she needs to get her sugar-honey-iced-tea in order. Else, I’d like to point her to the city code of ordinances and state law:

CHAPTER 3. REMOVAL OF ELECTED OFFICIALS

Section 5-301. Recall elections.
Any person holding an elective office of the city shall be subject to removal from office at a recall election in the manner provided by Chapter 4 of Title 21 of the O.C.G.A., the “Recall Act of 1989,” as now or hereafter amended.
(1996 Ga. L. (Act No. 1019), p. 4469)

—

Section 5-304. Removal of elected officials.
(a) Grounds for removal. The mayor, the president of the council, or any councilmember shall be subject to removal from office for any of the following causes:
(1) Malpractice, misfeasance, or malfeasance in office;
(2) Failure at any time to possess any of the qualifications of office as provided by this Charter or by law;
(3) Failure to maintain continuously the residency within the district or districts from which elected.
(4) Violation of the conflicts of interest and standards of conduct provided in this Charter or the code of ordinances;
(5) Violation of the oath of office as provided in this Charter;
(6) Abandonment of office or ceasing to perform the duties thereof; or
(7) Failure for any cause to perform the duties of office as required by the provisions herein or by law.
(b) Procedures for removal. Removal of the mayor, the president of the council, or any councilmember pursuant to subsection (a) of this section shall be accomplished by the following method. In the event the mayor, the president of the council, or any councilmember is sought to be removed by action of the council, an impartial panel shall conduct a hearing and render a decision on the matter. Such elected official sought to be removed shall be entitled to a written notice specifying the ground(s) for removal and to a public hearing which shall be held not less than ten days after the service of such written notice. The council shall provide by ordinance or resolution for the appointment of an impartial panel and the manner in which such hearings shall be held to render a decision. Any elected official sought to be removed from office as herein provided shall have the right of appeal from the decision of the council to the Superior Court of Fulton County. Such appeals shall be governed by the same rules as govern appeals to the superior court from the probate court.

By: Andisheh Nouraee

Andisheh Nouraee — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 19:47:45 +0000

More evidence that crime and our worries about crime are not important to Mayor Shirley Franklin.

Instead of addressing concerned citizens outside The Standard, who doubtless would have welcomed a sincere gesture of support from the Mayor’s office, Franklin attacks Mary Norwood.

If Franklin is as successful as she claims, why is a she so bitter and defensive?

By: atlpaddy

atlpaddy — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 18:58:39 +0000

Awwww, poor wittle Shirlwee. Her feelwings got hurted.

She gets more bent out of shape about what somebody says about her than she does about the city going to hell in a handbasket around her.

Shirley, Pennington, and Frank Wren need to get the f#ck out of town.