District 6 forum at Inman Middle School … how was it?
October 2, 2009 at 10:52 am by Thomas Wheatley in NewsLast night, candidates aiming to replace outgoing Atlanta City Councilwoman Anne Fauver in District 6 gathered at Inman Middle School to win residents’ hearts and minds.
We’re sure it was a crowded house — District 6 includes such politically active neighborhoods as Virginia-Highland, Morningside, Candler Park and Midtown, among other hamlets. And since there isn’t a clear-cut frontrunner among the six candidates vying for the open seat, voters probably wanted to hear some opinions on the issues.
We couldn’t attend the gathering, mainly because we were in Athens talking to whippersnappers about the future of journalism. (Keep your heads up, yo!)
If you were there, we’d love to hear your take. And if you don’t write anything, it means you hate America. Consider this an open thread.
October 2nd, 2009 at 2:27 pm
The forum was very informative. Steve Brodie showed that he is clearly the most qualified candidate and the most knowledgable on the issues. Wan and Azizi had good presentation styles but did not have the depth of knowledge Brodie showed on all of the issues. Liz Coyle fell flat. Gallegos had no clue on most of the issues and Tad came across as nice, but not much ahead of Gallegos as far as knowledge of the issues.
October 2nd, 2009 at 5:25 pm
Low turnout – less than half full – maybe two dozen there who were not wearing candidates’ badges. Un- dynamic moderator did not use pointed or follow-up questions to get candidates to take distinct positions. For half the evening, you would not have been aware that the city can barely make ends meet. For most of it, nothing would have disturbed your snooze. As another commentator said, Gallegos and Azizi demonstrated that they don’t know the score, while Christian was border-line.
Eventually, two major issues emerged where a Kremlinologist could detect differences between candidate positions – pensions and Beltline development.
On pensions, Steve Brodie argued for deferring to the police and fire unions, and avoided committing to reducing benefits. Liz Coyle, Tad Christian and Alex Wan spoke of the need for tough decisions – presumably timid code for some unspecified benefit reduction. (Kasim Reed at the same venue a couple of weeks before proposed a benefit rollback to 2% per year and his opponents agreed some reduction was inevitable. Candidates failed to say which approach they preferred. )
On Beltline development, Liz Coyle spoke in general terms about protecting the character of single-family neighborhoods; Steve Brodie spoke of frustration with Beltline decisions, and a need to listen to community input and prevent inappropriate density; and Alex Wan emphasized that to make Beltline economics work development needs have to be balanced against neighborhood wishes.
Finally, on trees, Tad Christian argued that since the ordinance does not prevent developers from clear cutting and paying recompense, it should be weakened. He demanded that the recompense money be given to Trees Atlanta to plant new saplings. (It already does, though Council diverted some to pay the city’s arborists.) Liz Coyle saw a pattern of city employees who enforce ordinances being harassed. (Tom Coffin was in the audience.)
In sum, a District-Sixer who wants the city budget balanced without ever higher taxes and who does not want Monroe Drive to bear the brunt of high-density Beltline development is stuck. Coyle is slippery on the Beltline but fairly sound on pension rollbacks, while Brodie is slippery on pensions but holds the line on density around Monroe Drive. Wan, an ADA board member until last month, is much less neighborhood friendly than Coyle with no stronger claim to fiscal responsibility.
Because there were no follow-ups on these key issues, I may have misinterpreted some positions. Let’s hope the candidates themselves chime in.
October 2nd, 2009 at 5:45 pm
“isn’t a clear-cut frontrunner”? Alex lost big in a race that included about 1/2 of D6. As voters get to know Liz, they’ll realize that after she messes up in 2 years she’ll claim victory and move on. And sorry to sound catty, but who picked out her wardrobe? Anne Fauver? Bahareh is at least atractive, polished and articulate. But that’s all. And Tad and Miguel looked like they were playing a round of “last man to catch a clue wins”.
Even though I thought Steve was not on the top of his game, he was the only candidate who had some real ideas that are specific and attainable. It may just be that he was drowned out by the banality that was Alex/Liz and the stupidity that was Tad/Miguel. Regardles, back to no front runner. Dude got like 49.9% of the vote last time.
October 2nd, 2009 at 7:16 pm
The highlight of a lackluster evening led by a soporific moderator was Brodie’s posing and answering one tough specific question: Do you support Atlanta Beltline Inc. (ABI) in their unyielding attempts to put 4 and 8-story development in areas originally promised as for green space at Monroe & 10th?
The local neighborhood and NPU have adamantly opposed ABI from the start on the topic. So does Brodie, as he made clear. Coyle generally tries to spin it by telling people that she opposed the Mason 38/42 story towers and leaves it at that. (So, of course did almost everyone who wasn’t being paid by Mason.) Last night she ducked almost out of sight after Brodie denounced ABI and their role in this. This was a not too subtle attack on Coyle, the ‘citizen rep’ ABI board member until legislation was introduced in City Council last month that left her and Wan – who had a similar position at ADA – no choice but to resign in order to run for office.
Given the community’s anger on the subject, it might have been the best thing that could have happened to her. Coyle stayed far away from this question for the remainder of the night, a choice facilitated by a genial and clueless moderator who posed only open-ended and vague questions that allowed the candidates endless leeway to roam at will about the District landscape. (Though, to be fair, he did stun them – and the audience – with one toughie: “What’s the most recent neighborhood festival each of you have attended?”)
There may have been little that Coyle could have done to fight ABI’s bait and witch and refusal to hear the community, but what has hurt her has been her subsequent (and ongoing) refusal to pledge opposition to ABI’s plans. It’s her greatest electoral vulnerability; those who feel disappointed and angry at ABI’s form a strong component of Brodie’s support.
The other candidates – except for Wan – offered general “Emerald Necklace” Beltline tributes. Wan blandly said “the process should be followed” and “the NPU’s will should be respected” “consistent with the overall goals of the project”. Is he unaware – or hoping that the voters are unaware – that ABI has made it clear that they have no intention of following the community’s wishes in the northeast corridor around Piedmont Park?
Wan seems much too smart not to have understood and carefully chosen his response, but he has been remarkably vague on many subjects,as if his main concern is not to offend anyone. If so, he must assume that the election is his to lose. Leading his effort is Beth Shapiro, a professional in the field last seen in the area when she guided “Landslide Anne” Fauver to a heavily-financed and stirring 5-vote incumbent win over a then little-known and impoverished first-time candidate named Steve Brodie.
The most improved candidate by a wide margin was Azizi, who in her opening statement noted the usefulness and importance of being able to form alliances and coalitions with other council members. As a relative newcomer, she’s probably not had a chance to size up the non-scientific crew she’d have to work with on Council – though out in front of Inman School was Lamar Willis, still unindicted and still unwilling or unable to pay state & federal taxes on the “non-profit” that he used to collect donations (some from companies regulated by his Committee) before the state and feds shut it down after he never got around to filing reports. A chat with him would have been illustrative.
Azizi may not get a significant number of votes, but she appears to have some sort of future if she stays involved. Whoever loses among Brodie (very involved in Midtown), Christian (active in Morningside and apparently confident that there are enough votes there to elect him, because he’s not spending much time filling out many surveys, including – amazingly – SoVo’s), Coyle (a longtime VaHi and NPU activist), and Wan (who ran against Pat Gardner for state house a few years ago) seem certain to continue their many commitments.
Even newcomer Gallegos has been active in local politics, and there’s always room for likable people with energy. He may not have been as widely informed as the others, but there’s one thing they could learn from him: When you don’t know an answer, say so in 10 seconds instead of 2 minutes.
October 2nd, 2009 at 7:57 pm
craig: are you trying to say there is a frontrunner, or not a frontrunner? I dont get it from your comments…
October 3rd, 2009 at 10:31 am
For the typical opportunity this blog provides for the rant and ravers out there, this is a very accurate discussion of the event. Too many candidate, too little time.
I came in trying to decide between Coyle and Wan, and left knowing Brodie is the choice. Yep, he seemed off his game but given the time limits he did get specific and took positions. Certainly was not vague about his BeltLine position or Code Enforcement. Found it interesting that every candidate kept refering back to Brodie’s comments and using his ideas as good approaches. Couldn’t figure out what was going on there.
I can only assume that he really has been actively engaged in all the neighborhoods since his 5 vote miss against the incumbent in the last go around. At least he’s been preparing while the rest of the gang decided it might be something interesting to do after Fauver dropped out a few months ago. Brodie stepped up to the plate and announced he was running before the field opened up and directly challenged Fauver. If all these other candidates really wanted to represent the District, where have they been for the last 4 years?
As a VaHi resident, admittedly, I was comfortable with one of my own; now I know that Brodie is interested in more than crime issues in Midtown. His partnership with Dianne O on the extra cops for Piedmont Park was impressive. Frankly, if I heard Coyle or Wan say “lack of leadership and no money” one more time it was going to drive me crazy. At least Brodie answered each of the mundane questions with a way to pay for the ideas. And oh lordy, if Wan thinks running his defunct little business qualifies him…please. I talked with Brodie afterwards, didn’t know he is also a venture capitalist and has started and sold 5 companies. No wonder he’s so big on small biz development.
All in all an informative evening, just wish there were more opportunities. But let’s thank the folks over at NPU-F for stepping up to the plate and creating one opportunity.
October 3rd, 2009 at 12:05 pm
Thanks to everyone for chiming in. Since I wasn’t there, I’m glad to have my suspicions confirmed that Brodie does not want appropriate levels of density along the Beltline.
October 3rd, 2009 at 2:14 pm
VaHi: Since you (or someone with your exact same avatar) posted back in July pushing for Brodie, something about claiming that you went in undecided and left knowing Brodie was the right choice reeks of astroturfing….
“If all these other candidates really wanted to represent the District, where have they been for the last 4 years?”"
Coyle has been extremely active in the neighborhood for the last 4 years. Everything Brodie has done she has done, from the neighborhood association to the NPU membership, she is extremely involved. Alex Wan also has been quite active. To act like Liz Coyle (or Wan) just showed up and hasnt been active for the past 4 years is showing your bias a little too much.
October 3rd, 2009 at 2:19 pm
Interesting event from a Candler Park viewpoint. We don’t usually get invited over to the Virginia Highland stuff; thanks for sending us the information. Our little group that took the ride over thought it was interesting to mix the Council Candidates with the Board of Education Candidates; that is what Liz Coyle is running for isn’t it? She’s so qualified for that. Seems that’s about all she has to offer, I’ll vote for her for education even though Tad was the only one touting his qualifications as some PTA person. The other Education candidate was left out, Charlie Stradtlander. I guess since he doesn’t live in the Highlands he didn’t get to speak.
October 3rd, 2009 at 2:43 pm
Our little group that took the ride over thought it was interesting to mix the Council Candidates with the Board of Education Candidates; that is what Liz Coyle is running for isn’t it?
Heh.
October 3rd, 2009 at 3:08 pm
@candlerrez – huh?
All six on the stage were running for council.
There was no Highlands discrimination against other parts of the district. The event was organized by Dianne Olansky, chair of NPU F. A fairer, more inclusive person one could not imagine.
Liz for better or worse has been very active on development for years, e.g., on the board of ABI, and run licensing for NPU F, so it’s quite inaccurate to say all she knows is schools.
October 3rd, 2009 at 7:10 pm
I’m so sorry if my posting was taken as a negative statement about Dianne O; my gosh to the contrary. She reached out to us and invited everyone to attend. There was no intention to be deragatory in anyway; I deeply apologize if that was the message.
Dianne is one of the most positive and helpful people around. All of us who came over felt very welcomed and appreciate the folks at NPU-F for being so hospitable and thinking to include us; a real role model of community spirit!
October 4th, 2009 at 9:10 am
The District 6 City Council race is close for what will undoubtedly be a run-off. The Vote-O-Meter reports that if that Council election were held today, the voting would be Liz Coyle – 34%, Steve Brodie – 25%, Alex Wan – 24%, Tad Christian – 9%, Bahareh Azizi – 5%, Miguel Gallegos – 3%. Coyle remains in first place but is losing ground. Brodie and Wan are running neck-in-neck. Tad Christian is not convincing the electorate. Azizi impresses people with her sincerity and attitude but remains far off the pace. Miguel Gallegos’ brief splash due to the Eagle bust has dried up.
October 4th, 2009 at 9:35 am
To: jpmontoya
From: Previously known as VaHi.
Sorry in my nomenclature appears to be someone else. When I filled out the name box in CL the VaHi “name” didn’t show as “taken.” I’ve never even been to this site and didn’t know it existed until I got a link from a friend on the Coyle campaign.
The point I was trying to make is that the one thing I’ve been very interested in the past few years is the BeltLine. I’m on the TADAC Board. If you’re not aware, that’s actually the citizen oversight board that was created by the TAD Legislation. City Council and ABI are supposed to consult with us on plans, decisions and expenditures. As you may have seen in recent articles, we are now having to raise official complaints concerning the lack of cooperation from ABI.
I’ve seen Coyle and Brodie in action over the past two years. Liz does attend meetings. If that’s being involved, she is very involved. However, she is silent on community issues and her job as explained to TADAC is she the citizen representative. I have also attended every planning committee meeting in District 6. Liz is there but not a word, Brodie is speaking out and representing what most people seem to be saying; too much density without improvements. Think that is pretty much backed up by the opposition letter that came out of NPU-F and the recent opposition vote at Midtown.
I haven’t been in a meeting where a vote has been taken in favor. Yet, Coyle sits silent and not one word from her about what at least appears to some of the citizen concerns. On the other hand, Brodie is out taking a position.
Wan has never shown up for a TADAC meeting and I never saw him at a BeltLine meeting until he started running for office; same goes for all the other candidates except Brodie. I’d say Brodie and Coyle are in a tie for attending meetings, but I’ll give Brodie credit for actually taking positions.
Everyone may not agree but at least he has something to say. And on that matter, it’s important to take a look at the ABI and ADA websites to review what goes on at the Board Meetings where Coyle and Wan were members until threatened with legislation by Fauver to remove them from their positions. Again, not a mention of any input from them, pro or con. Since no dissention is mentioned in any document or minutes, I can only assume and the official records reflect that Coyle and Wan are in complete agreement with how the BeltLine is being managed: overpaying for the Mason land, changes to the land use plans that have some very active opposition and officially opposed by NPU-F and MNA. Then there is their silence on the very risky bonds that were issued last year.
At the Annual Meeting of TADAC, Coyle sat silent on the frustration expressed by the Board, while the Board President asked Brodie to send his opinions in writing to Council and ABI because they reflected the feelings of the TADAC Board and if someone outside the Board could communicate their frustration someone might listen.
Yep, there is bias there as you say. I’ve seen Brodie in action but I’ve seen what appears to be support for Wan and Coyle and wanted learn more about them. I was personally concerned that I may have a bias because I’ve heard Brodie take positions and certainly isn’t shy about that. When I see Coyle, I see a warm body taking up space and Wan is MIA unless it’s politically correct and voters are around. He takes a lot of notes but doesn’t say a word.
I don’t have the privilege of being able to sit in on ADA and ABI Board Meetings so I thought I’d have an opportunity to actually get to hear their positions. Didn’t happen for me. I did hear Brodie take specific positions on the BeltLine and they were consistent with what he has been saying for years now. I’m not saying everyone needs to agree, but acknowledge that he does take positions. Beyond the BeltLine I certainly heard him being very specific about code enforcement and the tree issue. Over here in VaHi we are outraged by what happened to Tom Coffin and Liz danced around that issue; Brodie said what needed to be said: people are fired for political reasons and that needs to stop.
So sorry if I mislead you with an “avatar” that has been used in the past. I don’t spend my time doing research on rants and finger pointing that you seem to have time for. I’m trying to make an informed decision on what I think is an important election. Heck, just look at the printed material the candidates provided us. Coyle gives us a laundry list of meet & greets but not one word about a position, Wan lets us know he has run a small business and has lived in Atlanta, and then Brodie gives us issues and shows us who’s backing him.
Biased, yes because I got what I needed. Coyle and Wan are about slogans and political gain; Brodie does take positions. And to the other comments by others in this blog about the moderator; you just try to handle enough questions with 6 candidates and be able to get it done in 2 hours. Sure follow-ups were missing, but so was the time. Given the time available, I think he did a great job!! It’s so easy to sit back and be critical. From the comments I’ve seen in the past few days and going back to the links on this site (glad I found this), its clear there is a real bias to keep Districted 6 represented by someone who represents the “people behind the current” rather than the residents.
There is a definite theme here and it’s consistently repeated. I guess if something is repeated enough people will begin to believe it.
Frankly, I feel sorry for anyone who puts themselves out publically in this District or even tries to comment in disagreement with the “regulars.” After spending sometime going through these blogs yesterday it’s obvious that there are the few who seem to get the fun by attacking people personally from the comfort of the anonymity of the internet. The most constructive thing I’ve seen is the very first comment in this blog; a useful critic of the event; seemed balanced and fair. And now I’m finding that I’ve been pulled into this negative culture of these blogs. No more for me; I’ve had my say and it’s time to stay away. There are too many nice, thoughtful people in Virginia Highland and I think they’re smart enough to stay away from this negative rhetoric. Constructive feedback and commentary is healthy dialogue, but these attacks on a personal level against candidates who are simply citizens putting themselves out there to try to help, to a moderator who had a tough job with very limited time; this is just plain mean spirited. So “jpmontoya” come after me; I won’t be around to read your rant and make it as personal as you want…. So sorry for not researching the way to play your game. I’m mad at myself for even taking the time to write all this out, but I think it needs to be said…..there are very mean, shallow people out here who seem to be more focused on destruction; great role model for our kids……take anonymous pot shots but don’t offer up constructive solutions and beware of becoming a public figure because there are people who will work hard to destroy you. Stay home, be quiet and don’t get involved; that’s the easiest way to survive in this neighborhood.
October 4th, 2009 at 11:13 am
@candlrerrez, Glad we agree that Dianne Olansky is a great community leader. We need the involvement of many more folks like her with no vested interest or ambition beyond what’s good for residents.
October 4th, 2009 at 3:03 pm
don’t live in District 6 but I think anyone accusing someone of “astroturfing” should first be assumed as an astroturfist. It was all civil and informative until you showed up jpmontoya. Your comments did not further the discussion in any way, and it appears you came here to start trouble and make things personal. I think the term for that is “trolling.”
I really appreciated the comments by VaHi-2 regarding personal attacks. People need to stick to substance, but I understand it’s hard to do when you lack intellect.
October 4th, 2009 at 6:38 pm
I’ve not met Wan before, but I’ve seen Coyle in action for the past few years now. I’ve never seen her silent on anything. Reading this thread makes me wonder if I’ve somehow entered the Twilight Zone.
October 4th, 2009 at 7:22 pm
Many of us came to the forum to hear the answer to one specific question: “Do you support Atlanta Beltline Inc. (ABI) in their unyielding attempts to put 4 and 8-story development in areas originally promised as for green space at Monroe & 10th?” (Quoted from black and white above)The moderator chose to water down this question with a more generic BeltLine question, allowing the candidates to dodge the issue. Only one came forth with a clear, unambiguous statement supporting the neighborhood over ABI. Steve Brodie was able to commit to fighting the ABI on this issue. Their plans to reverse the previous land use from open space to 4 and 8 stories would have detrimental impacts on District 6 and Piedmont Park. He should be commended for taking this stand.
October 5th, 2009 at 1:29 pm
One of the ill-informed posts here says Alex previously lost big. Not true. He won nearly 40 percent of the vote against a popular incumbent who is now supporting him in this race. His vote-getting ability that time was impressive, as is the fact that he is gentlemanly enough and a strong enough candidate that a former opponent is supporting him. But he needs more than that to be a front-runner and he has more: He takes a blanced approach on everything from the Beltline to city pensions and more. He’s the kind of hands-on biz guy who I am happy wants to provide public service. Brody’s heart does not seem in the face. Not sure what Gallegos is doing there. Azizi is classy and smart but does not seem ready. Christian seems to just be running as a Dad. Coyle seems to think she is a shoe-in.
October 5th, 2009 at 3:05 pm
If Wan’s such a talented businessman, why did he wind up his small engineering firm last year? And why does he have nothing substantive to say about the massive challenges facing the city – now being well dissected in the AJC. Wan’s bland presentation style suggests that it is he, not Coyle, who thinks he has the campaign wrapped up if he can be all things to all people.
Balance is in the eye of the beholder, but an ADA board member is unlikely to seem balanced to those who put neighborhood quality of life before Wayne Mason’s quality of life.
October 5th, 2009 at 3:44 pm
Wish the forum had given someone the chance to ask why Liz, as our Beltline citizen advocate, never once stood up against any of ABI’s Beltline “plans” no matter how ill-conceived they were. For those in neighborhoods in District 6 adjacent to the Beltline, you need to worry if your voice will be heard by her once she’s in council. She is capable but she’s in this for Liz, not the community.
Wan is nice enough but seems disconnected from the issues for District 6. And neither Liz nor Alex have the financial experience that Steve Brodie has. And until our finances get in order, ain’t nothing gonna work.
October 5th, 2009 at 9:35 pm
Guess the D6 candidates agree with this summation of their positions, since they have not bothered to try finessing it!
<>
October 5th, 2009 at 9:37 pm
If the website allows a self-quote, that is – In sum, a District-Sixer who wants the city budget balanced without ever higher taxes and who does not want Monroe Drive to bear the brunt of high-density Beltline development is stuck. Coyle is slippery on the Beltline but fairly sound on pension rollbacks, while Brodie is slippery on pensions but holds the line on density around Monroe Drive. Wan, an ADA board member until last month, is much less neighborhood friendly than Coyle with no stronger claim to fiscal responsibility.