One last time...

Over the last 4 years I have tried to use this blog to inform my constituents about the inside workings of the Signal Mountain Town Council. That I have disagreed with the majority on the Council on certain issues is well know. This is part of the political process. I have tried hard to make my positions clear and public. If my style has occasionally reflected my frustration, well I freely confess to being human. I have never tried to make personal attacks and if my admitted intensity has at times made it seem that way, again I regret it but don't think I am in any way unique in the political process. I have not made personal or "ad hominem" attacks, I have disagreed with policy positions and decisions and occasionally disagreed with philosophical or stylistic approaches. If that has been misinterpreted it has not been my intent. If my approach has not always been perfect, I'll have to accept that criticism. If some people are upset that I disagree with them, they'll have to get over it. I have been very successful at getting along with people I disagree with. After all, some of my best friends are Republicans. So, I really don't think that is the issue.

As I finish my term, I have tried to highlight some issues that I feel strongly about. I thought this would be helpful as part of the process. What started as a communication to the citizens of Signal Mountain about issues that I care about has now been ramped up into a major personal dispute by the Chattanoogan.com. I supposed I should expect that since, as the old saying goes "that's what sells newspapers"... or web ads, as the case may be. Here is the article: http://chattanoogan.com/articles/article_185473.asp.

So, let me try to address the attacks on me by Mayor Bill Lusk in a way that hopefully will explain my positions and hopefully not further inflame this already ridiculous exchange. I have already addressed the "sour grapes" issue in my previous blog. He knows that I had already planned to step down from the council. I have never denied being disappointed about being voted out as mayor, but that is part of the political process. I am not the first politician to lose a race. It should be clear that the policy differences between myself and the majority on the council led to that event and that it was a symptom of that disagreement rather than the cause. I would have appreciated a more candid and forthright process, but that is old news.

The Chattanoogan.com accused me of "surreptitiously" trying to raise taxes. Mr. Lusk's own words contradict this when he says "“(O)n a number of occasions that are well supported by the public record...". It is kind of hard to be surreptitious on the public record. I freely admit that I was concerned our town manager might propose a tax increase. We collect quite a bit more in taxes from the "school tax" than we need to pay our yearly installment and I suggested that, if a tax increase were needed we could offset it with the school tax. I made this case to the council in a public meeting. It was a contingency we have not needed, but when we do need to raise taxes I would still propose we offset it by lowering the school tax if possible. I proposed this only as a way to soften the blow on taxpayers if a tax increase were needed. In the recent Town Council Forum, Mrs. Robertson stated that once the school bond is payed off  "we could have a moderate tax increase and still be less than 19 percent" referring to the school tax. This is the same proposal as mine with the possible exception of timing. I doubt we will be able to get away with another 17 years (when the bond is paid off) or so without a tax increase. If that is not clear, I'm happy to elaborate, but it is certainly nothing I have tried to hide.

As to the zoning issues, I have elaborated ad nauseum on this. I disagree with the Council's approach. I do hope that eventually there will be a positive outcome. However, I am not encouraged by the actions of the council. We'll just have to disagree on this issue. I hope I'm wrong, frankly. However, I am also concerned about timing. We have already had significant turnover on the Planning Commission since our intial public hearings and Randall Arendt's presentation on his principles. I have concerns about comments from some members about the commitment to Mr. Arendt's (and our Land Use Plan's) proposals. Part of the intent of my blog was to encourage the candidates running to support this proposal. If the Council and the Planning Commission plans to remain true to that vision, that will be a good thing and Mr. Lusk should support my efforts. I confess to being dubious, but will try to give them the benefit of the doubt. As to attending Planning Commission meetings, well I'm not a member of that committee! When I was on the Planning Commission, I was very diligent. I don't know how many meetings Mr. Lusk attended before he was Mayor, or how many other committees he attends of which he is not a member or liaison. However, it has been made pretty clear to me that my input is not welcome, so I have worked to put my energies into areas where I might be more productive. I have tried to follow the discussion from a distance, but the minutes and output of the commission have been very difficult to figure out. As to "making few attempts to work with his fellow council members", I do take umbrage at this and think that anyone who knows me knows that this is not true. Clearly we have agreed far more than we have disagreed and I have frequently deferred to the other members on issues of particular concern to them.

Finally, he has tried to spin my support for education funding into something somehow sinister. I was very clear from the time I ran for council that I supported Signal Mountain Middle/High School where my daughter is now a 6th grader. When I became aware that this money was committed to the school, I fought hard to put it where I thought it would do the most good. I was strongly supported by a large segment of the community. Even Ms. Allen supported spending a part of the money for the school, which I appreciated. As we were considering this, I became aware of the dire problems with heating at the MACC. I considered and proposed possibly using some of this money for this purpose. I never received any dissent from the council on this proposal, however when this idea was opposed by some in the community, I immediately backed off and decided we would need to seek a different avenue of funding for the MACC heating. I don't consider this new heating system to be "spiff" and am thrilled that we have recently received a grant to accomplish this goal. I was very out front on this issue and still regret we did not use that money to improve SMMHS. I do confess to a mistake, though in that I have made assumptions I should not have made. When I got to know Bill Lusk, part of my interest in him and reasons for supporting him for State Legislature and ultimately voting to put him on the council was that he was, like me, a liberal Democrat. He was also a member of the Founder's Fund which was raising funds for the school. Because of this I assumed he would, like I, support this funding for the public school. Unfortunately, I was wrong. He resigned his position with the Founder's Fund soon after being appointed to the council and ultimately decided to oppose the funding. While we disagreed on this, that was his decision. However, I do not regret my own decision on this and will continue to do all I can to support public schools in general and SMMHS in particular.

Finally, I must take extreme exception to Mr. Lusk's comment "When it comes to honesty and integrity, these writings are seriously lacking". This is the definition of an "ad hominem" attack. While he attacks me on the issues I addressed above, he provides not one example where I am not honest. I deeply resent this. While personal honor seems to be an old-fashioned virtue in this modern age, it is one that is critically important to me, as a professional, as a husband and parent and as a public official. I do not lie. If I am wrong, point it out and I'll retract it. But do not accuse me of dishonesty without any substantiation.

I regret that this attempt to discuss the issues got so ugly. For whatever degree any clumsiness on my party has lowered the tenor of this discussion, I am sorry. I had thought I could publicly air differences and discuss issues without such nastiness occurring, but in this day of Tea Parties and Glenn Beck, I guess I was naive.