以下是网站 georgechidi.com 在 2015-11 的历史页面存档,小提示:CTRL+U 查看源码
本站和 georgechidi.com 的作者无关,不对其内容负责。本历史页面谨为网络历史索引,不代表被查询网站的即时页面。 *号[x]表示已屏蔽显示的敏感字。
原网页标题:George Chidi | Pine Lake City Councilman, writer

Committing acts of journalism.

A magistrate’s court judge heard Tom Owens‘ application for a warrant on stalking charges today, and threw it out cold. “If this is stalking, Sam Donaldson would have gone to jail,” he said.

However, the temporary protective order remains in effect, barring me from being with 100 yards of Mr. Owens or contacting him聽until the emergency hearing tomorrow at 1:30 p.m. in Judge Cynthia Becker‘s courtroom.

I like my chances.

Owens argued that I am a big scary guy and that asking questions too loud and in his face (I really wasn’t) constituted a threat. “It’s OK if you ask me questions in a respectful manner,” he said. But apparently approaching him and asking questions loudly enough to be heard by a man walking away from you is perceived as a physical threat to him.

Owens’ grand evidence of my perfidy is a video of me trying to ask him about his putative daughter and Joe Newton getting in my face — literally, six inches from my face — to hurl invective and insult while I sternly questioned why Newton was invading my personal space. The video depicts me as mildly exasperated, showing his cameraman the court documentation about his arrest and conviction for stalking, along with his mugshot, and explaining why I have questions.

My attorney, the inestimable Thomas Clyde of Kilpatrick Townsend and the Georgia First Amendment Foundation, asked Owens about his criminal and civil history, in part to demonstrate the relevance of my questions. And for the first time, I heard some answers.

Owens attributed all the restraining orders and police reports bearing his name to political retribution for his work exposing corruption. I’m sure Ms. Davis will be gratified. She’s the woman he dated in Forsyth County in 2006, years before Owens’ supposed anticorruption work, who ultimately pressed charges against him after months of harassing calls including one in which he said not to “underestimate his power.”

In a hilarious moment, Owens told the judge that he couldn’t talk about the restraining order that Susan Fraysee placed on him because of a settlement and a “gentleman’s agreement” not to discuss it. The man needs a lawyer. Joe Newton doesn’t count.

Both Newton and Wayne Witter testified that I had threatened Owens, but after seeing the video that Owens supplied, the judge kept asking them what the absolutely worst thing that they believed I had done, that merited a charge … and both gave answers that amounted to me asking questions in a way they found objectionable.

Witter repeated the claim that I had said “I would destroy you” to Owens. They produced no recordings to support the claim. And their own video undermined their argument that my other conduct constituted harassment.

Witter claimed in open court that they could find no copy of my DD-214 — my Army discharge papers. Brother, Bill Torpy of the AJC has a copy of it, and there’s a photocopy sitting in an envelope in the desk of Pine Lake police chief Sarai Y’hudah-Green, available for inspection … provided I can be there with a video camera to record your reaction and your apology.

After this, I think it’s becoming clear that Owens probably never told the initial magistrate that I was a writer of any sort. It’s entirely possible given Owens’ initial testimony today that he never bothered to mention that he was a candidate, nor that the meeting at a church was a public candidate forum — that he merely claimed that I had showed up at a church and harassed him, then called him and sent him text messages.

The court brought in a magistrate from Gwinnett County, Judge Kenneth Sissel, to hear the case. I can only assume it’s because the political element, to avoid appearance of bias. We asked for the hearing to be continued because Owens never bothered to serve notice of the hearing. Owens appears to have been going for three ex parte hearings in a row. We only heard about it because Bill Simon of the PoliticalVine site so kindly posted a garbled copy of the warrant application on his site. Thanks, Bill.

Sissel held the hearing any way. While ruling, Sissel said that the questions I had asked and the way I had asked them might not pass an etiquette test, but asking questions as I did of a political candidate would be acceptable for any journalist, or any blogger, or any voter, or even anyone who wasn’t going to bother to vote.

For what it’s worth, I smiled at Joe Newton when I realized how done they were. After Sissel’s ruling, Newton addressed the court to tell me to stay away from him, and that Newton would seek a new protective order barring me from being near him. And the madness continues to roll along.

I only hope Owens, Newton and Witter all bother to show up to court tomorrow to defend their claims, because I can imagine them chickening out after this.

If you would like to support the legal defense of journalism — the聽Georgia First Amendment Foundation聽would be an excellent place to direct your filthy lucre.

And if you want to support … well, broke-ass me … then feel free.

Buy George a beer: $5

Buy George dinner: $20
Buy George a security guard: $100
Buy George a lawyer: $500
Buy George the antidote: $1000

Note: giving me money is not a political donation. (At least, not today. I don’t have a campaign account.) This is not a non-profit donation. I’m offering nothing except my continued interest in afflicting the comfortable and comforting the afflicted.

Posted in Uncategorized

Journalism is not a crime.

This morning, I posted on Peach Pundit聽a lengthy and difficult story about Tom Owens,聽a candidate for DeKalb County’s commission and a man with a years-long history of strange public behavior.

This afternoon, a DeKalb County sheriff’s deputy served me notice of a “stalking temporary protective order,” barring me from any acts “stalking, harassing or intimidating the Petitioner and/or the immediate family of the Petitioner.”

A hearing has been scheduled for October 22.

The date matters. Owens is running in a special election called after the resignation of Elaine Boyer. Qualification closed less than a month ago; a campaign that might normally stretch over six months has been compressed into less than two.

I have no idea what he might have told the judge that would have convinced her to sign a TPO. I’m eager to find out. Meanwhile, I am now legally barred from asking questions of a candidate for public office — a public figure by any definition — sharing responsibility for overseeing a $1.2 billion budget, until two weeks before the election ends, if then. I am legally barred from even attending public events at which Owens may appear — the rule is 100 yards.

Mr. Owens has every right to refuse comment. And he has plainly done so.

But if this is allowed to stand unchallenged,聽it sets a precedent that a politician receiving unfavorable press at a sensitive moment can use the power of the court to bar coverage. The word “chilling” doesn’t cover it. It’s outrageous and dangerous and almost certainly unconstitutional.

I believe the story I wrote to be well reported and well researched. But given the findings — a long list of police reports, restraining orders, a no-contest plea to stalking and a legal accusation calling for unpaid child support — I considered it irresponsible not to make every possible effort to give Mr. Owens an opportunity to offer his side of the story, and to help correct inaccuracies before publication. Instead … this.

I’ve contacted Tom Clyde of Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton, and we are exploring legal options.

Meanwhile, if you would like to support the legal defense of journalism — or just buy me a beer — feel free to donate to the cause below.

EDIT: Tom Clyde is representing me pro-bono now. My legal defense is covered.

However, I’m still a broke-ass writer working on a book about civic participation in Georgia. If you donate, you’ll get first dibs on it when I’m done.

The Georgia First Amendment Foundation would also be an excellent place to direct your support.

Buy George a beer: $5

Buy George dinner: $20
Buy George a security guard: $100
Buy George a lawyer: $500
Buy George the antidote: $1000

Or Dwolla, if you are so inclined.

Note: this is not a political donation. This is not a non-profit donation. I’m offering nothing except my continued interest in afflicting the comfortable and comforting the afflicted.

Posted in Uncategorized

Adventures in Governance

City council meeting was ... well, no one died. I can imagine murder was contemplated.

Tax assessments in Pine Lake have risen by 40 percent year over year on average. It's one of the largest increases in metro Atlanta, and it might be one of the largest in Georgia.

Normally, three or four people show up to city council. We had 30 tonight.

I've been fielding calls and emails from people for a week, telling me that they'll have to sell their houses to get out from five and six and seven-thousand dollar tax bills. That's really not an exaggeration.

Pine Lake plans to drop its millage rate to revenue par at 21.4 mills, a decrease of about 6.7 mills. The county is dropping the unincorporated millage by .4 mills ... but increasing its taxes on Pine Lake by 1.7 mills, to something like 17 mills. And the school system is advertising a 2.2 mill increase, to 23.98 mills, which is insane.

That's a total of about 62 mills. A house assessed at $250,000 will have a tax bill of about $6,200. If that price reflects a 25 percent increase in value, then that's an additional $140 a month in taxes.

I am hearing regularly from neighbors who own houses that were assessed last year at, like, $40,000 agog at an assessment that is more than double from last year.

My own assessment doubled.

That said, my house was worth a hell of a lot more than $75,000 last year, and may be worth more than the $150,000 assessment this year. I don't plan to challenge it.

One of my campaign pledges was to see the number of homes in Pine Lake assessed under $40,000 fall to zero. It seems that may have come true, through no part of my own, though. We still have code issues to deal with.

The assessment rise is a crisis in much the same way the fall in home values during the recession was a crisis. People are telling me they'll have to sell their homes because they don't have the income to support the additional taxes.

The way out is to grow. The city's tax base is too small and too residential to continue to operate this way. We must expand. We must annex commercial property along Rockbridge Road, and we should start discussions -- internally and externally -- about annexing surrounding communities while we still can.
... See MoreSee Less

6 months ago  ·  

I would like to make it clear, to all who read my posts on Facebook and other social media, that my comments here -- and, well, everywhere, unless I say otherwise -- are my own. I do not speak for the city government of Pine Lake.

That is all.
... See MoreSee Less

7 months ago  ·  

The city council of Pine Lake has essentially done away with executive sessions from this point forward.

Government bodies are allowed to meet outside of the public's presence only under a narrow set of conditions. For example, they can have a private meeting to discuss hiring and firing of employees, or to talk about buying land, or to negotiate their way through a lawsuit. They can keep talk about a criminal investigation or information that might reveal medical information private.

We have always entered into executive session with unanimous votes. And yet, one of us has chosen repeatedly to disclose the private information to people who then broadcast it -- in error-ridden and slanderous form -- on the Internet.

So, we're done with it.

We no longer trust the body to be able to keep private our discussions about legal issues or personnel matters or real estate acquisition. I spoke at length about the breach of trust and what it potentially costs us. A majority of the council agrees. Until we know who is responsible, these conversations will be conducted in public, or not at all.

The city council also enacted a six-month moratorium tonight on permitting in the Uptown district while we reconfigure our building code. We're also going to circulate a survey looking at building code issues in the city, the first step toward making our code a little less insane.

We also had a long talk about boundaries.

A Pine Laker got a little too familiar with the clubhouse last month, and decided to rewire the lights without permission. If the work was done well, I probably wouldn't care, but it turns out to have been a bit of a hack job and not up to code. It will have to be redone. We're billing the party involved.

We're going to talk in a couple weeks about getting the beach house open to the public on a regular basis, so that residents can enjoy the use of city property without always having to write a check for the privilege.

There's more to discuss, but I'll save it for the next post.
... See MoreSee Less

9 months ago  ·  

Miller-Valentine ends with a whimper, not a bang. The plaintiffs dismissed their Fair Housing Act suit against the city, and we humbly accepted their surrender. My understanding of it is that the grant they had been counting on to pursue construction of the 90-something unit property ran out. With no path to funding and a expensive, difficult-to-prove case in court, they abandoned the suit.

That frees the council to speak openly about the dynamics of the issue again, something I haven't been able to do for about a year. It's been excruciating.

I always want people to know where I stand. I detest politicians who hide.

Through much of the last year, a whisper campaign by Kari Loomis and a handful of confidantes has sought to portray me as favorable to the Miller-Valentine development.

This is false.

It's more than false -- it has been deliberately misleading and malicious, and done in ways that put the legal question of the city's fight against the development itself at risk.

Miller-Valentine approached the city in ... February, I think ... and more-or-less caught us flatfooted with their proposal. I knew something had been planned for that parcel, but I had a senior housing development in mind at first and didn't give it much thought.

I've had some experience covering development as a news reporter, so I gave them a call to see what they wanted, and to give them a sense of our community's interests -- respect for the environment, respect for artists, respect for funky architecture.

Typically, when a developer comes in with a substantial project, there's a period of back and forth, some horsetrading around heights and facades and buffers and parking and what not. I assumed that would be part of the process. How little I knew.

The tree incident -- felling trees without a proper permit -- soured our working relationship with Miller-Valentine almost immediately. And then it became clear that Miller-Valentine wanted to build something more substantial and difficult.

My sister died in May, just as the Miller-Valentine proposal started to draw fire. I was away, and in a state of profound grief. My ability to process this stuff from a distance was reduced.

But I was aware that zoning law in Georgia can punish certain missteps. I've covered zoning litigation for the AJC. I knew that if I were to take a formal position on the project in public before it had come before the council for a vote, I would have exposed the city to legal liability for approaching a decision with prejudice.

So I described my view of the situation in relatively neutral terms in a lengthy public note, which among other things warned my fellow council people to roll easy in case we got sued. My note was not a defense of the project. It was a defense of the zoning rationale for the parcel and a call for commercial property in a mixed-use development.

As it happens, the key legal argument that would have formed the basis of Pine Lake's defense against the suit was the need for commercial development on that site, and the lack of such in the site plans.

But somehow, Kari Loomis decided that meant I must secretly be for the project, simply because I wasn't helping carry pitchforks and torches. Had I done that -- overtly called for the project to be banned, we would have had a much, much weaker legal case.

The environmental concerns held center stage at this point, and I give Lynn Alexander credit for bringing in the Army Corps of Engineers. Their involvement bought the city needed breathing room and made the environmental issues on that parcel clear.

The public campaign -- lawn signs, petitions, comments at council meetings -- were gratifying to see. I like knowing that I live in a community that knows how to fight. But the zoning issue itself? That's purely a legal matter. The public campaign had no bearing on the result, nor could it if our legal defense was to be effective.

For the record: I am deeply opposed to that kind of residential density in a conventional development in Pine Lake. I still favor mixed-use development ... although less now than I did last year. I think the city's commercial footprint is comically small and a massive problem for our tax base, and I'm looking for ways to expand that commercial footprint.

It was right around this point that Pine Lake's attorney met with the city council and said, in effect, shut the hell up. Stop talking. Now. Especially on Facebook. Every public pronouncement about the project would be admissible in court, and Miller-Valentine would be looking for evidence suggesting a violation of the law -- illegal meetings, racial prejudice, anything.

But at just the same time, Loomis -- and others -- began extraordinary kinds of public attacks, making accusations which I absolutely could not respond to without causing legal trouble for the city.

I asked her to have a quiet talk in person. She refused. Her personal behavior has been, frankly, erratic. I think at this point she's managed to alienate a fair percentage of the city with wild accusations and black-and-white reasoning. So it goes.

That might be a minor thing ... but at least one member of the city council has been steadily leaking confidential material from city council meetings to her, and to others. Some of that has found its way to Facebook and some to other sites in anonymous postings, intermixed with erroneous material and straight libel.

I can't point to specifics ... because to do so would cause ME to be the one putting the city at additional legal risk by confirming the veracity of some of the postings.

A city councilperson here would be aware of those legal constraints, which makes anonymous accusations all the more malicious.

This whole episode has been eye-opening. I understand now why city and county leaders do everything they can to avoid saying anything substantial. I still detest the practice. But it prevents this kind of malice.
... See MoreSee Less

9 months ago  ·  

A bit of sad news from the January council meeting. Kathie DeNobriga told me after delivering the state of the city address that she does not intend to run for re-election. We'll need to find a new mayor this year.

The address itself contained good news, for the most part. The city's finances are improving. We're on track to add police officers to the night shift, and to get body cameras and new computers in the cars. We brought the millage rate down by about 8 percent last year -- although the county intends to raise taxes significantly on the county portion of your bills.

DeKalb plans to raise the millage on cities everywhere, ostensibly as a reaction to HOST remittances. Their cost to provide services hasn't changed -- they're just losing too much sales tax money to cities, so they're raising property taxes there to compensate. Just on cities. No change to unincorporated areas. It's ... deeply questionable.

The increase -- if adopted -- would change the millage on the county portion of your tax bill from 15.38 to 18.64, an increase of 21 percent. That wipes out the 1.7 mill decrease we were able to do at the city this year. DeKalb's finance folks say that we had a big decrease last year, so we should be comparing the two-year change -- a 4.5 percent increase -- instead of the 2014 to 2015 figure. Naturally, I think that's bulls--t, and I'm going to fight it.

The Miller-Valentine suit against Pine Lake remains active.

We're still working on policies related to body camera use, and on a local ordinance to address blighted homes. We're chewing a bit on annexation issues, although nothing to the degree of Clarkston, Avondale Estates or Stone Mountain.

Monday, we reappointed our city judge and our auditor, reaffirmed the Champion as the publication-of-record and appointed to the ARB and the tree authority. Megan Ross Pulsts remains mayor pro-tem.
... See MoreSee Less

10 months ago  ·  

Posted in Uncategorized