On October 3rd, after candidate qualification ended, the Underground e-mailed all 12 LaFayette City Council candidates in competitive races a series of questions. Candidates were asked to respond to the questions via e-mail by October 18th, and were instructed not to share their answers with each other before we made them public. Every candidate was given the same set of questions except where noted below.

Not every candidate responded, but seven of the 12 did. Candidates who did not respond will have [no response] after their name for each question asked, and candidates who responded but chose to skip certain questions will also be marked [no response]. Responses received after this point will not be accepted for a full post, but candidates are welcome to add to their responses, answer questions, or respond to our opinions in the comment section below.

Answers are copied directly from e-mail without corrections or changes except for redaction of addresses. Redactions or any editorial clarifications of questions or answers will be made in [brackets]. Our thoughts are in italics beneath the responses.

We will be doing responses one ward at a time. Ward 3 was posted Friday, the Q&A with candidates for Ward 4 will be posted later this week.

Ward 2 Candidates Ben Bradford, Dell Montgomery, and Keith Talley:

UNDERGROUND: What is your full name, and what name do you generally go by?

BRADFORD: My full name is Benjamin Thomas Bradford, but everyone calls me Ben.

MONTGOMERY: Byron LaDell Montgomery; Dell

TALLEY: [no response]

UNDERGROUND: What is your age?

BRADFORD: I am thirty-three years old.

MONTGOMERY: 39

TALLEY: [no response]

Mr. Talley’s Facebook says he was born August 27, 1970 – making him 41 years old.

UNDERGROUND: What is your address? (We will only publish the street, not your house number.)

BRADFORD: [redacted] Johnson Street

MONTGOMERY: [redacted] Lake Terrace Circle Lafayette, GA 30728

TALLEY: [no response]

Keith Talley has no listing in the phone book, but county tax records show he co-owns a home on Crest Drive with perennial mayoral candidate James Mashburn, a relative or in-law. He may live elsewhere but that’s the only record we were able to find. Crest Drive is in Ward 2 in a subdivision south of town off Highway 27. The contact address for tax bills on that property is Boynton Drive in Ringgold.

UNDERGROUND: How can voters contact you or stay in touch with your campaign? (Please include info like e-mail, phone, Facebook, Twitter, etc. if applicable.)

BRADFORD: My number is in the phone book, and you can reach me at bbradford31@gmail.com or friend me on facebook.

MONTGOMERY: Home: 706-638-6317, Work: 706-638-9769, email: dellmonty1972@hotmail.com Facebook: Dell Montgomery

TALLEY: [no response]

UNDERGROUND: How long have you lived in LaFayette, and (if applicable) where else have you lived?

BRADFORD: I have lived inside the city limits of LaFayette for almost ten years. I grew up in Kensington, where my parents still reside, and aside from several years where I split time between home and college I have lived exclusively in Walker County.

MONTGOMERY: 39 years, but not always in the city limits.

TALLEY: [no response]

Talley is originally from Ringgold. A relative’s obituary indicates he still lived and worked there in 2001.

UNDERGROUND: What’s the best thing about living in this community?

BRADFORD: The best thing about LaFayette is that it actually IS a community. It is a place where people have values, manners, and a genuine concern for their neighbors. It is small enough that many people can call you by name, and the people that don’t know you smile and greet you when they pass by on the street. We have a small southern town that hasn’t lost its character and our citizens are the type of people that I want to be around my children as they grow.

MONTGOMERY: Good place to raise children; not a high crime area.

TALLEY: [no response]

     

UNDERGROUND: Starting as early as you want, what kind of education do you have?

BRADFORD: I graduated from LaFayette High School in 1997. My undergraduate degree is from the University of the Cumberlands in Williamsburg, Kentucky where I majored in chemistry and received a minor in mathematics in 2002. My Juris Doctorate degree is from Atlanta’s John Marshall Law School where I graduated cum laude in May of 2010.

MONTGOMERY: Graduated from LaFayette High School. Went to “Walker Tech”, but didn’t graduate.

TALLEY: [no response]

UNDERGROUND: What is your current occupation?

BRADFORD: I am an Assistant Public Defender in the Lookout Mountain Judicial Circuit, which means that I am a criminal defense attorney representing solely indigent clients – clients that cannot afford to hire an attorney but have a right to representation under both the Constitution of the United States and the Georgia Constitution. I also do the majority of the court-appointed juvenile defense in Walker County.

MONTGOMERY: General manager at Sonic Drive-In (Lafayette)

TALLEY: [no response]

Talley, in 2001, worked for Mashburn Tree & Stump in Ringgold, a business owned by his family. Far as we know he still works there.

UNDERGROUND: What previous jobs have you held?

BRADFORD: Before I began working at the Office of the Public Defender, I was employed at Trion High School as a science teacher for eight and a half years. I taught primarily chemistry and biology, but also taught classes in physics, environmental science, and physical science. While attending high school and college I worked summers at the LaFayette Recreation Department as a lifeguard and spent the final summer of my college career on the touch-up line at the LaFayette Blue Bird (before they laid off all the summer help and temp-workers in early July).

MONTGOMERY: I’ve managed at the following places: Rent A Center, Favorite Market, KFC, Arby’s. Also, worked a short time at Roper and Mount Vernon Mills.

TALLEY: [no response]

UNDERGROUND: Do aspects of your education or job experiences make you a better potential city council member? If so please explain.

BRADFORD: As a high school teacher I was expected to create and implement plans for student achievement and growth. I was also expected to reflect on my lessons and make notes of what worked well and what needed improvement. I learned that it is hard to maintain the status quo – if I wasn’t continually striving to be a better teacher then I was actually getting worse. I managed the learning of around one hundred students during any single semester and answered to almost twice as many parents.

BRADFORD: I am sure that managing a classroom is a far cry from managing a city, but I do have experience listening to members of the public and respecting varying points of view. As a teacher, one must remember that he is responsible for the well-being of something that is likely the most important thing in the lives of the parents – their own children. A city council member must remember that he is also a steward of something that holds great personal value in the lives of the community and treat the office accordingly. Just as parents have a vested interest in their children’s lives, a council member must listen to the people in the community in which they serve.

BRADFORD: As for my education, I do believe that my background in science and mathematics will make it easier to understand various aspects of management, perhaps most especially in the areas of water and electricity. However, the most practical benefit of my educational background would surely involve my legal training. I feel that, as an attorney, I am perhaps especially qualified to answer the question posed by one LU reader, – “Is this constitutional?” I know that I can work closely with the city attorney and save time and money by recognizing legal problems with suggested courses of action and by also spotting potential liability issues for the city.

MONTGOMERY: Yes, having managing experience with people working for you I believe will be a plus. As well as, I have made budgets and understand how to spend and when not to spend.

TALLEY: [no response]

Bradford is obviously very educated, but his limited experience in management and business could be a problem. We have more on the council now who have government experience than business experience, and Bradford’s only non-government job was for a few months on the line at BlueBird. Without actually managing departments, businesses, or employees many concepts of business and economy are only theoretical. He’s a good attorney by most accounts, but the city already has an attorney. Montgomery’s education is pretty limited compared to Bradford’s paragraph-long answer, but Montgomery is more likely to understand the real needs of local businesses and how to supervise city employees.

UNDERGROUND: Do you have any previous political experience? If so please explain.

BRADFORD: No.

MONTGOMERY: None

TALLEY: [no response]

UNDERGROUND: What will be your first priority once you’re elected to the council?

BRADFORD: My first priories will be to listen and to learn. I obviously have no prior experience as a city council member, which makes me very wary of making promises or grand schemes. Instead, my promise is to listen – I will listen to people with experience, I will listen to people that I trust, and I will listen to the voters in my ward and others, and I will listen to the business owners. My second priority is to learn. I will learn how to be effective and I will learn how to best use the resources at my disposal to help my community.

MONTGOMERY: First off, I need to find out first hand what’s been taking place. Then in the near future get a game plan on where we want the city and make a plan to get us there.

TALLEY: [no response]

UNDERGROUND: Is there a criteria you will use when deciding to vote for or against motions made by the council? (An example would be “Is it moral?/constitutional?/Do we need it?/Can we afford it?” etc..)

BRADFORD: It is tempting to simply steal the questions provided on the LU site by Wayne Winters, as I feel that those are great questions for anyone to ask themselves in any political office in charge of spending tax dollars. Those questions are part of a broader question that I ask myself before making a decision, which is, “Is this the responsible thing to do?” My definition of responsible spending includes making decisions that are both moral and legal. Spending money on frivolous things that we either do not need or cannot afford is certainly not responsible. Also, a responsible decision is an informed decision. Therefore, I would steal those questions proposed by Mr. Winters with one addition – “What is my opposition saying about this?” Too often we surround ourselves with people that share our ideas to the point that we are blinded to the thought that there may be viable alternatives. If my job has taught me anything it is that there are two sides to every story. Effective leaders will actually listen, even to those that do not share their position, and will be strong enough ethically to stand their ground when they believe they are doing what is right, but will not be too prideful to change their position when they see that they are wrong.

MONTGOMERY: Definitely! Those are the questions everyone should be asking.

TALLEY: [no response]

UNDERGROUND: Looking over the field of candidates for the other wards, who do you hope to see elected to serve along with you on the council? Are there any candidates who you don’t think you’d be able to work with?

BRADFORD: My campaign isn’t about tearing down others. I have nothing negative to say about Dell or Keith, and I have nothing negative to say about the other candidates. I can think of few things more detrimental to the council than to have members that alienate one another and refuse to work together. Openly opposing candidates from other wards that could potentially be elected is not in the city’s best interest. Everyone will not agree on every issue, but that is not required for mutual respect.

MONTGOMERY: Of all the candidates, I only “know” Chris Davis and Donnie McGaha. Most of the others I have been acquainted with, but I feel I can work with anyone. We just have to get in there and work together for the better of the city.

TALLEY: [no response]

UNDERGROUND: Do you expect to get along with the remaining councilmen (Swanson and Andy Arnold) and Mayor Florence? Do you think they’ve done an adequate job in leading the city?

BRADFORD: Of course I expect to get along with the remaining councilmen. I expect to get along with everyone. Do I expect to agree on every issue? Of course not. I have worked with people that liked me and I have worked with people that did not like me. I have always found a way to be effective in my job and to maintain a respectful environment. It is what professionals do. Is there room for improvement in our city? Of course there is. As I previously stated, if you are not constantly working for improvement then you are probably falling behind.

MONTGOMERY: Yes, that shouldn’t be a problem. I think they have let outsiders “run” the city.

TALLEY: [no response]

UNDERGROUND: Andy Arnold and Wayne Swanson have been on the council for ten and twelve years, respectively. Neal Florence will begin his 22nd year [actually 21st] in the mayor’s office next January. Do you agree that the city should implement term limits for all its elected leaders, or does LaFayette benefit from having experienced leadership?

BRADFORD: I understand the fear of having an entrenched incumbent politician holding on to power way past the point of being an effective leader. Term limits would certainly curtail this. However, term limits come with a price. We could, as a city, be in the predicament of losing an effective and experienced leader simply because it is unlawful to keep them in a position where they are making real progress. I personally believe that term limits are unnecessary. Perhaps I am naïve, but I have faith in the political process. When leaders become so ineffective that they are a burden to the city, will the city not rise up?

MONTGOMERY: There are pros & cons to both sides. I like the idea of leadership, but if things are inadequate they should be changed.

TALLEY: [no response]

UNDERGROUND: Currently the city’s councilors must live within the ward they represent, but any resident of the city can vote for candidates for any ward. Does that system provide adequate representation for all the city’s residents, and if not would you consider changing that aspect of the city charter?

BRADFORD: I have promised to listen, which would be worthless without the implied promise that I will consider what I hear. Of course I would consider it. I would need more information, and I would like to be educated on why the city chose this manner of voting in the first place. My initial fear about changing the system is that there are already very few voters that turn out in a city election. If only Ward 2 voters were allowed to vote, then we could be looking at between one and two hundred voters. This is an extremely small population size and would be more susceptible to statistical anomalies than a larger population. It would also be more susceptible to dirty politics. For instance, if one could buy 25 votes, this would be 25% of the population in a 100 person election. This would be a huge swing in the voting population. Further, there are already checks and balances in place to insure that I keep the best interests of Ward 2 at heart. I am not going to concede to trashing Ward 2 for the “good of the city” – I have to live in Ward 2. My wife and my children have to live in Ward 2. For those reasons, my initial reaction is that the voting situation is appropriate. However, I will not say that I could not be convinced to change my position given further data.

MONTGOMERY: I don’t believe it does give adequate representation. That is definitely something that needs to be looked into.

TALLEY: [no response]

Bradford’s concerns are valid, something we had not considered before. However, the current system can be compared to having the entire country choose each state’s senator – it kills representation and forces candidates to cater to areas with the most voters, which is why current leaders tend to over-focus on the needs of residents from Wards 1 and 2. Issues of voter fraud and “vote buying” should be addressed in some way other than taking away representation from half the city. If the city has concerns about too few people voting in each ward it would be better to have only three wards with more voters in each than to have four that aren’t truly represented.

Candidates of course don’t want to trash the places where they live, but few of the candidates actually live in the center of their ward. Bill Craig, as example, currently represents Ward 3 extending all the way to Flora Street but lives on Culberson next to old LaFayette High School and recently was confused about LaFayette Housing Authority neighborhoods in his own ward on the opposite side of the tracks. Bradford lives in Ward 2 near the golf course but his ward extends all the way to Roper. Councilors can take care of their immediate neighborhoods without providing for all the residents of their ward, and many over the years have done exactly that without fear of being voted out.

UNDERGROUND: Have you been following the situation with outgoing City Manager Johnnie Arnold? Do you think Arnold has done his job well, and do you feel the council properly responded to his recent behavior?

BRADFORD: There are still many questions about the Johnnie Arnold situation that haven’t been answered and I am in no position to know nor do I feel comfortable guessing at the details.

MONTGOMERY: Yes. No, on both accounts.

TALLEY: [no response]

UNDERGROUND: Are there any changes you would make to the City Manager’s authority and duties? Would you consider splitting aspects of the City Manager job (like handling human resources and payroll) into a separate paid position?

BRADFORD: As I said before, I will consider any reasonable alternatives to what we are currently doing as a city. My initial concern with splitting the City Manager job is that it would create another paid position with benefits for the taxpayers to fund. If the job can be handled effectively by one person, then it doesn’t make fiscal sense to have more than one person paid to do it. Perhaps the question is really, “Should one person have all that power?” I think it can be done so long as there are appropriate checks and balances in place to make sure that everything is on the up and up. Every check should require two signatures and every account should be audited by a third party.

MONTGOMERY: Absolutely.

TALLEY: [no response]

In a city the size of LaFayette it would be hard to justify the costs of a completely separate HR position. But the city’s current HR policy of allowing city managers to handle everything is how we ended up in an age discrimination lawsuit that could potentially cost much more than an HR director’s salary, in addition to costing LaFayette a handful of good employees.

Even if the council can’t make a way to add an HR director position (which could be economically unfeasable) they at least need to review every aspect of current HR policy within the city and apply a consistent set of rules, policies, and procedures for every department to follow and have a board or panel to check out every termination from any level. The council should also be prepared to have every job in city government regularly reviewed and appraised to determine if it should still exist and be held by the current employee. New City Manager Etheridge hints he wants that done, but it actually happening is another thing entirely.

The city does require two signatures for most checks, but having the City Manager, Mayor, or City Clerk be those two signatures could be the “all that power” problem Bradford refers to. A sole individual hiring, firing, setting HR policy, handling payroll, and also signing checks absolutely concentrates too much authority under one person and invites the kinds of abuses we’ve seen – especially when the council doesn’t keep a close eye on day to day operations of the city.

We’d love to hear what additional checks and balances (if any) Bradford proposes putting into place, and hope everyone on the council will begin to more carefully monitor what happens in city departments. We need councilors willing to stand up and call out bad behavior even if other members of the council will not. Until we have that, similar abuses are still very likely to occur.

UNDERGROUND: Are you familiar with the Richie White situation at LaFayette Solid Waste? Has the City Council handled that issue correctly, and what (if anything) should be done to prevent similar incidents of fraud and theft from city employees?

BRADFORD: I do not have knowledge of the actual facts of the Richie White situation. I do know that it is both a fortunate and unfortunate result of small town life that everyone seems to know everyone else. When there is a situation where one could be accused of improperly dealing with the city because of social ties, we must make sure that our actions are not only proper, but that we act in a way that is beyond reproach even to the most casual observer. At church, we always have three people count the offering money. This is not because we do not trust any one member, but we do it as a protection to the member that counts the money. We are protecting them from even being accused of misappropriation of funds. This concept would serve us well in other areas.

MONTGOMERY: I’ve heard a little about the situation. I’m not sure what they did to handle the issue.

MONTGOMERY: Criminal background checks should be a starting point. Also, make sure department heads and contractors don’t have a conflict of interest as in the case.

TALLEY: [no response]

Accountability is a must, even with trusted people. Leaving the door open for abuse just invites it. As Bradford said, that protects both the worker and the city from improper behavior and accusations of it. A solid conflict of interest policy that can’t be dismissed by the city manager (as happened with Richie White) should be introduced immediately, as should a better policy against nepotism – something Ward 3 candidate Judy Meeks killed during her previous time on the council.

UNDERGROUND: What is the biggest overall problem citizens in LaFayette currently face, and what (if anything) can city government do or change to help them with it?

BRADFORD: The biggest problem our citizens face is the same as pretty much everywhere else in America – the economy. Our businesses and our households are struggling to make it month to month. One thing that I have been hearing, and that I certainly agree with, is that our city would benefit from an increase in business. However, we need to be reasonable about our expectations of what can be done in our city in response to a national problem. Certainly we can look at our zoning regulations and business licensing procedures to see if they are discouraging potential businesses. We can also offer tax incentives to potential businesses. We can go outside of the city and try to shop our land and resources to corporations. However, we do not need to spend so much effort looking for outside business to bring in that we ignore and hurt the businesses that we already have. We could begin as simply as funding a few well-placed signs along the bypass that might catch the eye of one of those that simply zoom past daily and alert them to some of our wonderful small businesses that could always use more attention. On two separate occasions I have had delivery truck drivers heading for my house pass by LaFayette completely and not even realize it until they see the Trion city limits sign. Discouraging.

MONTGOMERY: Businesses leaving, nothing coming in, and unnecessary spending. I think we need to look at some ordinance we have in place that maybe prohibiting businesses from coming in.

TALLEY: [no response]

Both candidates’ answers are excellent. Reform of zoning and codes is one of the simplest things the city can do to encourage business growth and make it easier for existing businesses to operate. Bradford’s observations about taking care of existing businesses are accurate. The city would definitely benefit from signage on the bypass pointing visitors to various stores and restaurants, along with better signage showing where the city itself actually is. The Downtown Development Authority, which seems to mostly promote existing businesses to themselves, should be working to advertise the amenities of LaFayette (tourism, business, nature, and recreation) to outsiders in Chattanooga, Rome, and elsewhere to help the economy here at home.

UNDERGROUND: How has the City of LaFayette done in regards to maintaining or improving its infrastructure, including streets, sidewalks, sewers, and utilities? Will you make any changes to the Public Works Department?

BRADFORD: Our infrastructure is more than just streets and sidewalks, which have both seen better days. LaFayette is growing north along highway 27. Growth is good, but we do not need to neglect our downtown area. Most people are familiar with downtown decay, as Chattanooga and Atlanta have experienced it on a large scale. However, we have seen Chattanooga revitalize their downtown area with amazing results. I am not suggesting that we build an aquarium, but I would like to see us do more with what we already have. We have an old football stadium that is crumbling. We have a historic area along the railroad that is crumbling. I would like to see a revitalization movement in our downtown area centering around some strong businesses. Sidewalks would be required to link the businesses to foot traffic. Street lights must be in good working order for pedestrians to feel safe. We do not need to try to be Chattanooga, but we do need to embrace what we already have and not squander it for the sake of growth. The flip side of this coin is of course the fact that we are working with a limited budget in a down-turned economy. We cannot spend money that we do not have. If elected, I am very interested to see what can be accomplished with the money that is available.

MONTGOMERY: Their a bit off. We have a lot of bad streets, Linwood currently has one of the best streets right now (since it was just paved). We need better (and more) sidewalks. Public works need people who are willing to work and they need to be held accountable for there actions.

TALLEY: [no response]

Both candidates who replied are more willing to talk about sidewalks than we’ve seen in the past, and both recognize that the city isn’t doing an acceptable job of maintaining streets. Infrastructure is more than streets and sidewalks; current conditions of street lights, signage, and road striping are embarrassing for LaFayette and should be corrected along with new pavement and new or rebuilt sidewalks. However, the downtown area, between Duke and Cherokee streets, hasn’t been neglected – it’s been given more than its fair share of street and sidewalk repairs. The crumbling football field and areas near the railroad absolutely need more attention.

Northern and southern expansion of city limits should definitely end, and the city needs to focus on providing better streets, sidewalks, and services for older core neighborhoods in West LaFayette, Linwood, and many of the subdivisions. If the city isn’t a decent place to live, nobody will want to live or work here. Public Works needs more funding (see our comments on the next question) and leadership that is both capable and responsible, something the current department head hasn’t fully proven herself to be.

UNDERGROUND: If voters approve it, the 2013 SPLOST cycle will fall inside your term. What projects will be your priority when the city gets its share of that multi-million-dollar funding source?

BRADFORD: [no response]

MONTGOMERY: I’m not 100% sure what all SPLOST money can be used for, but sidewalks and streets are a big issue.

TALLEY: [no response]

SPLOST is promoted to citizens as a way to get roads paved and bridges repaired, but neither Walker County nor LaFayette used their shares of the 2003 or 2008 SPLOST cycles to do road, bridge, or infrastructure repairs. The last of LaFayette’s 2003 funds were sank into the golf course, and all of the 2008 funding has so far gone to projects like the softball mecca, tacky Christmas lights, and library renovation. Both candidates have shown a concern for roads and sidewalks, so both need to commit future SPLOST money (if we get it) to maintaining and improving those critical resources.

UNDERGROUND: If you had been on the council during the last four years, would you have approved any or all of these projects, and why?

UNDERGROUND: $1.4 million for a new clubhouse for the LaFayette golf course?

BRADFORD: Government activities range from those that can be characterized as purely a service to the community and expected to be of no direct monetary profit to the city (such as police protection, a swimming pool, a library), to those that we expect to be run like a business and to actually make money for the city – such as utilities. When viewed on the scale from service activity to business activity, the golf course should be at least slightly closer to the business end of the spectrum. At this time I do not know enough about golf course revenues to determine if $1.4 million was a wise investment.

MONTGOMERY: No, could have refurbed the old one with much less money.

TALLEY: [no response]

City operations are, by law, classified as “governmental” and “business” activities. Police, fire, roads, parks, swimming pool, and administrative activities are considered traditional government territory not meant to be profitable, while the airport, golf course, and utilities/garbage are traditionally services provided at a profit by businesses, and are accounted for differently. The golf course loses several hundred thousand dollars each and every year on top of the $1.4 million in road money wasted on a clubhouse.

Current city leaders have said the course drives tourism dollars, but they have failed to promote it to outsiders, built the new clubhouse too far from the city’s core, and didn’t tell citizens about the facility when it was first opened to avid backlash in an election year. The course is a benefit for city employees and political leaders who play for free (along with others who just never pay) and they don’t want outsiders on it. That has to change. If we’re going to own a golf course, it should actually be used by more than just city residents, or it should be losing a lot less money. How to make that possible is something the city’s leaders have to address after they take office in January – and if they can’t do it, it should be sold or closed.

UNDERGROUND: $900,000 for four new softball fields at Lowell Green Rec?

BRADFORD: The idea was at least attractive in the sense that it sought to add value back to an area of town that has seen much decline. It is my understanding that the original plans, when approved, did not call for this much expenditure.

MONTGOMERY: No, I like the idea of having it, but not at this cost and this economy.

TALLEY: [no response]

The ballfields cost so much because the city council didn’t put controls into place to keep it in budget and wanted it done so badly they skipped important steps to speed up construction – which actually slowed the whole thing down. To meet a ridiculous timeframe set by ex-councilman Hodge and Mayor Florence, they failed to do adequate preparation or study the properties it was supposed to be built on. That led to two different sites being chosen and prepared but not used, and many cost overruns due to bad soil in the location where they were finally built. Councilors should never become so obsessed with getting something that they throw common sense out the window, and that’s the core of what happened at Lowell Green.

UNDERGROUND: $500,000 (city share of $4 million project) for the LaFayette library?

BRADFORD: I believe that the LaFayette library is a good investment. It is discouraging to see that many libraries are struggling to stay open. I have heard some people opine that libraries are no longer needed. I disagree – libraries play a crucial role in our society and system of government. Not everyone can afford to pay for the internet or pay for other means of gaining information. Without a free and public library, we are making a value judgment to withhold information and resources from our less-advantaged citizens.

MONTGOMERY: Yes, I’ve just lately come to realize the number of people who utilize the library.

TALLEY: [no response]

UNDERGROUND: $500,000 (and counting) for a new terminal at Barwick Airport?

BRADFORD: I am not sure exactly why a new terminal was needed, however I am convinced of the airport’s potential value to the city as a part of our infrastructure. If we want our city to grow, we cannot neglect a resource that we have already invested in, especially one that could attract business owners that may like to fly from their out-of-town homes to their business in LaFayette.

MONTGOMERY: No, what’s the purpose?

TALLEY: [no response]

As we’ve noted before, the airport doesn’t draw in outsiders – it’s a perk for about two-dozen of the area’s wealthiest residents who could well afford to pay more to use it. As with the golf course, LaFayette doesn’t advertise its airport, and there’s no way to get people from the airport to restaurants, stores, or hotels unless they want to walk three or four miles. The city needs to raise its rates at the airport, promote it to outsiders, and stop throwing good money after bad to build fences and buildings for less than .1% of the city’s residents. If the airport can’t at least break even, the city should turn it over to Walker County, privatize it, or kill it. The small potential amount of new business it might bring in pales in comparison to how much it costs the city to operate.

UNDERGROUND: Several of those projects cost more than expected because the city didn’t build anything into the construction contracts calling for them to be finished by a certain date or completed under a certain budget. Will contracts approved during your time on the council include fines for cost or time overages, and would you consider adding bonuses to contracts that reward early completion with bonus payments?

BRADFORD: I would absolutely consider it. This is one of those propositions that appears to be a no-brainer on the surface. However, I have a few questions that I would want answered before supporting this one hundred percent. First, why aren’t we doing this now and second, have we ever done this in the past? One concern that I have is with contract law in general. Liquidation damage clauses in contracts are often un-enforceable when the court interprets them to be punitive in nature. This means that any contractual clause calling for damages in the event of breach or non-performance would need to be carefully crafted or risk being unenforceable at law. More disheartening is the idea that, even if such a clause were carefully crafted, it might still be in a grey-enough area that it could be litigated. This means that we could potentially lose money (in legal fees) by trying to save money (in contract damages). I am not saying that this will happen, I am merely stating that it is a concern that would need to be addressed by an attorney with more contract experience and with more experience specifically in Georgia contract case law. I would also like to speak to someone with experience in the practical effect of such clauses on the working citizen. I know that in large construction contracts there is often a primary contractor who enters into a contract with the city. This primary contractor will then contract with sub-contractors to do different jobs, who will in turn contract with sub-contractors of their own. This can go on for several layers. I have seen situations where the primary contractor gets paid, but then goes bankrupt, leaving those contractors beneath them without a pay check. This makes me wonder about the practical effect of damage clauses in city contracts. Primary contractor might be a large corporation that can absorb a bit of loss, but that loss may be amplified as it is passed along the layers of sub-contractors until the man on the ground – some hard-working citizen – is not paid at all or is paid substantially less for something that is completely out of his control, such as a delay caused by the primary contractor. The idea is good, but if the actual practical effect is to take money out of our worker’s pockets without truly influencing the major players to meet deadlines, I will have serious ethical and moral dilemmas about insisting on such clauses in our contracts. In summary, if my fears can be set aside without any new fears being brought to light in the process, I would strongly encourage such clauses in our contracts. I like to see work done well and completed on time.

MONTGOMERY: Yes, I see no reason we should work on someone else’s time. We need deadlines. Possible bonus for early completion and work done well.

TALLEY: [no response]

Clauses of that type are common practice, if they weren’t nobody would ever get projects done in time and budgets wouldn’t matter. This doesn’t seem to be a problem for other cities or the state, and it shouldn’t be for LaFayette. The solution here might just be to find a better city attorney or to have a council that actually reads contracts before signing off on them.

UNDERGROUND: How has the city done in regards to funding the recreation department (outside of the golf course, which is budgeted separately) and do you feel LaFayette Parks and Recreation is doing a good job of providing activities and facilities for all of the city’s residents?

BRADFORD: My oldest son has played baseball in the LaFayette Recreation Department’s program for the past four years. This past season was my second-oldest son’s first year to play. My oldest has also played soccer for the LaFayette Recreation Department, and has been involved in the LaFayette wrestling program – which, incidently, is not funded by LaFayette Parks and Recreation. The fees for playing sports at the Recreation Department have gone up recently, but I know that in this economy many Recreation Departments across the state are struggling. Still, I feel that our Parks and Recreation Department does an adequate job of providing for children that desire to play the traditional sports. I am concerned at the opportunities for our citizens that do not enjoy the more traditional organized sports. For instance, I realized one day that my children have nowhere to ride their bicycle except on the city streets. I took them to the old football field and there was a sign on the track saying that no bicycles were allowed. When my father was a child he rode his bike all over LaFayette, but our city was a much different place then with a lot less traffic. This is just one small example of how we can get better in providing recreational services to everyone – and not just those interested in Football, Basketball, and Baseball.

MONTGOMERY: They do OK, but it could be a lot better, we are losing some of our youth to Rock Spring for sports. The rec needs more support and funding to keep our kids here.

TALLEY: [no response]

Support for alternative activities and facilities would be most welcome. As we noted previously, something as simple as building a skate park or reopening the city’s two closed rec centers would go a long way to making LaFayette a better place for kids to live. Other activities that don’t involve balls, like wrestling, bike trails, more walking trails in other parts of town, or more free-play parks should also be options.

Lowering fees for the pool and city sports leagues should be strongly considered, along with bringing back summer camp activities at the main rec. Recreation doesn’t even have to be solely about sports. Two Ward 3 candidates have suggested a movie theater, which is probably unaffordable, but the city could show free public movies in one of the parks for minimal cost.

UNDERGROUND: How well does the city manage its utility departments? Currently the city’s electric rates go up during summer months – would you consider averaging prices year-round to avoid charging people more during peak usage times?

BRADFORD: I would consider it and I would like to hear more opinions on the matter. My personal opinion is that I like to get what I pay for and I like to pay for what I get. I like knowing that if I want to save money this month, I can use less energy. The only way to average the prices is to ask people to pay for more energy than they actually use during the winter with the promise that they will have a lower bill in the summer. Many people do not like to pay for a benefit that they have not yet received – it just rubs them the wrong way. Also, accounts like this work by trying to predict the future by looking at the past. The city would have to guess, based on mathematical averages, how much to add in the winter in order to cover the summer charges. Imagine the outrage if the city isn’t able to perfectly predict the future and your bill still goes up a little bit in the summer, even after your winter bills were higher. Further, I also think that it bears pointing out that the government would be forcing you to pay more in the winter and holding your money until the summer, thereby getting to keep the interest on your money over those months instead of allowing you to keep your money and the interest until you actually use the energy. The actual impact on your wallet might be de minimus, but the math still works out to your disadvantage.

BRADFORD: As it stands now, every citizen has a choice. We can elect to pay higher payments in the summer and lower payments in the winter, or we can set aside more money than necessary in the winter months, on our own, and save it until we need it in the summer. If the city mandates an averaging or escrow system, we citizens lose our choice. At a time when most people want less government, I am not sure that I want more government control of how I choose to budget my own money.

BRADFORD: An opt-in/opt-out system further muddies the water and may likely create more problems and anger than the current system due to mistakes and either adding to the duties of existing employees or hiring new employees to oversee the escrow system.

BRADFORD: However, as an elected official, if public outcry demands such a system, I would feel obligated to set aside my personal opinion and relent on this issue.

MONTGOMERY: That would be fair to people especially the ones on a fixed income. They may have a program in place now, but with restrictions, maybe?

TALLEY: [no response]

This question was probably not worded clearly enough. We were referring to the city having different base rates for electricity during different parts of the year. The same usage in some months costs more than in other months; 1 Mw of electricity costs more during a high-demand month than a low-demand month. That puts people at a disadvantage and makes the bills even higher than they would be during periods of peak usage. The city should either average the cost-per-Mw and keep rates the same all year or eat the difference during peak periods. The system of averaging bills Bradford comment against is actually already an option for customers who choose it (the city calls it Levelized Billing), and isn’t exactly what we meant – but his confusion is our fault for not being clear.

UNDERGROUND: Are you satisfied with the city’s current system of meter readers (for water/gas/electric) and the current system of billing? Will you consider introducing reforms to the utilities’ meter and billing departments?

BRADFORD: I detest waste due to inefficiency. If there is a better way to do what we are already doing, we should not be afraid to try it.

MONTGOMERY: Yes, we do need some reform there. I have heard many complaints about the readers not actually reading the meters. There needs to be some accountability there.

TALLEY: [no response]

Meter reading can be done more efficiently and more consistently with the use of self-reading digital meters for gas, water, and electricity. Upgrading would cost money but the electric department makes a profit, and it would make more in the long run with upgrades put into place. Plus people would be billed for their actual usage instead of whatever magic guessing formula the city uses to calculate bills now in months when meters don’t get read.

Bills also need to be reformed, with costs clearly broken down so customers can more easily understand what portion of the bill is due to their usage and what portion comes from the city’s add-on costs. Bills should reflect the previous month’s usage, not the usage from two months ago held over or last year’s usage reused, as many accuse the city of doing currently.

UNDERGROUND: Health insurance for city employees is currently managed through self-insurance. Are you familiar with this form of insurance and do you feel it is appropriate for a city the size of LaFayette?

BRADFORD: I was unfamiliar with this form of insurance until I qualified to run for city council. I became concerned when several city employees mentioned their current benefits package. Even in this economy we are an extremely lucky city monetarily in that we own our own utilities. Our budget is quite large compared to many other cities in Georgia. I would hope that some of that could be passed to our employees – especially those that we depend on to provide vital services. As a former teacher, and as someone that is still a state employee, I know what it is like to have a set salary but see my insurance premium increase every year. Perhaps this cannot be avoided, but I am interested to look into this matter and see if this is really the case.

BRADFORD: As for self-insurance specifically, the risk is, of course, that we have more claims than expected in a given year, thus causing the city’s cost to be higher than that budgeted for employee health insurance. Conversely, the potential benefit is that employee health claims are lower than expected and the city saves money. For small populations, the risk and reward is higher because small populations are greatly influenced by even small statistical anomalies. Larger populations have a smaller risk because there are more people to absorb anomalies that occur. For instance, in a very large population, if several employees have much higher claims than expected in a given year, there are probably several employees that will have much lower claims than expected such that it all averages out.

BRADFORD: From speaking with a few people in the insurance field, it seems that LaFayette is probably of a borderline population size for self-insurance. From year to year, the cost of comparable private insurance should be carefully weighed against the risk and potential reward of continuing to be self-insured. I must admit that, as a conservative spender, I am wary of self-insurance. But, I would not vote against it if the records from past years and current information seem to indicate self-insurance is the most responsible fiscal choice.

MONTGOMERY: Not sure about this.

TALLEY: [no response]

Bradford gets credit here for doing his homework on the insurance question. All insurance options should be considered each year; currently the city doesn’t always bid out its insurance packages, and when it does they normally only ask one or two outside companies for quotes. In 2010, councilman Eric Tallent noted that the council never tries to compare plans until the old plan is within days of expiring; in the future LaFayette’s leaders should begin looking at insurance options three or four months ahead of time in order to get the absolute best plan for taxpayers and employees alike. The current plan has, so far, kept the city’s costs lower than average but we should never assume that to be the case without doing exhaustive research into alternatives.

UNDERGROUND: How well does LaFayette Public Safety carry out its duties, and are there any reforms needed in that department? Do you feel that Tommy Freeman has been a good choice to lead the city’s combined fire and police agency?

BRADFORD: I have already made it clear that my campaign is not about tearing down other people. I have also already stated that there is always room for improvement and that if you are not getting better you are probably falling behind.

MONTGOMERY: We have a lot of new officers and I think they do alright. The chief has a good supporting cast.

TALLEY: [no response]

UNDERGROUND: Does the LaFayette City government have enough transparency? Once elected to the council, will you make any changes to make city government more accessible and open to the public?

BRADFORD: It would be interesting to see more interaction between the council and the voting public. Aside from seeing individual councilors take time to visit individuals or groups, it would be beneficial to have organized meetings with specific individuals at a time – where people might feel more comfortable asking questions and council members could give better answers. I am envisioning a question and answer session solely for the residents of Ward 2 for example, or a meeting where local business leaders are invited. Of course, these things may have already been tried with minimal or zero turn-out.

MONTGOMERY: Not really. The public should know what’s going on in the city government. We shouldn’t have any secrets.

TALLEY: [no response]

UNDERGROUND: Do the current council, mayor, and City Manager get enough input from the citizens before making decisions? If not, what changes should be made to raise the level of input? Do you feel that the City Council meets often enough?

BRADFORD: If the city council is available and truly listening, then they are doing a large portion of their job. From what I have seen, the meetings seem rather cursory. The work is accomplished between meetings, and this is where I want my council member to put in his or her time – gaining an understanding of the issues on the next calendar and actually listening to the community and forming an informed opinion on the upcoming issues for the next meeting.

MONTGOMERY: Judging from the meetings I’ve been to the citizens have no input. We should let the citizens have some say so before making a decision. Once a month is probably not enough.

TALLEY: [no response]

Bradford says the work is accomplished between meetings. Outside of councilors doing personal research or investigation into issues, the meeting should be where all decisions are made. That’s not just the right thing to do, it’s what the law requires. Meetings right now are cursory because most decisions are made well in advance of the public hearing or discussed in private “executive sessions” that the current council uses to excess. All decisions should be made in public with public discussion, with opportunity for citizens to ask questions or make comments before every single vote. Period. The council doesn’t need to meet more often to do business, but they should avail themselves to citizens outside of business meetings much more frequently – not just in private chats, but in public.

UNDERGROUND: Will you seek an increased role for technology, particularly Internet technology, in reaching out to citizens (both to keep them informed and to get feedback from them) during your time on the council?

BRADFORD: Absolutely. I think that a City Council Facebook page might be a little too “unofficial” and perhaps inappropriate, but I would like to throw out the idea of at least having a public forum feature added to the cityoflafayettega.org web page.

MONTGOMERY: I think the city should have a website to let people know what is going on and leave feedback on issues that affect them. We need to try to get more citizens involved in what’s taking place in the city they live in.

TALLEY: [no response]

An official city Facebook or Twitter account would be very helpful for making announcements, even if discussion wasn’t allowed. Right now many citizens are uninformed about upcoming events and meetings or emergencies because they aren’t reported in the media or online. In this day, and increasingly in the future, people will be looking to the Internet and social media for the kind of announcements and information LaFayette has traditionally put in the newspaper or not announced at all.

LaFayette also needs to provide automated ways to report emergencies, road problems, street light outages, garbage problems, and other common issues online – with the city committed to acting on those reports. The current online form is limited to just signs and potholes, and it’s not clear if anybody actually sees or acts on the requests made through it.

Once elected, new councilmen need to ask the police chief what happened to the system LaFayette purchased (or subscribed to) for sending text messages to all city residents. We invested a good bit of money into that and only used it once several years ago to announce a parade-related road closing.

UNDERGROUND: As a member of the City Council, what will you do to strengthen existing businesses within the city and attract new businesses in? Are there any aspects of the current city government structure that discourage businesses from moving to LaFayette?

BRADFORD: I believe I have already addressed this issue in a former question.

MONTGOMERY: Maybe we can give them tax breaks or breaks on utilities to help out. As a supervisor of a business in the city the fee for that runs anywhere from $50,000 to $100,000 a month to have the business. Every little bit will help. We need to loosen up on some of the codes and ordnance to bring in new businesses as well.

TALLEY: [no response]

UNDERGROUND: Homes are for sale all over town, and property values continue to fall. What steps will you take as a councilor to help improve property values inside city limits?

BRADFORD: As someone that has been trying to sell his former home (also in the city limits) for over three years, I am particularly aware of our property value problems. Unfortunately, property values are determined primarily by the “fair market” sales of similar properties in the area. In our current economy, foreclosures abound and the courthouse steps are considered a fair market for the trade of homes. Also, it is harder to get loans than before, and thus demand for homes has decreased. However, there are some things that we can do to get the most value out of our property in the city, and most of those things center around our infrastructure. By adding value to our neighborhoods by investing in roads, sidewalks, and services, we also increase the value of our individual properties. An increase in demand would also cause property values to rise. If LaFayette were able to land a large business, or even see a business move into the county, it could cause housing prices to increase with an increased demand for residential homes for the new workers.

MONTGOMERY: We need to make sure our streets are clean and drivable, nice sidewalks in communities, have the grass cut regularly, and keep all the trash cleaned up. People don’t want to live in a dump.

TALLEY: [no response]

Bradford has good ideas – infrastructure isn’t just about safety or not beating your vehicle to death on streets, it’s about curb appeal. Roads, sidewalks, good police presence – those make it nicer for us who live here and make everybody’s property more attractive to potential purchasers. Business, infrastructure, and people – the three-legged stool we mentioned in the last Q&A.

And as Montgomery said, people absolutely don’t want to live in a dump. Simple things like better pickup of loose trash or debris and more consistent mowing would go a long way. So would reforming laws about abandoned properties, and taking more responsibility to clean up burned buildings. The city is legally limited in some of those areas but there is no reason on earth outside of wrong priorities why they can’t mow the right of way more than once or twice a year and pick up broken toilets off the side of the road in less than two months’ time. Where’s the $14,000 garbage truck GPS device we bought two years ago?

UNDERGROUND: Please summarize in a single paragraph why LaFayette voters should pick you over one of your opponents in the upcoming election:

BRADFORD: LaFayette is where I grew up, and LaFayette is where I chose to make my home and start my family. I do not have an agenda, I simply want to volunteer whatever I can to help the community I have chosen to be a part of. I will make responsible decisions and will listen to the voters.

MONTGOMERY: I want to be an open, honest Councilman who listens to citizens and directly addresses their wants, needs, and concerns. I am not a politician. I’m running for this position because I feel a sense of duty to LaFayette, not because I have political aspirations. I’m just like you –a concerned citizen who wants to do something for our city.

TALLEY: [no response]

UNDERGROUND: Is there anything else LaFayette voters should know about you? Family, faith, philosophy, inspirations, etc.?

BRADFORD: I attend Naomi Baptist church with my wife, Lindsay, and my three boys: Ryan, Jesse, and Max.

MONTGOMERY: I’ve been married to my wife, Danielle, for 18 years. We have two teenage children. We are members of the First United Methodist Church. Thank you for giving us the opportunity to let the public know where we stand.

TALLEY: [no response]

Great answers from two of the three candidates for City Council ward 2.

We didn’t mention Talley much in this, because there really isn’t a lot known about him. We’ve heard from several who say he’s a nice guy, which is good, but he doesn’t (far as we know) work here and hasn’t provided any information about himself to local media – including the LU. His campaign seems to be an afterthought; we had a hard time finding Talley signs to photograph, and he’s not made much of an impact. If by some miracle he is elected we certainly hope he’ll make more of an effort as a councilman than he’s made to become one. Talley is really a non-factor in the Ward 2 race and probably won’t force it into a runoff, while a December runoff vote for Wards 3 and 4 is almost inevitable.

Bradford is obviously well-educated and an asset to the community. He could have chosen to live anywhere but has decided to keep his family in LaFayette, and that’s appreciated. We also appreciate the amount of time he put into composing some well-thought, often lengthy, answers – although several of them say a lot without really saying anything.

Despite providing multiple-paragraph answers to many questions, he did not take a real position on many of the key things we asked about (like Johnnie Arnold, Richie White, the golf course, construction contracts, or the police department.) And he’s definitely not in tune with a majority of citizens on the need for an airport.

A desire to get along with everyone is noted and appreciated, but that can go too far. In LaFayette we’ve taken a lot of abuse over the years because nobody would stand up and call out wrongdoing or willingly come into conflict with leaders heading in a wrong direction. It’s OK to nicely disagree, but occasionally you have to dig in your heels and fight to accomplish good or stop something bad. As we said here way back in 2008, “If the current condition of this community is the end result of unity and ‘lets all get along’ then we should all be in favor of disunity and not getting along anymore.”

Bradford is a candidate with much appeal to the FiSDOP voters who like things the way they are, and those who want to see some minor reforms without rocking the boat or losing their favorite perks. But for disenfranchised voters living in Ward 2’s western side, and the Ward 3 and 4 voters who have been ignored for too long by city leaders, he’s probably not the best choice. Maybe in the future when things are heading in a better direction, but not now when we need to do a 180° turn. He obviously has some vision for the city and has contributed ideas here that any candidate would do well to adopt.

Montgomery’s education is a disadvantage for him, but to us his decades of experience managing businesses and supervising people more than make up for it. He was more willing to take a stand on issues in his responses than his main opponent, and in a time when the city needs to change course he seems more likely to take a stand against wrong priorities and FiSDOP-focus budgets. It doesn’t take a lawyer to make a good decision for families or businesses in the community; sometimes it just takes some real-world experience and willingness to separate good options from bad ones when nobody else will.

For City Council Ward 2, The LaFayette Underground endorses Dell Montgomery. He’s got a better connection to the needs and wants of average citizens, and appears more willing to sacrifice unity for the sake of doing the right thing. Ben Bradford wouldn’t be a bad councilor, but Montgomery is closer to what we need for the city in 2011.

LaFayette’s municipal election will be held on November 8th at City Hall. Early voting is being held now at the Walker County Elections Office in the Courthouse, and absentee ballots can be requested at City Hall today for those who will be out of town on the 8th.

Next week: Ward 4 Candidate Q&A