From James D. Hargreaves

The Roswell Beacon is serving a leadership role in the community. Your Candidate Forum helped bring more people into the political process earlier. Roswell will be better for it. I fundamentally disagree with Kent Igleheart’s June 21 letter to the editor. Challengers need to be encouraged to start their campaigns before the filing deadline to compete against the incumbent advantage.

As a 2005 and recently announced candidate for Roswell City Council and participant in the June 27 Beacon-sponsored Candidate Forum, I see a lot of good things Roswell has done and is doing. I have also seen some waste, fraud, and abuse combined with hypocrisy and deceit. However, as an accountant and systems professional I see these problems as opportunities for a better Roswell.

I see a Roswell where we have: (1) 3-5 percent per year reduction in taxes for the same service levels, (2) a passion for the needs of all through ready disclosure without open records, a better informed citizenry – use of Roswell TV and the web to broadcast all Roswell meetings and hearings, active citizen partnerships, greater accountability, more honest and open government, and (3) the vision and leadership to continuously improve, not just maintain, Roswell’s quality of life and service levels.

Citizen education and involvement is key to achieving these gains. Concerned citizens that come to Council meetings and hearings bring common sense and real solutions to the political process. The lack of voter and citizen interest allows some special interests and “insiders” to misdirect and misuse city funds, violate established laws, and officials to mislead, if not lie, to the citizens they are supposed to serve. All of this costs the average taxpayer money for services they never get or that are substandard. Transportation and storm water sewers are two examples of neglected services.

I also want to thank the Beacon for getting an early release from the city of Roswell of the July 19 Roswell East Town Meeting Report. I tried to get a copy of the report a week earlier and was refused. The City Administrator’s office said the mayor told them to not release the report before the June 19 meeting.

How can citizens give intelligent feedback regarding a report 150 pages long without ever seeing it? The “blitzkrieg” presentations by department heads at the meeting only touched on a small part of the material in the report. Also, the report had: (1) unclear or unstated objectives, (2) unstated underlying assumptions, (3) missing supporting documentation, and (4) overall conclusions that were missing or unclear. The July 19 Town Meeting “glossed over” a very complex and important subject without the possibility for any real citizen participation.

Mayor and Council need to set clear objectives, policy and guidelines (what and why) for the administration. The administration should then answer how best to implement. This clear separation is critical because neither party is qualified to do the other’s job. To help this process, the city should actively use the web as a filtering process. Roswell should not only put the report on their web site but also all supporting and related materials. They can then solicit involved citizen input and answer most citizen questions before these public meetings. Let’s work together to grow a better Roswell!

James D. Hargreaves