Tuesday, November 06, 2007

Election Results 2007.

Milton Election Winners!

District 2 Seat

Julie Zahner Bailey (i) 2,125 62%
Roger A. Santi 1,322 38%

District 4 Seat

Burt Hewitt 2,061 60%
Neal J. O'Brien (i) 1,358 40%

District 6 Seat

Alan M. Tart 1,875 55%
Rick J. Mohrig 1,525 45%


Anonymous said...

Congratulations to Zahner-Bailey, Hewitt and Tart. Milton wins. Sleazy, developer-supported politics loses.

Anonymous said...

Maybe Roger can get his money back from the genius who did that nah nah ne boo boo ad.

Anonymous said...

These results were posted 4 hrs before the polls closed. Hope it turns out this way, need to see "The Real Thing", though..

Anonymous said...

Congradulations Bailey, Hewitt and Tart YOU DID IT!. Milton needs great people like you.

SG said...

When do we get to remove Thurman and Lusk? I hope the message is loud and clear that the citizens not the developers are going to control out own destiny.

Anonymous said...

This is a great day in Milton!!! it was so eloquently said "We have won our city back"!!

Anonymous said...

Well said Bigfeat!

It will be a great pleasure to unite everyone in the common goal of ridding ourselves of Lusk and Thurman! Such mean and devious people have no place in our city.

Anonymous said...

Vermin & Combover Boy had been dishing it out as members of fab4...Now the question is, can they take it being in the minority?

Anonymous said...

Congratulations Voters

You have just lost your pastoral views.

Large land owners will leaving Milton like it was Dunkirk.

Anonymous said...

Learn to speak english before you attempt to bad mouth us...idiot

Anonymous said...

So nice to see that the ugliness continues after the election. What a great bunch of neighbors we have here.

Anonymous said...

Whoo hoooo I am so glad to be a Milton Who living in whoville.
Congratulations to the winners!!!!

Anonymous said...

I'm confused, how have we just lost our pastoral views?

By electing 3 people that will fight to save those very things...

Still confused, maybe someone can explain...

-Travis Allen

Anonymous said...


I believe the confusion is developer logic. If people can't sell their land to developers because a new Council makes them follow the rules, then they will be forced to sell to developers.

It's kind of like Santi taking money from a sewer company and then saying he is against sewers.

Anonymous said...

Does it scare anyone that 3,000 voters out of the 14,000 registered in Milton decided the most important election in our short history?

That kind of turnout says to me that a lot of people here believe Milton will keep it's unique character just because we want it that way.

This was a narrow victory.

The developers will keep coming back. A pastoral setting is intolerable to them. If it's not covered in concrete then there is money left on the table.

Just a few thousand votes is not enough to make sure this city is run by the people who live here, and not those who want to move in, pave it over, and then move on.

They tried to shove three of their own down our throats with a nasty, personal campaign.

They failed. But they'll be back. All that money is still on the table.

So let's celebrate the fact that the good guys won. But let's also remember that this is a fight that is never over.

Anonymous said...

It is apparant to me from reading this board, that two things are the driving forces in Milton.

1] Fear
2] Hatred of those who choose to disagree.

Unfortunately, the politicians fan the flames that pits neighbor againist neighbor.

This blog is/was a wonderful opportunity for people to share information and discuss ideas and give opinions.

But it sickens me to see the level of nastiness of many post.

Good bye,

"The Idiot"

Anonymous said...

I think that the personal attacks kept people away from the polls.

I still do not understand how this election became so personal. All candidates were saying the same thing..."Lower taxes, no sewer, less density."

What was the need for the constant mud-slinging by the candidates? The bloggers were even worse!

And before 1 side claims to be lilly white...both sides were just as bad.

Anonymous said...

For those who were irritated with the banner fly over at the Roundup, think you will enjoy the sight I witnessed today.

Heard unusual sound, went outside, there was a plane, with one occupant, pulling a banner reading: "I AM OUT OF HERE".

Immediately behind was another plane with two unknown occupants pulling, a banner, reading: "AS OF 01-01-2008 WE ARE ALSO OUT OF HERE".

Can anyone identify these individuals?

Anonymous said...

I have to tell you why I think this became a one side vs. another. It all goes back to the changes made to the Milton Charter and the apparent lack of respect for the citizens of Milton by council persons Thurman, Lusk, O'Brian, and Morhig. Roger Santi aligned himself with those four so he was doomed from the start. The Mayor was disrespected and the people who voted for hum, came to his defense in this election. It's time for Ms. Thurman, Mr. Lusk and Jan Jones to get in line with the voters. Although I doubt they can avoid the same result in their next run no matter what they do now (some things are just too little too late).

Anonymous said...

to the i'm outa here folks, i seem to recall a michael moore said he was leaving if george bush was elected in 2000, and he didn't. please don't disappoint us like he did.

Anonymous said...

I've said it before and I will continue to say: Jan Jones is RUTHLESS !!

She will never get over Joe Lockwood beating her candidate..but she knew the fab4 would back her on charter changes, therefore she was going to teach Joe a lesson.

Two years hence, we must remove the remaining two and remove her when she runs and that can be the voters lesson to her.

Thank God the legislature does not meet until January 2008, after the new council members are seated...otherwise, no telling what she might introduce and support regarding city charter.

Her best bet might be to introduce and support an undo of last changes she made to City Charter.

Anonymous said...

Too Jan Jones, Bill Lusk, Karen Thurman and the "Idiot"-

We will see you at the polls in 2009.

Anonymous said...

One side againist the other because the campaign[s] were all emotion and no logic.

Growth/development is a BAD, BAD thing.

Now we have the idea that if we all put our land in "conservation" [like Ms. Bailey] we will have this bucolic horsey city forever.

Now there's a brillant idea. Lower the taxes on all undeveloped land to preserve it.

So let's take in less tax revenue and speed up Milton's bankruptcy.

I'm all for ending the insanity as quickly as posible.

Anonymous said...

Don't forget, "THE GORDON" also has his land in "conservation".

How many undeveloped tracts are in Milton with ten or more acres?

Most contests, political, athletic, are one side against the other, right?

What is your logic on ending this insanity thing?

Anonymous said...

The open land in Milton is not fenced off like a crime scene. Ride around the town and there is quite a bit of development -- Birmingham Highway, Birmingham Road, Cogburn, Freemanville and more.

The land can be developed if you follow the rules. The problem is that the rules mean less density and less density means less profit. Not a lack of profit -- just not every single dime of it.

When developers are forced to follow the rules designed to protect the city and not their margins, the whining starts: We're anti-growth, we're anti-business.

The truth is we're anti-greed and anti-stupidity.

Developers are thinking about the next year's financials. Those of us who love this place are thinking about the next 20 years' quality of life.

fortunately, we now have a Council majority that thinks the same way.

The simple solution: follow the rules or pack up the bulldozers and find a place that won't fight back.

Anonymous said...

Absolutely right.

Do you think Wieland could have gotten away with what they did to Crabapple if they had to go through this Council instead of working midnight deals with Fulton?

Now that they've ruined what could have been an amazing town center, they can't sell the houses they jammed in. Riding through there is depressing.

Birmingham Crossroads and Crabapple Cross roads are object lessons in what happens when the community is in control and the develpers are in control.

Anonymous said...

"Birmingham Cross Roads and Crabapple Cross Roads are object lessons."

FINALLY we agree on something.

But both are the extremes. Crabapple is over developed and
Birmingham will never be finished.

We need some balance. Not raping the land and not making unrealistic plans. [That will never be built]

Midnight deals come from frustrations, I don't like them, but our late Commissioner Bob Fulton used them twice [ I assume out of frustration with some preservation nuts]that I can recall.

Once to tear down the Birmingham Community center that was a rat trap [that some people wanted to save] and once to demolish the old school [Because some people wanted to save it even after the Crabapple Baptist Church had bought it and wanted to use their property]

There simpily needs to be some balance between preservation and practicality.

On a personal note, I do not beleive all the, wild exagerations, name calling and fire fanning [for political gain] do anyone a bit of good.

Anonymous said...

I don't believe anyone really hates anyone as some bloggers want to make others believe. I don't remember reading anywhere on any candidate anyone stating they "hated" the opponent. That is ridiculous.

Harsh words and accusationn are plainly just that, not hatred.

Anonymous said...

Bon Fulton.... I don't he he acted out of frustration. As I recall, he got caught secretly buying an acre or two of land at Crab Apple Crossing, before it went before Fulton County for approval? Maybe that is why the deal took place at midnight, and not in the light of day.