Clicky

About the Candidate Questionnaire...

October 4, 2015
34 Comments
Views
???

Regarding the 2 candidates and About the Candidate Questionnaire. Jay Lin & Nazeera Dawood, who chose Not to participate in our JCP Questionnaire, many questions have been raised if they can still participate even though the deadline was Sept 8th.

It wouldn't be fair to the other candidates' who met the 5-day deadline. It wouldn't be fair to have an additional 4 weeks to answer the questions, and have the advantage of reading the other Candidates answers before answering themselves.

All the questions/replies are formatted and scheduled to publish on the server. We are trickling them out so as not to overwhelm the readers. There are a lot of candidates and we covered a variety of issues. However, Candidates can reply in the comments area as so many others have done.

Communications are an important role for City Council Members.  Answering questions is important.  Follow up is important.  The campaign is the time to find out how each candidate operates and thinks about the important issues.
 -
The ability to come to conclusions quickly is important.  City Council Members are presented with information and make laws during the Council Meeting.  Motions are changed in real time and a Council Member will not have days or weeks to reach their decision.  The vote will occur whether or not they have generated their own conclusion.
  -
Also important as a Council Member is admitting when one has erred. Not doing so paralyzes them going forward.
  -
Most of the issues above all rely upon the principles the candidate holds true and plans to govern by. When the principles held are unclear to the candidate, it will indeed take much longer to reach a decision in most cases.
What is your thought About the Candidate Questionnaire?
 -

34 comments on “About the Candidate Questionnaire...”

    1. That is simply not true. All the candidates had the same amount of time to answer the same questions. This has to do with candidates meeting deadlines and their priorities.

    2. Arun Misra, an Asian candidate chose to reply... while the other 2 Asians who have the same caucAsian CONsultant who advised them not to, chose not to.

      No use crying racism here. Looks like one candidate for post 5 constantly mentions being a minority, a woman, an Asian, one with an ethnic name etc., etc. Hopefully the voters of JC don't fall for her crocodile tears.

      1. That is ridiculous. We are funded by no one, endorsing no one. Johns Creek Citizens are intelligent enough to make their own decisions on whom to vote for, particularly when the issues are presented to them.

    3. What an offensive and inflammatory thing to say- completely off base. Race-baiting is so counterproductive. It accomplishes nothing.

  1. Treating everyone equally is not the definition of discrimination.

    Giving some extra time would also be called favoritism.

    You want the latter.

  2. Everyone had a timeline to submit their replies. Tough toenails if they didn't know the answers. This is a city council election, not some high school student council one.

  3. How sad that someone would bring up the issue of Asians being discriminated against. That person must be just another liberal

    1. Since when do deadlines equate to discrimination? If you want to participate understand and follow the rules. If you don't understand or can't follow you probably don't belong in the process.

  4. You can see the priorities of these candidates, they are too busy raising money for their campaign. That's the only thing they care about and that's not what we want in Johns Creek.

  5. After thinking about this for several days I can see why some candidates chose not to respond. If I were running I probably wouldn't answer either. I am new to Johns Creek having just moved here about 6 months ago but I like to plug in to local politics and it looks like I have found the circus.

    Besides the fact this publication is promoting this "candidate questionnaire" as a source of public information its actually the opposite. Pretty clever but should come with a big fat disclosure like the warning on a pack of cigarettes. As I type this I see a big Stephanie Endres ad in my face. Since thats the case lets use her as an example.
    Its easily concluded that the candidates being trashed are the ones opposing Ms Endres but you as an "Editor" dont validate these comments because she is buying advertising from you. Oh they didnt meet your deadlines. They must be a liberal......lalalalalalal......Kinda hard to bite the hand that feeds you isnt it?
    So candidates spending time to raise money is perfectly logical to me. Its the American way. I dont have a problem with it. It allows them to control their message. Much like the way Stephanie is paying this blog to promote her while MT carries her water by attacking anyone who has an opposing viewpoint
    Buying advertising on a site that uses a kangaroo court to ridicule its opponents is a tried and true Tea Party tactic. I guess thats what Stephanie Endres is...a tea partier. I dont care but at least she should admit it. I have been to several CC mtgs and Stephanie is always the one against spending money for anything. Sidewalks, school crossing guards, reducing traffic, you name it she opposes it. So its amusing to me that the only money she can justify spending is not to better the community because she is against spending anything ..But spending money to get herself elected is OK. Stephanie Endres is a hypocrite...and not only is she a hypocrite she is the worst kind of hypocrite One who preaches do as I say not as I do. What a phony. So I say to the candidates who didnt answer GOOD FOR THEM.....to me it means they stand for something other than trying to buy off a desperate publisher to endorse them. The candidate questionnaire is actually an infomercial and Stephanie is the product being sold.
    Ill bet this comment never gets posted.

    1. The candidates that do not answer here do not have much to state at their websites either.

      Yes it's always good for candidates to turn down an opportunity to express their platforms. right?.

      The only challenge for you is that the majority chose to answer, and only two did not. Obviously one of those candidates is the one you support, despite knowing as little about their qualifications as the rest of us.

      Most of us can only wish we knew the viewpoints of Lin and Dawood.

      Most of us also realize that after election day is too late to learn their viewpoints. We were fooled during the last election. We have learned our lessons.

      The candidates you reference as good for them? They happen to be raising the most money from outside of Johns Creek.

      Since you are new to Johns Creek, take heed. It's not about the money. It's about saving our community.

    2. There is a difference between spending money wisely and spending it foolishly.

      Spending money wisely is doing something to actually reduce commute times.

      Spending money foolishly is spending 500k to test a hypothesis.

      Spending money foolishly is advertising why the CBD is a good idea in every available local magazine when the citizens aren't buying the concept.

      People do not oppose spending. We oppose spending on the wrong solutions.

      It's really that simple.

  6. @JCVoter your comments are welcome here.

    It is nice hear you've spent several days thinking and ruminating about this candidate questionnaire, it must be very important to you.

    For your information, all the candidates are welcome to advertise on the JCP. It is a great way for readers to connect with the candidates on their own accord and find out about events and additional campaign platforms, etc.

    Please don't forget Mr. Carlos Carbonell another JC citizen vying for post #5, as well as the other post #2 & #6 candidates, regardless of marketing, they all deserve your consideration.

  7. JCVoter, you must be on one of the "no responses" candidates's team. ( probably from the woman who will not fess up about her credentialls and marital status. It obvious that you wasted several days "pondering".
    And I do not blast anyone with opposing views. So far, I have seen no opposing views from your candidate.

  8. During the last several elections, I only knew what the candidates told me about themselves. Where they went to church, what their military service was, and what they had done in the private sector.

    Those "facts" as presented by the candidates on their own behalf were supposed to earn my vote. That and the number of mailers I received and the signs I saw as I drove the Creek.

    And, as one can predict, those were not the best factors to decide who was best suited to sit on the Council. I can say I voted for everyone sitting on today's council(some three times). And I can say that I wish I could change most of those votes.

    You will not get the insight needed to make the decisions as to what is best for Johns Creek by relying on the number of signs you see or reading the mailers you receive.

    Questions like the ones we have seen presented and answered at the JCP are what we need. And we need more of it. The Herald is not asking questions. The AJC has not published anything of merit.

    Thank you Johns Creek Post for being willing to ask the questions and post the answers.

    Someone should.

    1. Facts are something you'll NEVER get from the "Doctor" running for post 5. She constantly keeps changing her story, resume, etc. Her PR folks are good at DELETING and HIDING posts from her facebook,, campaign website etc.

      Why does this woman and her team continue to submit info to publications calling her a Johns Creek Physician even though she hasn't practiced a single day as a physician in JC or anywhere in the U.S. -- She is NOT qualified to.

      "In the United States, the usual academic degree for physicians is MD, which means "Doctor of Medicine" . Absolutely no reputable practitioner in the United States who lacked a doctorate would call himself a "Doctor", and in the US practically ALL doctors of medicine have an MD degree from an accredited institution."

      "In the United States, some foreign doctors work as waiters or taxi drivers while they try to work through the licensing process. Others decide to apply their skills to becoming another kind of medical professional, like a nurse practitioner or physician assistant, adopting careers that require fewer years of training. But those paths present barriers as well."

      http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/12/business/economy/long-slog-for-foreign-doctors-to-practice-in-us.html?

      She works at the Fulton Chairman's office as of the 15th of July as per our queries(How did she get that job?) Before that she had been with the Fulton County Health Dept. feeding at the taxpayers' trough(still does) But was misinforming voters that she was a physician/health care executive CONsuting(kind of insulting to the voters) with Fulton County. LIES, LIES. Looks like more FACTS about her are about to surface.

  9. JCVoter, I disagree with your assessment that candidates shouldn't answer issues of concern here in Johns Creek. I'm running an extremely frugal campaign that focuses on substantive platform rather than how much I can raise and spend. Therefore, I jump for joy at any opportunity in which I can discuss my ideas regardless of the medium as that can give voters a better picture of my platform. I was advised to be careful for "idea gouging," but, to be honest, I'd rather avoid rote politics and lose the election as long as my ideas (e.g., balanced budget, decreasing our property taxes, allocating the huge surplus, reforming the business taxation model, etc.) were "borrowed" and implemented as I believe that would lead to the betterment of the community.

    Thus far, only the AJC/Women League of Voters (their voter guide will be released shortly and I encourage you to read it) and the Johns Creek Post has asked us candidates for our opinions on subjects germane to our municipality and these, I think, have been great opportunities to deliver our message to the voters. They also gave us ample time to answer these questions (in my opinion, almost too much time). I hope the Patch and the Herald also do something of this nature as well. That way, you can have multiple impartial sources of information to decide how you should vote if you're unable to meet with candidates individually.

    I'd love to chat with you (or any other readers) about the issues of concern to you and feel free to reach out to me at any point at [email protected] or 770-853-9409.

  10. They chose not to participate, too late now! Why do they even want to run for this position if they didn't even bother to answer these questions??

  11. Does the mayor need some more lackeys { Yes men or women} to vote along side of him?
    Is that why some of these people are running?

    1. No wonder word is out that he's discreetly supporting the "script" reading/delivering "doctor." The ESTABLISHMENT(soon to be embarrassed) without knowing enough facts about her history have joined with the chamber in supporting her campaign/fundraising etc. - just because of their opposition to her opponent who actively follows the city's business and tries to look out for the taxpayers by questioning unnecessary expenses. She being an authentic CPA seems to be the MOST qualified contender this time to represent post 5. But then again, that doesn't bode well with the elite "Big Government" tax-and-spend Republicrats who want to subsidize private industry by picking and choosing winners a.k.a. the well connected campaign contributors.

  12. My vote will go to the candidates with less donations, those are the ones who really care about our city. They don't have any commitments with donors or even with the mayor. They just want to work for our city, for our families. I don't care if they're doctors, CPA, whatever. Kelly Stewart had a wonderful resume, was more than qualified and she obviously didn't care about our city.

  13. I have been following the candidates and their responses to the questions posed by the JCP. Some candidates seem inclined to pass on every question. I would not vote for ANY candidate that cannot offer constructive ideas about the governance of this city. I vote for those candidates with policies that offer hope for a better JC in the future. May as well vote for "Kevin" from the lottery commercials than a candidate with no ideas to offer.

  14. This "news source" is simply a hack job. They are trying to raise interest in a complete non-issue. Why don't you focus on the real issues of Johns Creek instead of focusing on who responds to your precious survey?
    The citizens of Johns Creek deserve better coverage than the racist rants posted here. Instead, the Johns Creek Post chooses not to moderate such vile hatred and turn that instead into its own manufactured "news".

    1. I'm sorry but I don't think the comments here are being racists. In Johns Creek we love and embrace diversity, just go to any neighborhood or school or park and you will see it. However, lying to win an election is terrible, that's not the kind of person we want in our City Council and I believe as residents and voters we deserve to know the truth. These people are taking decision that affect all of us, so being transparent and honest is a must. Why would somebody lie about simple things like: where they live or their education or even their marriage/divorce? Who knows what else she is hiding. That's not good and it doesn't have anything to do with race.

    2. I see the real issues being addressed here. Higher taxes, traffic issues unresolved, unwanted urban redevelopment being courted, a City Council that chose to leave two seats empty for a year to save money and then spending more than necessary for both the Morton Road Pocket Park( State Bridge Park is planned just a three iron away).

      There will be of course noise generated that is unrelated. But that should not stop the dialogue of the actual issues this City faces.

      If the issues were not being brought up here, where would they be? On the mailers that will soon be filling your mailbox?

      I'll take conversations with residents on issues over that approach each and every time.

      1. ---- "If the issues were not being brought up here, where would they be? On the mailers that will soon be filling your mailbox?"

        Looks like the "fiscal conservative's" campaign is in the red. That's what they've been telling BIG donors and holding more CELEBRITY fund-raisers.

        http://northfulton.com/stories/Johns-Creek-council-races,76288

        How much more of OPM{other peoples' money} does this woman need to spend for a post that pays a salary of $15,000 annually(according to her campaign manager).

        By the way, are those mailers going to be "issues" supplied to the "doctor" by her coaches and tutors? -- Can she take a test without anyone's help?

    3. "Minority" candidates Jay Lin and Arun Misra are not trying to manipulate their resumes, titles, jobs, relationships, addresses and associatons and therefore are not being questioned about those issues.

      Honesty and Character do matter. Even in 2015. We need to know the ones representing us. We, as a proud city cannot afford to be humiliated upon later embarrassing revelations about office holders(people representing us)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.