2019 Johns Creek City Council. With three seats in contention for the November 2019 elections for Johns Creek City Council, we have ten candidates, including one incumbent Council Member Chris Coughlin.
Post 2, which is being vacated by Council Member Jay Lin after one term, will have three candidates vying for your support. They are:
Post 4, which is currently held by incumbent Chris Coughlin, will have four candidates vying for Johns Creek City Council. They are:
Post 6, which is being vacated by Council Member Steve Broadbent, will have three candidates vying for Johns Creek City Council. They are:
With two years left for Mayor Mike Bodker as well as Council Member Lenny Zaprowski, who have stated they will not seek re-election, the outcome of this Fall's election will be significant.
Stay tuned for more information on the Johns Creek Post about these candidates, the issues, and where they stand as we learn about where they stand on the issues.
If you are for big government, high density development, and all the things that Vickie Horton ran on, then by all means you should support Judy LeFave.
But if you are for lower taxes and keeping the character of Johns Creek what has made it on of the best cities to live in in Georgia, then vote for Issure Yang.
Carl, You should really do some research and fact checking before posting!! That post is like "Fake New" that CNN or MSNBC would put out!
Judy Lefave is probably the most qualified of all the people running and is NOT like anything you posted, not sure where you got YOUR facts. Why don't you at least do a little research.
Understanding the zoning process is not the qualification most of us seek for this City Council. You must ask yourself if this and other candidates are going to pursue an agenda that the residents desire, or the one they desire.
No More Density,
If you do your research, she was also President of the JCCA, fought for your "handle" "no more density".
So, you are saying that someone that ran for City Council, lost, did nothing during that whole time and now wants to run again is a good candidate? But someone that has worked in many different areas and has a great handle on things is not? What kind of logic are you using?
Why not ask some of the sitting City Council Members that worked with her at the JCCA, if they are honest, you will find someone is giving out "misinformation":
There are some great people running, I just don't like "fake news" when people don't do their research, please give examples of the High Density that was voted for, that was not in alinement with the cities comp plan?
I look forward to your response!
What is this "great handle on things" you are referring to?
No More Density,
It does not look like you want to do any research or answer any questions! That is fine. I would just ask the people of Johns Creek to check out each candidate, see what they have been involved in and attend the upcoming debate.
There are "wishers and complainers" in this world, I go with the people that actually go out there and do something!!
My original post was concerning a very misleading opinion, that "Carl" put out that this woman is for High Density and Big Government and as we know perception is the name of his game. I am asking that people look for facts not fiction and then vote for whomever they choose.
Please don't vote based upon my posts or anyone else's and don't just vote because your "friend" said Vote for "X". Do a little research, look at each candidate's websites, attend (or watch later) the debate and Please make up your own mind and don't be a drone. They all even have their phones numbers listed so you can call them and have a conversation with any concerns.
@Anonymous, if you really want to take our city back from Bodker and his Chamber-cronies, elect Yang and Reinecke!
@No More Density,
Any idea why "John" hasn't answered your “great handle on things” query yet?
Hey John, you forgot to add Fox-aganda News as another "Fake News" source....
Running for City Council was not an easy decision nor was it taken lightly. I can assure you that I have been here, watching, observing, and attending our City Council meetings. After observing many of our City Council meetings, I realized that some of our city council members may listen to our comments, our emails, and our phone calls but they still vote the way they want to vote without taking into consideration what the residents truly want. I want the residents of Johns Creek to not only know that they are being heard but that they have a say in the decisions that are being made.
It is a fact of political life that a candidate who goes up against the establishment is not likely to get political appointments. It is not in any way a reflection on my qualifications or willingness to serve my community. I ran a lean campaign and was able to initiate dialogue regarding our Comp Plan, high-density development, and opportunities for smarter traffic solutions. I also campaigned on honesty, transparency, and better communications. I have not wavered and remain steadfast in my belief that we can have a better functioning council when we make decisions based on facts, we are proactive in our planning, and we actively engage our residents. We have some of the brightest and most engaged residents -- you guys are our most valuable resources and assets.
I know you support Judy and that is the beauty of our election system, as we are free to support whomever we want. I encourage you to keep an open mind and meet and chat with everyone running for council. I would welcome the opportunity to meet and chat with you and/or anyone else.
Please contact me at:
email: [email protected]
Thanks weirdo for solidifying my vote AGAINST Judy.
Which candidates will allow “Lazy Dog” restaurant
to serve dog for food on the patio of their new
Did you really mean "serve dog" as a food, or did you mean serve dogs? I don't much like the way I first read it.
Brian Weaver would be a Great addition to our City government. Hè is as straight-lacked a person as I have met, hè would not allow for corruptieonderzoek of any kind. I lived in the same neighborhood before, so I think to know him a little bit.
Please help some of us JCP assess viable candidates for the open seats (Broadbent & Lin) who will not become members of Bodker's nod squad. Endres and Coughlin are doing a great job for the citizens. This election represents our best chance to take our City back from Bodker's self-serving agenda and under the table deals for family and friends...
Thanks for your reply, for some reason a previous post I submitted didn't go through or it must have been something on my end.
I think that anyone that runs for anything during these political times should be commended. My original post was more to Carl, but like everyone in American we all have opinions.
I just hope the people of Johns Creek do some research on ALL the candidates and not just listen to other people. There is also the debate coming up where if you can't see it live, watch it later!! No excuses.
Good Luck To Everyone
Please post your full name ! I do ! It makes your comments more credible .
As for your comment about giving at least one example where Planning Commission making decisions not in alignment with the Comp Plan.
Well here is ONE BIG EXAMPLE: the Planning Commission has voted on. By the way, Judy was on the side that agreed and voted in favor of mixed use, townhomes, etc. It is for up to 616 residential units on 77 acres on a major corner to a major artery in our city that is already over-populated. This will only add to our overburdened roads and intersection. So, if we do the math, 616 residential units on 77 acres is about 8 units per acre -- with the assumption that some of it will be used for parking, businesses, townhomes, and apartments.
Here's the link ... https://www.johnscreekpost.com/letter-to-jcp-regarding-atlanta-athletic-club/
And just some other thoughts:
1.) It wasn't an unanimous vote (3 - 2)
2.) The Planning Commission did make change to the language in the 2018 Comp Plan -- which was NOT in alignment with the agreed upon Comp Plan
3.) The Planning Commission gave the go ahead to change from AG-1 to a mixed-use high density development, thus recommending apartment complexes and mixed use development at the corner of Medlock and Old Alabama
4.) This is at a major intersection where it will ADD to our traffic and is at one of busiest intersections in Johns Creek.
I am responding to your comment concerning the Planning Commission and Mrs. Lefave’s voting for HI DENSISTY and nothing you have stated could be further from the truth!
I watched the whole 4 hours and re-watched important sections repeatedly and the snip-it provided is so out of context it’s not even funny:
Commissioner Carr put in a motion that the Planning Commission (PC) support the request from Atlanta Athletic Club (AAC) to change property from AG1 to Mixed use (it’s their right to develop as they see fit).
That was voted DOWN by Commissioners Taylor/Sanders/Lefave
Commissioner Lefave stated “It’s been AG1 for over 50 years, when I look through the comp plan, it tells what a property can and can’t be used for, it still has to go through the Zoning Process, but property owners should have rights and PC needs to look at previous zoning cases as to what the community wants / don’t want in an area”
Judy then put in a motion to “Approve the Comp Plan as presented with NOTES to Council that they need to take into consideration what has been stated and brought forward, in the end it will be City Councils recommendation anyway”
Community Development Director, Sharon Ebert stated that the motion needed to be cleaned up, so the final motion voted on was:
Comp Plan move forward
City Council take into consideration the AAC Request (review public comments)
PC wanted clarity on how to implement new zoning documents
Yes vote: Taylor/Sanders/Lefave
How you came up with all stuff you wrote is just wrong and not true, I do not see where the 3-2 voted in favor of the mixed-use plan AT ALL, you took an extremely large leap there.
John & Dennis
Here is the video of Judy Lefave on the Planning Commission. Voted 3-2 to recommend to Mayor and Council that AAC’s request for Mixed-Use be considered.
Yes, this is not a good snip-it of what actually went on, the conversations leading up to this vote are the most important parts, I stick by my post above of what really occurred, by watching the whole interaction, not by sniped together pieces
It's the actual vote that counts.
For those inclined to view the entire four-hour meeting
A lot may happen during the meeting, it is the vote at the end that matters.
Yes, but very important detail you keep leaving out, the vote was NOT for OR against the AAC request to move to Mixed-use. At best it was a "punt" to the City Council to let them decide. They did NOT send it to City Council with a recommendation and support to allow the change to Mixed-use (which was the first motion shot down), they sent it to City Council to consider (with public comments)
"...to take under consideration ACC's Request..."
Had they not wanted the City Council to consider this request going forward they could have left it out. They chose not to.
Punting is not something a Planning Commission is there for. There were a lot of expensive lawyers present at this meeting. No one should have been taking this "request" lightly.
To EJ Moosa, I think you meant to say “expensive LAWYERS” (not layers) in your comment above.
Thank you. You are correct.