Kyle Williams’ Concession Note
Decatur Metro | November 4, 2009Sent out in a press release this morning. A more candid reaction can be found on his Twitter page. (Those tweets have since been removed)
“I congratulate Patti Garrett for her win on Tuesday. I am proud our campaign. We fought a hard, clean campaign, based solely on the issues that face Decatur. This campaign began and now ends with my love and my commitment for our great city.
I want to thank all of our supporters, contributors, and especially the 1,372 people who voted in this race on Tuesday. It has been an amazing experience that I will never forget. Our campaign put together a coalition of neighbors from across District 2 over varying races, ethnicity, ages, sexual orientations and economic circumstances. Our campaign engaged the public, as turnout in District 2 was 82% higher than it was in the last municipal election in 2007.
I am grateful to my campaign chair Elizabeth Wilson, treasurer Judy Turner and my partner Larry Kosten.
There are signs that many of the issues that we fought for in this campaign, including senior tax relief, updating our zoning codes, crime reduction and better cooperation between the City Commission and the School Board are already beginning to be addressed by the City. I look forward to working with Patti, the City Commission and School Board to continue this progress to make Decatur a better place for all of its residents.”
Latest from Decaturish
Hmmmm. Well, at least he was gracious in his statement above. From the Twitter page: “I could not defeat the Mayor-change does not come to #decaturga.” It’s pretty insulting to imply that the people who voted for Patti did so because of the Mayor’s influence– and it’s petty, too. Having seen this, I’m glad she won.
I’m sorry for Kyle’s loss. Please don’t give up. We need your energy and ability to get things done. I’m sad for the lost potential, but there will be another opportunity. Your track record and commitment to the City and it’s people will prevail.
The more “candid” comments have been deleted from the Twitter page.
I thought we had two fine candidates in District 2. But there were some other “twits” last night that confirmed I made the right choice. I believe the word “regressive” was thrown in there but it was late at night and it’s not there now. In any case, today is a new day.
IMO, Bill Floyd is a good mayor. I wish Kyle would share some specifics about why he was trying to “defeat the Mayor.” And for that matter, I’d be interested to hear why he thought South Decatur needs “fighting” for. Does anybody think that’s a constructive attitude to take to the City Commission table?
Kyle: I live in District 1 so I could not vote in your race. I did follow the race through this web site, conversations with Oakhurst and WP neighbors and the forums. Because of your experience “on the Hill”, I felt you could have been a good person to have on the Commission. So will Patti. It would have been a difficult decision for me to make and I am glad I did not have to decide.
cubalibre- I don’t think Kyle was being petty at all. He is a very good man.
I think it has to be annoying to have your opponent basically be annointed by the mayor.
Do you know Kyle spent most of last last Saturday in the kitchen at College Heights serving food at the fall festival (where were you with my limes and rum, lady??). He didn’t wear a button, a Kyle t-shirt or campaign at all. He is actually a long-term volunteer at the school and chose to spend the Saturday before election day feeding hamburgers and cupcakes to toddlersl. But he didn’t trade on that at all. Patti showed up all decked out in campaign gear, shook hands for 5 minutes and left. That speaks volumes to me.
Nellie, I usually agree with you on lots of topics, but not here. I’ve no doubt that Kyle’s a good man, that he’s committed to this community, or that his motives in running were because of his commitment. However, the fact that the offending tweets were removed suggests he himself realized that they were petty. I’m glad he took them down, because for him to suggest that no change will come to Decatur without his being elected is rather, well, petty (not to mention just a tad arrogant). Who knows? Maybe Patti will effect no change at all– but that’s for voters to decide when & if that comes about. Until then, IMO, he would’ve come out looking a lot better if he’d just conceded without having one last slam at his opponent.
All well and good, but you did not bring me rum and limes to the fall festival and you are refusing to address that.
If cuba and nellie become notorious web-emies in the near future, this was the post that did it folks! Forget the city commission fights, this could ruin us all!
Heh! Won’t happen. We both love cupcakes too much.
1,000 pardons, mon frere!!! The neglect to address my failure to appear bearing limes & rum was but a mere oversight, and not intentional…alas, the Saturday afternoon of the CHS festival, I was supervising Mr. Libre whilst he was on the roof sweeping off the accumulation of leaves. And yes, afterwards, we did retire to our patio to enjoy a shilled adult beverage, albeit not my namesake drink…
It also would have been nice if Kyle had actually called Patti that night to concede the race, which is the appropriate thing to do and all candidates know to do it (every other Decatur candidate did). But he never did…and still hasn’t to my knowledge. I was with her that night and know she didn’t get a call from him. She’d kill me for exposing this because she’s a classy lady, but it just goes to show that Kyle has been a very sore loser. I hope he will live up to his promise..”Patti and I were friends before the election and I plan to be a friend of hers after the election.”
I agree with Nelliebelle1197, except I will go one step further — the mayor had no business endorsing a candidate — especially considering the mayor is elected by the commissioners, not by popular vote.
is this true? the Mayor is elected by commishes?
The Mayor is elected to the commission like any other commissioner. Then the five commissioners decide among themselves (in effect “elect”) who among them will be the Mayor.
MoonCat, I’m curious about your opinion of Kyle receiving endorsements from former Mayor Elizabeth Wilson as well as current State Representatives Stephanie Stuckey Benfield and Stacey Abrams.
To me that spoke to his commitment to the community and the broad base of his support. To those who keep harping on this, me feels you were worried about something else.
Mayor Wilson is a resident of District 2 and represented District 2 on the City Commission.
Reps Abrams and Benfield also represent District 2 in the Georgia House.
While Floyd is the Mayor, he does not represent nor is he elected by the residents of District 2.
1. Elizabeth Wilson is a former mayor. I have no problem with former mayors endorsing candidates, regardless of who they endorse. She is not in the position of being voted in as mayor by the commissioner.
2. Same goes for Stephanie Stuckey Benfield and Stacey Abrams. They are not in a position where the candidate they endorse might end up one of the 5 people who vote them into office without a popular vote.
My personal opinion is that no currently one on the City Commission had any business endorsing a candidate unless they were leaving the Commission. Mary-Alice Kemp endorsed Patti Garrett, but she was leaving the Commission — no problem there.
1. Any of the current commissioners have the potential to be mayor based on the vote of the commission.
2. All of the Commissioners have to work together. My opinion is that current Commissioners endorsing candidates invites problems with that cooperation.
That’s just my $.02, for what it’s worth.
It ain’t worth much.
It is akin to suggesting that Ms. Garrett could be bought via endorsement.
[edited] Both Kyle and Patti are great individuals who care about our city.
Seems all of this rearview mirror stuff is the TRUE pettiness.
While looking forward to seeing what Patti G brings to the Commission, I am deeply disappointed that we will be missing out on Kyle’s leadership and action agenda as a Commissioner. I know he remains committed to Decatur and will actively help the city in the many ways he has done in the past.
I remain astounded at the lashes Kyle took for being a good fundraiser, and having committed friends help him in that task. One of the persistant things I read as digs regarding Kyle in this blog during the campaign was the “out of town” money donated; as a Decaturite who co-sponsored one of his fundraiser events, I am left wondering if in my commitment to a friend (and metro-wide friends’ commitment to Kyle and/or myself), somehow I ended up hurting his campaign. A candidate with dedicated support in the Atlanta Metro area and beyond is one we should value, rather than write off. Of course, this was not the deciding factor for all– I just had to express the astonishment.
Speaking only for myself, I was disturbed by the prospect of a City Commissioner beholden to individuals and organizations outside the City of Decatur, whose interests might well run counter to mine and my neighbors’. Besides, no City candidate has ever before needed $20,000+ to get elected. What was the reason for injecting so much cash into this election?
Furthermore, Kyle has made no secret of his political ambitions beyond Decatur, leaving us voters with the choice of whether or not to let him (or anybody) use our municipal government as a stepping stone to presumed greater things.
This was the most bizarre political smear attack of the Decatur election season and the most disturbing. Unfortunately, negative politics tends to work, and it probably impacted some people’s votes in this race. But make no mistake about it, this smear against Kyle was hard core negative politics, which is kind of funny considering Ms. Garrett ran as the “non-politician” in the race. Either she or her supporters sounded like professional politicians at times, saying and doing anything, including negative campaigning, just to get elected.
But in any event, what is so wrong about him raising money? Why should a candidate only raise money from Decatur? What is wrong with having a city commissioner with friends and contacts outside of our little city? Why is that a bad thing? Can’t that help Decatur?
Patti Garrett raised no small sum of money either. Probably over $10,000 before it was said or done. Would it surprise you that almost a third of her money came from not just outside of Decatur, but out of state. She also loaned herself $2,500 for the campaign. Should politics just be for people who can put their own cash in their race?
And when did Kyle ever make no secret of his political ambitions outside of Decatur? And, even if true, what is the problem with that? Do we not want people on our Commission that have a little ambition in life, or should they just stay there forever like Mayor Floyd has for 18 years?
Smear tactic? I don’t get it. We’re not talking about bait and trap photos with a hooker. It’s public information, for gawd’s sake.
I would be very surprised if even one voter changed their mind based solely on financing. It’s just one factor — right along with vision, leadership, commitment, position on issues, etc. — to be evaluated. Some people saw it as a liability; others didn’t. I certainly don’t see the harm in it being part of the conversation.
Obviously funding counts for something. Otherwise, its documentation and reporting wouldn’t be so strictly regulated.
Macrolina, your post is almost as disengenuous as Kyle’s answer about this issue at the candidates’ forum a couple of weeks ago, where he avoided answering the question and talked about amounts donated by friends in the Highlands. It’s not money from a friend here and there around Atlanta that bothered people, but the large amounts from unions outside the state. What’s their interest in seeing Kyle elected to the City Commission? Why did Kyle accept their money? Does he really have the interests of the citizens of District 2 at heart? Beyond all this, Patti is plainly committed to working to make Decatur better, while Kyle seems to trying to get a career in politics going.
Please take this in the friendly manner intended as I mean no offense, but if you are “deeply” disappointed and “astounded”, then you either haven’t been around politics much or haven’t lived in Decatur very long.
As many past candidates (both winners and losers) would tell you: “Politics ain’t for sissies”
(like old age, to which I can attest).
Both sides are getting a bit too feisty. Dial it back please.
Choose your bogeyman. “Outside funding” or “the Mayor”, because lord knows it’s much too boring to discuss the issues.
Thank DM.
This just seems like some crybaby stuff from disappointed supporters.
Kyle is a smart, ambitious, intelligent guy who will bounce back in some
other way. So let it go folks…Kyle no doubt has!
Right on SAACJack.
Stop the smears. Your candidate won. Be happy and move on.
Those of us who have actually lived in the neighborhood for more than just a little while, Jeff Kershaw, know Kyle’s commitment to our community, and his service to others. Maybe after some time here you will learn a little bit about your neighbors yourself.
The first thing is to be nice to them and not question their motivations when they want to serve. [edited]
Good point DM. I think Another Rick’s first post sums it up nicely. It really was a tough call with two good candidates running for the post and ultimately it was a no-lose situation for the residents. Unfortuantely, being an election someone did have to lose and in this case a hsndful of voters picked Patti over Kyle. Everyone can vent a bit as they feel the need, but I’m pretty sure life in Decatur will be back to normal in a matter of days.
All I want to know is, which candidate took all that questionable ‘Non-Decatur Mayors Union’ money?
Did anyone make their choice in this race based on a substantive policy difference? If so, what was it?
In District 1, there was a pretty clear difference in policy, however that didn’t seem to be the case in the second district and it inevitably seemed like it would devolve into this conversation. Kyle and Patti are obviously on the same side regarding many issues, but maybe we didn’t work hard enough to dig deep and find and detail policy differences. As a result many suffer from feeling personally affronted by the results when your friends are criticized for reasons that have nothing to do with policy. We (and I) must work harder next time, so people can vote for more reasons than a handshake or a casual relationship. Because THIS is what happens otherwise. Yuck.
Paula’s question to the commissioners during the online debate seems more crucial than ever right about now.
Why yuck? This is politics – this kind of stuff is inevitable. Attacking one’s opponent for where he gets his money, or for who is (or is not) supporting him, is going to happen, even if there are many issues on which the candidates disagree.
Yes, but these sorts of issues could be a bit more tempered if people could also defend their vote with a policy position or two.
It’s inevitable, but that doesn’t mean we should just sit back and let the neighborhood tear itself apart over it.
I don’t agree that politics is inevitably yucky, not in a community this small. After all, this year’s arch-enemy may be next year’s ally when a different issue is on the table. And in any event, we run into each other at the grocery store, the post office, or may even get stuck volunteering together at an event. So keeping it civil is a survival tactic as much as anything.
In any case, I take issue with the characterization “attacking one’s opponent for where he gets his money.” Some of us were not comfortable about the proportion of his campaign funds that Kyle raised from outside Decatur. Discussing that issue and those concerns does not equal “attacking” him. (Nor does it constitute a “smear” as has been claimed.)
BTW, I voted for Patti Garrett primarily because she discussed issues and offered up ideas about how to move toward solving many different problems facing Decatur; she works as hard as anybody I’ve ever known, and does it with good ideas and good humor; and she seems to be all about finding common ground so people who think they have opposite agendas can find ways to work together and move forward.
Yes it is fair game in politics, Jeff. However, we are all neighbors here. Most of us know both Kyle and Patti and know that they are good people and know their history of involvement in our community. Maybe you are unfortunate enough, or not experienced enough in the neighborhood, to know Kyle. Maybe you should have gotten to know him better before “attacking” his motivations or spreading dubious rumors about his support or funding as if he just dropped down out of nowhere this past summer to run for office.
Pete, my original comment was cynical, I admit, and I agree with Decatur Metro that we should aspire to make our politics better than that. And you’re right, I don’t know Kyle personally. But I haven’t attacked anyone. Nor have I spread rumors. The sources of candidates’ donations is public record and legitimate subject for concern – that’s why it’s public record. As far as Kyle’s motivations, most folks have generally agreed that he is a rising star on his way to bigger and better things. See Kyle’s endorsement by the Victory Fund, which included this statement: ” Kyle is a rising star in Georgia politics. A donation to his campaign today will be an investment in the future of equality in the south.”
Available here: http://www.victoryfund.org/endorsed_candidates/profile/candidate:27
Fair enough, Jeff.
I guess I’m just one of the 46% of District 2 (Kyle won with 55% in Oakhurst by the way – precinct numbers are up now at the Dekalb elections website) that did not mind having a bright, young, ambitious person serving us at the City Commission. Yes, someone who might even have a future in politics beyond Decatur and go on to do bigger and greater things. I don’t think it is a bad thing to have people with political futures starting out in local government, where politics and government is closest to the people.
But, 53.57% of the voters chose an older person, without any such ambitions, do the job instead. And that is fine. I do think that age and gender played larger rolls in the outcome than anyone on here would care to admit – more so than concerns over campaign financing. I hope that Kyle, even after his rejection by just over 53% of the voters, continues to serve our community through through his quiet good works and positive attitude.
But the choice in this election was made, with a higher than normal turnout, so let’s move on. I hope Patti does a good job for us on the city commission. And I hope that Kyle’s loss will lead to bigger and better things for him in the future. I’m certain after he dusts himself off from this fight, it will.
But for both sides, lets just stop the hate. And work together for all of our futures.
A quick reminder to folks that may be commenting for the first time – and who’s comments are first going to moderation – personal attacks are not allowed on this site. I’m a bit more lenient when it comes to public figures and even less lenient when it comes to kids.
So if you don’t see you’re comment here, that’s probably why.
Might be one of those threads that gets commenting closed pre-emptively, no?
Let’s go back to being a town of friendly people. After all, that’s why I chose to live in Decatur anyway.
Chad, I think you may be confusing “friendly” with “eco-friendly”. Don’t be embarrassed, it’s a common mistake.
Speaking of friendly, where is the best place to get pie in this town?
My house. I make pecan, apple, chicken pot and meat.
I can’t help it – I find the terms “smear” and “attack” just silly in this context. We’re not talking about allegations that candidate A clubs baby seals or that candidate B traffics narcotics!
That being said, recently there’s been a spate of pet attacks in Oakhurst lately. Dare I suggest that one of these candidates might in fact be a pet vampire or zombie? That would be a real smear; that would be an attack worthy the term.
Reading these threads is absolutely hilarious. In true Decatur Reverse fashion, the citizens here have gotten the whole political mud-slinging, smearing, and attacking thing backwards: you are supposed to do this sort of thing BEFORE the election. But thanks all for the amusement anyway, and cheers to Nader and Zappa for another great election season.
Four or five years ago (or was it three years ago?) the City of Decatur spent a lot of time and money on public meetings regarding the challenges and positives of zoning changes. With this public input, the City of Decatur & our voted commission developed and approved zoning laws that met the needs of the citizens to expand their homes but where sensitive to the infrastructure limitations of our City. By infrastructure limitations – sewer, schools, police, roads, etc. IMO Kyle Williams showed his disagreement with these laws through actions on the zoning board of appeals, through his words regarding zoning prior to the campaign and through his words during his campaign (zoning laws are antiquated). Was he ignoring zoning laws that the citizenry helped to develop? Is that what I want from my commissioner?
The supporters both inside and outside of the City of Decatur appeared to be folks that would benefit from zoning law changes that would not necessarily benefit the citizens as a whole. I don’t know if that is the case or not, but coupled with my first concern, I was worried.
Responsible development is key to making a small town great. This is not about historic districting or McMansions or undeveloped property in both districts we all wish would be developed, this is about 20,000 individuals living in a City sized four square miles. You make this happen by always putting citizens interest first on every decision made. I for one believe that Patti Garrett understands. It is something I find that Floyd & Boykin get too. IMO that was one of the real issues in the campaign.