Thank you Mr. Silver for your update, but what does that exactly mean that Kroger has renewed their lease for five more years? What will become of that space? Will it stay vacant? Also, as the partial owner and manager of this center, who can we contact regarding the condition of the center, such as litter, the condition of the backside of the center, etc. Thank you.

Yep, I guess, the rapes, molestations, thefts, and murders that take place across our state are why all of the other cities and towns in Georgia are also in such bad shape. What a brilliant analysis on your part. I never would have realized that had you not pointed that out. Thank you.

And you are ridiculous. What is your point. I would love to meet you in person to discuss these issues. You seem to enjoy your perch behind a computer. A coffee shop? Restaurant?

Good luck with getting a response to that invitation Smyna Res......the request have been made many times before with the normal anti Mr. Murphy posters, but never been acted upon as it has become clear that the individuals who regular target Mr. Murphy can only hide behind their computers and make claims that are false, misleading and at times libel. Not once in the time spent on this site have any of their claims been proven factual, nor will they because there simple is zero merit. But when and a big IF you ever have the opportunity to have that meeting, I do hope I can be there. :)

Really K. Davis......then explain that to the Laurel Hill town home members who stated in the meeting that night that they more than any one wanted to see the corner of Dunton & Concord dealt with as they have to look at directly on a daily basis. In addition, Mr. Welch spoke very honestly and detailed as to his position on that property being purchased. Furthermore, he too, felt it was the right decision for the city and the citizens that must live in that area and travel Concord Rd. So good luck again with trying to misrepresent anything about Mr. Murphy. For the record, there is more than one person one the DDA that have to vote on issues, so that would make it impossible for Mr. Murphy to make it his "deal". Please educate your self.....it would make your comments more viable and better received by all concerned parties.

My understanding from an article posted here about this property is that it came to the attention of the city (Eric Taylor) as they were attempting to purchase properties along Concord Rd. So, here's a question: what ever happened to the OTHER properties that were being looked into? Were they purchased by the city?
And, my understanding from an article here is that another business had made an offer on that property, but the city refused to allow liquor sales, even tho it was already zoned for beer/wine sales. And within 90 or so days of the cities refusal, ET proposed the idea to the city, to be voted on by the DDA. And that information came directly from the city itself.
Next, before the DDA could meet for it's once a year meeting, since it literally hadn't met in an entire year, the City Council had voted to "publically support the DDA's purchase of this property."
The DDA finally met, for 75 mins, and decided to spend $275,000 of taxpayers money to purchase this property, which just happens to be in a very vocal member of the DDA's ward.
These are facts. And people will draw their own conclusions.

Fact: Our city council listened to their constituents who care about the n'hood and community and knew a liquor store would not be the best fit for a residential area. Fact: the outspoken DDA member lives at the opposite end of the n'hood..the steel structure has nothing to do with him or his residential location. Fact: Laurel Hill residents wanted this dealt with more than the SHN residents, especially since most of the homes on that end are rentals and have changed occupancy frequently since the structure was built. Fact: if the taxpayers are so opposed to the $275,000 spent to rid our community of a situation that negatively impacts hundreds of people who live and travel in that area...I guess the next election will speak volumes as to who is in favor of the changes taking place and who is not. Fact: the constant attempt to make more out of this topic and allude to a reality that something shady is going on is becoming mundane and counter productive for the city as a whole. Fact: a better way to exert our energy would be to come together for the betterment of our community verses trying to tear it down at every opportunity. Fact: let's generate some ideas for a great usage of this land or possible sale of this land that as a community we can embrace and support and be happy with.
Drawn conclusion...positive things are happening, council members are listening to their constituents, transparency is in place & apparently...FACTS are being told and listened to.

The council has said repeatedly they don't have control over what businesses move into areas. To state they didn't allow the business that wanted to buy the property because the neighborhood didn't want it is in direct contradiction to that statement. And they were spending $275,000 of Smyrna's money. Not JUST Laurel Hill's.
A member of the DDA does live there. And has made no bones about speaking, at least in this forum, about "Changing his neighborhood." Surely you can see where there is an appearance of favoritism. Especially when there are so many other areas of Smyrna that need considerably more help than that intersection.
Taxpayers ARE opposed to the spending of $275,000 that they had no say so in and especially when the land purchased has no direct impact on them. On top of when there was an offer on the table to make that space into a revenue producing outlet.

It's no longer acceptable to glibbly toss about the idea that "I guess the next election will speak volumes..etc." Change doesn't always mean change for the better. And irresponsible spending, on property we didn't need and have no plan to recoop the monies spent is simply unacceptable.

To offer up the addage: "what's done is done" isn't cutting it either. If there's an appearance of impropriety, then the people of Smyrna have the right and responsibility to speak to it. Regardless of the opposition.

When people are satisfied with the answers, they move on to the next topic.

And FYI, Patch isn't productive or counterproductive to the city as a whole. That's simply nowhere close to true. The overwhelming majority of citizens don't even read it.

I don't see people trying to tear down our city. I do see our citizens trying to tear down each other however. There is no crime in asking pointed questions. It is our obligation to speak when we have questions. And it is our goverment's obligation to be fully accountable to each and every one of its citizens.

Just because people don't share you POV on what needs "repair" doesn't mean they're not as committed to changing things for the better as you are. I'm just seeing a lot of different ways of expressing that committment.

It all comes down to respect.

Well I guess what we have here is a need to agree to disagree on our opinion based facts.....because at the end of the day not everyone will be happy or agree with every decision made by council or their appointed committee members or for that matter the request made by the citizens/neighbors in our city. It would appear to me that an individual has two options to impact the changes that are important to them.....voting for people they want to represent their interest or getting involved personally and on a volunteer basis to help make the changes in their neighborhood or city happen. Which ever way you do it.....it's still an opportunity for change and a reality that not every one will agree with those choices. Best of luck to you in getting the areas of Smyrna improved or the money spent in a way you see more appropriate for your interest. In the mean time, for those of us that agreed with this current decision to purchase this corner and tear down this awful steel structure, we look forward to the new opportunity it will provide for our city and the adjoining neighborhoods. :)