1. 1

    Tom Reilly

    Kathy Forbes and Catherine Bernard [and Linley Jones for that matter]: I have nothing but enormous respect and liking for them all. This is the direction in which Brookhaven’s future should be moving.–Tom Reilly

  2. 2

    Thomas Porter

    I thoroughly agree with all the listed character traits for Catherine Bernard, and, add an additional benefit – a vote for her will help keep one specific other candidate from holding office again. THAT is a win-win for us!

  3. 3

    Garland Favorito

    I had the privilege of working with Catherine on a variety of issues since the last session of the General Assembly. I am amazed at how accurate Kathy’s description is of her courage, integrity, independent thinking, effectiveness and compassion. I could use five completely different examples of what Catherine has accomplished already to make the same five points but I could not have written it any better.

  4. 4

    Philip Capps

    Hmmmmmm. I find it interesting that this letter’s purported support of Catherine Bernard is peppered with negative comments about her opponent.

    If Catherine is so accomplished and such a desirable candidate on her own, why the negativity? Me thinks I smell a rat.

  5. 5


    Thank You Philip, For pointing out the truth.

  6. 6

    Brittany Mother

    Truth? I just love the truth Patrick. Did the letter mention J. Max Davis and his can of Lysol? Did it mention the EEOC charge against Brookhaven involving J. Max Davis? I bet J. Max Davis prays every night that Faz does not release her cell phone audio. Patrick, what do you think? About the truth now?

  7. 7


    Philp Capps AKA “Carrie”. Why won’t J Max debate Catherine Bernard?

  8. 8


    The point was to show that there is room for improvement in Brookhaven. Her opponent (by the way, there are others) is just not any opponent, but the previous Mayor of Brookhaven who is in part responsible for some of the hiccups that have happened in the past few years.

  9. 9


    Negativity? Since when did honesty become negativity?

  10. 10


    My wife and I are both registered Democrats who strenuously opposed cityhood in part because the whole thing smelled of a Republican gerrymander (borne out by the complete lack of political diversity of every initial elected office).

    But since the city is here to stay and we try to be realists, we are crossing the aisle (with regrets to my ACC brethren, Taylor Bennett) to vote for Catherine on July 14 because we believe:

    (1) she is honest and open about who she is and what she intends to do, and appears to be a woman of impeccable character;

    (2) she has the best chance to knock off an ex-mayor who neither finished the job of being mayor nor finished it well;

    (3) she knows the neighborhoods that make up the City and has demonstrated a much higher level of sensitivity to minority voters and the disenfranchised (and she has consistently demonstrated such sensitivity no matter where she’s been) than either the ex-Mayor or his wife (who have publicly demonstrated just the opposite, and have made people blanch at the thought of what their dinner table conversation must be like);

    (4) she is a bit more experienced, and accordingly seems to have a much better understanding of the dynamics associated with forming the City and the wishes of her constituency, whether it be in opposition to the resources the City wasted going after the Pink Pony, or in leading the charge against the grant of Redevelopment Powers (as opposed to Mr. Bennett, who appears to have waded into all of this only very recently);

    (5) we don’t have to worry about whether an EEOC finding of someone’s right to sue for sexual harassment is going to dog her term, compromise her ethics, or distract her from her commitment to her constituency as District 80 rep;

    (6) she is honest and open about who she is and what she intends to do, and appears to be a woman of impeccable character.

    I hear a lot of people saying that the ex-mayor is a complete pansy for chickening out of a public debate with Catherine, but I personally think he’s a clever politician.
    Why get engaged in a public debate in which your a** – be it intellectual or ethical – is going to get thoroughly kicked for all to see? Better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool, than to open it and confirm it.

    p.s. I’ll also bet the ex-mayor isn’t pretty when he sweats. Maybe that’s why he always keeps a can of Lysol within arm’s reach . . .

  11. 11

    Kathy Forbes

    Well said Bldv. I am also a registered Democrat, but am crossing the line for all the reasons you stated. I vote for the candidate, not the party. And I don’t get attached to any particular candidate indefinitely, no matter how “likeable” they may be. My vote always goes to the person who “walks the talk” and has a track record to prove it.

  12. 12


    Recognizing that we desperately need new blood in HD 80, I appreciate your realizing voting for Catherine Bernard is the best way to accomplish this. I am disappointed in many of the decisions made by our city council under the stewardship of our previous mayor and their general lack of transparency. This latest incident with Lysol, city employees and the previous mayor’s inability to be honest regarding details of this affair is just a continuation of his insidious, dissimulating, delusive, shifty, double-dealing and lying personality that we need to be rid of. I hope my D1 neighbors understand the ramifications of electing such a person to HD 80 and follow your suggestion.

  13. 13


    Kathy, Saul – imagine that – electing a representative based on actual merit!

    Total speculation, but I believe that like the vote for cityhood, the majority of Districts 2, 3 and 4 in Brookhaven will vote against the former mayor, as will a majority in Chamblee (who will associate the former mayor with the same District 1 group that rejected Chamblee for annexation prior to Brookhaven cityhood). Not sure what Sandy Springs thinks about him, but he doesn’t even need to win there; he just needs to keep pace with the other three.

    The problem is that Bennett is going to siphon more votes (especially the younger more progressive/newly arrived ones that are unfamiliar with the politics surrounding the formation of the city) from Catherine than from the former mayor, and as wet behind the ears as he is (I was a socially conscious, hotshot 29 yr old attorney myself once), I don’t think he realizes this. I’m not sure which district he lives in, but I wish he would consider running for a city council seat as one becomes available instead, and defer spring-boarding to District 80.

    Knowing this, the former mayor has zero incentive to come out into the open to fight, i.e. debate. That’s because like the vote for cityhood and for the mayor’s spot in the first place, he can just ride the built-in District 1 good-old-boy supermajority that foisted all of this upon us in the first place.

    Don’t you just love it when politicians use their self-created office to advance their personal ambitions?

  14. 14


    The only rats I ever see are the ones that scurry off of sinking ships . . .

  15. 15

    Stan S

    A number of posters have said they are Democrats, I’m surprised they aren’t giving Taylor Bennett a closer look. Thoughts?

  16. 16

    Anyone But J Max

    Taylor B. has zero chance of winning. Taylor conceded it himself. 47% voted for Michelle Nunn who has immediate name recognition, is a woman and personally knows President and Rosalyn Carter.

    You can put Catherine in the seat or you can face J Max in a runoff and lose.

  17. 17


    Stan S – There are many citizens that consider themselves more aligned as a Democrat or a Republican but that doesn’t mean we vote straight ticket. Esp. those of us within certain age groups. We actually research the candidates and cast our vote for who we personally feel is best in our eyes. Imagine that! Times are a changing.

  18. 18

    Eddie E.

    Vote for one of the three on the ‘R’ side:
    The ‘establishment guy’.
    The ‘tea party darling’.
    The ‘bull moose’ (really)?

    And help push Georgia into the failed state status our current legislator is creating (Kansas, here we come).

    Or vote FOR somebody who can see past the party!

  19. 19


    Kathy,when did the State start Party registering. For the past 45 years.There was no party registering. Every two years one has to pick what party primary ,they want to vote in.Only party primary runoff are base on the party they voted in on the primary. J Max would not come up with made up laws to support a person for public office.

  20. 20


    J.Max doesn’t make up laws, he skirts the law ever chance he gets. Number one reason not to send him to the Gold Dome.

  21. 21


    Eddie,please find someone in dist. 81 that can see past the party.We NEED one in 18months.

  22. 22

    South Side Bill

    Why won;t JMax debate?
    Voters should ask themselves this same quesiton

  23. 23

    Eddie E.

    We have a Representative currently interested in the Citizens of the 81st District who is not aligned with the party of continued failure.

  24. 24


    I’m also a traditional Democrat but after weighing all my options my vote will go to Catherine Bernard. I truly believe she is the best candidate to fill the position. Taylor Bennett just doesn’t have the experience and I don’t want to see Davis win.

  25. 25

    I Just Wanna Slide

    Have you seen Catherine in action? He’d get his a$$ handed to him and he knows it. She has exceptional public speaking skills.

  26. 26

    Bill Roberts

    I have also decided to vote for Catherine Bernard and here is why: In the run-up to the Redevelopment Powers referendum last November, Catherine attended an information session about the proposed law sponsored by the City of Brookhaven. She quickly initiated a lively back-and-forth exchange with an (underwhelming) municipal finance consultant that the City hired to promote the adoption of redevelopment powers. He was determined to stick to a canned powerpoint presentation yet Catherine (very politely) wouldn’t let him get away with it.

    Predictably, the consultant declined to identify even one example of a taxpayer-funded real estate project gone spectacularly wrong. (I referenced Underground Atlanta as one such example, which triggered laughter and nods of agreement throughout the room.)

    Catherine effortlessly debated with this consultant, and our Brookhaven City Manager, and former Councilwoman Williams. Catherine was professional and courteous, yet she was absolutely resolute in her command of the facts. If this is the type of representation that we will get from Catherine in the State House, it will be a privilege to vote for her!

  27. 27


    Richard Nixon once debated John F. Kennedy. It was amazing that who anyone thought won that debate depended on whether they listened to the debate on the radio (which most radio listeners thought Nixon had won) versus whether they watched the debate on television (which most viewers thought Kennedy had won).
    The problem with seeing the candidates publicly (v. listening to them on the radio) is that Nixon sweat like crazy during the debate, which made him look shady and untrustworthy.

    Given his own apparent issues with ethics, telling the truth, his and his wife’s demonstrated lack of sensitivity to minorities or to the disenfranchised, his bullying behavior, or his willingness to place his own personal ambitions over finishing a public service job he volunteered for, the ex-mayor would have far more to have to sweat (and lose) – literally – in a public debate than Catherine ever would. And unlike Nixon, there are more than a few of us out here who doubt that the ex-mayor has the intellectual stamina or command of the issues that matter to his constituents to even look half as good as Catherine would on a paper transcript – much less in person.

    What the ex-mayor does have is a built in supermajority in District 1 that is presumably loyal to him, and that is the least likely to have votes siphoned off by any of the other candidates. Don’t underestimate how significant that advantage is, especially since the remaining voting groups in District 80 – Chamblee, Sandy Springs, Districts 2,3 and 4 of Brookhaven – are likely to be split three or even four ways.

    The ex-mayor knows this, and he will never risk this built-in supermajority in a public debate with Catherine. He’d be behind both the ethical and intellectual eight-ball right out of the gate – especially weighed down with all the baggage that’d be making him sweat – and being seen in public squirming and sweating next to her could easily cost him some of that supermajority support. It certainly cost Nixon.

  28. 28

    Brittany Mother

    I am well aware of the loyalty Max has in this district. I just don’t understand what his supporters find appealing enough to consider voting for him for political office in the first place. Especially so since they have seen him in action as mayor of Brookhaven and have been exposed to his contradictory actions. But these are the same people that would have rejected Mike Jacobs as a lifelong Democrat yet welcome him as a Republican. Let’s just hope Max doesn’t take his can of Lysol to the state capitol.

  29. 29


    Brittany Mom –

    It’ll be up to that small minority of you in District 1 who value integrity in our elected officials to nibble away at that supermajority, one voting neighbor at a time.

    If the former mayor had an iron grip on District 1 voters, he could risk a public debate with Catherine knowing he’d get their vote no matter what. But he doesn’t, and he’s been getting dinged left and right (deservedly so) for his unbelievably frequent lapses of anything approximating good, or even just basically ethical judgment for a man in his position.

    So, it seems to me he’s playing possum – curl up into a ball, leave nothing exposed, and count on his supermajority to help him survive Tuesday.

  30. 30

    Eddie E.

    Yes, the City had a terrible idea and presented a flimsy case.
    Most people had sense enough to vote against the idea and decided as such very early.
    What did Ms. Bernard have to do with it?

  31. 31


    She helped educate us on what RPL entailed and exposed the dangers of giving that much power to a completely incompetent group of city officials. The city council reps didn’t even know answers to RPL questions people had. I saw the video Bill referred to, she challenged the city on this legislation and they didn’t seem to undertand the language of what they were pushing us to vote for… In light of recent news, I am even more pleased than ever that legislation failed.

  32. 32

    Taylor Bennett

    Good morning,

    It should be noted that I have conceded no such thing. Every election is different and so is every candidate. I am not Ms. Nunn, and the issues facing a gubernatorial candidate in 2014 are not necessarily the same ones facing us as candidates for State House in 2015, though there is certainly overlap. We have and will continue to run a clean campaign on the issues, and the thousands of voters we’ve contacted have responded well to our message and share our values and goals.

    I’ve been very clear on what I believe: in public schools, in making it easier to start and run a small business, in investing in transportation, and in equality for all Georgians. I would not be in this race if I did not have facts to support my belief that I can win. I believe that I can and will win, and I’m looking forward to representing you and every other resident of this district with integrity.

    If any voters have any questions regarding my vision for this district, please reach out to me via my website at and I will be happy to answer them personally. This election is too important to rely on misinformation when making your decision to vote, and I’m more than happy to take the time to speak directly with any voter, of any party, regarding my candidacy and my goals for our district.



  33. 33

    Taylor Bennett

    I misspoke. I meant to say “senatorial candidate” rather than “gubernatorial candidate” regarding Ms. Nunn. But the point remains the same and applies to Sen. Carter’s race as well. This is a unique election about unique issues, and I believe I am the candidate best suited to represent the people of House District 80 as we address those issues together.

  34. 34


    Thank You ,Eddie. A point well stated.

  35. 35

    Mary Ellen Sechler

    I have yet to see any flyers.. On her or anyone else. Could you pear tell me where I can find them. Ty

  36. 36

    Eddie E.

    That was all clear from the outset.
    A tiny bit of research showed the Redevelopment Powers referendum was a terrible idea (the simple fact that California has outlawed such nonsense should have made it clear to the Council before they voted on it).
    Again what did Ms. Bernard have to do with such an obvious non-starter? (other than maybe posturing and positioning for a future run for office by taking a vocal position on a referendum that would never have passed)

  37. 37

    Greg Trinkle

    Eddie, I tend to agree with you on a lot of issues, but not in this case.
    The way Redevelopment Powers was written on the ballot made it appear you were voting for/against development.

    I myself, who admittedly has limited knowledge of local government, had no idea what Redevelopment powers were.
    It was because of Catherine that I learned the full extent of these powers and voted against it.

    I was so concerned with this law and the powers it would give our city officials, I joined Catherine’s group. I spent the latter part of September and all October spending 4 to 5 days a week going door to door to help educate others. I spoke to a lot of people in my canvassing. Most of the people I spoke with had no idea it was on the ballot and let alone what it truly meant.
    I am not saying I changed anyone’s vote on this. I do know that I helped educate some Brookhaven Voters on the true teeth of this law.
    Would this law have passed without the organized opposition that Catherine provided? 40% of Brookhaven citizens did vote in favor of Redevelopment Powers. If we could have reached all Brrookhaven voters I am sure that margin of defeat would have been much higher. Catherine was the biggest reason for the organized opposition.
    With my working with Catherine, I can attest that District 80 would be best served by having Catherine representing them.

  38. 38

    Stan S

    In the next session of the legislature, our representative will likely be voting on issues of religious and personal freedom, safety, education, abortion, gun rights, transit expansion, and health care.

    I would like to hear more on how each of the candidates would vote on these issues.

  39. 39


    I’m voting for Catherine Bernard and against the ex-mayor because he’s already demonstrated to me that his priorities are very different from a large chunk of the people who live around me on about every major issue.

    RELIGIOUS AND PERSONAL FREEDOM – aside from the fact that those are already guaranteed by the US Constitution and none of our candidates are going to change that at the local level (unless they just want to disregard the US S Ct, like judges in Alabama), a platform of limited government espoused by Ms. Bernard is a great way to continue ensuring such freedom.

    ABORTION AND GUN RIGHTS: US S Ct has already decided abortion and the 2nd amendment right to bear muskets should be allowed to stand, and I don’t see any of the candidates being radical enough (or unwise enough) to burn all their political capital charging windmills for whatever their personal beliefs on those issues may be.

    EDUCATION: On this one, I wouldn’t trust the ex-mayor any further than I can throw him. He’s the one that signed off on giving $30,000 of Brookhaven taxpayer money to Gareth Jenner to try and undercut DeKalb public schools with a City Council controlled academy. Just what I want – elected officials (i.e., more government), instead of trained educators running a school. Actions speak louder than words.

    TRANSIT EXPANSION: I didn’t see the ex-mayor’s name on the vote for T-Splost. And it was his own ZBA appointee who actually cited the need for even more car traffic on Peachtree as a reason to grant commercial variances.

    HEALTH CARE – given that at one point, Brookhaven taxpayers were required to fund health insurance premiums and a healthy car allowance for the ex-mayor, I’m not buying that he’s personally as invested in this question as those of us who actually have to pay for our own health insurance or our own wheels.

    A big reason Catherine is getting votes across the political spectrum is because she has already demonstrated that she understands what residents’ concerns are on the ground level (she’s written a number of terrific op-ed pieces over the years on this site detailing the nonsense behind the Pink Pony litigation, or the lack of wisdom that would have come from giving a city still trying to work out its numerous kinks – which is what happens when you try to railroad a city down people’s throats instead of taking the time to reach a consensus and to work out the kinks beforehand – something as broad as redevelopment powers), and she comes off as honest and direct. I don’t have to worry about her understanding of fiscal consciousness, or her judgment in demonstrating tolerance and respect for people who are not exactly like her, or giving the City (and those she represents) an ethical black eye.

    On the flip side, the last time I heard the ex-mayor speak was in response to the Marie Garrett compensation flap, for which we got a bunch of disingenuous responses and half-truths. Add that to all the shenanigans that have bubbled up to the surface and the fact that the ex-mayor bailed on a job he volunteered for, and it’s pretty easy to vote for someone who wants to be District 80 rep because they earnestly want to serve their people, as opposed to someone who gives the distinct impression that they want their people to serve them (or else get sprayed with Lysol).

  40. 40

    Disgusted in Ashford Park

    Vote Catherine tomorrow. The Rotund One is making cheap and misleading statements in his last minute campaign flyer. Please relegate J Max back to the personal bankruptcy field that is his “expertise”. We do not need any more of his corrupt mindset. I say this as someone that originally voted for city hood and he as Mayor to my ever lasting regret. The primary focus and goal from the beginning, including incorporation was to make it cheaper and easier for speculative developers to make a quick buck at the expense of existing residents.

  41. 41

    Mind Sunshine

    What bldv189 said. Vote tomorrow.

  42. 42

    Ted M

    Mary Ellen,

    go to

    Catherine Bernard Represents You.

Comments are closed.