Ask the Candidates: What are your thoughts on creating a park in Johns Creek capable of hosting sports tournaments?

41 Responses to Ask the Candidates: What are your thoughts on creating a park in Johns Creek capable of hosting sports tournaments?

  1. Editor says:

    Here is John Bradberry’s park chart
    JB park chart

    • Mark Venco says:

      That is the perfect example of John Bradberry, “The Spinmaster”, putting fear into the residents of Johns Creek by making statements without justification. Let’s identify some of his “FearFacts”

      FearFact #1 – Calling it a “Sports Complex”, it’s a park that will have trails, greenspace, benches and yes some sports fields that will mostly be used mostly by kids.

      FearFact #2 – The park is for “Visitors” It’s a local park within Johns Creek. I don’t think that Gwinnett, Forsyth, Cherokee, … county residents will be driving on a daily basis to use Cauley Creek. They have their own parks that are much closer to where they live.

      FearFact #3 – According to the above, the Visitors Bureau is going to love us given all of our high profile events/entertainers/tournaments that we host in the City of Johns Creek. Seriously? The truth is, it’s meant to be a quality outdoor facility for residents to enjoy.

      FearFact #4 – “No” residential support, residents don’t want it. The truth, residents “VOTED” and approved the parks bond, I think that should count for something.

      FearFact #5 – “Negative Impact on Quality of Life” – I guess residents spending time outside in a local park is a bad thing for John. Did you know that teens that play sports are less likely to use drugs/substances. That alone is worth putting in some sports fields.

      Roads/Traffic, I agree it is a risk and needs to be addressed and should be done with the Shakerag residents. The risk of traffic congestion could also be reduced by staggered scheduling of activities at the park. A comprehensive solution is needed.

      Placing “fear” within residents by open ended statements without substantiating facts is just wrong.

      Best Regards,
      Mark Venco
      Candidate – Post 3

      • Ed Thompson says:

        The true source of “fear” for our residents should be the ways in which our City Council seems to continue to seek a result that residents clearly reject.

        I attended the public meeting regarding the plans for a tournament facility at Cauley Creek and was one of many to offer public comment in opposition to those plans. The outright effort to push a park designed to attract tournaments was put on the shelf with promises to get more resident input. That is much like what we’ve heard when residents rose up in opposition to widening 141/Medlock Bridge, the Michigan Thru-U, The District, and other grandiose plans that do little to benefit current residents. These controversial topics will not be brought before City Council again before the election, but once that has passed, you’ll see them again in one form or another.

        If we want to consider the use of “fear” with our residents, how about the fact that we were told that if we DIDN’T approve T-SPLOST, that we would still be taxed, but would NOT receive any of the allocated funds? At the same time, we were told that some “options” had been identified for how we might use those funds if we DID approve T-SPLOST, and that the final approval of any projects would be subject to hearings and a vote by our City Council. AFTER passing, we were then told that by approving the T-SPLOST referendum, we had also provided our de-facto approval of the projects that were presented as “options”. Thus, fear was used to get a desired voting result, and that result has been used to push a development agenda that isn’t aligned with residents desires for their community.

        Some on our City Council are determined to pursue an agenda in spite of our residents. Thankfully, some of our candidates have been on the forefront of the efforts to make sure our residents’ voices are heard and respected. John Bradberry has been a consistent advocate for residents throughout Johns Creek. I applaud him for his efforts and wish him well in his quest to bring that perspective to the City Council as our Post 3 representative.

        • Mark Venco says:

          Ed,

          Remember, nobody running in Post 3 is part of the City Council including me and Vicki. We both have our own approaches, opinions and experience we bring to the table. That is what the residents should be voting on and not what I refer to as “FearFacts” that provide no solutions.

          Mark Venco
          Candidate – Post 3

  2. Concerned Voter says:

    @Zaprowski, On more than one occasion you touted tournament parks. Mark Venco, another candidate, touted tournament parks. Since this has not yet been voted on, this is a valid question.

    Until you cast your vote, we have no idea how you will cast your vote.

    Do you? WWBD?

  3. Mark Venco says:

    Concerned Voter,

    No, I would not support hosting tournaments at the Cauley Creek Park.

    I would like to see the City of Johns Creek excel at being recognized in the future for having one of the best city youth sports program in the state for our kids.

    One of the of the proudest moments for parents is to see their kids achieve success, especially in sports. Our high schools excel at so many sports with many state championship titles over the years. I believe that our city should have a strong infrastructure to support our kids. That doesn’t mean tournaments!

    Most importantly, if the moto of the City of Johns Creek is “to be the exception”, I believe this would a great place to start by focusing on youth sports, especially since studies show teenagers that are involved in sports have a reduced risk of drug/substance use. To me that would be a reason enough to try to build up our athletics program for the kids within Johns Creek.

    Mark Venco
    Candidate – Post 3
    Vencoforjohnscreek.com

  4. Editor says:

    Mr. Zaprowski,

    This is a valid question to ask. You and the City council have spent tens of thousands of dollars on a park plan for a tournament facility in Cauley Creek, that has come to a halt, and now are spending more money on new plans, because of resident opposition, and failure to gain consensus with the local homeowners.

    the word “tournament” is in the new Recreation & Parks Strategic Plan 105 times.

    The word “Pastoral” 1 time.

  5. Suzi Krizan says:

    I like John B’s chart…the left side of it.

  6. mommanature says:

    As a Master Gardener and Master naturalist with grown children and a grandchild who does not live here, I am all for being very careful in going forward with making major sports tournaments or activities.
    As the former president of the doublegate Garden Club, we toured Dean Gardens when it was still in existence. I would love to see something positive happen with that now devastated area.

    I would love to see only native trees and plants be installed because they will most likely be the plants that feed the animals and bugs in our area. There is nothing more magnificent than seeing a luna moth or a black swallowtail butterfly finding their sources of nutrition so they can lay their eggs. And then there’s the red bud which has certain butterflies which need its leaves on which to feed for the caterpillars. It goes on and on and I hope that we will have wiser heads prevail.

    I shudder at the thought of a sports complex. I don’t need the noise I am old. I don’t want the traffic congestion it is unnecessary now and I am trying so hard to keep trees 200 years old from being cut down in the name of progress. That is bogus.

    Momma Nature Carole Madan

  7. John Bradberry says:

    There are very real concerns about our quality of life and protecting it moving forward, which is a more appropriate word than fear.

    Even though I don’t live in the Shakerag area, I was asked if Preserve Johns Creek would lend its voice against any potential sports complex or tournament park. I was glad to. I love the area and hope that if the pastoral character of the Buice Road area where I live were one day threatened, that Shakerag residents would equally want to advocate on our behalf.

    Experience over the last several years has taught me that we have to be pro-active and pay close attention to the words and potential actions of our Council. So close that I haven’t missed a regular Council meeting in over two years. I am simply not willing to take a wait and see approach on the future of our community. I hope more residents than ever will do the same during this election.

    There have been several negative proposals over the last few years that almost became reality. If the residents had not made their voices heard early on about the District, would we have that today?

    When the Michigan Thru-U was proposed for State Bridge and 141 , I’m proud to have been one of several citizens giving independent thought and analysis, communication, and public comment challenging the City’s assumptions. The Thru-U was eventually tabled (not removed). Am I playing on your fears if I share that the Mayor still mentions it as a possibility? The TSPLOST project list has “Medlock at State Bridge Improvements” as a Tier 1 project with an $8M earmark. That is the third most expensive project out of 23 total projects. Do I think you should be worried that the Thru-U will raise it’s ugly head after the election? Absolutely.

    On TSPLOST, I was concerned that approval of the project list would later be used as backdoor justification for each of them. I asked this question to Lenny Zaprowski who then asked the Mayor during the debate to approve. All of us were told that each project would not move forward without the go-ahead of the Council. Although I am glad to have helped raise this issue, I kick myself for not being more aggressive on this point. We are now being told that we may be forced to do these projects due to…wait for it…the approval of the project list.

    Regarding the widening of 141, one point of justification for this project was that Peachtree Corners was set to widen their part of 141. Through my research, I learned that this was simply not true. It took a while, but eventually the City did admit that there were, in fact, no plans for widening south of the river. To me, this makes the widening of 141 an even greater folly. This is not a fear but a fact, and sometimes those are scary all by themselves.

    I have been and continue to seek other options and alternatives. I have written extensively about these options. One such article from February can be found here:
    http://www.preservejohnscreek.com/141_improvements

    I believe that if I can always learn more and then share what I have learned with you, then maybe you will join the effort in whatever way you can and together, we can “Preserve Johns Creek…Protect Our Quality of Life!”

    • Mark Venco says:

      John, you just proved my point about “Spin” shifting a post asking “What are your thoughts on creating a park in Johns Creek capable of hosting sports tournaments?” to transportation. Why?

      Here is the biggest reason why Cauley Creek will NEVER be a Sports Complex or Tournament Facility. It’s not financially feasible AND I’ll give you the detailed reason why!

      The biggest revenue generator is youth sports, not adult sports (we work too much).

      In order to have a Sports Complex, you need to have an ongoing, recurring stream of revenue through youth team registrations coming in throughout the year from baseball, soccer, football teams but it can’t happen.

      Why? Tournaments can ONLY be held when the kids are not in school during the fall and spring. Competitive/Select youth sports programs don’t run much during the summer, families go on vacation. It’s not financially feasible for the clubs to operate over the summer.

      Example: Youth Soccer – Clubs sign kids to one year contracts (two seasons – Fall/Spring). The contracts go from July to end of May. Tryouts are in early June for one week for the following season. Again, n summer tournaments. How about State Cup hosted by Georgia Soccer Association? Try telling the the teams from Valdosta or Savannah they need to drive to Johns Creek for the state championship tournament. That’s why they hold it in Columbus, Georgia. The facility is already their and it’s neutral ground.

      Bottom line: No kids, no teams, no registration fees, no tournaments, no revenue! No way a Sports Complex/Tournament fields would survive.

      When you voted for the Parks Bond, did it say anything on the ballot mention a Sports Complex or Tournaments or did you feel it was for residential parks?

      Cauley Creek will be the centerpiece that will include green space, benches, playgrounds, trails and yes some sports fields, (hopefully multi-use) mostly used by kids. Is that a bad thing for our “quality of life” having parents/grandparents going to watch their children have a good time?

      Details make a difference John. So please provide DETAILS why Cauley Creek:

      Is a negative on Quality of Life?
      Is meant for Visitors?
      Is meant to generate revenue as a Sports Complex?
      Doesn’t have the support of Johns Creek residents (despite the vote)?

      Regarding transportation since you brought it up.

      If you are so against road widening across the board, then why at the 8/21 city council meeting (time point – 56:40) do you, in your words:

      1 – Compliment the city council for “Asking the right questions” and
      2 – later talk about the “positive impact” of the road projects and that council is “on the right track”

      Do you believe that the transportation projects are right on track?

      It was to bad that you left the meeting right after your public comment announcing your candidacy for Post 3 and didn’t stay for the “Water Tower” new residential development case. Their were over 200 people their and it lasted for almost 3 1/2 hours.

      I look forward to your responses so us as residents can understand more about your comments.

      Best Regards,

      Mark Venco
      Candidate – Post 3

      • One Two Three Stop says:

        “When you voted for the Parks Bond, did it say anything on the ballot mention a Sports Complex or Tournaments or did you feel it was for residential parks?”

        Can we apply this same logic to TSPLOST? Who knew when they voted for this they were implicitly approving 141 and State Bridge to 6 lanes and Jones Bridge to 4 lanes?

        Should have been worded “Do you approve of widening and paving our roads because we cannot get the ITS to function the way the residents desire?”

        It’s never a good idea to base your decisions on what you “feel” government will do. You need it in writing and unambiguous.

        You’ll be sorry otherwise.

        • Mark Venco says:

          You are correct! As citizens we need to understand what we are voting for before we get into the voting booth. That goes for TSPLOST, Parks and candidates as well.

          There was 120+ page document before the vote for tsplost that was available to voters but most people aren’t aware. Is it the citizens fault, absolutely not!

          We lack the communication structure within our city in order to grow awareness of what the heck is going on around us. That’s where my proposal for residential nodes has gained traction and will address the gaps in communication within our city. I’ll be talking more about it at the next debates.

          We need Council Representatives that can actually come out with ideas to trigger dialogue, not just talk about the problems and not provide Solutions. Golden Rule in Corporate America, don’t bring me a problem without proposing a solution.

      • Toes in the Sand says:

        Mr Venco,

        You made a presentation on October 10th, 2016. Promoting 7 figure revenues (millions of dollars) for Cauley Creek.

        You seemed insistent that they get the field configuration correct so that this revenue could be generated.

        You also mentioned just how far from outside of Johns Creek we draw players into Cauley Creek.

        http://johnscreekga.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=186

        Viewers can watch at 17:31 Mr. Venco go into detail about the plans he brought to City Council, the revenue potential,and more.

        Not only have you flip-flopped, you seem to be running from your original proposal.

        Not that I can blame you.

        • Mark Venco says:

          Toes in th sand,

          I appreciate your constructive input and I’ll be very happy to answer.

          Regarding the revenue that I’ve mentioned, most recently at one of the last debates, I see revenue potential coming from registration fees from youth sports that are currently going to third-party Sports organizations outside our city where director level employees make up to $250,000 a year in annual salary.

          I would rather see the money spent by Johns Creek parents on select level Sports go back into the city of Johns Creek revenue bucket versus to those private clubs and potentially offset any risk of future millage rate increases. Let’s keep the money we spend within the city of Johns Creek .

          Registration for a single select youth soccer player is approximately $1,500 a year, times that by 750 players and there you have your $1 million at the very least that is being spent outside of the city of Johns Creek. That doesn’t include the recreational level registration fees of a few hundred dollars per player. I believe that money could remain within the city if we focused on a strong youth sports program within Johns Creek that would be run bye our recs and Parks Department that would also control the scheduling of activities within Cauley Creek.

          By outsourcing to a third party sports club any type of sports program would then run the risk of night time activities that would impact local homeowners in the area.

          My main goal is to create a youth sports program that’s under the administration of the city of Johns Creek so we eliminate the risk of third parties controlling those fields at Cauley Creek. I do not support a large number feels that would support tournament play as that is not what our residents want. I don’t dig my heels in so deep that I don’t listen to Residence.

          What I am very good at is coming up with ideas, creating dialogue, listening to the input in order to come up with the best desired solution for all the citizens/residence and in this case making sure our kids are not forgotten about.

          If you vote for me as a candidate you will get a council member that won’t avoid questions, will always respond and looks forward to the dialogue and is willing to listen. That’s not a bad thing.

          We need the ideas first, in order to come up with the best solution, dodging the questions like John Bradberry and only talking about the problems with no detailed solutions will not solve the problems we’re facing within the city of Johns Creek.

          Remember it takes four votes to affect change and an individual that is so contentious like John Bradberry has little possibility of winning over three other votes on Council. It’s better to have an individual like myself that is willing to come up with the ideas and listen and has the capability of presenting a constructive argument for residence in order to win over three other votes on Council.

          Best Regards,
          Mark Venco
          Candidate – Post 3

          • James Fitzpatrick says:

            Mark,
            Am I reading your comment right?
            “Registration for a single select youth soccer player is approximately $1,500 a year,”
            Where did that number come from (other than 1 million divided by 750 then round up)

            • Mark Venco says:

              James,

              For club soccer (select level, not rec.). Below is from the Concorde Fire FAQ webpage( See Below).

              My goal is to raise awareness and come up with ideas to start discussion to help our city develop.
              No spin, I’m just sticking to facts and if I don’t know something I will tell you. I know soccer, if you asked me about baseball, I would have to defer to another parent that is more familiar with what they have paid out over the years. Below is the FAQ question regarding cost

              Question:  What are costs for Academy compared to other clubs?

              Answer:  Cost for Academy players at Concorde fall within the average of most other clubs in the area (Approximately $1200-1400 per year) with payment plans and arrangements available to accommodate budgeted households. Included in your yearly fee is our Team Camp the first week of August.  This is a 4-day camp that is offered to all players to kick the season off with a bang!  A separate cost is made for tournaments throughout the year. Tournament costs range from $30-$70 per player per tournament independent of possible travel and lodging cost.  Our costs, unlike many clubs in the area are all inclusive, except for Tournaments.  Other clubs will charge monthly coaches fees in addition to their yearly fee. 

              Here is the full link:
              http://concordefire.com/teams/academy-faqs

              Another point of reference.

              Below is the link that shows the UFA soccer registration fee for their select program, $1795 for the year.

              This is the club that has the fields on the norsthside of McGiness Ferry that borders the Shakerag area that most of us have probably passed by at some point. Again, I know many Johns Creek parents who are paying these fees and Forsyth county is probably getting part of that money unless UFA has purchased the land recently from the county.

              Remember, in that case UFA controls the lights and the scheduling of events, not Forsyth county.

              For our residents at Shakerag, I think that is something we want to avoid with Cauley Creek. Concorde Fire has already submitted a petition to the city to gain access to Cauley Creek. I AM TOTALLY AGAINST THAT!

              http://forsyth.unitedfa.org/da-info

              Best Regards,
              Mark Venco
              Candidate – Post 3

          • Editor says:

            Mark,

            After the $1500 yearly registration fee, what is the cost per player to play soccer on a team?

            • Mark Venco says:

              The costs break down like this:

              Club Registrations (U9 to U19)
              Recreation: $100-$150 per season
              Select/Travel: $1300/yr to $3500/yr (elite level)

              Uniforms:
              Recreation: included
              Select: $150/yr

              Coaching Fees (Select Only)
              Coaching Fee: $75 to $100 per/mo. per player

              Tournaments (Select/Travel Only)
              Player Fee: $75 to $100 per player
              Meals:$50 per player
              Coaches Travel expenses: $35 to $50 per player

              It adds up. I would love it if we could keep these fees within the city versus paying it out to other clubs/cities.

              By the way, the coaches are mostly paid via 1099 IRS forms. Club executive management is where the big salaries are.

              Best Regards,
              Mark Venco
              Candidate – Post 3

    • John Bradberry says:

      Just to clarify, when I mentioned my question to Councilmember Zaprowski and him asking the Mayor that same question, I considered that a positive. Lenny voted against TSPLOST.

    • John Bradberry says:

      Just to make it easier for you, here is a link to the public comment I made in August.
      https://www.facebook.com/JohnBradberryJohnsCreekCityCouncil/?hc_ref=ARTCC_bRfJcewjLOlpmEq9c8n9GywvnJt8fLE63FBwb7WCkeeEjtkQx04i_NY60IIZM&fref=nf

      Thanks to Jaron for making this happen. While you are on our Facebook page, please like or share the clip. Also, for anyone interested, we are having a meet and greet at Country Club of the South hosted by Bob Gray. RSVP needed by 5pm to get you on the list at the gate. Details are also on the Facebook page. Thanks.

      • Preserve JC is a farce! says:

        If Bradberry thinks he can run on a partisan Big Government Republican slate, he will LOSE! Remember, Big Govt. Ossoff handily beat Socialist Boob Gray by a 3 to 1 margin, right here in Johns Creek. Be it Billboards, Dean Gardens, High Density, Zoning Variances, Park Bond Taxes, MARTA, Affordable Housing, etc., etc., his “strange bedfellows” Bodker and Zaprowski are/have been on the wrong side of the issues, ALWAYS.

        • @”Preserve JC is a farce!” – Please explain how Preserve Johns Creek is a “farce” OR perhaps you meant to say “force”. We certainly have not accomplished everything I would like, but we have tried and have some real dividends to show for it. Sometimes we are limited by time, manpower, and money. Could you make yourself available to help? I would like to talk with you.

          I am the only candidate in my race who has not made a partisan appeal to the residents of Johns Creek. I have strong support from voters across the political spectrum because so much of what is at stake is non-partisan. Our issues are more about common sense and accountability to the residents than anything else.

          Regarding Bob Gray, I am glad to have his support. He endorsed me, Stephanie Endres, Lenny Zaprowski and Mike Bodker. There have been endorsements by individuals in every combination among the different candidates. I am not running on anyone else’s record but my own. If you can point to a specific example of “Big Government” that I have been involved with, then I am glad to discuss it. If you examine the issues in more detail, you will find that I am a consistent advocate of government that is closest to the people. Thanks.

          • Vicki's Postcard says:

            Regarding party politics, even though I lean left, I didn’t appreciate it when I received a postcard saying to vote for Vicki because she’s a Democrat. People from outside John’s Creek or outside Georgia really do care a lot about us. NOT! I was shocked when she said what she said at the debate. Again, I’m somewhat liberal but I don’t want our John’s Creek election to be about anything other than John’s Creek.

            • John Hawkins says:

              What debate are you talking about? Are you saying that at a public forum she was asked about these postcards and she denied having anything to do with it? Wasn’t she a big Ossoff supporter? Wasn’t a lot of his backing also from out of the area? To coin a Hillary phrase “it requires the willful suspension of disbelief” to think that just spontaneously a flood of postcards and support from out of state democrats from flood into JC (a la Ossoff playbook) to help a candidate who was in the Ossoff campaign but she had NOTHING to do with it. I call BS on that.
              Normally politicians wait till theyre in office to start playing with the truth. Sad.

            • Vicki's Postcard says:

              It seems like the JCP would report on this partisanship that Vicki Horton is bringing into the race. You usually report on the important issues. This is a non-partisan race. It is important for residents to have all the facts.

          • Farce or a force, you tell us, Bradberry! says:

            So, who is “the consistent advocate …. to the people,” going to vote for (Post 1) – Capitalist Yang or Socialist Zaprowski?

            For the record:

            “Lovers of Big Govt., Higher Taxes, Higher Density, Manipulated Traffic Jams, Massive High-Intensity Tournament Parks(for MUSLIM non-citizens), etc.”- Bob Gray, Zaprowski, Davenport, Lin and Broadbent have voted against the people 90% of the time, ALONG WITH Billboard Bodker.

            But Stephanie Endres(who is for the people) has voted against this Socialist Bloc, about 95% of the time.

            Issure Yang WILL ALWAYS vote with Stephanie, if elected. Bodker-puppet Zaprowski DID NOT in the past.. and WILL Not, going forward.

            Again, your choice between these 2 candidates will tell us EVERYTHING we need to know about you. (Plain and simple).

            https://facebook.com/cricketinjohnscreek/videos/1200295486698491/

            https://facebook.comUSAIsmailiCricket/

  8. Mark Venco says:

    John, in case you missed some of the questions from above, I have re-posted them just to be sure you saw them:

    So please provide DETAILS why Cauley Creek:

    Is a negative on Quality of Life?
    Is meant for Visitors?
    Is meant to generate revenue as a Sports Complex?
    Doesn’t have the support of Johns Creek residents (despite the vote)?

    Thanks,
    Mark

    • E J Moosa says:

      The Park Plans were just that-plans- at the time of the vote on the Parks Bond. And yes there will be people not from Johns Creek that use Cauley Creek-we really do not know how many.

      The Parks Bond vote was just on a method of financing our Parks. Anyone reading more into that, such as approvals for certain concepts, is misleading themselves. I myself am for Parks but was against the Parks bond. I wanted us to self finance rather that waste our future tax dollars on interest payments.

      Are we not in the process of rebuilding a multi million dollar bridge across the river to connect to Gwinnett? Yes we are.

      Do you really think people will not be using that bridge? Yes they will.

      Have you ever been to Riverside/Azaela Drive in Roswell? It’s a local park along the River. It’s also a destination park for many who live outside of Roswell every day. Weekends? Good luck finding a parking space. And there are no tournament fields there. It’s just people wanting to get near the river for cookouts, cycling, playgrounds and exercise.

      What about the Chattahoochee River and Columns Drive in Cobb? Packed on weekends with folks not from Cobb, including me. And yes there are impacts from all of that traffic that affects those that live there.

      The Johns Creek residents who will be most impacted are those that live in Shakerag, every day, once it opens.

      So, yes it can have a negative impact on the quality of the life some residents wanted and sought when they bought in Shakerag.

      As for the Sports Complex, I believe there were council members and residents who were more than open to the idea and who pushed it, including you, Mark.

      Here’s what we do know at this point: Cauley Creek Park’s designs are far from finalized. We have an election that will have the winners voting directly on what Cauley Creek will become in the future.

      I know who was in favor of considering tournament parks and I know who was not. I have seen the council sessions, work sessions, and public comments.

      I heard the justifications made on why tournament parks were a good idea. And I disagree with that sort of thinking when it comes to parks in Johns Creek.

      So I will be voting accordingly to make sure there is not even an outside chance of Tournament Fields being built in Johns Creek.

      When did you change your mind and why? Most importantly, why would you not change it again?

      • Mark Venco says:

        Ernest, first well written and constructive and this will all come down to the planning.

        The first question I’ll be more than happy to answer is your last two.

        I been consistent on my stance and the most important thing to me is that residents have a voice in what happens in their local area, hence the residential node concept. Like I said before, the residents of Shakerag should have the most significant input to the design of Cauley Creek. That includes the number of fields.

        What I don’t like is that Johns Creek parents are spending the youth registration dollars outside of the City of Johns Creek. I want to see us develop a strong youth sports program within JC and keep the money within out city.

        That is my main driver. That doesn’t mean all fields throughout Cauley Creek. I’ll say it again, I won’t support that. When Directors at private soccer clubs are lining their pockets with big six digit salaries and the kids are treated like pieces of meat and teams are formed strictly for revenue purposes with the minimum amount of players on a team, that bothers me.

        Let’s keep the money in Johns Creek and hopefully that will reduce the risk of increased millage rates for our residents in the future.

        One more time, I won’t support a sports complex or tournament fields.

        Best Regards,
        Mark Venco
        Candidate – Post

  9. Disappointed says:

    Does venco think we are dumb? Is he misleading on purpose? Why does he keep asking these questions while so off? The bradberry chart and response clearly regarding a “Cauley Creek Sports Complex” but venco says “Cauley Creek”. Big difference. Details do matter and I’m disappointed in this most disagreeable venco

    • Mark Venco says:

      No, I don’t think your dumb, why do you say that? Healthy discussion is a good thing as long as everyone carries on the discussion respecting each other. Will i provide counter-arguments to the discussion (see below), absolutely, but I’m always open minded to listening to come up with the best solution The more input the better.

      Cauley Creek was never meant to be a Sports Complex and for the reasons I stated it could not be financially supported as a Sports Complex. John should stop misleading the voters.

      Putting in 4 multi use fields at 2.5 acres per field means utilizing 10 acres out of almost 150 acres, how is that a sports complex.

      10/150 acres means that less than 7% of the property would be sports fields. Even if you put in 6 fields that would be 10% of the property.
      That leaves 135 acres for other amenities. That is what I call Caley Creek Park

      A Sports Complex is dedicated sports fields for baseball, soccer, lacrosse, football, and many times with an indoor arena for indoor sports. That’s not what this is meant to be and I wouldn’t support that as a council member.

      To me it’s more constructive to understand how you think the Cauley Creek property should be utilized and gather input. I’m running for council as a public servant. Like I said, the more input, the better.

      Best Regards,
      Mark Venco
      Candidate – Post 3

  10. ccitizen777 says:

    Based on my observations of following various issues concerning Johns Creek for the last year, I feel that John Bradberry has the overall experience, understanding, temperament, knowledge and integrity to give the people of Johns Creek a real voice. I respect your comments Mark, but John has my vote.

  11. Christina says:

    Are you going to publish campaign money reports of the candidates like in the past? Hearing rumors that donations are coming from outside Johns Creek. If not going to publish them, where can we go to find those reports? Thank you.

Comments