A Bridge to Truth
The 2019 Whitehead Road bridge replacement brought Sugar Hill politics to a focal point. This article exposes the true nature of a mayoral candidate that is running for office for the fourth time.
Mayor Brandon Hembree’s opponent makes a bold claim in a recent post on her newest blog about the response she received from “government officials” in 2019 regarding the Whitehead Road bridge replacement.
In fact, those responses were so “thin” and “nonsensical” that she embarked on a journey spanning over six years of incredible claims against city officials, three attempts at getting elected to City Council and a current run for Mayor.
Well, what if we revisited those responses and you got to judge them for yourself? She didn’t actually provide them - so we will.
Before we do that, let’s set the table.
The Project Itself
The Whitehead Road bridge replacement project, which started in spring 2019 and wrapped up in fall 2019, became a hotbed of local discussion.
Here’s what the bridge looked like before the replacement.
And here it is after.
The bridge project was wholly a project of Gwinnett County Department of Transportation. The bridge had received a failing grade and was identified in the 2014 SPLOST transportation project list for replacement.
Below are two slides from a December 2015 presentation by Gwinnett County to a citizens’ project selection committee. (Full slide deck below.)
Bridge replacements are, without a doubt, a disruptive infrastructure project. Even under best case scenario, they will cause disruptions to typical traffic patterns. Because of the lack of connectivity of the typical street networks in suburban Atlanta, they become a major upheaval to the daily commutes for the local community.
The Need for Replacement
That said, failure of bridges result in catastrophic and often deadly consequences. The Whitehead Road bridge had been identified as a “failing” bridge by Gwinnett County. Then City Councilmember Brandon Hembree provided context to the bridge replacement.
The bridge had been subject to frequent scour (erosion around its structural components) and had failed in 1977 during spring storms.
Clearly the bridge needed replacement. As Whitehead Road is owned by Gwinnett County, they determined that replacement was necessary going back to at least 2014. Replacement was scheduled to begin in 2019.
Communication
While Gwinnett County had identified and begun design of the replacement, the county had not shared this information with the city. In January 2019, I noticed detour signs in the area and inquired with city staff about it.
I followed up with Gwinnett County about the impacts and relayed information to city staff.
Because of the nature of the project and the obvious impacts to our local community, I shared this information with the public via my social media.
As a result of this, the city took proactive steps to notify the community about the upcoming project. Below are a sample of the social media posts the city made regarding the project over several days in March 2019.
In addition, the AJC also printed several articles about the project.
The project was discussed at the March 2019 City Council meeting regarding utility relocation.
Nextdoor Social Media Response
While the social media discussion on Facebook was typical and reasonable, that was not the case on Nextdoor. Nextdoor is usually a hub of misinformation - particularly as it relates to local government. As expected, the discussion on this particular project took on a life of its own.
Here is the original post on the project from April 8, 2019:
Now, before we go any further, let’s go back to the recent accusation by Ms. Chambers on her blog.
Here is where Ms. Chambers (at the time, she was going by Amber Chambers-Lobonc) chimes in on the post.
Pretty aggressive language there. Some could even categorize it as a “crazy reaction” - “another good reason for the city government not to exist”. Keep in mind by this time that the city, local elected officials and local media had covered this extensively as previously documented. Pretty easy to find the answers - if you’re willing to do a very small amount of work. Or, if you have questions, simply ask someone at the city directly rather than speculate on social media.
Due to the way Nextdoor presents conversations, there is no nesting so it can be difficult to determine who is responding to whom on a post. But let’s keep going.
Remember - we’re looking for “City of Sugar Hill officials” giving “thin, non-sensical answers” about the project.
The first “city official” to weigh in from the city was then Downtown Development Authority (DDA) member Nic Greene. DDA members are volunteers.
The thread meanders into all sorts of different subjects pertaining to growth, taxes, county assessments among others for quite some time.
Nic Greene eventually weighs in again as the only “official” (if a volunteer DDA member is “official”).
The conversation continues for some time. Here is a sample.
Again, read the reasonable responses from Mr. Butts and then Ms. Chambers response to those. Mr. Butts is not a “city official” by the way - he is the husband of a former city employee who at the time had recently taken a new job with Gwinnett County in their Water Resources Department.
The conversation continues with Nic Greene weighing back in.
Are the aggressive responses Ms. Chambers is giving consistent with what has been said to her so far?
It continues now discussing the city election that would take place later in 2019.
The thread goes on for quite some time more - apologies for tone are given from both parties. Still, no other “city officials” have responded until I weigh in with this response on April 14, 2019.
If there’s something “thin” and “non-sensical” in that post, please point it out in the comments.
Let’s go back to Ms. Chambers’ current post where she mentions a private message from a former City Councilmember.
While he wasn’t named, she is almost certainly referring to former City Councilmember Marc Cohen. I asked Marc if he happened to still have that message. Here is what he sent me. From a timing standpoint, this message exchanges happens 3 days after the original post.
Is there a “very clear threat” in that from Marc? Perhaps Ms. Chambers was referring to a different message from someone else. Marc and I were the only two City Councilmembers to participate in the thread. I did not reach out to her privately. Marc says that was his only private communication he recalls with her regarding the matter.
Ms. Chamber’s even references it in a post April 13th - two days after the message. She doesn’t mention any clear threats about being smeared.
Marc eventually weighs in the public thread himself saying that he had reached out to Ms. Chambers to answer her questions. Marc’s post appeared on April 14th - 3 days after the private message to Ms. Chambers.
The thread continues.
Are you like me - still looking for the “thin” and “non-sensical” answers?
The remainder of the thread is fairly innocuous with some minor conversations about the then recently opened E-Center and a Planning Commission meeting.
This is pretty much the end of the conversation.
So, I ask - where is the crazy reaction? The thin, non-sensical answers? Here are the receipts.
To recap, the only “city officials” which responded regarding this project were Nic Greene (then DDA), Marc Cohen (then City Councilmember) and myself (a sitting City Councilmember).
Because of the nature of Nextdoor locking down posts to particular neighborhoods, below is the entire thread in the event you’re unable to access the actual Nextdoor post yourself which I linked at the top.
And just in case there’s any question about comments being deleted, here’s the April 16, 2019 version of the thread for completeness.
Conclusions
The conclusion is fairly self evident. Ms. Chambers does what she has done for six years - take a grain of truth (the community expressed legitimate concerns over the Whitehead Road bridge replacement) and turn it into something that it’s not.
This is how her stories are spun - and here are the receipts and evidence for all to actually read.
The only reason that I went to this effort is that she, now for the fourth time, is seeking public office. The highest office in our city. Ms. Chambers is a public figure seeking public office yet blocks anyone with a counterpoint to her views so responses directly to her aren’t possible. So much for transparency, openness and accountability.
Citizens deserve a Mayor who prioritizes collaboration and truth in communication. More importantly, the Mayor must be someone with integrity.
It is incumbent on us, the citizens of the City of Sugar Hill, to vote to make sure that happens.
In order to have a Strong Community, our elected officials should be accountable and transparent. But without honesty and integrity, there can’t be accountability and transparency.
So this is what started it all. Thanks for your indepth research to show us what happened with the bridge and the fallout from a project that unleashed such fury against the city for something the county was doing. Who’d have ever thought we’d be dealing with this still in 2025?
I am a fan of truth! I read research, not opinions! It’s a part of my job to know what’s right and what’s wrong in the world of medicine and the human body! I have trouble getting anybody to attend my classes, or my coaching, because they’re so busy believing they know everything there is to know! I always say “but what if you don’t?” The truth seems so irrelevant to the people who have already locked in their opinions. How do we get these truths out to the people who need them when they won’t come to anything to hear the truth?! I was hosting a fireside chat today, of course in the rain it’s not gonna happen, but I was certainly willing to have everyone inside to hear from our mayor, councilman Hicks, and candidate Samantha. Very few people were signing up because they like everything that’s going on so they don’t see that there’s an undercurrent about to sweep them away if they don’t take a stand for what they do love about our sweet city. They just assume everything is gonna be fine because it’s been fine. They love what’s happening. They go to the theater they go to the bowl. They don’t mind traffic because they understand that they’re not the only people who live in this city. But what they don’t understand is if they don’t get out and vote in favor of what they love they’re gonna lose it!