Clairmont Heights Residents Preparing Petition for Decatur Annexation
Decatur Metro | October 7, 2014Some residents in the Clairmont Heights neighborhood (outlined in red above, west of the Medlock neighborhood outlined in yellow) are preparing an annexation petition to submit to the City of Decatur prior to the October 13th deadline set by the city. From the Clairmont Heights Civic Association website…
From the CHCA board: Neighborhood residents may be aware that there is an active petition effort underway seeking support for an annexation into the City of Decatur for our neighborhood. (This is separate from the survey that Clairmont Heights Civic Association volunteers recently completed, and the petition effort is not an activity of the CHCA.) The petition is being pursued under a process described on the Decatur website at http://www.decaturga.com/index.aspx?page=660.
While it is unclear if the area in the petition will be the exact boundaries of CHCA, the organizers have consistently sought support in all parts of the neighborhood. While there are no guarantees, the organizers did receive indications that Decatur will consider petitions demonstrating strong support on each street included in the petition. This volunteer-driven process relies on neighbors participating on every street to reinforce the solidarity of the petition.
Decatur has set a deadline of October 13 for submitting petitions. Organizers in our neighborhood report that they may submit their petition even earlier than that. If you would like more information or are interested in signing the petition, contact Mark Knowles at or Mike Hall at .
Not sure how the addition of such a relatively distant stretch of residential would be of value to Decatur. Maybe if you threw in all the commercial property at Clairmont and North Decatur it would be worthwhile. Maybe.
The residential wouldn’t benefit CoD. And based on a quick look at Zillow, the average home price in that area is about $50k less than “lots” are currently selling for in Decatur, so I have to believe that a lot of current residents are tired of the predicament they find themselves in and are ready to move on. Of course it wouldn’t be so bad for them if they could cash in at CoD’s expense. All of the arguments about why the Parkwoods would be a good fit (valuable homes, proximity to downtown, etc.) simply don’t apply to this area, and I can’t see a single justification for CoD to consider this petition.
How many more students will this area bring in now and in the future?
What kind of negative number will the Rosser’s Report produce?
http://www.decaturmetro.com/2008/11/26/rossers-student-count-for-annexation-areas-revised/
http://www.decaturmetro.com/2014/10/06/decatur-school-enrollment-hits-all-time-high-as-predicted/
I am honestly starting to believe that CoD is enjoying a power play with CSD. Yes, it is true that CSD can’t dictate city decisions and that it is CSD’s job to find desks for all kids. But, it is crystal clear to anyone with a brain that we don’t have capacity for our current kids, not to mention new ones acquired by annexation. So, is it unreasonable to suspect these annexations might be, at least in part, retribution for CSD interjecting itself into the annexation discussion? In other words “You can’t tell me what to do” and “I’ll show you who is in charge”. I really am at a loss as to why these annexations are even on the table.
What about people there who adamantly do NOT want to be annexed? Will there be any opportunity for them to be heard?
That’s a really good question!
To those who disfavor annexation, unfortunately: the momentum is towards citihood. It is unlikely that our little pocket will be permitted to remain unincorporated while the areas all around us are incorporated into Decatur, Atlanta, or a newly formed city of Briarcliff/ Lakeside. So, from my perspective, the question is not “do you favor annexation?” The question is “Because our neighborhood will very soon be incorporated, do you want to petition to be incorporated into City of Decatur, a proven winner, or do you want to wait and be swallowed up into an experimental new city?”
Depends on the taxes.
Yep. By not signing the petition.
In the event that Decatur agrees to include this area into the annexation map, it is put on the ballet in 2015 for referendum so all registered voters have the opportunity to be heard then. But, as I said earlier, I don’t think this neighborhood will remain unincorporated much longer. Lakeside will swallow us up unless we are invited to join Decatur.
The only way it would be on a city-wide referendum would be if legislation were passed by the General Assembly to that effect.
Agreed. My 12:41 comment was in response to the person in the ~unincorporated~ portion who asked when his/her opportunity to weigh in on annexation would be.
Common sense would say CoD has no interest in annexing this area, but considering past annexations and the recent vote on “Can’t We All Just Get Along” dollars I feel I need to ask:
What about people currently in the city limits? Will there be any opportunity for them to be heard?
So these guys are contiguous to City of Decatur via Superior?
Yes, in fact, all of the houses along N. Decatur Road from the lot just west of Superior to about halfway between Wendan Dr. and Suzanne Dr. are already inside the City of Decatur completely. And, many of the lots behind them are partially in and partially out. So a good bit of Clairmont Heights and Medlock are contiguous. You can see where on the city map here:
http://www.decaturga.com/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=26
Sorry if my post is pedantic, but I live inside the city on N. Decatur (hence my name) and people always forget about us.
Yes. That northern doohickey on the city map that contains the stretch of Superior between Scott and N Decatur. I have wondered how that came to be in Decatur.
Lets go for 10,000 kids in the schools by 2025! We can do it!
Thank you for your interest in reading this article. Please note that it is inaccurate. If you have any interest in the actual process please contact me directly at .
Can you simply post information or a link to something describing the process accurately so everyone can be properly informed? Presumably there is an attempt to present a petition by 60% of the property owners asking to be annexed, encroaching on MANA by taking in Willivee Drive and Scott Circle as a surprise to some of those folks. Feel free to clarify.
Thank you for your note. The annexation process is outlined by the City of Decatur at this link: http://www.decaturga.com/index.aspx?page=660
As part of its 2014 annexation master planning process, the City of Decatur is currently accepting petitions to request annexation as well as to request not to be annexed. The petition discussed in this article includes areas with substantial voter and homeowner support that are not necessarily congruent with the actual map shown. The area seeking the petition is contiguous to the City of Decatur as required. The petition will have substantial support, be an area of efficient municipal service ability, and provide a desirable addition to the City of Decatur Schools without a significant impact but where parents are willing to serve and students seeking to excel at the highest level.
“provide a desirable addition to the City of Decatur Schools”
I am still not clear on how current CoD residents benefit from adding more kids to the school system. Is the benefit that we will feel good because we did something nice for someone else – provide annexed homeowner’s an opportunity to send their kids to the great CoD schools and provide them with a financial windfall in the form of a significant overnight increase in their property value?
The city schools are already jam packed. And part of the charm of Decatur is the small town feel and walkable neighborhoods. Is the goal now to expand into suburban sprawl?
We could change the slogan from Berkeley/Mayberry to Decatur the New O.C.
Why not stay on the sidelines and let Atlanta, Briarcliff, Lakeside, Avondale etc scoop up the unincorporated areas.
Someone please explain.
Yeah, 10,000+ kids by 2020. 25% school tax. 3 bedroom/2 baths [1200 square feet] Ranch houses worth 1 million dollars.
Hey, cool. We get Medlock Park. Can’t we go a little further and get the school too?
Yes, please take every scrap of our neighborhood. We don’t cherish or use those places ourselves, so have at it.
(I get the feeling that is written in the sarcasm font.)
It does seems wrong to try and take the park with the CH neighborhood.
Also, to annex a bunch of residential without the commercial is a non-starter at this point.
I don’t think Decatur needs to jump N. Decatur Rd.
And although a petition may be signed by 60% of the voters/property-owners, Decatur still can say “no, thanks!”
It already has jumped N Decatur. The first few houses on North Superior are already COD.
No, NO, NO, NO. This effort has no benefit to the City of Decatur or its citizens. Stop this annexation effort. Only areas of majority commercial from now on. No.
Thank you!
Yes, Decatur, just take all the commercial properties supported by residents of Clairmont Heights and Medlock Park, and leave us with none. We’d be MORE than happy to have the money we spend at Publix and all those other businesses benefit COD and CSOD, instead of our own neighborhoods/schools.
I don’t believe this matters, does it? If Publix or any other commercial property moves from the county to a municipality, the money you spend (i.e. sales tax) continues to go to the county and is subsequently divvied up the same way. (Steve, jump in if I’m wrong.)
You have a lot to learn about internecine warfare, my friend.
No comment on whether or not it’s a workable or fair system. Just that the manner of collection and distribution doesn’t change based on a commercial property being annexed.
Yes, but you are injecting fact and reason into a discussion that stays much more lively if fueled primarily by assumptions and reflexive responses.
Damn. You’re right. Let me rephrase: Decatur will annex you, steal your money, and entomb your children to power their posh, newly refurbished schools, a la The Matrix. Mark my words!
Truth. Wars between necines are the worst!
You are correct on the sales tax issue. With the exception of a small portion of the E-SPLOST which goes to CSD. COD (nor any other city for that matter) gets no direct sales tax revenue.
Not true (or, actually, it’s only partially true.) If the commercial properties are annexed into COD, the commercial owners would not have to pay any more DeKalb County School Board related taxes– their taxes would go 100% to the City of Decatur schools. The commercial properties would still pay some amount of tax to the County, but it would be a fraction of their total property tax.
+1
If Clairmont Heights residents want to annex into Decatur, that is their right to attempt it. But the decision will hinge on whether the people of Decatur, through their elected city commission, want to take them and there is NO indication that is the case. The statement by the organizers that they received “indications that Decatur will consider petitions” is pretty flimsy. Nothing in writing; nothing official. The annexation law requires the petition get 60% of the voters AND 60% of the property owners to sign — and they are going to complete that in one more week? Good luck with that. My view is this is a huge distraction from the only viable option which is to join a city of Briarcliff-Lakeside in which your schools remain in DeKalb and avoid an impossibly messy merger with the Decatur city school system.
“Decatur will consider petitions” Consideration is one thing; acceptance is something entirely different.
That’s true in principle, but the City has had a “We Will Annex” sign up for years. First creating highly irregular boundaries, and now “to clean up” the boundaries. Certainly the obvious fact that these are detrimental to CSD, and against the express will of CSD, has made no impact. (Also therefore in clear violation of their own Strategic Plan.)
Until voters tell them to stop, I don’t see that they will stop. Protect your schools, protect your property values, protect against tax increases. Tell them to stop.
Completely agree. Why does the City Council continue to approve these residential annexation petitions? What am I missing? I see no benefit to the city.
The “we will annex” sign is definitely true. I know Decatur has always wanted more commercial, that the tax ratio between commercial and residential is out of whack, and that the schools are already too full. The city needs no more pure residential annexations. However, Parkwood slipped on in back in the spring, and that was essentially the entire neighborhood. I still don’t know what that was about. It’s like there is a hidden reason that no one will share.
I hope the city does not annex this neighborhood – it’s all residential, and where does it end? Something is always contiguous to the city. Should we annex all the way to other city borders, just keep on going? Why? Because some other city will get it? Who gives a rip.
I realize that a lot of neighborhoods don’t want to end up in a new city, but Decatur cannot accept everyone in that situation. A large part of the city’s charm is that it is small, compact, walk-able, etc. This will fade if we stretch into more suburban neighborhoods farther and farther away. I’m sorry that many neighborhoods in unincorporated DeKalb are anxious about the future, but in no way is it Decatur’s problem.
Citizens have spoken to the city commissioners about their concerns over more annexation, but the commissioners seem not to hear. I really don’t get it. The city commissioners also don’t listen to the school board and CSD, which is a real shame.
Does any of City Commissioners own property in the Areas of annex? Does any of the City of Commissioners own any stock in the Commercial companies that are the in the Areas? Walmart Stock, McDonald';s Stock, LA Fitness, Goodyear, Publix, Petco, etc?
Oh man, Decatur has officially jumped the shark. Now if the Mickey D’s at Clairmont & N. Decatur is annexed it will move the stock price?
WAKE UP, SHEEPLE!
I worry about you, Scotty. I worry a lot.
+1 Maybe someone should tell McDonald’s to petition for annexation. Their stock performance has been lackluster for a while.
“Decatur has officially jumped the shark.”
If jumping the shark means we get AJC-style comments here now, you might be right!
It’s Obummer’s fault!
OK, but is dummocrat or dumbocrat? The trolls really need to come to a consensus on the multiple spellings of these terms. Otherwise I totally miss the insults because I’m too busy shaking my head at all of the perceived typos
All I can say is that I don’t want to see COD spending a dime on sidewalks for newly annexed areas until all of the current COD streets have sidewalks. I don’t care if they have to pay off all the sidewalk opponents for the loss of “their land” (not).
I wonder what will happen if areas stay unincorporated. What will become of those neighborhoods?
In any thing that goes on in the world always follow the money. How will the money be spent? Who is getting the money? Annexation is all about money.
The population in City of Decatur is only 20,000. City of Decatur needs more kids so they can shape the future for City of Decatur. Every house hold needs to have at least 2 kids in them. Once the kids have left the nest. It is time for two more kids to replace them. City of Decatur needs to be Kid City that everyone know. So bring in more kids.
Just to summarize Clairmont Height’s predicament:
1. City of Atlanta is annexing our high performing elementary school, Fernbank.
2. City of Decatur is “jumping North Decatur Road” to annex our neighborhood’s commercial property.
3. Assuming COD is successful in its commercial annexation, we will not be contiguous to the City of Atlanta’s annexation of Fernbank. COD’s commecial annexation therefore precludes our ability to annex along with Fernbank into COA.
Our neighborhood is not asking for an act of charity in seeking COD annexation. Instead, we’re using the democratic process to lobby COD not cherry pick out our commercial property and leave us behind. We have long been good neighbors with COD, and they admittedly want the commercial part of our neighborhood. So I don’t get the hate here.
It’s not hate. It’s just that your neighborhood isn’t needed whatsoever within the city of Decatur – it’s just not desirable. We don’t need residential. At all. Tax base is already too heavy in residential. I’m sorry all of the cityhood initiatives are taking place and are putting you in a tough position, but that doesn’t mean Decatur has to take you. We just don’t need to be saddled with more residential.
“So I don’t get the hate here.” — It goes with the [blog] territory, so if you really want in to Decatur, be prepared to either mock it or ignore it.
Context is everything. I could be wrong, but I’ll bet it would be pretty interesting to take the sub-population comprising the loudest squawkers (against letting you or anybody else in) and plot their level of vehemence against how long they’ve lived in the city of Decatur. Everybody might want to take a breath and remind each other that the extraordinary quality of the school system along with many other aspects of municipal Decatur that they cherish, didn’t just happen by divine providence. Decatur is where it is today because city leaders (and a boatload of followers in the guises of homeowners, business people, volunteers, parents and all-around good neighbors) have managed to make more smart moves than dumb moves. Nothing happens, or has happened, overnight; it’s the work of a generation. Back in the 1980s, nobody could see around enough corners to know for sure how things would pan out by now. But they had imagination, determination and perhaps most importantly, found ways to be comfortable with change and the unknown. They read the weather as best they could, plotted a course and tried to watch out for uncharted hazards.
Guess what. The world around us just keeps changing and morphing and being scary. Maybe people who arrived recently to find things peachy and keen, don’t realize their own and their neighbors’ capacity for keeping Decatur great even as it morphs into the next version of itself. I have no idea what the next version might look like. And nobody else will either, who can’t see past their own fear.
+1
Silly STG. Have you no shame? It’s ALL ABOUT THE KIDS!!!
Seriously, do you even dare make this about newcomers vs, old timers? I get censored every time I even try that! Move to Dunwoody? I wish! Ugh….
+1
Where’s the “we’re going to neighbors after this” T-shirt?
+ All I’se Gots to Give.
And good news, STG. Even though you’ve moved on, I’ve been scouring state law to find a way for us to annex you — just you — back into the city. It will likely involve all residents holding hands and forming a human chain from the city limits down to your new place, and then remaining in that position in perpetuity. Bathroom logistics remain to be worked out but it should be a good community building exercise and remind everyone that, at the end of the day, community is comprised of people. Not Excel spreadsheet cells.
I’ll volunteer to be part of that there chain, Scott!
Y’all are mighty sweet, but… no, thanks.
That said, this human chain exercise idea has legs, maybe. Organize it to encircle the current city limit of Decatur. Have people who categorically oppose annexation face inward, and those who think it has a place in discussions about Decatur’s future face outward. People between the ages of 5 and 18 are free to move back and forth, inside and outside; everyone else has to stay put for half an hour. Then everybody turn around and face the opposite direction and stay there for half an hour. Then everybody walk home.
Great perspective, Small Town Girl. I will not let the loud squawkers dampen my affection for COD or optimism that this is a shared problem that can be resolved through mutual cooperation. (My spouse is a frequent reader/ occasional contributor to this blog, but I don’t usually read the comment sections.)
“City of Atlanta is annexing our high performing elementary school, Fernbank.” Huh ?
^yes, Steve. Clairmont Heights has been in the Fernbank elementary school district since it was built in the 50s. There is a movement to annex Fernbank into City of Atlanta, along with much of the Druid Hills neighborhood. (COA is not as far into its annexation process as COD is.)
So, imagine the Clairmont/ N Decatur Road intersection as four quadrants, all currently unincorporated. Fernbank is in the SW quadrant, and Clairmont Heights is in the NE quadrant. COD’s current annexation plan is to annex the commercial in the NE quadrant, but leave Clairmont Heights unincorporated. This severs our neighborhood from Fernbank and would prevent us from annexing into Atlanta. Bluntly: we lose Fernbank because of COD’s commercial annexation plan.
So, our neighborhood was surveyed and overwhelming supports the plan we are currently pursuing, that is, Clairmont Heights supports the annexation of its commercial property into COD because we see the (overwhelming) benefit of our joining the City of Decatur, even though it means losing our beloved elementary school. However, if COD is not interested in annexing our neighborhood, we will execute Plan B, which is take steps to stay with Fernbank, which in turn would (in my opinion) halt the COD’s ability to annex the commercial property it seeks. Let’s work together on this, COD residents, it’s in our mutual best interest. You need our commercial, and we’d love to join your fine city.
(Here’s where someone responds with”10,000 children!” and “McDonalds!”)
Not that anyone has asked, but I’d love for y’all to keep your commercial and not join CoD. It’s crappy that CoD just wants to grab commercial. We’d like it, yes, but we shouldn’t go about it in that way.
I’m pretty sure Fernbank Elementary would still be part of DKalb County schools. I don’t see the county just willingly handing it over to APS. it’s one of DeKalb’s best elementary schools, as you well know.
Unfortunately no. The form of annexation proposed by the Druid Hills advocates would take Fernbank from Dekalb County to Atlanta City Schools by referendum, which does not require Dekalb County approval. It has precedent in Georgia and the procedure has been tested and blessed by the appellate courts.
Oh Marlbey, that is awful. With so many school jurisdictions – all of the counties and then several cities (Marietta has a city system in addition to Atlanta and Decatur, not that Marietta is relevant here) – it gets messy when annexation conversations start taking place. All of these cityhood initiatives are kind of a mess and are causing cities to try to grab land everywhere they possibly can, figuring there will be no choice later. It doesn’t make for the best decision-making. While I still don’t believe that the addition of your neighborhood is necessarily beneficial to Decatur, I now understand the point of view from y’all’s perspective. What a mess. Perhaps the city will take this into consideration when making a decision about Clairmont Heights. For your sake, I hope y’all are annexed.
Marlbey, it isn’t YOUR commercial property. Clairmont Heights is a residential neighborhood.
Missing the point. If the tax revenue is redirected to COD, then CH has lost “its” commercial property.
Don’t think so, but you and I are each free to interpret his post as we see fit. See his Plan B in which he mistakenly thinks he has some sort of leverage or bargaining power.
Whatever. Anyhoo I suspect the lines are being drawn on maps and the horsetrading is underway. Smoky room optional.
“Ours” in the sense that it is currently in our school district, supporting our schools with its property taxes, and adjoining our residential neighborhood. The COD proposed annexation cuts it out of our neighborhood with surgical precision, so that the tax revenue will go to COD schools instead. If annexed by COD, they will no longer pay any taxes to Dekalb County schools. (I urge anyone who doubts this to look it up, because there seems to be some misinformation on this point.)
Yes, we have bargaining power. The commercial properties oppose annexation, and successfully defeated COD’s past annexation attempts. If Clairmont Heights annexes in to COD, then the commercial comes in to COD with us, guaranteed. Remember, the state legislature has to approve the annexation. Will the legislature permit COD to 1) cherry pick out commercial properties to support their own (well funded) schools, 2) leaving behind adjoining residential properties whose schools were previously supported by those same commercial properties, when 3) the commercial properties themselves oppose annexation? Not if the past is indication.
(Also, I’m a “she,” not “he.”)
“If Clairmont Heights annexes in to COD, then this commercial comes in to COD with us, plain and simple. ”
Assuming you are already contiguous, this is simply not true. Unless you or one of your neighbors owns the commercial property, you don’t vote for the commercial property, nor do you speak for the owners of said property. They can’t be included in your 60% method as they aren’t part of your neighborhood. CoD could accept your petition and then still be unsuccessful in it future attempts to annex this commercial property. If any of my statements in this paragraph are untrue, please prove me wrong as I may reconsider. Otherwise, you are mistaken or being dishonest.
And you have framed your argument in the wrong context (albeit this was likely intentional as it doesn’t hurt your argument). It is not CoD vs unincorporated DeKalb. In all likelihood that property will be with city limits within a couple of years, and the only question is which city. Given that reality, why should a yet TBD city be given the first draft pick over an established city that is next door? Why should CoD sit idle just so Briarcliff or Lakeside or whatever can claim it, especially as it is much closer to CoD than any of the other proposed cities. Any decisions regarding those properties will have a much larger impact on CoD than the other HOA governments currently being pursued. So, if/since it will be annexed soon, CoD is the logical choice.
Let me add that it is unfortunate that some neighborhoods MIGHT be negatively impacted (as STG said above, change alone isn’t negative), and I might be making the same arguments if I were in your shoes. But, that doesn’t mean that CoD should have to take the bad with the good, especially when the only true negative you are facing is the unknown.
What is an HOA government?
A city, often new, that doesn’t have a city hall, police force, etc. For ex., Peachtree Corners contracts for almost everything from Gwinnett. But, they have complete control of their land use plan, zoning, etc.
I’m confident the state legislature will not allow an unincorporated, thin commercial strip surrounded by COA and COD residential.
I agree with you that this isn’t an incorporated v. unincorporated issue. (I’ve never framed it that way.) It’s a “which school district gets funding” issue. COD wants more commercial tax revenue for its school district, at the expense of Dekalb County Schools. In contrast, if formed, the city of Briarcliff/ Lakeside will still be in Dekalb County Schools (GA law prohibits newly incorporated cities from forming their own school districts.) So, if the commercial districts stay outside of COD, they continue to support the same school district (Dekalb) that they’ve always supported, even if the commercial is incorporated into a newly formed city.
Maybe I’m an optimist, but I don’t see the GA legislature allowing affluent COD schools to snag the commercial from impoverished Dekalb County schools unless there is also neighborhood support. Fortunately, COD currently has our support, if it wants it.
But, your comments do raise an interesting question. Could the Briarcliff/ Lakeside advocates in the legislature join forces with these commercial districts to oppose COD annexation? Possibly. In that case, Clairmont Height’s support of COD annexation is valuable for in any fight there, too.
I also quibble with your assertion that our “only true negative is the unknown.” I’ve commented about our Fernbank woes at length here. The short version is: COA proposes an annexation that includes our current school, Fernbank. COD’s proposed annexation severs Clairmont Heights from the proposed COA annexation. COD’s annexation of commercial means that we are not contiguous and lose our beloved school. It is hard to overstate this serious blow to our neighborhood. It is is what ignited our annexation action, to begin with.
Here is the problem with your argument – you don’t own or control the commercial property. Given the speed with which CoD has moved in the past, it could approve your annexation petition long before the state legislature reconvenes next year. If that were to happen, notwithstanding your guarantee, the commercial property owners could still fight annexation altogether, or they could opt for Lakeside or Briarcliff or another city if, for example, those cities have lower taxes. Although your neighborhood and the commercial property are physically close, they don’t necessarily have to end up in the same municipality.
Here is another problem – you are putting the cart before the horse. Even if those commercial properties and your hood end up in the same city, if nothing else, the annexation should happen simultaneously. You are asking CoD to take the bad first in the hopes the good follows. Notwithstanding some recent decisions, our officials aren’t that stupid (at least, I hope they aren’t).
“But, your comments do raise an interesting question. Could the Briarcliff/ Lakeside advocates in the legislature join forces with these commercial districts to oppose COD annexation? Possibly. In that case, Clairmont Height’s support of COD annexation is valuable for in any fight there, too.”
You are assuming that the positives for CoD from the commercial would outweigh the negatives from your residential. I am not sure that is the case, and if this is a package deal (which it isn’t), we might just say thanks, but no thanks.
Sigh…
Assuming that you have success in offering up Clairmont Height’s support to COD in exchange for annexing “your” commercial properties, the Medlock neighborhood (which, by geographic boundaries, is rather inextricably linked to Clairmont Heights) ends up with limited or perhaps no options in the same fashion that Clairmont Heights fears so deeply.
Who is making those “we’ll still be neighbors after this” bumper stickers and t-shirts? I’m ready to place an order…
The bitterness of comments reminds me of the CSD school closures, although it doesn’t seem to have reached the same fever pitch. Your idea of “we’ll still be neighbors after this” t-shirts is a great idea. It’s human nature for people to demonize those on the other side of issues.
“Not if the past is indication”
If new cities in DeKalb weren’t imminent, I would agree. But, IMHO, I think the past may be of little use as precedent as there weren’t massive cityhood pushes surrounding this area last time. Unless the political environment in northern DeKalb drastically changes soon, someone is going to cherry pick the properties – the only question is who.
You might be right. Last year, a key stumbling block was the inability of the different proposed cities to agree on boundaries. Unless I’m misunderstanding what I’ve read, that won’t happen next year because the legislature will draw the boundaries if no agreement is reached. Of course, there will still have to be votes, but I think if anything there is a stronger desire to break from DeKalb now.
“Hate” was too strong. But there’s a whole lot of sarcasm directed towards our neighborhood in the comments above, which I find disappointing given the 50+ years we have happily been neighbors. And the comments above also suggest a surprisingly strong sense of entitlement to take the commercial portions of our neighborhood and leave behind anything that is not currently deemed needed. Make no mistake, the issue has been called into question by COD’s current annexation efforts, which propose to separate us from Fernbank, and not by some vague, undefined cityhood initiative which could be occurring in the future.
I am probably pointing out the obvious in stating that our commercial area is not anxious to get annexed into COD. The commercial may oppose annexation in the legislature, as they have in the past. Bringing our neighborhood in with the annexation virtually guarantee the commercial annexation. (Which may be a compelling reasons why the COD should consider welcoming us, if they are not already.)
Come on everyone. Say it with me. City of Decatur needs more kids. Kids will control the world someday. City of Decatur needs to be the haven that provides the best education for the Future kids of the World. Bring in more kids. Bring in more kids. Need to get to the 10,000+ kids by 2020.
It is comments like yours that are really off-putting to those of us who willingly help pay for the school system. As my revenue positive household stands by and watches this debate unfold, where it always revovles around a single interest of the school system, it makes me want to rent out my large house to the largest family I can find. Thereby I get to reap the continued rise in my property values and crowd the school system even more.
I ask that you consider the possibilty that some residents may be pro or against annexation for reasons other than the school population. If you drive people like me away from the discussion by a one-sided argument, you will likely add to your problem rather quickly.
I have children in school and do oppose annexation – but not just bc of the school situation. If I didn’t have kids, I’d still be against the annexation of residential that is that far from and so different in nature than the rest of the city. In addition, the N Decatur Road / Clairemont intersection is not aesthetically pleasing. It’s ugly. And it’s not “rightfully ours.” Y’all can keep it!
Interesting perspective, how is it less gorgeous than commerce and church in terms of intersection beauty? I can honestly say in all my years I’ve never really seen an intersection that I would consider aesthetically pleasing. Even in DC where roundabouts have grand statues in the middle, all I really see is a mechanism to shuffle vehicles. I doubt I’d even lightly take into consideration such an intersection beauty scale when trying to decide where to live, but it take all kinds I guess.
Back in 1960s when candidates us to boast about having big houses and two car garages for big families. Now in the 2010s it should be about having big families and lots of kids in the City Schools. This is the time to get with the City Officials and say the city is all in for more kids to get excellent SAT scores. To be the future leaders of the world. Bring in more Kids. Still need 10,000 by 2020.
I grew up in the COD and graduated from DHS in mid 70″s. I know very well the history & transitions that have taken place over the years. The quality of the schools matter the most. In my day, CODS were not very good with very few new students moving in. Home prices in the city were much lower, while home prices in the DHHS, Shamrock, Briarcliff, Clarkston, Avondale, (and the gem of them all – Lakeside) areas were substantially higher. Whatever decisions are to be made, do not degrade the school system, as that will influence the value and desirability of any neighborhood. I don’t know if adding more students helps or hurts Decatur schools, so be certain before actions are taken. I wish my wife would give me (us) the thumbs up to move back to COD but she won’t leave Cobb County right now!
Before emotions take over, please look at http://www.decaturga.com/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=5373 and you will see that the decision by City of Decatur to lay claim to Clairmont Heights was made long ago. In what is described as a ‘modern annexation’ Clairmont Heights is accessible only from North Decatur Road from the South/North, and Clairmont from the West. See http://www.decaturga.com/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=2105, Decatur has already annexed the only 3 entrances to Clairmont Heights from the North/South. The current Decatur map has a very odd, protruding section of residential to the direct North which – curiously – takes the three entrances to Clairmont Heights and first homes, then stops, abruptly. Putting this perspective, Decatur is about 2 miles by 2 miles, yet it extends a half mile North (25% of its width) to reach up into Clairmont Heights today. So the idea that it would include that neighborhood is not only reasonable, it appears to have been contemplated and planned (else why take the entrances??)
Decatur’s current map leaves the only entrance to Clairmont Heights from the West through Desmond (limited also because Emory is directly adjacent and non-municipal major thoroughfares limited – only major thoroughfares not in a city limits are circuitous routes Druid Hills Road, Scott/Lawrenceville hwy). The result is any city other than Decatur would have to cross City of Decatur jurisdiction for police, fire, sanitation, and other services – not optimal and potentially preclusive.
Decatur’s prior annexation actions have resulted in effectively preventing Clairmont Heights from being annexed by any other city entity, with the exception of Atlanta (but the annexed Clairmont Heights entrances remains). Clairmont Heights is the only neighborhood for which Decatur has taken this approach, and it was done long ago. Medlock does not currently have this problem (but would if Decatur’s annexation plan moves forward, as Decatur proposes the same thing for the Medlock North/South entrances).
In essence this prior annexation serves as both a message and a substantive barrier in that Clairmont Heights annexation options are very, very limited due to Decatur’s prior annexation.
For those (few – I see only one or two vocal participants in this deliberation) who would oppose Clairmont Height annexation to Decatur, the question you should pose to your elected officials is: (1) why did Decatur annex the only 3 entrances to Clairmont Heights (and refrain from doing so with Medlock and other neighborhoods surrounding Decatur). (2) is it fair (right, legal?) for Decatur to annex entrances to neighborhoods without annexing those neighborhoods themselves, (3) is it fair (right, legal?) for Decatur to annex the businesses serving neighborhoods, obtain those tax revenues, and preclude those neighborhoods from other annexation, but without serving the neighborhoods themselves.
If the answer is that it is indeed fair to annex the neighborhood entrances and businesses without annexing the neighborhoods, then Decatur is a very much different type of community that the one I have come to know over the past 20 years. Honestly, I think rather this is the position of very few who do not possess the facts above.
Please report back your leader’s responses, it would be very interesting to know why Decatur would foreclose entrances to Clairmont Heights, and then not include Clairmont Heights in the initial annexation map. I think the answer lies in the democratic principles of self determination, which require Decatur to either annex the area or relinquish the entrances.
I found the property value comment (above) interesting if not provocative. There is a lot for sale in Clairmont Heights with a creek running through it for $ 170,000, if someone is interested in that (no home). In Clairmont Heights non-Decatur we have recent sales in $ 700,000, $ 500,000, and $ 400,000. This area is served by Fernbank Elementary (at least for now) and built separately from the neighborhoods surrounding. Compare that to two sub-$200,000 recent sales in the Decatur side of the neighborhood (with homes). I don’t think the facts bear out the comment, but, this took me maybe 10 minutes research. Its hard to make a bright line comparison like the comment above, when the actual data is considered.