Mayor Jim Baskett Comments on Decatur Annexation Legislation

After we learned a few more details yesterday of the partial Decatur annexation legislation submitted by Georgia State Rep. Karla Drenner on Monday, we followed up for reaction from the Decatur City Commission to get their thoughts on the partial annexation and the new inclusion of the neighboring residential neighborhood of Decatur Terrace.

Decatur Mayor Jim Baskett responded this morning…

A lot is happening with our legislative agenda, and decisions are being made very quickly.
We did not have the option of moving forward with our overall map and plan.
The map that is before the legislature now has a great deal of commercial and is a large part of what we set out to annex.
Going forward we will see where we are at the end of this legislative session and determine how we will move forward with the rest of the plan. An updated annexation master plan report will be available after the session is over.

Commissioner Patti Garrett echoed the Mayor’s statements and emphasized that “we were unable to move forward with our original map but still have a significant amount of commercial property included and Representative Drenner requested the addition of Decatur Terrace.”  She added “I think we have all been made keenly aware that the legislative process for getting annexation considered is a complicated and complex process.”

I’m going to see if its possible to get a commercial/residential breakdown of the current partial annexation area.  Stay tuned.

63 thoughts on “Mayor Jim Baskett Comments on Decatur Annexation Legislation”


  1. Thanks for following up, DM. Also, has anyone seen a map of Drenner’s proposed annexation area? I have read that it includes portions of the original Decatur annexation Area B (obviously plus Decatur Terrace now) but excludes Suburban Plaza. What does it look like?

    As a CoD resident along N. Decatur Road, I am concerned that we could end up with three different jurisdictions in charge of N. Decatur Road between the Clairemont intersection and Scott Blvd. (possibly City of Atlanta, Decatur and DeKalb County).

    Is Suburban inside anyone’s map, now? City of Atlanta?

  2. a poor player
    That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
    And then is heard no more: it is a tale
    Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
    Signifying nothing.

      1. My favorite cartoon of all time -2 vultures sitting in a desert- one says to the other,”Patience, hell. I’m going to kill something.”

        Decatur had a plan and failed to commit to it. Again. In the mean time, North Decatur, Scott Blvd, Church St. is being redeveloped and rezoned. While Decatur fiddles its thumbs.

        Go away, Decatur. Just go away.

        1. One of my favorite Far Side cartoons:
          two guys are sitting in Hell and one is whispering to the other, I hate this place.

        2. I’ll play. Mine is “Midvale School for the Gifted” where the kid is pushing with all his might to get in. Sign on the door says “Pull”. 🙂

          1. I LOVE the gifted school one! Thank you for reminding me about it – you gave me a good Friday morning laugh.

  3. Unbelievable. An updated master plan will be available after the bill passes and the damage is done? Why did the school board and citizens not get a chance to be apprised of the new territory added on the map or the commercial which was subtracted before this was sent to committee. If Drenner “requested” that Decatur Terrace be added, why didn’t Baskett say “no”, or at least let the school board and citizens know what was going on.

    This whole annexation thing has been shady from the start, with hidden agendas and backroom deals. They should kill the whole thing. Just like with Parkwood, our commission says one thing and does another.

  4. This CoD citizen & voter is not pleased. Bringing in +100 more households (Decatur Terrace) is not at all what the annexation effort was supposed to accomplish. Even if these houses have relatively few school age kids now, if annexed, look for the tear-down/new build effort to crank up big time; which will yield many, many kids for our already over-crowded schools. Come on CoD leadership, shut this down.

    1. Here come more apartments?!
      I have nothing against them per se, but in addition to the mammoth complexes on Dekalb Industrial (leading to the Kroger plaza which appears to remain in the annexation plan), it would seem Decatur Terrace now sweeps in the Twin Oaks apartment complex. I don’t know how CSD is expected to survive the addition of hundreds of units that will be new entry points for the school system, and I don’t buy the rationale that we only need to count 3-bedroom units.

      And watch for this parlor trick: In the past, the City has declared apartments to be “commercial” annexation, to neutralize talk of residential-heavy annexations.

  5. Other than contacting our State Representative and Decatur Commissioner, what can we do to stop this?

    1. You should call and email all of the members of the DeKalb delegation and express your opposition to the annexation plan. Calls and emails from citizens are very effective. I am sure they are getting an earful from city leaders. They need to hear from the people!

      Their names and email addresses are here http://www.lavistapark.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Legistlators-Email-Addresses.pdf

      Their telephone numbers are on the House and Senate websites.

      1. Done! I have been anti-annexation all along, but I have to assume this “bait & switch” even has supporters questioning this?

        1. It does me. I supported annexation before and I have defended the city against the MANAs of the world, but annexation has been botched by a lack of outreach, poor tactics and a general failure to be diligent in addressing the changing circumstances. This is the type of effort that needs a city task force who will be vigilant and lobby the stakeholders. Our leadership seems very reactive, and the results are predictable.

  6. Do we know yet the floor plan breakdown for the apartments going up next to Patel Plaza? I’m assuming it will have more 2br units than the one on W. Ponce. That’s a factor the city should consider.

    1. I’m not certain but since it is not currently in COD, it will likely have more 2+ bedroom units and very few if any 1 bedroom units. That development is attracting a different demographic than downtown Decatur developments.

      1. So a higher percentage of 2 or 3 BR units than the average of what’s being built downtown (40 % vs. 30%), but not quite as high as I thought. Still, may be the type of complex that attracts more people with kids than those downtown.

      2. * Atlantic Realty Partners reduced the # units from the 330 originally announced to increase the amenity space.

  7. Doesn’t adding Decatur Terrace “un-neater” the eastern border of the city . . . when all along the commission has approved annexations in an effort to “neaten up the borders? This move seems to run counter to nearly everything the commission has used to “sell” the necessity of annexation to current residents.

    1. Oh, I’d forgotten about that ridiculous “cleaning up the border” *reason* the city was selling last year when it annexed Parkwood, which was entirely residential…

  8. I think, maybe, any annexed areas, regardless of the number of school children, will serve to increase the CoD’s borrowing power. CoD citizens seem disappointed to annex areas with children in them, because that will contribute to the overcrowding of schools. Instead, the CoD wants to annex residential areas with commercial value and as few children as possible. I understand the concept of enlightened self-interest, but can you please step back and take a fresh look at the ethics of CoD’s Master Annexation Plan? When the goal of a plan is to ‘get something for nothing’ it is bound to be ill fated in some way. When the CoD mayor says they will try again in 2016 for the plan, please realize that this would be the 4th attempt in a period of about 8 years that the CoD has tried to annex those in area A and B. Each time, those in Area A, have overwhelmingly said by petition that they do not want to join the CoD. This is beginning to feel like a really bad date with a bully where the girl has to say, “what part of ‘no’ do you not understand”? You may be cute, but he/she’s just not that into you!

    1. I agree with you about Area “A”, but how much of this has been a lack of outreach by our city to these property owners? The School Board has complained constantly that the city leaders won’t even keep them in the loop about annexation.

      Annexation could be a win/win for the city and others in the annexed areas if our city leaders would do more than publish a map and sit silently. You have to sell your vision. I think Brookhaven and Together in Atlanta have done that, and they are getting what they want.

      1. Moderate, I think the CoD has done a great job in pitching the plan, it is just that the plan stinks.

        1. If you want to have the argument about whether annexation/cityhood is ethical and moral, then you can argue it is not and someone else will point out the corruption in DeKalb and say it is necessary. That argument has been had and Decatur and all the other cities have made their judgment.

          Once you cross the Rubicon on that issue, then execute your plan and see the vision through. Brookhaven, Atlanta, Druid Hills and other polities have aggressively pursued their vision and Decatur has not. Those cities’ cityhood and annexation bids did not collapse because of bad karma. Decatur will get the opposite of what it wants and its taxpayers pick up the bill. The results speak for themselves.

    2. Do you have any insight into why those in Area A are fighting annexation?

      Living in that area, many I speak with appear to be in favor.

      1. Moderate, and tmonax, the new cities referendums may pass or fail, but they all have promised to lower property taxes while providing better services. The CoD annex plan will double the property tax for owners, add new taxes on our utility bills, and put us under zoning and permit rules and guidelines that will be more invasive than we have had in unincorporated Dekalb. The age that one has to be to not pay school taxes is so old in the CoD, compared to Dekalb, that there is no comparison at all about it being unfavorable to retirees in CoD. That would be one glaring difference. AndI have not heard that CoD plans, or even has the budget to buy one new police car or improve our services. The CoD wants to take Area A’s shopping center and I expect they will ruin it. There will be business after business going out of business, just like in Downtown Decatur. There will be no easy free parking, and they will increase the density only for the purpose of satisfying their coffers, without regard for convenience and esthetics. They will try to redevelop every thing we have known and loved for the last 50 years living near Emory, not Decatur! Further more, the CoD has said it will take two land parcels to the north in the annexed areas for new schools by eminent domain. And you think it is ethical to not be 100% transparent about this with the voters in the areas at risk of being consumed? Why should we risk loosing our homes to a city we never bought into in the first place? And tmonax, I guess you are one the people who lives in Area A? Or are you just a spoiler advocating our ruin for your gain? Because the petition last fall for Area A: Yes – 9, No – 73. The ones who are open to the CoD’s plan are being lulled by the promise of higher property values, which we will pay for each year in higher taxes, so that claim is not valid. And as the financial truth becomes common knowledge about the under-funded schools, I doubt property values will remain as high. And I’m not so sure with the loss of Phyllis Edwards, and the complete muck-up of funding and planning for the CoD schools, that they will continue to be an asset. Year round school, trailers, split shifts, and a huge influx of new students that may not have parents who share the CoD’s parents educational focus and commitment? I would say the school situation is not something that is guaranteed to be better a few years from now. And I have other reasons, too, for not wanting to be in CoD; I’m just tired of typing!

        1. I guess you are a “no” then for Parcel A. You will likely be in Atlanta then, so your taxes will go up anyway, though probably not as much as if Decatur annexed your property.

          One disagreement though. Decatur does not develop properties. Private developers do that.

            1. “Oddly for homes up to about 500k in value, Atlanta taxes are less than Dekalb.”

              But is that just the Atlanta portion, or the Atlanta + Fulton as compared to DeKalb?

        2. “There will be business after business going out of business… There will be no easy free parking… they will increase the density only for the purpose of satisfying their coffers… They will try to redevelop every thing we have known and loved for the last 50 years living near Emory… the CoD has said it will take two land parcels to the north in the annexed areas for new schools by eminent domain… Year round school, trailers, split shifts, and a huge influx of new students…”

          https://youtu.be/O3ZOKDmorj0

      2. As with the rest of Decatur, Area A residents are not all the same. I live on Landover Dr., and the majority of residents on our street favor annexation. The first two houses on our street (off Scott Boulevard) are in the City of Decatur, and the last house on the street (corner of N. Decatur and Landover) is also in the City. The 20 houses in-between are DeKalb County. We have the CoD waste management folks drive from one end to the other to pick up trash and recycling, then have DeKalb County service the rest of the houses. For me (single, 50+, no children) it makes more sense to be part of CoD despite the fact I will have to pay much higher taxes.

        1. “For me (single, 50+, no children) it makes more sense to be part of CoD despite the fact I will have to pay much higher taxes.”

          Just curious: why?

            1. it is a no brainer, your property value will go up 75-100K, then you can move to kirkwood 🙂

              1. I have no desire or intention to move. Having read the comments over the last couple of years regarding annexation (Parkwood being a good example), it seems many make the immediate assumption those interested in being annexed are doing so to cash-out. Though it would be great to increase my property value so I can borrow against equity to make improvements to it, I have no interest in selling my house.

            2. I’m confused. Are you not currently part of a community because you’re not in a city? That’s weird.

  9. “She added ‘I think we have all been made keenly aware that the legislative process for getting annexation considered is a complicated and complex process.'”

    Complicated AND complex. That’s really something.

    In other words, we got hosed, hood-winked, bamboozled, but will do anything to avoid admitting it. Lipstick on a pig.

  10. I attended many CoD meetings when there was talk of annexing my area into CoD. This occurred on 3 different occasions over the past 5 years. That was the time for CoD citizens to speak. I think out of the many meetings maybe less than 5% of speakers were CoD citizens. My guess is that because of this Commissioners assumed ya’ll were ok with their plans, which have been in on the table multiple times.

    1. A lot of us were okay with their plans. This bill is not their plan. It leaves out half of what CoD wanted, and includes areas they specifically excluded. Nothing inconsistent between prior support and present dismay.

  11. DM,

    Can you please ask for a fiscal breakdown of the net additional revenue that the city expects to generate from this revised map? I assume that they did a fiscal analysis and looked at the revenues vs. additional students before submitting this bill.

    Thanks.

    1. Moderate, that is *exactly* what we need to see. The mayor says we are still getting commercial out of the Decatur Terrace deal, but will it be a wash when you consider how many students we’d be adding to the school system? In other words, does it help at all the overall problem that annexation was supposed to solve?

      DM, fingers crossed you can get something like that.

      And I want to know if the commissioners – the other four – are in favor of this particular annexation bill. They’ve said NOTHING.

    2. I can’t imagine the annexation will be net positive for the city without the suburban plaza development. The rest of the commercial areas contain a lot of apartments.

  12. Can we please get guidance on the process to “recall” city commissioners and/or the mayor. It does not appear CoD elected officials are listening to the CURRENT CoD residents and taxpayers. Decatur Terrace was not included in annexation plans. I believe the Mayor met with this neighborhood multiple times just as he met with MANA and made it perfectly clear Decatur did not want to annex these residential areas.

    Decatur Terrace residents you are welcome to move into any current or housing in development within the current boundaries of city of Decatur if you wish to avail yourself of city of Decatur schools or other services.

    City Commissioners I believe any plans to proceed on this proposed annexation plan with holding public forum meeting and consultation with the school board should be considered a failure to execute the fiduciary duties and responsibilities of a city commissioner. This annexation plan should be scrapped, no annexation is better than a bad plan we are bullied into accepting. CoD was clearly out played and out maneuvered here. We maybe a nice city but we need some more savvy commissioners! Where is a Frank Underwood when you need him? Or do we already have one and he is plotting against us.

  13. Can we please get guidance on the process to “recall” city commissioners and/or the mayor. It does not appear CoD elected officials are listening to the CURRENT CoD residents and taxpayers. Decatur Terrace was not included in annexation plans. I believe the Mayor met with this neighborhood multiple times just as he met with MANA and made it perfectly clear Decatur did not want to annex these residential areas. At a listening meeting it was stated if MANA were included in an annexation proposal the city would walk away from the proposal. So why are we okay with this jamming addition now?

    Decatur Terrace residents you are welcome to move into any current or in development housing within the current boundaries of city of Decatur if you wish to avail yourself of city of Decatur schools or other services.

    City Commissioners I believe any plans to proceed on this proposed annexation plan without holding public forum meetings and consultation with the school board should be considered a failure to execute the fiduciary duties and responsibilities of a city commissioner. This annexation plan should be scrapped, no annexation is better than a bad plan we are bullied into accepting. CoD was clearly out played and out maneuvered here. We may be a nice city, but we need some more savvy commissioners that can work the political machine as oher areas do! Where is a Frank Underwood when you need him? Or do we already have one and he is plotting against us?

  14. Personally, I’m not in favor of annexation of any purely residential areas, or commercial areas that unfairly leave out residential. I find the arguments about Decatur being able to better develop these areas to be flimsy self-justifications; the real reason is obviously to avoid tax increases. I also don’t really get the “if we don’t do it, someone else will” argument. So what?
    I’m for maximizing our commercial areas and downtown residential density in order to diversify the tax base. The latter is happening. Hopefully the city will concentrate on the former instead of wasting any more time on annexation.

  15. As far as Decatur Terrace is concerned, whether they wanted to or not, they were put on the initial annexation plan for Avondale Estates. They weren’t storming the gates to be annexed into Decatur; they didn’t start all of this. Faced with inevitable annexation by one city or another, they did what a community is supposed to do and worked as a neighborhood to establish what was the consensus of preference was—then sought to have their wishes known. Who of you can condemn that? And who would condemn a state representative who would listen and act accordingly? She is a representative of our District (or part of it), and is not solely at the service of Decatur.

    All of DeKalb County is a mess—the City of Decatur is –perhaps unfortunately, to some -not immune to the consequences of that. Not an island.

    1. Avondale’s submitted map maintains their commercial and offloads residential. Decatur does the opposite. Decatur loses.

      Why in the world was Decatur scrambling to find a sponsor near the last day of the session so that they have to go to Avondale’s rep and save face while getting jobbed at the same time?
      Outflanked and outmaneuvered.

      1. Decatur city leaders definitely could have gone about this better, but a lot of it has to do with the fact that the plan was flawed from the beginning.

        1. Agreed. There was too much cherry picking of commercial. You’re asking reps to approve of leaving their constituents in an unincorporated area while taking away the commercial base. Why would Decatur expect that to get legislative backing?

      2. “Why in the world was Decatur scrambling to find a sponsor…”

        I’ve got a feeling they overly relied on Mary Margaret Oliver to make it happen and didn’t spend much time trying to convince Rep. Rahn Mayo to help champion the cause. North Decatur is also his territory, but he was rarely mentioned in Mayor Baskett’s annexation updates at City Commission Meetings.

        1. If that’s true, then it really points to serious political misjudgment that we will be paying for for years to come.

          1. Agree. This was some seriously poor politics. Unbelievable miscalculations. Now we’re left with this annexation plan which is TERRIBLE.

  16. Where is Mary Margaret Oliver in all of this? Also this isn’t a done deal yet. Why is the Mayor ready to throw in the towel and accept this annexation deal? Reject the bad deal or prove to the residents and the taxpayers of City of Decatur (who you were elected to represent) why this is a fiscally sound good deal for City of Decatur. We residents want to hear the justification for why this is good deal before City of Decatur approves the deal and puts it forward for an annexation vote NOT after it is done. City of Decatur leadership action on this matter is unacceptable.

    If this annexation goes through without an open meeting with the School board and residents I will lead an effort for the Recall of the City Commissioners and the dismissal of the annexation plan before it goes to a vote. This deviates significantly from the original annexation plan and it is unacceptable for the City Commissioners to proceed without approval of the School Board and Residents open comment.

    Here are the grounds for a recall: “Grounds for recall are conduct which relates to and adversely affects the administration of his or her office and adversely affects the rights and interests of the public; and act(s) of malfeasance, violation of oath of office, failure to perform duties prescribed by law willful misuse, conversion or misappropriation of public property or funds.”

    1. What?! Can we please take a step back and learn a little more about this plan before jumping all over our officials? They presumably also want what is best for CoD. My read is that this is a MUCH smaller chunk of residential than the original plan, with a great amount of commercial. I believe it is considered extremely unsavory and, therefore, unrealistic (i.e., no hope of passage), to write and sponsor an annexation bill that includes only revenue-generating commercial areas without some residential. It seems too me that we managed to annex the tiniest of neighborhoods that expressed strong interest in joining the city while also bringing in lots of commercial Seems to me that it’s a good deal, no?

  17. Guys….Neither Decatur nor Avondale’s (or Clarkston’s) annexation bills will pass the Legislature. Drenner said she wasn’t too confident of it herself. I’m going with the Shakespeare/Faulkner quote above! I haven’t seen much evidence of either Decatur or AE ‘s commissions making much noise about why annexations are so critical so that their plans could be defended…(City commission and neighborhood meetings aren’t the same as a campaign)..their plans, at this point, are a reaction to the City movements, really… Also there is no paid lobbying effort by cities to the legislature to get this through (which, I don’t think they can), whereas the City movements and TIA folks have been down on Washington Street from day one.

  18. Unincorporated DeKalb County residents need a reality check. Their area will either become part of Tucker, Lavista Hills, Avondale, Decatur or whatever city is created in South DeKalb.

    Decatur Residents:
    It’s time for Decatur leadership to step up! We either find a way to grow as a community and expand the commercial tax base we need to be viable or we will get swallowed up by the other cities around us.

Comments are closed.