Musings On Another AJC Annexation Article
Decatur Metro | January 26, 2009I have two questions for the AJC’s April Hunt and one for the city of Avondale after reading this latest AJC annexation article…
First to Ms. Hunt –
1. Does the city of Decatur really care whether residents way up near Doraville accept annexation? Are we really simplistic enough to think its even remotely an apples-to-apples comparison?
2. Is it really accurate to assert that it was negative vocal opposition at commission meetings that killed Decatur’s annexation plan?
So, assuming that the city had bullet-proof data to show how a large-scale annexation would reduce property taxes, all it would take to kill such a huge plan would be vocal opposition by nonresidents at a commission meeting? So riddle me this – assuming that this vocal opposition represents the will of the annexed areas (which is still not really known) and the initiative failed to get the necessary 50% vote, would the city commissioners really be any worse for wear? Might they actually be better off for having tried to lower residents’ taxes?
As I’ve said before, I believe it had a lot more to do with the irreconcilable student enrollment data than anything else. But that’s just my not-so-humble opinion.
And finally, to Avondale –
3. Avondale, I love you, but why so reactionary? If you want to annex part of College Ave, just do it! Why are you letting Decatur’s actions dictate your border?
Excellent musings, DM, and reflective of who’s actually been paying attention to all this.
Decatur’s situation is entirely unique because we’re the only muni of those mentioned that would take on the burden of education during annexation. As the biggest chunk of our tax budget, that skews everything.
It’s always about money but, in Decatur’s case, it didn’t fall out of favor because of opposition, per se, as though red-shirted residents tipped the scales at some heated meeting. It fell out because opponents got down to the core issue and revealed defects in the projections.
As demonstrated by our dollars in reserve, I personally find the Commission pretty pragmatic and conservative when it comes to minding the store. If the promise of annexation dollars isn’t iron-clad, I can’t see them putting their weight behind it. At least that’s the way it played out.
The AJC’s comparison is pretty sloppy.
FYI, on the DeKalb Commisson agenda
G3. Resolution Expressing Support for Restraints on Annexations that are Done Not to Provide New Services to an Underserved Area, but Simply to Increase a Municipal Tax Base and Legislation to Allow Property Owners to De-annex Themselves from Municipalities
Hmmmm. I wonder WHO they are talking about!
Some of these areas interested in annexation are underserved by police and schools. So, it certainly wouldn’t apply to where I live. Annexation has not been killed as was stated above. Ponder that.
It’s a good question, DM, what Decatur & Avondale annexation have to do with Doraville annexation. There does seem to be a lot of reaching for unincorporated DeKalb recently. Dunwoody incorporates, Tucker talks of incorporation, Decatur, Avondale, and Doraville all talk about or attempt large-scale annexation. Doraville over 60% increase. Decatur almost 50% increase. (And the mayor said last night that “we” still think that annexationis the way to “deal with it,” although he didn’t say what “it” is.) This is all very major stuff all at once. Unrelated?
In today’s AJC: 79% of voters said no to Doraville annexation yesterday.
So Decatur has annexed the strip of Columbia all the way to the new Friends School, (abutting North Carter) and now plans to annex all of East College to the Avondale border.
The end result of this annexation mess is that now Forrest Hills sits in a finger of unincorporated land trapped between Decatur and Avondale. The other result is due to this anomaly, DeKalb police, fire, and other services will probably get worse; all due to incorrect misinformation and hysteria that we would inundate the Decatur School System with hordes of children.
The information at least in regards to the number of children in Forrest Hills is incorrect. The FHNA provided an updated survey on the number and age of current residents in the neighborhood. Dr. Edwards and her cronies at the minimum could have conducted a new and accurate survey of the actual number of children of the areas in question.
Forrest Hills Elementary was closed due to decreasing enrollment. Most couples in Forrest Hills move out of the neighborhood after their first child because of the size of the homes. If Forrest Hills had been incorporated my wife and I would have probably stayed and renovated our home to a three/two for our new baby (we don’t plan on having more).
Now we plan to move out of the perimeter and “drive till we qualify” for better services and schools.
Thanks Guys! Enjoy your victory.
The concern of most Decatur residents is not how many school age children Forrest Hills has now but how many there could/would be in the future. We feel it is likely the number of children would grow if Forrest Hills became part of the CSD system. Similar to the situation with the Oakhurst area.
Forrest Hills resident, please understand that this is not some sort of personal attack against your neighborhood. You say that families leave the neighborhood once they have children . You say you yourself would renovate and stay if Forrest Hills became part of CSD. I am sure others would do the same. CSD is already dealing with tough decisions because of enrollment growth. We can’t accomodate all the students we have right now . No way we could handle additional kids from annexed areas.
Forest hills – why not stay and work in your local elementary school (Midway)… or help support the new Avondale Charter school.. or the International Charter School? Seems to me that you could stay and make it work if you wanted to. Lord knows a bunch of folks here in Decatur “stayed and made it work” several years ago… – organized and worked their rears off in fact….. against difficult odds and difficult school leaders…. and now we have good schools.
Sorry to rehash old lines, but I’ve gotta tell you…until we deal with the current overpopulation in our schools, we absolutely must not add any more children to our system through annexation. Last night we attended our kid’s choir concert at Glennwood, and we actually COULD NOT GET INTO THE ROOM to see her sing. There was standing room only IN THE FOYER. Ridiculous, if you ask me. So glad I didn’t invite her grandparents to go. When you have fifty kids in the choir, you have to understand that there will be at least fifty, if not 100, if not 150 or more, people attending the concert. Geez. I should have called the fire marshall. Sad that in order to accommodate a crowd, our former “neighborhood” school ought to have their Winter Concert somewhere else.
I also live in Forrest Hills.
We understand that City of Decatur residents have a good thing going and don’t want it “messed up”. We also understand that it’s not your fault that we’re underserved by Dekalb County. However, as Fifi, states: “CSD is already dealing with tough decisions because of enrollment growth”. In my mind, and in the minds of others in my neighborhood, City of Decatur is acting shortsightedly by their opposition to annexing these few neighborhoods.
In our minds, you’d be smart to annex us, take our money, and have a chance to deal with the enrollment issues over a period of several years (the majority of children in our neighborhood are toddlers or younger, unless I’m mistaken, and so would enter the system gradually).
If you knew the crap (exuse my crudity) with which we put up from Dekalb County, you’d understand why we’re just not willing to let this go. Just as you’re trying to do the best for your children and your community, so are we.
Cranky: Thanks for that. Must look into it.
Judd: Excellent point.
I don’t dispute the fact that there is a larger trend here. Namely that DeKalb cities are all attempting annexation. I would have loved to see a more in-depth article about all the annexation attempts going on in DeKalb (not to mention the creation of Dunwoody).
But what this article seems to argue in its headline is that other DeKalb cities are “wondering if an approval [in Dunwoody] will create momentum for their own annexation efforts.”
What does that mean? To think that Decatur will make future decisions on annexation based on whether DeKalb residents want to be a part of Dunwoody is a big over-simplification. Maybe I’m just splitting hairs here, but I thought the whole idea of “momentum” was a weak attempt to tie the story together.
Rhonda, an effort was made for several years to do just that with Forrest Hills Elementary– which was closed last year. All of that effort went for nothing. I understand your point, though. However, this isn’t just about schools, either. Rather it’s about our being underserved in practically every way by Dekalb County. Now, you might argue that we should “stay and fight” the Dekalb County, but I already have a full-time job and doubt very seriously that’s a fight we could win.
Opposition in the northern neighborhoods was definitely important. If there was any constituency in the annexation areas in favor, they were in the southern areas (although it became increasingly unclear if it was a majority even there). Opposition in the north became decisive after the school board said emphatically no to southern annexation.
That said, Scott is right that the core issue was and remains student projections. Not current numbers of students in those areas, but the ultimate impact after annnexation. Why? It’s actually quite simple. Annexation is sold as a tax cut (although we’re also told that the benefits won’t materialize for 10-15 years, but set that aside for now). We can get a good estimate of property values in the annexed areas and therefore of revenue. We know how much we spend per student, and can estimate fairly well our cap ex to accommodate incoming students. The big variable that determines whether annexation is a tax cut, tax neutral, or a tax hike is how many students. And precious little attention was paid to this all-important variable. I still don’t think it has really sunk in in all quarters that if the proportion of students in the annexed areas begins to approach what it is in the city currently (and it WILL begin to approach that number), then annexation means a massive financial loss to the tax payers. This core issue will not go away. The math will remain the math.
And Scott: Speaking for myself, I wasn’t and am not an opponent of annexation per se. I wasn’t an opponent who “got down to the core issue.” I became an opponent of THIS annexation BECAUSE I (helped and prodded along by Pat Herold) got down to the core issue and saw that the bad projections spelled disaster for the tax payer and the schools.
Sorry it read that way, Judd. Did not mean to imply you had your position first, data second. I was clumsily attempting to reference how you and others recognized that everything — success or failure — ultimately rode on enrollment numbers, so you applied greater scrutiny to those projections.
From what you came up with, you drew your conclusions. That’s what I meant to say. Thanks.
Good explanation Judd.
Ugh… Math… can’t live with it, can’t live without it.
Hi everyone,
What all these discussions ignore is the concept of annexing someone’s land just to get at their money is unAmerican, anti-democratic, an erosion of property rights, and just immoral. If your neighbor can’t afford the TV they want, they should work harder or save money somewhere else. But to take the money from you to buy the TV they want is theft. How is annexing commercial property which doesn’t have voting rights any different than that? We bought our land, put together a business plan, invested our life savings, and chose what jurisdiction (and thus tax level) would work for us. Then the city comes along and says, sorry about all that, we’re taking you over, you get no vote, and we get your money. They don’t even bother to explain it any other way, just we want your money. It is oh so wrong, its just plain shameful. Live within your means, don’t steal from your neighbor. -Erik
Erik, I live in the city limits but I totally agree with you…I would be livid if I had specifically chosen a house outside the city limits and someone told me I was being annexed without being given a choice.
Erik has it on the money (pun intended). I bought my house because it was NOT in an incorporated city, because I didn’t want to pay the extra taxes. This was a money grab, plain and simple, because the city didn’t want to raise property taxes on it’s own residents. But those of us that would be annexed would see a significant rise in ours. For what? I am not underserved by Dekalb County in the least. Using the city’s own online tax calculator, my estimated *increase* in property taxes would have been nearly $3000 per year.
I have a number of family members who live in northern New Jersey where this has gotten totally out of hand. Town after town after town. Every town has its own mutiple levels of bureaucracy, it’s own police force, its own school system, its own trash collection, its own mayor and city staff and tax collectors, etc., etc., etc. This all costs lots of money for duplication of resources. And these bureaucracies become growing entities that feed on their own power and the budgets become larger and larger. Why is all this necessary? It would be much smarter for cities like Decatur to contract services with Dekalb instead of re-inventing the wheel. This is wasteful spending and gross inefficiency.
I grew up in unincorporated Dekalb, have been educated in the school system, and have never found services lacking. Except for six years in the city of Atlanta, I have spent almost all of my childhood and adult life in Dekalb and am just fine with things the way they are. If you don’t like your school, then do something about it. Get involved, help fix it, or buy a home in Decatur. You have free will. Being annexed by the City of Decatur would be against my free will.