Comments on: Decatur Mayor Reacts to DeKalb’s Annexation Moratorium Idea

By: Cityhood Likely to Cut Property Taxes « Representative Mike Jacobs

Cityhood Likely to Cut Property Taxes « Representative Mike Jacobs — Tue, 08 Nov 2011 15:21:49 +0000

[...] line and even cutting taxes. This is what Decatur Mayor Bill Floyd meant when he recently said on a local Decatur blog: “The contention that living in unincorporated DeKalb County offers less taxes is quickly [...]

By: Occupy Brookhaven — Peach Pundit

Occupy Brookhaven — Peach Pundit — Tue, 18 Oct 2011 15:56:31 +0000

[...] commenter in Decatur Metro who calls himself “Ridgelandistan” described the situation accurately: Basically, cities take the county’s “market share” of municipal services and undercut wealth [...]

By: Julia Sellers

Julia Sellers — Mon, 17 Oct 2011 13:10:43 +0000

I agree with this statement posted “The moratorium is needed to provide a process and improved system for incorporation.” If DeKalb County is to go the way of Fulton and everything will be incorporated then let’s step back and do this in a logical manner- creating city boundaries that are fair and not allow cherry picking commercial areas hurting other communities.

For my neighborhood’s sake this is an interesting idea that I would support. Mike Jacobs and his group Citizens for North DeKalb (C4ND) have drawn a map for the proposed city of Brookhaven which includes all the commercial areas surrounding my neighborhood and not the residential.

Yes, Jacobs keep saying “that the “study area” map for Brookhaven is not a set of city boundaries and could be changed.” But what if it is not? What recourse does my neighborhood have? We have no say and no input.

A small group of 12 living in the north area of the Brookhaven study map created the map. It was not created by a fair representation of all who are included in the mapped area. No input from the south of the Brookhaven study map. The polling done by Jacobs only included the north area of the map, an area that is historical been associated with Chamblee not Brookhaven. Kind of wrong!

Jacobs’s original stated that Cityhood could not happen before 2014. Again what is the rush to get it vote on in 2012? Jacobs and C4ND are rushing it! The question to ask is why? Jacobs at a public meeting was asked if he would be willing to slow down this process. No direct answer from him. Neighborhoods are being bullied in this creation of Brookhaven. The moratorium would be welcomed to slow down this process.

By: TD

TD — Mon, 17 Oct 2011 05:10:19 +0000

This moratorium resolution is the only item I have ever agreed with Commisioner Radar on. In particular the creation of Dunwoody, the expansion of Chamblee and now the push for the creation of a City of Brookhaven are having a balkanizing effect on DeKalb County. Dunwoody (where apprx 6 % of the county’s population was given apprx 15% of the tax base by going around home rule in the legislature, plus they convienently created islands of unincorporated land-one island houses a strip club) and Chamblee were able to disproportionately increase their net worth while having a negative effect on the county as a whole. The city of Brookhaven would do the same. Everyone is a loser with the creation of cities as now defined. While Dunwoody and Chamblee talk as if they provide an “enhanced” service delivery. A closer examination of services provided show they provide the same type but less of the services the county was providing. Where service is most negatively impacted is with public safety. A four mile stretch of I-285’s northern arc now has four 911 centers. This is irresponsible.
I have been greatly ashamed of DeKalb County’s elected officials financial stewardship but I’m not willing to create another government. The current laws create adversarial city and county governments. Not only do we see this in Dekalb but in all of the metro counties. It’s time to rethink this. The legislature should develop an option that works to meet the wants of more “local control” while meeting the demands of a large urban area. Almost always the voice of “local control” talks of zoning, code enforcement and parks. A township or village designation would meet the wants and needs of both. The townships or villages could drive zoning, development, code enforcement and parks, the quality of life issues at a lower cost than a full city gov’t while the county delivered public safety and infrastructure.
Our current path will stifle job growth, segregate and create financial hardships for all. It is time to deliver government that benefits each other ; not government the competes with each other.
The way we are heading we will all be drowned out under duplicate and competing governments for every square mile of DeKalb.

By: Scott

Scott — Fri, 14 Oct 2011 19:49:10 +0000

The six homes on Midway were annexed at the request of the property owners. How is that cherry picking?

As an elected official, it’s Mayor Floyd’s obligation to protect our interests which, in this case, translates to options. Whether we should annex in the future is, at this point, irrelevant. What matters is that we retain to option of doing so should it prove desirable or necessary.

Even those currently against any annexation effort should respect the Mayor’s fighting to keep it on the table. Who would want elected officials that support reducing our future choices simply to serve today’s temporary conditions?