MM: DeKalb City News, Druid Hills Home and Garden Tour, and the World’s Oldest Surviving Aerial Photo
Decatur Metro | April 8, 2013- The future of DeKalb County? [Patch]
- New cities under review in north DeKalb [Reporter]
- Druid Hills Home and Garden Tour [CHCA]
- Large mixed-use project in Cobb County back on track [AJC]
- Emory faculty to vote on Wagner’s leadership [AJC]
- 1968 pic of foot traffic along Peachtree Street [AHC]
- World’s oldest surviving aerial photo – Boston circa 1860 [Smithsonian]
Map courtesy of Tucker Patch
Latest from Decaturish
When the North Dekalb land grab frenzy begins (like in North Fulton a few years ago), it will be interesting to see how Decatur copes and or reacts.
We (in Decatur) have the looming counter-balance of school impact that all these other cities-to-be do not have (or at least the are not thinking about it yet).
I was against the proposed commercial annexations north of us (Suburban Plaza, etc). But I suspect that my thoughts might be changed if it looked like annexation of such commercial parcels was inevitable by some other city-to-be.
That’s a great point. I wonder if that’s true for most folks or not.
In terms of the current annexation consideration, those in the proposed areas were weighing what Decatur had to offer against what DeKalb had to offer and, on those terms, Decatur’s effort failed to get any meaningful traction.
I tend to agree with you. In the future, it might evolve to weighing the prospect of being part of Decatur vs. being part some new city. Not saying that’ll swing sentiment a different way. Only that it’ll introduce a whole new set of variables.
It will be interesting to see how all this pans out over the next decade or so.
I think that it may be a bit of “Decatur envy” on the part of northern DeKalb County that makes city hood look so attractive to some. But they should keep in mind that it is our school system that really sets Decatur apart from the rest……and if they have that in mind in their quest for city hood…..they can forget about having lower taxes as a benefit.
Talking to friends and co-workers who live in Tucker, Lakeside, Druid Hills and elsewhere in the northern part of the county, I don’t think this is a case of “Decatur envy” other than Decatur (and Chamblee, Stone Mountain, Lithonia, etc.) has the ability to keep a larger chunk of tax revenue for needs within the city limits and can control decisions for the area a bit better (zoning comes to mind). The people I know who live in these areas do not particularly care for the county administration or the various probes concerning it. Cityhood may or may not increase their taxes, but they feel a smaller municipality means local elected officials with greater accountability to those who are taxed and official advocates for them when dealing with the county. Since I live in Decatur, I can understand this. I pay more attention to Decatur’s elected officials on matters from bike lanes to zoning variances than I do to Dekalb’s because I’m a bit insulated from from Dekalb’s decisions by the city government., at least until I drive up Church Street towards Suburban Plaza.
I hope that Dekalb County finds some leadership to halt this death spiral.
I get the feeling that leadership change will only begin with indictments someday.
N. DeKalb is moving in the same direction N.Fulton did years ago. In the case of Fulton, I believe there were some legitimate disparities in service between the North and South ends that spurred the cities of Milton, Johns Creek, and the push for a new Milton County. I’m not so sure if that’s the case in DeKalb. And if the school system debacle is the motivation, I think people are kidding themselves if they think new city-based school systems are going to be created (which would require a constitutional amendment).
Also, none of these proposed new cities have much of a commercial base, so that is going to be an obstacle in providing services without raising taxes on residents. I’m not sure that DeKalb County wouldn’t be better off if they were to give up responsibility for parks and roads maintenance, etc, in some of these proposed cities, though I’m sure someone can tell me why I’m wrong on that one.
I think it has less to do with services than say so over how and where current taxes are spent. I also think it has quite a bit to do with the county administration and a desire to have city officials who can counterbalance some of the decisions made by that administration.