DeKalb Neighborhood Survey - Comparing Possible Futures

via MANA President Lynn Ganim...

The Georgia Legislature goes into session in early January of 2019. Among many other possible issues, the specters of new cities and annexations might once again appear and affect our neighborhood, so we need to be prepared--again.

MANA is coordinating with nearby civic associations, including Clairmont Heights, to find out what our residents might prefer if we were forced to choose or have a choice: to stay unincorporated, join a new city, or an existing city. For more information and to express your current opinion, please go to https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/2018-DeKalb-Neighborhoods, read the introduction and brief survey there carefully and answer the questions.

We realize that you have many questions about annexation and incorporation, which this survey does not answer, but for now we simply hope you will start thinking about the issues and consider what you might choose IF you had to. 

The MANA board will continue to monitor developments and try our best to fill in the blanks as we can or need to (e.g., we will conduct a Medlock-specific survey and canvas the neighborhood door-to-door as we did a few years back if necessary).

If you have questions, please contact medlockassoc@gmail.com.

Emory pursues annexation to City of Atlanta

DeKalb County's Parcel Viewer map highlights Emory University property in grey. The graduate student housing complex on Briarcliff Rd. sits across the street from the City of Atlanta boundaries, marked by a dashed line.

Late last week, Emory University issued a brief statement about its intention to pursue annexation to the City of Atlanta. Around the same time, neighborhoods adjacent to the Emory campus were invited to a meeting, led by Commissioner Rader, to discuss the ramifications of such a move.

The meeting was covered by multiple sources:

AJC:

• Mark Neisse: Atlanta may expand to cover Emory University
• Bill Thorpy: Emory wants to move into Atlanta?

11 Alive (video)

Atlanta.Curbed: Emory annexation could be a smart move for Atlanta

Creative Loafing: Emory wants to be part of Atlanta--and according to some observers, speed up the long-awaited MARTA rail line

MANA board members attended the above meeting. As aways, we will be on the lookout for new developments and share what we learn through this website.

DeKalb Delegation Townhall Meeting

DeKalb Delegation members listened to citizen concerns at the last pre-2016 legislative session townhall meeting.

MANA representatives were present at the DeKalb Legislative Delegation's Townhall meeting on January 7, 2016 at the Maloof Building.  It was a lively, well attended session that lasted around 2 hours.

Senator Gloria Butler's reversal of her appointment of Harmel Codi to the County's Audit Oversight Committee was a hot topic; multiple speakers asked the delegation to look into the situation and wondered if this is a sign that the effort to reform DeKalb is already compromised. When asked if the other Senators were part of the decision to remove Ms. Codi, Senators Parent and Millar responded no. Senator Butler did not attend the town hall meeting.

As expected, many topics were covered--potholes and speed limits, crime, mortar fireworks, police officer compensation, quality public education, concerns about home insurance providers using breed-specific lists to reject would-be policy buyers, among others. Cityhood was a common theme, specifically the proposed cities of Stonecrest and Greenhaven, with strong voices and a variety of arguments. The new cities had strong support with many people asking for action during this legislative session so that they can vote soon. Conversely, many speakers asked for careful consideration of how new cities impact the County's ability to function and emphasized their belief that creating cities does not fix the kinds of problems mentioned by citizens at this very meeting--the way out is to strengthen the County. A speaker compared ill-conceived cityhood proposals to the Wizard of Oz: there is a man behind the curtain, a master puppeteer, but that will not "give you courage or give you a brain" to fix the problems you already have.

MANA's president, Lynn Ganim, asked the legislators to consider the impact of commercial annexations such as those pursued by City of Decatur these last several years. It is an issue of fairness, she said, with a significant impact on DeKalb County School System's budget.

The 2016 legislation session begins on January 11, 2016.

Yes to ethics reform and the City of Tucker; no to La Vista Hills

UPDATE, 11/12/2015: Decaturish reports that LaVista Hills supporters suspend campaign activities, indicate lawsuit unlikely.

UPDATE, 11/6/2015: DeKalb vouches for election results: "DeKalb election officials triple-checked vote totals from voting machines and tabulation computers, and everyone’s votes were accounted for, said DeKalb Elections Director Maxine Daniels." http://www.ajc.com/news/news/local-govt-politics/officials-certify-dekalb-election-lavista-hills-su/npHzb/

UPDATE, 11/5/2015: investigation opened on La Vista Hills vote, see http://www.ajc.com/news/news/dekalb-countys-lavista-hills-election-investigated/npG8k/.

Per the AJC's election results website, the County's ethics reform plan was soundly supported. Voters also approved the formation of the City of Tucker. The proposed City of La Vista Hills was defeated by a small margin.

Decaturish also reported on the vote http://www.decaturish.com/2015/11/voters-narrowly-reject-lavista-hills-approve-tucker-in-dekalb-cityhood-votes/.

November ballot: two information meetings coming up [Oct 14, 19]

November approaches and so does election day.  MANA residents, depending on location, will vote on different measures, and all County residents will vote on an item on ethics reform. The following meetings offer information on these important issues.

Issues for the Greater Decatur area for the November 3 Election [Wednesday, OCTOBER 14]

Topics: Annexation and New Cities in Georgia, DeKalb County Board of Ethics, City Schools of Decatur $75 million bond request

Sponsored by: Good Growth DeKalb

Confirmed guests include:
Scott Drake (City of Decatur Commissioner), Garret Goebel (City Schools of Decatur), Pat Killingsworth (Bluepring DeKalb), Howard Mosby (GA House), and Elena Parent (GA Senate)

When: Wednesday, October 14, 7pm

Where: North Decatur Presbyterian Church, 611 Medlock Road, Decatur GA 30033

Community Forum on Proposed City of LaVista Hills [Monday, OCTOBER 19]

Sponsored by State Representative Mary Margaret Oliver and State Senator Elena Parent
Moderated by Sen. Parent and Rep. Oliver

Purpose: To provide a structured meeting enabling both sides to present their positions to the public, and for community members to have their questions answered

When: Monday, October 19, from 6:30-8:00 PM. Meeting will start and end on time.

Where: Young Israel of Toco Hills, 2056 LaVista Road, Atlanta, GA 30329

Note: Questions will be read by the moderator. They may be submitted in advance to stephanie.tanner@senate.ga.gov

Fran Millar wastes everyone's time; Medlock appeals to House to rectify La Vista Hills boundary

MANA President Lynn Ganim sent the following letter to Representative  Rex Brockaway.

Dear Representative Brockway, 

Recently, Senator Fran Millar showed his contempt for the House by ignoring the agreed-upon northern border of LaVista Hills with Tucker.  Yesterday he showed his complete disregard for openly and fairly-agreed-upon changes in the southern border of LaVista Hills.  I was part of a group representing the Medlock and Mason Mill neighborhoods of DeKalb who met with a representative of LaVista Hills and staff for Senator Elena Parent and Representative May Margaret Oliver.  We were told that Senator Millar would incorporate our requests to have parts of our neighborhoods removed from the LVH map if the LVH representative agreed. These areas had never been on the LVH map before, and LVH does not even want them. As a result, we spent several hours with the map and amicably agreed on relatively minor changes which would have restored the wholeness of our neighborhoods and would, we thought, satisfy Senator Millar’s requirements. 

However, he changed his requirements and proceeded to run roughshod over our agreement for no understandable reason. This dishonorable behavior reinforces the public cynicism and distrust of government.  It’s as if he were a cat playing with a mouse, and we are outraged. There is no acceptable excuse for his actions.
Please defeat the Senate version of the LaVista Hills map, which reaches into Medlock and Mason Mill, and return to the original map agreed upon by your Governmental Affairs sub-committee or the map recently sent to you by Senator Parent. Doing so would be to take one small step towards restoring integrity to this process and the faith of citizens in their elected representatives. 

Thank you.

Lynn Ganim
President
Medlock Area Neighborhood Association (MANA)

---

MEDIA RELEASE

Contacts:  
Mary Hinkel, President, Mason Mill Civic Association

maryhinkel at comcast

404-235-5117

Lynn Ganim, President, Medlock Area Neighborhood Association (MANA) lganim at bellsouth 404.735.2510

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

March 26, 2015

NEIGHBORHOODS SPLIT IN TWO CALL FOR CONFERENCE COMMITTEE

In spite of the fact that neighborhood leaders from Mason Mill and Medlock reached boundary agreements with LaVista Hills prior to the Senate's adoption of HB520 on March 25th, Senator Fran Millar (R-40th district) refused to delay action on the bill, thus splitting two neighborhoods in two for no apparent reason.

According to Mary Hinkel, President of the Mason Mill Civic Association: "We acted in good faith, following Senator Millar's instructions to Senator Parent on Monday, March 23rd, that he would make any changes LaVista Hills representative Steve Schultz agreed to.  We met the following morning and essentially agreed to the map that had already been approved in the House, with minor modifications.  The next step was to write the legal description of the boundary for inclusion in an amendment to be proposed by Senator Millar.  As it turns out, while we were meeting, Senator Millar was moving forward on his own.  I am shocked by his heavy-handed and cavalier approach."

While the Mason Mill and Medlock neighborhoods remained intact in the original House-drawn map, Senator Millar presented a new map to the Senate created by the Legislative and Congressional Reapportionment Office.  The office relies on census-block mapping techniques, rather than more up-to-date geographic information software.  As a result, in order to draw the commercial areas of Toco Hills and North DeKalb mall into the new LaVista Hills map, the office also had to include the residential properties in the same census blocks, thus splitting the neighborhoods.  

Legislative Counsel for the House and Senate assured Senator Parent's staff on Monday that a map could be used that included a boundary described by "metes and bounds" and not census-block mapping.

"We want to keep our neighborhoods unified.  To be thwarted by an antiquated mapping technique is outrageous in a time when every smart phone can create a highly detailed map." says Lynn Ganim, President, Medlock Area Neighborhood Association (MANA). "We ask the legislature to convene a conference committee to fix the southern borders as agreed, using metes and bounds."

Splitting up the neighborhood: another brilliant idea (not)

via MANA President Lynn Ganim

Update on LaVista Hills’ Incursion into Medlock

According to Senator Parent’s office, the problem with the LVH map and Medlock is with the way census blocks are delineated. We have been told that state law will not permit those census blocks to be broken up in creating new cities, although that can happen with annexation parcels. (If anybody in the neighborhood truly understands the process of working with census tracts, please share it with all of us because this situation keeps getting crazier.) Most of our neighborhood is in one census tract. However, the short explanation is that LaVista Hills wants North DeKalb Mall, and part of our neighborhood is in the same census tract as the mall, a different one from the rest of the neighborhood. What all this means is that, as we understand it now, a part of our neighborhood cannot be separated from LVH because they cannot give up that area without losing the mall, which, of course, they will not do. IF the LVH referendum passes, that section could then ask to be de-annexed, which Senator Parent will help us do and which she believes will face no opposition from LVH. She is trying to work out an arrangement with Senator Millar, so once again everything could change in the blink of an eye.

We’re investigating how new cities like Brookhaven have worked with this limitation. The attached map from Senator Parent’s office shows in yellow the section of our area, not just the neighborhood, that is in a separate census block from the mall but was, I believe, added in the latest LVH map. The green is still LVH. This is most recent information we have. MANA is continuing to follow these developments closely and investigate our options. I can assure you that we have as many questions as you do. And, of course, we’re very curious about why this area and problem were not highlighted earlier during the many discussions of the LVH maps over the last year and a half.

---

Contact information for our legislators is available here. In particular please call Senator Millar's office, as he is championing this shenanigan while simultaneously blocking County-wide reform (that was put together by the DeKalb Co. Operations Task Force --of which he was a member-- and Blueprint DeKalb citizens work group). 

Atlanta Annexation Survey Results

MANA has now completed a second survey of residents to determine the neighborhood's interest in being included in a City of Atlanta annexation map. See our community meeting notes explaining why we decided to conduct a second survey on cityhood and annexation.

For the current survey, volunteers went door to door and also collected responses online:

- 564 neighborhood addresses were validated, which reflects 42.6% of households

- 745 valid surveys are included in this brief report

- 71% of respondents supported the idea of being added to an Atlanta annexation map

In view of these results, the MANA Board is contacting our representatives about including our neighborhood in any Atlanta annexation map that is considered during the current legislative session. Should an Atlanta annexation referendum take place, being in the map protects our residents' right to vote in favor of or against the proposal. 

The survey included two questions; results are summarized below.

Community meeting notes: Atlanta, unincorporation [Jan 22]

MANA organized a community meeting to continue informing the community on cityhood and annexation issues in our area. Over 175 people attended. Our thanks to the International Community School for lending their facilities.

The MANA Working Group has launched an online survey and is going door-to-door to encourage residents to voice their preferences--at the time, it appears that our options are to remain unincorporated or petition to be annexed to the City of Atlanta. Volunteers were available to administer the survey, which is also available online. The volunteers also collected signatures opposing City of Decatur's commercial annexation that, as Zoning Chair Theresa Same noted, attempts to capture 8 of 11 entrances into our neighborhood.

KEY LINKS:
+ Survey (for Medlock Park residents only)
+ Petition to the DeKalb Delegation to say NO to City of Decatur's Unreasonable Annexation (open to all DeKalb County residents)

Kudos to the MANA Working Group for a very informative and well-run meeting!

Introductory remarks

DeKalb County Commissioner Jeff Rader and Atlanta Councilman Alex Wan gave brief summaries of key issues as they see them, and then handled questions from the audience.

Commissioner Rader noted that historically, new city proposals were individual and well defined, compared to the current crop of overlapping maps. Annexations are handled by the state legislature rather than the county delegation. On the issue of remaining unincorporated, this remains viable as long as we are a fairly large population (~ half million), there would be the capacity to provide services and that ability won't collapse overnight, however, annexations that reduce the unincorporated area can affect the cost of those services. The annexations that we are seeing are based on the tax base, and you can see that they are adjacent to residential areas that are not included and cannot influence decisions--state laws do not protect against this. Annexation is a local delegation issue so continue to voice your concern to your DeKalb Delegation and specifically to Rahn Mayo and Elena Parent. [for a full list, see ______]. Rader acknowledges that the County has in some cases disappointed the public and this has created vulnerability (that we now see as efforts to incorporate new cities). Remaining engaged is essential: talk to your legislators, general assembly.

Councilman Wan stated that Atlanta is not negotiating in favor of annexation or pushing the idea; Mayor Reed supports efforts to join the city (e.g. Together in Atlanta map that includes Fernbank Elementary and therefore the Clairmont neighborhood). Wan discussed common concerns such as property taxes (similar or lower for properties in the $200K range; higher in Atlanta for higher-value $400K+ homes, but that these differences are often overstated). Councilman Wan reminded us that even if annexed, property values and property taxes are tied to DeKalb County. As to safety as a concern, Atlanta has a larger police force per capita. Atlanta water bills are very high, however, annexed areas would continue to be serviced as they are now therefore, if annexed, our neighborhood would continue to be serviced by DeKalb. As to what changes we might expect once annexation happens, probably nothing drastic, but Wan highlighted that Atlanta has become more fiscally responsible in the last 10 years. Its bond rating has improved, which will allow them to negotiate a new infrastructure bond that would benefit newly annexed areas, too. Also, Atlanta reinvests 3.5% of its general fund in infrastructure projects.

Questions from the audience

Q:  How about property tax exemptions for seniors?  Wan acknowledged that Atlanta's exemptions for seniors are not as generous as unincorporated DeKalb's. If annexation proposals go to a referendum, as the city prepares an operation plan, that would be the time to negotiate.

Q: School reorganizations if we remain in DeKalb, disadvantages? Rader noted that the County cannot protect itself from annexation and that impacts schools; cities bring more certainty in the school issue. There is a possibility of an intergovernmental agreement between DeKalb County and City of Atlanta. Shifting attendance, if Druid Hills goes to Atlanta, would be disruptive.

Q: Intergovernmental problems with jurisdiction, would we run into problems where Atlanta says "Call DeKalb" and DeKalb says "Call Atlanta for that issue" with regards to safety, permits? Wan agreed that this happens and can be an issue but public safety is everyone's concern. GIS mapping is very clear about boundaries so that should reduce mix-ups. If there is a referendum, he would insist on a well-articulated agreement to avoid such issues. Rader added that there are lots of boundaries everywhere, things get worked out.

Q: What would shift if we were annexed to Atlanta? Certain services remain with DeKalb, about 2/3 of the tax bill covers roads and drainage, parks and recreation. Building permitting (fees, sanitation) would shift but Rader noted that Dekalb's sanitation system is very good and affordable.

Q: Do we need to decide now, do we lose the opportunity to annex--are there drawbacks if we don't proceed now? Wan said that there is no harm in hitting the "pause" button. If a referendum fails, we can continue to lobby. The challenge is that there are 3 methods for annexation:
- legislature draws a map that is voted on
- 100% method (petition to municipality)
- 60% method (those championing the annexation have to collect signatures of at least 60% of landowners and voters, then petition the municipality they seek to join) --> this is the highest bar

So, the reason to push for annexation via legislative map is that it's the easiest to get through because you just need to secure legislator votes vs. population votes at the 60% threshold.
Schools ARE an issue. If annexation happens, DeKalb will have to reconfigure.

NB: Annexation requests to Atlanta would likely go through the Atlanta delegation to the General Assembly, not to the City itself. [updated 1/25/2015]

Q: City of Decatur's annexation map: what gives the the right? Is some of their annexation also in the Together in Atlanta annexation map? Rader noted that there is no "right", the legislative delegation can decide, if less that 20% of population then the delegation votes (9 votes form a majority). Decatur argues that it is cash-strapped and needs to increase its tax base because it's currently only 15% commercial BUT the residential is high-value so the comparison ratio (of 15% being low) is only relevant for areas with homes that are similarly assessed. Decatur is the third wealthiest city in the county. Rader also noted that he does not hear from citizens supporting the annexation; it seems that the City's administrators are the one pushing the idea. It doesn't have to happen.

There is overlap in the Decatur annexation and Atlanta Annexation maps in particular in the area along Superior Ave. but no overlap in the Suburban Plaza area.

Q: If we become an island, will the legislature force us into a city? Rader said it comes to the issue of disruption in County services. In the near term, we are large enough and should not be forced into a particular jurisdiction.

Q: What is the rush? Wan answered that as far as the Atlanta annexation, it's community-driven, specifically by the folks in the Together in Atlanta map area. That the Druid Hills Charter Cluster was withdrawn also factors into it. Rush to avoid the 60% vote option. Rader added that with new cities, as well as Decatur and Avondale Estates, there is a rush to grab commercial properties. Rader said that he understands the anxiety that if our nearby commercial areas are gone, who would want us as a residential area with no commercial assets (that help cover County costs)? Commercial property brings more income to its municipality: this is how our County was designed, with lots of commercial to help keep taxes lower on the residential.

Rader said that in contrast to cities are annexing along their edges to serve their own residents, the Atlanta annexation is more balanced. He reminded us that although Emory, CDC, Childrens Healthcare, etc. are large and have a big impact, they are not commercial and do not pay taxes the way commercial properties do. Rader joked that "it's that sucking sound" when you hear about your commercial areas going away.

Q: Damage (by annexation to Atlanta) to the DeKalb Schools System through the loss of Fernbank, Druid Hills? Rader said this is subjective. It would create a challenge to the school system, a challenge that the system will need to address. It wouldn't be the death of the school system but it needs officials focused on increasing service delivery. Status quo is not worth keeping. Elected officials need to be more responsible but first we have to put good officials in place, focus on the wellbeing of the entire county and not just that district.

Q: Overcrowding in Atlanta schools--what likelihood is there of an intergovernment
compromise? Wan said that there is overcrowding in schools adjacent to the area being proposed
for annexation, i.e., schools in the Grady cluster. He can't guess at the likelihood of an agreement but he indicated that it is probably one of the more difficult pathways. There are two thoughts out there: contract services with DeKalb (to educate students at those schools) or facilities could be reconfigured so there is no impact on the current attendance area. Wan emphasized he is not aware of any official conversations between Atlanta, DeKalb and Together in Atlanta.

Q: Who pays for existing debt relating to these schools (that could move from DeKalb Co. Schools to Atlanta Schoools)? Rader said there is no debt, that the 5 year tax cycle would persist. Any ESPLOST that passes would need approval across the board.

Q: Fernbank school would become part of Atlanta? Rader said that the sales tax would persist through the cycle and the school should be unencumbered from debt by the end of that cycle. Wan added that Together in Atlanta claims that is the case but DeKalb County schools challenge the idea and Mr. Thurmond threatened litigation. Could also be that the legislature makes a decision on this. Talk to your legislators!

Q: Is there any guarantee that our kids would go to Fernbank or Druid Hills High if the neighborhood is annexed into Atlanta? Wan said that if annexed, there is no guarantee as there are no negotiations right now. If there is no reconfiguration to Atlanta schools, might be but Atlanta could choose to reconfigure its school attendance. Rader added that other things being equal, you are typically districted to a nearby school, and to remember that a K-5 school could be reconfigured to a K-7 and so on.

Q: If  Fernbank and Druid Hills are annexed, any guarantee that those currently attending but who remain unincorporated would still be able to attend? Wan said no, unless there is an intergovernment agreement in place.

Q: Are there Fernbank kids who could be displaced if the school is annexed? Yes.

Q: How about DeKalb teachers currently teaching at Druid Hills, Fernbank? Wan said there are 2 scenarios. If annexation but no intergovernment agreement, facilities would belong to APS, and would be staffed by APS teachers. DeKalb teachers wouldn't be able to teach at APS schools. APS would rehire and place teachers at those schools. If there is annexation with an intergovernment agreement, could address the issue of teachers but the default scenario is that they would be replaced by APS teachers.

Q: Why does DeKalb County seem so quiet regarding cityhood and annexation? Rader said it's not the County's decision. The County has focused on pointing issues that arise from cityhood and annexation. Rader said he'd continue to be our commissioner, our taxes would be paying for different services than they do now. Rader said that places evolve, in 25 years, could be that Fulton and DeKalb Counties merge. What is feasible for the region? Incorporation does not disconnect cities from the County or other areas of the county that are doing less well. Rader suggests that we "take off the parochial blinders" and consider what is best for all. County officials can't advocate but can give information, continue to try to improve services.

Q: Would Atlanta take us without our nearby commercial areas? Wan said yes. Atlanta is not looking at annexation as a revenue-maker; it has economies of scale. He'd love to have us all.

Q: If we were annexed to Atlanta, would we be absorbed into a new neighborhood planning unit our would we join an existing one? Wan explained that Atlanta has 20+ neighborhood planning units that are very involved in local zoning and decision-making. He doesn't know, without looking at a map but in general, if it's a small group of people, they'd join an existing group. A larger group might be split into other existing planning units, or it's possible a new unit would be created. Similar scenario would apply to council seats.

Q: How would Atlanta benefit from annexing us? Are you kidding?! Medlock is awesome!! 
I'm sure that's what Councilman Wan was thinking but what he said was that annexation allows Atlanta to play a bigger role in regional issues.

---

At this point in the meeting, Theresa Same (MANA Zoning chair and MANA Working Group member) made a few remarks about the survey. Theresa has graciously shared the notes from her presentation, below.

"I have been working with the MANA Board and a group of neighbors that we are calling the  MANA Working Group.  We have been meeting sometimes weekly since early November in an  effort to figure out how to best guide the community during these murky times.

I have been working with the group on an updated survey.  Why are we doing a new survey?  We just did one in October. The answer is that things have changed since October and in a way that has made our earlier survey results no longer a helpful tool.

What has changed?

City of Decatur – After the survey in October, which showed a preference to be annexed to the
City of Decatur, members of the Board and Working Group met again with the Mayor and the  Manager of COD to share our survey results.  COD again expressed, in no uncertain terms, that
they are not interested in annexing Medlock citing their already overcrowded school system as the main concern.  We again expressed our concern over their proposed commercial annexation which takes the entire Medline study area, including properties that are inside ouneighborhood boundaries and 8 of 11 entrance into our neighborhood.  I view this as a pretty aggressive stance, but COD shows no signs of backing down – thus our letter and petition to oppose their proposed annexation.  I think many neighbors had hoped that the legislature would force COD to take Medlock and there were early signs that this could be the case, but we have since heard our legislators back off of this stance.  For all these reasons, the MANA Board has decided that annexing to Decatur is not a viable option for our community.

La Vista Hills – LVH has released their map and decided not to include us.  They stated that this decision was made both because they felt our community has not demonstrated enough support as well as creating an island of Druid Hills and CHCA if that proposed annexation does not take place.  They did give us their assurances that if their referendum passes that they would be willing to annex us in the future if that community demonstrates the desire.  The MANA Board feels that La Vista Hills is thus not a viable option for Medlock in the immediate future.

That leaves us with Atlanta and remaining unincorporated for this Legislative Session which is what we are focusing on for right now.

As many of you know, Atlanta was the least favorite option in our last survey, which has led many to ask, why would we even pursue this option?

1.  We have been told by several neighbors that they did not believe that Atlanta was really a possibility for Medlock – I can’t tell you how many times I heard someone say that Atlanta would not cross Clairmont Road – and that they wished they could change their vote

2. Several neighbors who supported being annexed by Decatur, which was our highest vote getter, have changed their support to Atlanta

3. Now that the proposed Atlanta annexation map has been endorsed by Mayor Reed, we now know that our closest neighbor, CHCA, and 3 county schools, including our high school could go to Atlanta and many feel we should aligned with them.

4. Lastly Atlanta has stated that we have an open invitation, so we thought given the changing circumstances that it was worth finding out if there is interest in pursuing this option or not.

Our other option would be to remain in unincorporated Dekalb – be it temporarily or in the long term.  I believe that all things left unchanged, that this would be the hands down winner for our community, but as you all know things are not likely going to be the same.  All the latest indicators are that no matter what happens around us that we will be allowed to stay unincorporated for at least a year – beyond that it is unclear.

A few people have asked me why the Board has not taken a strong stance on this issue?  I think I can speak for everyone when I say that we feel it our place to represent what the majority of our community desires.  In order to hear what the majority of the community wants, we need you to answer the survey.  We have tried to bring you as much information and ways to hear your feedback as possible.  Believe me if the MANA Board felt that through our research, meeting with politicians, attending meetings, etc. that there was a clear decision about the best thing for our community, we would share that with you.  The truth is that this process continues to be a very complex situation, full of uncertainties and it is still unclear to us as to the best way to proceed.

Which brings us to our current survey...  As I stated earlier that we feel our only potential options for Medlock for this legislative session are staying in unincorporated Dekalb or asking to be included in the Atlanta Annexation map.

On the survey, you do not have to include your name, but you must include your address so that we will know that you live in the neighborhood.

Question#1 – Do you support the Medlock Area Neighborhood Association in pursuing inclusion in the potential 2015 Atlanta annexation map and subsequent referendum. Yes or No

If the majority of the respondents answer yes to this question, the MANA Board will take our survey results to City of Atlanta and ask them to include us in their map and allow us to vote in the referendum, if it comes to be, later this year.  This does not guarantee that Atlanta will include us or that this map will ever make it to a referendum.

If the majority of the respondents answer no to this question, the MANA Board will be fighting for us to remain in unincorporated Dekalb.  We will also be fighting to stay in unincorporated Dekalb if not enough people answer the survey or Atlanta does not add us to their annexation map.

Question #2  I equate this question to an insurance policy.

If all the proposed annexation/cityhood proposals (CoA, CoD, and La Vista Hills) are successful, Medlock could become an unincorporated island.  If the State Legislature decides that we will
not be allowed to remain in in unincorporated this legislative session, would you want MANA to advocate that our neighborhood be included in the map for ____________?  Atlanta annexation, La Vista City or no preference.

We don’t anticipate this happening, but it has been mentioned to us enough times that the Legislature could assign us to one of the maps that we felt that we should be prepared to advocate a stance for the community if this should arise.  Decisions would need to be made quickly and we would not have time to poll the community.  That was the intention behind this question.

Current Statistics

As of the afternoon, 251 people have completed the survey.   This is only 1/3 of the minimum number I set as our goal.  If we want the survey to be truly reflective of our community, we need to get a lot more responses than we did on our first survey and that we currently have now on this survey.  You can complete your survey here tonight or online.  The link can be found on the MANA website at medlockpark.org.  We also have neighbors going door to door, but we cannot guarantee that we can reach everyone.  We may also pass paper surveys door to door this week for those who have not completed it yet.  This will again depend on our resources.  If you want to help with this effort, please come by the table at the end of the night.

The survey is set to close on Sunday night.  We may extend it a few days if our sample is not large enough.  We will share the results after the survey is closed."

---

There were a few more questions from the audience at this point.

Q: What else can be done to get the word out about this survey? Theresa noted that in addition to this meeting and going door-to-door, the survey is online and there's lots of information in our website at medlockpark.org.

Q: Who can complete the survey? Any eligible voter, including Medlock neighborhood renters. Multiple adult household members should complete separate surveys (i.e., this is not a 1 vote per household survey).

Q: Atlanta annexation map for us? Unknown. The survey is to determine if the neighborhood, as defined, is interested in being added to an annexation map.

Q: If La Vista Hills proposal doesn't get legislative approval, could the Atlanta annexation plan still go through? Wan said that one, both, or neither could go through.

Q: What would be the Atlanta annexation boundary? Theresa said that whatever the neighborhood advocates, and would certainly advocate to commercial include areas next to homes.

Q: Are there any sponsors for these bills? Not yet.

Q: Some group is pushing for this Atlanta annexation! Lynn Ganim (MANA President) noted that no group is pushing, some neighbors are interested in the Atlanta idea and others simply want to know what the neighborhood thinks. We are just trying to get and share information.
  Q: What group is pushing? Together in Atlanta is the group that created an Atlanta annexation map. Wan clarified that Together in Atlanta and Druid Hills are advocating, but they are not pushing Medlock to do anything as Medlock is not in their map (and they don't want Medlock as we are not in the Fernbank attendance zone).

Q: If we are in favor of the Druid Hills Charter Cluster, what can be done? Wan said that to keep the schools together, fight annexation. If annexation is going to take place, fight for intergovernment agreement.

Q: Why is there such a focus on schools when there are so few kids in the neighborhood? Ganim noted that parents are passionate about their children's education, also, that there are many more children in the neighborhood now than in the recent past. Wan also added that school quality is very tied to property values.

Q: Is there a single map showing all the cityhood and annexation proposals? Decaturish.com valiantly is maintaining a map here.

Q: Could Medlock become its own township? Who would sponsor such a bill? Wan said it's not feasible, we'd have to provide 3 municipal services and have a feasible tax base.

Lastly, Schools Liaison Tanya Myers mentioned that the DeKalb County School System is searching for its next superintendent. This is a real turning point for our county and community. Additional information about community meetings happening soon will be posted on this website soon.

Annexation into Atlanta: what would that mean?

The MANA Working group has done a lot of research on our neighborhood's annexation options. Our survey did not point to Atlanta as preferred annexation goal, but much has happened since we conducted that survey: City of Decatur rejected the notion of including Medlock Park in its annexation map, and a new La Vista Hills city has been mapped but its fate in the coming legislative session is uncertain (if approved, the proposal would still go to a popular vote). Although a number of nearby communities are clamoring to remain unincorporated, many individuals believe that sooner rather than later, north DeKalb neighborhoods all will be incorporated into new or existing cities. If we accept the idea that incorporation is inevitable, it is important to educate ourselves on the impact of joining a new city [such as those being considered in the current legislative session] or joining City of Atlanta.

Comparison of Unincorporated DeKalb Governance vs City of Atlanta
This file also available here [pdf file, updated 1/17/2015]

Comparison shopping: It has been, and continues to be, impossible to create a comparison chart for proposed new cities: they do not have charters in place because they don't exist yet. We can, however, establish a comparison between being in unincorporated DeKalb County and being in City of Atlanta. The MANA Working group has created an extensive comparison table. Rep. Rahn Mayo published an abridged version of this table in a recent newsletter that was distributed to his Medlock constituents recently.

At this time, the MANA Board is not issuing any particular recommendation other than to stay informed and continue to contact our elected representatives to ensure that our neighborhood's concerns are factored into any decisions made during the current legislative session and beyond.

We are working on a new survey to ascertain the wishes of as many residents as possible and planning a MANA community meeting for January (details coming soon) timed to take place before the survey's closing date.

"Is Unincorporated DeKalb a Viable Option?

On the issue of remaining unincorporated, there is a meeting this week that may bring some answers.

"Is Unincorporated DeKalb a Viable Option?"

Acting DeKalb County CEO Lee May and Commissioner Jeff Rader will host a community meeting to discuss this topic on

Thu Jan 15 7:00 pm
Young Israel - 2056 LaVista Road

Per the CHCA site, this meeting has been organized by the Merry Hills and LaVista Park neighborhoods.

AJC poll: 69% think new cities in the metro area are a bad idea

The Sunday edition of the AJC featured several items on the 215 legislative session, include a legislative how-to section that includes information on how to contact legislators and track bills.

Also included were the results of several polls [article behind paywall] on issues such as transportation (folks want more emphasis on transportation but don't want to pay for improvements through gasoline taxes), legalizing marihuana (even split) and minimum wage (overall in favor of increasing).

The article closes with the factoid that only 25% of respondent said they supported the creation of new cities in the metro are. "Sixty-nine percent gave the idea a thumbs-down."

Action alert: contact your elected officials to oppose City of Decatur's unreasonable commercial annexation plan

City Schools of Decatur has voted in favor of Decatur's unreasonable commercial annexation plan that, if approved, will remove $5+ million dollars/year and more from DeKalb County schools. MANA Secretary and school liaison Tanya Myers and MANA Treasurer Judy Perras attended the meeting, appealing the school board to remember that as part of DeKalb County, City Schools of Decatur share the overarching mandate of educating all DeKalb students. While the COD school board seemed sympathetic to our situation and voiced some concern for  impact on Dekalb County Schools, at the end of the day,  they voted  to support the City Commission's plan.

WABE and the AJC have reported on the ongoing uncertainty triggered by annexation proposals, in particular their impact on public schools; both approached MANA for comment.

MANA maintains that it is wrong to allow City of Decatur's annexation to go forward without studying its impact on the County at large. The same goes for other cityhood movements and annexations. There are opportunistic, non-inclusive forces at play that want to impose new cities and annexations without allowing DeKalb citizens the opportunity to review all necessary information. We oppose these maneuvers. And we are not alone: other neighborhoods are speaking out against this mad rush, as noted in a recent press release.

MANA has forwarded the letter below to the DeKalb County delegation. Any who share these sentiments are welcome to use the text below, in part or in full, to contact the DeKalb Delegation and City of Decatur to share these grave concerns. Emails appear at the end of this post.

---

We, the Medlock Area Neighborhood Association (MANA) Working Group on Annexation, are writing to oppose, in the strongest possible terms, the City of Decatur’s plans to annex commercial properties within and adjacent to our Medlock neighborhood. (map below created by Brad Mayfield)

The City of Decatur has proposed to annex and strip away commercial property that is historically and geographically connected to our neighborhood without also accepting the residential homes and families that support and rely on these businesses. As detailed below, Decatur’s unreasonable annexation proposal would

·       Irreparably harm our DeKalb Schools and the quality of our children’s education through the decreased local tax base,

·       Isolate our Medlock community as an unincorporated island, while also wholly eliminating our neighborhood’s voice in all governmental decisions that deal with surrounding commercial and residential zoning and development, and

·       Pilfer the commercial assets of our neighborhood, while ignoring the well-being of our residential community and Medlock’s long-standing commitment to these surrounding developments.

MANA is a voluntary citizens’ association that was incorporated in 2004 to represent Medlock Park, a neighborhood of more than 1,300 homes and families just north of Decatur. The surrounding businesses where we work, shop, and dine, such as Melton’s App and Tap, Suburban Plaza, and Emory Commons, are an integral part of our community. Medlock residents support them on a daily basis, and they support our schools and children. We have stated our objections to these annexation plans in two meetings with representatives of Decatur and made specific, reasonable requests which have been ignored.

The City of Decatur has made it clear that their annexation plans include our businesses but exclude our homes because they want the expanding commercial revenue without adding more students to their school system. This is unfair to MANA families. These businesses generate more than $5 million for our DeKalb schools, a figure that will only increase with our current revitalization efforts. Annexation of these commercial properties by Decatur, without our associated residential areas, means that, while Medlock residents can shop locally, most taxes will benefit the City of Decatur, not our community or DeKalb County. This would translate into a decreased tax base for DeKalb County, greater financial stress on our DeKalb County schools, and likely higher taxes for local property owners.

Over the past several years, MANA has been very involved in the development of surrounding commercial areas for the benefit of DeKalb County and our neighborhood.

·       While the City of Decatur has largely ignored our neighborhood efforts, MANA has been deeply involved in the Cross-Neighborhoods Committee for redevelopment of Scott Boulevard Baptist Church and Suburban Plaza, as well as the Atlanta Regional Commission/DeKalb Medline LCI along Lawrenceville Highway bordering our neighborhood’s entire east side. MANA and other local civic associations have devoted thousands of hours towards shaping these commercial assets in a locally sensitive and responsible manner. And DeKalb County, with support from the Atlanta Regional Commission, has invested financially in the project. Only now, after enormous community efforts have addressed the most intractable development issues, has the City of Decatur “laid claim” to these rapidly expanding commercial zones that they had no hand in growing.

·       The City of Decatur’s unreasonable annexation plans would also effectively leave our Medlock community as an unincorporated island in DeKalb County without a voice in adjacent property development and no viable commercial assets. (See map.) This could, quite literally, place our residents in the shadow of businesses when the City of Decatur chooses to rezone existing parcels without opposition.  For example, if Decatur chose to allow high-density development alongside single-family homes, MANA residents would have no say in the process. Decatur’s annexation “land grab” would both isolate and silence our thriving community.

As citizens of DeKalb, we understand that municipal maps within the county are in flux. We strongly feel that Decatur’s unilateral annexation approach is unfair, disingenuous, and threatens to cut off our vibrant Medlock neighborhood from the businesses we support while irreparably harming our schools. If Decatur insists on taking adjacent commercial property, it should also accept the entire Medlock residential area; it should certainly not be permitted to violate the integrity of the neighborhood by picking and choosing what it wants without regard to the best interests of DeKalb citizens.

We appeal to you, our elected representatives, to ensure that changes to municipal boundaries are made in a fair manner and provide the maximum benefit to all of the county’s residents.

Thank you for your time and attention.

Sincerely,

Members of the MANA Board
Members of the MANA Working Group on Annexation

Joanne Bryan, Lesley Cogburn, Barb Dalton, Carrie Engleman, Lynn Ganim, Elizabeth Glass, Jason Goldstein, Cindi Johnson, Sharon Johnson, Patrick Kelley, Emily Mann,  Jeff Mercante, Tanya Myers, Emily Osteen Johnston, Judy Perras, Cathy Quinones, Suzan Rowe, Theresa Same, Mary Shellman, Donna Skelcy, Andy Walton, Kirsten Widner

House Governmental Affairs Committee

Carter, Amy, Chairman	amy.carter@house.ga.gov
Brockway, Buzz	buzz.brockway@house.ga.gov
Taylor, Darlene K.	darlene.taylor@house.ga.gov
Brooks, Tyrone	tyrone.brooks@house.ga.gov
Fleming, Barry	barry.fleming@house.ga.gov
Floyd, Hugh	hugh.floyd@house.ga.gov
Hamilton, Mark	mark.hamilton@house.ga.gov
Hightower, Dustin	dustin.hightower@house.ga.gov
Kidd, E. Culver "Rusty"	rusty.kidd@house.ga.gov
Meadows, John	john.meadows@house.ga.gov
Morgan, Alisha Thomas	alisha.morgan@house.ga.gov
Mosby, Howard	howard.mosby@house.ga.gov
O`Neal, Larry	larry.oneal@house.ga.gov
Oliver, Mary Margaret	mmo@mmolaw.com
Powell, Alan	alan.powell@house.ga.gov

Easy cut/paste:
amy.carter@house.ga.gov
buzz.brockway@house.ga.gov
darlene.taylor@house.ga.gov
tyrone.brooks@house.ga.gov
barry.fleming@house.ga.gov
hugh.floyd@house.ga.gov
mark.hamilton@house.ga.gov
dustin.hightower@house.ga.gov
rusty.kidd@house.ga.gov
john.meadows@house.ga.gov
alisha.morgan@house.ga.gov
howard.mosby@house.ga.gov
larry.oneal@house.ga.gov
mmo@mmolaw.com
alan.powell@house.ga.gov

DeKALB COUNTY LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION

GEORGIA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES http://www.house.ga.gov/Representatives/en-US/HouseMembersList.aspx Speaker David Ralston  david.ralston@house.ga.gov
Last Name	First Name	District	City	Email
Abrams	Stacey	89	Atlanta	stacey.abrams@house.ga.gov
Bennet	Karen	94		kb51701@aol.com
Dawkins-Haigler	Dee	91	Lithonia	dee.dawkins-haigler@house.ga.gov
Drenner	Karla	85	Avondale	karla.drenner@house.ga.gov
Henson	Michele	86	Stone Mountain	michele.henson@house.ga.gov
Holcomb	Scott	81	Atlanta	scott.holcomb@house.ga.gov
Jacobs	Mike	80	Atlanta	mike.jacobs@house.ga.gov
Kendrick	Dar’shun	93	Lithonia	darshun.kendrick@house.ga.gov
Mayo	Rahn	91	Decatur	rahnmayo@gmail.com
Mitchell	Billy	88	Stone Mountain	billy.mitchell@house.ga.gov
Mosby	Howard	90	Atlanta	howard.mosby@house.ga.gov
Oliver	Mary Margaret	82	Decatur	mmo@mmolaw.com
Peterson-Anderson	Tonya	92		Tonya.anderson@house.ga.gov
Stephenson	Pam	90	Atlanta	pamela.stephenson@house.ga.gov
Taylor	Tom	79	Dunwoody	tom.taylor@house.ga.gov
Williams	Earnest “Coach”	87	Avondale Estates	ernest.williams@house.ga.gov
GEORGIA SENATE http://www.senate.ga.gov/senators/en-US/SenateMembersList.aspx
Last Name	First Name	District	City	Email
Butler	Gloria	55	Stone Mountain	georgia.butler@senate.ga.gov
Parent	Elena	42	Decatur	elena@elenaparent.com
Davenport	Gail	44	Jonesboro	gail.davenport@senate.ga.gov
Henson	Steve	41	Tucker	stevehenson@mindspring.com
Jones	Emanuel	10	Decatur	emanj@mindspring.com
Millar	Fran	40	Atlanta	fran.millar@senate.ga.gov
Ramsey, Sr.	Ronald	43	Decatur	ronald.ramsey@senate.ga.gov

Easy cut/paste:

stacey.abrams@house.ga.gov
kb51701@aol.com
dee.dawkins-haigler@house.ga.gov
karla.drenner@house.ga.gov
michele.henson@house.ga.gov
scott.holcomb@house.ga.gov
mike.jacobs@house.ga.gov
darshun.kendrick@house.ga.gov
rahnmayo@gmail.com
billy.mitchell@house.ga.gov
howard.mosby@house.ga.gov
mmo@mmolaw.com
Tonya.anderson@house.ga.gov
pamela.stephenson@house.ga.gov
tom.taylor@house.ga.gov
ernest.williams@house.ga.gov
georgia.butler@senate.ga.gov
elena@elenaparent.com
gail.davenport@senate.ga.gov
stevehenson@mindspring.com
emanj@mindspring.com
fran.millar@senate.ga.gov

ronald.ramsey@senate.ga.gov

CITY of DECATUR, GEORGIA, LEADERS

Last Name	First Name	Title	Email
Drake	Scott	District 1 Commissioner	Scott.Drake@decaturga.com
Baskett	James	Mayor	Jim.Baskett@decaturga.com
Boykin	Fred	District 1 Commissioner	Fred.Boykin@decaturga.com
Cunningham	Kecia	District 2 Commissioner	Kecia.Cunningham@decaturga.com
Garrett	Patti	District 2 Commissioner	Patti.Garrett@decaturga.com
Merris	Peggy	City Manager	peggy.merriss@decaturga.com
Saxton	Hugh	Deputy City Manager	hugh.saxon@decaturga.com

Easy cut/paste:

Scott.Drake@decaturga.com
Jim.Baskett@decaturga.com
Fred.Boykin@decaturga.com
Kecia.Cunningham@decaturga.com
Patti.Garrett@decaturga.com
peggy.merriss@decaturga.com
hugh.saxon@decaturga.com