Skip to main content

Brand Dilution (blog about the Carl Vinson Institute)

MONDAY, APRIL 21, 2014 by http://theotherdunwoody.blogspot.com/


In the local city stampede one of the most powerful brands is that of the Carl Vinson Institute. While there are alternatives a CVI study is all but required to get the citihood boulder rolling down the hill. One political use of the study is as a measure of support--there must be enough sincere interest from the City Crusaders to pony up around $30,000. Once the study is successfully completed it becomes a stick to beat back any naysayers with a few simple words : "the CVI study says that the City of St. Somewhere will be financially viable."

And generally that works.

However the recent crusades ran into a spot of bother with overlapping land grabs. Since the CVI study is basically a back of the envelope balance between a proposed city's revenue and service costs with the former largely supported by business taxes and fees and the latter associated with residential areas the actual map of a proposed city is critical. It was the competing city maps showing Northlake (and its associated revenue) on the books of more than one proposal that not only made it clear that residents cannot afford their own city but that there are not enough businesses to pilfer to pay for all the cities on the docket. While the issue of multiple claimants on the Northlake revenue was never resolved one thing did happen rather late in the game--maps were redrawn! To be very, very clear redrawing a proposed city map after the CVI study is complete makes that study worthless.

To propose that a CVI study based on a map that is no longer valid is still somehow valid is not only logical nonsense it calls into question the validity of these feasibility studies. For CVI to allow these studies to be bandied about after map changes dilutes their brand and undermines their credibility. CVI should make it clear that map changes invalidate previous studies based on different maps.

These changes also undermine the process.

Changes make it clear that City Crusaders are either ignorant or lying when they claim significant, majority support for their plans--were that the case changes to the map would not occur. Furthermore these changes make a joke of the process put in place to protect citizens and the legislature should make a simple change to restore integrity: whenever a map change is made any previous study must be re-done or updated before the march to citihood continues.

Popular posts from this blog

Taxpayers and Voters are Unhappy with Commissioner Barnes-Sutton:

IMPORTANT RUNOFF ELECTIONTUESDAY, JULY 26!  DEKALB COUNTY'S DISTRICT 4 CHOOSES BETWEEN INCUMBENT BARNES-SUTTON OR CHALLENGER BRADSHAW! 

If you DID NOT vote in the last election, do not despair, you can STILL VOTE in the July 26 Runoff so long as  you were registered to vote at the time of the first election.  To have a say in this runoff, you will need to ask for a "Democratic ballot" for you to cast your vote on.

From the desk of the group "Unhappy Taxpayers and Voters," we received the following:

To DeKalb Teachers and Georgia Teachers:

Commissioner Sharon Barnes Sutton (of the 4th District in DeKalb County) has a long history of arriving to work late (Commission meetings and/or committee meetings) and/or not showing up at all. We ask that you review the following records (prior performance and work history/records of arriving to work on time and/or showing up) and ask if teachers that are not elected officials could get away with the same violations:

How ma…

Tucker Township? A Vision or a Pipe Dream?

Who drew this map?  We are not really sure.  We stumbled upon it recently while looking for Tucker election results. We do, however, think this map, called "Tucker Township" actually shows a good compromise between Tucker and Lavista Hills that could have worked well for everyone.   It offers a great way to share the Northlake area commercial tax revenue.  So, why didn't anyone suggest something like this  prior to putting forth competing bills in the 2013 and 2014 legislative sessions?  And, why is Tucker's city still being allowed to move forward when it has been called "unconstitutional" by even the legislators who supported it?
Limited services government in the form of a new city is something that the Georgia constitution does not allow, apparently.  But, unless citizens decide to fight the creation of Tucker or Peachtree Corners, two of such limited cities are going to continue operating until someone tells them that they cannot.  
Save Tucker…

Tucker Behaving Badly

Newly elected Tucker Mayor Frank Auman (center) and four council-members were sworn in to their positions on March 8 at Tucker High School.  The council members represented exactly 2 of the 3 districts.  Despite the fact that they were not bound by any particular charter requirement to do so, they decided to move forward without the conclusion of District 2's election, which was held over by the need for a runoff.

When met with objections, they promptly began holding meetings anyway.  And they hired staff members, specifically lawyers, more specifically lawyers who are experts in election laws and understanding the charter. 

The seats for District 2 were decided in a runoff election March 29. And April 1, the results were deemed finalized by the Elections Supervisor in DeKalb County.  A separate swearing in ceremony was held at Tucker Recreation Center for them.

When Auman was elected mayor, he said his first goal is to build a foundation for the city.
“We have to get the rev…