Skip to main content

Proposed Cities Have Not Disclosed Real Costs, Attorney Says

This letter was posted on the Decaturish site, under the title "Just Say No to New Cities."  It is true for both the city of Lavista Hills as well as the city of Tucker. 
Dear Decaturish,
It is my understanding that the LaVista Hills movement is upset with the AJC article that the proposed revenue will be less than anticipated.
I am more concerned about other misrepresentations to the community by the pro-city movement. The pro-LaVista Hills group in public meetings contends that court functions will remain in DeKalb County despite the fact that they are going to duplicate services.
Regardless of what you call it, leaders 
in the city effort have been less than 
transparent about the cost of 
services and where they plan 
to get the funds.
LaVista Hills residents will have to support the County Court system whether there is a new city or not. However, LaVista Hills will also unnecessarily duplicate services for municipal court functions. Municipal taxes will be used to support a Municipal Court, judge, public defender, solicitor, court clerk (and staff) and city attorney. (All these functions are currently run by the county.)
Of course there will be taxes to pay these employees or 1099 contractors, along with buildings (rented or built) to house the Municipal Court.
If the LaVista Hills Yes movement did not mention the court system in their presentation to the public I would not be as concerned.
However, by blatantly misleading the public before they get into office, I am extremely concerned about what happens if they get in office.
When it comes to cityhood, just say “no”.
David Markus, P.C.
Attorney at Law

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 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…

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…