Skip to main content

One of Many Unanswered Emails

During the fight to save Tucker and learn about whether a city was the right way to go about protecting our borders from hostile Lavista Hills / Lakeside City advocates, we emailed and spoke to many state and county officials.  There were time when they were forthcoming and seemingly understanding.  Other times we were completely ignored. 

We were so busy that we did not always have time to post our emails for our followers to read, or we were waiting to post them once we received a response.  But, some of our questions didn't receive responses and they remain as doubts in the minds of many. 

To let you know about the work we tried to accomplish, as we run across emails that we think you would like to know about, we will post them on the blog. 

We have XXX'd out the names of private individuals to protect the privacy of ordinary citizens.  Politicians, however, are public figures and so we have left their names and emails in tact.
Here's one of many:

From: XXXXX  (Save Tucker!)
To: Rep. Mary Margaret Oliver <>; Howard Mosby <>; Rep. Billy Mitchell <>; Rep. Karla Drenner <>; Rep. Earnst Williams <>; Ann Abramowitz <>; Rep. Scott Holcomb <>
Cc: Sen. Steve Henson SD 41 <>; Sen. Gail Davenport <>; Sen. Ron Ramsey <>;
Sent: Thursday, March 5, 2015 7:45 AM
Subject: Fw: Results of the Boundary Committee

We did not get a reply to this email.   (please see below)  Can anyone in the Delegation try to answer these important questions for us?  We will post the answers on our Save Tucker! blog site and FB page.
Thank you,
Save Tucker!
Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2015 6:29 PM
Subject: Results of the Boundary Committee
Reps. Brockway and Carter,
Thank you both for your careful consideration of the factors involved with the proposed cities of Tucker and LaVista Hills.  We have heard a few questions in our “Save Tucker!” group that we would like to pose to you:
1.)  Can you ask the committee or staff members to double check the accuracy of the population figures that were presented along with the final map?  It does not seem to be correct when compared to the population figures given in the Census or presented by the city groups with their original maps.  We are concerned that any viability analysis for the city of Tucker will be grossly misrepresented if they mistakenly use a small population estimate when determining how much revenue it will take to support the services they plan to offer initially.
2.)  Is there anything that your committee can do to ask the city advocates to make their draft charter documents public?  As Rep. Tom Taylor mentioned at the boundary hearing, it is very important that the public knows exactly what it is that they may be eventually ask to vote for or against.
3.)  Is there any rule or law that speaks to the transfer of assets between an unincorporated area when it joins a city?   Do all assets necessarily become the cost of the new city to upkeep, including schools?  What will happen to school buildings if they are incorporated along with the rest of the land to a neighboring city or another county and a separate school system?
4.)  What is the  position of the committee regarding the very large refugee resettlement population that lives in DeKalb County as part of a federal / state cooperative agreement?  Would the formation of cities require this agreement to come to a halt since the unincorporated areas are becoming smaller and smaller and could be burdened significantly if they are expected to take on the highest cost areas by themselves in order to provide police and other social services?  The cost of the refugee resettlement is not something that has been clearly calculated or presented to the public and is beyond our own knowledge or control and not something that follows natural trends for growth/decline.
Thank you again for your time.  We would very much appreciate a reply and  would like to post the answers on our blog site for the members of our group.  Hopefully, this will cut back the number of individual emails you may receive on this same topic. 
Kind regards,
Save Tucker!

Popular posts from this blog

Welcome to Smoke Rise, Soon to be Tucker, GA

The driving force behind the city of Tucker has been the leadership within the community known as "Smoke Rise, GA."  Smoke Rise residents currently have addresses that say "Stone Mountain, GA" and many of them worked hard in order to create a separate identity for themselves, petitioning the U.S. Post Office to change their official name to "Smoke Rise."  While the Post Office did not agree to change the official name, they did agree to allow "Smoke Rise" as a recognized alternative to "Stone Mountain" that could be used interchangeably as long as it accompanied their 30087 zip code.

It is important to note that these residents did not ask the Post Office to recognize their use of "Tucker" as an acceptable alternative.  They asked to be called "Smoke Rise."

It appears that zip codes and address labels are important to them, just as our Tucker zip code is important to us.  And, while we do understand that Smoke Rise…

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…