Save Tucker!

 We've wondered why more people are not speaking up like Joe Bembry (below) about the new city proposals.  Do people outside the proposed city limits of Tucker or Lavista Hills understand the impact of what could happen if voters approve these new government structures?  If they do not, and they are worried about it, why aren't they trying to reach out to the voters here and ask that they consider remaining unincorporated so we can solve our problems together? When Tucker, Briarcliff and Lakeside proposals failed to pass the committee in 2014, we thought that was the end of this talk.  The city proposals should have died .. just like any other bill is supposed to fail when it cannot pass the committee it is in.  But somehow it came back.  Through no extra advocacy or effort that anyone is aware of, the state elected officials just decided suddenly, on their own, to take up the cause once again.  Did they not hear the same things we did?  Were they not clear that the majority

originally published in the Tucker Patch. When we first started our inquiry into the proposed city of Lakeside and its impact on our community of Tucker, we were leaning toward cityhood as a possible solution.  And, Tucker Civic quickly told us that it was not in the cards financially.  Fast forward to today and they are advocating as individuals (the groups has no official position) for cityhood even though we have taken on enormous areas not considered Tucker and lost significant portions of our commercial districts. And, here we are today being painted as the anti-city force.  We've never been anti-city.  We just want what is best for everyone and we are more and more doubtful that these particular types of cities will solve any problems. Here's a look back at how we first became involved: (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( LETTER TO TUCKER CIVIC ABOUT POTENTIAL FOR CITYHOOD Feb. 7