Lakeside cityhood bill clears Georgia Senate (Atlanta, Tucker: taxes, live in, zoning)

[JPD]

Originally Posted by arjay57

I would support Tucker it they want to form their own city.

If they feel strongly about it I am surprised they haven't already done so.

SPECIAL LEGISLATIVE EDITION OF TUCKER 2014 | City of Tucker 2014City of Tucker 2014 | Tucker, Georgia

They do wantto form a city. The reason they haven't done so in the past is because of an older population that tended to be very tight with their money and the cityhood movement of the past wasn't able to raise the necessary funds. Many of the old-timers in Tucker have died or been displaced and there's a younger crowd living there now that is very interested in becoming a city. Funds were raised, studies have been completed.

If Lakeside becomes a city with their currently proposed borders which engulf two of Tucker's elementary schools and most of the more affluent neighborhoods, Tucker will never be able to incorporate.

[jsvh]

Tucker should have existed before Lakeside. That is why taking initiative on local control is important before it is decided for you.

[arjay57]

I wish the best for Tucker and hope they haven't waited too long.

[bornjacksonian]

I doubt if it will make it through the House. Only time will tell.

[jeoff]

"The Lakeside bill’s sponsor, Sen. Fran Millar, R-Dunwoody, said he would be willing to combine Lakeside and Tucker into a single bill. "If Tucker's not going to happen, I don't want to leave those people behind," he said."

Does this mean that they are thinking of adding the entire Tucker area to Lakeside?

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by jeoff

"The Lakeside bill’s sponsor, Sen. Fran Millar, R-Dunwoody, said he would be willing to combine Lakeside and Tucker into a single bill. "If Tucker's not going to happen, I don't want to leave those people behind," he said."

Does this mean that they are thinking of adding the entire Tucker area to Lakeside?

I think he is suggesting both cities on one bill. Which sounds like a win to me. But it is a bit ambiguous.

[jeoff]

Originally Posted by jsvh

I think he is suggesting both cities on one bill. Which sounds like a win to me. But it is a bit ambiguous.

But, aren't the proposals pretty much mutually exclusive? I mean they both overlap too much for both cities to be viable independently. There is not enough commercial area for both.

[WanderingImport]

Originally Posted by jeoff

But, aren't the proposals pretty much mutually exclusive? I mean they both overlap too much for both cities to be viable independently. There is not enough commercial area for both.

I don't think commercial areas are needed for incorporation of a city/town.

Either way, I hope it does not happen.

[jeoff]

Originally Posted by WanderingImport

I don't think commercial areas are needed for incorporation of a city/town.

Either way, I hope it does not happen.

There are a certain amount of services that an incorporated city must provide--that requires "revenue", which means taxes--I think that commercial areas generally are the net source of tax revenue.

[WanderingImport]

Originally Posted by jeoff

There are a certain amount of services that an incorporated city must provide--that requires "revenue", which means taxes--I think that commercial areas generally are the net source of tax revenue.

There are also residential property taxes which provide revenue.