South Fulton residents could get a vote on incorporation (Atlanta: theater, gated community)

[South Fulton Facts]

Dr. Peter Bluestone, one of the authors of the 2014 South Fulton feasibility study says, "You really have to look at these things with the numbers, and they haven't been presented to me. It may be possible. There's just no way to say if they annex this much property, then it doesn't work. If they don't, then it does.

"If someone is to ask us to comment on the changes, then we would have to do a new report."

Georgia Unfiltered | Telling the Truth

South Fulton Feasibility Study Author: No Way to Determine Annexation Impact without New Study

Is the proposed city of South Fulton financially viable?

Some say yes, and point to a 2014 Georgia State University study that confirms their belief.

Others point to the wide swath of annexations occurring after the 2014 study was produced, and say no . . .

. . . the proposed city of South Fulton is not viable.

Since the South Fulton cityhood movement was revived in 2013, after a six year hiatus, registered voters and property owners have flooded local municipalities with annexation petitions in an effort to beat the 1 July 2016 deadline before South Fulton's borders are locked for the November referendum.

In a report to the Fulton County Commission late last year, county staff put a hard count on the amount of unincorporated south Fulton land lost to annexation. Fulton County received ten petitions for annexations from five different cities, accounting for nearly 9.6% of the land in unincorporated south Fulton. That amount adds up to 2,480 people and 6,275 acres. These numbers do not include the annexation petitions recently received by Atlanta, Chattahoochee Hills, and College Park.

Given these numbers, some are questioning whether the proposed city of South Fulton is still viable.

South Fulton United, a pro-city group, says yes.

An exchange with cityhood skeptics on the South Fulton United Facebook page seemed to dismiss the impact of annexations.

"Petitions don't mean a thing until they are approved," South Fulton United posted. "But guess what? Whether Publix and those Cascade businesses goe [sic] to Atlanta or not we get their money without having to spend city resources to provide fire and police for the area. So its a win win. We don't have to provide services, but we still get revenue because we will be one of the 3 required signatures for LOST."

Dr. Peter Bluestone, Senior Research Associate with the Fiscal Research Center at Georgia State University, says it's a bit more complicated than that.

"Cities do have flexibility," Dr. Bluestone said. "Once a city is incorporated, they obviously have choices on their level of taxation and on their level of services to be provided; and they can change that mix.

Bluestone, along with Dr. John Matthews, authored the 2014 Report on the City of South Fulton: Potential Revenues and Expenditures.

"Based on these estimates and given the assumptions that are detailed in this report, we find that the City of South Fulton is financially feasible," the report reads.

In a telephone interview with Georgia Unfiltered, Dr. Bluestone said the 2014 feasibility study was a snapshot in time.

"What we put out was a report based on the situation as it was when we wrote the report," Dr. Bluestone told Georgia Unfiltered. "Given the amount of revenue and the level of expenditure, does this city look like its viable?"

When asked if the proposed city of South Fulton could remain viable in the face of finalized and pending annexations, Dr. Bluestone called it an "interesting situation."

"You really have to look at these things with the numbers, and they haven't been presented to me," Dr. Bluestone said. "It may be possible. There's just no way to say if they annex this much property, then it doesn't work. If they don't, then it does.

"If someone is to ask us to comment on the changes, then we would have to do a new report," Dr. Bluestone conceded.

Fulton County Commissioner Marvin Arrington, who represents part of the proposed city, says he believes the area is still viable even with the pending annexation requests.

Still, Arrington said, he plans on voting no on any commercial annexation that comes before the Fulton County Commission.

"I'm voting no to any commercial annexation before June 30th," Commissioner Arrington wrote in an email exchange with Georgia Unfiltered. "I don't believe it's fair to new city. If annexations are not completed by June 30th then they can not go forward. I will ask all other commissioners to do the same."

[cqholt]

Originally Posted by fourthwarden

Why? If the tax payers and the city are willing to take on the burden to supply services to an area the needs it, I see no issue with that.

Otherwise, you just end up with pockets of areas that can't finance themselves.


I suppose the distinction is in net benefit... since an area that starts out as a drain could become an income generating area (brownfield reclamation and clean up efforts opening up redevelopment), and an area that starts out as a generating area could fall to be a drain (industrial facilities closing and leaving lots of people without work / no longer paying taxes).

If the existing taxpaying citizens are allowed to vote on the annexation, then I can see your point, but some of these annexations are using the other method.

[South Fulton Facts]

Originally Posted by cqholt

If the existing taxpaying citizens are allowed to vote on the annexation, then I can see your point, but some of these annexations are using the other method.

Why should other property owners be allowed to vote on what I do with my property?

If I am contiguous to an existing city, and choose to annex, that is my right.

[demonta4]

Originally Posted by South Fulton Facts

Why should other property owners be allowed to vote on what I do with my property?

If I am contiguous to an existing city, and choose to annex, that is my right.

You got it backwards. What's happening is a few homeowners are deciding the fate of a whole neighborhood/subdivision. No one's stopping a single homeowner from annexing. (Not saying I'm against annexation, just as long as everyone in a neighborhood agrees)

[cqholt]

Originally Posted by South Fulton Facts

Why should other property owners be allowed to vote on what I do with my property?

If I am contiguous to an existing city, and choose to annex, that is my right.

There are 2 options that the state has set as annexation. One allows existing citizens to vote on multiple-parcel annexations; eg: we voted on several parcels south of Glennwood and the East Lake GC.

[South Fulton Facts]

Originally Posted by cqholt

There are 2 options that the state has set as annexation. One allows existing citizens to vote on multiple-parcel annexations; eg: we voted on several parcels south of Glennwood and the East Lake GC.

State law, specifically O.C.G.A. § 36-36-16, is the only section relating to annexation that requires a referendum, and it only comes into play if the Georgia General Assembly passes local legislation "proposing annexation of any area comprised of more than 50 percent by acreage of property used for residential purposes."

O.C.G.A. § 36-36-16(b) reads as follows:

"Such bill may include a requirement for referendum approval of the annexation under such terms and conditions as specified in such local law; provided, however, if the number of residents in the area to be annexed exceeds 3 percent of the population of the municipal corporation or 500 people, whichever is less, as determined by the most recent United States decennial census, referendum approval shall be required in the area to be annexed. The cost of holding the referendum required by this article shall be paid from funds of the municipality proposing the annexation."

All other annexations are governed under either the 60% method or the 100% method.

I would also add that annexation in Georgia is much more difficult than creating new cities. A majority of the minority, meaning a low-turnout election, can decide whether a cityhood referendum is approved or rejected.

Annexation requires residents physically going door-to-door, convincing their neighbors and business owners to sign the petition.

A cityhood referendum only requires 50% of the people who actually show up and vote to approve it.

Annexation requires either more than 50%. It requires either 100% or 60%.

I would suggest to anyone reading this that annexation requires a higher threshold, and as such is more representative of the will of the people than a referendum.

[Saintmarks]

Originally Posted by South Fulton Facts

State law, specifically O.C.G.A. § 36-36-16, is the only section relating to annexation that requires a referendum, and it only comes into play if the Georgia General Assembly passes local legislation "proposing annexation of any area comprised of more than 50 percent by acreage of property used for residential purposes."

O.C.G.A. § 36-36-16(b) reads as follows:

"Such bill may include a requirement for referendum approval of the annexation under such terms and conditions as specified in such local law; provided, however, if the number of residents in the area to be annexed exceeds 3 percent of the population of the municipal corporation or 500 people, whichever is less, as determined by the most recent United States decennial census, referendum approval shall be required in the area to be annexed. The cost of holding the referendum required by this article shall be paid from funds of the municipality proposing the annexation."

All other annexations are governed under either the 60% method or the 100% method.

I would also add that annexation in Georgia is much more difficult than creating new cities. A majority of the minority, meaning a low-turnout election, can decide whether a cityhood referendum is approved or rejected.

Annexation requires residents physically going door-to-door, convincing their neighbors and business owners to sign the petition.

A cityhood referendum only requires 50% of the people who actually show up and vote to approve it.

Annexation requires either more than 50%. It requires either 100% or 60%.

I would suggest to anyone reading this that annexation requires a higher threshold, and as such is more representative of the will of the people than a referendum.

While I knew all the facts you list, hadn't come to the summary you so succinctly word in your final sentence. Excellent post.

You are rather new here. Please keep posting on this forum, we need some new blood. Especially blood connected to a good brain.

[jero23]

Another update includes the City of Atlanta now processing the annexation petitions for Sandtown and multiple neighborhoods along Cascade and New Hope roads. This is interesting because the entire unincorporated peninsula that existed on the westside of Atlanta is about to be enclosed by these annexations.

[bu2]

Originally Posted by Saintmarks

While I knew all the facts you list, hadn't come to the summary you so succinctly word in your final sentence. Excellent post.

You are rather new here. Please keep posting on this forum, we need some new blood. Especially blood connected to a good brain.

Well annexation can also be through a vote approved by the legislature, just like new cities. So its not harder. Only the petition methods are harder.

[jero23]

Originally Posted by bu2

Well annexation can also be through a vote approved by the legislature, just like new cities. So its not harder. Only the petition methods are harder.

However, there are some states like neighboring Alabama where municipalities can have annex at will. Birmingham has annexed at will for decades now and has as sprawling boundaries as a municipality as cities like Oklahoma City, Dallas, and Houston. Georgia's annexation law was basically written to prevent Atlanta and other larger cities from annexing surrounding sprawling areas, so instead basically every other larger city (with the exception of Savannah) in the state have merged with their counties instead..