South Fulton residents could get a vote on incorporation (Atlanta: appointed, house)

[Airforceguy]

Personally I would vote against a proposed South Fulton City. I think Atlanta, Union City, College Park and Fairburn should have a chance to annex these areas.

A bill that would allow Fulton County’s last unincorporated area to vote on whether it wants to be a city was resurrected Tuesday a week after was defeated in committee.

And in resurrection, it was approved unanimously by members of the Senate’s State and Local Governmental Operations committee. Its next hurdle is the Senate, then it must return to the House for approval. Its outcome is still uncertain.

Even this much progress, though, was exciting for Rep. Roger Bruce, D-Atlanta, who sponsored HB 514.

“They just did the right thing,” he said. “It restores your faith in the democratic process.”If approved, the proposal would allow all of South Fulton’s residents to decide whether they wanted to incorporate into a single city. The measure was stopped two years ago, and again earlier this session. Last week, a competing proposal to annex all of the unincorporated area into neighboring cities was shot down by the Fulton County delegation. The bill to allow a single city of South Fulton resurfaced this week.

When the measure was defeated along partisan lines last week, residents said they were disappointed that they would not get a chance to vote on cityhood. Since then, Bruce and others have been talking to committee members in an effort to convince them that a city of South Fulton is viable.

For a decade, Bruce said, the area has essentially had its own police and fire departments, administered through the county. A feasibility study showed it would have a surplus in the millions.

South Fulton residents could get a vote on incorporation | www.myajc.com

[primaltech]

If there is a new city, first of all they would need a better name/ unique identity than "South Fulton". Something like 'Campbellton', or 'Camp Creek' sounds a lot better.

And regardless, the section north/east of Camp Creek Pkwy should be in Atlanta.

[Airforceguy]

I agree with you. I think areas east of Camp Creek should go to Atlanta. Honestly though I don't see this bill passing this late in the session, plus isn't the general assembly studying how to change the rules of how an area can become a city?

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by Airforceguy

I agree with you. I think areas east of Camp Creek should go to Atlanta.

Why so? I'm not challenging you, just asking.

[primaltech]

Originally Posted by Airforceguy

I agree with you. I think areas east of Camp Creek should go to Atlanta. Honestly though I don't see this bill passing this late in the session, plus isn't the general assembly studying how to change the rules of how an area can become a city?

What they need is some kind of incorporated entity that is also not a city. Then this area, and areas like East Cobb could look at something like that. And LaVista Hills. Anything that doesn't have an historical center.

Johns Creek, Milton, and Peachtree Corners should have been that. 'Township' or whatever. Unlikely now, but they should be downgraded, because they simply are not cities in any kind of sense. Though, maybe now they will be gradually retrofitted to resemble cities with central town centers and a local identity and sense of place.

[primaltech]

Originally Posted by arjay57

Why so? I'm not challenging you, just asking.

For one, look at how funky the borders would be:

https://www.google.com/maps/place/At...fede2f990b630b

Just makes sense for Atlanta to extend to the river, I dunno.

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by primaltech

For one, look at how funky the borders would be:

https://www.google.com/maps/place/At...fede2f990b630b

Just makes sense for Atlanta to extend to the river, I dunno.

Hm. Many (if not most) cities have "funky borders."

I'm not seeing how that helps or hurts the ATL. We have a lot of challenges in our city and we don't need to be annexing new territory unless there's a clear reason to do so.

[primaltech]

Originally Posted by arjay57

Hm. Many (if not most) cities have "funky borders."

I'm not seeing how that helps or hurts the ATL. We have a lot of challenges in our city and we don't need to be annexing new territory unless there's a clear reason to do so.

Not sure, but I think that area would do more for the tax base of the city than it would cost the city. It's minimally residential, and contains an airport.

And the residential portion is Sandtown which I believe is moderately wealthy.

Also it would bring in black residents, to equal/balance the mostly white annexation proposal in Druid Hills.

[AtlantaIsHot]

Originally Posted by primaltech

For one, look at how funky the borders would be:

https://www.google.com/maps/place/At...fede2f990b630b

Just makes sense for Atlanta to extend to the river, I dunno.

Most of metro Atlanta's suburbs have crazy borders. Look at Smyrna, Marietta, and Kennesaw. Alpharetta too. That won't stop it from being approved.

[AtlantaIsHot]

Originally Posted by arjay57

Hm. Many (if not most) cities have "funky borders."

I'm not seeing how that helps or hurts the ATL. We have a lot of challenges in our city and we don't need to be annexing new territory unless there's a clear reason to do so.

There is a clear reason to do so. A lot of that industrial land would be valuable to the city coffers and there is also some newer residential areas that could be brought in. These two reasons are two of the most important reasons for any annexation anywhere. These are some of the reasons that other cities in the metro have annexed willy-nilly. But for some reason when Atlanta wants to add anything to it's territory, it's some big federal case that requires court cases and rulings, Assembly bills and approval, and referendums where the opponents wage total warfare public campaigns against it. This silly bias is insane.