Deal Approves forming Eagles Landing from exisiting City of Stockbridge (Atlanta: home, buying)

[Saintmarks]

Originally Posted by aries4118

This is how I feel.

Georgia's annexation laws suck.

What Stockbridge did sucks.

And--I do think a City of Eagle's Landing should exist. I think it would be good for the area, for Henry County, and for the Southeast Metro.

However, there is dangerous precedent that could be set with this.


I am torn.

Some provision should be made by Eagle's Landing to help pay off the debt. At least a rightful portion. It's only right.

[Saintmarks]

Would we feel the same if say Cumberland and or Cumberland-Vinings wanted to incorporate and then took away the slices of Smyrna and Marietta that snake down Cobb Parkway? Overall that might be a good thing but the lost income that Marietta and Smyrna get from these commercial properties... would it be fair to these cities to have that taken away with no provision made to recoup? This is like a divorce. Debts should be shared as well as the equity.

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by AcidSnake

I also questioned how the cities in Dekalb County were able to simply leave the county without dealing with any of their leftover debt obligations as well.

Well, in DeKalb the new cities didn't leave the county. Take Emory, for example -- it's still part of DeKalb even though it was annexed by Atlanta.

Since the residents of these cities remain DeKalb residents, don't they still owe the county debts?

[bu2]

Originally Posted by arjay57

Well, in DeKalb the new cities didn't leave the county. Take Emory, for example -- it's still part of DeKalb even though it was annexed by Atlanta.

Since the residents of these cities remain DeKalb residents, don't they still owe the county debts?

This is only an issue because in Georgia, counties are pretending to be cities.

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by Saintmarks

Would we feel the same if say Cumberland and or Cumberland-Vinings wanted to incorporate and then took away the slices of Smyrna and Marietta that snake down Cobb Parkway? Overall that might be a good thing but the lost income that Marietta and Smyrna get from these commercial properties... would it be fair to these cities to have that taken away with no provision made to recoup? This is like a divorce. Debts should be shared as well as the equity.

Becoming a city adds another layer of government, but I don't think it cancels pre-existing debt.

I'm not sure Cumberland becoming a city is exactly like divorce, since it would still be part of Cobb.

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by bu2

This is only an issue because in Georgia, counties are pretending to be cities.

There are plenty of places where cities and counties are not co-extensive with cities located within them. Nor do they necessarily have the same duties, debts, powers, etc.

For instance, look at Westchester County in New York. They've got a slew of cities, towns and villages.

[demonta4]

Originally Posted by Saintmarks

Would we feel the same if say Cumberland and or Cumberland-Vinings wanted to incorporate and then took away the slices of Smyrna and Marietta that snake down Cobb Parkway? Overall that might be a good thing but the lost income that Marietta and Smyrna get from these commercial properties... would it be fair to these cities to have that taken away with no provision made to recoup? This is like a divorce. Debts should be shared as well as the equity.

I don’t think it’s fair for Marietta and Smyrna to annex properties just for tax revenue. This was an issue in south Fulton before we incorporated. Union City, College Park, and Fairburn would annex land, rezone it to industrial land with no consent of nearby residents, and they have no incentive to because they were unincorporated residents.

[citidata18]

Cities don't just annex land for the hell of it. What happens is a developer will approach them with a massive project and request annexation.

It's usually for a number of reason. One is to avoid a county's ridiculous development fees. The other reason is that developers assume their projects will be an easier sell to interested parties if they can boast the fact that they'll receive municipal services / infrastructure.

Under state law, counties can't do anything to stop a city's annexation request.

[demonta4]

Originally Posted by citidata18

Cities don't just annex land for the hell of it. What happens is a developer will approach them with a massive project and request annexation.

It's usually for a number of reason. One is to avoid a county's ridiculous development fees. The other reason is that developers assume theur projects will be an easier sell to interested parties if they can boast the fact that they'll receive municipal services / infrastructure.

Under state law, counties can't do anything to stop a city's annexation request.

They aren’t forced to annex anything, if cities didn’t see a financial incentive they wouldn’t approve these annexations.

[Turnerbro]

Originally Posted by Clayton white guy

This may be "economic balkanization", but NOT "racial balkanization". Granted, the new City of Eagles Landing WILL be more affluent than the old Stockbridge, but it will still be "Minority/ majority" with really no ethnic group in the majority.

Won't it have a white plurality?