The CVI study estimates that the proposed city’s annual revenues would be approximately $28.5 million and expenditures would be approximately $25.1 million, leaving a surplus of $3.4 million.

At 49,188 residents, the proposed City of Brookhaven would supplant Dunwoody as both the largest city in DeKalb County and 16th largest in the State of Georgia.

CVI also performed the feasibility study for the City of Dunwoody. A review of CVI’s track record with Dunwoody helps to show that their revenue and expenditure estimates are realistic and conservative. For example, in 2006 (a boom economy), CVI estimated that Dunwoody’s revenues would be $18,777,904. In its first full fiscal year in 2009 (after the economy tanked), Dunwoody’s actual revenues turned out to be $18,394,942, or two percent less than CVI estimated.

In the same study, CVI also predicted that Dunwoody’s total operating expenditures would be $15,571,573. In 2009, Dunwoody’s actual operating expenditures were $13,823,811, or eleven percent less than CVI estimated.

With a $3.4 million surplus, incorporating the City of Brookhaven is likely to result in a property tax cut.

To understand why this is the case, it is important to understand how the Special Services Tax District works. The Special Services Tax District is a line-item on your property tax bill that is used to pay for police, parks and recreation, roads and drainage, and planning, zoning, and land use. That is, it funds all of the local government services that a city could provide.

In 2011, the Special Services Tax District was bifurcated into two line-items, one for police and one for everything else. In 2010, the county charged a millage rate of 3.5 mills for the Special Services Tax District. In 2011, between the two line-items, the county increased that millage rate to 6.39 mills, a tax hike of 82 percent.

The millage rate is the factor by which the assessed value of your property is multiplied in order to arrive at the amount of property taxes that you pay.

If a city is incorporated, the new city does not add new taxes to your property tax bill to pay for police, parks and recreation, roads and drainage, and planning, zoning, and land use. Instead, the Special Services Tax District (all 6.39 mills of it) goes away completely and a new city tax takes its place.

Here’s the key: The proposed City of Brookhaven does not need 6.39 mills – or anything close to it – in order to provide a high level of service in the areas of police, parks and recreation, roads and drainage, and planning, zoning, and land use.

House Bill 636, the proposed charter for a City of Brookhaven, contains a millage cap that would prevent the city council from raising the city millage rate above a certain point without your vote in a citywide referendum. This is a benefit that does not exist in unincorporated DeKalb County.

Dunwoody was the first city to show that it is possible for a city to provide better services than DeKalb County at a lower cost. Brookhaven would be the second.

The trend toward lower taxes in DeKalb cities than in the unincorporated areas probably will not stop there. The cities of Chamblee and Decatur are on the verge of having lower overall millage rates than unincorporated DeKalb. Taxes in DeKalb are headed higher, while cities are holding the line and even cutting taxes. This is what Decatur Mayor Bill Floyd meant when he recently said on a local Decatur blog: “The contention that living in unincorporated DeKalb County offers less taxes is quickly dissolving.”

As a reminder, I am hosting two town hall meetings about the City of Brookhaven proposal:

Tuesday, November 15
7:00 p.m.
Cross Keys High School
1626 North Druid Hills Road

Thursday, November 17
7:00 p.m.
Montgomery Elementary School
3995 Ashford Dunwoody Road

The presentation in both of these meetings will be identical. If one of them presents a schedule conflict, I hope you will be able to attend the other one.

Click here to see the sample ballot for the election. Click here and scroll down to review the list of projects that is proposed to be funded by the E-SPLOST if it is passed.

A few constituents have asked how I will be voting on the E-SPLOST. Despite the fact that there are ample reasons to be angry with the school system’s past management of school construction funds, I will be voting in favor of it.

If the E-SPLOST is not passed, homeowners will see an immediate increase in their property taxes because a homestead exemption will be revoked by operation of law. I prefer sales taxes to property taxes, particularly because everybody (not just homeowners) and a substantial number of people from outside DeKalb (think Perimeter Mall and the Brookhaven Costco) pays them. Furthermore, I view it as positive that part of the funding is allocated to the overdue new facility at Chamblee High School.

Some constituents have asked me whether the legislation that I helped to pass reducing the size of the school board from nine to seven members is tied to the E-SPLOST vote. While this is technically true, I do not view it as a reason to vote for or against the E-SPLOST. I am certain the General Assembly will take whatever steps are necessary in the 2012 legislative session to ensure that this important reform takes effect next year as planned.

Our neighboring cities of Chamblee, Dunwoody, Sandy Springs, and Atlanta will be voting on this question next Tuesday. If you are in unincorporated DeKalb, however, the county has yet to do anything regarding Sunday sales.

Click here to see the sample ballot for the election. Click here and scroll down to review the list of projects that is proposed to be funded by the E-SPLOST if it is passed.

Early voting for the E-SPLOST election is now through Friday, November 4, from 8:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. weekdays at the DeKalb County Voter Registration & Elections Office, 4380 Memorial Drive, Suite 300, Decatur, GA 30032, near the junction of Memorial and I-285.

This opposition concerns two parcels. The first parcel is Century Center, the office complex on the east side of Clairmont Road just north of I-85. The second parcel is bounded by Clairmont Road, Buford Highway, and the Chamblee city limits, and includes Plaza Fiesta and the southern half of PDK Airport.

C4ND has decided to exclude Century Center from its final map of the Brookhaven study area that was released to the public yesterday. Click here to view the map.

When the City of Dunwoody was created, I worked with Senator Dan Weber and Representative (now Senator) Fran Millar to exclude the Perimeter Summit office complex, located just south of I-285, from the City of Dunwoody. This complex has a vital connection with the Murphey Candler and West Nancy Creek neighborhoods directly to its south. If these neighborhoods were to control their own destiny – as is currently happening – the entire area needed to remain intact.

In my own opinion, Century Center is to DECA what Perimeter Summit is to Murphey Candler. After listening to the affected neighborhoods, C4ND made a decision in the interests of fairness and equity to exclude it from the Brookhaven study area.

Century Center is estimated to have been worth substantial net revenue to a City of Brookhaven. By contrast, the PDK parcel is more of a wash from a revenue standpoint. It is mostly comprised of tax-exempt property and may have some significant expenses associated with it.

The PDK parcel will remain in the Brookhaven study area for a different reason. Some citizens in the Ashford Park and Drew Valley neighborhoods have made a compelling argument that this parcel is inextricably connected to their neighborhoods.

First, putting the airport aside, the heaviest development on this parcel is along Clairmont Road, directly across the street from Ashford Park and Drew Valley, and includes late-night clubs that sometimes negatively impact the adjacent neighborhoods.

In addition, Ashford Park has airport-owned property located directly in their neighborhood. This property, a roughly 30-acre parcel known as a runway protection zone (RPZ), is vacant. It is anticipated that the airport no longer will need this property once it shuts down the runway that the RPZ is intended to serve.

As we draw closer to the 2012 legislative session in which the Brookhaven city charter (click for information about House Bill 636) could move forward, I want to continue talking with citizens in the neighborhoods adjacent to the PDK parcel about its inclusion in these boundaries. Please feel free to e-mail me at repjacobs@comcast.net with your thoughts.

You also may have heard that Commissioner Jeff Rader is asking the county commission to ask the General Assembly to impose a moratorium on new cities in DeKalb County. Then, he wants a study committee of the General Assembly to be formed to “develop a rubric for determining reasonable boundaries for the existing or new cities using theories of urban organization.”

This proposal is not likely to gain any traction in the General Assembly. It is a delay tactic. The county commissioners who will be voting to make this request do not actually support creating new cities in DeKalb in the first place.

Here is the bottom line on cityhood: After the feasibility study is done, and if HB 636 is passed, you will get to vote on whether or not Brookhaven becomes a city. It will be in your hands.

I trust you to make the best decision for our community. Some of our county officials do not.

Members of the Montgomery Elementary PTA are helping to organize this meeting. Representatives from the Georgia Department of Transportation and DeKalb County Infrastructure Department will be on hand to answer your questions.

In addition, I feel compelled to address the following e-mail that was sent by a community group shortly after midnight:

“We are holding an emergency meeting to discuss the Ashford Dunwoody Rd Corridor and the potential issues that are arising. The roundabout at JFR & ADR was discussed as a done deal at a recent Cambridge Park CA meeting. The neighborhoods have not had any input on the matter and we certainly don’t want the project to appear as approved without discussion.”

I’ve never before asked the community to pay no mind to a meeting organized by a community group, but it’s important for the community to know that this alarmist e-mail is false.

I talked earlier today with DeKalb County’s Deputy COO for Infrastructure, Ted Rhinehart, and have confirmed that there is no plan to build a roundabout at Ashford Dunwoody and Johnson Ferry Roads. I have heard one or more citizens within the community suggest such an idea (it was merely a suggestion), but there is not a plan from any government entity to build such a project. Furthermore, I was at the Cambridge Park homeowners meeting and can confirm that a roundabout was not discussed there.

Please spread the word. I want to ensure that citizens do not get worked up about a false rumor. I look forward to seeing you at the Ashford Dunwoody meeting on Tuesday, September 20.

Thank you to everyone who took the time to call or e-mail the school board members about the proposed contract for Dr. Atkinson. Click here and here to read my previous messages on the subject.

I hope Dr. Atkinson turns out to be a good superintendent. However, the contract that is bringing her to DeKalb County reveals that our school board has learned nothing from its colossal failures with two recent superintendents, Crawford Lewis (who was indicted) and Johnny Brown (who was dismissed).

As I showed you in one of my previous messages, Dr. Atkinson’s contract contains the following “termination for convenience” clause requiring a vote by three-fourths (3/4) supermajority of the school board in order to terminate her if her performance is sub-par:

“The BOARD, upon a three-fourths (3/4) vote of its members, may at its option unilaterally terminate this Contract for its convenience by giving the SUPERINTENDENT a minimum of ninety (90) days written notice of termination at any time. In the event of such termination, the BOARD shall pay to the SUPERINTENDENT severance pay, either all of the aggregate salary she would have earned under this Contract from the actual date of termination to the termination date set forth in this Contract, or a sum equivalent to twelve (12) months of the annual base salary as stated in Paragraph 4 of this Contract, whichever is less.”

In responding to citizen concerns about this clause, a couple of school board members chose to hide behind a subsequent clause of the contract, the “termination for cause” provision, which reads:

“Termination for cause shall constitute conduct which is seriously prejudicial to the District, including but not limited to, neglect of duty, or breach of contract. Notice of termination for cause shall be given in writing and the SUPERINTENDENT shall be entitled to appear before the BOARD to discuss such causes. If the SUPERINTENDENT chooses to be accompanied by legal counsel at such meeting, if allowed in closed, executive session under applicable law, she shall bear any costs therein involved. Such meeting shall be conducted in closed, executive session unless specifically prohibited by State law. The SUPERINTENDENT shall be provided a written decision describing the results of the meeting.”

The concept of termination for cause is a breeding ground for litigation. It is unclear what, short of a criminal indictment, would constitute a sufficient basis for invoking this provision.

The provision that is most likely to be invoked is the termination for convenience clause, the one with the three-fourths restriction. It is odd for a government entity to contract away its right to take an action by simple majority vote. I’m not 100% convinced that the three-fourths restriction would pass legal muster if challenged in court.

Dr. Atkinson’s contract already includes high compensation, abundant fringe benefits, and an overly generous “golden parachute” if the termination for convenience clause is invoked. If you couple the generosity of these provisions with a three-fourths barrier to termination, the school board has gone too far.

In 2012, the DeKalb school board will shrink from nine to seven members. Right now, all it will take is three of nine board members to keep a lackluster superintendent in place. After the board membership is reduced to seven, just two members can prevent our school system from moving forward.

It’s easy to see how a superintendent and very small minority of school board members could abuse the three-fourths provision. Let’s hope it never comes to that, but the fact that the contract allows this to happen is an unfortunate byproduct of the decisions that have brought Dr. Atkinson to DeKalb.

The consensus of the attendees was that the funding should be pursued and the project should focus on improving the intersection of Ashford Dunwoody and Johnson Ferry Roads, synchronizing traffic signals where possible, and improving the sidewalks along the entire corridor from I-285 at the north to Peachtree Road at the south.

There remains opposition to the concept of imposing the regional T-SPLOST sales tax in the first place. I acknowledge this opposition, but note that we are only talking about the T-SPLOST project list at this point. You’ll get to cast a vote on the sales tax at the ballot box in July 2012. Ultimately, whether or not there is a T-SPLOST is in your hands.

Ted Rhinehart, DeKalb County’s Deputy COO for Infrastructure, will be developing a scope for the potential Ashford Dunwoody project. If you have any further thoughts, you can e-mail them to David Pelton, who works with Mr. Rhinehart, at dwpelton@dekalbcountyga.gov.

Embedded in the proposed contract between Dr. Atkinson and the school system is the following, very troubling termination clause:

“The BOARD, upon a three-fourths (3/4) vote of its members, may at its option unilaterally terminate this Contract for its convenience by giving the SUPERINTENDENT a minimum of ninety (90) days written notice of termination at any time. In the event of such termination, the BOARD shall pay to the SUPERINTENDENT severance pay, either all of the aggregate salary she would have earned under this Contract from the actual date of termination to the termination date set forth in this Contract, or a sum equivalent to twelve (12) months of the annual base salary as stated in Paragraph 4 of this Contract, whichever is less.”

You read that correctly. The DeKalb County Board of Education proposes to require a three-fourths (3/4) supermajority of its members to terminate the new superintendent’s contract.

That makes it difficult to fire a superintendent whose performance is lackluster. The contract should provide for termination upon a simple majority vote. Our school board is failing us on this one.

The school board has a poor track record of picking superintendents. Our most recent superintendent, Crawford Lewis, was indicted. The superintendent before him, Johnny Brown, was a failure and released from the position. Why on earth would our school board want to make it more difficult to dismiss a superintendent who is failing our children?

The three-fourths termination clause, standing alone, is terrible. When viewed in context with DeKalb’s history of hiring bad superintendents, it’s unconscionable. And if Dr. Atkinson won’t come to DeKalb without the three-fourths clause in her contract, we don’t need her.

Please take a minute to call or e-mail the members of the board of education and ask them to rewrite the termination clause to allow the superintendent to be released by simple majority vote of the school board. Here is their contact information:

Tom Bowen, Chairman
(404) 392-1621
thomas_bowen@fc.dekalb.k12.ga.us

Paul Womack, Vice Chairman
(404) 680-8790
h_paul_womack@fc.dekalb.k12.ga.us

Sarah Copelin-Wood
(404) 371-1490
sarah_copelin-wood@fc.dekalb.k12.ga.us

Jay Cunningham
(404) 392-3091
jay_cunningham@fc.dekalb.k12.ga.us

Donna Edler
(404) 394-1238
donna_edler@fc.dekalb.k12.ga.us

Nancy Jester
(404) 394-8750
nancy_jester@fc.dekalb.k12.ga.us

Don McChesney
(404) 664-2458
don_mcchesney@fc.dekalb.k12.ga.us

Pam Speaks
(404) 931-7971
pam_speaks@fc.dekalb.k12.ga.us

Eugene Walker
(404) 593-5095
eugene_p_walker@fc.dekalb.k12.ga.us

I am told that some of the school board members would prefer that the contract provision be eliminated, but a majority of the school board is intent on proceeding with the contract as written. You can read the full contract by clicking here.

Please consider forwarding this message to your neighbors and urging them to take action.