| It was back to work last week in the Georgia Senate, as we began the second half of the 2007 session. This is the hectic portion of the 40-day legislative session, where we roll up our sleeves and really get down to the people's business. At this point in the session, there are numerous issues moving through the legislative process, ranging from dog fighting to education to election laws. This week, I would like to focus on some issues that concern local governments in Georgia.
Over the last two years, the Legislature has provided many county residents the opportunity to vote on incorporation. These votes resulted in the formation of the cities of Sandy Springs, Johns Creek and Milton in Fulton County. In 2007, the residents of the proposed cities of South Fulton and Chattahoochee Hills Country will have the opportunity to vote. This year, we've seen legislation introduced that could result in a new city of Dunwoody in the metro Atlanta area. This trend toward municipalization has been somewhat controversial, with strong cases being made on both sides of the debate. There are some new trends developing as well, and I'd like to take a look at those.
Deannexation
Legislation I have sponsored in the Senate (Senate Bill 110) would give property owners in our state the option to "denannex." This is a pro-property rights bill, establishing the same process for deannexation that currently exists for annexation. Among its provisions, it allows a certain percentage of property owners in an area to request deannexation from a city. The county must pass a resolution consenting to the deannexation, and a city no longer has absolute veto power over the property owner's request. Deannexed property is required to be contiguous to an unincorporated area. Unlike current annexation law, however, there is a waiting period prohibiting deannexation of property within two years of it being annexed or incorporated. Likewise, the property cannot be annexed if it was deannexed within the past two years. As this issue evolves in the legislature, several organizations have expressed their support and/or opposition to the idea. Annexation and deannexation and the procedures for each have been continuously debated for over 20 years. It is time we deal with these issues in a fair and equitable way, and we hope to have a vote on these proposals this session.
Townships
I have co-sponsored bipartisan legislation that would create an alternative to establishing a new city, offering smaller government that is closer to the people. SB 89 would give residents in an unincorporated area a new option when they contemplate incorporation. They could instead vote to form a town that would make critical decisions about land use and local zoning. Residents of a Georgia township would continue to benefit from the larger tax base of their county. Basic services such as fire, public safety, water and sanitation would continue to be provided by the county.
Under the proposal, Georgia towns would have distinct boundaries with identifying markers. They would have locally elected Boards of Supervisors, who would come from small districts and thus be closer to the people they represent. Because the obligations of a town would be so limited, the cost of running the new town could be minimal. Also, every new Georgia town would have a mandated cap on the level of property taxes they could levy and could only be annexed or converted to a city with the consent of its residents. The legislation has sponsors on both sides of the aisle, and I feel that it is a viable alternative for areas that may not be quite ready to municipalize.
It should be interesting to see how both of these issues develop as we move closer to Crossover Day in the General Assembly, which is the last day that bills can pass out of one chamber and 'crossover' to the other. Remember to contact me in my office on the issues that are affecting you and your area. |
