News Items
Libelous post against “Clean Sweep” Candidates
Selective Outrage by Dunwoody Council Members
A post on the Dunwoody Patch falsely gave the impression of impending legal action against the “Clean Sweep” candidates. The post was authored by a frequent user of the web page with only the name of “Capital”. This negative and malicious article
was also promoted on Twitter. An editor with the Dunwoody Patch was not aware of the posting until notified by a reader. The editor then emailed the author to give him the opportunity to change the online image in the post because it had the potential to be ruled libelous. However, the author did not respond within a timely manner, so the Patch was forced to delete the entire post.
Additionally, Dunwoody City Council members John Heneghan and Lynn Deutsch were informed of this post on the Patch, as both have been very vocal in the past week with what they described as fear mongering by some who are considered Clean Sweep supporters. It was hoped that the two council members would also fairly criticize and dispute the article that was clearly an attempt to scare people from the "Clean Sweep". However, after repeated attempts, neither Heneghan or Deutsch would offer any reply or comments.
The photo below shows the post with the image used to scare Clean Sweep supporters, along with comments to the post
was also promoted on Twitter. An editor with the Dunwoody Patch was not aware of the posting until notified by a reader. The editor then emailed the author to give him the opportunity to change the online image in the post because it had the potential to be ruled libelous. However, the author did not respond within a timely manner, so the Patch was forced to delete the entire post.
Additionally, Dunwoody City Council members John Heneghan and Lynn Deutsch were informed of this post on the Patch, as both have been very vocal in the past week with what they described as fear mongering by some who are considered Clean Sweep supporters. It was hoped that the two council members would also fairly criticize and dispute the article that was clearly an attempt to scare people from the "Clean Sweep". However, after repeated attempts, neither Heneghan or Deutsch would offer any reply or comments.
The photo below shows the post with the image used to scare Clean Sweep supporters, along with comments to the post
Study supports Dunwoody School System idea
(from The Dunwoody Reporter)
The campaign for a separate Dunwoody school system got a boost Sunday when State Rep. Tom Taylor released findings of a new study showing that local tax dollars could easily fund the enterprise.
Taylor (R – Dunwoody) told a crowd of about 40 members of the Dunwoody Homeowners Association during its Oct. 6 meeting that, if taxes were left at the same rate, a local school system could operate with a surplus of cash, possibly more than $20 million.
(Read more: Dunwoody Reporter)
Taylor (R – Dunwoody) told a crowd of about 40 members of the Dunwoody Homeowners Association during its Oct. 6 meeting that, if taxes were left at the same rate, a local school system could operate with a surplus of cash, possibly more than $20 million.
(Read more: Dunwoody Reporter)
Early intersection design threatens property, 88 trees
(from the Dunwoody Crier)
Dot Garrison is 88 years old. She has lived on one beautiful corner of Dunwoody since 1952. She thought that she had seen it all.
Then, accompanied by a neighbor, she went to a city meeting about intersection improvements at St. Luke’s Presbyterian Church. It was right there on the renderings: a large chunk of her carefully landscaped property might be taken by the city as part of the plan for the Mt. Vernon and Vermack roads improvement.
Mrs. Garrison lives in what some residents call the cabin, a comfortable, rustic home on the southeast corner of that intersection, landscaped against Vermack road.
City officials confirm that in the first stages of design, her property would suffer from the installation on Vermack of a turn lane, two four-foot bike lanes and two five-foot sidewalks plus landscape buffers. The road is now 30-feet wide. The city plan would bring it to 60 feet with travel lanes and curbs.
(Read more by clicking this link at the Dunwoody Crier, September 24, 2013)
Note the loss of landscaping and property to the home.
YouTube video via Reporter Newspapers
Dunwoody residents flood charter meeting instead of council
Originally published July 9, 2013 in the Dunwoody Crier
By Sue Stanton For The Crier
Ironic?
The right to vote was a popular rallying cry of citizens attending Dunwoody’s charter commission meeting on the eve of Independence Day. One even chided the commission for holding the meeting on July 3, stating that it was a means to suppress citizen input.
Phyllis Weisser, a homeowner in Fairfield, said that she attended because “the city is acting like our congressman. They think they know better than we do.”
The commission, an appointed group of five citizens, was formed to review the city’s charter and recommend changes in a report to legislators Fran Millar, Tom Taylor and Mike Jacobs (none of whom serve on the city council.) The group has been meeting for weeks, and the past three sessions have seen citizen attendance skyrocket.
A hot button issue, the ability for city council to change city service providers without a citywide vote, passed 3-2 by the commission on June 19. The reaction came to a head last Wednesday night when at least 50 citizens attended to protest the vote. Several gave public comment while holding up signs that read “Unhappy citizens = unhappy city”, and “I demand my right to vote.”
“It is ludicrous that you are even doing this,” said Jeanette Smith. “I am distressed that I ever voted for a city.”
The existing charter states that a change in city services requires a citizen vote, but it does cover fire services if the city wanted to add them. The recommended change states that council can vote to change city services as long as the rate does not exceed the average rate of the preceding three years prior to the cutover of the service.
Services currently provided by DeKalb County are subject to this vote, including fire services. At a recent city council meeting, city staff recommended that council approve $75,000 in funding to conduct a feasibility study on fire services. One of the concerns the city has with fire service from the county is the increasing millage rate for that service, from 2.75 to 3.29 mills over the past three years.
The thought of council changing fire services without a citywide vote brought harsh comments from a few citizens including one who only gave her first name, Cheryl.
“None of you have looked at what Sandy Springs went through,” said Cheryl. “Eva (Galambos) didn’t want the fire department. They eat money up. It took $10 million to start that up. They wanted their new trucks to last 10 years. They didn’t. They had to buy new trucks in seven years.”
Another citizen asked if the city had statistical data to back up a decision to change the city’s fire service.
Merry Carmichael reminded the commission that the current charter clearly states that the millage rate cannot exceed 3.04 unless approved by a majority of Dunwoody voters.
“We voted to become a city with a charter that gives us, the citizens, a right to tax or not tax ourselves,” said Carmichael. “We did not give this right solely to the council.”
Other citizens took the opportunity to air their disappointment with other city decisions like the Dunwoody Village Parkway project. Katherine Wrigley said that she hated to see the trees destroyed in the median on the parkway and asked if it was really necessary?
Weisser said no one in her neighborhood was in favor of the parkway project. She recalled a homeowner’s meeting in her neighborhood that a council member attended. After the meeting, Weisser said she received an email from that councilor who wrote that he thought more than half the people approved of the project.
“He was being tone deaf,” said Weisser. “I think all of you are being tone deaf. You are not listening. The voters in Dunwoody are smart enough to make decisions on our own.”
Max Lehmann, commission chair, reminded citizens that the commission had no purview over that project.
Other citizens used their comment time to talk about the upcoming election, including Jim Dickson who asked the group to hold off finalizing their report until after the election.
“The election is going to bring out how people really feel about a lot of these things,” said Dickson.
Smith said that she would campaign in the next election to fight for the city.
“I voted, I walked the streets for Mike Davis and he has betrayed us” said Smith. “Terry Nall has betrayed us.”
The growing number of citizens attending the meetings prompted the commission to discuss pursuing a larger venue. Lehmann said he wanted to make sure citizens were comfortable at the meetings, and to be able to hear the discussions. The large group left some standing outside of the confer- ence room while others sat on the floor.
The group spoke briefly about the municipal court portion of the charter which brought a very small change re- garding judges. Instead of mentioning judge pro tempore, the commission voted to recommend the language be changed to simply judge(s), plural. City manager Warrant Hutmacher said there was no benefit to dis- tinguish between a judge and a judge pro tempore as there were no distinguishing responsibilities.
The charter’s next meeting is July 17 and they will discuss the area of the charter related to finance.
Reprinted with permission of the Dunwoody Crier
By Sue Stanton For The Crier
Ironic?
The right to vote was a popular rallying cry of citizens attending Dunwoody’s charter commission meeting on the eve of Independence Day. One even chided the commission for holding the meeting on July 3, stating that it was a means to suppress citizen input.
Phyllis Weisser, a homeowner in Fairfield, said that she attended because “the city is acting like our congressman. They think they know better than we do.”
The commission, an appointed group of five citizens, was formed to review the city’s charter and recommend changes in a report to legislators Fran Millar, Tom Taylor and Mike Jacobs (none of whom serve on the city council.) The group has been meeting for weeks, and the past three sessions have seen citizen attendance skyrocket.
A hot button issue, the ability for city council to change city service providers without a citywide vote, passed 3-2 by the commission on June 19. The reaction came to a head last Wednesday night when at least 50 citizens attended to protest the vote. Several gave public comment while holding up signs that read “Unhappy citizens = unhappy city”, and “I demand my right to vote.”
“It is ludicrous that you are even doing this,” said Jeanette Smith. “I am distressed that I ever voted for a city.”
The existing charter states that a change in city services requires a citizen vote, but it does cover fire services if the city wanted to add them. The recommended change states that council can vote to change city services as long as the rate does not exceed the average rate of the preceding three years prior to the cutover of the service.
Services currently provided by DeKalb County are subject to this vote, including fire services. At a recent city council meeting, city staff recommended that council approve $75,000 in funding to conduct a feasibility study on fire services. One of the concerns the city has with fire service from the county is the increasing millage rate for that service, from 2.75 to 3.29 mills over the past three years.
The thought of council changing fire services without a citywide vote brought harsh comments from a few citizens including one who only gave her first name, Cheryl.
“None of you have looked at what Sandy Springs went through,” said Cheryl. “Eva (Galambos) didn’t want the fire department. They eat money up. It took $10 million to start that up. They wanted their new trucks to last 10 years. They didn’t. They had to buy new trucks in seven years.”
Another citizen asked if the city had statistical data to back up a decision to change the city’s fire service.
Merry Carmichael reminded the commission that the current charter clearly states that the millage rate cannot exceed 3.04 unless approved by a majority of Dunwoody voters.
“We voted to become a city with a charter that gives us, the citizens, a right to tax or not tax ourselves,” said Carmichael. “We did not give this right solely to the council.”
Other citizens took the opportunity to air their disappointment with other city decisions like the Dunwoody Village Parkway project. Katherine Wrigley said that she hated to see the trees destroyed in the median on the parkway and asked if it was really necessary?
Weisser said no one in her neighborhood was in favor of the parkway project. She recalled a homeowner’s meeting in her neighborhood that a council member attended. After the meeting, Weisser said she received an email from that councilor who wrote that he thought more than half the people approved of the project.
“He was being tone deaf,” said Weisser. “I think all of you are being tone deaf. You are not listening. The voters in Dunwoody are smart enough to make decisions on our own.”
Max Lehmann, commission chair, reminded citizens that the commission had no purview over that project.
Other citizens used their comment time to talk about the upcoming election, including Jim Dickson who asked the group to hold off finalizing their report until after the election.
“The election is going to bring out how people really feel about a lot of these things,” said Dickson.
Smith said that she would campaign in the next election to fight for the city.
“I voted, I walked the streets for Mike Davis and he has betrayed us” said Smith. “Terry Nall has betrayed us.”
The growing number of citizens attending the meetings prompted the commission to discuss pursuing a larger venue. Lehmann said he wanted to make sure citizens were comfortable at the meetings, and to be able to hear the discussions. The large group left some standing outside of the confer- ence room while others sat on the floor.
The group spoke briefly about the municipal court portion of the charter which brought a very small change re- garding judges. Instead of mentioning judge pro tempore, the commission voted to recommend the language be changed to simply judge(s), plural. City manager Warrant Hutmacher said there was no benefit to dis- tinguish between a judge and a judge pro tempore as there were no distinguishing responsibilities.
The charter’s next meeting is July 17 and they will discuss the area of the charter related to finance.
Reprinted with permission of the Dunwoody Crier
City considers raising cap on millage rate WITHOUT VOTER APPROVAL
Via the Dunwoody Neighbor - by LaTria Garnigan
In one of its first discussions as a body, the Dunwoody Charter Commission brought up the suggestion of changing the language in the city’s charter in regards to the ad valorem tax.
The commission, made up of members Mallard Holliday, Max Lehmann, Rick Otness, Beverly Wingate and Robert Wittenstein, discussed last week how the city would pay for its own fire department in the future.
Commission member Robert Wittenstein brought up a section of the charter that references the millage rate cap for the city that is set at 3.04 mills.
“If we ever decide to take on fire, we need to assess the millage rate to do that,” he said. “I’m not sure we want to be in a position that the only way to get fire would be a ballot decision, but if we did offer fire we would want a cap on that as well.”
Under the current city charter, there is a cap on the rate of taxation of property owners at 3.04 mills and if the city wanted to raise the millage rate, it would require a resolution to go before the voters. The current millage rate is 2.74.
With input from the commission, City Manager Warren Hutmacher said he will present language to City Attorney Cecil McLendon that will read “the millage rate cap would apply to services provided at the time. A new tax would be allowed by city council without voter approval for services already provided by another governmental entity to the citizens and business owners of Dunwoody.”
Only in the discussion phase, once McLendon brings the language back to the commission, and the group has time to review it, they will then decide whether submit it to the Legislature. Hutmacher reiterated the general assembly has the final say on any changes to the city charter.
This article appeared in the Dunwoody Neighbor May 29, 2013
The commission, made up of members Mallard Holliday, Max Lehmann, Rick Otness, Beverly Wingate and Robert Wittenstein, discussed last week how the city would pay for its own fire department in the future.
Commission member Robert Wittenstein brought up a section of the charter that references the millage rate cap for the city that is set at 3.04 mills.
“If we ever decide to take on fire, we need to assess the millage rate to do that,” he said. “I’m not sure we want to be in a position that the only way to get fire would be a ballot decision, but if we did offer fire we would want a cap on that as well.”
Under the current city charter, there is a cap on the rate of taxation of property owners at 3.04 mills and if the city wanted to raise the millage rate, it would require a resolution to go before the voters. The current millage rate is 2.74.
With input from the commission, City Manager Warren Hutmacher said he will present language to City Attorney Cecil McLendon that will read “the millage rate cap would apply to services provided at the time. A new tax would be allowed by city council without voter approval for services already provided by another governmental entity to the citizens and business owners of Dunwoody.”
Only in the discussion phase, once McLendon brings the language back to the commission, and the group has time to review it, they will then decide whether submit it to the Legislature. Hutmacher reiterated the general assembly has the final say on any changes to the city charter.
This article appeared in the Dunwoody Neighbor May 29, 2013
via Reporter Newspapers:
Save Dunwoody says city ‘shuts out’ residents
- by Joe Earle
Robert Green’s political awakening started last year, when he spotted a notice that city officials were contemplating building a roundabout in his Dunwoody neighborhood.
Green lives on Vermack Drive, just eight or nine houses down the street from the intersection where the roundabout might go. He thought the proposal was a terrible idea. “My girls are grown,” he said. “It’s not a walking issue for me. But it is for a lot of other children.”
Green started distributing fliers to alert his neighbors about public meetings on the roundabout. He went door-to-door to alert people about the plan. He started attending city government meetings himself. “Bottom line, I got involved,” he said.
He soon realized others were getting involved, too. Some regularly attended public meetings or spoke out during public comment periods at Dunwoody City Council meetings. Others wrote letters of complaint to local newspapers.
Different groups of people focused on different local issues. One group protested the removal of trees at Brook Run Park to build a multi-use trail. Another argued against a plan to reconfigure Dunwoody Village Parkway to reduce the number of lanes and add sidewalks and bike lanes. Others, like Green, objected to the roundabout.
Soon, they were talking to each other. In October, 25 to 30 people met at a local restaurant and decided to organize themselves into a group called Save Dunwoody. Save Dunwoody set up a website – SaveDunwoody.com – and started distributing yard signs calling for the city government to stop the trail, the parkway and the roundabout.
Since those early meetings, Save Dunwoody has grown, members say.
The group posted a poll on its website that drew 1,300 responses. The poll was set up so no computer could be used more than once to answer questions. At last count, responses were running 78 percent against the projects, said Jim Dickson, a long-time Dunwoody resident who says he hadn’t really been active in local politics since the 1970s until the Dunwoody Village Parkway plans came along.
Norb Leahy, a Dunwoody Tea Party activist who helped Save Dunwoody organize, says the group counts more than 700 members on its mailing list.
Although the original members were interested in different issues, they agreed that they felt shut out by the city government. “The common denominator was we had a City Council that wasn’t willing to listen,” Dickson said.
City officials dispute that. “We do as a council very much listen to everyone,” City Councilman Terry Nall said. “I wouldn’t say any group of citizens has influence any more than another. … As a group of seven [council members, we listen] to the community, to all the groups, … and we come up with what four of the seven think is best for the city for the next 25 years.”
City officials have said publicly they believe the city’s policy debates are the product of Dunwoody’s natural evolution as a young municipality. City leaders organized city-wide planning sessions during the first several years of the city’s existence, and drew up plans based on what residents said they wanted.
Now, they say, the city is moving into an implementation phase with projects such as the Brook Run trail and the public-private Project Renaissance redevelopment in the Georgetown area of the city. Suddenly, residents are seeing change. “Moving to implementation makes the projects more real,” Nall said.
Save Dunwoody members question the city’s plans, saying advocacy groups controlled the planning meetings. “They went through a planning process that was illegitimate,” Leahy said.
Some outsiders say they can’t tell what Save Dunwoody’s members really want for the city. “I’ve looked at their website and I don’t quite understand, other than they’re opposing those three things, what their mission is,” said Dunwoody Homeowners Association president Stacey Harris.
Others bluntly oppose the new group. One Dunwoody blogger posted an item titled “Save Dunwoody from Save Dunwoody.”
Dickson argues that opposition to the city’s present direction runs deep. “If you get out into the neighborhoods and talk to the people who actually vote, you hear it,” he said.
Dickson looks to the fall elections to bring change. “My guess is there’s going to be people running for office that have positions that are contrary to the agenda of the past year,” he said.
(This article appeared in the Dunwoody Reporter Newspaper on April 18, 2013)
Robert Green’s political awakening started last year, when he spotted a notice that city officials were contemplating building a roundabout in his Dunwoody neighborhood.
Green lives on Vermack Drive, just eight or nine houses down the street from the intersection where the roundabout might go. He thought the proposal was a terrible idea. “My girls are grown,” he said. “It’s not a walking issue for me. But it is for a lot of other children.”
Green started distributing fliers to alert his neighbors about public meetings on the roundabout. He went door-to-door to alert people about the plan. He started attending city government meetings himself. “Bottom line, I got involved,” he said.
He soon realized others were getting involved, too. Some regularly attended public meetings or spoke out during public comment periods at Dunwoody City Council meetings. Others wrote letters of complaint to local newspapers.
Different groups of people focused on different local issues. One group protested the removal of trees at Brook Run Park to build a multi-use trail. Another argued against a plan to reconfigure Dunwoody Village Parkway to reduce the number of lanes and add sidewalks and bike lanes. Others, like Green, objected to the roundabout.
Soon, they were talking to each other. In October, 25 to 30 people met at a local restaurant and decided to organize themselves into a group called Save Dunwoody. Save Dunwoody set up a website – SaveDunwoody.com – and started distributing yard signs calling for the city government to stop the trail, the parkway and the roundabout.
Since those early meetings, Save Dunwoody has grown, members say.
The group posted a poll on its website that drew 1,300 responses. The poll was set up so no computer could be used more than once to answer questions. At last count, responses were running 78 percent against the projects, said Jim Dickson, a long-time Dunwoody resident who says he hadn’t really been active in local politics since the 1970s until the Dunwoody Village Parkway plans came along.
Norb Leahy, a Dunwoody Tea Party activist who helped Save Dunwoody organize, says the group counts more than 700 members on its mailing list.
Although the original members were interested in different issues, they agreed that they felt shut out by the city government. “The common denominator was we had a City Council that wasn’t willing to listen,” Dickson said.
City officials dispute that. “We do as a council very much listen to everyone,” City Councilman Terry Nall said. “I wouldn’t say any group of citizens has influence any more than another. … As a group of seven [council members, we listen] to the community, to all the groups, … and we come up with what four of the seven think is best for the city for the next 25 years.”
City officials have said publicly they believe the city’s policy debates are the product of Dunwoody’s natural evolution as a young municipality. City leaders organized city-wide planning sessions during the first several years of the city’s existence, and drew up plans based on what residents said they wanted.
Now, they say, the city is moving into an implementation phase with projects such as the Brook Run trail and the public-private Project Renaissance redevelopment in the Georgetown area of the city. Suddenly, residents are seeing change. “Moving to implementation makes the projects more real,” Nall said.
Save Dunwoody members question the city’s plans, saying advocacy groups controlled the planning meetings. “They went through a planning process that was illegitimate,” Leahy said.
Some outsiders say they can’t tell what Save Dunwoody’s members really want for the city. “I’ve looked at their website and I don’t quite understand, other than they’re opposing those three things, what their mission is,” said Dunwoody Homeowners Association president Stacey Harris.
Others bluntly oppose the new group. One Dunwoody blogger posted an item titled “Save Dunwoody from Save Dunwoody.”
Dickson argues that opposition to the city’s present direction runs deep. “If you get out into the neighborhoods and talk to the people who actually vote, you hear it,” he said.
Dickson looks to the fall elections to bring change. “My guess is there’s going to be people running for office that have positions that are contrary to the agenda of the past year,” he said.
(This article appeared in the Dunwoody Reporter Newspaper on April 18, 2013)
Mayor Delivers State of the City Address
In mid-February, Mayor Mike Davis shared his vision for Dunwoody at the 4th annual state of the city event for the city. One key focus was on transportation accessibility. During a portion of his speech he claimed that the Vermack-Womack intersection is failing due to congestion, while at another part of his 65 minute address, the Mayor conceded that the reality of the traffic situation across the city is due in part to people using Dunwoody streets as a cut-thru when the highways are congested. However, this revelation did not alter his opinions for the idea that the city should seize property owners' land to construct a roundabout at Vermack-Womack roads to deal with the number of cars there. Recall that at the November 12, 2012 City Council meeting, Mayor Davis stated that Womack Road is a major thorough fare and is "not a residential street". He argues it is used and needed to move people across the city (including people from other cities who get off the highway). Note, the traffic studies used in assessing the Vermack-Womack intersection do not consider the numbers of commuters from other cities, so it is impossible to determine who would be benefitting from this 1 million dollar proposal.
Click below to listen to a brief audio clip from the State of the City Address on Tuesday, February 19, 2013 to hear Mayor Davis acknowledge that it would take an infinite amount of money to accommodate commuters from other cities who desire to use our streets as a cut-thru.
Click below to listen to a brief audio clip from the State of the City Address on Tuesday, February 19, 2013 to hear Mayor Davis acknowledge that it would take an infinite amount of money to accommodate commuters from other cities who desire to use our streets as a cut-thru.
Construction injunction lifted in Brook Run lawsuit; 12 ft wide trail construction may begin
SaveDunwoody.com is participating in the city of Dunwoody's Adopt-A-Spot program, to beautify and maintain a section of roadway along Mt. Vernon. Email us if you would like to help.
Mojo Burrito & Café At Pharr
Two restaurants announce they are opening in Dunwoody Village – [despite Dunwoody Village Parkway looking the way it is]! If changes are made to Dunwoody Village Parkway as shown in the artist rendering promoted by Dunwoody leaders, along with the city’s “Master Plan” for the Village, these two new restaurants would most likely be expected to wait for new buildings to be built along the street and would not be able to open in existing spaces. There currently are no buildings along the street as depicted in the drawing for “improvements” to the parkway, and there is no public knowledge of anyone offering to build them. These businesses are opening without the city spending nearly 2 million dollars on the street.
http://www.tonetoatl.com/2013/01/mojo-burrito-wants-to-roll-one-for.html
http://www.tonetoatl.com/2013/01/cafe-at-pharr-to-open-far-outin-dunwoody.html
http://www.tonetoatl.com/2013/01/mojo-burrito-wants-to-roll-one-for.html
http://www.tonetoatl.com/2013/01/cafe-at-pharr-to-open-far-outin-dunwoody.html