Marsha Middleton, if by the old Kroger site you mean the former Harris Teeter, that's NOT a good location. We've kicked this topic around quite a bit. I also believe there has been general agreement (meaning both Yes and No's) this site should not be underutilized with a city hall versus providing a potential tax revenue stream to Brookhaven. There were also concerns about traffic safety and congestion at that location. As far as temporarily locating city hall in Dunwoody...Meh. I would rather a home run on it's permanent location. The location for municipal court seems reasonable.

Did you?

Mr. Plumber, I don't have those concerns to voice. The offices are TEMPORARY and most cost efficient. Isn't that what all you NoCity folk wanted?

John,
Why be a jerk? If the city is here THEN IT SHOULD BE HERE. Another example of this city being formed for the benefit of a select few that were refused by annexation into Dunwoody. But hey, if we cannot be officially part of the city of Dunwoody...whats the next best thing? Give them some our Brookhaven taxpayer dollars and move our offices there? Shameful. You mean there is ABSOLUTELY NOWHERE IN OUR CITY for the offices to go?

"Jqp, did you voice those concerns during the open Offices & Facilities Commission committee meetings you attended?..."---John Galt

Are you claiming it was announced that the City Hall of B'Haven might not to be located in B'Haven at any such meeting? Prior to the B'Patch's now report?

That anyone decent should have anticipated such unmitigated none-sense to oppose?

That if they did, they would matter anyway?

A city with no legal address is no city at all.

Welcome to corporatist governance.

Yes Don, I am quite sure it was discussed at great length at the Offices & Facilities Commission committee meeting, open to all. Surprised you weren't there, being as concerned and involved as you are in our community. Even if you weren't, the meeting minutes are available on-line if you care to educate yourself.

Yes Don, I am quite sure it was discussed at great length....the meeting minutes are available on-line if you care to educate yourself."

"Quite sure"?

In other words: not certain.

Sounds like you need to read the "on-line minutes" yourself.

In any event, a web-site is not a "legal address."

Nor should anyone be expected to "find out" via the i-net.

Meanwhile do yourself a favor and stop embarrassing yourself (whehter you are aware of it or probably not) by claiming bad reasons for anyone to not have attended (other than the first) non-elected governor's commission meetings in lieu of "good cause."

Don, this has been the most transparent governmental process I've ever witnessed; Certainly more transparent than anything that has ever transpired out at Decatur. There were no surprises to anyone who bothered to pay attention.

I can't help it if you aren't really interested in putting in the effort that so many others have. But that's the rub; the decisions usually get made by those who just bother to show up.

"...this has been the most transparent governmental process..."---John McGrew

Sly as it has been, and remains, not even the slyest charade ever witnessed.

"Certainly more transparent than...Decatur."

Yet again, if Decatur never existed, this cityhood would still have been conceived and imposed as it has; and still be the sham it is.

"But Decatur...!" "But DeKalb County...!"

All fools' bait.

"There were no surprises to anyone who bothered to pay attention."

Certainly your inability or unwillingnes to know what to pay attention to comes as no surprise.

"I can't help it if you aren't really interested in putting in the effort that so many others have. "

Listen to yourself. You don't even know me

The fact is you have no idea of the prices I've paid and continue to pay for my boundless interest.

It is you, not me, who is the new boy on this block.

"But that's the rub; the decisions usually get made by those who just bother to show up.'

There was a time when the response "There is good cause" was sufficient onto itself to require no further explanation.

Of course that's when enough people had couth.

Again listen to yourself.

At any time you attented a meeting which allowed questions, you could have relayed the concerns of others who, yet again, "have good cause not to attend."

But, at best, you are not paying attention, If capable or even willing to pay any beyond the tired script you ceaseleslly repeat with others to get everyone else going, as intended by the script master, nowhere.

don, FUNNY that you, of all people, have the nerve to advise someone to stop embarrassing him/herself. Have you ever taken the time to try and read your babbling comments? It is like watching a bunch of monkeys run around on acid. Mr. McGrew is one of the few on here who a) is not a fearmongerer (see Eddie E.), b) is not an egotistical tyrant (see HamBurger), and c) actually attended OPEN meetings, read COMMITTEE MINUTES, and PAID ATTENETION to reality and not suspicions. Now please, go back to Rite Aid, CVS or wherever you get your medication and fall back asleep on that couch of yours. Brookhaven is here and Brookhaven is great (no matter where the TEMPORARY offices are located)!

"babbling....fearmongering....suspicions..."----John Galt

"Suspicions"?

I've have no "suspicions."

I have hard-core experience.

"Babbling"?

Mr Galt. do let us know when you can connect even one dot back onto itself.

Again, a guy who never comes out from behind a keyboard is telling those who are actually involved that they're not paying attention. Amusing. It's my sincere hope that the worst that the new Brookhaven has to deal with are such ignorant and baseless rantings.

"Again, a guy who never comes out from behind a keyboard..."---John McGrew

Is that what I do?

"...is telling those who are actually involved that they're not paying attention."

Well. Obviously you're not.

Aside from having "good cause" for not attending: as I posted on the very day of the Governor's "Executive Order" decreeing the commission, I stated that to even attend the interim-government's public meetings would then lend undue credence to its legitimacy.

Now do pay attention: I, nonetheless, did attend their first public meeting.

Unfortunately it confirmed their illegitimacy---brazenly, even threateningly so.

But, go ahead and score more points with them, to, nonetheless, put a ludicrous attendance record on what they may merely say, or have said, before what they actually do and have done.

Surely you will score high on having attended their Show-and-Tell Attendance Record and get at least more slaps on your back and a free beer or two.

After all, conformity is the first step toward subjugation.

"How temporary is temporary?"---FreddieK

Until Dunwoody, Chamblee, Doraville and Embry Hills are incorporated into the City of Brookhaven?

John,

It isn't enough to be expected to pay for what we don't want, so now we have to LIKE IT as well?

Eddie, I really am sorry you're stuck in the boat you voted against. But does that really mean that you want it to sink anyway?

"But it's far easier to complain..."----John McGrew

Tell us Mr. McGrew just how this 'decision' to where even the seat of a government is located must not the decision of government?

Don't worry. Help may still be on the way.

Certainly forever complaining about those complaining, about this City of Brookhaven, should be "non-binding."

John,
Look at it this way, I don't care what happens to it.
I have to pay more either way, of course, I expected that.
As far as I'm concerned, any level of 'success' is up to those who were intent on forcing it down our throats at all cost.
The 'occupiers' now bear the responsibility.

Eddie, since you have to pay more, seems to me that you'd want to actually be involved more. At least that's the way I feel.

"I have to pay more either way, of course, I expected that. As far as I'm concerned, any level of 'success' is up to those who were intent on forcing it down our throats at all cost. "

I thought you were a big supporter of our current president and his policies?

"The fact is, though, that the office space requirements articulated could not or would not be accepted by Brookhaven-based property owners."
Thanks Kim, that seems to sum it up. It would be nice but without if it doesn't reasonably exist then there are worse things than having the City Offices outside the city for one year.

Though I assume/hope the public meetings will be held in the temporary Court space at Corporate Square.

"However, we must keep in mind that this is ultimately a question of requirements..."----Kim Gocke

Of a state legislated city charter that did not require a legal address for even an interim governor's commission prior to operating? Much less city?

A governor's commission incapable of even finding space within its own city-to-be?

And instead in a city whose officials engaged themselves in the imposition of a City of Brookhaven on whole districts of citizens who were deprived by the State of being allowed to even vote on being incorporated, or not, into any proposed city of Brookhaven?

Baloney.

"The fact is, though, that the office space requirements articulated could not or would not be accepted by Brookhaven-based property owners."---Eric

Including "property owners" who wanted the city but not its city hall?

That's a good one.

Mr. Gringo @ your comment "Including "property owners" who wanted the city but not its city hall?"

The short answer is, YES. Hope this helps.

"Mr. Gringo @ your comment 'Including property owners who wanted the city but not its city hall? The short answer is, YES."---Guru Drek

The question was obviously r-h-e-t-o-r-i-c-a-l.

"Hope this helps."

But, thanks for YOUR affirmation: "...YES."

There were literally hundreds of posts on the blog AGAINST the Harris Teeter site. if you 'know' of space on Buford Highway why didn't you get off your keister and volunteer to help. As Kim said, if you don't like it, let your councilman know.

I imagine one problem with the Kroger/Harris Teeter spot is it would require buildout to convert it into useable space for offices. while this is a possiblity for a longer term space, the City is seeking temporary space to use for offices which is why it makes sense to move into something set up for offices. I suspect the space proposed doesn't even require new carpeting or paint.

"This is ridiculous."---Cindy

"Naysayer"!

This is "local government."

Jacobs'/B'Yes Sir style.

Take it or (literally) leave it.

I would much rather see a prime commercial location such as the Harris Teeter location developed as something that would generate revenue for the city as opposed to one that would consume too much of it.

I'd rather see the permanent location on Buford.

It's a one year lease

"There are very few landlords who can meet the current requirements with available space."----Kim Gocke

A city without the space to be one.

Gad!

And where is this budget published?

Kim,
With all due respect and thank you for all of your hard work, but it is ridiculous that you can find space for municipal court but you cant find space for administrative offices IN BROOKHAVEN. I wasn't for the city due to the compressed timeframe, did support the concept of city hood if done with careful planning and due diligence. This is precisely why. Rubber bands and paper clips. We could have done better. What will be the next excuse - we can't have a police force because we don;t have anywhere to put it? C'mon. This is lame man.
Again - nothing personal and with all due respect. BROOKHAVEN SHOULD BE IN BROOKHAVEN. ALL OF IT.

Wouldn't if have been nice if consideration of whether or not there was A SINGLE FACILITY READY TO HOST A GOVERNMENT EXISTED IN THE BROOKHAVEN FOOTPRINT were included in say the CVI?

This borders on ridiculous.

Couldn't we buy a couple of used classroom trailers?

"Wouldn't if have been nice..."---Eddie

Does it really matter when the new city, additional governance of B'Haven is governable by remote anyway?

Smile! You're on Candid Camera!

"As per..."---Kim Gokce

"Decision making": Who made this 'decision'? And when?

Similarly, the 'decision' to have premature---though obviously not premature enough---taking of even oaths of office?

From conception to date, this city has been nothing but one bulldozed imposition after another.

Did the referendum include the City of Brookhaven's City Hall to be anywhere but within the prosposed city?

How many people other than the number of members of the so-called "citizens committee" C4ND, its substitute that followed, B'Yes, and its, in turn, substitute that followed, "Governor's Commission," would have voted for any city incapable of having a city hall within its own boundries?

How many others would have even bothered to vote except to laugh the lot of you out of town?

Phil,
It's not enough that we have to pay for what we didn't want, we are also expected to 'volunteer' to assemble this tinker-toy monstrosity and like it?

Expect too much there very often?

Phil - what have you done?

"...volunteers that did get involved KNOW what was available out there in the Brookhaven footprint...."---Filemon

"KNOW"?

Then they KNEW that the City of Brookhaven will owe money (rent), for its Municiplal Court (in "Corporate Square"), to the same landlord that the MxGov owes money for its Institute of Mexico? Just next door at "Executive" Park")?

You know: The same "Instituto de Mexico" which has been so helpful being provided, having and using our own---still untold numbers of--- voter registration forms?

Btw, just down the street from both, is where all these knowers should take a good look at for City Hall: 1700 Chantilly Dr NE.

Hope that helps.

So your answer is "It is what it is. Deal with it?" Classic.

Kim,
Not to besmirch your efforts and my question is not necessarily directed to you but instead is simply a general question.
However, if there were no space in the city limits that met the legal requirements for a Municipal Headquarters, would it have been too much to ask that such a reality be made public BEFORE the vote?

"I completely am supportive of a healthy debate about the location of 'City Hall.'" ---Kim

How generous of you.

Debating about it still, however, serves no purporse.

Like so many others throughout history, even the Aztecs looked for---and found---a seat for a new government before having one.

Let's just get the sham over with.

On a P.O. Box in Mexico City. Cancun?

P.S.: "Like so many others throughout history, even the Aztecs looked for---and found---a seat for a new government before having one."---Me

And they were cannibals.

Henry,
As a victim of the invasion of my neighborhood by a city, I feel no obligation whatsoever to undertake any effort for any of the requirements.

I just want my tax cut, remarkable parks, new streets with sidewalks everywhere and a world class police department.....

And lets start with the mammoth tax cut.

eDDIE, always playing the victim card. You should have done a better job of getting more "victims" out to vote on July 31st, November 6th and December 4th. The MAJORITY voted for the City and your "invaded" neighborhood voted for Mayor Davis TWICE. Maybe you don't know your neighborhood as well as you think you do.

I'm going to echo Eddie here. I was not in favor of the city as I believe there is enough government already. To complain about the "complainers" because they are not working for a government they did not want seems odd. If the pro-city advocates could complain about the county why is it those who saw no need for more government can't voice their opinion about the new city?

Enuff, probably because I've been to enough county meetings as well.

Enuff,
Apparently 'local control' means losing one's ability to decide for oneself.
After all, we have been given our instructions, it is time to obey!

But I do take umbrage at the notion of a 'majority' deciding this nonsense.
A 'majority' of the population has voted on neither the municipality, nor the elected officials.
Welcome to Occupied Brokehaven!

" If the pro-city advocates could complain about the county why is it those who saw no need for more government can't voice their opinion about the new city?"---Enuff Govt Already

Because 'corporatist government' disallows dissent.

Corporatist government will go to any extent to silence it.

Have you not noticed the many posts here, from Day One to date, by B'Yes Sirs flaunting even their snooping?

Along with threats to make univited visits to people's homes, to be wary of going down streets at night, demands to know how people voted on the state-mandated referendum and, most recently, even a visit to one dissenter's place of work?

Place of business?

Snooping even the Editor of the B'Patch as to where he has another job?

Accompanied often enough with statements that even their businesses---their incomes---(including the B'Patch's) should suffer if the dissenters continue their dissent and, respectively, are allowed to post their dissent?

No matter the facades, role-players and their master-script, this is not, and never has been, a matter of mere government rather than sheer rule.

Welcome to 'corporatist governance.'

"If you are not part of the solution you are the problem!"---Henry Orivn

How quaint.

Actually, for quite some time its been a new world for what has become the City of Brookhaven.

Try the, certainly now, apt:

"If you're not part of the problem, there is a solution."

Welcome to 'corporatist governance.'

"It is what it is" is poor answer. However you slice it. Perhaps you can extrapolate more on it in your book. I know you guys have worked hard. And I really do appreciate that. And I appreciate that you are the only commission member who has a backbone to address these issues on this forum.

PS, I have never missed a single meeting and I have never missed a single public forum. I am involved in my community and I am very much committed to it.

But putting our city hall in Dunwoody sends a message to the citizens of Brookhaven that the administration will do what they dang well please when they dang well please and there is nothing the people can do about it. It's a bad idea. Did you all present an alternative than moving outside the city limits?

Joe, do you really believe that they actually want to place it outside of Brookhaven? Other than being ready to occupy and saving a boatload of money, what other possible explanation could there be?

If someone knows of a better location within the city limits that fits the parameters as defined by the Offices & Facilities commission, contact your councilperson. I'm sure they'd be interested.

"Joe, do you really believe that they actually want to place it outside of Brookhaven? Other than being ready to occupy and saving a boatload of money, what other possible explanation could there be?"---John McGrew

Unabashed cronisim.

"...that the administration will do what they dang well please when they dang well please and there is nothing the people can do about it..."----Joe The Plumber

Nothing new since Day One.

Even to, as surely precipitated by nearly simultaneous posts last Thursday, to hastily cancel that night's and, what turned out to be, all further public meetings to instead jump-start the new government no matter the referendum's grant for when being even legislatively allowed to do so.

FreedieK, the only "higher plane" I hold is above those who purport to know more about what is going on with all their conspiracy theories and what-not, and yet never seem to appear outside of their basements.

Literally hundreds of Brookhaven citizens contributed thousands of man hours to this project in the most transparent manner possible. Everyone was invited. (Ironically, the only people chased away from committee memberships were those seeking to submit responses to the RFPs; that certainly thinned some of the rooms)

People are free to voice an opinion. But they certainly aren't entitled to be taken more seriously by those who were actually there.

Just sayin.

FreddieK...well said.

"...without attending multiple laborious & insidious meetings..."---FreddieK

It should not be too long now that, as in Mexico, the ruling hacks have their "vigilantes" (as in neighborhood watchmen) round-up and bus everyone to fill even stadiums for their political charades to lend false popularity to their persons and false credance to their powers empowerments while woe onto any stragglers or persons staying behind.

It does have a bit of an upside though: free tacos, Tecate, bags of dry beans, tortilla flour, even gift cards, big-band mariachi and other assorted trinkets.

No Job-Johnnies though.

Resulting in quite a bonanza in fines for waiting police.

If it makes you feel any better, I was no more confident in the math presented than you are. But that's why I'm paying even closer attention now, instead of just surrendering.

And I have no "higher power" than you. (In fact, I never said that; someone else who wanted to argue with a straw man said I was on a "higher plane") I just said that there are a lot of people making more of an effort than the basement dwellers are, and I take them far more seriously.

The” higher level of responsive, attention to parks, and ethical local governance” were the primary issues that most of my neighbors were focused on. In my opinion, the budget look reasonable and the calls for a recalculation were silly given that we could never really get real tax estimates out of DeKalb County.
Ultimately, if things start getting a little tight the city can always re-assess the home values in Eddie E's neighborhood. Homes in that neighborhood were reassessed at extremely low rates when the county was angling for a massive condemnation process a couple years back. Now that DeKalb is out of the picture, those houses could probably be reassessed at 1.5X to 2X their current assessed value.

Mr. GuruLikeDrucker, LOL, now that DeKalb is out of the picture? Really? By the way, DeKalb will continue to handle property assessments and taxation. But you know that!

Additionally, you know how turbulent the past few years have been with all of the assessment protests filed due the economic changes. The tax digest changed rapidly from when it is first presented to a point when the vast majority of protests and reassessments are completed approximately a year and a half later. Was DeKalb uncooperative? Did Brookhaven Yes choose not to utilize the information provided because it was estimated due to ongoing changes during this volatile economic period?

So you rolled the dice and Rep. Mike Jacobs along with Vinson’s Mr. Baggett manipulated the Vinson study intending on shell gaming the budget if you could sell enough folks on the city?

What a fine Guru you are. Did you experience a little lump in your throat during the swearing in last night?

Special hamburger and a Cheeerwine?

"What a fine Guru you are. Did you experience a little lump in your throat during the swearing in last night?"----Hamburger

Didn't the legislation and referendum grant the city officials the power to govern to begin "12:01 AM December 17"?

No matter what issues certainly precipitated, beginning last Thursday, the sudden meeting changes to, subsequently, jump-start the oath-taking and governing?

Why would any of the publc holders-elect have allowed themselves to begin, as they have, anytime sooner?

Similary, why would any judge give any oath of office prior to the date granted to any public holder-elect when having to know the same occassion included immediate governing to follow?

Why, at this date, would any advising lawyer allow the office holders appoint him (or not) the city lawyer?

That is, if any of the office holders and would-be appointees have, or indeed ever had, any interest in their actions having the force of law?

The only bright side on this is the office holders are now being bound by the US Constitution to----first and foremost----protect and defend it.

As obviously as always, the US Constitution does not empower any foreign power, including the MxGov, to engage itself in any matter whatsoever in our voting processes, referendums and indeed electons.

(Including their own.)

So? Who among the elected then, if any, will be the first to ignore the "schedule" and be the first to fulfill their primary obligation of office?

While, on the matter of Brookhaven's cityhooding, the question never really having been just what, if anything, has been illegal about it rather than just what, if anything, has ever been legal about it?

"While, on the matter of Brookhaven's cityhooding...?"---Me

Come to think of it, this most recent episode of suddenly canceled public meetings, and subsequent decision by an unknown (or unknowns) for this new state-legislated government to commence operation sooner than granted, is far more than merely cavalier.

It's downright flagrant.

Does this flagrancy not provide sufficient cause in itself for the nullification of this government? By its own doing no less?

The problem is that there simply is not a lot of office space in Brookhaven. Of the possibly suitable locations that were found, it was the landlords that were not interested in leasing to the city because of issues they believed hosting a government would entail. (parking, number of visitors, etc)

The details of this problem were outlined in the minutes (online at brookhavencommision.com) and at several of the meetings, including Sunday's and last night's 1st council meeting.

It would be quite interesting if a "losing landlord" were to present themselves. I seriously doubt there will be since if there was, they'd already be all over here screaming about it.

"The problem is..."---John McGrew

There was never any will; and thus no way.

Again don, how would you know? You weren't there.

Tom you are not looking at it from all angles. This location is actually very convenient for our founding fathers of district 1.

Marsha Middleton...I do understand what you are saying.

All kidding aside, I do think this new budget is reasonable.

x, LOL! Excuse me for not asking the obvious!

Celebrate with a special hamburger and a Cheerwine?

EPU your visions of self grandeur and bravery are seriously misplaced and bordering on delusional. Your inability to adequately observe and comprehend are the cause. You wrote "We did not surrender...." As if you were engaged in an arduous or risky battle. YOU WEREN'T. You and the other basement dwellers or crotchety old men were hiding behind fake names repeating generalities over and over again. It is just pathetic.

And the ultimate proof is the complaints expressed here about the temporary location of the city hall. I prefer saving money over a short term and largely meaningless symbolic gesture of housing the county manager and 3 or 4 other staffers inside the city limits for the next year. ITS JUST TEMPORARY! The Governors Commission pursuant to the Charter and the legislation covering the Commission has executed its role in a very admirable fashion and there recommendation justifiably is based on the facts as they exist.

And this city hall location has nothing to do with what the budget will look like. And we could spend another year studying things but that will not change the fact that everything was an estimate. As of now there is nothing to indicate that the city won't be able to provide greater services with a millage rate below the cap of 3.35. That's the commitment, and yes we know you and your ilk think that can't be done. But do we really need to hear that opinion 50 times a day 365 days a year?

"That's the city charter that I have found to be a font of wisdom on the subject of the startup and operations of the City of Brookhaven. I recommend it to everyone but it is rated, 'M,' for 'Mature.'"---Kim Gocke

How "not condescending" of you to yet again instruct others on what you deem must be the "wise," and even now the "mature," thing to do.

Meanwhile, do familiarize yourself, and let others re-familarize themselves also, with what is certainly germane here too:

sos.georgia.gov/elections/constitution.htm

Even:

www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution.html

Meanwhile, are you going to answer the question, again repeated: Just who made the
decision to cancel the public meeting scheduled last Thursday to, subsequently, jump-start the city government to commence Dec 10 rather than the date legally granted of December 17?

Or would answering even this question not be the "wise" and "mature" thing to do?

"Don' s fallacious question can be identified as such, ironically, in the referenced Charter. For those that refuse to read it, the date has always been Dec. 17 *sigh*..."---Kim Gocke

Kim, it is your response that is "falacious."

"Sigh."

Please do not "refuse to reread" what I indeed posted:

"...to, subsequently, jump-start the city government to commence Dec 10 rather than the date legally granted of December 17."

Yet again: Who made this decision?

Who, beginning last Thursday, cancelled the public meetings scheduled?

"I have never made it a pre-requisite to be a volunteer to have an opinion."---Kim Gocke

As if it should really matter if you did?

" - not sure where that came from ... "

Try your incessant "I"----on this, that and everything.

"in any case the listing you share falls short of the requirements starting with the space isn't sufficient on the first floor."

It does. Especially when, as any conscionable citizen would, for only one, simply drop any contrived requirement for an unecessary, in fact objectional, police department.

Given the very (co)author, Mike Jacobs, of the house bill acedeing compliance, including "townships," to the National Voters Rights Act---- and passed without a statewide referendum to change the Constitution of the State of Georgia to include "townships"---would never less declare, on the very subject of Brookhaven having to be a city (which includes its own police) and not a township (which does not include its own police), that having a "township," would require a state-wide referendum?

A matter which, among many others, invalidates the whole of the cityhooding and city no matter how later legislated and referen-dumded .

"...it is not a political decision ... "

TomMiller if you had attended any of these "first city meetings" that have already taken place you would realize that no council meeting has been or will be held outside of the city. The temporary city hall is for day to day business like permits etc. It won't be used for anything else.
Legally, I believe, council and any other public meetings have to be held in the city limits. Faux Maven, there are ADA requirements, square footage requirements 12-15k s.f. free and and ample parking requirements, less than 20$ per s.f. requirements, and of course a landlord who will allow a government tenant. Oh and move in ready in 3 days with Internet and phone lines already run and furniture with a one year lease requirement. Jed Beardsley said all of this at the swearing in. Were you there? And you call yourself a Maven!

rm,

You got your city, quit whining.

Now you guys make it work!

"if you had attended any of these 'first city meetings' that have already taken place you would realize that no council meeting has been or will be held outside of the city."

Baloney.

Who met, and where, to even decide even same-day cancellations of public meetings as somehow made public notice on a webpage?

Even police committee's?

Much less the cancelations of scheduled public meetings beginning last Thursday?

The temporary city hall is for day to day business like permits etc. It won't be used for anything else."---The Real Maven

Who are you to make such claims?

Dictator?

"I have looked in the charter..."---Brookhaven Maven

Thanks to Kim's prodding, I have just now looked at the charter authored by Mike Jacobs:

BM, Did you notice line 1348:

"This act shall become effective upon approval of the Governor or upon its approval...

and, continuing on, line 1349:

"...without such approval."?

Also lines 1352-54:

"If the referendum provided for inn Section 6.02 fails, then such boundries shall cease to exist and shall be subject to annexation by other municipalities?

As I posted so long ago at the verybeginning when this City of Brookhaven was first proposed: beginning with Doraville's forays into Embry Hills, the sponsors are not really not interested in Brookhaven being a city rather than the "annexation" of, and subsequent "consolidation" of, whole zones into any city existing, or yet proposed.

Posting later that even if the B'Yes Sirs lost the referendum on B'Haven, they'd nevertheless pursue "annexing" (incorporating) zones into Dunwoody, Chamblee, and Doraville for an ultimate, corporatist, super-city anyway.

Note: "...without such approval..."

Shouldn't the "Governor's Commission" have been called the "Legislator's Commission"?

No comrade.
All you are saying is citizens have been gotten out from under impure county (and many did not know it was impure county) so citizens should be happy and QUIET.

Glorious District 1 now have access to funds to make District 1 paradise inner party deserves.

Proletarians in Districts 2, 3 and 4 just give tax money and be happy.

There is now local control, District 1 is local, and in control, and have decided where is best for inner party to do business of city.

No more questions about city or actions of Glorious Mayor will be tolerated (remember, Glorious Mayor knows where you live!).

"Give this ci-ty a chaaance."---The Real Maven

To have a court not on public property---for any duration---must be as illegal as it is preposterous.
.
Similarly to have the seat of government outside its own jurisdiction.

Until these, and other, matters are legally resolved, this City of Brookaven in Dunwoody must cease and desist all further activites.

I can assure you that, if the commssion had even had a legal address, and, to date, even this City of Brookhaven in Dunwoody, legal and certified correspondance would have commenced as early as the commission having seated itself.

Legal addresses that, astonishingly, we still await.

"The more important question is if Mayor Jerry Max Davis will have that door removed from his office..."----HamBurger

Surely not.

Our City of Brookhaven City Hall in the City of Dunwoody will, like our "Municipal Court," be subject to (if not already), at minimum, the private---not public----tennant policies of their locales' private---not public---property owners.

Or, at least, the policies of those who would exploit the corredor.