The only map I've viewed is the one reported by the Patch article "Brookhaven City Map". This might be the same updated map used in the CVI. Tough to view details on it.

I'm fairly certain Mr. Witt held a BrookhavenYES meeting at his home.

Kerry Witt:

“He is currently serving a second term as president of the Pine Hills neighborhood association and his fifth year on its zoning board. Concurrently, Witt has been serving as a community council member for the past four years for DeKalb County, chairing the community council over the last two years.”

===

Mr. Dean, DeKalb was not perfect, but many are revealing that they negated their citizen duties to make changes to our existing county government.

You live in Pine Hills. It is nice to see how involved you have been on a local level in Pine Hills. You have an extreme hatred for DeKalb County but you are clueless as to what is going on in your own neighborhood. How accountable will you be if the new city cannot live up to its promises? Or, have you been practicing your apologies if the new city does not work out as promised?

Cheerwine and a special hamburger?

Mr. Dean, by the way, the Republican party is for less government, not more . . . And, that is exactly what we now have . . . More government . . .

Please pass the yellow mustard!

Hamburger, you know that line didn't scare people away from voting for Brookhaven, the very intelligent voters realized that replacing a slice of governance currently ruled by a bloated bureacracy with a governance run fically sound (as our brethren in Sandy Springs and Dunwoody have shown) results in better government bang for our buck.

Calling Brookhaven citizens lazy or insinuating we could sway the bureacracy without incorporation wasn't so bright of your NOCity DeKalb Democrats, burglar, really bad campaign strategy buddy.

Mr. Dean, how sadly mistaken you are. There are no intelligent voters. There are informed voters and there are uninformed voters.

Regardless, there were a large amount of registered voters that chose not to vote in this new city election. I have met several of them since the vote and presented them with an unbiased synopsis of the impact of the final vote. I have used Brookhaven Yes data. Many of these folks are upscale apartment tenants or condo owners. Their after vote responses, although with no bearing, have been interesting, and resoundingly, NO city.

Sir, please do not let this phrase (spelling corrected), incorrectly attributed to me, come back to haunt you:

“Calling Brookhaven citizens lazy or insinuating we could sway the bureaucracy without incorporation wasn't so bright of your NO City DeKalb Democrats, burglar, really bad campaign strategy buddy.”

Previously, you have shown how clueless you are, about the cited quote above and your lack of participation in your DeKalb County government. There are some very unhappy folks out here. You may want to make sure this city succeeds in budget and as sold.

Mr. Dean, would you like a special hamburger?

Again with insulting Brookhaven citizens...why do you hate your neighbors?

In regards to performing the city level services in a fiscally sound manner, the DeKalb Democrat bureaucracy has set the bar very, very low, it will not take much to improve on their status quo.

"Again with insulting Brookhaven citizens..."---Dean

How does being a Brookhaven citizen excuse one from being an insult to humanity?

"...why do you hate your neighbors?..."

Why do you beat your wife?

"In regards to performing the city level services in a fiscally sound manner..."

In other words they'll screw everyone else cheaply or, better said, the promise of cheaply.

"...the DeKalb Democrat bureaucracy has set the bar very, very low, it will not take much to improve on their status quo."

Replacing the status quo of regimented incompetence with the status quo of regimented menace is not changing the bar. It is replacing the bar.

Talking about "bars"...

You make a decision like that from a website? I guess that as soon as i put up my website I'll be a successful businessman.

As president of Pine Hills C/A Mr Witt never attempted to inform any of the residences of the impending Brookhaven vote since no one I know of considers Pine Hills to be in any way affiliated with Brookhaven it seems it would have been important to know.

Hank,

I'll let you know when that successful website is up and running and maybe you can vote for me.

"...who are going try to make Brookhaven a good city..."---Rough as a Cobb

They had to work on themselves to be good long before any city.

I heard that at today's meeting at least one city council seat is only for a one year term.

For the District 2 and District 4 candidates those seats will be up for re-election in 2013. The District 1, District 3 and the mayor’s seat will be on the ballot in 2015.

Mr. Ashford Observer, that is what I like.

Do a little more research on the new city you voted for just like you have done on the county you want to distance yourself from. Informed voters, folks paying attention, are aware of the staggered election cycles. Is it interesting that the staggered cycles are for the southern portion of the new city?

In Brookhaven, are some folks more special than others? The answer is yes, some folks have more control over others . . . That is just what this new city is all about . . .

Hey! You need a special hamburger?

"I heard that at today's meeting..."---AshfordObserver

Where? And who?

."..at least one city council seat is only for a one year term. For the District 2 and District 4 candidates those seats will be up for re-election in 2013. The District 1, District 3 and the mayor’s seat will be on the ballot in 2015."

Gaa!

Anticipating loose ends to complete the incorporatization.

"For the District 2 and District 4 candidates those seats will be up for re-election in 2013. The District 1, District 3 and the mayor’s seat will be on the ballot in 2015."---Roger That

Could it be that Districts 1 and 3 require more time to be subordinated to City of Brookhaven?

"...don't you find it disturbing that there still seems to be a significant awareness and knowledge gap within our voting community?"---E Pluribus Unum

I don't. They figured it would be fixed. The only reason I went to vote was to see the setup to later figure out how they were, then, pullling it off.

I've figured it out.

"This includes being aware of...the qualification process, the Governor's soon to be named commission, and being informed on candidate qualifications to run our city."

Well, doesn't that tell you its been fixed all along?

"Qualification process" should be less complicated than getting a driver's license. In this case the process of presenting yourself in the right place and proving you meet age and residence requirements. Most people would not want to even hear about anything else. So why listen to anything else?...

don Gabacho

7:49 pm on Saturday, August 11, 2012

..."The Govenor's soon to be named commission" is not---and was not allowed to be---elected."

"Being informed (actually "trained") on candidate qualifications to run our city," in a democracy, is counter to the candidates themselves doing the informing and the People deciding just who qualifies via authentic elction.

Why do you presume they are not informed and, instead, simply not wanting to indulge these phonies while afraid to oppose them also?

Welcome to 'corporatist' governance---now localized.

Do you really believe that the insiders were going to suffer any embarrassment of losing?

Especially given the course they took?

And not establish that course for all even local elections and referendums to come?

no need to lie, just say that there are 25,972 voters, not nearly twice that as you claim. No need to lie to support an argument.

EPU while I think you overstate the numbers I agree with the general facts that most people don't really keep up - think Hamburger alluded to that fact. I do disagree with your conclusions or assumptions.

This event has been heavily publicized. Information is available. And its really not that complicated. Its a fact of life. just like even the most aggressive HOA's that are voluntary are doing an amazing job if they get a 30% membership rate. That's just life. Would love to increase voter turnout and participation. But we don't and we must still move forward. Lack of participation is not a reason to stick with the Status Quo.

"The numbers don't lie."----AshfordObserver

Yes they can.

Regarding the returns of the Brookhaven City referendum: What were the first percentages---for and against---reported?

E you really do put the "PU" in the name don't you ..as I ..ahem hold my nose at your name calling.

Truth hurts huh? I'm just an average guy, not an ounce of lie in me. You however...

"E you really do put the "PU" in the name don't you ...---AshfordObserver

Do recall: "The numbers don't lie."----AshfordObserver

Again: Yes they can.

And again: regarding the returns of the Brookhaven City referendum: What were the first percentages---for and against---reported?

Plus: The final percentages, for and against?

Don't tell us, after your statement, that you really don't want to know where the truth lies?

"I still remain a product of the power and control system of our society."---E Pluribus Unam

Start thinking "the power and control system 'for' our society."

"As a result, I still miss seeing so much."

You won't even know what to look for to see until you, even inadvertantly, give sufficient cause to be a threat to the power and the power uses its apparatus for control---on you.

And even then, you'd have to realize unimaginable methods and apparatus adopted from a very different country to impose and maintain absolute authority over a very different society now being applied here; also the extent they wiil go to not only impose that authority but also keep their intent and methods unknown.

"Davis is interesting. One moment he's a liar w no character, the next a standup guy..."---E Pluribus Unum

Have you seen the front page of the perceptibly Yesser's 'Brookhaven Reporter'? Giddy with having been sticking his nose in what should never been his business, "Rep. Tom Taylor, R-Dundwoody ("a co-sponsor to incorporate Brookhaven"), is, "in celebration," holding up a toy-like "flying pig," while Jacobs, looking at the flying pig, is giddy for having achieved his assignment and Davis, gazing at the flying pig, is suspiciously forlorn of---what?---he being eventually perceived to be the flying pig?

The accompanying article. inadvertently admits: "DeKalb County Commissioner Jeff Rader said, once the governor's commission is in place, members will [only then] work out an agreement with the county to deliver services to the city while it is in the start-up stage."

And, amazingly, and in lieu of having at least a tentative agreement prior to any referendum: "The transition period is a very important period because"---now get this---"if the city moves too quickly, they may not be prepared."

While, according to Davis, Sandy Springs Mayor Eva Galambos "is excited about the public-private partnerships and [presumably openly-public] partnerships we can have with her city."

Not even the residents of imposed Brookhaven.

"Dekalb County will do any and everything in its power to delay and prolong the transition period of various departments involved..."---Steve Walker

In the case of the police department, I certainly hope so.

".....and leave it to don groucho to plagiarize comments..."---Steve Walker

How is quoting and attributing you for the quote "plagiarizing"?

"...in order to further his diatribe.."

Despite your false accusations of "plagiarizing" and "diatribe," my statement---"In the case of the police department, I certainly hope so"---stands, no matter how you deal with it.

Making exception for one department, among the "various departments" of your statement, for objection, is hardly "deceitful."

One size does not fit all.

As it turns out, what is "deceitful" is your attempt to allow no exceptions to bury one department among "various departments" "in support of" your "diatribe."

Your malice.

Regarding my vaild concern: a feature making cities and townships distinct: the former having their own police and townships not:

"Mike Jacobs

5:33 pm on Monday, February 13, 2012 [Brookhaven Patch]

I've supported township legislation in the past and know from experience that there is not 2/3 of the House and 2/3 of the Senate to support the constitutional amendment required to give zoning power to a third type of local government (other than counties and cities)."

Did anyone see on the so-called "referendum even the choice of Brookhaven being a city or township?

Tell me just where is this prohibition ---"other than counties and cities [to the exclusion of townships]"---that Jacobs does not cite in the State Constitution of Georgia?

http://sos.georgia.gov/elections/GAConstitution.pdf

Meanwhile, who elected any representative, or even 2/3's of the legislature and senate, to be the electorate?

For a "referendum" no less?

Even judge and jury?

Certainly referendum does NOT require any "Constitutional Amendment."

Don G. I never mentioned ONE word in my statement about any given Dept within Dekalb County, once again that is something that you are weaving into your comments.

"Don G. I never mentioned ONE word in my statement about any given Dept within Dekalb County..."---Steve Walker

Correct. You said two: "various departments."

Yet again, regarding my most vaild concern: a feature making cities and townships distinct: the former having their own police and townships not:

"Mike Jacobs

5:33 pm on Monday, February 13, 2012 [Brookhaven Patch]

I've supported township legislation in the past and know from experience that there is not 2/3 of the House and 2/3 of the Senate to support the constitutional amendment required to give zoning power to a third type of local government (other than counties and cities)."

Did anyone see on the so-called "referendum", if there were to be a city (or township) at all, the choice of Brookhaven being a city or township?

Tell me just where is this prohibition ---"other than counties and cities [to the exclusion of townships]"---that Jacobs does not cite in the State Constitution of Georgia?

http://sos.georgia.gov/elections/GAConstitution.pdf