One of the gunmen in Atlanta's former mayor's "autonomous zone" has been convicted of killing a young girl. During sentencing there were statements made by interested parities, including the mother of the recently convicted.
Seriously? Do they allow conjugal visits at Gitmo?
Not to worry, he got quite the sentence, and thankfully that child will grow up without his guidance.
One of the folks who circulated an online petition against the monstrous apartment complex proposed for the Life South property, a proposal endorsed by city bureaucrats, has done a victory lap.
Just what was the victory?
To hear them tell it, that would be the rejection of the oft-modified proposal. That's it.
No strategic changes by folks who should care, and DHA should, but probably isn't amongst them. Nothing that takes note of the "ask for the stars to get the moon" approach often adopted by these developers. Nothing to address the fact that the city's Confederacy of Dunces who promoted and recommended approval of this fuster cluck had no elected official representing the electorate.
Maybe these committees, or whatever the hell they are, should have at least one citizen representative from each district in the city. None of these citizens should serve in any other capacity in the city or the city adjacents: the large number of authorities, councils, committees...whatever they've thrown up as a "we didn't do it, they did" CYA. It should have at least one elected official from council or a first term mayor. In other words someone accountable at the ballot box. Otherwise we'll continue with what we have, a sham rubber-stamping whatever it is these unelected bureaucrats want, and they want what outsiders have told them to want. And maybe it is time for a Citizens Oversight Group to ride herd on this goat rodeo.
Until meaningful, enforceable changes are made, there has been no victory.
You may have noticed something missing in daVille. That's right, that big, majestic tree in front of Dentistry With A Difference has been cut down.
Why?
Well, someone with the city went on social media explaining it was coming down because it was: a) afflicted with mistletoe; and b) had been determined to be rotted. We were also informed that mistletoe is a parasite, and when someone from this city declares something else a parasite, well, you gotta laugh. Is this the pot calling the kettle black or what?
Let's look at some of that rot.
We know what's next: the similar landmark tree in from of Novo Cucina. It's gotta go. We will be told that it has mistletoe, which it does, and has for decades. We will not be told that this can be dealt with.
The city wants these trees down and they don't want you to know why. Wonder if any of the candidates know.
The AJC, well Torpy, dropped a nugget in a recent piece on burglary in Atlanta and the drop in rates. Being an actual journalist he checked in with some law enforcement experts with one offering a possible explanation for the drop in burglary rates.
Was this part of city hall's plan all along?
You've heard of BPA, right? Of course you have. Why, you'd never have any of that BPA emitting plastic in your house and you sure as hell wouldn't let your kids anywhere near it. No responsible parent would.
BPS is BPA's toxic sister. Guess where it shows up. In receipts. You know, the ones you get at checkout when you buy things. Even when you buy things at Costco, not to pick on Costco, but some Social Medialists got all knicker knotted when Costco folks at the exit stopped drawing happy faces on receipts. Why the upset? Because their children liked the happy faces and these parents let their children play with these BPS laden receipts. You may be wondering if "play" includes any oral fixation. You don't need to wonder if these folks should have ever had kids, because, well, now you know.
Do you ever feel like Dunwoody is run by folks who can never catch a trend in time? Like they don't do what the cool kids are doing until they've built up enough envy and jealousy, and by then the cool kids have moved on? It's not just interstate lanes in your front yard or Dunwoody Dildos at the outskirts of town, it now is apartments.
That's right, apartments. Seems the boom is over, which is a kind way of saying "developers can no longer get filthy rich building apartments." That's not to say these gulag-like atrocities are not still being built, but if developers cannot get some kind of lucrative sweetheart deal, well, then, they just cannot engorge their purses. Rental demand is being depressed because the fact is these apartments really are not "affordable" unless it involves subsidies, which are getting scarce, so developers profit the most building luxury apartments. Does anyone think that the developer's and Dunwoody bureaucrats' damp dreams about that high rise on Ashford Dunwoody was going to have apartments that meet the average person's idea of affordable?
So, you have to wonder... What was the motivation for all those bureaucrats to unanimously recommend this high rise apartment complex? Do we need to follow the money, or can we just ask? Are they just trying to play 'keep up with the Joneses?" And then they get a public spanking by a unanimous vote from council rejecting their plan. After all, they only had to convince four folks to go along with the plan. Maybe they should have had an ice cream social, as the rumor mill suggests a vote might be had for a pint of Ben & Jerry's.
At this point, who, outside of these bureaucrats themselves, can justify what is going on at city hall? As some have pointed out, we have elections coming up and it might be a good time to ask some questions.
Atlanta is in a bit of a bind with their policies directing funds to minority businesses as the current federal administration sees that as discrimination. The AJC is on top of the issue and has dropped a few nuggets.
You have to wonder if the bureaucrats at our beige palace aspire to staking a claim on federal funds, no matter what the cost to the community.
Well, not unless they are forced to. And just what would be the forcing function? Well, it seems our off-tune bureaucrats have advanced from "place making" to "brand management" and the brand they think they have created and will manage is "Dunwoody." That's right, they think they created the Dunwoody brand, and if that brand represents destruction of traditional Dunwoody to tap into urbanity and the money they think comes with it, then, yeah, they created that brand.
What does this have to do with suing folks?
Glad you asked. Turns out that Dunwoody was a "place" before these bureaucrats "made place" but their taking credit for the pre-existing aura of Dunwoody should come as no surprise. Hypocritical, yes. Surprising, no. Now that they've literally staked out their territory with those Dunwoody Dildos, they're on a rampage to obliterate any use of "Dunwoody" (what they call their brand) by any outsiders. If you've bounced around north Brookhaven, cruised down Peachtree Dunwoody, or taken the scenic drive on Roberts between Dunwoody Place and Roswell Road, you've seen dozens of subdivisions, condos and apartments proclaiming themselves Dunwoody This and Dunwoody That. It isn't clear if city hall is bothered by road names or if that will be addressed in another phase of the campaign.
But city hall is going to put a stop to all that brand misappropriation and dilution. If they learned anything from that litigious sign painter it is that you use the courts to protect your brand or you lose it. Apparently everything will not be OK without some serious legal bills, but it is rumored that someone at city hall pointed out that the PD has been lying low of late and there is quite an excess of funds in the legal war chest. So, lawfare it is. That said, they do hope to economize by threatening lawsuits and only pursuing a few in the hopes most will be intimidated into capitulation. Sound like anyone you know? One way or the other, if "Dunwoody" is in the name, it damn well better be in Dunwoody.
Ever wonder why candies look so much different in Europe? It is almost as if there are completely different formulations in the U.S. As it turns out, the formulations are different. And it isn't just candies, which frankly you can not only live without, but some folks would benefit greatly from abstinence. It is also all manner of products that we put in, and on our bodies. A key difference between the U.S. and, well, pretty much every western democracy, was exposed in a discussion about nail polish. Yep. Nail polish.
Seems like a bunch of founders [successfully] came out in opposition to the phallic 55+ apartments the city bureaucrats planned for the Life South site. This has led some of these founders to do their very best Gomer impersonation expressing surprise at how all these city bureaucrats could be so out of touch with the folks who actually live in Dunwoody, many of whom voted for the city that cuts their paychecks.
Really Gomers? Surprise? These are the same folks who [should have?] wrote the city charter that included an impenetrable firewall between our elected officials and the bureaucrats who are then free to treat this city like their very own playground. Yet now the Gomers are surprised that this is exactly what happened. Surely these statesmen at least read the charter, and mayhap understood it. If they were trying to make a mockery of democracy what would they have done differently?
Let's just say that their surprise and shock seems a bit disingenuous.
He's back at it again. Who? That founding councilman who keeps observing how we've been deceived by city hall. Now that the bureaucrats at city hall are busy crafting a vision statement to their liking, he's pointing out the obvious: they're undermining everything this city was supposed to stand for.
Now you might defend these bureaucrats by suggesting they're not word-smiths. Maybe. Maybe not. As the founder points out the original vision statements, the ones founded by the promoters of city hood, were proscriptive, somewhat restrictive and easily used to hold city hall accountable. Bureaucrats are having none of that. So they are crafting vision statements that are vague, easily [mis]interpreted to suit their needs, and the needs of the developers and other outsiders they serve. As the founder points out, they are boiling frogs, and it will work, as this mayor and council will dutifully sign off on whatever these bureaucrats shove under their noses.
You voted for a city and you may have thought it was your city. It isn't. It belongs to unelected bureaucrats and developers.
It's that time again, time to pick the clowns in the circus. Yeppers. Elections are nigh upon us.
So let's have some fun.
Here is a good way to do just that: ask the question that will put them on the spot. First, a little context. Everybody knows that there is no, nada, zero traffic enforcement inside Dunwoody. Yes, 285 gets patrolled either because superspeeders are lucrative or there is a chance for an asset seizure, but in our neighborhoods? No way. Now this is the context you should use when posing a question to these posers.
It goes a little like this: "As you know we have a problem with speeders in our neighborhood and what I want to know is can you tell the police chief to run a patrol to put a stop to this?" It is very, very important that you emphasize the word "can" because that means there is only one correct answer: No! Now if you want to have real fun, before you let them answer, say something along the lines of "this is a yes/no question, and anything other than "yes" means no, and anything other than just plain "no" is political obfuscation."
Let the fun begin!
If you've watched TV lately, the broadcast variety, you are probably over forty, and if you are you may well "own" a home, or at least be committed to a mortgage. Goodonya. It also puts you squarely in the crosshairs of those ads screaming about "what the FBI calls house stealing," which is a fraudulent activity based on filing a "quit claim" deed including falsified signatures and a bogus notary stamp which then allows the fraudster to take out loans on "your" property.
So what are these adverts selling? First, they'll tell you if this has already happened to you. Then they'll notify you if it does. Finally they are selling what amounts to an insurance policy should the problem escalate. Now you can, at least in DeKalb, go on line and check on current filings against your property. Anytime you want, but you gotta want. Even better, DeKalb lets you sign up for notifications should any new filing be posted against your property.
Will this prevent fraudulent filings? No. No it will not. But you will know about it as soon as possible and you can take action sooner rather than later.
 |
| Proof Readers??? |
Dominium, so aptly named, is persistent if nothing else and is acting with Trumpian sense of entitlement and ownership of facts: "no one under age 55 will be able to live there," where "there" is an incredibly out of place high-rise apartment on Ashford Dunwoody. Like Trump, who has his own facts, he has a reality problem with Congress. Seems the 104th passed something called HOPA (Housing for Older Persons Act) which explicitly defines the rules for 55+, including the 80/20 rule and that only one resident need be that old. This is an actual "act of Congress" that Mr. Dominium has no control over, so despite his protests, the actual fact is that, by law, folks under 55 can, and very likely will, live in these apartments. Otherwise, honestly (that's a stretch) why would anyone build three bedroom apartments?
The fact that this man's proposal is so inappropriate that even advocates of urbanization are against it is concerning. What is more concerning is the bureaucrats at city hall that are actively advocating for this proposal. The folks are on our payroll, and they have not a single clue about, and even less consideration for the people living in this city. They don't know us. They don't care to. They don't work for us. So who do they work for? And what is the power these outsiders have over city hall bureaucrats?
Maybe it is time for a "power down reset," rebooting this operation with lots of new faces.
Ever spend much time with academics...professors? Outside the classroom, in the near occasion of alcohol? Yes, they're fragile. And they're whiners. But they are never more than a glass away from dropping "pedagogical freedom" as an existential element of their professional life. Like tenure, this is something we in the real world never have, and yes, unfireable government bureaucrats are not part of the real world. So what is this "pedagogical freedom?" In a nutshell, it means no one, not a colleague, not a department head, not a provost and not a university president can tell them what to do or how to do it in their classes. No one. Anyone who tries, and in fact, anything they don't like, will be declared an existential threat to their pedagogical freedom. For some unfathomable reason, it has been widely accepted that the academy would collapse if professors' pedagogical freedom were to be infringed in the slightest.
Not anymore.
Seems the University System of Georgia is rolling out a requirement that all syllabi be made publicly available. Professors are outraged. Seems they think transparency is something that applies to government and somehow their working as an academic in a public university means they are not government employees, despite the fact that they actually are. But they really don't like anyone telling them what to do, even their bosses at USG.
The histrionics are reminiscent of Campus Carry. You know, where bodies were going to drop by the hour and some profs protested by having office hours exclusively online (before pandemic shutdowns) so as to not be exposed to an armed student. Their imaginings include social media attacks based on syllabus topics. Heaven forbid! A troll. They see physical threats in their future. They expect self-censorship--like that's going to happen. They may actually fear that students, who now see the syllabus ahead of time, might choose another professor, like an in-your-face Rate My Professor. Should students not be allowed to vote with their feet? And parents' money? But mostly they whine about pedagogical freedom. You'd think they were Mel Gibson's William Wallace screaming "Freedom!" as he was about to be drawn and quartered.
As predicted (by lots of folks) now that Wally Whirled has left town the local Target is suffering the Dunwoody Shrinkage Effect. Seems some budding entrepreneurs tried to walk out with over $2400 in cosmetics. After many lies, including their ages, assumably in an effort to be treated as juvies, the perps copped to the theft. The justification: the perp wanted to start a business but didn't have the "capital" for inventory. Well, one could suppose that fencing stolen goods is indeed a business. Since they seem to be "operating" in Dunwoody, the next question is: are they paying their occupational tax?
Maybe the Lords and Ladies should be less fervent in their drive to high density and pay a little more attention to driving down crime.
This city put out the welcome mat for developers on day one, after all we had a Developers' Authority before we had a city hall. Now the city is rolling out the red carpet for developers wanting to build apartments. Hundreds, soon thousands of apartments since incorporation.
And the folks that run this city want even more.
It is as if they are cold-calling any and all commercial property owners suggesting they do a tear-down and re-build converting these properties to huge apartment developments. Irony? Absolutely. Remember that one of the things the Dunwoody Yes! folks claimed would change was the zoning backdoor that let commercial property owners build apartments without a zoning review. Now this city is encouraging exactly that.
Since this city is so good at collaboration, how about they collaborate with the school system. Maybe they could work together to convert one of these commercial properties into a school for the students already in all those apartments this city has encouraged. You know, give these families a sense of place, a neighborhood school around which to build community. Is that because they don't care about the folks living in apartments any more than they care about those living in our neighborhoods? Is it because all they care about is making a place for developers?
...right down the rabbit hole.
Higher Ed has been broken for some time, what with the publish-or-perish system creating aberrant and abhorrent behavior, but now, with Large Language Models, there is a deluge of fictional "scientific" publications. Retraction Watch has been diligent in rooting out suspect publications, but now the flood of publications, and suspect publishers and editors has the attention of none other than the Grey Lady. The Times article points to a Moore's Law doubling of suspect publications and notes the increase in publishers of sketchy journals with equally sketchy editors and reviewers on staff.
This is indeed a serious problem. One that has been around for quite some time, but now is headed in the direction of bogus articles far outnumbering legitimate research. Remarking on corrupt paper mills as lucrative business operations does little, and what little is being done, relies on automated processing to detect doctored and fabricated data, and scan for absurd wording. Have you ever read an article in popular press that uses the words "furthermore," "what's more," or "moreover," then you are reading something spewed out by a LLM. Nobody really uses those words. In an effort to hide their plagiarism, these millworkers pump out drivel that includes similarly uncomfortable diction, as well as artificial hallucinations and citations that do not exist.
The Grey Lady finishes up as she so often does of late: with a swipe at Trump. A postdoc is quoted saying that the "stuff that the Trump administration is doing" is going to make the situation worse. Yes. That's right. "Stuff" is the appropriate technical term. It is worth noting that neither the NYT author, nor any of the sources provided any kind of solution. None whatsoever.
The stock market attracts some interesting characters. Day traders, if they still exist. Dynamic traders watching trends and news and talking of indicators, and momentum. Then there are those folks who buy stocks as part ownership of a company, buying shares in companies they'd buy outright if they could. These investors put in a lot of time and effort towards evaluating companies, their products or services, their operations, and most importantly, their management. These investors are looking for steady, long term returns on their investments and while they accept risk, they want this risk to be within acceptable limits, so they are looking for companies that reliably offer products and services customers want; that consistently grow the business, top line and bottom.
The key to this analysis? Management.
Good management knows the market, their own offerings and their customers. They know how to optimize operations and they know how to weather economic storms. They handle economic good times and downturns with an equally steady hand. Good management drives the business to reliable returns in good times and bad.
How do investors find companies run by quality managers?
They listen. See, companies report on their operations and with many caveats, tell investors what they see in future, in the upcoming reporting cycle. They better be right. And good management, because they know the business, and the economic climate they face, have a plan. When you read a quarterly filing or an annual report, you are reading that plan in all its glory. Investors rely on the quality and integrity of this information when choosing to buy and to sell. This is a key measure of top notch management.
What happens if management's analysis misses the mark?
They are punished by the investment community. As investors lose confidence in management they sell off shares and the business' market value drops. This can cost highly compensated C-Levels their job. As it should. These managers are paid to know what they're doing, which is operating this business, and when their filings and reports lack veracity it screams "I have no clue." These are not people you want handling your money. And here's a key point: it doesn't matter if they come in high or low. A revenue windfall is just as bad as a shortfall because accuracy is competency.
What about government?
Well, veracity does seem to be kryptonite for politicians and career bureaucrats, but many of the same principles [should] apply. So we're now confronted with an odd situation, where city "management" has uncovered a heretofore unanticipated windfall of around one and.a quarter million dollars. This is celebrated in the Blue Bag Rag, with some fairly weak explanations from the city bureaucracy, and you can expect the head cheerleader to be shaking her pom-poms at the head of the parade with a brass band playing Happy Days Are Here Again. The simple fact is, this is unacceptably bad management. This management does not have sufficient understanding of fundamental operations. Their budgets are unreliable and cannot be trusted, begging the question: what do they say that can be trusted? The obvious answer? Nothing.
So, what can be done?
We cannot sell our stock, at least not without action under the gold dome to dissolve the charter. Operationally, mayor and council are powerless, even if we were to elect anyone who wants to remedy the situation. We could elect a group that would replace management, they can at least cut the head off the snake, and they could remove bureaucracies not relevant to founding commitments.
Are we going to demand competence or just continue to sing along with the band?
Tonight's City Hall Goat Rodeo should be more entertaining than most as there will be discussions of needs and greeds as well as where does the money come from? Just under $100K (wanna bet that is a magic number?) for facade lighting at the Beige Palace. Really? And, as one person with a brain who's been around a while has pointed out, this is the kind of happy horseshit that wouldn't be allowed on any building but a government building. That's because our Lords and Ladies of the Order of the Sleepless Nights are not subject to the same laws they gleefully impose on others. Aren't we blessed to be in their presence?
Those running city hall have been feeling their oats, for quite some time, but are they one toke over the line? They seem to have aroused some sleeping giants. At a recent DHA meeting a mega-apartment complex to be built at the Life South site, and rest assured it will be built, was discussed. There were some heavy hitters in opposition, particularly to this project, but seemingly to whatever the hell is going on at city hall that resulted in a favorable view in the first place. By heavy hitters, we mean one of the two big guys: Dan Weber, who as a state senator pushed the whole "let's have a city" party through the legislature. Is this what seller's remorse looks like?
The more important question is whether or not the DHA has had a rude awakening. Is it possible that they are spurred to action, that they will re-acquire the moxie to stand up and fight for the community? The mojo they lost when the city referendum passed. Apparently this odious issue has been a wakeup call to a number of founding councilmen and now even one of the two state-level advocates.
And is it really odious? Absolutely. The initial stench is from the unadulterated bullshit of "55+ community" with one unabashed proponent of the project claiming that because it was said that it would be restricted exclusively to residents 55+, well then that's that. Well, what that really is, is bullshit. Some lip flapping at city hall means nothing in the face of federal law. Even today. And everyone knows it, including the proponents who pivot quickly to an affordable housing rant, with no shame at supporting this with a "end justifies the means" argument. Nothing matters but what they want.
And as all things social media do, it devolved into ageist and racist rhetoric on the part of the project advocates. Did you know that the folks in Deerfield East are the recipients of generational wealth? Or that Dunwoody is just a bunch of old white people. Oh, and before you ponder that, it was meant as a "bad thing." And if there are folks in Winterhall who think they got where they are in life through hard work, prudence and good choices, well, park your privilege, preferably at the base of one of those Dunwoody Dildos.
Let's bottom line it. What Dunwoody needs to do is support creation of high paying jobs so people can afford to live here, instead of driving our community towards Section 8 housing.
After a recent $40M judgment against a DeKalb Hotel on allegations of supporting human trafficking (AKA prostitution) another hotel has settled a strikingly similar case to the tune of $6M. Quite a savings. This does call to mind the Dunwoody PD's falsified police reports justified on the basis of protecting local hoteliers whose properties may, or may not, be hotspots for human trafficking. Is this aiding and abetting? Are these kinds of judgments and settlements headed to Dunwoody? Does anyone wonder if a jury might find the city liable should a case present itself? Are any of those wonderers at city hall? Is it at all possible for the police department to ever do the right thing, and do that thing the right way?
A certain founding councilman is at it again, this time proclaiming that what is sorely lacking at city hall is the will to act, to re-imagine and re-create Dunwoody as a sustainable center of innovation. As he has been, he is absolutely correct, but there is much more missing at city hall than mere willpower.
Dunwoody has no vision because they have no visionaries. The founding councilman points out that we do not, we should not, invite outside consultants to create a vision for us. Correct again. But if not these outsiders, then who? None of the unelected bureaucrats have any vision that is not handed to them by these consultants, or by folks waving grant money under their noses, or developers who have them on speed dial. Either way, vision is that of outsiders. The elected cheerleaders are no better as the only vision they have is what the unelected serve up.
The other thing in desperately short supply at city hall is creativity and original thinking. This has been the case since day one. Whether a motto, logos or an artist's IPR, city hall has been a den of plagiarists and thieves. The irony of the original motto/logo being on a recycle bin should be of no surprise to anyone.
 |
| Plano Texas...Meet Walmart. |
Oh please! Not again. Sorry, but it is a never ending saga.
Our neighbors in Fulton County are in a bit of a snit over what they see as unfair treatment of homeowners vs commercial property owners as it relates to assessments. They have observed that homeowners are assessed based on comparable sales, while commercial real estate assessments are calculated by other means, often resulting in under-assessment of these properties. Not surprisingly, the homeowners assert this means under-payment of property taxes by commercial property owners.
Do they have a point?
Yes, they do. Despite what our head cheerleader would like you to believe there is quite a bit of turnover in the residential real estate market making comparable-sales assessments not only possible, but also the most reasonable method of assessing market value.
Commercial properties do not see that kind of sales turnover and the businesses that own them would balk at that form of assessment anyway. Businesses view these properties, these buildings, as assets, and for business and tax purposes, assets depreciate, representing the service life of an asset and the need to replace it. Helps explain why they love the occasional teardown and rebuild. Plus, local governments will shield these "re-developments" from any taxes for a few years, allowing for that depreciating assets algorithm to kick in.
The folks in Fulton have observed that when commercial properties do go on the market and do sell, they often command a market price twice or more than the county's assessment. Anything else would be man-bites-dog headline news. It turns out this isn't just Fulton, but DeKalb as well, and we have an existence proof very close to home. Prior to selling to the city, the owners of the building that is now city hall, were appealing the county's assessment of $2M. Before the appeal was resolved they sold that very same property to the city for $4M. For all the time these properties are not assessed in the same way your home always has been, commercial property owners have been carrying one half the tax burden you bear. The next time some soft-brained adultling whines that apartment dwellers pay the "full tax" you might try reminding them that apartments are commercial properties.
You might also remember, at the ballot box, how this city has bent over backwards for commercial properties, and their propaganda notwithstanding, they have done little for you. After all, have you heard of the mayor or anyone on council reaching out to the county to create an assessment process that more accurately marks commercial properties to true market value? No? Well, have you heard any of them dismissively point out it is the county, not the city that assesses property? Thought so.
 |
| The River... |
 |
| ...Is Spring Fed |
Ah, the "retirement age." So many meanings. Is it the period of time we are now entering where significant numbers will age out of work, to be followed by a dip in the size of the next generation to age out? Is it how old you must be to start collecting Social Security? Is it when you start "aging in place" whatever the hell that is?
Well, aging in place is the easiest to answer: it is a marketing ploy used by developers to force high density where it isn't wanted and doesn't belong. Think: the Life South property. This tactic is nothing new. We've been treated to "live-work-play" and "transit oriented development" and "mixed use," all marketing slogans used by developers to take our community where they want it to go---profits for themselves. Now we have the mantra of "age in place" and "affordable housing" to convince folks that hundreds of apartments should be built where none are needed. And they apparently have the shakers and movers at city hall, including the city manager, in their pocket. The DHA? Not so much.
The plan is simple, use these marketing tactics to push the development over the line. Pressure has been applied, "deferral is denial" in an attempt to force a hasty decision, though this has been walked back. A good mantra for those in the approval chain would be "make haste slowly" but that isn't likely to resonate with city hall. The actuality differs from the marketing promo. By quite a bit. First, the plan calls for a 55+ community of affordable apartments, whatever that means, with the implication this will have no impact on schools. After all how many 55+ have kids in schools? Well, that there is a fork in the road. Turns out, the rules for 55+ are pretty loosey goosey. Only one of the renting adults needs to be over 55, the other could be significantly younger and might well have school age children. Then there is the 80/20 rule, which says that up to 20% of the units could be rented to anyone of any age, which explains the developer's plan for three bedroom units. Even then there is the issue of enforcement. With resident owned 55+ units there is a HOA which is responsible for enforcing residency rules and is granted some means to effectuate enforcement. These are rentals, managed by a for-profit management firm whose primary objective is maximize profit by way of maximizing occupancy, a clear disincentive to enforcing the 80/20 rule. And will the city do anything? Hell no, they don't enforce sign ordinances or issue traffic citations. They're sure as hell not going to get involved here, and it isn't clear where they would even get the data needed to monitor residents' age. Same for DHA.
Now if the developers were really committed to building something for that age-in-place crowd, they'd make it a 62+ development. Here we're talking a bit higher bar for the residents as both adults, assuming two, must be 62 or older. Even better, and easier to monitor, all residents must be 62+ and there is no 80/20 rule. Enforcement is stricter and it is much easier to implement oversight, And, at 62, you're getting pretty close to retirement age, or at least the minimum age to take Social Security. For now. You're not likely at this age to have school age children so there is no reason, no rationalization for three-bedroom units, allowing for more units in total. For developers isn't more better? Also, this is the time of life where many people are making the transition from work to fixed income.
No one should be surprised if the developer pushes back on any suggestion that their age-in-place profit-taking scheme be compromised with a 62+ requirement. But here's the thing to watch for: how does the city manager react to such a suggestion?
As in, what's wrong with us, with us being us? There must be something. We hear it all the time. Coming from city hall and all those folks who run this city. The city we voted into existence.
We're a suburban community, a bit upscale but not posh, always have been, always liked it. Still do. This was never a community of "starter homes" and even the smaller houses have always been priced at a premium. And what's wrong with that? EXACTLY what is wrong with that? Is there something wrong with those McMansions being built across from the Fire Station on Roberts? You know, the ones starting at $1.6M. Who's going to buy those? Well, that would be the same kind of folks who bought their Redfield four-four-and-a-door thirty years ago: people buying their step-up home, perhaps their forever home, and very often transplants with a good relo package. Not some mid-20's kid who's just starting out and who, if you follow the science, sports a frontal cortex that is not fully formed. So, in a normal mind, what's wrong with being an upscale community?
We've also never been fans of density. Why? Because density brings crime because density brings people. More and more people. And there is not a peer-reviewed study, even one funded by developers, that shows that increasing density decreases the per capita rate of crime. Therefore: more people; more crime. This ain't even maths, this is arithmetic. Real. Simple. Arithmetic. So exactly how is it wrong for Dunwoody to not want more crime, to not invite more crime into our community?
Let's talk apartments. Dunwoody has always been against apartments. And by Dunwoody, we mean the community of folks who built this place and who in a moment clouded by enthusiasm, voted this city into existence. They have a very good reason for not liking apartments: schools. Certainly this is DeKalb and touting the school system as a whole is a precarious position to take, but there is no doubt whatsoever that folks pay a premium to get their kids into Vanderlyn, above and beyond the Dunwoody premium. It's a tight community (within a community) and apartments bring (more) overcrowding and transients. Not community stalwarts. Dunwoodians like their schools and they want them to be better, not worse. What's wrong with that?
Our "development" has always been organic, especially around the Village, Orchard Park and Georgetown. Dunwoodians like it like that, in no small part because they don't like things forced upon them. Someone wants to chase their life-long dream of running a restaurant? Fine. If it's any good, if it suits the community then they will do well, even thrive. If not, well...next. Mellow Mushroom has done well for quite some time, as has Village Burger. NFA is winning awards. Vintage has been a few places: Pavillion II; Corner Bar; MudCatz. Steak & Grace is the third steakhouse in that location. You do what you do, you do it well, you respect the community, and you will thrive, and...you're welcome. This is the essence of organic development. Dunwoodians like that. They really, really like when someone from the community, or coming to the community, tries to understand and serve the community, yet somehow that is seen as wrong.
Yeah, we like our streets paved, but more than that we like safe streets, and back in the day we had them. The referendum sales job would give anyone the impression that DeKalb North Precinct officers flocked to Buford Highway, but the fact is, if you reported speeding or other traffic violations in your neighborhood, DeKalb PD would send out a patrol and put a stop to it. We expected more of that and the definition of disappointment is "unmet expectations." We're disappointed. But it is hard to fathom how we're wrong, wrong to want speeders and red-light runners off our streets.
We were told about "local control," because we really, really don't like outsiders telling us what to do with our lives, with our community. And we really didn't like Decatur telling us what to do or how they, as outsiders, seemed to be ruining our community. So we were told things would certainly be better when our elected officials were nearby neighbors, as certainly they would not screw over another neighbor, someone you might see about town, at church, or shopping. What they didn't tell us was that would be because they really cannot do anything, good or bad, and they neglected to tell us that unelected bureaucrats would be running this place, and they are so far removed from the ballot box that vox populi is on full mute. By action, since the very beginning, we're being told there is no local control, and in fact, we were wrong to want it, and to expect it.
These bureaucrats have no interest in listening to us or in understanding us. Instead they understand and listen to those who best advance the bureaucrats' interests, and they are more than willing to sell Dunwoody out from under us. That's why we get a unanimous vote in support of a developer's damp dream of making a fortune building hundreds of (unwanted) apartments on Ashford Dunwoody. In further support, they'll tout the "over 55" nature of the development, suggesting no impact on schools, knowing full well this is neither rigorous nor enforced. Not by Dunwoody bureaucrats anyway. They will do their obligatory "soliciting public input" sessions but any public pushback will be ignored and all comments will be cherry picked in support of what they were going to do all along. They don't care what we want or what we like, and they don't even care to find out. They cater to outside interests, be it developers, or grant funders, doing what these entities want regardless of what the community wants or even needs. And they are so profoundly, completely banal. We have a logo that looks like someone spent all of five minutes cruising Google Images and settled on something more commonly associated with places on a river. Not Dunwoody. Some son of a son of a bible salesman sold them on "place making" so they join in the Sign Wars and we end up with Dunwoody Dildoes scattered around the city outskirts. Here's a clue for the mental munchkins at city hall: we ARE a place and we always have been. Then we simply must pave interstate lanes all across our residential areas. Why? Because everyone else is doing it. So the rule in this city is: we cannot be ourselves, we must be like everyone else, because being ourselves, well that's just plain wrong.
And why is Dunwoody, our Dunwoody, the one of our making, so reviled at city hall? Why do they cater to outsiders rather than us? It is as if they are trying to destroy us, destroy our community. Think of it this way: if they were really trying to destroy Dunwoody, what would they do differently? And, if you could vote all over again, would you vote differently?
You'd think (hope?) that when folks come to this city there'd be a welcome wagon. Something to let them know about the community, what is on offer and what might be expected. This is especially true for businesses, who seem to be the favorite of city hall. But we get this.
 |
| Why Don't They Know Better? |
This week's Blue Bag Rag sports yet another rematch of competing realities of a Founding Councilman and the Head Cheerleader.
Let's start with the Founder, who points to the office occupancy rate raising the alarm that a rate fifty percent higher than the national average might be alarming. Should be. Doesn't seem to bother bureaucrats at city hall, who simply pivoted from encouraging overdevelopment of office space to overdevelopment of apartment units. See? They can adapt. This Founder also points out that the worst is yet to come as some leases are held on spaces no longer occupied and not likely to be renewed. What he points out is alarming enough, or is it? Unoccupied also means loss of Occupational Tax revenue, which as anyone who has operated a business knows is a tax for the mere privilege of writing paychecks to your employees. Not as big as employer FICA/MC contributions but, still, a chunk of change. There are other knock-on effects. Fewer workers means fewer computers, networks, all things electrical, which means less power consumption and less franchise fees, which are a tax on the use of utilities, often necessary to run a business. There is also a loss of customers for those expensive restaurant build-outs in all those Developers Authority endorsed (and subsidized) buildings. The city gave up on controlled growth, selling out to the immediate greed of developers and now they are in a fiscal bind. Of their own making.
This week's Head Cheerleader was, frankly, spectacular. It was a political version of a call-to-the-altar revival sermon: the quoting of the scriptures; the homily, descending to a whisper; the crescendo of the call for redemption. Adequate shaming of the sinners with no outright condemnation. Masterpiece of political sermonizing. Supported throughout with background vocals of How Great We Art, it starts with some overwrought testimony to transparency, reaching the pivotal phrase:
"And, we are committed to a robust public process should changes be necessary in our revenue process."
And, given no similar mention of a "spending process" and how that might incur necessary changes, the pivot was to belabor "same as always" approach to millage rate, without the inconvenient observation that the city rakes in a back-door tax increase. Same as always. And maybe someone should tell the folks at city hall that shifting blame to DeKalb got pretty tiresome about five years into this dumpster fire of a city, and that the fact that appraisals come from Decatur in no way absolves city hall of responsibility for a millage rate above the roll-back rate. To the Head Cheerleader's point: the city sets the millage rate.
It gets even more interesting as some of the tried and true politi-speak oozes, with the use of relativism compounded with incomplete comparisons. Comparing a Dunwoody homeowner's tax burden to anyone else is irrelevant. This city was founded on promises not applicable, not comparable to these other cities and their homeowners. And "we do more with less" begs the questions: more of what; and less than what? Certainly not less tax revenue. And "managed well, but even without adding additional services" flies in the face of reality. There has been mission creep (adding "services") as well as scope expansion (adding costs, just because). Are SUV's more economical than patrol cars? Really? How much money is spent on PR? Are four-color glossy mail-outs really a good value? A better question: what value are they, and are they covering for a less than glossy reality? Is the Head Cheerleader going to shake her pompoms at the legal expenses incurred to defend some indefensible (proven in court) police antics? But yes, that kind of "pride" is indeed incredible.
...and the livin' is easy.
 |
| Sleeping Rough |
...the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
There's been a bit of point-counterpoint going on between the city's head cheerleader and one of the founding councilmen playing out in the blue bag rag. It is over the issue of property tax. The meaning of property tax is crucial to any reasonable comprehension of what is circulating, so we'll look at that later. First some context.
The head cheerleader, who is one of those politicos that loves to say "we didn't raise the property tax rate", is now saying "Dunwoody taxes to remain unchanged," with the assertion this is "No Spin." Now the context of this is property taxes, and as a revenue item, property taxes on homestead exemption eligible properties in the city is up this year over last, as it has been almost every year. This is the observation made earlier by the founding councilman, and it is absolutely true. However, if you close one eye, hold your mouth right and live in the alternate reality of politics, what the head cheerleader asserts can be viewed as true.
It all depends on your understanding of "property tax."
In the head cheerleader's world, "property tax" is yours, and if it is, then the taxable base value of your home is indeed frozen at the value in 2010 or at the time of your purchase. So how is it that the founding councilman can be correct?
It's actually quite simple. It is not your tax, because the city is taxing property, not you. That's why it is called "property tax." You may be deceived by the fact that you write the check and that makes it your tax, and some folks would like you to think that way. It isn't and it's actually quite easy to understand. First, you will find, if you try, that they don't care from where or from whom they get the money. Your rich mother-in-law could write the check and bet your bottom dollar, they will cash it. Or, if that doesn't convince you that this is not a tax on you, but instead is a tax on property you own, try this: don't pay it. See what happens. Do they garnish your wages? Nope. Do they dip into your accounts? No. Do they bring in the big guns, the IRS, to take your money that way? Absolutely not. So, what do they do? They will auction that property on the courthouse steps to get their money. That's what they do, because they are taxing the property. Period. Hard stop.
And that is why the head cheerleader can stand in front of folks owning homestead exemption eligible property and say "your property taxes remain unchanged," and it is true if you accept the [incorrect] notion that this is a personal tax. The fact (that must be disclosed by state law) that the city's property tax on homestead exemption eligible property increases without a milage rate increase casts an unfavorable light on "unchanged."
So who is winning the war of words? Well, if this were is a sporting event, the founding councilman looks like a veteran sports analyst and the head cheerleader looks like she'll shake her pompoms at whatever her team does on the field, no matter how bad that is.
Turns out you don't get your own facts, but you do get to spin your own truth.
It's not a bird. It's not a plane. And it certainly isn't Superman. It's some guy in a T-shirt and underwear standing on the fifth floor balcony looking down at your kids playing in your back yard. At least that is what the city's bureaucrats have in store for you. Yes, if you live near by the village they're going have their developer buddies build hundreds of rental overlooks ideal for destroying whatever privacy you thought you had.
Is this what you voted for when you said "yes" to creating a city? No? Then consider that next time you get a chance to vote.
Some of the city's founding fathers have become outspoken of late, decrying the dumpster fire they set alight. No, they're not apologizing, they are chastising the bureaucrats running this shit-show. Well, someone should. And there is much to worry about as well described elsewhere.
But it raises questions. Where are the other founders? Not just the locals currently playing but the two big hitters. Where are Fran and Dan? Are they proud of what's going on? Supportive? Is this what they intended? And let's be clear, this is intentional, just look at the city charter.
In this section we get:
This obstinate refusal to patrol our streets brings up another issue: they don't enforce the "no truck" zone either, even though it includes school zones. And then, if you've lived here long enough, it may occur to you that the repeated failures of this water main, started, and then picked up speed, once we had a city. Hmmm.... Perhaps there is a really good reason to NOT have heavy trucks frequenting this stretch of road. Possibly this is adding stress to subterranean infrastructure. Perhaps it is just the straw on the camel's back, or maybe it is more impactful.
Could the county recover maintenance costs from the city due to the city's negligence? Or perhaps the county should hold off on a proper fix until the city is under a court order to do their job. Regardless, the CEO should be looking into this. Lord knows lots of bad things happened when that city referendum was approved. Maybe she can step up, step in, and get some things fixed around here.
The Atlanta Board of Education has approved a budget that removes 135 positions garnering a $25M savings. Details, like hi/lo/median aren't available but this represents an average burdened cost of $185,185 per position. Assuming the burden, employer taxes, retirement contributions, health insurance, etc., is 50%these are positions commanding over $92K/year. On average. Some higher, some lower. All sizable paychecks. This rightsizing is justified as [re]focusing on the core mission, the obligations to the children and the community.
How much money could Dunwoody save were they to [re]focus on this city's core mission and promises made?
DeKalb's CEO recently reported that half, fifty percent, of residential water customers have bills in arrears. Some say that a crackdown on past due balances is somehow unreasonable. It isn't clear who these people are, what planet they live on, or how they've substituted emotions for character. Maybe they are the same [kind of] folks who think students, allegedly smart enough to get into college should have their debt erased because, well, they were actually pretty stupid. Somehow they think if you don't pay your water bill this month, well, it would be just wrong if you ever had to pay it.
These people are breathing our air.
Sandy Springs recently passed a "buffer zone" law seriously restricting in-your-face canvassing, proselytizing, and just general interaction in public. Yes, you would still be allowed to preach from the pulpit. In church. This passed with only two dissenting votes.
More recently, Sandy Springs rescinded that ordinance by a unanimous vote, with the city attorney's legal opinion also doing a 180. It's enough to make your head spin.
You gotta wonder why folks running the newish faux cities do the silly things they do.
Remember those days? When you could say something seemingly harmless, certainly with no ill intent whatsoever, but someone, perhaps because they live in a world of their own, becomes offended? Try as you might, no apology is sufficient. None will ever be acceptable and the offended clearly prefers to wallow in victimhood. If the offended has an entourage you will be summarily excommunicated from your world. Your life is over. Gone. Disappeared. You might even say "86-ed."
Those days are over.
Apparently some former D.C. hotshot posted something offensive, intentionally so, but it was interpreted as a threat. A serious threat. On life and limb. Directed towards someone who, not that long ago, has suffered attacks on their life. Bullet whizzing past the head kind of serious. This hotshot wasn't just flashing an OK sign (which would have lots of folks up in arms), he made a threatening post targeting someone who might have reason to be a bit sensitive about these things.
My how times have changed.
In the good old days, this hotshot would have been immediately canceled. Vilified in the media, social and legacy. Shunned by all right-thinking folk with an ounce of moral integrity. Today we can expect this hotshot to be immediately forgiven. It was just a misunderstanding of a term, a slang term, whose meaning is malleable and has been transformed at a rate this hotshot cannot fathom. He didn't know it would have that meaning, that his intent would be misunderstood, and after all it is his intent that is paramount, not the interpretation of the bloke he targeted. Right? Right. We can expect the hotshot to be defended, if not glorified, while his target will be vilified.
We've come full circle.
Air traffic controllers face mandatory retirement at age 56, though congress has allowed an extension to age 61. But, and there always is a but, many air traffic controllers can retire at age 50. Yep. Sweet deal, right?
It gets worse. Many air traffic controllers are working with equipment that is older than they are. That's right, much of the air traffic control systems are north of 50 years old, some over 60. You cannot even buy replacements or spare parts for this stuff. Maybe we should have retired some of that equipment.
Council recently approved funding for a maintenance facility at Brook Run, a proposal presented by city bureaucrats. And this facility sports five offices, potentially expanding this herd of bureaucrats.
The odious part? They are raiding the stormwater reserve to fund this. If you remember during the city referendum sales pitch stormwater was a big, very big, issue, with city proponents pointing out the county's negligence of this infrastructure. We were told the city would take this over and manage our stormwater system responsibly. Is stealing money from the stormwater reserves what this city's bureaucrats consider "responsible?" Do we really need more of them?
Economy, as in "take care of your needs and watch out for your greeds." Unsure whether the federal cash cow is going to deliver any milk, the City of Atlanta is looking at some serious belt tightening. Well, not serious, as at least one member of council has suggested there are some weighty salaries that are not needed.
How can this possibly be? How did we come to a situation where we're handing out hundreds of thousands in burdened costs to unnecessary employees? Surely our leaders are prudent care-takers of the public purse. And if you believe that, Elon Musk has some swampland on Mars he'd like to sell you.
This fiscal prudence seems to be a direct consequence of the feds turning off the previously free-flowing tap delivering beaucoup bucks to urbanity insanity across the USA. What is interesting about the proposed budget for the next fiscal year is the lack of a revenue line item for "Federal Largess."
Clearly the feds were funding a significant portion of previous years' income, so what, were they simply not reporting this on the budget? Or did they remove it from the upcoming budget because they expect it to be zero? Even so, they should list this as a source of revenue even if is drier than the Sinai. But what if it didn't show up on any budget? Was this federal money obfuscated? Was it a slush fund, perhaps used to fund six figure salaries for unnecessary employees? Were these friends and family?
More importantly is this trickle-down, fed-driven "economy" we're seeing in Dunwoody, though woefully inadequate, merely a smaller version of what we see in Atlanta? It begs the question: how many unnecessary bureaucrats with excessive salaries do we have on the payroll? How will we ever know?
The AJC recently reported that some federal workers have been notified that they will be laid off on June 31.
 |
| Forget Juneteenth |
Folks have been looking for some good use for kudzu since its invasion in 1876 and no one has come up with anything. Until now. Thanks to the brain trust at Dunwoody City Hall, we now have a wonderful, humanity saving use for kudzu. You see the city installed some of the most gawd-awful, butt-ugly "signs" around the outskirts of town. It's more than an eyesore, it's a challenge. And that challenge has been met. A small group of "resisters" have decided to plant kudzu around these monstrosities and train it to grow up and all over these odious phalli-a kudzu kondom. Some say that English Ivy is more appropriate for Dunwoody, citing its hardiness. The band of merrymakers see this as trying to put lipstick on a pig, and will start with kudzu as it is a southern tradition. And, did you ever think you'd be glad to see kudzu?
 |
| Not Utilities |
 |
| Hieroglyphs |
 |
| All Marked Up |
 |
| Tagged The Trees Too |
TOD: Hi Seymore, first thanks for speaking with us. Do you know what is going on in the Village...the Funwoody part?Seymore: My pleasure. Yes, we're preparing, with enthusiastic support from the city, to install trails around Funwoody. If you've seen the wonderful trails recently completed at Perimeter Mall, then you know what we're bringing to the village.TOD: So, to be clear, this is adding, not taking away, so the current sidewalks will remain?Seymore: Absolutely right! We're going to have an additional twelve foot trail alongside the existing sidewalks with a bit of grass setting them apart. You're going to love it.TOD: I can't tell you how wonderful I think this will be. So the trees...the ones that are tagged...are going?Seymore: Well, the great thing about trees is that they are inherently a renewable resource, but yes, tree removal is an essential part of the installation. We're confident supporters will be quite pleased with the results.TOD: And these supporters, who are they?Seymore: Some of the most ardent supporters are the bicycle crowd, you know, the Lance-a-lot wannabes, Now, they may not be the largest group, but they currently own the political megaphone down at city hall, so they have been key to the effort. You know, the smallest bird has the loudest chirp. And we're going to give them what they want. When we're done Funwoody is going to be the infield of a velodrome.TOD: Does that mean "only left turns?"Seymore: Not at all. We'll have a line down the middle for two-way traffic. In that regard we're politically neutral.TOD: Well, Seymore, you've been very helpful. Thanks for all you do.Seymore: No worries. It's been a pleasure.
Posts
All Comments
