Tucker responds to Lakeside, Briarcliff statements

Posted by Dan Whisenhunt November 14, 2014
A map of the proposed city of Tucker, obtained via http://tucker2015.com/

A map of the proposed city of Tucker, obtained via http://tucker2015.com/

Supporters of creating a city of Tucker contacted Decaturish Friday morning in response to comments from supporters of the proposed city of Lakeside.

In an article published on Nov. 13, Mary Kay Woodworth, with LakesideYES said that Lakeside and Briarcliff supporters are hopeful the Tucker supporters will join them. Lakeside and Briarcliff are working together to create a unified city map by Nov. 15. That’s the deadline the General Assembly set for the different cityhood groups to come to an agreement ahead of the 2015 session.

Anne Lerner with Tucker 2015 released the following statement about Woodworth’s comments:

The Nov. 15 deadline established by State Legislators for cityhood groups to agree on maps is approaching. As is standard in the process of mediation, all sides have made offers. Tucker 2015 is disappointed that the Lakeside City Alliance (LCA)/City of Briarcliff Initiative (COBI) are speaking to the press about any details of the mediations, which are confidential by standard mediation procedures, but we are more disappointed that they are trying to sway public opinion regarding the proceedings. We have made ourselves available through the deadline for additional talks and hope that all sides will respect the process as agreed. In the meantime, our discussions with LCA/COBI would in no way be complicated by the release of any mutually agreed upon southern and western boundaries they determine. We do not want our discussions to inhibit communication between LCA/COBI and their community.

To read our previous article on this, click here.

About Dan Whisenhunt

Dan Whisenhunt is editor and publisher of Decaturish.com. https://www.linkedin.com/in/danwhisenhunt

View all posts by Dan Whisenhunt

  • notapunk

    Am I missing something here, or is the Tucker group overreacting to a rather innocuous remark that does NOT contain any detail of negotiations? Ms. Woodworth has said exactly the same thing several times regarding the hope that Tucker supporters will join them in coming up with map(s) for the area. So have the COBI folks. Nothing new here. I don’t see why the Tucker group has such a burr under its bonnet over that. The Tucker woman’s statement says much, much more about the negotiations than I’ve heard or seen from Lakeside/COBI.

  • HB

    Yes, overreaction. I’m not in step with any of these initiatives yet (no reasonable person should be before to seeing maps, money flow at least a rough plan on future growth) But there’s nothing out of line in that Woodworth response above. Tucker’s response here doesn’t reflect well. This after reading their assertion that Lakeside/Toco is not a community and shouldn’t be a city because it doesn’t have a street named Main Street? Eye roll. I just moved here, but am seeing as many or more neighborhood charity, school and park clean up events as we had when I lived in Tucker. Petty remarks like that are just embarrassing. We’re adults people, let’s act like it. Hate to say it because I lived in Tucker for years and love the area, but am beginning to feel better about moving last year.

  • Mark Snyder

    Notapunk, if you read the actual quote you’ll see that details were released specifically that offers have been made – “We have made multiple offers to the Tucker cityhood movement and we’re still hopeful they’ll join our two groups in compromising.” The obvious implication is that Tucker 2015 has not made concessions. The key for our community on the other side of their map however is that Lakeside and Briarcliff continue to refuse to release a map for public review and comment. Residents of Medlock, North Druid Hills and other impacted communities are being completely left out of the discussions because we don’t know what we’re up against. This quote shows that LCA/COBI are using Tucker as an excuse to keep the map secret until the deadline passes. “Until then, we think it would disrupt the process to release any new maps.” I appreciate Tucker 2015 saying the borders near us could easily be published without impacting their discussions with these groups.

    • notapunk

      I did read the actual quote, Mark Snyder, and none of it is anything that hasn’t been said before. I do prefer the actual substance of the quote over “obvious implications” read into the quote, which can be interpreted differently by different people. There is no detail at all in the actual quote. As for maps — borders are what the discussions are all about, so I don’t blame anyone for not publishing a map until the deadline has passed. But, Americans are an impatient lot. We all want our candy yesterday, don’t we?

  • HB

    Correct me if I’m wrong, but Tucker isn’t releasing their map either. If either side did, the other side would cry foul. It seems to me the SMART answer is to incorporate the intown properties, and leave out the contended areas for now. Neither Lakeside nor Tucker should be forcing the hand of the bordering areas as they’re doing. They’re both wrong. Neither side has the moral superiority here. That way, the bordering areas can poll themselves and annex in later as they choose–not as some bureaucrat decides for them. Sanity doesn’t appear to be prevailing though.

  • Mark Snyder

    Interesting question so I googled Tucker 2015 to see if I could find their map. It’s posted on their website and their Facebook page. Also found some discussion indicating that map has been public since the session ended. Not sure why our area is focused on Tucker when the issue is transparency for the groups that will impact us. I honestly don’t care what the folks in Tucker decide but I do care about Emory and the Farmers Market and others that are in my backyard.

  • HB

    Mark Snyder, couldn’t agree more. This city business needs to be incorporating the real parts of North Decatur, including Emory and Farmers’ Market, and not worried about OTP. This will stabilize our property values near Toco and elevate the Market area too. Win win. Leave out the Northlake area for now since it’s under contention and let them figure that out for themselves later, because focusing on that could be the sticky wicket that sinks the whole process. Guarantee if the Lakeside map has an intown focus it will pass easily with the neighborhoods who are currently reluctant to cast themselves as a old-timey suburb, and the lack of vision that implies. The Lakeside folks might be out of touch with the trends. We’ll see tomorrow, I guess.

New Ben Ad
Banner Decaturish 300x250_April
Decaturish_300x250 V. 3
DeKalb_Medical-DMPG-300x250 (1)

Receive the Daily Email DIgest

* = required field