HB 962

House Bill 962 proposes to do this:

…to provide that no municipality may annex property in which certain services are provided by the county or which is included in the county’s comprehensive zoning plan unless the county consents…

It would combat the problem of “venue shopping” by developers, but I wonder if it weakens the autonomy of Georgia’s cities too much. What do you folks think?

3 comments

  1. nubie says:

    It would definitely weaken cities. That’s the point. There are cities and county conflicts all the time especially concerning annexation. Just like Fulton fought Sandy Springs, other counties don’t want more of their tax base, control, etc being absorbed into cities. The county says it’s about spending money to build the roads, build the sewers and other infrastructure from the county coffers, just to have the city annex the property taking away the tax revenue that they were planning to receive from providing those services in the first place. The cities will oppose it because it boxes them in keeping them from growing. Developers will oppose it because if there isn’t infrastructure, then it keeps them from being able to build as they would in a city that does offer things like water and sewer which allow smaller lot sizes = more profit on investment.

    It’s an interesting debate and will be interesting to see the outcome.

  2. Swifty says:

    Isn’t the whole problem that counties have started to act like cities – that is, providing lots of services? I’d be more excited if I saw some bills proposing to consolidate cities, counties, and metro areas. I’m not that interested in seeing counties behave more like cities, which this bill encourages.

    If the problem is venue shopping by developers, why don’t metro governments together work to create a metro plan for development? Not just Atlanta, but other areas where neighboring counties are becoming part of the city.

Comments are closed.