In the December 13, 2006 issue of The Cherokee Ledger-News Mr. Dave Henson stated his viewpoint of opposition to the new Macauley project, "A Village in the Forest", for the following three reasons…
1) Too many traffic problems on Hwy 20
2) Not enough tax money for infrastructure
3) Expedition of the rezoning process
It’s hard to find these three reasons in the letter as Mr. Henson uses flying cars, back-handed praise/sarcasm for Macauley, and the questioning of the Cherokee Board of Commissioners’ character as substitutions for having any substantive facts behind his reasons to oppose "A Village in the Forest". I will now discuss the reasons why I do support the Macauley project and specifically respond to Mr. Henson’s 3 reasons for opposition:
1) Traffic: Mr. Henson states that traffic is already a problem on GA Hwy 20. If this is the case, then why not solve the problem now without the development? Because it costs money and governments only make money from tax payers. Which means either raise taxes or allow for more tax payers. Furthermore, Macauley has pledged to improve GA 20 near their project, which could encourage the State D.O.T. to expedite their plans for improving the highway. Macauley has also pledged $12 Million towards Cherokee County’s transportation improvements. How many other chances will Cherokee get to make $12 Million to approve growth that is already projected to come to the county anyway?
2) Taxes: Mr. Henson states that Cherokee may "eventually" possess the diversified tax base to bankroll a massive infrastructure expansion. Macauley’s plan is an eventual growth. They aren’t going to drop 8,000 homes in next year. This a 20 year projected plan for a new community, not a 2 or 3 year plan like most other new home projects in the county. At the same time Macauley will be contributing $68 Million to parks, schools, fire protection, sheriff’s protection, and water/sewer infrastructure, plus the $12 Million to transportation yields $80 Million towards improving infrastructure and that doesn’t even account for the $4+ Billion added to the tax digest upon completion. (yes, billions of tax dollars)
3) Expedition of the rezoning process: Wasn’t this just delayed another week to allow for more public hearings? The new BOC Meeting will be December 27th instead of the originally planned Dec. 19th meeting. Furthermore, this project has been approved by the Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC) on a 16-11 approval vote and it’s Environmental Land Use Committee (ELUC) on an 11-1 approval vote. The county is not required to wait for any other approvals and they’ve added an extra week for public comments, why wait any longer unless there is an hidden agenda for those wanting to wait?
I have answered questions surrounding Mr. Henson’s 3 main reasons for opposing the Macauley project. Now, to respond to his accusations of Macauley bringing "cohorts" who are "out-of-county beneficiaries". I live in Cobb County and went to support smart growth and property rights in Cherokee County for the following reasons:
I own 4 properties in Cherokee County.
I own a small business in Cherokee County.
My mother lives in the county and owns a small business.
My brother lives in the county and runs a non-profit organization.
My grandmother lives in the county and works in the school system.
So before you start throwing out-of-county residents under the bus (or checking i.d.’s at a public meeting) Mr. Henson, be sure to consider the property taxes and business tax dollars that are generated from out-of-county contributors to the Cherokee County tax base and economy. As property owners we have a right to be there, but as concerned individuals we have a need to be there to protect our family’s future.
I didn’t even get into the silliness of calling for commissioners to be kicked out of office for an approval vote. That’s almost bullying and my wife teaches her 7th graders not to bully.
I do however agree with Mr. Henson on some points, he stated… "it’s true that a large, master-planned community can offer wide-ranging benefits not associated with random growth, such as architectural cohesion and set-aside land for new parks and schools." To clarify and substantiate his comments, Macauley plans to set aside 40% of the land to be undeveloped. That’s over 1,500 acres to never be developed in Cherokee County. How many rezonings will the county get to approve that pledges to save 1,500 acres of undeveloped real estate?
I also agree that the elected officials should be leaders, not followers. It’s time to create a new direction for growth and not follow the old path of "slow-growth" officials who ignore the realities of the free market in America. The only way I can truly think of slowing or stopping growth is to prevent reproduction. What’s next…stop having sex or if you reproduce, your kids can’t live in Cherokee County?
References & Research:
Mr. Henson’s Letter
Macauley: A Village in the Forest
Cherokee Citizens for Property Rights
ULI: Higher Density Development Myth & Fact
Cherokee County: Agendas & Minutes
