Comments are welcome on this blog, with little restriction and no requirement to register. However, all comments will be moderated with respect to a few rules, as follows:

All comments shall:
Be considerate of others
Be on topic
Not engage in personal insults
Not have any personal information
Lively debate and opposing opinions are welcome, but please behave courteously and responsibly.

Follow us at The Tucker Initiative on Facebook.

If you would like more information on incorporation issues, comment directly to the administrators, or to submit you own article for posting, use our email account at:


Tucker 2014 is the prime advocacy group for Tucker's incorporation. More information can be found at

Thank you for your interest in the City of Tucker.

Saturday, April 27, 2013

An Informal Poll


If you've paid any attention to this poll, you would've see how crazy the counts are.  Apparently this gadget on Blogger doesn't work very well as this has been a common problem.

We'll try again soon with a third party poll gadget and see if we can do better.

My apologies.

Which of the Three Cities would you prefer?


  1. Thanks for such a collection of maps. I know that drawing them can be quite fun, as I did a few myself at the start of the discussion.

    But there is a VERY important point to remember: There is only one map that matters, and that is the final map that is submitted by any city to the legislature for their vote.

    The creation of that map has to be driven by the actual needs of the proposed city, and has to include sufficient sources of revenue so that the taxes won't have to be significantly raised.

    I am not an expert, and I look forward to the 2nd Tucker study (the first having been done by Ga Tech), to see what it says. But I would think it will necessitate the larger "City of Tucker" map you created, but including the Northlake area. This was basically the area the first study said was required.

    But even then, we will have to discuss with the various communities the proposal, and see if they want to be included.

    I do look forward to the studies and upcoming discussions. But to the poll, I don't think any of the proposed maps will be feasible. But it most likely will be some form of the Two-City map that will be suggested.

    - Jim S

  2. I immediately am drawn to the size of the proposesd cities and new cities in comaprison to cities that already exist, particularly Decatur, Chamblee and Doraville. Somehow cities of reasonable size that are able to capture tight "commuities of interest" are able to deliver a full spectrum of services without the need to "acquire" large residential areas that are questionably related to each other. This of course, brings into question the validity of the required economic feaibility studies of Carl Vinson Institute. We need to find a way to question these assumptions. I'd say the area in question could be three smaller cities with large areas between them available for later annexation? Otherwise--the heck with it, just call it the whole area a small county and be done with it.