One of the last public informational forums in Dunwoody about the upcoming Nov. 7 bond referendum vote was remarkably different from earlier sessions in that a respectful exchange between the two sides and moderators occurred for the entire meeting.
The session, held at the Dunwoody North Driving Club on Oct. 29, was moderated by Dunwoody Councilmembers Tom Lambert and John Heneghan. Lambert walked the group through the list of nine projects that an advisory committee chose after considering 104 identified needs. The proposed list of improvements includes the:
- Buildout of Homecoming Park, formerly referred to as Vermack Park and Wildcat Park on Roberts Drive;
- Acquisition of land and construction of softball fields at a site that has yet to be determined;
- Improvements at Brook Run and other area parks;
- Construction of four multi-use trails (in the Dunwoody Village area, Winter’s Chapel Road, North Peachtree Road and Mt. Vernon Road).
Lambert said the community meetings are merely informational, not an attempt by city officials to influence the vote.
“This is not pro and this is not con,” Lambert said. “This is just an informational meeting and I’m not a councilman tonight. I’m just your Dunwoody neighbor Tom.”
Heneghan explained his lone vote against the bond referendum ballot, as he believed that the bond question for trails and multi-use paths should have been split into two separate questions.
“I also may be the odd man out here because I have a problem with 12-foot sidewalks in front of single-family residents,” Heneghan said. “But this is not our decision to make. It’s up to you to make.”
Lambert also discussed what he called “Bond 101,” explaining the process for obtaining funds and the timeline for the projects, which could begin in late 2024. He said each project would be reviewed by council, vetted by the public, and would be subject to audits as part of the city’s annual review.
After the presentation, many of the 30 attendees asked specific questions about the projects, including what would happen if the bond was rejected by voters. Lambert said the likely outcome would be that parks projects “would probably have to go.”
“We might be able to fund some trails with SPLOST (Special Purpose Local Option Sales Tax) money,” Lambert said. “But we couldn’t use it for parks.”
Another question involved the financial breakdown of the parks/trails expenditures, which Lambert estimated to be around $35 million for parks and $25 million for trails.
State Rep. Long Tran (D-District 80) made several remarks to the group, saying that he supports the bond, as it will attract businesses and people to the area and raise property values.
Bob Hickey, who represents the opposition group, did not speak at the meeting other than repeating the words of former mayor Dennis Shortal, who had commented that “paying lower taxes is not a sin.”
