Johnson et al v. City of Atlanta

IN THE STIPERIOR COURTSTATE OF GEORGIA

Fulton County Superior Courtr**EFILED***TV

Date: 51241201 6 9:09:03 AMCathelene Robinson, Clerk

2016CV275557

Jewel Johnson, Nathau Johnson, RebecaKashe, Charles E. Ross, RalphelAmmoas, Evelyn Wise Weaver, AnworShogarabi, Carol H. Wilson, Kelly D.Jones, Gloria T. Jones, PatriciaThompson, Dana L. Crockett, Charles L.Dudbley, Alexander Bristor, LucyLavoulle, Gladyne Hughes, Residents ofLoch Lomond Estates, andUnincomorated South Fulton. etc.

)

Plaintiffs, ) Civil Action File No:

vs. )

MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL,CITY OF ATLANTA

)

Defendant. )

COMPLAINT FOR INTERLOCUTORY INJUNCTION AIYDTE]\,[PO

PLAD\iTIFFS files this Complaint and shows the following:

o That the City of Atlanta has failed to follow annexation procedures pursuant toO.C.G.A. Titlc 36, Chapter 36.

No mailed notice was provided to residents of the proposed anrexedproperty or the surrounding neighborhood regarding the annexationproposal. The City of Atlanta has not met requiremeflts, set forth instate law, for public notification of potential annexation. Residentshave nql reqeived spch written notificatiens, nqr has any othprpotentially impacted property owner. Failure to provide the legallyrequired notification of properly grounds is clearly a violation ofannexation larvs as established pursuant to state law.

Failure to comply rvith State Law, the 60% method of annexationrequiring o'vali.d" signatures of both 60% of the registered voters andowners of 60Y' of the land acreage, within any mapped area requestingannexation into a city.

The larv also states that: (g) the necessary number of signatures oflandowners and electors shall be obtained within one calendar year

required nurnber within the one-year period shall invalidate previouslyi

coilected signatures. Nothing in this subsection shall prohibit'

collection of sigrratures fror4 lhq Sarne- perso!! oq- -subsequent,applications for an4exation. The first signature on several annexation

p"iitioirr for consideration was obtained August 2014, with an

ixpiration date of August 2015, thus, all sigratures are invalid-

The City caflnot determine its own number of registered voters, which

can only be determined by the Fulton County Board of Elections. The

Cify has calculated its own number (which is lower) as opposed to the

number of registered voters that the Board of Elections has indicated.

That manipulation of the number of registered voters is the basis for

their claim that 600/o of registered voters have signed and been

validated.

The state laiv reads as follows:

'5 36-36-3211a; nor the purpoie of determining the percentage of,

Electors signing such application, the municipal governing body shall

obtain a list of electors residing in such ar:ea -tgm-the.-board qfregistrars of the coun\t or counties in which the area lies- The list shall

'

be contrtiler! bv the board of reqistrars and provided to the municipalqoverning hody in accordance with Code Section 2I-2-227. The

municipal governing body shall bear the expense of the preparation ofthe list in the manner prescribed by such Code section.

The proposed future land use designation under the CiB'sComprehensive Plan is not consistent with Fulton County's Land Use

designation lor the Communities proposed to be annexed.

Numerous "service delivery mechanisms" have not been addressed inaccordance with state law. No report setting forth its plans to provide

services to the area has been presented to residents. No plans have

been submi:ted to citizens forreview.

(a) A municipal comoration exercisins authority under this article:shall make plans for the extension of services to the area proposed tobe annexed and. prior to the public hearing provided for in C.ode,

Section 36-36-36. shall prepare a report settine forth its plans toprovide sen ices to the area.

r There has been insufficient public discussion and awareness of a

potential action that would create new annual property tax obligation

for hundreris of ProPertY owners.

The potential impact of the proposed annexation will have adverse

effects far beyond the communities identified. Bvery property ownlr. will be adversely impacted. It is riot clear what the reasoning of the

city of Atlanta proposed annexations are and why they are proceeding

*ith trking actionJin violation of state annexation laws. The benefits,

implications, or costs of such annexations have not been

communicated by the City to residents of the proposed

areas/comniunities to be annexed. In fact, neither residents or property

owners have received any direct comrirunication from the City ofAtlanta in r.:gards to the proposed annexation.

Because oi the lack of communication from the City of Atlanta on

their proposed annexations, it is the belief of both residents and

properly o\!'rlers that they will be harmed by upcoming actions by the

City of Atlanta and believes that the proposed annexations are notlegitimate t.nd legal.

DEFENDANT is located in Fulton County, Georgia, and is subject to the jurisdictionofthis Court.

AS SHOWN fronr the facts contained herein, unless the defendant is immediatelyrestrained from further an^;exation proceedings, plaintiffs will suffer an immediate andirreparable injufy in tirat tireir "Due Process" rights will have been violated-

WHEREFORE, PLAINTIFF prays forthe following:

o That the Court i".sue a temporary restraining order prohibiting the defendant fromproceeding rvith t..king any further annexation actions until an "Independent Entityverifies conformiurce with Ga Annexation Laws pursuant to O.C.G.A. Title 36,

Chapter 36.

That the Court set dolvn at the earliest possible time a hearing on an interlocutoryiqiunction in this cause;

That upon said herring in this cause that the Court issue an interlocutory injunctionpro"hjbiting cle.fenrlart,tom po.mmu-nicati.ng rvith any.rpsident or p-roperty omer thatis a part of an ann.:xation petition that has been submitted to Fulton Coun$Government;

That upon a final hearing in this cause, that said interlocutory injunction be madepermanent;

For such other and further relief that the Court deems just and proper under thecircumstances.

Respectfulty submitted tire -2191-

day of May 2016,

PLAINTIFFS

1/*4cot,ur/./rhrrsry\fie/.oror ,#,+, l- F _

I 3 ta n/e,; /,p i,t*,kn-1tl* ('l?oss

Raplt"ef 4rna"cttt , .

Eta/y17 l./r s u tt/e-a /er^--t

[ ,

T@o,tn u+ (rllY o, Jottes

F*S* r'*; ff, s Y-\n FS' e \^

O^uLh*d*^ Da-no- L G,oo{.fi"Clar/ru L. C,//a-rfi(n /t, n/a P EdZ ,'J4a /6'

Lu,crt L oU^//*-a=tl+YnL rtu1 h'.S

Cl,,A/, )r,,fu-f,

Itk**B;otu'-/*tY/,h{14,,^-cil"-1"'-

{A C;t^""; Lurotq4 H{Ji rstn

7,)fur,/4 (b''in TW'"*

I

Respectfully submitted the zlS+'r/ day of May 2016,

PLAINTIFFS

City of Atlanta Law Department68 Mitchell Street, SW, Suite 4100Atlanta, GA 30303(404) 330-69 47 (Telephone)(404) 546-9s3s (E-fax)[email protected]

Jemtel Johson, ResideG ofl.ochI.ommd Estates, hoperty Oulrrss,Gladyne r+ngfres (Residerts ofthincoroced Souh Frilbd. t*c.

)

Plaimift, ) CivilAclionFileNo:vs. )

IVIAYOR& CIIY COUNCII,CITYOFATI.A}.ITA

)

f,tefmdant )

ATTIDAVITOF X'ACT

INIHE SIIPERIORGOTIRTSIAIE OFGTORGIA

personally qeeored befere tte unders:gned officer aftoriadto adainisten ods,\(i5 , fa-.4 .u,tostrBund6oae+ntsho,hehasperrcIhowtedgc otrtte frIlowiog tu;

That fu City of Atlryh bas friled'b foltow umtxr$g qpce&qes oursuaq$ to

O-C-G}A Ttrle 36 (hrytet36-

ffiistre cqA . -Wot

IN TIfi SIJPERIOR COURT OF FIILTON COUNTY, GEORGIA136 PRYOR STREET, ROOM C-103, ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303

SUMMONS

)e,,suL Jo),rr,son, Ala4nu^', - I.

.-4 r

) Of.,,lson n* *a _Plaintiff,

YS.{ lLt*q,r( + U,rq ,Lounut,v

e',lq e/'- *'P)c,,',h

2016CV275557) Case

) No.:))

TO THE ABOVE NAMED DEFLNDANT(S):

You are hereby summoned and reqr-rired to file electronically with the Clerk of said Court athttps://efilesa.tvlerhost.net/ofsweb and serye upon plaintiffs attorney, whose name and address is:

An answer to the complairit which is herewith served upon you, within 30 days after service of this

summons upon you, exclusive of the day of service; unless proof of service of this complaint is not filed

within five (5) business days of such service. Then time to answer shall not commence until such proof

of service has been filed. lF YOU FAIL TO DO SO, JUDGMENT BY DEFAULT WltL BE TAKEN AGAINST YOU

FOR THE RELIEF DEMANDED IN THE COMPLAINT.

t hts512412016

,'t]i I

/r#r{t/rt

day of 20

Honoiable Cathelene "Tin#.obinsonClerk of Superior Cour( " \aW f y

' ,/,ByDeputy Clerk

To defendant upon whom this petition is served:This copy of complaint and su:nmons was served upon you

Deputy Sheniff

lnstructlons: Attach addendum sheet for a d dltional parties if needed, make notatlon on this sheet lf addendum ls uscd

20_