Cities to sue state over sanctions
Save Email Print
Posted: 7:36 PM Feb 2, 2010
Cities to sue state over sanctions
Officials say department not imposing punishment on county
City officials are threatening legal actions because the state has not imposed sanctions on Gwinnett and its municipalities despite a judge’s order. Judge David Barrett ordered sanctions if the county and cities did not come to an agreement on a service delivery strategy, which has been in dispute for nearly a year.
Reporter: By Camie Young, Senior Writer
Email Address: camie.young@gwinnettdailypost.com
Font Size:

LAWRENCEVILLE — City officials are threatening legal actions because the state has not imposed sanctions on Gwinnett and its municipalities despite a judge’s order.

Judge David Barrett ordered sanctions if the county and cities did not come to an agreement on a service delivery strategy, which has been in dispute for nearly a year.

Barrett’s deadline was Monday, but the Georgia Department of Community Affairs’ Mike Beatty said the department would not impose the penalty, which includes the loss of state funding and permits, until the end of February.

“We’re talking about a judge’s order, which you are ignoring,” Norcross Mayor Bucky Johnson said. “That’s the only way we are going to get this settled. .... We’ve been burned so many times before.”

Gwinnett County Commission Chairman Charles Bannister said the punishment is not needed to force the county to negotiate.

“We are currently working overtime to reach a settlement with the cities that is fair to all of Gwinnett’s citizens. This takes time but can — and I hope will — happen,” Bannister said, pointing out that the judge also issued a scheduling order calling for a pre-trial conference to take place on March 19.

“This request by (attorney Buddy) Welch seems out of tune with the best interests of all citizens of Gwinnett, including those in the cities he represents who will pay for this motion,” Bannister said. “Think about it, even if he is successful, the sanctions are only imposed 28 days earlier and have the potential to restrict real money coming to Gwinnett or its cities within that time frame.”


Latest Comments

Posted by: To Concerned Citizen Location: Norcross on Feb 4, 2010 at 01:57 AM

Bannister did what was right for taxpayers - WHEN? We're paying way too much for his shady land deals with friends, the lawsuits that have followed, the bungled trash pickup deal, the sleazy reshuffling of tax increase dollars to pet projects in his neighborhood, etc. etc. etc. - the list is pretty long. Bannister basically wants a piece of city pies to help fund his incompetence. No, only just over half of the 9% turnout voted for him, but shortly the real majority will correct that error.
Posted by: Roska Location: Gwinnett on Feb 3, 2010 at 12:30 PM

What is really funny is that the collection of City Mayors actually endorsed Bannister in the 2008 election. How's that working for all you mayors now?
Posted by: Concerned Citizen Location: Grayson on Feb 3, 2010 at 12:17 PM

How is this all Bannister's fault? I think the Cities are in on this also. Lets not forget that Bannister is speaking for about 80% of Gwinnett's population, while the Cities make up the other 20%. Another example of the minority ruling the majority. The Cities are doing a grand job at shifting blame on the County and the Newspapers appear to be taking that side also. As a unincorporated resident I say: Stay the course Charles and get me the best deal. The heck with the Cities.
Stocks
QUOTES
    Symbol Lookup
Video: Subscribe Now!