James_September-October_2026_web - Flipbook - Page 87
here is a quiet but
consequential
shift taking place
in local government across
metro Atlanta
and, increasingly,
across the United States. Newly
elected city council members no
longer see themselves simply as
representatives of the communities
that elected them. Instead, many
view themselves as activists with
a mission to reshape those communities according to a particular
ideological vision.
That distinction matters because representative government
requires elected officials to listen
first to the people who already live
in a community, pay taxes there,
own homes there, raise families
there, operate businesses there and
have invested years, often decades,
in its future. Activist government
begins with a different assumption:
that the community itself is somehow unjust, outdated, exclusionary
or environmentally irresponsible
and must therefore be transformed.
That attitude is becoming
increasingly visible in Atlanta’s
affluent northern suburbs. For
generations, the Interstate 75,
Interstate 85 and Georgia 400
corridors have been home to many
of metro Atlanta’s most established and prosperous suburban
communities. Cities such as Sandy
Springs, Dunwoody, Roswell,
Alpharetta, Johns Creek, Milton,
East Cobb/Marietta, and Duluth
became desirable because they
offered something different from
urban Atlanta: mature trees, larger
lots, strong schools, public safety,
parks and neighborhood stability.
Families deliberately chose that
lifestyle and, in many cases, paid a
substantial premium for it.
The debate is not whether
these communities should grow.
They will continue to grow. The
real question is whether growth
should strengthen aging commercial corridors and underutilized
business districts or completely
alter established residential neighborhoods. I support the former and
wholly disregard the latter.
ELECTIONS ARE NO MANDATE
TO REMAKE A CITY
In Roswell, where I live, residents have recently had to remind
several newly elected council
members of a basic principle:
winning an election (in this case by
razor-thin margins) is not a mandate to remake a city. It is a responsibility to represent the people who
already live there.
That should be obvious, yet ideology has crept so deeply into local
politics that zoning, housing and
land-use decisions are increasingly
treated as fronts in a broader cultural struggle. Established neighborhoods are labeled exclusionary,
larger residential lots are portrayed
as inefficient, and density is presented as morally enlightened
while affordable housing is treated
as the universal solution regardless
of local infrastructure, environmental capacity or public support.
Roswell has struggled with
another problem for years: allowing small but vocal interest groups
to shape public policy. Years ago,
I opposed a proposal to dedicate
valuable land near Canton Street to
a municipal parking deck. The idea
was driven largely by complaints
from a handful of restaurant owners who wanted more convenient
parking for customers. My question
was simple: why devote marquee
property to parking when aging
commercial property sat only a few
hundred yards away?
Restaurants deserve a voice,
but if this is a typical restaurant that
employs under 20 people and has
modest revenues, the answer is obvious. In no way should they dictate
S E PT E M B E R/O C TO BER 2026
87
