I petition the Georgia General Assembly not to include my property address as a registered voter and property owner in the boundary of the proposed new city of Stonecrest. I do not want my property address to be included in the proposed new city of Stonecrest located in South DeKalb of DeKalb County, Georgia.

There are bills (HB539 and SB208) pending in the Georgia State legislature to create a new city and you would be automatically included unless you express your opposition to being included in the new city boundary.

This petition is to indicate that you do not want to be included in a city of Stonecrest boundary. It does not have an impact on whether there is an referendum at this point. This petition allows you as a resident to have a voice at the front-end of the process and not just at the end of the process which is the referendum. Many states have a petition process.

 A referendum at the end of the process only provides you the ability to either vote Yes or No on whether there is a city, it does not provide you the option to opt out of the city boundaries altogether. This is why the petition is important.

HB539 --  http://www.legis.ga.gov/Legislation/en-US/display/20152016/HB/539

SB208 -- http://www.legis.ga.gov/Legislation/en-US/display/20152016/SB/208

HB613  --  http://www.legis.ga.gov/Legislation/en-US/display/20152016/HB/613

SB221 -- http://www.legis.ga.gov/Legislation/en-US/display/20152016/SB/221

First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The prohibition of abridgment of the "right to petition" originally referred only to the federal legislature, Congress, and the US federal courts. The incorporation doctrine later expanded the protection of the right to its current scope, over all state and federal courts and legislatures, and the executive branches of the state[4] and federal governments.

The right to petition includes, under its umbrella, the petition. For example, in January 2007, the US Senate considered S. 1,[5] an omnibus "ethics reform" bill. This bill contained a provision (Section 220)[6] to establish federal regulation, for the first time, of certain efforts to encourage "grassroots lobbying". The bill said that "'grassroots lobbying' means the voluntary efforts of members of the general public to communicate their own views on an issue to Federal officials or to encourage other members of the general public to do the same".[this quote needs a citation]

This provision was opposed by a broad array of organizations, including the American Civil Liberties Union, the National Right to Life Committee, and the National Rifle Association.[citation needed] On January 18, 2007, the US Senate voted 55-43 to strike Section 221 from the bill. However, other proposed regulations on "grassroots lobbying" remain under consideration in the 111th Congress.[needs update]

There are ongoing conflicts between organizations that wish to impose greater restrictions on citizen's attempts to influence or "lobby" policymakers, and groups that argue that such restrictions infringe on the constitutionally protected right to sue the government,[7] and the right of individuals, groups, and corporations (via corporate personhood[citation needed]), to lobby[4] the government.

Another controversial bill, the Executive Branch Reform Act, H.R. 984, would require over 8,000 Executive Branch officials to report into a public database nearly any "significant contact" from any "private party", a term that the bill defines to include almost all persons other than government officials. The bill defines "significant contact" to be any "oral or written communication (including electronic communication) . . . in which the private party seeks to influence official action by any officer or employee of the executive branch of the United States." This covers all forms of communication, one way or two ways, including letters, faxes, e-mails, phone messages, and petitions. The bill is supported by some organizations as an expansion of "government in the sunshine", but other groups oppose it as an infringing on the right to petition by making it impossible for citizens to communicate their views on controversial issues to government officials without those communications becoming a matter of public record.[8][9][10]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_petition

The Georgia Constitution also guarantees the right to assemble and petition:

The people have the right to assemble peaceably for their common good and to apply by petition or remonstrance to those vested with the powers of government for redress of grievances. [Art. 1, sec. 1, para. 9.]