Amendment 2 on the ballot asks: "Shall the Constitution of Georgia be amended so as to authorize community redevelopment and authorize counties, municipalities, and local boards of education to use tax funds for redevelopment purposes and programs?"
Allow us to interpret: Do you want the Beltline to get the money it needs, or do you want it to be a long-rolling urban disappointment?
To understand the issue, first wrap your head around the idea of "tax allocation districts" – which were supposed to be the main funding source for the $2.4 billion proposed intown loop of parks, trails, transit and development.
For two decades now, cities and counties have, with the approval of local voters, created TADs around blighted areas. They sell bonds to pay for roads, parks, sewers and other fixes that spur development and boost property values within the TADs. At the same time, they freeze property tax revenue schools and local governments get from districts. The money that comes from higher property values is used to pay off the bonds. Without a TAD, Atlantic Station might still be an abandoned steel mill full of hazardous waste.
The Beltline (along with 40 other TADs) suffered a huge blow in February when the state Supreme Court ruled that using school property taxes for noneducational redevelopment violated the state's constitution. Because the bulk of property taxes in Georgia are levied by school boards, the development scheme du jour lost more than half its revenue stream overnight.
There are valid concerns about TADs. Big developers, who are getting help with the infrastructure they need for glitzy office towers, often whine like spoiled children when TADs require them to set aside affordable housing or do other things in the public interest. And any program that opens a spigot of public funds can end up being used for well-connected interests or distort market forces.
Still, most TAD projects have ended up funding the kind of community building needed to turn Atlanta and other cities into better places.
Of course, there's nothing like pissed-off developers to spur our state's politicians to action. After the court ruled, the General Assembly quickly passed a referendum that placed Amendment 2 on the ballot. If passed, it would revive the option of using school taxes for redevelopment purposes.
In the interim, the private sector's contributed to the Beltline, but that largesse gets things only so far – especially when other projects are competing for big bucks in a tight economy. And buyers of municipal bonds – long the go-to mechanism for cities to fund infrastructure improvements – have melted away with the credit crisis.
The Beltline isn't perfect. Skyrocketing property values around it already have displaced residents. The city's also been less than nimble with some purchasing practices (most obviously in dealing with mega-developer Wayne Mason over a huge tract of land in northeast Atlanta).
But the Beltline promises to be a tranformative project for the city. It will surpass Atlantic Station as the nation's largest "brownfield" project, converting 1,100 acres of former industrial sites into centers of commerce and leisure, and creating an alternative to the car in the heart of the city.
The challenges so far actually are arguments for a more dependable revenue stream. TADs would allow the city to move quickly in securing land that's needed for the parks, trails, transit and affordable housing. The quicker they can move, the better.
If we fail to provide the funding, shame on us for failing to grasp what's necessary to make that vision a reality.
COMMENTS
RE: Amendment 2: The Beltline's best shot
Posted by eric pfeifer on 11.03.08 @ 02:06 PM
"First of all, all Georgia taxpayers with any sense should vote "No" on Amendment No. 2. This is nothing but a corporate welfare handout and bailout sham for weak and inexperienced developers."
How, Dave? How is the creation of specific legislation to improve infrastructure in areas a corporate bailout? TAD legislation is meant to specifically fund capitol improvements in selected areas. It doesn't intersect with corporate responsibility at all. Mayhaps you don't know what you're talking about?
"Diverting educational use tax money to subsidize private development is a sham. It is corporate welfare and a bailout for weak developers."
TADs don't fund private development. They fund public infrastructure.
"Our school tax dollars should be used for schools. What sense does it make to give school tax dollars to real estate developers?"
TAD funds don't go into the pockets of private entities. They go to fund bonds to pay for necessary improvements. Sheesh, this place is a nest of astroturfers.
"Our property taxes are high as it is. Passage of this Amendment would only raise taxes even more."
That is absolutely not how a TAD works. TADs count on the difference between the level of funding at the point of passage versus the funding gained as values increase. There's nothing inherent in a TAD that would affect millage rates.
The least all these 'concerned advocates' could do is get their facts straight before trying to poison public discourse.
RE: Amendment 2: The Beltline's best shot
Posted by katherine Hutchings on 10.29.08 @ 12:00 PM
Atlanta, Atlanta, Atlanta!!!! I realize that this is an Atlanta-based website, but as a resident of rural northwest Georgia who is seeking both facts (i.e. the original text of the amendments)and (educated) opinions concerning this amendment, I would like to know how this particular amendment would work for the benefit or the detriment of public education/ development projects in areas OTHER than Atlanta. Georgia is, as I recall from my eighth-grade Georgia history class, the biggest state east of the Mississippi River. There are many other school systems /development projects in this vast state--urban, suburban, and rural. Please consider them too, and what is best for not just one metropolitan area (albeit the biggest), but the whole state. Opinions, please?
Thanks,
Katy Hutchings
RE: Amendment 2: The Beltline's best shot
Posted by noahglassman on 10.22.08 @ 06:01 PM
Here, read the actual senate bill yourself:
http://www.legis.ga.gov/legis/2007_08/fulltext/sr996.htm