GA Constitutional Amendments - what do y'all think?

[klook]

There are three proposed constitutional amendments up for vote this November 4:

• Amendment 1 - To encourage the preservation of Georgia's forests through a conservation use property tax reduction program.


• Amendment 2 - To authorize local school districts to use tax funds for community redevelopment purposes.


• Amendment 3 - To authorize the creation of special Infrastructure Development Districts providing infrastructure to underserved areas.

[klook]

1. I'm voting NO on #2 and #3

#1 seems benign enough, as near as I can tell.

#2 looks very bad. This one would allow local municipalities to take school tax money and reallocate it for development projects. In other words, money that should be going to public schools would be going into the pockets of developers. No thanks. By the way, if this passes it will overturn a state supreme court decision saying property tax money collected for schools can't be used for other purposes.

On #3 - This one is cynically worded to make it sound like a good thing, but this amendment would allow the creation of “private cities,” where developers can bill home buyers annually for infrastructure costs such as roads, lights, schools, etc. It's the latest salvo in the drive to privatize everything. Yuck.

References:
http://www.times-herald.com/Local/Proposed-amendment-would-protect-large-forested-tracts--552411

http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Georgia_2008_ballot_measures

http://news.mywebpal.com/partners/680/public/news915307.html

http://www.jasonpye.com/blog/2008/07/tads_to_be_decided_in_november.html

http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/shared-blogs/ajc/thinkingright/entries/2008/06/30/feisty_band_of_fighters_takes.html?cxntfid=blogs_thinking_right
(Normally I disagree with conservative columnist Jim Wooten, but in this column--although he doesn't overtly express support for the "feisty band of fighters" opposing this amendment--at least he gives their cause some publicity.

I hope you all give a damn about these proposed Georgia constitutional amendments. Please let me know your thoughts, or provide more info if you have it.

[tosh]

2. Thanks for these links and for your opinions, klook.

I vote in Florida but mr. tosh will find these useful.

[aaronbav]

3. Thanks for your insight

on #2 & #3.

My wife had sent me a link about #3 and I was STUNNED. I appreciate your insight on #2 as well,

In past years, I (sadly) have to admit that I probably would have voted in favor, simply because I used to believe the government worked for OUR (We the people's) best interest! The past 8 years have totally debased that notion!

Georgia has to be one of the most CORRUPT states in the U.S. today.

Aaron

[Citizen Jane]

4. Thanks!

I haven't researched the ballot yet, so your work on the amendments is very helpful!

LOL about agreeing with Wooten.

[miasmo]

5. I'm voting yes on #2

http://atlanta.creativeloafing.com/gyrobase/amendment_2_the_beltline_s_best_shot/Content?oid=584139

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?

Based on this explanation from Creative Loafing, I intend to vote "yes" for #2.

[racaulk]

7. Same here.

I saw that same article in Creative Loafing, and their logic and justifications for their positions make sense. I would love to see the Beltline Project go forward. IMHO, it's something our city desperately NEEDS! So I will be voting "Yes" on 2, although I'm voting "No" on 3.

Welcome to DU, miasmo! :hi:

[klook]

9. Read the responses on the CL website

What is good about diverting money ostensibly collected for education to private development projects??? Surely there is a better way to finance the Beltway.

From Creative Loafing readers:

RE: Amendment 2: The Beltline's best shot

Posted by Dave Walker on 10.18.08 @ 12:51 AM

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....

RE: Amendment 2: The Beltline's best shot

Posted by Georgians for Quality Development on 10.17.08 @ 11:47 PM

VOTE "NO" ON AMENDMENT 2!

The Atlanta Journal Constitution editorial board is officially on record supporting the Supreme Court's decision last February declaring that educational tax dollars should not be diverted to subsidize private development*.

Amendment No. 2 would have the effect of overruling the Georgia Supreme Court on this very important issue.

Given the shrinking educational budgets faced by school systems all across the State, this is no time to allow a corporate welfare bailout for developers at the expense of the education of our children.

Our property taxes are high as it is. Passage of this Amendment would only raise taxes even more. If we are going to be taxed for public educational purposes, then that money must be used for education, not for private development!


Please also be aware that the Georgia Association of Educators, the leading advocacy group for public education in the State of Georgia with over 40,000 members, has taken an official position against Amendment No. 2, because of the negative impact it would have on public education in the State of Georgia. (See link below)

www.voteducation.org/more/index.cfm?Fuseaction=more_51807§ion=more_51807


Again, more reason to vote "No" against Amendment No. 2 on November 4.

Please pass this information to at least 50 friends, colleagues and fellow parents, so that the word will spread all across Georgia about this very important issue.

[miasmo]

6. I'm voting no on #3

based on this:

http://atlanta.creativeloafing.com/gyrobase/amendment_3_crunch_time_for_private_cities_/Content?oid=584141

[Raffi Ella]

8. From what I've read about these ammendments...

they are put on the ballot because the Courts have already shot them down OR it's easier to get them passed by putting them on the ballot and not going through the court - I don't really understand ANY of them and the persons responsible for them being on the ballot are all Republicans.

I'm thinking I'm just gonna vote NO for all of them.

[aikoaiko]

10. Yes on #1, No freakin way on #2, and I don't know enough on #3

1. These kind of quid pro quo arrangements (conserved land for tax breaks) are good for everyone.


2. The beltline is a great project, but it shouldn't come out of the hide of schools. If the schools in those communities have too much money, then they can tax less and create tax code to address this issue specifically.

3. Thats complicated and I have to do more reading

[groundloop]

11. My take on amendmant #1

Is that it primarily is to benefit large corporate tree farms. I don't see any other benefit, so I voted no on it as well as the others.

[aikoaiko]

12. Yes, the corporate tree farms benefit in the short term with fewer taxes, but the residents benefit

by not having those tracks of land turn into mega-wearhouses, housing developments, factories, etc. I'm ok with the quid pro quo aspect of this.

[bunkerbuster1]

13. Is Amendment 3 necessarily as evil as depicted?

I can't help but wonder if it's a back-door way to finally use impact fees on NEW development to pay for needed infrastructure upgrades based on school requirements which, as far as I know, are banned under GA law at present.

I could be wrong; it's just what I've been thinking.

(I have already voted, and abstained on the amendments because I honestly didn't feel sufficiently informed either way.)