They work something like this: Local governments and school boards approve an area for a TAD and establish the baseline tax assessment before redevelopment occurs. The property owners in the TAD pay an amount equal to the fully assessed value to the local government and school board. After redevelopment, the tax increment that is created above the baseline (this is the value the new development created above the baseline) is pledged to repaying bonds that the local development agency has sold instead of going into the general tax revenues. The proceeds of the bonds are used to write down infrastructure costs like road improvements, cleaning up contaminated soil, new water sewer and storm water lines. The baseline taxes are continued to be paid to the local government and the school board. At the end of 30 years, sometimes earlier, the bonds are repaid and the value of the entire property goes into the general tax revenues.

Local governments currently have the authority to create TADS, and this amendment would allow school boards to participate. Typically school property taxes are 60-70 percent of the property tax bill. When the Supreme Court removed school boards from participating, the impact was to greatly reduce the bonding capacity of new TADs, and make them fairly useless. The Beltline was counting on TAD financing to buy openspace and build bike and transit lines. Atlantic Station is a TAD and much of the property around Centennial Park is too.

I belief school boards should have the option to participate. This amendment doesn’t create any TADS, but it allows for their creation. If it passes, local school systems must review and approve each application and make a decision based on the merits of the situation. When they consider a TAD district, they must consider if the new development is going to have a significant impact on the school system. For example, if there is going to be a lot of new school age children at the TAD it won’t pay for itself, and a rational school board would vote against the TAD. However if the development is for an office building or commercial center, the school board doesn’t risk anything. The larger community benefits by getting rid of a blighted property, and not having to spend money on the infrastructure. The improvements at a site might improve property values outside the TAD and increase tax revenues.

https://dklbweb.dekalbga.org/voter/pdf/advanceVotingLocation08.pdf

I’m interested in the second amendment proposed, regarding whether or not to allow school districts to spend money on community redevelopment plans. On the surface, this sounds like an expansion of school district taxing and spending authority. School district spending should be focused on schools, not community redevelopment. We have city and county government for that. Do we really want school districts making those kinds of decisions? That sounds like an invitation to hike school tax bills. I’m opposed to the expansion of government powers without good reason. I recommend a “NO” vote unless there is something to this that I’m missing.