Comments on: Beltline Blues

By: macarolina

macarolina — Fri, 25 Jun 2010 14:37:29 +0000

Atlanta isn’t the only municipality in the state to make use of the authority granted to create TADs, though Atlanta has definitely made use of them. So including the ability to add school tax increment in the funds pledged to pay back bonds isn’t related to any Atlanta debt probs or issues. The idea of having schools participate is that redevelopment of an area, and the (hopefully) resulting increased property values helps the schools in the end – if property values in their districts increase, then they are collecting more taxes themselves. TAD Bonds are paid off with only this increase in value & corresponding tax collection. Plus, redevelopment has been targeted to bring in a wider range of family incomes to an area, which has potential to improve the schools. So, a school district ties itself for a while in terms of where a portion of increased tax collections are paid (they go to paying off the bonds), but long term should be in a better position. Plus, as I said before, schools have opt in rights, and can negotiate some infrastructure items from bond proceeds or the developers themselves as leverage for contributing their tax increment to paying off the TAD Bonds. I think there are cases where developers have donated land to school districts, built a school, donated park land near a school, etc.

Of course, there are a lot of arguements that this type of redevelopment doesn’t have an impact on schools, or locking up certain school district funds for too long to pay back bonds isn’t worth the benefits, or that all this redevelopment is tax supported gentrificationon an evil scale. Myself, looking at how schools are funded in this state (which in my opinion is very inequitable), I think that redevelopment likely leads to wealthier residents coming to an area, and those wealthier residents lead to better schools. You only have to look at DCS, Mary Lin, Fernbank, Morningside Elemantary and Sarah Smith school districts to see the evidence of that.

By: Ridgelandistan

Ridgelandistan — Fri, 25 Jun 2010 01:00:44 +0000

Thank you for the additional information. I didn’t mean to single out beltline proponents. The creative rulemaking made school district backed TADs grow in popularity and they jumped on board. In a way I’m glad they did as it forced the issue to be dealt with. My main point was the lawsuit wasn’t a waste of time if it prevented an branch of the government from exceeding it’s authority.

I never did understand why non education infrastructure funding needed to be backed by the school district instead of the city. It wouldn’t have anything to do with Atlanta’s financial state, bond ratings and serial federal judgements on sewerage etc?

By: macarolina

macarolina — Thu, 24 Jun 2010 19:29:30 +0000

while I can see someone’s point of view that school taxes should only be used for schools, I think some comments here about ATL officials trying to be subversive in applying school taxes to repayment of TAD Bonds (including Beltline TAD) is misleading. The legislature had given cities who created TADs the power to ask the school districts to participate in funding the TAD Bonds for each respective TAD; cities with TADs with school tax participation were just acting with the powers that were granted to them. Additionally, the school districts could say no when asked to participate (indeed they did in the Princeton Lakes TAD). The challenge brought to bring down the Beltline TAD Bonds was that it was unconstitutional for the state legislature to grant those powers (not city shenanigans). The courts decided the state legislature had overstepped its granting powers, and a voter referendum had to be held to decide whether or not the state could opt to authorize school tax funds for use in redevelopment activities, including peldges to TAD Bond repayments– that voter referendum passed. again, it is the school district’s option to opt in or not.

also, AN, I agree completely with your vision for the Beltline. I hope someday we can get there. to accomplish these mighty goals in today’s budget and financing environment would be an accomplishment indeed.

By: HistoryJoe

HistoryJoe — Thu, 24 Jun 2010 18:51:22 +0000

Isn’t that great? I was down in Washington Park for the first time last month. The PATH there is “West Side Trail” but it will abut the Beltline headed south. Headed north from the park is one of the famous “discontinuities” (MARTA and rail corridor are right there).

By: Andisheh Nouraee

Andisheh Nouraee — Thu, 24 Jun 2010 16:00:46 +0000

I disagree. I don’t question the vision. I question the ability of the metro area to realize the vision.

By: Tom Lawton

Tom Lawton — Thu, 24 Jun 2010 14:50:25 +0000

Isn’t the trail from Washington Park to Allene Avenue in West Atlanta considered part of the Beltline? PATH has made vast improvements in West End.

By: Baker

Baker — Thu, 24 Jun 2010 04:41:43 +0000

“but Atlanta city government is corrupt, sclerotic, bloated, and responsive only to the typical urban machine issues of race and poverty.”

I’m still holding out hope that Kasim Reed will be different. On some issues already he has broken with the old way, but in general I’m afraid that I have to agree with TeeRuss on this point. Per Maria Saporta, Charlotte is kicking our butt.

By: TeeRuss

TeeRuss — Thu, 24 Jun 2010 01:31:36 +0000

This is one reason why I live in Decatur. Beltline champion Cathy Woolard was our ATL city council rep when we lived in Candler Park, and I appreciate her sponsorship and energy for the project, but Atlanta city government is corrupt, sclerotic, bloated, and responsive only to the typical urban machine issues of race and poverty.

The Beltline will not become a reality until this regime is toppled. Great idea, great people working on it, horrific city government.