Comments on: Atlanta Schools, ADA strike deal over TAD funds

By: cityzen

cityzen — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 13:36:14 +0000

Wayne Mason should not be entitled to make a $40mm profit on top of his $25mm investment in two years from his political pull. The guy had Roy Barnes in his pocket, shilling for him in a public hearing at City Hall, and doubtless pulling plenty of strings behind the scenes. So why would one not assume that Shirley, too, was well paid to negotiate on the city’s behalf with both arms tied behind her back. Anywhere sane, this is called corruption.

By: Intowner

Intowner — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 03:09:43 +0000

Shocked, the problem is not that the money went to Wayne Mason. He is entitled to make a profit since convinced the BeltLine to buy his land. The problem is what process (if any) was used to make the dceision? It seems little or no thought went into the decision, and that Mayor Franklin and Terri Montague were just out there negotiating without any knowledge or experience. And boy did they (read that as: we the Atlanta taxpayers) get snookered!

By: Shocked

Shocked — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 02:36:11 +0000

Voice of [Lack of] Reason: Your first post accused me of making up facts. I asked you to expalin why I was wrong. Now you changed the subject. What gives? Is it not you making up facts to suit your weird agenda? The fact is that almost all of the Beltline TAD bond proceeds went to pay off the Wayne Mason note. So, Atlanta taxpayer dollars went to a Gwinnett real estaste developer to buy prime land in teh NE quarter of the city. What does that deal have to do with blighted areas, as you suggest in your early post?

By: Jim Martin

Jim Martin — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 22:32:04 +0000

Voice of “Reason”: What is a beltline without 80% of the land? That is what ABI has now. The bit that they bought from Mason is the only bit that they own.

There should have been no urgency involved in purchasing the land from Mason. It had a rail easement running through it. Was someone else about to buy land with a rail easement through the middle of it?

If it is a long term investment, then why was the land bought with a 1-year loan at 11% interest (actually the 11% is interest + “fees”)? Would you buy a house with a credit card? The stupidity of doing that would have nothing to do with the useable life of the house or with how nice a house it was. It would still be a dumb way to spend money (i.e. on interest payments).

By: Turner

Turner — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 21:44:32 +0000

The property Tax pie, as I understand it, is cut like this:

25% To Fulton
25% To the General Fund (it’s actually a little less)

and 50% goes to APS.

The Fulton Chunk goes to Mental Health, Libraries, Judicial System and Parks and Rec.

I’m pretty well versed on the General Fund. Where do I go to break down the Fulton Chunk and the APS chunk year over year?

I think that is the first step to see where the hell the revenues went. Any advice in that direction would be appreciated.

By: Julian Bene

Julian Bene — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 20:21:26 +0000

Turner, Thanks for letting the facts speak. Yes, reconciling the data can feel like a full-time (unpaid)job!

The impact of the Shafer amendment – diverting N Fulton money back to N Fulton – would presumably be to raise Fulton’s need to find money to maintain S Fulton services. Whether that has translated to a tax increase for all Fulton residents – or only for S Fulton special tax district – or alternatively to service cuts – I really don’t know.

By: Turner

Turner — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 20:02:11 +0000

Actually I do remember 517K now that you mention it. I’ve looked at so many friggen budgets between North Fulton, South Fulton, All of Fulton and Atlanta it’s insane.

The only thing I would say about the Shaffer Amendment is if we had to supplement what was being spent with our Revenues it would impact Taxes but would agree it would not impact Revenue numbers if that is the case.

Do you have any more info on what types of things the amendment is speaking to so I can look into the impact if any?

By: Julian Bene

Julian Bene — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 19:39:25 +0000

So how is it that with such rapid growth in the city we have no more property or sales tax to show for it and to run operations like police and fire?

And, Turner, N Fulton’s Shafer money was being spent by the county, not by the city. It would not show up as tax revenue anyway.

By: Julian Bene

Julian Bene — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 19:32:05 +0000

Turner

The Census Bureau says Atlanta is up from 416,000 in 2000 to 517,000 in 2007. Looks close to 25% to me. (Ref below) The 2008 CAFR must have used the wrong figure.

A City CFO presentation of mid-2008 says the city’s population increased 20% from 2002 to 2008. From memory, the Mayor’s budget latest letter says the growth is up to 25% now.

http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/SAFFPopulation?_event=ChangeGeoContext&geo_id=16000US1304000&_geoContext=&_street=&_county=Atlanta&_cityTown=Atlanta&_state=&_zip=&_lang=en&_sse=on&ActiveGeoDiv=&_useEV=&pctxt=fph&pgsl=010&_submenuId=population_0&ds_name=null&_ci_nbr=null&qr_name=null®=null%3Anull&_keyword=&_industry=

By: Turner

Turner — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 19:03:02 +0000

Julian -

From the 2002 CAFR
Population according to 2000 Census
416,000

http://www.atlantaga.gov/client_resources/government/finance/cafr/coa%20cafr%202002.pdf

From the 2008 CAFR
Population according to Census Bureau
461,956

http://www.atlantaga.gov/client_resources/government/finance/cafr/coa%2008%20annual%20report%20finance.pdf

For an increase of 10% which is not more or less 25%

How can subsidies that the City was receiving that it now doesn’t not have something to do with City Taxes?