ATLANTA — A bill that passed the Georgia Senate
last week would change the types of projects local development authorities can
offer tax breaks to, leaving some education leaders worried it would take power
away from local school boards.
Senate Bill 85, passed 41-11 on March 3, would remove a 14-part definition of “project” in the part of the Georgia code related to development authorities and replace it with a more broad, one-paragraph definition.
Sen. Brandon Beach (R-Alpharetta), who also represents part of Cherokee County, said the new language is a “catch-all” definition of projects that simply cleans up the Georgia code.
“It’s a linguistic change, a modification to streamline the process,” said Beach, who is the president and CEO of both the Greater North Fulton Chamber of Commerce and the North Fulton Community Improvement District, in addition to being a state senator.
However, Sen. Lindsey Tippins (R-west Cobb), who voted against the bill, disagrees with Beach, saying the bill would replace the 14-part definition of projects with “10 lines that gives (development authorities) virtually unbridled authority to accept any project that they in their judgment deem to be in the best public interest.”
Randy Scamihorn, chair of the Cobb Board of Education, said he agrees with Tippins “110 percent” and called the bill a “serious intrusion” into the taxing authority school boards have.
“I don’t accept that (the bill) cleans up the language,” Scamihorn said. “It takes discretion and authority away from local school boards and it also limits our ability to justify and to control our authority to tax our citizens.”
Scamihorn explained how the changes in the bill would hamper school boards. “By broadly defining projects, then anything could be a project,” Scamihorn said. “Therefore, I can take whatever money when I want it, regardless of how the local school board feels about it.”
Beach rejected this notion, however, saying Tippins’ objections are unfounded. “(Tippins) thought it was going to hurt school boards and affect their taxes and all, and it does not do any of that,” Beach said. “It says nothing in the bill about that. He’s an ex-school board guy, and he’s always looking out for school boards.”
Development authorities can offer tax incentives to attract businesses to their areas. The general idea is while these businesses can receive tax breaks that reduce revenue going to school systems and local governments for up to 10 years, they bring new jobs and increase tax revenue in the long run.
Beach pointed to the recent decision by Mercedes-Benz to relocate its U.S. headquarters to Georgia as an example.
“Development authorities are an important vehicle when it comes to economic development. I can tell you right now Mercedes-Benz would not have chosen Georgia if (the Fulton County) Development Authority didn’t get involved and help through the process.”
Members of development authorities are appointed by the political body they represent. For example, members of the Development Authority of Cobb County are appointed by the Cobb Board of Commissioners.
Tippins, chair of the Senate Education and Youth Committee, said he believes Beach’s bill would put too much power in the hands of development authorities, who aren’t responsible to the public because they aren’t elected.
“Development authorities are appointed boards,” Tippins said. “They are not answerable to the public, yet they make ultimate decisions that affect the county tax digest. There are many projects that are accepted that are clearly in the public’s best interest, but there are no checks and balances as far as answering to the public because they aren’t elected.”
Tippins went on to say he has the same concern for any appointed body. “I don’t say what I say in respect to just the development authorities,” Tippins said. “I don’t believe that any appointed authority needs to have unlimited power as it comes to the tax digest to make huge decisions on behalf of the public.”
Ultimately, Tippins said, the restrictions in the current definition of “projects” are necessary for this reason.
“This bill, instead of having any checks and balances, it has none,” he said. “It just gives them unbridled authority. I don’t think that’s good public policy.”
Beach, who filed an almost identical version of SB 85 in the last legislative session that passed the Senate but didn’t get out of the House, said his bill would also result in fewer legal challenges to the actions of development authorities.
“What was happening is there were some lawyers that would sue every time the development authority, for example in Fulton County, would do any kind of financing or bonds for hotels,” Beach said. “And the guy would sue them every time, saying the hotel had to have a conference center. The development authority didn’t think that that was true, that you didn’t have to have a conference center to do bonds or finance a hotel. … That’s why we did this, is just to clean that language up to where there’s no lawsuits.”
On this, Tippins and Beach agree, albeit for different reasons. “I don’t think there will be any more legal challenges after this because there won’t be anything prohibited,” Tippins said. “When you have complete authority and unregulated discretion, there’s nothing to challenge.”
Scamihorn said Beach’s background is evidence of the true motives behind the bill. “I don’t know the gentlemen, but in my mind, he has a conflict of interest,” Scamihorn said. “And also in my mind, isn’t it coincidental that somebody either asked him to do that or he took it upon himself to do it right after the Cobb County school board challenged the development authority’s powers?”
Scamihorn is referring to the Cobb school board’s legal challenge of a tax break the Development Authority of Cobb County had given to a mixed-use development backed by developer John Williams. The development, called Riverwalk, withdrew the request for tax incentives shortly before the case was to be heard in court last year.
The bill has been assigned to the House Governmental Affairs Committee, which must vote to move the bill forward. If approved by the committee, it would then need to be sent to the House Floor by the Rules Committee for a vote before it would make it to Gov. Nathan Deal’s desk.
Of the six senators who represent Cobb, Tippins and Judson Hill (R-east Cobb) voted against the bill, while Hunter Hill (R-Smyrna), Bruce Thompson (R-White) and Michael Rhett (D-Marietta) voted in favor. Horacena Tate (D-Atlanta) did not vote. Rhett, Thompson and Hunter Hill did not return calls for comment by press time.
Read more: Cherokee Tribune - Development authority bill in Senate has critics
Senate Bill 85, passed 41-11 on March 3, would remove a 14-part definition of “project” in the part of the Georgia code related to development authorities and replace it with a more broad, one-paragraph definition.
Sen. Brandon Beach (R-Alpharetta), who also represents part of Cherokee County, said the new language is a “catch-all” definition of projects that simply cleans up the Georgia code.
“It’s a linguistic change, a modification to streamline the process,” said Beach, who is the president and CEO of both the Greater North Fulton Chamber of Commerce and the North Fulton Community Improvement District, in addition to being a state senator.
However, Sen. Lindsey Tippins (R-west Cobb), who voted against the bill, disagrees with Beach, saying the bill would replace the 14-part definition of projects with “10 lines that gives (development authorities) virtually unbridled authority to accept any project that they in their judgment deem to be in the best public interest.”
Randy Scamihorn, chair of the Cobb Board of Education, said he agrees with Tippins “110 percent” and called the bill a “serious intrusion” into the taxing authority school boards have.
“I don’t accept that (the bill) cleans up the language,” Scamihorn said. “It takes discretion and authority away from local school boards and it also limits our ability to justify and to control our authority to tax our citizens.”
Scamihorn explained how the changes in the bill would hamper school boards. “By broadly defining projects, then anything could be a project,” Scamihorn said. “Therefore, I can take whatever money when I want it, regardless of how the local school board feels about it.”
Beach rejected this notion, however, saying Tippins’ objections are unfounded. “(Tippins) thought it was going to hurt school boards and affect their taxes and all, and it does not do any of that,” Beach said. “It says nothing in the bill about that. He’s an ex-school board guy, and he’s always looking out for school boards.”
Development authorities can offer tax incentives to attract businesses to their areas. The general idea is while these businesses can receive tax breaks that reduce revenue going to school systems and local governments for up to 10 years, they bring new jobs and increase tax revenue in the long run.
Beach pointed to the recent decision by Mercedes-Benz to relocate its U.S. headquarters to Georgia as an example.
“Development authorities are an important vehicle when it comes to economic development. I can tell you right now Mercedes-Benz would not have chosen Georgia if (the Fulton County) Development Authority didn’t get involved and help through the process.”
Members of development authorities are appointed by the political body they represent. For example, members of the Development Authority of Cobb County are appointed by the Cobb Board of Commissioners.
Tippins, chair of the Senate Education and Youth Committee, said he believes Beach’s bill would put too much power in the hands of development authorities, who aren’t responsible to the public because they aren’t elected.
“Development authorities are appointed boards,” Tippins said. “They are not answerable to the public, yet they make ultimate decisions that affect the county tax digest. There are many projects that are accepted that are clearly in the public’s best interest, but there are no checks and balances as far as answering to the public because they aren’t elected.”
Tippins went on to say he has the same concern for any appointed body. “I don’t say what I say in respect to just the development authorities,” Tippins said. “I don’t believe that any appointed authority needs to have unlimited power as it comes to the tax digest to make huge decisions on behalf of the public.”
Ultimately, Tippins said, the restrictions in the current definition of “projects” are necessary for this reason.
“This bill, instead of having any checks and balances, it has none,” he said. “It just gives them unbridled authority. I don’t think that’s good public policy.”
Beach, who filed an almost identical version of SB 85 in the last legislative session that passed the Senate but didn’t get out of the House, said his bill would also result in fewer legal challenges to the actions of development authorities.
“What was happening is there were some lawyers that would sue every time the development authority, for example in Fulton County, would do any kind of financing or bonds for hotels,” Beach said. “And the guy would sue them every time, saying the hotel had to have a conference center. The development authority didn’t think that that was true, that you didn’t have to have a conference center to do bonds or finance a hotel. … That’s why we did this, is just to clean that language up to where there’s no lawsuits.”
On this, Tippins and Beach agree, albeit for different reasons. “I don’t think there will be any more legal challenges after this because there won’t be anything prohibited,” Tippins said. “When you have complete authority and unregulated discretion, there’s nothing to challenge.”
Scamihorn said Beach’s background is evidence of the true motives behind the bill. “I don’t know the gentlemen, but in my mind, he has a conflict of interest,” Scamihorn said. “And also in my mind, isn’t it coincidental that somebody either asked him to do that or he took it upon himself to do it right after the Cobb County school board challenged the development authority’s powers?”
Scamihorn is referring to the Cobb school board’s legal challenge of a tax break the Development Authority of Cobb County had given to a mixed-use development backed by developer John Williams. The development, called Riverwalk, withdrew the request for tax incentives shortly before the case was to be heard in court last year.
The bill has been assigned to the House Governmental Affairs Committee, which must vote to move the bill forward. If approved by the committee, it would then need to be sent to the House Floor by the Rules Committee for a vote before it would make it to Gov. Nathan Deal’s desk.
Of the six senators who represent Cobb, Tippins and Judson Hill (R-east Cobb) voted against the bill, while Hunter Hill (R-Smyrna), Bruce Thompson (R-White) and Michael Rhett (D-Marietta) voted in favor. Horacena Tate (D-Atlanta) did not vote. Rhett, Thompson and Hunter Hill did not return calls for comment by press time.
Read more: Cherokee Tribune - Development authority bill in Senate has critics
Unelected governance is a scam that is
costing Georgia taxpayers a fortune and exposing them to huge debts. Tax money
that should be spent on our crumbling roads and sewers are going to benefit
CIDs and pay bribes to corporations. Last year, the unelected, appointed
Dunwoody Development Authority gave $83 million in tax breaks for 15 years to
State Farm for moving to PCID without a vote of the citizens.
Norb Leahy, Dunwoody GA Tea Party Leader
No comments:
Post a Comment