Get Schooled

By HS Teacher, Too

November 3, 2008 8:38 AM | Link to this

I am not sure how the tax system works in Georgia, but it seems to me that money collected and earmarked for schools should go to schools, and that should be the end of it. Now, I won’t sit here and try to argue that schools necessarily spend their money in the wisest ways 100% of the time, but if we get into the business of re-allocating funds to build strip malls and highways (or whatever else would fall under the “redevelopment” umbrella), that is a slippery slope we’ll never climb back up.

Didn’t the governor just cut education funding substantially recently? Now the state proposes re-allocating funding? Why not just close the schools completely, sell the buildings, and be done with it? I just don’t understand the logic. Maybe someone better-informed than I am can explain.

Alabama just had to pay teachers 75 cents on the dollar for their paychecks this past week, because the state ran out of money. It was up to local systems to make up the difference with short-term loans or rainy-day funds (fortunately, this is just until the state can reimburse the systems). Is that next for Georgia?

By Dan

November 3, 2008 9:04 AM | Link to this

This is simply a way for pols to claim they are helping children when they are really collecting for their own pet projects. and btw the education problems are not due to lack of funding but rather irresponsible spending

By Scoots

November 3, 2008 9:21 AM | Link to this

This article is very one-sided, and does not explain the benefits of a TAD, which spur redevelopment in needed areas, and increases the tax base in that area. Yes those tax benefits are temporarily frozen, but when they are unfrozen a new flood of taxes starts coming in.

Also, the majority of redevelopment (well over 3/4) is non-residential (so it would not produce taxes that would go toward schools), and the housing in these projects is usually multi-family housing - so not likely to have a lot of school-aged children.

So, please don’t let this article fool you into thinking that you are ‘robbing’ school kids of their money. The school district money used by these TADs is very small, but an important piece of making them work. I’m not telling you to vote YES (although I will), but just wanted to tell the other half of the story.

By Tony

November 3, 2008 9:23 AM | Link to this

This amendment is a clever plan to subsidize development. To me, this means developers reap the benefits and schools are robbed of resources at to pay for the projects. The argument that it is good for schools in the long run is ridiculous. The government should not be in the business of subsidizing development projects. Schools should not be handing over money to business for this purpose.

By Mark

November 3, 2008 9:32 AM | Link to this

Everyone should really research how a TAD works and how they benefit the school system in the long run before making comments. TADs do not “take” money from schools and the school system has the choice of whether or not they want to participate.  If the school board is savvy they can actually negotiate some pretty sweet deals.  Additionally, property values around TADs increase at a much higher rate, thus creating more tax revenue for the school system. It is a really good deal for forward thinking school systems…and before someone kills me for being a money hungry developer, I’m not. I just understand the issue.

By boogie

November 3, 2008 9:35 AM | Link to this

As a teacher who lives in an in-town area that has been postiviely affected by development of the type a TAD would bring, I have to agree with the idea. Most of the in-town public schools are in a state of decay because they do not have the property tax base to support them or the students with the accompanying parental involvement that usually follow a higher property taxed area. Example: North Fulton’s property tax base and their schools. Once people want to move into an area (such as one that a TAD would bring) they will purchase homes..homes which have been built/rennovated etc.. to meet the demand of those moving in. Higher property vaules mean higher property taxes, which means WAY more money for schools..not to mention an increase in parent involvement and school achievement.

By Ernest

November 3, 2008 9:53 AM | Link to this

My understanding of Amendment 2 was that it would allow school boards to ‘consider’ TADs, NOT that it was automatic. Used correctly, TADs are used to spur development in ‘blighted’ areas, i.e areas not providing much in tax revenue at the current time. If a TAD can substantially increase the amount of property tax revenue that is generated, which can benefit the schools and community, it should be evaluated on a case by case basis. I would also suggest others look up Tax Increment Financing (TIF), another form of TAD.

The proposed use of TADs for the Beltline and Sembler projects projects were questionable. The use of TADs for Atlantic Station ‘seems’ to be a ‘win win’ situation for everyone.

By jim d

November 3, 2008 9:55 AM | Link to this

Tony,

I totally agree.

I think a few bloggers are ignoring the potential risks which include financing projects whose benefits do not materialize sufficiently to cover the costs of the debt issued or other public-sector investments.

TADs might also stimulate growth that increases demand for public services but not generate sufficient new revenues to meet this need.

Also consider that relying on increases in the value of property, TADs could conflict with other public policy objectives such as property tax relief or tax abatements for targeted businesses.

Granted there maybe some positive aspects of TAD’s, I just don’t think I trust politians enough to gamble the education of future generations.

VOTE NO

By TheBlogger

November 3, 2008 9:56 AM | Link to this

Vote No!!!

This is another Pandora’s Box that the GA republican governor wants to open.

First, he wants to raid TRS (teacher retirement) and now he wants to steal money collected for schools. Ya think that he is getting some sort of kick back here from the contractors and developers? You bettcha!

If money needs to be collected for development, then so be it. But stop with the “shell game” of collecting money for schools and then stealing it to pay for development. Be up front with why you collect taxes and spend it appropriately.

If the politicans want money for development, how about putting that on the ballot and let citizens vote for it? Isn’t that the way it should be?

Schools are already under-funded (read no money to pay for NCLB). Now, our idiot governor wants to take what little money there is for schools and steal it? I just don’t see the logic.

By jim d

November 3, 2008 9:58 AM | Link to this

Who should get school money?

Well here’s a novel thought. How about, say, Schools?

By jim d

November 3, 2008 10:01 AM | Link to this

Ernest,

You can’t be serious my friend. You honestly trust a 4-5 member BOE to do what is right for the kids when money is involved?

Look at teacher salaries before answering that.

By jim d

November 3, 2008 10:05 AM | Link to this

Blogger,

Pretty scary when You, Tony, and I totally agree on any issue.

Perhaps there is hope :)

By Ladilovely

November 3, 2008 10:14 AM | Link to this

‘I Didn’t Vote For Obama’

‘I Didn’t Vote For Obama’ by Kentucky Scott

I’m a middle-class white guy living in Jacksonville , Florida . I’ve got a wife and two kids. Because the kids had no school today, I took a vacation day from work, and took the kids downtown to vote early. Fifty-nine minutes later, two smiling children and I proudly sported ‘I Voted’ stickers.
But I didn’t vote for Obama.

I voted for my ancestors, who believed in the promise of this country and came with nothing as immigrants. I voted for my parents, who taught in the public schools for decades. I voted for Steve, an acquaintance of mine from Kentucky . (Killed by an IED two years ago in Iraq ). I voted for Shawn, another who’s been to Iraq twice, and Afghanistan once, and who’ll be going back to Afghanistan again soon — and whose family earned eleven bucks a month too much to qualify for food stamps when the war started. I voted for April, the only African-American girl in my high school — it was years before it occurred to me how different her experience of our school must have been. I voted for my college friends who are Christian, Jewish, Mormon, and yes — Muslim. I voted for my grandfathers, who worked hard in factories and died too young. I voted for the plumber who worked on my house, because I want him to get a REAL tax break. I voted for four little angels from Birmingham . I voted for a bunch of dead white men who, although personally flawed, were willing to pledge their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor, and used a time of great crisis to expand freedom rather than suspend it. I voted for all those people and more, and I voted for all of you, too.

But mostly, I voted selfishly: I voted for two little kids, one who has ballet in an hour, and one who has baseball practice at the same time. I voted for a world where they can be confident that their government will represent the best that is in this country, and that will in turn demand the best of them.
I voted for a government that will be respected in the world. I voted for an economy that will reward work above guile. I voted for everything I believe in. Sure, I filled in the circle next to the name Obama, but it wasn’t him I was voting for — it was every single one of us, and those I love most of all.’

By TAD supporter

November 3, 2008 10:17 AM | Link to this

What Laura Diamond fails to point out is that the additional tax money flowing to pay off the cost of public improvements in the TAD would not exist if the TAD had never been created. All the money currently flowing from the property at the time the TAD is created continues to flow into school and other public coffers just as it always has. The money that is then dedicated to TAD public improvements come exclusively from rising property values created by the development the TAD makes possible. Without the TAD, the property value increase would not occur. In addition, TADs not only raise property values on the land inside the TAD boundaries, they also raise values on surrounding properties. And the taxes generated from those increased property values do go to schools and other public coffers.

By Tony

November 3, 2008 10:18 AM | Link to this

Blogger - I couldn’t agree more. If commissioners think a project is worthy, then propose a special tax for the voters to decide. Do not place projects like this under school boards’ authority or use school tax money to fund them.

jim d - There is always hope.

By jim d

November 3, 2008 10:54 AM | Link to this

Tony,

Always?

We shall see after tommorrow. Hope may become fleeting.

By jim d

November 3, 2008 10:57 AM | Link to this

TAD supporter,

I’m not convinced! Just because you say it’s so don’t make it so.

TAD’s are NOT WITHOUT RISK. why in heavens name would anyone be willing to gamble the future of our children?

By Sonya

November 3, 2008 11:03 AM | Link to this

Schools will not lose one cent of existing tax revenue by voluntarily participating in a TAD. It’s the future school tax revenue that is in question, but these dollars wouldn’t exist anyway if there were no TAD, so either way, the schools aren’t losing anything and have lots to gain in the long term.

By Mike D

November 3, 2008 11:05 AM | Link to this

Everyone should realize that the children aren’t our future, and the school systems here are just bloated jobs programs (there are as many non teaching jobs as teachers in most systems). At least using the money to build a nicer looking area will do something.

By MrLiberty

November 3, 2008 11:32 AM | Link to this

Isn’t it funny how nobody except the libertarians ever makes the argument that property that is taxed is not YOURS?

Why because I own a home should I be forced to pay for somebody else’s child’s education. I signed no “social contract.” I was enslaved into this arrangement by virtue of my birth. And what a stupid arrangement it is anyway. Now that the economy is in deline and housing prices are falling and homes sit vacant, the ever-wasteful school districts now get less money. I’m shedding no tears.

And why should I have to pay for the destruction of hundreds of small businesses so that some City Council can get a brand new downtown area? Can businesses no longer afford to pay their own way when redeveloping an area? And if they can’t, could high sales and property taxes be to blame?

And why should all of us have to pay for the “beltline” when thousands of businesses near stations will see huge profits and the builder will rake in a pretty penny? Can they not convince any venture capitalists to invest? Maybe the idea sucks so much and is such a boondoggle that nobody in their right mind would invest.

So why do we have to pay to build it?

That’s the beauty of the free market that you all badmouth so much. When people are free to spend or not as they see fit, only worthwhile projects are begun, only performing schools are built and operate. When government is involved, politics, never good sense prevails.

Vote no on Prop. 2 and then tell your elected representatives that you are tired of being a slave to wasteful government spending and that you want your property back in your name only.

When the government can tax your property, tell you what you can do on your property, and sieze it when you do not pay or comply, you not only don’t actually own the property, but what exists is socialism.

By mike d is not wrong

November 3, 2008 11:38 AM | Link to this

I think that it would be interesting to see how many non teaching jobs are in a school in comparison to how many teaching jobs there are. Anybody?

By Dan

November 3, 2008 11:40 AM | Link to this

If the TAD program has all of these wonderful benefits than call it what it is and tax accordingly. Dont’ bury it in the school tax. Of course if it was as wonderful as they say, they wouldn’t bury it somewhere. Just typical bait and switch politics

By Filster

November 3, 2008 11:53 AM | Link to this

In light of how poor Georgia’s public education system as compared on a national basis, taking any money earmarked for education away from education is insanity. While in theory TAD’s could generate more tax base for local governments, none of that base would be used for schools, only for the local politicos’ pork projects. I voted NO on Amendment 2 and I hope everyone else does as well.

By Mike needs to look closer

November 3, 2008 11:59 AM | Link to this

Mike needs to do some research. So who do we cut? Librarians, Kindergarten para-professionals, maybe technology support staff, or lunch ladies? What about the folks who fix or clean the buildings….hmmmm What services would you like your kids to do without? I been in many schools as a volunteer and NEVER see folks sitting around twitteling their thumbs.

By Meme

November 3, 2008 11:59 AM | Link to this

Reading online paper on my planning time and I counted. We have 35 non-teaching persons and 55 teachers. I never dreamed it was so close.

By MrLiberty

November 3, 2008 12:16 PM | Link to this

If the projects these TADs fund are so great then why not let the developers float the idea as a private bond or some similar FREE MARKET solution? Surely everyone who KNOWS there will be a benefit will want to invest. Why wouldn’t they?

What’s that? You can’t rely on the free market because some will not see the value and want to invest. So let others buy a bigger share of the risk. What’s unamerican about that. They invest more, they get a bigger payoff when complate.

Oh, I see, there may be risk. The whole project may not deliver as planned. Well that certainly seems like a good reason to SOCIALIZE the risk while privatizing the benefits. I mean there are definitely folks who are going to benefit. The contractors to start.

Face it, you support stealing the money from ME and my fellow citizens to pay for your boondoggle. You HOPE that there will be shared benefit but the reality is that it will just be another big waste. Marta can’t sustain itself now, and even full trains will likely run at a loss.

You say my property values will increase. Can I get a guarantee on that? What if my house is too close to the tracks and my values decrease. What if my house is too far from a station and the same occurs? Will the TAD be compensating me? What if the tracks run right through my property? Will you just TAKE my property, pay me a pittance, and tell me the only alternative is to have the train run right next to my house? How american of you.

There is either a voluntary process or there is THEFT. Allowing people to vote on it and giving it the blessing of government doesn’t change the immoral nature of the process.

All you Judeo-Christians out there. Does “thou shalt not steal” mean anything to you? How about “do unto others as you would have them do unto you?”

Starts making these simple ballot measures a bit more complicated doesn’t it?

By Mike D

November 3, 2008 12:33 PM | Link to this

To the detractors of Mike D.

I don’t mean a single employee actually deployed at any school building but the giant systems that govern them.

If I had my way, the money would follow the child. That way government and private schools would compete for each child and all would have to get better and better to attract and keep each child.

What we have now is a system that forces most kids into a waste land of broken dreams. Think of Clayton County - If it had to compete with better managed private schools it either never would have gotten into this mess, or it would now be gone completely.

By GS

November 3, 2008 12:40 PM | Link to this

Schools should get the $.

So many Georgia schools are barely functional with the present level of funding. The TADs will divert money in areas where the schools are struggling the most.

Good schools are the best investment Georgia can make. While throwing money at bad schools doesn’t necessarily make them better, taking money away from bad schools will make them horrendous schools.

By NO

November 3, 2008 12:48 PM | Link to this

Considering how poorly most local school boards manage their current resources, and considering as well how frequently our school systems fail at educating students, I can’t imagine why anyone would wish to give the school board any additional roles or powers. They are not competent at those tasks for which they have been elected. Do not give them the opportunity to screw up anything else.

By TheBlogger

November 3, 2008 12:56 PM | Link to this

Mike D

I disagree with your prediction about “what if” in Clayton Co. You cannot know that for certain.

There are too many parents that don’t care about the quality of their child’s education. Even when this was happening in Clayton Co., very very few parents attended the meetings.

There are too many parents that only want their child to attend a school with a great sports program. They feel that a sports scholarship is the only way to pay for college and then get a pro career.

Your idea of “money following a child” already does happen in public schools. Schools are funded by student count per school. It is called “FTE” money (I think it stands for full time equivalent). If a schools enrollment decreases, it gets less money.

By Texas Pete

November 3, 2008 12:57 PM | Link to this

I think we should take those tax dollars and pay for homeless healthcare and shelters. The kids don’t really care if they go to school or not, but wait until you see the smiling gaped tooth hobo getting a new liver or eating a pulled pork sandwich. He’ll be forever greatful - the kids are pretty much stupid now anyway and will probably end up homeless.

By LB

November 3, 2008 12:58 PM | Link to this

I have pre-voted and I voted no. My reason is because Gwinnett County, where I live, has not spent money wisely in the past. Until they can come up with an itemized list of the proposed spending and a guarantee it will be only that, then count me out. The developers in Gwinnett County have taken advantage of the residents and now parts of Gwinnett are ghost towns and ant hills of illegals. No thanks.

By Ernest

November 3, 2008 1:35 PM | Link to this

JimD:

You are a businessman. If you are looking to expand your business, would you consider areas that offered tax incentives? My understanding of the TAD is the existing monies allocated for schools would be ‘frozen’ for a period of years and any increases of property taxes would be reinvested in the TAD.

I mentioned the Atlantic Station area. Many of us remember that was an ‘unused’ sight where I75 & I85 North splits. I would call that a ‘blighted’ area that probably was not generating much property tax revenue for the school system. Assuming Atlantic Station did not bring many new residents (especially school aged), the school system doesn’t seem to be negatively impacted by the TAD since they are getting what they were always receiving. When the TAD expires, they can now benefit for the increases in property taxes. This can fail if the TAD brought more children to the school district and there wasn’t a way to get additional revenue to cover the added expenses.

That’s my understanding and why I indicated earlier I’d consider it. It probably should not be used for the proposed Sembler project near North Druid Hills because that did not meet the definition of a ‘blighted’ area. In DeKalb, I’d consider it near I-285 & Memorial Drive as that area has a MARTA station and not much development in the area. The business plan would need to include an ‘adjustment’ if there was a significant change in school population due to the TAD.

I understand Chicago makes heavy use of TIFs. In fairness, I don’t know the long term impact to the school system however it is fair to say that they are more competitive in attracting businesses over other municipalities. When you consider you want the right ‘mix’ of commercial and residential property for your tax base, you should consider if TADs can help with that.

Correct me if I am wrong with my understanding as to how TADs are supposed to work.

By NCLB

November 3, 2008 1:42 PM | Link to this

Our progressively dumbed down public schools should be forced to put 35% of their budget into community projects now, projects that soley employee their dumbed down products. 35% representing Georgia’s dropout rate.

Then we can just let results determine which is more valuable and adjust accordingly..

By jim d

November 3, 2008 2:09 PM | Link to this

ernest,

Indeed that is how they are “Supposed to work” and well planned ones may. However, with the history of politics in georgia, I’d be damned if I trust politicans to plan properly.

And that my friend is why i vote NO!!

By Ayn Rand was Right

November 3, 2008 2:27 PM | Link to this

Our government is a big sticky spiderweb. We call our laws and taxes by misleading names. With good bills we add on the items that couldn’t get through on their own merit, effectively passing into law that which could not and should not be passed into law. School Tax should go to schools, period. A good school system can build a community. Caring teachers, involved parents and motivated students can create their own great communities. Leave the money where it belongs. And if, as some bloggers have suggested, the money doesn’t belong in the schools but belongs in the community, I challenge we the people to change the name to reflect correctly where our money goes.

By Tim Shaw

November 3, 2008 2:40 PM | Link to this

Vote Yes - Gwinnett County has the right idea - look at it case by case - when it makes sense, do it and when it does not, don’t do it - TADs are best in areas where there is higher crime, a lot of blight and less tax revenues - these are usually the same locations of the lowest performing schools and when you look at the tax revenue generated in these areas, it is steadily declining every year - a TAD will reverse such a negative course and in a very few years make the area many will desire to live, work and play.

By demwit

November 3, 2008 2:46 PM | Link to this

No worries. Obama said that under him all Americans would get the same education as those 44 graduates of Bill Gates High School. Go Obama!!

By Ernest

November 3, 2008 2:51 PM | Link to this

Point taken, my Gwinnett County friend! I am ‘naiive’ enough to believe that if you can get the ‘right’ kind of progressive thinking politicians in place, you can see about the needs of the school system while stimulating economic growth in the community.

Watch the results on Wednesday to see if we get those kind of politicians locally….. :)

By high school teacher

November 3, 2008 3:05 PM | Link to this

jimd, add me to the list of those in agreement with you! However, you and I see eye to eye more often than not.

VOTE NO!

A side note regarding the comment about Alabama’s 75% proration for teachers: You wanna know how Alabama gets their money for education? They don’t do it through property taxes; rather they collect an additional penny sales tax, like Glenn Richardson proposed for GA through HB400. Because of the economy and decreased spending, Alabama can’t make payroll. I for one am grateful that HB400 didn’t pass.

Sorry, I am back to class. I was only checking the main headlines while my kids were writing, but this blog title caught my eye. Don’t tell my principal!

By demwit

November 3, 2008 3:21 PM | Link to this

The Georgia Supreme Court banned cities and counties from using TADs because it is unconstitutional. Does the school board now think that they can successfully circumvent the judical branch??

By b6542

November 3, 2008 3:25 PM | Link to this

If when you go into the voting booth and read the proposal……if it does not make sense……then just vote NO. Who writes this stuff ?!?!?!?

By jim d

November 3, 2008 3:28 PM | Link to this

Ok folks,

there are more than a few here I wish would address the following comment.

TAD’s present some risk that could ultimately intercept resources that could be used to fund local school systems.

While TAD investments may stimulate growth and increase the demand for public services they may not generate sufficient new revenues to meet the demand. In the end, the community ends up losing the benefit of dollars that could have been used elsewhere.

The risk is real my friends. Weigh your vote caarefully!!

By jim d

November 3, 2008 3:32 PM | Link to this

Oh and BTW freinds. The comment came straight from the GAE-FPE

By Dave Walker

November 3, 2008 3:44 PM | Link to this

VOTE “NO” ON AMENDMENT 2

This proposed amendment is insanity. It is a government handout to developers. Look at how Gwinnett County secretly did that stadium deal.

You want to give these same type of people the power to “invest” school tax dollars in speculative real estate deals?

No just no, but hell no.

By Joel

November 3, 2008 4:07 PM | Link to this

Jim D,

TADs do work as they “are supposed to work.” They do so in 48 other states. This is not something new. In case you forgot TADs have been used in Georgia for over 20 years. Where are these disastrous projects that have you so concerned? Is it Atlantic Station, or maybe Centennial Olympic Park? Yup all done with TADs.

The only people that bear the risk are those that purchase the bonds.

As far as risks to the schools, I doubt there is any way to convince you, but the point you keep missing is that the money being “diverted” would not exist were it not for the TAD. If no TAD is in place then those properties will continue their downward spiral, ensuring that school boards will have to find another way to raise revenues. Another SPLOST? This is a way for an area to see improvement without taxing the general public- remember the only tax dollars we are talking about are for the properties within the TAD.

By Larry C

November 3, 2008 4:27 PM | Link to this

Here is another way for the Lairs that we have elected to use Education money to feed their pet projects. I voted NO!

By williebkind

November 3, 2008 4:50 PM | Link to this

Do any of you know a middle class developer? VOTE NO!!!

By Arwen

November 3, 2008 5:06 PM | Link to this

Why spend any more money on schools? If parents want their kids to have quality educations, send them to private school. Most of the teachers I know do not have enough sense to do anything other than teach and spend most of the day on personal emails and other business. The same teachers complain about “no child left behind” because they are held accountable for their performance.

By Just_Me

November 3, 2008 5:09 PM | Link to this

I teach gifted; we were told that our g/t kids brought in 3.2 million last year. We asked, “So why doesn’t the county give us money for supplies? Why does our school allocate money (and it varies-$25 to $250-no set amount)….”

We were told that once the state boe allocates the money, the counties DON’T have to give our “gifted money” to the gifted program! We see approximately ZERO-it goes someplace else.

So, given that scenario, it is no wonder that we all voted NO on Amend. 2- more money to get redirected by people who have no idea what REALLY goes on in a school?

No thanks. I got $100 to last me a year for 75 kids. It’d be nice to keep school money in the schools.

By jim d

November 3, 2008 5:11 PM | Link to this

Joel,

Tell ya what buddy. You get our local BOE to stop meeting for votes behind closed doors (in violation of state law) and I’ll gladly vote yes. However, I refuse to give them one more ounce of authority until they abide by current laws.

Now go out and vote my friend! Yours will cancel mine out.

By love my 4 kids

November 3, 2008 5:15 PM | Link to this

It is an extremely rare occurrence that I would vote “yes” on anything that begins with, “Shall it be amended..”. It is also a virtual impossibility that I would ever vote to tax myself and others. The Federal Reserve takes care of that on a regular basis by inflating the dollar. Educators who support the SPLOST are as bad as developers who support the TADs. We’ve become nothing but a nation of beggars! I will also never vote for anyone who voted to turn over $700tr of BORROWED (guaranteed by the taxpayers) money to unaccountable banksters. The party’s over folks. Ben Franklin said: `A Republic, if you can keep it’; we didn’t.

By Vocational life

November 3, 2008 5:16 PM | Link to this

In my classes I teach kids how to use a cash register and how to stock shelves. I believe in teaching our children what real world jobs they will probably hold. If I could find some land close to our school, I would teach more children how to use shovels, rakes, etc…

I wish more schools would teach reality based learning.

By bill

November 3, 2008 5:20 PM | Link to this

does this open up lottery money to TADS which means to a politician Take Any Dollars Soon. I dont trust them any more than I do Wall Street Executives

By don't trust

November 3, 2008 5:31 PM | Link to this

I worked in the Georgia Department of Education Technology Department and I would not trust one statistic from that place. Every data element is changed to make things look worst than they are for more federal or state funding - and where does the money go - all of that is changed also. Trust me, we really don’t know what is happening in our schools and where the money goes.

By catlady

November 3, 2008 6:00 PM | Link to this

If the project is so great, is so worthy, is such a good thing, then the developers can pay for it out of their pockets as spec work. Then, good for them if it pays off. If not, well, we have not lost any money.

Public money should NEVER go for private business. This includes the bailout.

By catlady

November 3, 2008 6:16 PM | Link to this

BTW, who is on your school board? Ours has folks who would benefit from the TAD in all likelihood. Folks like the banker, the insurance agent, the realtor, etc.

By J Atlanta

November 3, 2008 7:09 PM | Link to this

This entry - like many articles in the AJC - is completely skewed. It is not “funneling” money “earmarked” for the schools. It is borrowing AGAINST school funds for INFRASTRUCTURE improvements. Like road extensions, stop lights, etc.

So the comments above are as mis-informed as the original blog entry. Great job, Al-Jazeera Constitution.

Want an insight where this would help? Take a look at the Riverside ghetto - new houses and subdivisions with youths running wild (those same youths who SHOULD be in school). They are breaking into homes due to minimal commercial/retail traffic resulting in little or no fear of consequences.

If this passes - and it probably won’t due to people like the blog author - it will improve areas of the city that need it. If not, you’ll see a mass-exodus of people - LIKE MYSELF - who can’t deal with the thugs, ghetto, and lack of services in my neighborhood.

Regarding the underlying tone - do you really want to improve the schools? SPEND YOUR TIME helping kids READ and stay in school (note: close to 50% of Atlanta Public Schools children won’t graduate high school). It’s not about MONEY, people. It’s about PARENT INVOLVEMENT.

All of the school money in the world couldn’t help some of these thugs.

By FrustratedEducator

November 3, 2008 8:15 PM | Link to this

By Ladilovely and Kentucky Scott;

You spin a good yarn, but the liberalism you just voted for will rapidly turn to Socialism and cause the complete destruction of the America our forefathers built.

• In God We Trust will soon be gone from our money.

• One Nation Under God will be gone from our pledge.

• a 6 month old fetus will be allowed to be killed.

• and God will disappear completely from our government.

For all you hypocrites out there who say you are Christians, don’t try to sell me that line if you’re wearing an Obama button. You’re just as bad as the wolf in sheep’s clothing. True christians will not vote for Obama solely on his stance being in favor of late term abortions.

Heck, the man wants to be our president and doesn’t even know how many states there are in the Union. When my son was four years old he knew that!!!!

NOBAMA —> McCain/Palin all the way!

By Your God Obama

November 3, 2008 8:25 PM | Link to this

I think we should take that money and buy me (your future God) a television station. You will be forced to watch me 24 hours a day everyday. Bow before me you ungrateful heathens.

By Jim Martin

November 3, 2008 8:49 PM | Link to this

I will take these extra tax dollars and put them to work on Georgia’s new liberal free abortion campaign. We can take those dead babies and sell them to the Koreans for stem cell research.

By Ayn Rand was Right

November 3, 2008 9:09 PM | Link to this

Studies show that an effective manager should have no more than 6-8 direct reports. These direct reports being adults who should know how to do their jobs, yet may need some guidance and training from time to time. How is it that our schools think teachers can teach 30-35 kids? Kids who must learn (it is their job), the need constant guidance.

Yes, let’s give more money to the corporations so that they can bloat their middle management, at the expense of our kids who are at a negative 5:1 ratio for productive learning in the best of schools.

Because “borrowing” against future tax revenues is like “borrowing” gas money from your kids piggy bank.

By Jim Martin

November 3, 2008 9:26 PM | Link to this

When I am elected, I will make sure all students have all A’s. Well maybe kids of republicans will have F’s, but all democratic children will have nothing but A’s. Since the grades will be predetermined, we can use these tax dollars to support our unions.

By for the record

November 3, 2008 10:47 PM | Link to this

I see the GetSchooled blog has been hijacked by the weirdos tonight…

While I understand the purpose of TADS, I don’t think they have always been effectively used. Building apartment complexes and thinking that they won’t have kids who go to the neighborhood schools is ridiculous - and apartment kids can be more of a drain to the system due to transiency and gaps in their education (yeah, yeah, not all apartment kids…blah blah blah).

Maybe use the TADS for commercial development only - I don’t know - as is, no go.

By Joel

November 4, 2008 9:51 AM | Link to this

Re: Jim D @ 11/3 5:30 p.m.

Fair enough Jim, but it sounds like you should be more concerned with electing quality BOE members. Just an FYI- By law the BOE and the County or City are required to hold a public hearing and public vote on TADs.If they break this law they should absolutely be held accountable, but that is no reason to throw out a viable tool.

By jim d

November 4, 2008 11:48 AM | Link to this

Too late Joel,

My ballot has been cast with a resounding NO!! I have excersized my only authority over these boards by refusing to grant them more power over spending. And I’m actually quite content knowing our two votes merely canceled each other out.

By Phill

November 6, 2008 4:34 AM | Link to this

Here is A novel idea, How about the schools getting the money.