Showing posts with label Tax Allocation District. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Tax Allocation District. Show all posts

Monday, July 29, 2024

Full Court Press

And it is by the press. The Blue Bag Rag, the official organ of Dunwoody, has run yet another front page article about how this city is not raising the property tax rate. And this one comes with a byline. 

Makes you wonder, doesn't it? Why are they yammering and hammering this point? We all know they maxed out the legally allowable tax rate years ago. Without going to the voters they cannot raise the millage rate. This is about the only time, and the only issue where they actually respect the electorate. So what's up? Is this prepping for some tax finagling like setting up some special tax allocation district so they can raise taxes without our approval? Are they trying to rebuild trust credibility after their disastrous attempt to sneak through Shining PATH taxes claiming these were for parks?

We only know this: if they could have raised the millage rate, they would have, and then we'd not get flooded with these repeat articles.

Wednesday, May 30, 2012

Magic Carpet or Titanic Iceberg?

Concerning Dunwoody's Special Investigator's Report, which is it? A political "Magic Carpet" under which the real dirt is being swept or just the tip of the Iceberg regarding what has really been going on down at Smart City Hall? And what should we suppose has been going on? Well, that is hard to tell given the City is not very transparent in its operations. Certainly there are many questions deserving of answers.

But first a simple observation. There is no living, breathing, mysterious Sasquatch called "The City", but there are living, breathing people who individually take action on behalf of the collective entity called "The City". And they are, to greater and lesser degrees, individual players who are individually responsible for their individual actions on behalf of the collective. Recent events bear that out. When those actions are aligned with the good of the community and the goals established by our elected officials they deserve credit in proportion to their initiative and responsibility. Recent events bear that out as well. But in all matters they should be accountable and to that end the Citizens OF Dunwoody deserve transparency. We deserve answers.

Who initiated contact with Wieland and who specifically, City and Wieland were involved in the initial and following negotiations? Was this kicked off in a country club locker-room after a round of golf? During a rousing game of checkers at the local hardware store? Over coffee at the gas station or local BBQ joint? Via an open and transparent bidding process, because someone, yet to be named, at City Hall had an original, innovative idea? Was the City Attorney engaged to assess the legal propriety of these negotiations? Would it have mattered?

And who is it at City Hall that "suggests" changes to the developer, like "ditch the siding these need to be all-brick"? Who with the developer is suggesting that the City retain the flood plain property leaving only the juicy bits for lucrative development? How was it the plan went from detached construction to attached housing? Who, on both sides, is involved in these negotiations, and when and where have they and are they taking place? Who, on both sides, negotiates and approves the plan? Who is shaking hands over these agreements?

Where are the email and phone records, the meeting calendars and topics of discussion? Who attended the plenary meetings or was engaged in these conversations? What was the timing, especially with regards to the failure of the Parks Bonds and passage of the TAD? Was this always in the works or is it a reaction to voters shouting down the previous plans from City Hall? Who is driving these efforts?

And what about the folks selling the Shallowford/Emory hospital site? Who are these people and how did that ball get rolling? Before the Parks Bonds went down in flames, they seemed all but assured of a windfall sale of two properties in a very tough market as they were also the owners of the Peachford property slated (for what this is worth) to become a road to nowhere. How did THAT deal happen? What about the discussions leading to the plan with the bond contingencies? And was connectivity the real motivation for the City's Peachford purchase, or was it to secure an option on the hospital property post vote? Even if only by a "gentleman's agreement". Are we really to believe these two transactions were independent "arm's length" negotiations, only to concoct a plan where sale and purchase are so intertwined as to be indistinguishable? Is anyone in Dunwoody that naive? Who exactly are these folks--faces and names? Again, real names of real people who really sign legal, binding documents and the names of those who pay them to do so.

Now that the deals are done and we have skin in the game it seems imminently reasonable for the City to proactively publish on the City Website all the records related to these negotiations. Full disclosure, nothing less.

Wednesday, November 9, 2011

Just a TAD Will Do Nicely

The Citizens OF Dunwoody rightly rejected the ill-managed drive towards deep debt represented by the two parks referenda. Whilst the approximately forty percent who voted in favour might be considered a "forty percent wrong out of a hundred" and consequently a pretty solid "F", this is politics where fifty plus one is an undeniable "A". Those forty are down.

But not out.

The Citizens OF Dunwoody have granted the City the power to create Tax Allocation Districts, allowing the City to identify an area as "blighted", issue bonds (w/o any more approval from those unruly citizens) and re-structure our tax base and expenditures. Expect this "tool" to be used by the City well before the currently sitting council and mayor leave office. And what might we expect?
  1. A blighted area will be identified and it will, not coincidentally, be EXACTLY the same area the EXACT same mayor and council had identified as the IDEAL location for a major city recreation center.
  2. Negotiations with area businesses (aka "apartments") will be revealed, preferably as a last minute agenda item at the end of an intentionally long city council meeting.
  3. It will also be revealed, unwillingly, that details of these negotiations as well as development plans have been sitting on a city computer for some time. We will never know how these "discussions" originally started and who started them nor the real power structure behind them.
  4. Though the location was ideal for "playgrounds for the children of the rich" it will have since been determined even better suited for a "Live, Work, Play" redevelopment with heavy emphasis on "Play", some on "Work" and not so much on "Live"-- and only to the extent that it is owner occupied.
  5. Deals will be signed, bonds issued, taxes pulled from the general fund and directed exclusively to the "blighted" redevelopment, and Dunwoody will be rid of its undesirables as well as off on an exciting adventure in land speculation and development.
To their credit, the Citizens OF Dunwoody exercised fiscal prudence with their vote on the bonds referenda, but until the City reflects the will of the Citizens and not a shadow power structure, the Citizens OF Dunwoody must remain unwaveringly vigilant in all matters regarding TADs.